‘In the Strong Name of Our Collective Faith’? Closing of Inauguration Benediction, LACKING IN JESUS’ NAME, Refuted by Pastor




Matthew 24:10 - And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

Matthew 24:12 - And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

2 Timothy 3:1-5, “But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. 2 For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, 4 treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these,”

2 Timothy 4:3-4, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, 4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.”

John 14:13-14 and John 16:23-24 are some of the most powerful verses in all of scripture related to prayer. In fact, when most of us pray we conclude with the phrase, "in Jesus' name."

But what does it mean to pray in the name of Jesus? When we pray in Jesus' name

1. We are admitting the bankruptcy of our own name.

When I pray in Jesus' name I come boldly before God because of the power of his name. It would be like a bride coming from abject poverty to marry a wealthy husband. At that point the woman takes the name of her husband and all that entails. She no longer acts in her name, but in his.

2. We identify with the person of Jesus Christ.

Jesus has literally given us his name. When I use that name, I am confessing that he is mine and that I am his. It is like going to the bank of heaven, knowing I have nothing deposited. If I go in my name I will get absolutely nothing. But Jesus Christ has unlimited funds in heaven's bank, and he has granted me the privilege of going to the bank with his name on my checks.

3. We pray in his authority.

We are like the child who picked up a policeman's hat, wandered out onto a busy intersection and began to direct traffic. The people in the cars followed the child's direction because they respected his position of authority. To pray in his name is to ask by his authority; and to ask by his authority is to ask in accordance to his will as revealed in his word.

4. We submit to his will.

Jesus' authority rested with his submission to the Father, so our authority rests with our submission to him. To ask in his name is to ask according to his nature, and his nature is one of submission. This, by the way, is why prayers that ask for things contrary to the Word of God will never be answered.

5. We are representing him and his interests here on earth.

It is much the same as the legal arrangement known as the power of attorney. In such matters one person may represent another in his absence. They act in their behalf. Jesus has given every believer unlimited and general power of attorney in all matters and with the right to use his name in every situation.

6. We pray expectantly.

When we pray in Jesus' name, we may expect the answer in accord with the value of his name. So we can pray with great and excited expectation.


SEE: https://christiannews.net/2021/01/21/in-the-strong-name-of-our-collective-faith-closing-of-inauguration-benediction-refuted-by-pastor/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

WASHINGTON — “In the strong name of our collective faith, amen” was how Silvester Beaman of the Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Delaware ended his benediction on Wednesday during the Biden-Harris inauguration. His avoidance of using the name of Jesus in the prayer was noted by at least one pastor, who refuted Beaman’s choice of words online.

“It must be said: there is no such name,” wrote Mike Riccardi, the pastor of Local Outreach Ministries at John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California.

“And even if there were, that name would not be the only name under Heaven given among men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12),” he noted. “It would not be the name above every name — the name to which every knee will bow and every tongue will swear allegiance (Phil 2:9-11). It would not be the name of Christ, in whom alone are the promises of God yes and amen (2 Cor 1:20).”

Beaman, a longtime friend of the Biden family who participated in the funeral for Beau Biden in 2015, had been asked by Joe Biden to close out the inauguration ceremony with prayer.

“Joe Biden is a man whose life experiences have taught him to seek the face of God,” Beaman told NBC News. “He’s had some dark times in his life. And he’s someone who is naturally a person of faith. He prays and listens to God.”

“We need a president who is after the heart of God,” he continued. “In these terrible times, if anybody can bring healing and reconciliation to a divided country, if we give him room to work, Joe Biden can be that person.”

On Wednesday, Beaman asked for God’s favor on Biden and Harris, controversial figures who were opposed by Christians in the election primarily because of their support for homosexuality, transgenderism and abortion “rights.”

“God, we gather under the beauty of your holiness and the holiness of your beauty. We seek Your face, Your smile, Your warm embrace,” he said. “We petition you once more in this celebration. We pray for divine favor upon our president, Joseph R. Biden, and our first lady, Dr. Jill Biden, and their family.”

“We further ask that you would extend the same favor upon our vice president, Kamala D. Harris, and our second gentleman, Doug Emhoff, and their family,” Beaman continued. “More than ever they and our nation need You.”

In keeping with the theme of unity, he spoke of realizing the common humanity, which compels one to have compassion for the sick, poor, elderly and oppressed. In brevity, Beaman also mentioned confessing sin and seeking forgiveness.

“In you, O God, we discover our humanity. And in our humanity, we discover our commonness, beyond the difference of color, creed, origin, political party, ideology, geography and personal preferences,” Beaman stated, remarking that men should “make friends of our enemies.”

He also touched on the nation’s stain of slavery, noting that slaves had been used to build the U.S. Capitol building.

“Let us all acknowledge from the indigenous Native American to those who recently received their citizenship, from the African American to those whose foreparents came from Europe and every corner of the globe, from the wealthy to those struggling to make it, for every human being — regardless of their choices, that this is our country,” he proclaimed.

“As such, teach us, O God, to live in it, love in it, be healed in it, and be reconciled to one another in it, lest we miss kingdom’s goal.”

Beaman then ended the prayer with, “To Your glory, majesty, dominion and power forever. Hallelujah. Glory, hallelujah,” the latter of which when literally translated means, “Praise Yahweh.”

But then he said, most likely to again incorporate the theme of unity, “In the strong name of our collective faith, amen.”

View Beaman’s benediction in full here or watch the video below.


Riccardi shared his thoughts about the prayer on social media Wednesday evening.

“We do not petition the Father in the name of our faith. Our faith is worthless apart from the object in which it trusts,” Riccardi wrote. “To come before God in the name of our faith is to come before God in our own name, which is blasphemous, idolatrous, and hopeless for those who do not possess the infinite righteousness required for fellowship with God.”

He said that God accepts nothing less than coming to Him in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ.

“Instead, those who would hope to receive anything from the Father must come to Him in the name of Christ His Son, for all the promises of God are yes in Him alone,” Riccardi outlined. “And coming before God in the name of Christ — who has accomplished the infinite righteousness required for fellowship with God — in union with Him we are heard for Christ’s sake.”

“Our prayers before the Father — the holiest of which are laced with enough sin to damn the entire human race for eternity — are thus sanctified in the sweet name of God’s dear Son, and received as a sweet-smelling aroma of the sacrifice of His own precious blood,” he said.

“Solus Christus.”

Read Riccardi’s post in full here.

1 Timothy 2:5 states, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

Psalm 96:5 also teaches, “For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the Lord made the heavens.”

The late Anglican preacher J.C. Ryle also once said, “Live a courageous life. Confess Christ before men. Whatever station you occupy, in that station confess Christ. Why should you be ashamed of Him? He was not ashamed of you on the cross.”

“He is ready to confess you now before His Father in Heaven. Why should you be ashamed of Him? Be bold. Be very bold. The good soldier is not ashamed of his uniform. The true believer ought never be ashamed of Christ.”



At the close of his prayer at the inauguration, Dr. Silvester Beaman concluded, “To your glory, majesty, dominion and power forever. Hallelujah. Glory, Hallelujah. In the strong name of our collective faith, amen.”

It must be said: there is no such name.

And even if there were, that name would not be the only name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12). It would not be the name above every name—the name to which every knee will bow and every tongue will swear allegiance (Phil 2:9-11). It would not be the name of Christ, in whom alone are the promises of God yes and amen (2 Cor 1:20).

We do not petition the Father in the name of our faith. Our faith is worthless apart from the object in which it trusts. If we came before the throne of God solely in the name our faith, we would be cast into hell, for our faith has nothing in it that is virtuous or meritorious before God.

To come before God in the name of our faith is to come before God in our own name, which is blasphemous, idolatrous, and hopeless for those who do not possess the infinite righteousness required for fellowship with God.

Instead, those who would hope to receive anything from the Father must come to Him in the name of Christ His Son, for all the promises of God are yes in Him alone. And coming before God in the name of Christ—who has accomplished the infinite righteousness required for fellowship with God—in union with Him we are heard for Christ’s sake. Our prayers before the Father—the holiest of which are laced with enough sin to damn the entire human race for eternity—are thus sanctified in the sweet name of God’s dear Son, and received as a sweet smelling aroma of the sacrifice of His own precious blood.

Solus Christus.

Little children, guard yourselves from idols (1 John 5:20).


Rep. Mary Miller on US Capitol Breach & Teaching Our Children Good & Evil-American Thought Leaders

In this episode, we sit down with newly elected Illinois Congresswoman Mary Miller, to discuss her experience of the events of January 6th, her response to criticism she received for a recent speech she gave to a mothers’ group, and her vision for America.

A Deep Dive Into “Critical Social Justice” & How It Took Over the Humanities-New Discourses

An American-born author, mathematician, and political commentator, Dr. James Lindsay has written six books spanning a range of subjects including religion, the philosophy of science and postmodern theory. He is the founder of New Discourses and currently promoting his new book "Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody."

Why Schools Are Teaching Our Kids “Social Justice”


SEE: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/10/schools-teaching-kids-social-justice/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Woke have a very specific conception of the world and a very specific mission that has everything to do with that conception. Most of us, going about our daily lives and getting hit with Critical Social Justice — the ideology that leads one to become “woke” — don’t understand this. We mistake what is, in fact, an entire worldview for a set of fringe ideas dealing with socially important issues like racism, sexism, and transgender rights. Most of us see “Wokeness,” in other words, as something that’s probably mostly good or, at worst, well-intentioned and benign.

When it comes to our children’s schools, then, many of us will conclude that it’s necessary and important in our modern, progressive world for our children to learn about these sorts of issues, and we trust our educators to communicate important truths about them so our kids can keep doing the good work of building a better society.

This kindly liberal view, borne from a combination of good intentions and being too busy to learn otherwise, misunderstands the Critical Social Justice ideology at the most fundamental level, however. It therefore completely misses the specific mission woke people—and woke educators—have for our society and our children. The crux of that mission is hiding in plain sight in the word “woke” itself, and it has everything to do with why we should be opposed to seeing these ideas featured in our educational system.

The mission of Critical Social Justice, to use its right name, is to “awaken” people to the so-called “realities” of systemic oppression in society, as it defines it—thus, “woke.” People who are woke are people who have been trained to see systemic oppression in a particular way, which has been outlined in an otherwise obscure branch of philosophy known as Critical Theory. Speaking formally, the Woke are people who have developed a “critical consciousness” about the identity-based systems of power that are alleged to permeate and define all of society, creating profound and almost intractable injustices that must be “disrupted and dismantled” to achieve “liberation.” The goal of “anti-racist,” “culturally aware,” and “social justice” approaches to education is to awaken a critical consciousness in our children so that they will grow up not to think critically but to think in terms of Critical Theories.

To understand why this isn’t just a problem but an incredibly alarming one requires understanding how the Critical Theories in Critical Social Justice see the world. That is, you have to understand what your kids will be “woke up” to in their classrooms.

To take the issue of race, Critical Race Theory begins with the assumption that racism is ordinary in our societies and present in all interactions and social and cultural phenomena, and it is up to the Critical Race Theorist—using a Woke critical consciousness—to “make it visible” and “call it out.” In Critical Race Theory, the question is not “did racism take place?” but rather, “how did racism manifest in that situation?”

Rather than learning how to do mathematics, then, your children will be taught to ask questions like how mathematics is used to maintain racial oppression—for it must, according to Critical Race Theory. This is precisely the sort of curriculum that we already see in the Ethnic Studies program in the state of Washington and its “ethnomathematics” project. Rather than focusing on the mechanics of mathematics, students will be taught to focus on the ways they can explore topics like racism and oppression through mathematics, or leaning on math as a foil that facilitates discussions on important topics—like “who it benefits” to focus on getting right answers in mathematics.

Other subjects will be similar, if not worse. A Critical Theory approach to studying American history will be dedicated to making students woke to all of the ways the United States, from its founding, has been an unjust, oppressive nation that systemically oppresses certain identity groups. This shouldn’t be understood to be part of a balanced program that reckons honestly with the darker aspects of our national past as framed against the liberal promises that eventually—and painfully—have won great freedom and equality to our diverse citizenry. It will be a sustained program of teaching our children how America is a horrible nation that has never been able to or even wanted to live up to its promise of all men having been created equally, as individuals. “Whiteness is property,” they will instruct, and that property is theft—slogans we have heard repeated as justifications for race-based riots throughout this ugly summer.

Indeed, many such programs will claim that the United States was founded intentionally on genocide, slavery, and a principle of white supremacy and anti-Blackness that has never been repaired. Its legacy is white privilege and white comfort that must be challenged at every opportunity if we are ever to achieve racial equity. Already, at least in the state of California, a proposed – although rejected – curriculum would teach these lessons not as history but as “hxrstory,” where “his” has been replaced by an explicitly “non-binary” formulation of “her,” so that maleness and cisheteronormativity won’t accidentally be centered in the term. (By the way, “his-story” isn’t even the genuine etymology of the word history, but Critical Theory looks for oppression hidden in unlikely symbols, even when it doesn’t make sense.)

Bringing Critical Social Justice into our educational systems is therefore not beneficent or benign. It is a deliberate attempt to try to program our children to think in an explicitly cynical, pessimistic, and falsely sociological way about all matters relevant to identity in every possible subject, including our history and even science and mathematics. The goal is to make our children woke, to give them a critical consciousness with which they will, unlike their parents, know that the point of understanding society is to change it in a very narrow and increasingly divisive way.

Editor’s Note: This article has been revised to clarify that a proposal to rename “history” “hxrstory” in California was rejected.

This article was originally published at Roca News.


SEE ALSO: https://newdiscourses.com/2021/01/what-is-critical-race-theory/

AND: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/11/why-your-organization-should-not-do-diversity-training/



James Lindsay sits down with American Thought Leaders host Jan Jekielek to discuss Critical Social Justice, the Grievance Studies project, and neo-Marxism in education and culture at large.

From American Thought Leaders:

To “expose the political corruption that’s taken hold of the university,” James Lindsay, Peter Boghossian, and Helen Pluckrose made headlines in 2018 with a series of hoax papers that were accepted in peer-reviewed journals. Since then, Lindsay has made it his life’s mission to understand the ideas and theories underpinning what they dubbed “grievance studies.” Just how are these identity-oriented academic fields rooted in deeply flawed methodologies? And how has neo-Marxism and what Lindsay recently named “critical social justice” permeated the education system in America? Lindsay documents his work on his website “New Discourses”, where a constantly updated “Social Justice Encyclopedia” can also be found.

