President Trump Launches New Communications Platform


President Trump Launches New Communications Platform



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

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump launched a new communications platform that will allow him to communicate with followers after being banned from social media platforms Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. The rollout came one day before Facebook’s so-called Oversight Board upheld the suspension of Trump’s Facebook account, citing the January 6 Capitol protests.

Supported by Campaign Nucleus, Trump’s communications platform is called “From the Desk of Donald J. Trump.” The Washington Times reports that the new site allows Trump to post comments, images, and videos but does not allow users to comment, though it allows users to share Trump’s content to their own social media pages.

“This is just a one-way communication,” a source said. “This system allows Trump to communicate with his followers.”

According to Fox News, Campaign Nucleus is a “digital ecosystem made for efficiently managing political campaigns and organizations” and is the creation of former Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale.

Trump spokesman Jason Miller clarified that the newly launched communications platform is separate from Trump’s long-awaited social-media platform, which, like the communications platform, was also teased several months ago.

“President Trump’s website is a great resource to find his latest statements and highlights from his first term in office, but this is not a new social media platform,” he tweeted. “We’ll have additional information coming on that front in the very near future.”

The communications platform rollout came just in time as Facebook’s quasi-independent Oversight Board announced on Wednesday morning that the ban on the former president from Facebook and Instagram was appropriate. However, the board added that it was “not appropriate for Facebook to impose the indeterminate and standardless penalty of indefinite suspension,” CBS News reported. The board determined Facebook must create “clear, necessary, and proportionate policies that promote public safety and respect freedom of expression.”

The board said Facebook should take the next six months to review the case and decide whether its ban will be permanent or last a specific length of time, MSN reported.

Facebook was reportedly “pleased” with the board’s decision.

“We will now consider the board’s decision and determine an action that is clear and proportionate. In the meantime, Mr. Trump’s accounts remain suspended,” Facebook said in a statement.

It was unclear how the Oversight Board would rule in Trump’s case, with HuffPost claiming the panel has a history of favoring free speech over content restriction, based on its nine previous decisions.

Still, Facebook critics contend the Oversight Board is merely smoke-and-mirrors.

“Facebook set the rules, are judge, jury, and executioner and control their own appeals court and their own Supreme Court. The decisions they make have an impact on our democracies, national security, and biosecurity and cannot be left to their own in-house theatre of the absurd,” said Imran Ahmed, CEO of Center for Countering Digital Hate, a nonprofit critical of Facebook. “Whatever the judgement tomorrow, this whole fiasco shows why we need democratic regulation of Big Tech.”

Gautam Hans, a technology law and free-speech expert and professor at Vanderbilt University, said he finds the Oversight Board structure to be “frustrating and a bit of a sideshow from the larger policy and social questions that we have about these companies.”

“To some degree, Facebook is trying to create an accountability mechanism that I think undermines efforts to have government regulation and legislation,” Hans said. “If any other company decided, well, we’re just going to outsource our decision-making to some quasi-independent body, that would be thought of as ridiculous.”

Meanwhile, Twitter’s ban of Trump’s account in the aftermath of the largely peaceful Capitol protests on January 6 was permanent, with Twitter claiming the account posed a risk of “further incitement of violence.”

“After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter — we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” Twitter said in a statement. “In the context of horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would potentially result in this very course of action. Our public interest framework exists to enable the public to hear from elected officials and world leaders directly. It is built on a principle that the people have a right to hold power to account in the open.”

The platform also permanently deleted the accounts of Trump loyalists, attorney Sidney Powell and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

The treatment of President Trump by social media platforms highlights Big Tech’s hypocrisy. Social-media companies made no such efforts to crack down on any of the accounts of Democrats such as then-Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senator Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), or ex-NFL player Colin Kapernick, all of whom applauded and encouraged the Antifa/BLM violence last summer. So-called comedienne Kathy Griffin tweeted out a photo of herself holding a fake decapitated head intended to look like that of President Trump. She is still on Twitter.

In fact, Twitter’s hypocrisy is particularly glaring. As noted by Voice of America, Ayatollah Ali Khamanei of Iran continues to enjoy virtually unfettered access to the media giant, despite his account’s frequent anti-Semitic, anti-Israel tweets and Iran’s ban against Twitter for ordinary citizens. Even left-wing questioned why President Trump’s account would be banned while the Chinese embassy was allowed to continue using the platform to tweet controversial claims such as ones claiming the Uighur women in the country’s Xinjiang region were “liberated” by the Chinese government’s policies and were no longer “baby-making machines.” In these cases, Twitter removes the tweets but allows the accounts to remain.

DHS Considering Hiring Contractors to Spy on “Domestic Terrorists” Online

SARAH CORRIHER: The American Stasi Strikes

In the former American Republic, the Biden regime is making lists of its enemies but the God-given rights that are cataloged within the U.S. Constitution are an impediment to his weaponized law enforcement agencies. The Department of Homeland Security is going to hire private companies to do its dirty work, so that it may trounce the 4th Amendment and existing privacy laws. These companies will be working for the government, in a dirt digging (fishing) operation against conservatives and Christians, while pretending not to work for the government. Get reliable notification options and further information at Sarah's home site:

Report: DHS Considering Hiring Contractors to Spy on “Domestic Terrorists” Online



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

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is considering working with outside firms to surveil “extremist” language by Americans online, according to a report.