Peter Boghossian: How Social Justice Silences - New Discourses

In October of 2019, we held a conference in the heart of London with the simple mission of starting to “Speak Truth to Social Justice,” a conversation that we can all plainly see now was, even by then, long overdue. Among the eight talks given that day to address the subject, Peter Boghossian addressed the important issue of the ways that the Social Justice ideology stifles free speech. In this passionate talk, he outlines many of the speech-stifling actions that have been made against himself and others when they have dared to speak up about something they believe in when it goes against the “prevailing moral orthodoxy.” For Boghossian, and now many of us, that moral orthodoxy is the ideology calling itself Critical Social Justice.

Boghossian outlines seven different ways that the Critical Social Justice ideology stifles free speech and discusses each with poignant examples. Its advocates call names. They brand unwanted speech as violence. They assert policies of “inclusion” that are meant only to allow viewpoints they agree with. When people who hold ideas that challenge their growing hegemony are invited to speak about those views, its advocates see to it that they’re disinvited. Speech is stifled further in institutional settings that take up “Bias Response Teams.” They also, quite famously now, engage in a bullying tactic reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution of China that goes by the name “cancel culture.” Lastly, they justify all of this through “idea laundering,” a process by which they provide false legitimacy to these ideas and the other tenets of their ideology by getting them published in their own corners of the academic literature and mainstream journalism. These seven methods combine to stifle speech and even free thought in an incredible fashion.

Join Dr. Boghossian as he walks you through these points, speaking truth to “Social Justice” and fighting back for freedom of speech and cognitive liberty.

Watch Peter Boghossian’s subsequent presentation from this conference here. The audio version of this presentation is available on SoundcloudApple PodcastsGoogle PlaySpotifyStitcher, and RSS.

(Higher) Education Is Destroying America-New Discourses


SEE: https://newdiscourses.com/2021/01/higher-education-destroying-america/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

“[Y]ou offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom, for they … seem to know many things, when they are for the most part ignorant and hard to get along with, since they are not wise, but only appear wise.” – Plato’s Phaedrus

“I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Boston telephone directory than by the 2,000 people on the faculty of Harvard University,” conservative icon William F. Buckley notoriously remarked. I have always thought of his oft-quoted quip as just that: a clever quip. But we have reached the point today where, given the choice Buckley was contemplating, I would vote for the 2,000 Average Joes over the 2,000 professors in a heartbeat. Even in a firmly Democratic-blue city like Boston, where the politics of ordinary citizens might resemble the professors’ political preferences far more than they would resemble mine, I wholeheartedly believe that those 2,000 random names would bring to the task of governance more common sense and more diversity of opinion. They would ultimately create a healthier, more vibrant and more livable society. And I strongly suspect that I am increasingly far from alone in that view.

Consider this apparent paradox: commanding, as they do, behemoth corporate entities, the media, the entertainment industry and the social media and tech hubs of Silicon Valley, the educated today arguably wield more power, influence and ubiquitous social control than they have ever wielded in American history, and yet they are also as scorned and distrusted as they have ever been. The prevalence of loony conspiracy theories on the political right notwithstanding, less educated people have their reasons for feeling conspired against and for distrusting those who are ostensibly their betters. They distrust the educated contingent’s claims to knowledge and expertise because they both consciously and instinctively know that such “experts” can no longer be trusted, that knowledge claims by the educated elites now routinely come packaged with liberal doses of barely concealed political prejudice. Experts are the ones who tell us that Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden will defeat Donald Trump in a blowout and that Democrats are set to pick up significant gains and take control of both houses of Congress in the 2020 election. Experts are the unelected backroom technocrats at Twitter and Google who take it upon themselves, despite having transparent political biases and no obvious qualifications for such roles, to intervene on the side of “Truth” in complex political and factual debates — inevitably citing as backup for their decisions some of their favorite sources, such as CNN or The Washington Post — and then proceed to label, take down, bury and censor competing claims and their conservatives or contrarian sources. Experts are the ones who issue confident pronouncements about Covid-19, only to issue inconsistent but equally confident pronouncements a few weeks or months later, the ones who tell us masks don’t help to protect healthy individuals only to completely reverse that guidance, the ones who command us that frequenting religious services, Trump rallies, restaurants, hair salons or family gatherings poses a mortal risk to our health while turning a blind eye to or even throwing full support behind massive #BLM protests or disregarding their own edicts and going unmasked into chic hair salons or large parties at expensive French restaurants. And, as I’ll have reason to discuss in more detail below, the kind of “expertise” that emanates from the mainstream media or the educational establishment is egregious in its political biases.

The reason for the problem is simple: the “educated” have become a stale, stagnant monoculture, a culture within which groupthink reigns, within which prejudice predominates, bad ideas go unchallenged and the worst ideas get insulated from scrutiny by strictly enforced taboos. In fact, the more “elite” the quality and quantity of the education people receive, the more herd-minded, prejudiced and intolerant of dissent they become. The danger of this predicament is not just one for political conservatives to bear; when a diversity of ideas is choked out by years of ideological indoctrination and enforced conformity when thought police patrol our public and private spaces and factual claims and ideas remain untested in the crucible of free and open debate, the resulting harm is borne by all. As I will explain in what follows, the ultimate issue springs from a tectonic shift in the complexion of our educational institutions. It will not be solved until those institutions are shaken to their very foundations and remade from the ground up.

Driving Polarization

In recent studies, education — the very thing that is supposed to open minds — has repeatedly been found, instead, to create closed-minded filter bubbles. A 2019 study by the polling and analytics firm PredictWise, retained by The Atlantic for the purpose of analyzing partisan prejudice, found that a high level of education was strongly correlated with political intolerance. The Atlantic reported as well on prior research from University of Pennsylvania professor Diana Mutz that had concluded that “white, highly educated people are relatively isolated from political diversity” and that “people who went to graduate school have the least amount of political disagreement in their lives.” Mutz’s explanation was that such people are less likely to talk with those who disagree with them.

A 2019 study by the “More in Common” project that analyzed the accuracy of people’s perceptions about their ideological opposites reached similar conclusions. Among its notable findings was that “the more educated a person is, the worse their Perception Gap” — their distorted view of and tendency to attribute extreme positions to those on the “other side.” But the “one critical exception” to this finding is that it applies only to Democrats, not Republicans:

[W]hile Republicans’ misperceptions of Democrats do not improve with higher levels of education, Democrats’ understanding of Republicans actually gets worse with every additional degree they earn. This effect is so strong that Democrats without a high school diploma are three times more accurate than those with a postgraduate degree.

Why does this differentiation exist? The “More in Common” research echoes Diana Mutz’s conclusion: “Highly educated Democrats are the most likely to say that ‘most of [their] friends’ share their political beliefs.” While the political composition of Republicans’ circle of acquaintances does not correlate with education, for Democrats the correlation is very direct: the more education they receive, the less likely they are to associate with anyone who disagrees with them. And there is good reason to believe that the composition of those with whom one pals around play a causal role in creating polarized groupthink: as research by Cass Sunstein, David Schkade and Reid Hastie has demonstrated, when people spend time discussing issues with like-minded others, their views predictably become more extreme.

Education’s Left Turn

Has education always cooked up an over-saturated brew bubbling over with an overpowering flavor of left ideological extremism? No. Pew Research Center findings from 2016 show a widening ideological gap between 1994 and 2015 among those who are more versus less educated. One metric examined the extent to which people’s views have become monolithically down-the-line liberal or conservative over the years. In 1994, one percent of those whose educations stopped after their high school graduation or even earlier leaned “consistently liberal,” while that number was four percent for those with “some college,” five percent for college graduates and seven percent for post-grads — a small upward progression but, all in all, not a massive difference. By 2015, however, the educational divide had become a gulf: five percent of those in the high-school-or-less category were consistently liberal in their views, but those numbers were 12% of those with some college, 24% of college graduates and 31% of post-grads. No similar pattern obtained for those who were “consistently conservative.” Both in 1994 and in 2015, the percentage of down-the-line conservatives hovered between six percent and 11 percent across all education categories, with no particular correlation with education to be found. The massive growth in the consistently liberal-minded over the course of these two decades had not come at the expense of conservatives, but rather, largely at the expense of those with less partisan and more “mixed” political views. While 53% of the “high school or less” crowd had held ideologically “mixed” views in 1994 and 48% held mixed views in 2015, among post-grads, that number had declined from 38% in 1994 to 24% in 2015. The conclusion: something has shifted dramatically over the course of the past 20 years to yield a direct correlation between how many years of education we have had and the extent to which we are immersed in an across-the-board liberal monoculture.

What changed is education itself. Beginning in the late 1980s — not long before the political opinions of the “educated” began to veer sharply to the left — education itself went from being a universally touted pathway to personal enlightenment and professional advancement to becoming a one-sided purveyor of political ideology. Belying any notion that university professors are inherently liberal-minded mainly because liberals are simply more curious and open-minded than their conservative brethren, not so very long ago, a fairly even split in political affiliations could still be found: in 1984, 39% of college faculty identified as left/liberal, while 34% identified as right/conservative, as reported in a 2005 paper from Stanley Rothman et al. A massive sea-change materialized over the course of the ensuing decade-and-a-half, according to the same paper: by 1999, 72% of faculty (and 81% among humanities faculty) identified as left/liberal, and 15% identified as conservative. By 2018, the situation had become still more dire, especially at the most elite universities. A comprehensive National Association of Scholars report from April 2018 headed by Mitchell Langbert of Brooklyn College, which tracked the political registrations of 8,688 tenure-track professors at top liberal arts colleges, found that “78.2 percent of the academic departments in [his] sample have either zero Republicans, or so few as to make no difference.” At the leftward end of the spectrum were the newly emerged ideological fields, such as gender studies and Africana studies, in which there was not “a single Republican with an exclusive appointment.” Again, casting serious doubt upon any notion that academics are overwhelmingly liberal simply because liberals are better suited to be eggheads, the political affiliations of university administrators are now similarly skewed far to the left. A 2018 survey of 900 college administrators by Samuel J. Abrams of Sarah Lawrence College revealed that 71% identified as liberal, and only 6% identified as conservative.

I have explored the causes of this seismic shift at length elsewhere, and suffice it to say here that the gradual replacement of a highly literate elite by a techno-financial elite dislodged the academic humanities from their once-vaunted perch in which they had served a pragmatic economic function (not a function that I believe true higher education should serve in any event, as I will make clear later). This change opened the door for a takeover of these departments by 60s radicals entering their 40s and 50s and positions of peak influence in the mid-to-late 1980s and 1990s. These original culture warriors succeeded in repurposing the humanities (dragging other university departments behind them to greater or lesser extents), deflecting them from the tasks of education, enlightenment and career prep and re-orienting them to the mission of social critique. The academic humanities, having been displaced from their prestigious mission of preparing a new generation for elite careers, found a new way of clawing back what they had lost by adopting a less practical but, in their eyes, still more critical mission: preparing a new generation of those who could claim elite status by virtue of their ability to stand in judgment over the rest of us. They spawned a new array of ideological victimology departments within academia and a market for diversity consultants and sensitivity training within corporate America and for hysterical and sensationalized media coverage of alleged oppression and persecution of “marginalized” and “vulnerable” minorities of every sort.

Distorted Academic Priorities

It is the lack of ideological diversity, not liberal bias per se, that presents the bigger challenge. I would not want universities or other institutions to be dominated by conservative groupthink any more than I want the current alternative. Thoroughgoing conservative bias at universities that are supposed to cultivate out-of-the-box thinking and groundbreaking research would, I assume, result in stagnation. But this is not the reality with which we are dealing. What we have is overwhelming liberal bias, not conservative bias. And liberal bias at institutions principally intended to instill a love of learning, an appreciation of a great tradition and the pursuit of lux et veritas creates its own specific problems.

A recent study from SUNY New Paltz’s Glenn Geher et al. — a study, it should be noted, that the authors had trouble publishing because of its politically explosive conclusions — building upon the prior work of prominent NYU psychologist Jonathan Haidt, found that the profound liberal bias in much of academia today is not without consequence. The researchers surveyed 177 academics in a variety of universities about their political orientations and personality characteristics as measured on the “Big Five” model of personality and then asked them to assign weights to five possible priorities: academic rigor, academic freedom, student emotional well-being, social justice and the advancement of knowledge. What they found is not surprising, but it is disturbing: liberal professors were significantly more likely to place a higher value on social justice and student emotional well-being than were their conservative colleagues, who tended to place a higher value on academic rigor and the advancement of knowledge. While many modern-day liberal academics — whether following in the tradition leading back to the prominent mid-20th century liberal Columbia sociologist C. Wright Mills or of the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci ­— believe in activist scholarship, few of us would disagree that if academic rigor and the advancement of knowledge are not at the very forefront of university professors’ priorities, the reputation and reliability of scholarship suffers, and mass skepticism of the politicized professoriate starts to seem justified. Still more concerning is that these researchers found that, of the academics surveyed, those who taught in schools of education — the places that teach the teachers to whom our kids are handed over for instruction — were the most likely to hold social justice and student emotional well-being in highest esteem. Indeed, we are seeing pre-college education today becoming both radicalized (with 79% of teachers leaning left, including 87% of high school teachers and 97% of English teachers, and becoming increasingly hostile to religion, so much so that they are one of the primary causes of its decline) and racialized (with school systems throughout the country beginning to teach The New York Times’ discreditedahistorical and hate-filled “1619 Project” as actual history).

Finally, the study found the Big-Five personality trait of “agreeableness” to be positively correlated with a preference for social justice and student emotional well-being and negatively correlated with academic rigor and advancement of knowledge. While the researchers’ proffered explanation for that result is that agreeable people are more likely to be “inclined to help students with issues that are not strictly academic,” my interpretation of their data would be different: agreeableness is known to be correlated with “conformity to social norms and expectations,” while disagreeable people are less concerned with what others think. Because liberal pro-social justice dogma is unquestionably an ascendant orthodoxy at universities, while dissent requires real intestinal fortitude, it makes total sense that those who are most agreeable are most likely to follow the herd. From this standpoint, therefore, the disturbing aspect of the role of agreeableness in these research results is that it signals that many academics are not so much joining a dominant consensus due to their own independently reasoned conclusions as they are, for fear of bucking the tide, reflexively hopping aboard a bandwagon — and, in the end, adding dead weight to what is fast becoming a sinking ship.

Sowing Ignorance and Stifling Debate

As I have already begun to suggest above, the impact of this comparatively rapid transformation in the core complexion of university staff upon the rest of society has been monumental and remains one of the great under-reported stories of the past few decades. Today, nearly three-quarters of students enrolled in U.S. News & World Report’s top ten colleges identify as liberal, while only 15% identify as conservative. Far from cultivating any spirit of open-minded inquiry of the sort one might expect to be the outcome of a university education, however — but consistent with the findings of the Glenn Geher et al. research profiled above — those top universities are leading the anti-intellectual crackdown against “disfavored” viewpoints. Here, according to FIRE’s survey of 20,000 students from a variety of American universities from earlier this year, are some of their attitudes concerning measures they think may appropriately be taken with respect to speakers with whom they disagree:

Students from Universities Ranked 50 or Below Students from Top 10-Ranked Universities
Okay to tear down speaker flyers/announcements 60% 73%
Okay to block entrances to speaker events 37% 50%
Okay to use violence to stop speakers 17% 21%

These numbers, as a whole, will be disturbing to anyone who values open-minded intellectual inquiry, but the numbers from top-ranked universities are especially alarming, showing a pronounced inability on the part of our purportedly “best and brightest” to abide opposing views.

More evidence concerning the unrepresentative and muddle-headed beliefs of the highly educated comes from the large 2018 “Hidden Tribes” demographic survey of political attitudes. The survey found that the left-most grouping — those who could be described as “Progressive Activists” — are the wealthiest and most educated subgroup in America, with 59% of this overwhelmingly white subgroup having completed college, as contrasted with a 29% average in the general population. Such people are far more likely to be politically engaged (73% as compared to a general-population average of 35%) and, for that reason, “have an outsized role in political debates.” Such people are also obsessed with what they perceive to be racism, sexism and other identity-based discrimination, and a whopping 69% of them (as compared to 24% of all Americans) are “ashamed to be American.”

Zach Goldberg’s 2019 discussion of data pertaining to such white liberals documents the fact that their leftward shift in beliefs is of relatively recent vintage but largely predates Trump’s Presidency and is, thus, not attributable to him or his policies. Among the highlights:

  • The percentage of these liberals who thought anti-black discrimination to be a “very serious” problem did not change much between 1996 (27%) and 2010 (25%), yet it shot up to 47% in 2015 and to 58% in 2016.
  • In 1995, 2000 and 2007, white liberals were evenly split among those who thought the criminal justice system fair to blacks and those who thought it biased against them. But by 2014, there was a 70%/20% gap in favor of those who thought the system biased.
  • 29% of white liberals perceived there to be “a great deal” of discrimination against immigrants in 2000; in 2013, that number had risen to 57%. The percentage of liberals feeling “very sympathetic” to illegal immigrants rose from 22% to 42% between 2006 and 2014.

Notably, in each of these cases ­— and especially in the cases of racial issues, with our first black President having still been in office through the end of 2016 — there was no obvious, relevant real-world change for the worse that would have spurred the very significant attitudinal change reflected in these numbers. It is the skewed content of their education, not rational considerations spurred by real-world changes, that is getting these highly educated liberals to alter their views.

At least four more of Goldberg’s conclusions with respect to these white liberals merit attention:

  • The attitudes of these liberals on race issues and immigration issues are significantly to the left of the attitudes of the very minorities they claim to represent.
  • These white liberals have recently developed a significant pro-outgroup bias, meaning that, by a significant margin, they prefer other racial groups to their own. Goldberg calls such an unusual bias “unprecedented,” and of course, no other group — blacks, Hispanics, Asians or non-liberal whites — exhibits such a bias.
  • Their “lack of awareness of how fast and far their attitudes have shifted fosters an illusion of conservative extremism,” whereas the data indicates that “[i]n reality, the conservatives of today are not all that different from the conservatives of years past.”
  • Consistent with the conclusion of the “Hidden Tribes” survey, Goldberg observes that while “[w]hite liberals make up 20-24% of the general population, … [they] exert an outsize political and cultural influence. They are more likely to consider themselves activists, are more active on social media, and, significantly, they are one of the most affluent groups in the country.”

That last point, in particular, merits further reflection. Rich, university-educated white liberals are precisely the kinds of people who rise to prominent and influential positions in what used to be called “media” but what, at this point (for much the same reasons professional wrestling is now commonly known as “sports entertainment”) should rightfully be called the “infotainment industry” — combining, as it does, the likes of formerly white-shoe, traditional media publications that have long since buttoned down and given themselves over to unvarnished advocacy, shameless scandal-sheet propagandists, social media “influencers,” Silicon Valley tech authoritarians, moralizing musicians, woke jocks and other species of shrill B-list celebrities.

“Educated” Infotainers

As The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf has written, “The New York Times, New York, The Intercept, Vox, Slate, The New Republic, and other outlets are today less ideologically diverse in their staff and less tolerant of contentious challenges to the dominant viewpoint of college-educated progressives than they have been in the recent past.” Predictably, the role of the infotainment industry in broadcasting out to the masses the messages our politicized educators have taught them cannot be understated. The “Perception Gap” research of the “More in Common” project that I discussed above reaches this conclusion about the depressing role of the media in driving distorted perceptions of reality:

You might think that people who regularly read the news are more informed about their political opponents. In fact, the opposite is the case. We found that the more news people consumed, the larger their Perception Gap. People who said they read the news “most of the time” were nearly three times more distorted in their perceptions than those who said they read the news “only now and then.”

Zach Goldberg reaches similar conclusions in an August 2020 article fittingly entitled “How the Media Led the Great Racial Awakening,” in which he presents a treasure trove of data convincingly demonstrating that, in a word, the media was in the cockpit of our careening craft. In a few short years, beginning roughly around 2010 (thus, again, well before Trump appeared on the national stage as anything other than a vulgar television personality), the media — with The New York Times leading the charge — began to racialize America, vastly expanding its coverage of race and racism, immeasurably expanding its definition of what counted as “racism” or “white supremacy” to encompass anything and everything that, regardless of the reason, did not produce total and utter demographically proportionate equality and, in the end, getting us all to believe, regressively, that “‘color’ is the defining attribute of other human beings.” The opinions of these infotainment industry thought leaders were quickly adopted by their liberal readers, viewers, listeners and followers, leading, finally, in the summer of 2020, to nationwide protesting, looting and rioting due to the mass adoption of a wildly delusional belief that black people are dying every day at the hands of racist white killer cops — the truth, as FBI data and numerous studies have shown, being that cops do not kill unarmed blacks at higher rates than the crime data would predict and, more importantly, that in all of 2019 (the last year for which there is full data on record), 14 unarmed black people, as well as 25 unarmed white people, were killed by police, as compared, for the sake of maintaining perspective, to 20 (presumably unarmed) people killed by a lightning strike in the same year. As Goldberg documents, the black victims of police shootings generated huge waves of sensationalized media coverage, while the white victims were largely met with the chirping of crickets. What the infotainment industry is doing to our perceptions of race and racism, in other words, might best be characterized as a never-ending, omnipresent Willie Horton ad driving us into irrational paroxysms of racialized mass hysteria.

What emerges from the data I have advanced thus far is a picture in which a massive leftward lurch in the composition of university faculty and administrators beginning in the late 1980s and continuing on through the ’90s and ’00s created, some years down the road, a massive leftward lurch among infotainment industry elites, leading together, in turn, to a massive leftward lurch among the “educated” public as a whole and resulting, finally, in the formation of a fissure between the educated and their less-educated peers. This is why the main axis along which pro-Trump versus pro-Biden voters were divided in 2020 is not the media’s favorite bugaboo of race, but rather, education. Trump’s many obvious faults aside, we should not mistake the joyful tears of the talking heads on our screens and the delighted yelps of urban bobos, yuppies and hipsters in the streets on that Saturday when the media called the election for Joe Biden for anything other than what it was: the relieved cry of the educated elites that the most organized mass propaganda campaign this side of Stalin had succeeded in toppling the crude, unhinged, nationalist-populist championed by the deplorable underclass and installing the easily puppeted, doddering career politician favored by the wealthy, the powerful and the educated. For this reason, as well, the Biden administration is expected to be chock-full of college faculty, a straightforward case of dancing with the ones that bring you to the dance.

Credential Inflation

So education today, and especially elite higher education, is systematically polarizing us, driving misperceptions of the “other” side, fomenting an escalating race war and skewing the composition of the electorate, all while replacing the pursuit of knowledge with politicized groupthink. But is it at least doing a good job of discharging its practical function? Are nominally great universities at least giving us our money’s worth in educating a highly qualified workforce? Not exactly. A recent study demonstrated that when 28,339 graduates from 294 universities — representing universities around the world ranging from the top 50 to 10,000 spots down — were evaluated on various facets of their job performance, for every 1,000 spots lower on the university rankings, the graduates exhibited a performance decline of a measly 1.9%. The starting salaries these students commanded, however, exhibited a far wider gap: while graduates of universities at the top of the rankings had average starting salaries in the high $80,000s or low $90,000 bestowed upon them, graduates 1,000 spots down got average starting salaries in the high $40,000s or low $50,000s, a difference of about 45%. The moral of the story for employers: save your money, and hire the kid from the university a thousand spots down on the list, the one who’ll do almost as good a job but without the political headache and petulant demands the top-tier grad is likely to bring to the job. The moral of the story for the rest of us: highly ranked universities might be paying off financially for some of their graduates (assuming they monetize their credentials rather than pursuing their passions), but they’re not paying off for society as a whole.

What such universities may be producing, in lieu of better qualifications, is what is known as “credential inflation” (a type of phenomenon likely to be especially prevalent during a pandemic-driven recession), in which jobs that never used to — and still technically don’t — require a college education go to college graduates, while jobs that require no more than a college degree go to graduates of the more elite colleges. What happens when we are all reflexively told to go to college is mass underemployment, with, as of September 2020, over half of college graduates and just under half of recent college graduates underemployed, holding down jobs that do not require a college degree. In fact, as a recent Hechinger Report article concludes, college grads could often have gotten similar or higher salaries (without incurring the national average of $28,950 in four-year college loan debt) had they pursued lucrative professional or associate’s degrees in fields such as nursing, construction management or dental hygiene.

Social Instability

What universities may also be producing today is social unrest, not only by miseducating and radicalizing the public, as I have described at length above, but also by contributing to what the U. Conn. scientist and cultural evolution researcher Peter Turchin has dubbed “elite overproduction,” the phenomenon that occurs when a society manufactures many individuals who would appear to have some claim to elite status — such as by virtue of their educational credentials — without there being enough actual elite job slots to go around to satisfy their inflated self-conceptions. In such circumstances, Turchin argues, history repeatedly shows that these individuals become troublemaking malcontents. They begin to comprise a “counter-elite” that lays the groundwork for revolution by fulminating against their own society, its ruling class and the legitimacy of its governing principles, e.g., against the very notion of American meritocracy. Revolutions, in this empirically driven conception, are not made by Marx’s romanticized immiserated proletarians having reached their breaking point, but rather, by aspiring status-seekers and would-be intellectuals stymied by structural roadblocks that prevent their advancement through acceptable, conventional routes. Consistent with Turchin’s thesis, terrorism — the ultimate outlet for malcontents — is also normally not driven by ignorance or poverty, but rather, by a “lack of adequate employment opportunities for educated individuals.”

That social instability is generally summoned up by alienated elements within the “thinking classes” is something prophetic writers like Dostoevsky understood some time ago: his “commoners” tend to be preternaturally virtuous or preternaturally vicious, but it is various disaffected thinkers — students and the like — who tend to become possessed by dangerous ideas. As Adam Garfinkle has written in an article on the decline of deep literacy published in National Affairs earlier this year, superficial education not vivified by a habit of lifelong learning and deep reading, largely serves to make people ideal victims of and disseminators of propaganda. Such “scantily educated” individuals, emboldened by the official sanction of university credentials and enabled by social media, “contribute scantily supported opinions about things they don’t really understand, validating the old saw that a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing” and bringing into being the kind of “distributed mob … the ancient Greeks warned against.” I would add to Garfinkle’s diagnosis just one more proviso: with education configured as it currently is, more does not equal better. In fact, more education will only make the problem worse, adding more dug-in groupthink, more unwarranted self-assurance and more specialized steeping masking deep ignorance.

For all these reasons, fewer people going to college — and especially to high-price-tag, uber-politicized elite colleges — today is a win-win-win, a win for employers who can pay significantly lower salaries without a comparable drop-off in performance quality, a win, paradoxically, for employees, provided they make strategic choices to go into in-demand fields that pay almost as much as or even more than they would have made without incurring crushing debt in the process and a win for society as a whole, which will be saved much of the polarization, systematically skewed politics and social instability associated with contemporary education.

A Higher Calling

But what of education for its own sake? After all, don’t we want people to aspire to the enlightenment that knowledge itself confers? Yes, absolutely. I am far from being one of those philistine conservatives who value only that which can be monetized. I believe firmly that all of us who are truly willing and able to study “the best which has been thought and said” should have that opportunity … but that is certainly not what universities are teaching today. Contemporary universities are little more than social clubs and credentialing degree mills where kids get to stave off the responsibilities of adulthood for four years while insulating themselves (unless they happen to be conservative) from true challenges and discomforts and learning, repeatedly, the pat PBS children’s moral that everyone (except, perhaps, white male heterosexuals) is great exactly as they already are.

There is, moreover, no reason for those intent not on the pursuit of knowledge but on lucrative careers as doctors, lawyers, financiers and techies to waste four unproductive, costly years suffering through classes in elite universities in which they will get little more than some inadequately considered radical politics and an admission ticket into the intolerant American intelligentsia. Just like nurses, auto mechanics or electricians, such careerists should go straight from high school into their professional training schools and not be invited to delude themselves into believing that they are informed aristocrats merely by virtue of their elite credentials and resulting compensation packages. It is only when we take the ruse of career prep out of higher education and reserve such education for those few who want to be working their way, line by line, through the glories of Shakespeare or musing about the wildest implications of quantum mechanics that we will have any chance of purging the universities of the unintellectual students not up to the task and the anti-intellectual academics who thrive by giving those very students the sour-grapes license they need to reject our finest traditions.

To say this another way, the bottom-line problem is that when we made the mistake of trying to open higher education to everyone, we opened the campus gates to people who neither had any interest in learning “the best which has been thought and said,” nor the ability to breathe that rarefied air. We then found ourselves in the position of facing and acceding to strident calls of elitism, racism and other -isms and began to dumb our education down to meet people where they were. A wise observation from T.S. Eliot’s mid-20th-century compendium of essays published as Notes Toward the Definition of Culture puts this point better than I could:

[W]hether education can foster and improve culture or not, it can surely adulterate and degrade it. For there is no doubt that in our headlong rush to educate everybody, we are lowering our standards, and more and more abandoning the study of those subjects by which the essentials of our culture — of that part of it which is transmissible by education — are transmitted; destroying our ancient edifices to make ready the ground upon which the barbarian nomads of the future will encamp in their mechanised caravans.

Eliot’s essay also contains this absolutely critical observation: “A high average of general education is perhaps less necessary for a civil society than is a respect for learning.” While I will leave it to those more qualified for that task to debate whether or not a trickle-down approach works in the realm of economics, in the realm of culture and education, such an approach is exactly what we need. A society in which higher education is reserved for the few who actually crave the precious gifts it confers is one in which higher learning remains an appropriately lofty and difficult arcana unadulterated by the need to condescend to a mass audience. In such a society, elite educated mandarins and, more importantly, the knowledge they command are held in high esteem because they serve as its protectors, keeping it sacrosanct. Then knowledge retains its luminescence, a polestar towards which would-be-initiates will aspire and a guiding light towards which even their less capable brethren among the masses will incline. Lit up by the glow at the top, an entire society is haloed over.

When, instead, the seal is broken, when higher education is instrumentalized in the service of financial rewards or bastardized to avoid bruising the fragile egos of second-rate students, then sacred syllables and profound mysteries are de-solemnized and set adrift in a generalized sea of indifference in which every crown jewel will be lost and every drop of holy water will be diluted. The more open to the barbarian hordes are the gates of our ivory towers, the more closed will remain the minds of those who scramble in their unimpeded headlong rush to the top. When the unreconstructed barbarian resurfaces at the tower’s very apogee and peers down from his newfound perch upon those he now thinks are his inferiors, he may be shocked to find that, far from inspiring the kind of reverence he had imagined came with the role, he will see gazing up from below slightly more ungroomed and unpolished — though also less haughty and more grounded — versions of himself, a sea of expressions betraying skepticism of his claims to expertise and mirroring his own scorn. And when he flings boulders down in disgust to crush dissent, he will find them hurled unceremoniously right back at him.


HOMESCHOOLING: America’s Broken Education System; Leigh Bortins Talks Classical Education, Homeschool

As we enter 2021 and contemplate new beginnings, we sit down with homeschooling expert Leigh Bortins, founder of the curriculum company Classical Conversations, to discuss how American public education has declined in the past century, the responsibility of parents in educating their children, and how classical education can enrich the lives of America’s next generation. This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek.

Fauci Proudly Announces US Will Stay in and Fund WHO Under Biden, Walking Back Trump Withdrawl

Fauci Proudly Announces U.S. Will Stay in and Fund WHO Under Biden, Walking Back Trump Withdrawal


SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/fauci-proudly-announces-u-s-will-stay-in-and-fund-who-under-biden-walking-back-trump-withdrawal/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and chief medical advisor to the president, was pleased to tell the pro-China World Health Organization (WHO) on Thursday that the United States will remain in it after Joe Biden reversed President Trump’s decision to pull the United States out of the scandal-plagued outfit.

“I am honored to announce that the United States will remain a member of the World Health Organization,” Fauci said while speaking at a World Health Organization Executive Board meeting.

At the gathering, Fauci called WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus “my dear friend.”

Tedros is an actual communist who does not even have a medical degree. He landed his UN job with backing from Communist China. Before setting up shop at WHO, he played a leading role in the murderous Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) in his native Ethiopia. This Marxist terror organization declared war on other ethnic groups. Tedros served as a top member of TPLF’s Politburo Central Committee.

The U.S. government designated TPLF a terrorist organization for its history of murder, kidnapping, and other violent acts, including attacks on religious figures, journalists, and private citizens. In fact, the Global Terror Database still lists it as such.

Fauci then announced that Biden had signed a letter retracting former President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from WHO — and assured those present that the United States will continue to fund the organization.

“I join my fellow representatives in thanking the World Health Organization for its role in leading the global public health response to this pandemic,” Fauci said.

The NIAID head made no mention of the WHO’s failures during the COVID-19 outbreak, during which it allowed China to lie and downplay the nature of the disease until it had spread to much of the world.

It was because of the WHO’s failures and its favoritism toward China that President Trump withdrew the United States from it in July 2020.

“China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year,” Trump said in July 2020. The country was scheduled to withdraw from the organization in July 2021.

“The Biden Administration also intends to be fully engaged in advancing global health, supporting global health security and the Global Health Security Agenda, and building a healthier future for all people,” Fauci declared in his speech before the WHO Executive Board.

Fauci further announced that Biden will reaffirm the United States’ commitment to join COVAX, a WHO program to push vaccine acceleration and distribution while subsidizing vaccine access in poorer countries.

Tedros was grateful to know the United States will be remaining in his organization.

Fauci was often at odds with President Trump on COVID-19 policy, but the NIAID director appears eager to form part of the Biden administration.

In November, in fact, Fauci appeared in a livestream with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in which the tech baron said he would work closely with the new administration to “push around authoritative information on vaccines.”

On his second day in office, Joe Biden is expected to sign an executive order mandating the use of masks or face coverings in airports and on commercial planes.

This would come right after his Wednesday order that all federal employees and contractors wear masks, as well as anyone in federal buildings or on federal lands.

“Put simply, masks and other public health measures reduce the spread of the disease, particularly when communities make widespread use of such measures, and thus save lives,” reads Wednesday’s order.

The expected Thursday order would extend to modes of public transportation such as trains and intercity buses.

These moves have the support of the unions.

As Fox News notes:

Airlines for America, a trade organization with members including most major U.S. carriers, has previously and repeatedly championed masks in both airports and on airplanes since the start of the pandemic. Most recently, the group lauded the Federal Aviation Administration’s decision to implement a new “zero tolerance” policy for passengers who refuse to comply with the airlines’ mask policies, or exhibit unruly behavior. While not a federal mandate — the airlines are currently responsible for setting and enforcing their own face-covering policies — the FAA will impose steeper fines and penalties for passengers who refuse to comply with the carriers’ rules.

… “We will no longer adjudicate certain of these unruly passenger cases with counseling or warnings,” FAA Chief Steve Dickson told Reuters, outlining fines of up to $35,000 and possible jail time. “We’re going to go straight to enforcement.”

Joe Biden’s America truly will be one long “dark winter” unless patriots step up to stop him.

Hail to the Thief BIDEN: Democrats celebrate a “victory for democracy” with barbed wire, soldiers, and political terror.


SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/hail-thief-daniel-greenfield/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

On a cold, windy day with a small group of spectators watching from behind barbed wire,

Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. swore another in a long series of false oaths before his motorcade passed between a long row of soldiers with their backs to him looking outward for threats.

No inauguration has been this empty in a century of American history. And at no inauguration have the spectators been outnumbered by a raw display of armed force. American presidents have been inaugurated in wartime and during actual national emergencies with a better turnout.

Through world wars and wars on terror, Washington D.C. has remained a national capital where the hundreds of millions of taxpayers who labor to pay for its grand edifices, free museums, and lavish lifestyles could briefly come to enjoy a little of the life lived by the ruling class in the Imperial City. Now the ruling class has made it clear that it doesn’t want peasants entering D.C.

Even as Biden’s team prepped the executive orders that would end the national emergency at the border and shut down construction of the wall, new walls topped by razor wire were rising across the imperial city. The new Fortress of Government sealed off two miles of the National Mall and parts of downtown D.C. and filled it with more soldiers than are deployed in Iraq.

The Secret Service designated green and red zones. Some 25,000 National Guard members were dispatched from Vermont, Maine, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Ohio, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Arkansas, Missouri, South Carolina, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Colorado to prepare for a fake invasion that never came. But the armored vehicles and heavy weaponry did come. President Trump had wanted a military parade that would show America’s strength to the world. Biden held his own military parade to intimidate his fellow Americans.

Democrats had deployed more soldiers in D.C. than they had in Iraq and Afghanistan while authorizing them to use lethal force and investigating their politics before the deployment. The radical leftists who had resisted using the military to fight terrorism or secure the border from invasion were eager to deploy the military against the people of the United States of America.

The handfuls of ordinary people who arrived, as Americans always do, to attend the inauguration of a new president were confronted with heavy weapons and barbed wire.

D.C. had become a Baghdad and Berlin of checkpoints, choking off access to much of the city, closing roads, bridges, and metro stations. Soldiers could be seen on every corner, and the 25,000 troops were bolstered by 4,000 Marshalls, and a motley crew of local forces, including 200 members of the NYPD, 40 members of the Chicago police, New Jersey and Maryland state troopers, Miami-Dade cops, and other law enforcement officers who were needed back home.

24 people were shot in Chicago this weekend and murders are already up 125% this year in New York City. Those officers could have done more good at home, but Democrats don’t care about murder victims in urban areas, instead redeploying officers to D.C. in a show of force.

Biden took office in a city under military occupation whose businesses were closed and boarded up. The D.C. government had tried to force hotels to shut down. The hotels didn’t close, but there were hardly any people. Instead the hotels were filled with soldiers tramping through their lobbies. Any tourists that did come found nothing to see except barricades and barbed wire.

Sometimes what you don’t see is more important than what you do see.

Filling D.C. with soldiers meant that no one was going to measure Biden’s crowds. The only crowds were heavily armed and had been ordered to come. The complete lack of enthusiasm for the new one-party state that was getting its Mussolini on was the dog that didn’t bark.

Questioning Biden’s election has been deemed to be incitement. It’s enough to get you censored, de-platformed, and fired by the companies standing behind him. The election challenges have been used as the pretext for a military occupation of Washington D.C. But the cloud of a disputed election, like the winter clouds overhead, still hung over the inauguration.

There were no crowds, just soldiers. After the military and police contingent, the second largest group there for the inauguration weren’t Biden’s civilian supporters, but his propagandists. With few people, the media had to work twice as hard to manufacture the illusion that this was a popular leader taking office instead of a usurper imposed by Amazon, Google, Facebook, and the rest of the political, cultural, and economic oligarchy which owns the media on America.

CNN, a subsidiary of AT&T, had already gushed about, "Joe Biden's arms embracing America". MSNBC, a subsidiary of Comcast, compared Biden to God. "He heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds." The only wounds being bound up were those of the ruling class which had temporarily lost electoral power to an army of flyover country workers and peasants, only to reclaim it with sedition, wiretapping, abuse of power, billions of dollars, and soldiers in the street.

Popular leaders, elected or unelected, might have troops in their cities, but they also have adoring crowds to cheer them on. Biden’s only cheers were coming from employees of huge corporations whose jobs depend on praising him as the greatest thing since SuperPACs.

Biden couldn’t manage the cheering crowds that greeted even the most mediocre presidents on their arrival. The band might as well have struck up a rousing chorus of, “Hail to the Thief.”

Jokes like that are all but illegal these days even though they were ubiquitous during the Bush and Trump administrations. But jokes only need to be banned when they’re too close to the truth. The hysterical fascist theater with troops in the streets and fawning praise on the lips of the press are all efforts to overcompensate for the hollow man taking a false oath on a bible.

This isn’t the pageantry of Stalin or Hitler. It’s the weary theater of Brezhnev, a senescent leader of a decaying regime being propped up by desperate threats of force by the nomenklatura. Even though the media has told us more about Biden’s dogs than it has about any of the Americans killed by Islamic terrorists enabled by the open borders that Biden just reinstated, no one cares.

Biden isn’t a charismatic leader. He isn’t moving the cause forward. He’s a placeholder for a ruling class that wants homes in Dupont Circle that it buys by selling out America to China, by ruining our economy with environmental consulting gigs and racial contract quotas, and for all the manifold ways which the swamp is coming back as Biden’s wetlands restoration project.

“Hail to the Thief” is as much their anthem as it is Biden’s. They fought to keep hold of D.C., the center of their power base not because they care about its history or that of this country, but because it’s where they network, collaborate, and do their dirty little deals at our expense.

The troops in the street are their warning to the rest of the country about who is really in charge.

And it isn’t Joe Jr, who, along with his criminal family, will be allowed to dip their beaks in cash and cocaine until they’re sopping wet, along with every aide, staffer, and associate. Biden will be fawned over, his idiot wife will be dubbed a doctor, and the investigations involving his son and brother will be swiftly dropped. And when the time is right, Kamala Harris will step into his place.

When the Soviet Union was entering its last days, one leader quickly made way for another. The parade of old Communist hacks in their dotage became a procession of political funerals. Generations after the revolution and the purges, the only thing anyone in Moscow believed in was the power and decadence of the ruling class. That and the threat America posed to them.

These are still the only three things that Washington D.C.’s ruling class believes in anymore.

Democrats and their media claim that this charade is a “victory for democracy”.

"We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it, would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy. And this effort very nearly succeeded. But while democracy can be periodically delayed, it can never be permanently defeated," Amanda Gorman, the Harvard youth poetess, sonorously recited her tin-eared Maoist verses at the inauguration.

But where is this democracy? Where are the adoring crowds, the joyous mobs celebrating and the people cheering the tremendous victory of the democracy of Google, Facebook, Amazon, AT&T, Comcast and their D.C. lobbyists and associates over the Rust Belt and the flyovers?

Biden and the Democrats celebrated their democratic victory with barbed wire, troops in the streets, political terror, and the threat of even more political repression to come.

"There is a broader societal issue that is going to take years to detox the disinformation," Ben Rhodes, the Obama adviser who had boasted of creating a media echo chamber, ranted on Comcast's MSNBC. On that same state TV news network, John Brennan warned that "because of this growth of polarization in the United States" members of the Biden team would be "moving in laser-like fashion" to "root out an insidious threat to our democracy".

Democracy is in a state of permanent emergency that requires locking down D.C., filling it with soldiers, walls, and barbed wire, and investigating political crimes. And D.C. will do everything it can to end the threat that Americans pose to democracy even if its ruling class has to live in its green zone surrounded by troops and barbed wire until democracy is saved from Americans.

Biden, we are told by the political interests and corporations advocating this, is incredibly popular. But the crowds of his devotees can’t be allowed to come to Washington D.C. Anyone who doubts that Biden is incredibly popular is inciting violence and will have to be rooted out as an insidious threat to our democracy. The more people doubt Biden’s popularity, the longer D.C. will have to be under military occupation until finally no one doubts his legitimacy in office.

Hail to the Thief.


Evangelical Leaders Rejoice in Communist Takeover of America

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2021/01/21/evangelical-leaders-rejoice-in-communist-takeover-of-america/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

January 20, 2021 marked the death of America as we know it. The funeral service, with America’s new Chinese Communist Party-controlled priest, Joe Biden, preaching the service, was held in honor of America’s history as Biden announced his intentions to move the country further away from its founding Judeo-Christian roots and bury her alongside dead bodies of Western Civilization, ingenuity, and superiority.

While the funeral service — also referred to as Joe Biden’s “inauguration” — barely had any attendees save a few media outlets and global elites, the “new administration” had an unlikely fan base found primarily in the left-wing of the Southern Baptist Convention (TGC) and The Gospel Coalition (TGC).

If you’ve followed Reformation Charlotte for any amount of time, you’re probably aware of the leftward drift of the Evangelical Church — primarily, the Southern Baptist Convention. We’ve covered the phenomenon for years. Leftists, like Russell Moore of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) and various other seminary leaders have either actively promoted or turned a blind eye to the influx of cultural Marxism taking over.

Now, all blindfolds are off and there should be no doubt about who supports this movement and who is against it.

In the wake of the inauguration of Joe Biden, the country’s first fully Communist president, many of these Evangelicals rejoiced. Of course, there were the obvious; Thabiti Anyabwile, Lecrae, Jemar Tisby, to name a few. But the leftist outlets pretending to take a neutral stance to politics can no longer pretend.

For example, Brett McCracken, a prominent TGC contributor, gave glowing accolades to the Pagan performance put on by the new American Communist Party during the inauguration.

A lovely and dignified ceremony. Poetry. Pageantry. Prayer. Peace. All in a pandemic.

I oppose much of Biden’s policy, but I’m grateful for this moment and pray his leadership brings more goodness, truth, and beauty to America in the years to come. #InaugurationDay

McCracken, whose material is promoted in Southern Baptist and Evangelical Churches all around the nation and who pastors look to and read almost daily, referred to the ceremony as “lovely” and “dignified.” The ceremony, the poetry, the pageantry, the prayer, and the peace came from some of the most God-hating people in the world — including the disgusting and filthy, foul-mouthed musician, Lady Gaga.

We have seen McCracken’s version of false peace played out over and over in Scripture proclaiming “peace, peace, where there is no peace.” (Ezekiel 13:10Jeremiah 6:14, etc.) The false peace and false unity McCracken proclaims is demonic, evil, and should trouble the spirit of any discerning, Bible-believing Christian.

But he isn’t the only one. Of course, there is Beth Moore, the Southern Baptist Convention’s very own lady gaga who, in turn, promotes the false peace and unity of the new Communist takeover of our once-great nation. Instead of seeing the sickness of this demonic ritual for what it is, Beth Moore is able to drool over these wicked murderers.


And then, as Biden proclaims he’s going to be the president for “all Americans,” Beth Moore — who, along with the new American Communist Party — apparently does not believe that unborn children are Americans, or even people for that matter, continues her drool fest all over these wicked people.


While true Christians would mourn at the loss of life and judgment of God being unleashed on this nation, leftists masquerading as Christians rejoice. Russell Moore, head of the ERLC says “some things that President Biden has committed to do should please Christians.” And Thabiti Anyabwile, a Southern Baptist pastor, says that Joe Biden’s pick for health secretary — a transgender who can’t even figure out his own sex by looking in the mirror — is qualified and competent to execute the nation’s health policy.

While Joe Biden’s itinerary for his presidency reads like the antithesis to the Ten Commandments, these leftists want us to stand with the enemies of the Church. It is time for true Christians to stand up and begin purging these false prophets and God-hating ministers of darkness from the ranks of the Church. True Christians do not rejoice in wickedness.



Beth Moore Says God is Judging His People Because They “Sinned Grievously” By Supporting Trump


SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2021/01/19/beth-moore-says-god-is-judging-his-people-because-they-sinned-grievously-by-supporting-trump/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Beth Moore is the Southern Baptist Convention’s top lady-preacher and prime merry-andrew of Evangelicalism. Beth Moore, like her spiritual brother, Russell Moore (no relation), has lead the charge in opposing conservative policies in the political realm, primarily railing against the evil orange man, daily.

Today, she has what she’s been asking for.

Moore has repeatedly lambasted conservative Evangelicals who supported Donald Trump while giving approval to those who support the pro-sodomy, pro-abortion anti-religious freedom political party. The Democrats, unlike the Republicans, stand for everything that God is against. In fact, the Democrat party platform is like the antithesis to the 10 Commandments. Yet, Beth Moore, like the growing swaths of leftist Evangelicals, are increasingly encouraging “political diversity” and giving approval to leftists.

Now, Beth Moore says that God is judging his people because so many Christians supported Donald Trump. In a series of tweets, she writes, “God’s got this thing about pride. He does not let it go unchecked. When his people continue in arrogance after multiple warnings, he is going to bring them down.”

While she doesn’t exactly explain what she means by “bring them down,” one can only assume that she means that God is punishing them. Today, the world finds out that the incoming Democrat president plans to unleash upon the nation a depraved, confused, sexually immoral person to lead the nation’s health policy. In the words of John Calvin, “when God wants to judge a nation, He gives them wicked rulers.”

Of course, repentance, she says, is what we should have done.

Repentance, instead of what? Repentance, instead of “doubling down,” apparently. Because, apparently, in Beth Moore’s simplistic and feeble mind, Republicans — especially Donald Trump — are pro-death for everyone except straight, white men.

Therefore, God is judging the Church for sinning “grievously” by “wedding evangelicalism to a political party.” Because, it wasn’t about protecting religious freedom — that we all know is now gone. It wasn’t about protecting unborn life — that we now know will be in greater danger. It wasn’t about protecting the consciences of people who don’t want to be forced to deny reality when it comes to sex and gender.


It’s all about “power.”

Therefore, since so many Christians supported Donald Trump — cause, you know, all those white trailer park trash are all about maintaining their positions of power — God is releasing his judgment and the only way out is repentance.


Antifa? Infiltrators? Eyewitness account of what happened at the US Capitol on Jan. 6


What a veteran of many other Trump rallies saw and heard that day –

very disturbing. It was clearly a setup.


SEE: https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/21a/Eyewitness-account-at-US-Capitol-Jan6/index.html;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Richard Howell, a resident of Massachusetts and a long-time friend of MassResistance, traveled to Washington, DC on Jan. 6 to hear President Trump’s speech near the White House and then attend the scheduled pro-Trump rally outside the US Capitol building.

What he saw was quite different than what most Americans have heard from the media (much of which are outright lies) – and certainly different from any other conservative rally. Since then, many reports have appeared in conservative media of intense infiltration by Antifa there that day (see here and here and here) to create trouble.

Here’s what Richard told us a few days after he returned:


President Trump’s speech at the Ellipse

We’re all hearing that Trump’s speech that day riled the people to attack the Capitol. That’s a complete lie. If anything, his speech was so subdued people were walking away early because they weren’t hearing enough fire from him. I’ve never seen that happen at a Trump speech ever before. And I remember looking at the guys I was standing with and saying to them, “I don’t know what he’s doing, but there has to be a reason he is doing this the way he’s doing it.” I left just when his speech was concluding..

Walking to the Capitol

I’m walking up Pennsylvania Ave. from the President’s speech at the Ellipse. It’s about a 40-minute walk, but I was in a rush to get there and made it in 25 minutes. I’m hungry. I’m thirsty. And I’m wondering where our people are – that’s what’s on my mind. The White House grounds are completely blocked off, which is normal. So I’m walking up and behind me I see a throng of hundreds of thousands of people packed together. They were our supporters coming up, and I’m glad I’m here. They’re probably five or ten minutes behind me.

As I’m walking, I notice a policeman in an SUV, and he’s taking pictures of the crowd like everybody else.  I went up to him and I said, “Yeah, you too huh?” I’m joking with him and he started to laugh. And he was the last policeman I saw.

Arriving at the Capitol

I get over to the end of Pennsylvania Ave., right where the Capitol circular drive starts. And I see nothing but our people there, large numbers of them. And I didn’t see one police officer of any stripe – Capitol police, Capitol building police (which is under the control of Speaker Pelosi), or any others. The people were just standing where they were. You had to work your way through that crowd. A lot of people were doing that, but many were standing still.

As I’m working my way through the crowd – it’s not quite one o’clock – and as I’m approaching the building, I’m hearing people saying, “Wow, I can’t believe this, we have a good spot here.” And I thought, “You know, they’re letting people be very close to the building.” Now, I haven’t seen that in a couple of decades. The Capitol building is usually a fortress, and those grounds are cordoned off with barriers and policemen all over the place. If you’ve been there, you’ve certainly seen that.

In fact, the last few times I was down there, they were even kicking people off the Supreme Court grounds next to the Capitol, which was ridiculous. People weren’t anywhere close to the Capitol building but the police were kicking them out.

So this time we’re wide open to the Capitol building, and we’ll be able to get a good spot there. But it was a little hard to get there, because there were some people standing still and not moving, and other people were trying to work their way through, like me!

Things began to happen

Then in the background, somewhere, I don’t know where, I hear whiz bang, thud, whiz bang, thud, whiz bang, thud.  I’m like, what was that? Who’s shooting? It sounded as if there were some kind of canisters. I don’t know who was shooting them or what. I presumed it was the police, but I didn’t know. At first I thought it was maybe some kind of troublemaker, maybe an Antifa guy or BLM guy, doing that. I thought, “This is odd.”

And then I get closer to where there’s a brick plaza, the last long stretch of territory before you get to the columns in the south portico. I only get to the edge of that, as there was no need to go further. As I’m looking around, nothing big is happening. There are people that are trying to move forward.

Suddenly I’m hearing some people in back of me shout, “Oh, go forward, go forward fellow patriots!” I’m saying to myself, “I don’t know these idiots, I know where I need to go, I don’t have to listen to these imbeciles.” I just thought these guys were trying to be hotshots.

Tear gas

I’m at that area for probably five or ten minutes and I smell smoke and I see people streaming back. There are a lot of people in front of me and they’re coming back and their eyes are watering and they’re covering their faces. I said, “My God, that’s tear gas.” So I back off. I retreat back to just before that area. And I said, “Something’s happening. This is trouble. And I can’t believe these are our people. Our people just don’t get into that.”

People are streaming back and they’re holding their eyes. And then, when it cleared up – it might have been another five or ten minutes – I go back again.

The lie about wanting to go after Pence

As I’m going – this is probably about 1:15 pm – I’m hearing a guy not far away making an announcement, “Pence just certified, Pence just certified.” People are saying, “What! My God, that can’t be true!”

I pulled him aside and said, “Where did you get that information?” And I think he said, “Oh, I got it off of NewsMax or One America.” Whatever he told me, it seemed credible and I wasn’t shocked. Then there was a guy with a bullhorn standing on one of the concrete retaining walls nearby, and he’s saying, “Yes, it looks like the Vice President has betrayed us, it looks like he has certified. But that’s preliminary information. Does anyone have any information to the contrary?” 

Nobody really knew what Pence had done. So lie number two was that people were there to hang Pence. Nobody had a clue what was going on; people weren’t thinking about that.

Guys up on the scaffolding

Then I see more tear gas and more people coming by. I tried to phone my buddies who were somewhere in the crowd, but our cell phones were not able to communicate. I wouldn’t be surprised that they were jamming the phone signals. But I finally was able to I hear one of them say, “There are guys on the staircases now,” but the signal was lost again.

Then I looked up and saw some guys were on the scaffolding (that’s there presumably for the inauguration ceremonies). So, I’m thinking, “What are these guys in the scaffolding for? This is crazy. You’re going to be surrounded and apprehended by security.”

But I don’t see any policeman anywhere. Normally (pun intended) it’s a capital offense if you get to the building and you’re not supposed to be there. They’ll rush you down, they’ll shoot you. They’ll bind you up and take you away. But the Capitol police were nowhere to be found.

The guys in the scaffolding, who looked like they were trying to breach the building, were just standing there with goofy smiles on their faces. It was just very tacky, which is another thing that really looked weird. They certainly didn’t seem like our people at all.

The guys on the scaffolding began waving American flags, and the people in the crowd didn’t know who they were – some were cheering and some were just looking at them, and some people were saying, “Why are they doing that?”

But tear gas was still going off – you could see the smoke – and blowing back to the crowd from the front, which by now disturbed a lot of people. It seemed as if police somewhere were doing this, and the people were getting upset. They’re saying, “We’re here, exercising our rights, and they’re firing on us. Why are they doing this?”

I said to someone, “If we were Antifa or BLM, they wouldn’t be doing this.” and the guy said, “Yeah they certainly wouldn’t be.” That was the sentiment. So people really were dismayed that they were being treated this way. It’s also likely that Antifa was doing the tear-gassing – which I’ll get to.

A few police show up

Finally, for the first time all day, I see six Capitol policemen, scurrying down a metal staircase right near that scaffolding. They are pointing at one of the guys up there – there may have been 3 or 4 there, I couldn’t see them all because there was a tarp in the way. One of them was pointing back at the police officer. Now the voices can carry, and I was close enough to hear some of what was said. The police were saying, “Get out of there now!” And the guy was saying, “No! We’re not getting out of here!” 

And, I don’t know where it came from, but all of a sudden a canister of tear gas came out from the scaffolding into the crowd of policemen. One of them got hit in the face. And the other five police had to carry him away.

No police came back! Normally when you assault a policeman like that or you’re in the middle of that, even if you’re defending yourself, you’re going to have a platoon come down and take you out. If six guys couldn’t take those guys out they’re going to send 21 down to stop them, right?  But nothing, zero.

Man shot by rubber bullets

And at this time I see this man who was shot, by rubber bullets. His jacket was shredded, he was being helped by three people, two men and a woman. And he’s sitting in a corner.

Meanwhile, my friends texted me and said they were on the other side of the building near where the Supreme Court faces.  So I said, “OK, I’ll see you in a minute.”

But first I wanted to see if this other man was going to be OK.  And he went into shock, the medics came and got him, and I don’t know what happened with him after that. He didn’t look like he was particularly quarrelsome. The only thing I remember is that he had cowboy boots on. Other than that he seemed like a clean-cut, middle-aged fellow. His temple was grazed by a bullet. He looked like he was also shot in the chest. He was bleeding from the hands and was bandaged there. Maybe also shot in the arm and leg, I don’t know. Once he was out of there I figured, OK, I’m leaving now, because I want to find my friends on the other side of the building.

Shouts of “Go into the building!”

But then I saw a group of guys directing the other people there to go into the Capitol building. They were shouting, “Come on patriots, go in! This is our house! Yeah! The second American Revolution!”  I was shaking my head saying, ”This is a trap, this is crazy.”

But there were guys going in! Now, some of them looked to be guys that would have been our guys. They were dressed the right way, they were acting the right way. In other words, they were people that I was convinced were actually Trump constitutionalist supporters that were just getting carried away.

But the guys leading them in there were different. I thought, “Something’s wrong. This is insane.”

So I backed off.  I wanted to go to where my friends were. So I walked around the building to the west portico. And I could see some officers around the corner, but not many.

At the other side of the Capitol building

The west portico faces the Supreme Court building. And the two wings – the House and the Senate, and also the middle wing – all had our people on the staircases, all the way to the top. On the landing of each wing there was a police corps in there, of I don’t know how many policemen altogether, but 30 at least. (It’s not a continuous building, it’s sectioned off. You have a portico in each one of the entrance ways.)

In each one of those cases, I could see that the police and our guys were probably a meter apart. Nobody was in anybody’s space. It was pretty calm. You know, some of the guys were talking with each other, some guys were chanting a little bit, but not too much. And that was the case in each one of those three staircases there. And I am thinking to myself, “Why didn’t they do this at the south portico?” Well of course the answer is obvious, there were activists looking to stage something on the south portico. There is no doubt in my mind.

Nancy Pelosi controls the Capitol security and the Capitol police in the building. Mayor Muriel Bowser also controls the Capitol police. And there was no doubt in my mind they were setting things up. There is no other explanation for it and that’s what turned out to happen.

After that point, we left to go to our metro stations to get to our rides back.

A few more observations

When I was at the front side, the south portico, I could see activity right up front, but I couldn’t see what was happening up in the wings. I didn’t see any windows being broken.

One interesting story after the scaffolding incident: Some of the guys crawled all the way up to the top balcony in the portico. And I’m thinking, “What are they doing? They’re really asking for trouble now.”

Once we're up there, I could hear people saying, “The doors are open! The doors are open!” Not like they broke them in or somebody else broke them in, they were surprised the doors were open. 

I thought, “That can’t be, these people are delusional. There’s no way the doors can be open.” Somebody asked me if I thought they got in. I said, “There’s no way. I just can’t see them getting in the building.” But I was wrong. Clearly, they did get in!


There was no doubt that there was something very strange going on. But I didn’t think much about it till afterwards. One incident in particular now stands out.

As I mentioned, earlier there were people streaming by me that had tear gas in their eyes. And there were two fellows in particular I remember, a white man and a black man. They were stocky men, lightly dressed even though it was freezing out. And I said to them, “Are you all right?” because their eyes were watery and they looked different than the other people walking by. They just looked very different. And they ignored me. And I said to them again, because they were walking slowly by me, they couldn’t run by me. I said, “Hey, are you all right?” And they ignored me again. I said, “I asked you if you’re all right.” They blurted out, “Yeah, yeah.” And they looked at me in a hostile fashion. I believe those men were probably the Antifa/BLM infiltrators or deep-state/FBI operatives and ran into their own tear gas.

Final thoughts

Another thing that went through my mind afterwards: I definitely think this was some kind of planned operation to orchestrate this whole mess, with the authorities in collusion. My friend on the west side of the portico told me that they saw helmeted men coming by, and they definitely looked to them like the Antifa crowd who we used to face off against back home in Boston. And when the crowd was trying to interact with them, they were very hostile and standoffish to them, and made it very clear they didn’t want any part of them. Those aren’t our people.

Just the way it went off, not to mention the damage that was done, this was definitely not what our people would do. That’s all a BLM/Antifa/deep-state move. It looked like they were doing to us what they had been doing to Trump. They were setting us up and trying to make us look bad and creating an incident that we didn’t create but they created, and were blaming us for it. That’s what it came down to.

No sooner did I leave the Capitol grounds on was on my way to the Metro that I was messaged about ten times. There was an edict by Mayor Bowser that she would be shutting down the city at 6:00 pm. All our people would be out at 4:00 or 4:30 anyway, so that was not a big deal. But it was still strange.

Then the Capitol police started showing up in force! There were suddenly all of the cars that you’d normally see there. The Secret Service had their baton and shield crowd out, and some of them looked like overweight females. It was weird. But they were well-armed and weaponized.

In fact, the vast majority of people that were there – 99% of them – didn’t get very close to the Capitol building. And most of the people, I could see their faces, most of them did not move from where they were, they wanted to stay put.

As I said, there were only 6 police officers that I remember seeing the entire time there was trouble at the south portico, the main entrance. There were zero there for the first half hour I was there. Zero. There was nothing to stop people.

I have to hand it to the other side’s organizers. There’s no question that they pulled off a masterful stroke. Nobody on our side could see it coming. Nobody was thinking about this. Our guys weren’t talking about doing anything inappropriate. You know, how long have we been doing these kinds of rallies, and nothing bad has ever happened? Personally, I’ve been at hundreds of Republican or conservative events over the past decades without incident.

And the funny thing is, if you look at the video, which I saw after the fact, you could see that our guys that went in were on the rotunda taking pictures like tourists. And they were walking properly through the purple ropes, where you’re not supposed to go to your right or your left. That’s quite an insurrection, isn’t it? And, the police were in there were taking selfies with these guys, they’re interacting with them. They were standing around letting these guys walk all over, no problem.

So much for the riot and insurrection narrative. Those people – Pelosi, Bowser, and the other DC authorities – are complicit as hell.

MassResistance needs to get the word out about what really happened.


The "Back the Blue" movement needs to die, for our modern police are the willing instruments of tyranny. They run interference for Antifa and Black Lives Matter while participating in a campaign of destroying businesses, preventing assemblies, and terrorizing people who refuse to wear masks. America is close to becoming like other Western nations where the police patrol Twitter to find thought criminals. Disregarding the agenda or the plandemic are already clearly forbidden. As this is being written, the U.S. military is being deputized in the nation's capital to eventually induce martial law, in utter disregard of it being absolutely forbidden by the Constitution (for the military to police citizens on U.S. soil). Get reliable notification options and further information at Sarah's home site: https://SarahCorriher.com/

Leftists Call For New “Secret Police” Force to Spy on Trump Supporters

Let the "healing" begin.


SEE: https://www.infowars.com/posts/leftists-call-for-new-secret-police-force-to-spy-on-trump-supporters/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Perhaps channeling the spirit of the Soviet NKVD, leftists are now literally calling for a new “secret police” unit to be created at the federal level to spy on Trump supporters.

In an article published by the Daily Beast, Jeff Stein argues that existing federal agencies like the FBI are ill-equipped to stop “white terror” because they missed signs of the pre-planning of the Capitol building siege.

The solution is to create a new “secret police” (yes, he literally uses those words) in order to “infiltrate and neutralize armed domestic extremists,” which according to the media’s latest narrative potentially includes 70 million Trump voters.

Stein even compares the Capitol breach to 9/11, an attack that killed nearly 3,000 people, and argues that a similar response to that should be directed inwardly against American citizens directed by a new “domestic spy agency.”

“One response to the 9/11 tragedy may well get renewed attention after the Capitol assault—especially if armed white nationalists are successful in carrying out more attacks in the coming days and weeks: The call for a secret police,” he writes.

The existence of a “secret police” force that subverts constitutional norms to repress the population is of course a hallmark of all dictatorial regimes, but that doesn’t appear to bother self-proclaimed “progressives.”

“Hundreds of Black Lives Matter/Antifa riots, some of which entailed firing mortars at, firebombing, or burning down police stations, did not qualify as domestic terrorism. But the Capitol Riot was terrorism, due to the usual double standard,” points out Dave Blount.

He also hits the nail on the head about the real reason why the creation of a new secret police unit would be necessary.

“Neither the FBI nor the NSA has the culture of brutal hostility toward their own country’s population needed to efficiently repress dissidents in the unfolding police state.”

As we highlighted yesterday, in addition to a new secret police, some are calling for the creation of a Stasi-like citizen spy network that would recruit Biden supporters to spy on Trump supporters and grass them up to the authorities.

Presumably, this is all part of the national “healing” and “unity” that Joe Biden has called for.


Fascist Democrats are Using a Manufactured Emergency to Create a One-Party State

The manufactured emergency is here. The power grab comes next.


SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/fascist-democrats-are-using-manufactured-emergency-daniel-greenfield/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

During the election, Speaker Pelosi had railed against Republicans as “domestic enemies” and “enemies of the state.” Now, Pelosi can be seen addressing soldiers outside the U.S. Capitol.

Fascist theater is now as common an occupation for the D.C. elite as upscale cocktail bars.

Pelosi’s fascist state and its crackdown on enemies is here with a militarized occupation of D.C. by 25,000 troops whose politics had to be cleared by the political commissars at the FBI, a ban on protests, and political opponents being silenced, fired, and banned by corporate monopolies.

Scenes that Americans would have once associated with banana republics and fascist dictatorships are now playing out daily as media propaganda broadcasts warn of a grave threat that requires a military occupation of Washington D.C. and the total repression of the opposition.

The wave of censorship that began with Facebook and Twitter banning President Trump has escalated to a takedown of Parler, a conservative alternative, to media campaigns urging crackdowns on a variety of alternative apps and services like Signal, Telegram, MeWe, and Zello, and a push by CNN to have AT&T and Comcast ban conservative cable networks.

There’s even an FCC crackdown on conservatives using ham radios to communicate.

Proposals are percolating through the media and its national security commentariat to transform the FBI from a law enforcement agency to a “domestic spy agency” monitoring Americans.

Last year, Hillary Clinton was warning that fascism was coming to America.

"The idea that it can't happen here is just old fashioned," Hillary had insisted while falsely claiming that the 2016 election had been stolen from her. Now her party is rolling out actual fascism while criminalizing any questions and concerns about the 2020 election.

It is happening here.

Hillary’s latest op-ed in the Washington Post, a paper owned by the richest man in the world whose company de-platformed Parler, calls for expelling Republican legislators, passing “new criminal laws”, and government oversight of social media platforms. This is fascism.

All House Democrats voted for a resolution calling for an unconstitutional 25th Amendment coup and when that failed for an impeachment that falsely blames President Trump for the violence because, even though he urged peaceful protests, his speech contained the word, “fight”.

Democrats warn that questioning their election wins is “incendiary”, “incitement”, “shouting fire in a crowded theater”, and “not protected speech”.

The basic norms of political protest and legislative opposition are rapidly being criminalized.

Many Democrats have endorsed an illegal 14th Amendment push to expel Republican Senate members, including Senator Ted Cruz, for merely questioning the election.

Expelling political opponents for questioning your abuses is the behavior of fascists.

Attorney General Karl Racine in D.C., who cheered the Black Lives Matter race rioters, is investigating conservative rally speakers for incitement for questioning the election results.

The only places where questioning election results are illegal is in dictatorships.

We now live in a country with politically vetted soldiers in the streets, political propaganda, and a climate of political terror against the people that Speaker Pelosi called “enemies of the state”.

The same Democrat machine that supported a year of Black Lives Matter riots that killed 8 people, wounded over 700 law enforcement officers, and caused over $2 billion in damage, which included violent attacks on the White House and on federal buildings, exploited a single day of violence on Capitol Hill to declare a national emergency and claim an “insurrection”.

When President Trump and Senator Tom Cotton proposed using the Insurrection Act to stop the year of Black Lives Matter violence, Democrats had accused them of fascism.

“This is Fascism,” The New Republic blared then. Now that fascism has actually arrived, it’s cheering the military occupation and the Democrat purge of the “enemies of the state”.

Exploiting a moment of crisis, real or feigned, to unroll a system of domestic repression from Stalin’s exploitation of Kirov’s murder to launch the Great Purge, to the Reichstag fire being used by the Nazis to eliminate the political opposition, is how totalitarian regimes are born.

A totalitarian fascist regime is being birthed again by the Democrats in Washington D.C.

This is not the first time that Democrats have exploited violence to criminalize and delegitimize the political opposition. After the Kennedy assassination by a socialist traitor who had defected to the USSR, Democrats blamed a climate of “right-wing hate” in Dallas. The false claim of a right-wing conspiracy was invented by the KGB and fed to the Washington Post by Khrushchev.

Democrats and the media spent two generations convincing Americans that “right-wing hate” had killed Kennedy and reviving that smear to attack every new conservative movement.

The narrative of “right-wing extremism” began before the Kennedy assassination in the same way that it always does as a pretext for suppressing political opposition to a new Democrat administration. Kennedy’s death helped solidify what would become a well-worn template.

The Clinton administration built its domestic program around fighting “right-wing extremism”. Democrats and the media focused on “anti-government extremists” while ignoring the growing threat of Islamic terrorism from Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda that would lead to 9/11.

While Biden cracks down on the conservative political opposition, history is likely to repeat itself with the rise of Islamic terrorists and a growing new threat to America.

But cracking down on conservative populism was key to Clinton’s agenda while 9/11 wasn’t.

When Obama came into office, Bill Clinton revived the smear that the Oklahoma City bombing had been caused by "right-wing, radio talk-show hosts" and that history was repeating itself. The Obama administration jettisoned the fight against Islamic terrorism and instead focused on fighting conservative populism while ISIS built a terror empire and beheaded Americans.

When the Obama administration didn’t have enough material from genuine extremists, Democrats and the media falsely blamed a shooting by a mentally ill man that killed a Republican judge and wounded former Rep. Gabby Giffords on Sarah Palin and the GOP.

No amount of time or contradictory events has managed to part Democrats from this lie.

And so the New York Times responded to the violence on Capitol Hill by rolling out an op-ed connecting the Giffords shooting with the events there. Other media outlets linked it to the Kennedy assassination and other equally discredited narratives about “right-wing hate”.

The Biden regime is following the familiar pattern of suppressing a conservative populist movement rising against its radical agenda by criminalizing it as a dangerous threat. But no previous Democrat suppression campaign, not even after the murder of a president, ever involved the scope, ruthlessness, and brutality of the one we are witnessing right now.

In the generations and decades since the Left has gained a great deal of control over some of the biggest companies in America. Previous Democrat administrations had repressed their political opponents by abusing the IRS, the FCC, and the FBI. These forms of political repression were ugly but fell far short of fascism. But the new partnership between the government and the monopolies has spawned a crackdown more closely resembling fascism.

The integration of governmental, cultural, and economic power within a single agenda while using it to conduct a full-spectrum campaign of criminalization, de-platforming, and banning against the political opposition has created an all-encompassing totalitarian fascist machine.

Fascism is rooted in the ancient symbol of the ‘Fasces’: the bundle of bound rods that have come to embody the centralization of power. And power has never been as centralized in America as it is today with political, cultural, and economic power in a handful of hands.

But that’s just the beginning.

The Democrats don’t want unity or healing. What they want is to bring about a one-party state just as they have in California where massive election fraud, ballot harvesting, ghost districts of illegal aliens, and the concentration of economic power in Big Tech gave Senator Kamala Harris a national political career when she won her Senate seat by running against another Democrat.

D.C. isn’t under military guard to protect our government, but a partisan political agenda.

The Democrats didn’t want troops in D.C. when their own were rioting during President Trump’s inauguration or violently attacking the White House. They don’t need 25,000 troops to stop a few hundred protesters. They need them as a show of force to suppress political opposition.

Biden and the Democrats are using a military deployment for a show of political force, using a manufactured crisis to rally support behind their radical agenda, while suppressing dissent.

That agenda is deeply unpopular among Americans. It entails eliminating election safeguards against voter fraud, opening the borders to illegal aliens, passing illegal alien amnesty, transforming D.C. and Puerto Rico into states, and packing the Supreme Court to prevent the judiciary from stopping its abuses. All of this is meant to create a one-party state.

The Democrats are marshaling all their political, economic, and cultural forces to distract attention from their agenda and to suppress the rising opposition to its plot against America.

That’s why anyone listening to 15 seconds of CNN would imagine that we are at war when the only war is the one that the Democrats and their media allies have declared on Americans.

America is not a banana republic. There is no place for military theater, lists of enemies, or declaring political opponents to be enemies of the state. The Democrats have already embraced fascism before even formally taking power. Fascists always claim to be seizing power in reaction to an emergency. The manufactured emergency is here. The power grab comes next.


Twitter Insider Secretly Records CEO Jack Dorsey Detailing Agenda For Further Political Censorship

Twitter Senior Executive Vijaya Gadde Details Plans for Political Censorship on a Global Scale

James O'Keefe LIVE on Hannity to discuss Project Veritas #ExposeTwitter BOMBSHELL! 01-14-21 

#ExposeTwitter: James O'Keefe FULL INTERVIEW with Sean Hannity 01-18-21


Honduran migrants hoping to reach the U.S. border walk alongside a highway in Chiquimula, Guatemala, Saturday, Jan. 16, 2021. Guatemalan authorities estimated that as many as 9,000 Honduran migrants have crossed into Guatemala as part of an effort to form a new caravan to reach the U.S. border. (AP Photo/Sandra …

Biden names lead US negotiator of the Iran nuclear deal to be deputy secretary of state

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/01/biden-names-lead


The lead US negotiator of the Iran nuclear accord and a battle-tested hawk on Russia were named Saturday to top posts in President-elect Joe Biden’s State Department, signaling a return to a more traditional, multilateral approach after Donald Trump’s chaotic presidency.

Wendy Sherman, who brokered the Iran accord under Barack Obama and negotiated a nuclear deal with North Korea under Bill Clinton, was named as deputy secretary of state.

Victoria Nuland, a former career diplomat best known for her robust support for Ukrainian protesters seeking the ouster of a Russian-aligned president, was nominated undersecretary for political affairs — the State Department’s third-ranking post, in charge of day-to-day US diplomacy.


Biden to Cancel Keystone XL Pipeline on First Day

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/reports-biden-to-cancel-keystone-xl-pipeline-on-first-day/

EXCERPT: Several news sources are reporting that Joe Biden will use an executive order to cancel the permits granted to the Keystone XL pipeline on his first day in office as the nation’s 46th president. If true, this act would be a powerful demonstration that elections have consequences, as President Donald Trump was a huge advocate of the pipeline — a project that has faced both political and legal opposition for its entire existence.


Biden plans 10-day blitz to reverse Trump legacy

SEE: https://www.wnd.com/2021/01/biden-plans-10-day-blitz-reverse-trump-legacy/

EXCERPT: On his first day in office, Joe Biden will issue a dozen executive directives to kick off a 10-day blitz that will include a flurry of legislative proposals aimed at reversing President Trump's legacy, the New York Times reported.

Along with proposing legislation to provide a pathway to citizenship for more than 10 million immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally, Biden will on Inauguration Day:

  • Rescind the ban travel from countries that aid and abet terrorism;
  • Rejoin the Paris climate-change accord
  • Extend pandemic-related limits on evictions and student loan payments.
  • Issue a mask mandate for federal property and interstate travel.

Biden also will ask Congress to pass a $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief and economic stimulus package that will include a $15 minimum wage.


Amnesty for Everyone Who Was Here on January 1

SEE: https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2021/01/18/joe-biden-amnesty-for-everyone-who-was-here-on-january-1/


President-elect Joe Biden’s amnesty plan will reportedly provide the glittering prize of U.S. citizenship to everyone who can show they were in the United States illegally on January 1, if Congress passes the wage-cutting, nation-changing legislation amid a deep economic recession.

“To qualify, immigrants must have been in the United States as of Jan. 1, a move meant to blunt any rush to the border,” according to a description provided “by transition officials” to the Washington Post.

But the “rush to the border” is likely because migrants and the coyotes’ smuggling industry can backdate documents and forge new identities, especially when the prize is the opportunity to escape their lives in undeveloped countries and then become citizens of the United States of America.


Joe Biden Selects Pennsylvania Transgender Health Official Rachel Levine for HHS

SEE: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/19/joe-biden-selects-pennsylvania-transgender-health-official-rachel-levine-for-hhs/


President-elect Joe Biden announced Tuesday he had chosen Dr. Rachel Levine to serve as the assistant secretary of health for the Department of Health and Human Services.

Levine, born Richard Levine, is an openly transgender individual and would mark the first transgender official confirmed by the United States Senate, if approved.

Levine is currently the Secretary of Health for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in charge of the local response to the coronavirus pandemic.

Levine joins Biden's Health and Human Services secretary nominee Xavier Becerra, a Latino politician who rose from humble beginnings to serve in Congress and as California’s attorney general.


Biden Taps Transgender Health Official With Horrifying COVID-19 Nursing Home Record

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2021/01/19/biden-taps-transgender-health-official-with-horrifying-covid-19-nursing-home-record-n1395959

EXCERPTS: Levine, a male who identifies as female, faced harsh criticism for removing his mother from a personal care home during the COVID-19 pandemic after he had directed nursing facilities to admit people who had previously tested positive for COVID-19. The elderly are at particular risk for the virus. In May, multiple members of the Pennsylvania State House demanded Levine’s resignation over “the horrific results of the [health] department’s COVID-19 policy” on nursing homes and other facilities under the department’s oversight. More than half (10,022) of Pennsylvania’s 19,390 COVID-19 deaths can be traced back to long-term care facilities


Biden to Allow Transgender Students to use Bathrooms of Their Choice via Executive Order 

SEE: https://amgreatness.com/2021/01/19/biden-to-allow-transgender-students-to-use-bathrooms-of-their-choice-via-executive-order/

EXCERPT: Joe Biden has vowed to reverse a previous Trump Administration decision revoking an Obama-era rule that allowed sel-identified transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms of their choosing, as reported by Fox News.

MICHELLE MALKIN: Amnesia of the Anarcho-Tyrannists

A reflection on the primary means by which the Left operates.


SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/amnesia-anarcho-tyrannists-michelle-malkin/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Is it just me or has the entire universe of establishment media, politics and Hollywood forgotten that this country has endured an entire year of relentless violent anarchotyranny?

Antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters set businesses and churches ablaze, smashed state capitols and laid siege to federal courthouses. They permanently destroyed precious statues and symbols of America's heritage. They assaulted elderly people, stalked and menaced bystanders, taunted and terrorized law enforcement. And they committed murder — dozens of times — in the name of social justice while the powers that be sat idly by.

How conveniently they have all forgotten the grief of Ann Dorn, widow of retired St. Louis police captain David Dorn, who was slain by George Floyd vigilantes looting a pawn shop he was guarding on June 2, 2020. Ann Dorn condemned the violence during a speech to the Republican National Convention last summer and recounted how she relives "that horror in my mind every single day. My hope is that having you relive it with me now will help shake this country from this nightmare we're witnessing in our cities" and "bring about positive, peaceful change."

Dorn's plea went unheeded. Why? Because riots and invasive protest are the primary means by which the left operates and has always operated.

When they take over government buildings, like 40,000 Democratic union workers did when they stormed Wisconsin's state capitol in 2011 for nearly a month, it's not an insurrection. It's a First Amendment celebration.

When they take over U.S. Senators' offices, like they did during the 2018 Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, it's not sedition. It's "democracy."

When they feel like blocking traffic and shutting down highways, the police don't arrest them. They protect them.

And when they occupy U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities and vandalize federal courthouses — while obstructing homeland security operations, shining lasers in cops' eyes to blind them and hurling bricks at them to maim them — it's not a crime. It's "peaceful protest."

This is not "whataboutism." It's an absolutely necessary and vital backdrop as we seek to make sense of what happened last week in our nation's Capitol. (And isn't it the Left that always urges us to identify "root causes" when their thugs cross the line?) Law-abiding Americans are angry and frustrated precisely because the law has not been equally applied.

Whether we're talking about lockdown rules or mob rules or election rules, the elites and their allies live by one set of rules and govern by another. Hundreds of thousands of peaceful Donald Trump supporters are being smeared by pundits and politicians who have downplayed left-wing lawlessness from Day One of the Trump presidency. Those who protest this injustice are being purged from social media and the public square at warp speed:

—Some 70,000 dissidents on Twitter were summarily purged after being tarred as dangerous conspiracy theorists on Monday.

—Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed Trump supporter who was gunned down by Capitol police last week, has been ruthlessly defamed by blue-checkmarked celebrities on Twitter and labeled a domestic terrorist.

—MAGA moms and their children are being dragged off airplanes by federal jackboots for attending the Jan. 6 rally, while antifa and BLM advocates gloat.

—"Stop the Steal" organizer Ali Alexander and his colleagues have been wiped off Silicon Valley platforms, along with conservative social media company Parler, libertarian Ron Paul, "War Room" host Steve Bannon, "America First" host Nick Fuentes, "Red Elephants" host Vince James, cartoonist Ben Garrison, Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton, election fraud researcher Ron Watkins, Gen. Michael Flynn, and lawyers Sidney Powell and Lin Wood.

—Trump faces yet another phony impeachment attack despite his explicit call for supporters to "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

Meanwhile, actual convicted domestic terrorists like Black Liberation Army assassin Assata Shakur, Weather Underground killers Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert, and May 19th Communist Organizer Susan Rosenberg (a left-wing weapons supplier and insurrectionist pardoned by Bill Clinton and now a board member of the umbrella group overseeing Black Lives Matter) are deified by the media, Hollywood and academia.

Maxine Waters has been cribbing Martin Luther King Jr.'s line about riots being the "language of the unheard" ever since she danced on the ashes of the L.A. riots with Bloods and Crips.

Liberal magazine Slate declared just six months ago in defense of Antifa and BLM anarchotyrannists that "non-violence is an important tool for protest, but so is violence."

There simply cannot be peace and civil order in such a dysfunctional country of double standards and stifled dissent. It is dishonest and harmful to our republic to pretend otherwise.

Democrats Outsource Political Repression to Corporate Monopolies

Those rights that the government can’t take from you, Google, Amazon, and Facebook will.


SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/democrats-outsource-political-repression-corporate-daniel-greenfield/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

The repression will be televised. It will go better with Coke, it will promise to clear up your bad breath and make your toilet shine. It will be in the cloud, it will be digitized and monetized.

It will have a trademark, a brand, and it will be outsourced to the private sector.

Democrats love public-private partnerships and they outsourced political repression to the private sector. The Constitution has inconvenient things to say about freedom of speech and so the Democrat government of elected and unelected officials outsourced the problem of censoring and suppressing speech to the handful of Big Tech monopolies of the internet.

That same old document written by old white dead men, not to mention centuries of jurisprudence and tradition, prevents the government from kicking down your door in the middle of the night for wrongthink. But nothing keeps corporations from firing you for wrongthink, for being related to someone who committed wrongthink, or for insufficient political correctness.

The public-private partnership between big government and big monopolies is based on Democrats and corporations doing the dirty work of repressing each other’s opponents.

Corporations can’t write regulations that suppress competition from upstart rivals, and so the government steps in and keeps the marketplace under the control of a few cartels. And the government can’t censor, deplatform, fire, bankrupt, and bar its political opponents from speaking, flying, and doing business. But the monopolies it’s been partnering with can and do.

This political Strangers on a Train arrangement goes much more swimmingly because both the government Guy and the corporate Bruno are eager to take care of each other’s dirty business.

Democrats knock off Amazon’s rivals and Amazon knocks off Republicans. The Washington Post, owned by Amazon CEO Bezos, goes after President Trump. Amazon’s AWS takes out Parler and makes it more likely to get back its $10 billion military cloud contract from Biden.

You know, that contract which Amazon thought it had before President Trump took it away.

Big Tech monopolies like Amazon are also government contractors. Microsoft has 6,860 federal subcontracts, Amazon has 477, Google has 384, Facebook has 172, and that's just in military and law enforcement. And Big Tech employees pour millions into Democrat campaigns.

Google employees gave the Democrats $21 million, Microsoft gave $12 million, Amazon $9 million, and Apple and Facebook $6 million. But that’s just the official cash coming from employees. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spent $400 million to buy the 2020 election.

Not to mention the priceless in-kind contribution of Facebook censoring stories about Hunter Biden’s ties to China and the FBI money laundering investigation right before the election.

The monopolies give Democrats cash and get government contracts worth a thousand times more. The corps suppress Republicans and Democrats suppress their corporate competition.

Everyone makes more money and gets more power.

The public-private totalitarian partnership between a one-party state and oligarchs who carry on its propaganda, enrich its officials, and suppress its enemies is a familiar one in China, Russia, Turkey and other hellholes that the Democrats seem bent on using as models for their utopia.

But it’s not just a simple economic ecosystem. Like the Communists and Nazis of Weimar Germany, socialists and monopolies claim to hate each other while secretly allied together.

Democrats let monopolies take over the internet and by extension much of the economy because they can then run against the abuses of “capitalism” and push socialism.  And the monopolies can retort that it’s a choice between them and AOC’s version of socialism.

Pick your poison.

Like the Communists and Nazis of Weimar Germany whose political polarization convinced the public it had to choose between them even while Hitler and Stalin were privately allied against the liberals and moderates behind the scenes, economic polarization brings together socialists and monopolies to ally against the free market and offer a choice of two unpalatable dystopias.

But you don’t actually have to choose because we get both for the inflated price of one.

Google and AOC join together in jumping up and down on the bleeding corpse of the free market while the dumber sort of Republican pretends that they’re two different sides. (Google employees were AOC’s second-biggest donors. Amazon and Apple were the fourth and fifth.)

Americans get an inept kleptocratic government that’s socialist in all but name and a dystopia of cartels. The hybrid system is destroying jobs and the middle class at a record pace. The socialists tax and regulate to keep the competition down and the monopolies offshore jobs.

Those rights that the government can’t take from you, yet, Google, Amazon, and Facebook will.

The public-private totalitarian nightmare is mediated by the media and non-profits which act as the interface between the government and the cartels. The media and the activists tell tech firms, banks, and superstore whom to ban, which rights to eliminate, and how to virtue signal. The industries fund and own the media outlets and organizations that coordinate their activities.

In the wake of the Capitol riot, these middlemen have come up with wonderful ideas like banning conservatives, cutting off corporate political contributions to conservatives, and firing anyone who questions a massively rigged election, which the corps are implementing.

All of this really got underway once it was clear that Democrats would control the Senate.

Big Business was not about to turn up the machine of political repression to eleven on behalf of the Democrats until it was really sure that they would have sole control of the government.

The public-private partnership for tyranny is a balance of power and of terror.

Democrats keep threatening to break up the monopolies because that gives them direct leverage. They don’t really mean it, but as they radicalize into socialism, they will. And then they’ll nationalize the monopolies, toss the Bill of Rights in the trash, and then they won’t need to outsource repressing political dissidents to corporate middlemen for plausible deniability.

The monopolies need some Republicans around to protect them from the socialists. Just not the kind of Republicans who would be bad for business by breaking up monopolies, bringing jobs back from China, restricting immigration, and rebuilding the economy for the middle class.

And the Democrats need to protect themselves from monopolies so powerful that they can erase their opponents, like President Trump, from the marketplace of ideas, a power so dreadful that it has longtime international foes of Trump in the European Union fearful of this Death Star.

The public-private totalitarian partnership is also a rivalry.

America is being consolidated into a handful of monopolies, not only in the tech industry, but in retail, entertainment, medicine, publishing, household brands, and anything you can think of.

These rising monopolies dominate the economy and are the country’s next biggest power bloc.

The biggest power bloc is government. Not so much the government of the people you vote for, but the massive administrative state which writes its own regulations, has its own politics, and runs most of the country without input from elected officials, let alone little people like you.

Some call it the deep state or the administrative state. A better name is just socialism.

The full scope of the beast encompasses not just the official employees, elected and unelected, but the lobbyists, contractors, public universities, government grant recipients, and operatives who have made D.C.’s bedroom counties into some of the wealthiest places in America.

These two blocs are entwined by class, geography, and economic relationships. And by power.

Their partnership allows them to overcome the legal limits of the current system, one in which Comcast or Google can’t directly legislate, and in which the Democrats can’t directly destroy your life by using each other as middlemen to expand the limits of their power over America.

Only America could recreate Soviet political repression and Maoist culture wars using Target, Disney, and Coca-Cola. Your commissar is a diversity consultant at Goodyear, you will be doxxed on Twitter, your life will be destroyed by a paper owned by Amazon’s CEO, and your neighbor will turn you in on an app built into a $1,000 Apple smartphone. Only in America.com.



War in Belgium: Coronavirus Curfew Arrest leads to Massive BLM and Islamic Riots (Videos)


SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/war-in-belgium-coronavirus-curfew-arrest-leads-to-massive-blm-and-islamic-riots-videos/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Violent riots led by communist group Black Lives Matter and Islamic supremacists break out in the city of Brussels after the death of Ibrahim, a migrant in Police custody.

The migrant was filming police enforcing coronavirus lockdown measures at a train station. Ibrahim refused to comply with police and their requests to stop filming. Ibrahim fled the scene, but was captured by police and shortly after died, possibly of a heart attack at the station due to drugs he ingested.

Ibrahim’s Arrest

Ibrahima B. was arrested on Saturday, January 9th a little before 7 pm by inspectors from the Brussels North police zone, at the train station in Belgium. Police say they had stopped to check on a group of people who had gathered at the station past curfew. Police believed the group were in violation of the states coronavirus measures.

According to the police, Ibrahim B. fled and was intercepted. However, his family says he was there to take the train to Waterloo, where he lives. According to the family, Ibrahim B. was arrested for filming the police check with his mobile phone.

After a police chase, Ibrahim was transferred to the police station, and suffered an apparent heart attack immediately after arriving. According to media reportsthe migrant ingested drugs that he had in his possession. It was as a result of this that he was said to have felt unwell during his search at the police station. 

“When he arrived at the police station, he lost consciousness,” says the Brussels prosecutor’s office. The officers tried to resuscitate him. The emergency services also arrived quickly, but he died in the hospital around 8.30 pm. The cause of death would have been a heart attack, reported Ibrahim’s sister.

According to the family’s lawyer, they claim police left him on the ground for five minutes, “Those several minutes without worry are crucial moments in which Ibrahim’s life which could have been saved. The officers let him die,” says lawyer Alexis Deswaef. Furthermore, “It was legal for Ibrahima to exercise his fundamental right by filming the police.”

An autopsy and a toxicological examination have been performed on the body. They will reveal whether any violence was used against him and or whether he had a heart attack due to possible drug use. The prosecutor’s office did not want to confirm whether he had drugs in his pocket.

“The deceased young man’s family and his counsel met with the Public Prosecutor this morning to obtain answers to some of their questions,” says the prosecutor spokeswoman,“ and to assure them that all resources are and will being used to provide clarity into what happened.”

Migrant and BLM Riots Break Out

Hours after the family’s meeting, the peaceful protests taking place in Brussels turned violent around 4 pm. Stones, fireworks and other objects were thrown at the police and the Islamic migrant and Black Lives Matter communists shouted “police, murderers”. 

Rioters broke the windows of police cars and set vehicles on fire. The radicals burned down the police station and attacked the car of King Philippe, the current King of Belgium.

Communist Black lives Matter Joins forces with migrants

By coincidence, the Belgian king ended up in the middle of the violence. His car was recognizable to rioters by the number plate ‘1’, which suddenly appeared in the middle of the melee. Police officers escorted the king and his car away from the rioting crowds.

The riot police arrived en masse. Water cannons were used several times against the rioters. Initially, officers tried to send the demonstrators home, but their calls received little response. The organizers of the event’s efforts to calm things down were in vain. Police eventually arrested over 100 rioters and four injured police officers were taken to hospital. 

Minister of Justice Vincent Van Quickenborne tweeted. “Under no circumstances can we accept what happened in Schaerbeek (Municipality in Belgium) today. Investigations are in full swing, ”said the minister. “The rioters will not go free.”

Watch the following videos compiled by RAIR Foundation USA of the riots in Brussels:

Red/Green Axis

As France’s Eric Zemmour has previously stated, BLM and Islamic migrants have united in their collective dream of “beating world capitalism and beating white western countries.” The author points out that despite riots in different countries being staged by BLM and Islamic supremacists, the riots all have the same plan of action and take the same form.

Even the infamous Venezuelan terrorist Carlos The Jackal, a convert to Islam penned a letter to President Obama in 2003 stating, “only a coalition of Marxists and Islamists can destroy the United States.”

As reported at RAIR Foundation USA, the tactic of leftist and Islamic coordination has a name: the Red/Green Axis: “Communists and Islamic Supremacists have a long history of uniting to destroy their common enemy: those who believe in sovereignty and individual freedom.” In order to achieve their own goals, they use one another until their goals are achieved, and only at that time will they “turn on one another and in the end, fight to destroy the other.”

Support our work at RAIR Foundation USA! We are a grassroots activist team and we need your help! Please consider making a donation here: https://rairfoundation.com/donate/



SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/we-are-not-sheep-thousands-of-czechs-demonstrate-against-lockdown-measures-video/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Thousands of citizens gathered in Prague, at Old Town Square on Sunday, Jan 10., to demonstrate the Czech government’s crushing Chinese coronavirus measures. Citizens are no longer accepting the states arbitrary and scientifically unproven approach to tackling the virus and are demanding their freedoms are restored.

Citizens attending the “Let’s Open the Czech Republic (Otevřeme Česko)” carried Czech flags and held sign saying, ‘COVID tyranny’, ‘Let’s stop totalitarianism in the name of Covid!’ and ” ‘We are not sheep’ . Many protesters came with their families and brought small children.

“We want to open the Czech Republic. The government’s measures do not work and will never work. On the contrary, they cause far more drastic epidemics, namely epidemics of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy and failing companies,” said Jiří Janeček, co-organizer of the demonstration and an entrepreneur in the hospitality industry..

“People feel that money is one thing, but losing the opportunity to associate, go to sports, go to restaurants and theaters, they perceive it as a great loss of their personal freedom, which is guaranteed to them by our constitution,” said Jakub Olbert, a restaurant owner.

During the two-hour demonstration, there were speeches by government representatives, famous actors and singers, small business owners, entrepreneurs in the hospitality industry, fitness trainers, doctors, academics, and business union leaders.

Demonstrators listening to speeches

The former President of the Czech Republic, Václav Klaus also spoke at the demonstration. “I came mainly to express my unconditional support to the organizers and participants of this event,” Klaus said. The former president criticized the government’s harsh measures. “There have been enough prohibitions and orders that fundamentally damage our lives, our professional and life activities,” he said. He also opposed the coronavirus vaccination, saying that there was no miracle vaccine. “Vaccination must not be compulsory. I, even at an at-risk age, will not get vaccinated,” he added.

The convener of the demonstration and the chairman of the Svobodné political party, Libor Vondráček said that the goals of their protests are twofold. In the long run, it is the “opening of the Czech Republic”, and in the short term, the government will start communicating with the people affected by the current measures and to have a real dialogue with them. According to him, it is no longer just about entrepreneurs who are suffering, but also, their clients, children in schools, elderly, and others.

Chairman of the Svobodné political party, Libor Vondráček

“Whatever the government does only makes this situation worse. Today, with the numbers we know about the infection of the population in the Czech Republic, we can say that the government has lost this battle with the pandemic. Let them throw a white towel into the ring and start protecting those who need it and want it. Let them return to the Czech Republic a normal world. Let us go to work again. Many people are so mentally and financially so bad that if they still have to suffer from this disease, it is worth it for them. We will fight this pandemic far better, provided we are a healthy and a hard-working nation with its security, its workers and its children in schools,” added Jiří Janeček.

Janeček organized a previous protest that made a line of beer mugs and candles between the Government Office and Prague’s Old Town Square. Janeček was trying to bring attention to the many pub owners and restaurateurs on the brink of financial disaster.

Support our work at RAIR Foundation USA! We are a grassroots activist team and we need your help! Please consider making a donation here: https://rairfoundation.com/donate/




SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/watch-democrats-celebrities-and-media-call-for-insurgency-and-violence-against-trump-and-his-supporters-video/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The following video compilation captures Democrat leaders, celebrities and media calling for insurgency and violence against U.S. President Donald Trump and his supporters.


As reported at RAIR Foundation USA, leftist activists have made an art of swarming into state buildings, often receiving praise for their efforts by politicians and the media. Now, Trump supporters who were waved into the Capitol by police are facing federal charges for something leftist activists do on a regular basis.

Support our work at RAIR Foundation USA! We are a grassroots activist team and we need your help! Please consider making a donation here: https://rairfoundation.com/donate/


A New Leninism Is Gripping America-James Lindsay on Repressive Tolerance & Free Speech

The shocking assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 has been followed by widespread censorship and de-platforming of Americans, including President Trump, with the professed goal of preventing violence. James Lindsay, co-author of the bestseller “Cynical Theories,” argues the Capitol breach has been used to implement a major power grab and “apply Leninism to the American context, using corporations as part of the toolset.” This is the “woke” movement in action, Lindsay argues. The ideology involves an inverted morality, he says, allowing it to apply double standards when it comes to political violence. In this episode, James Lindsay, founder of the New Discourses website, gives us his take on our current political moment. This is American Thought Leaders, and I’m Jan Jekielek. #jameslindsay #criticaltheory #freespeech


The New Jersey Statehouse and Capitol Building In Trenton

New Jersey State Police Superintendent Pat Callahan takes questions during a recent press briefing.

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez Wants to ‘Rein In’ Media


CHILLING: AOC Wants a Gov't Commission to 'Rein in' Media to Prevent 'Disinformation'


'I can say, there is absolutely a commission being discussed but it seems to be more investigatory, in style rather than truth and reconciliation, so I think that’s an interesting concept for us to explore,' she replied. 

'And I do think that several members of Congress, in some of my discussions, have brought up media literacy because that is a part of what happened here and we’re going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so that you can’t just spew disinformation and misinformation,' Ocasio-Cortez said. 

Welcome to AOC's "Ministry of Truth" (COMMUNIST STYLE) 

SEE: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9149219/AOC-slammed-suggestion-federal-commission-rein-press.html

Squad member's suggestion for federal commission to 'rein in' the press is slammed as 'wholly un-American' attack on free speech

  • Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made the remarks in Instagram video this week
  • She said Democrats are discussing plans to 'reign in' media 'misinformation'
  • Suggested the plan could be part of a 'truth and reconciliation committee' 
  • Proposal drew furious backlash and was called a plot to restrain the free press
  • 'She wants to basically establish a Ministry of Truth,' columnist Joe Concha said
  • 'It's just creepy, not to mention wholly un-American,' wrote David Harsanyi
  • Others predicted that government 'fact checkers' would be politicized 
  • AOC's remarks echo Trump's attacks on the press that were slammed by critics



SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2021/01/14/rep-ocasio-cortez-wants-a-government-commission-to-rein-in-media-to-prevent-disinformation-n1347680;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said in an Instagram post that she and several other members of Congress were exploring the possibility of setting up a commission to “rein in” the media, whom she accuses of spreading “disinformation” in the lead-up to the Capitol attack.

Since I don’t think she’s talking about stifling the New York Times or Washington Post, I wonder who she has in mind to “rein in”?

This was the same Instagram interview in which she admitted that she feared for her life during the Capitol attack, so it’s not surprising that the media would ignore her suggestion for censorship and lead with her life being in danger.

But her suggestion that the United States Congress needs to form a commission to rein in the news media has gone largely unreported,

New York Post:

There’s absolutely a commission that’s being discussed but it seems to be more investigating in style rather than truth and reconciliation.


I do think that several members of Congress in some of my discussions have brought up media literacy because that is part of what happened here.

Here’s our “expert” on media literacy.

How easily could a government commission become a censorship board?

We’re going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so you can’t just spew disinformation and misinformation.

It’s one thing to have differentiating opinions, but it’s another thing entirely to just say things that are false, so that’s something that we’re looking into.

What is “disinformation”? What is “misinformation”? What is “false”? What AOC is ignoring is that her “truth” might not be the same as your “truth.” And she wants a government commission to “investigate” which is which?

David Harsanyi:

As a practical matter, we can already envision from “lived experienced” — as a progressive might say — how sanctioning the state to adjudicate the veracity of journalism can be abused.

We need only point to our media “factcheckers,” journalists with political and ideological biases who have regularly, and arbitrarily, labeled completely debatable contentions as falsehoods, while either ignoring or justifying scores of other unsettled contentions. Are these the arbiters of facts who will be manning the government commission appointed by those storied truthtellers in congress?

A recent example was the suppressing of the New York Post’s blockbuster story of Hunter Biden’s business deals and whether or not Joe Biden, as vice president, profited from them. An alliance of Big Tech and left-wing media made sure that either the story was suppressed or “debunked” by “fact-checkers.”

No doubt AOC’s “commission” would help facilitate bringing to heel the conservative media. I don’t know about you, but I’d almost prefer a “truth and reconciliation commission” to a media star-chamber.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Wants to Liberate Red States From Their Suppression


1 2 3 17