The DHS is discussing a plan that would allow them to circumvent limits on intelligence gathering. Federal agents are only allowed by federal law to scroll through public posts on social media and cannot use burner accounts to follow private accounts or enter private chat rooms. However, the reported DHS plan would enlist private cybersecurity firms to engage in those practices.

The initiative comes as law-enforcement agencies ramp up scrutiny of extremist groups with members present at the January 6 Capitol protest. In the aftermath of that event, both Republicans and Democrats criticized security officials for intelligence failures that caused them to underestimate the number of people that would attempt to enter the Capitol.

During his address to a Joint Session of Congress, President Biden said, “The most lethal terrorist threat to the homeland today is from white supremacist terrorism.” He said that, even though the Capitol survived the supposed insurrection, “The struggle is far from over. The question of whether our democracy will long endure is both ancient and urgent.” 

Biden’s remarks echo comments made in congressional testimony by FBI Director Christopher Wray in March. “The problem of domestic terrorism has been metastasizing across the country for a long time now, and it’s not going away any time soon,” Wray said at the time.

The extremists allegedly operate and plot online. It was found that the majority — more than 85 percent — of those charged with crimes for their role in the January 6 “insurrection” were charged in part using evidence from their personal social media accounts, others’ accounts, or both. Facebook was the preferred platform and was used by 73 of the people charged, more than all other social media sites combined, according to a Forbes analysis. YouTube was the second most-referenced at 24 percent. Instagram, a Facebook-owned company, was next at 20 percent. Parler, the app that pledged protection for free-speech rights and garnered a large conservative user base, was mentioned in just eight percent of the charges.

Thus, monitoring “extremist” chatter online becomes a crucial necessity for the DHS. To achieve that, some privacy protections need to be overcome. According to the Exclusionary Rule, first formulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Mapp v. Ohio, the government is prohibited from using information that it obtained illegally — usually meaning without a warrant — in court. However, evidence first obtained by private citizens may be used in court, regardless of how it was obtained, as long as the private citizen is not acting as an agent of the police.

In coordination with the National Security Council and the FBI, officials at DHS are considering multiple ways to expand the department’s approach to gathering information via social media. “There was only limited awareness before January 6 of what violent extremists were planning through social media,” said Tom Warrick, former DHS deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism policy. Warrick confirmed the DHS will likely “explore whether contractors could help them understand plots and trends” online.

Using private contractors to monitor social-media sites would give DHS a work-around to warrant requirements. In the new reported plan, the private contractors could tell the government officials what information they saw, thus avoiding the warrant application. “We are exploring with our lawyers, civil rights, civil liberties and privacy colleagues, how we can make use of outside expertise,” a DHS official said.

The DHS is not the first major federal institution under the Biden administration that has sparked concern among Americans.

The U.S. Postal Service has been quietly monitoring social-media posts, including posts about planned protests. At least some of that specifically targeted “right-leaning accounts,” Yahoo News reported. The surveillance program, they explain, known as the Internet Covert Operations Program (iCOP), centers around hired analysts who review social-media accounts for “inflammatory” posts to share across government agencies.

Last summer, amid the Portland protests, the DHS got under fire for compiling “intelligence reports” on two journalists who covered the riots. After the Washington Post published a story detailing the department’s practices, then-Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf ordered the intelligence office to stop collecting information on journalists and assured Americans that DHS is committed to respecting civil rights and civil liberties, particularly when it comes to the exercise of First Amendment-protected rights.

But as President Joe Biden says, no amendment is absolute, and for his administration, privacy and freedom of speech seem to be secondary to “public safety” endangered by the “most lethal terrorist threat.”


Mozilla has a woke new plan to protect women from mean words on the Internet, because our dainty maidens just can't handle criticism. Their new Firefox extension will literally alter offensive words on web pages to the word "boss" like something a fourteen-year-old would do. They want to transform the Internet into one giant 'safe space', for de-platforming disagreeable people is no longer enough. This patronizing idea will hopefully trigger feminists and start an outrage mob. It's just what we need: yet another Internet company policing our thoughts as they lock the Internet.

Watch on Gab TV:

Watch on Odysee:

Watch on Bitchute:

Watch on YouTube:

Sarah Corriher
+1, (336) 528-4120

Website Tracks Which Colleges Embrace Training in Critical Race Theory




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

It takes only a few clicks to see that critical race theory is influencing hundreds of college campuses and universities across America.

A new website called Critical Race Training in Education allows users to quickly access information about more than 230 schools and the ways in which those schools are instituting critical race theory on campus. 

Critical race theory holds that whites use their social status or their legal and economic advantages to create or maintain power over people of color. 

The rapid embrace of critical race theory training programs for students and faculty is “very troubling,” website founder William Jacobson told The Daily Signal in a phone interview earlier this month. 

Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>

“My greatest concern is campus free expression [which] is already [under] a very coercive and repressive atmosphere on a lot of campuses,” Jacobson said.

Jacobson is a professor at Cornell Law School and founder and publisher of Legal Insurrection, a conservative media news and commentary platform. 

Training in critical race theory likely will “exacerbate a free speech and free expression problem that already exists on campuses,” Jacobson said.  

Jacobson’s concerns about critical race theory training began to grow when he saw how rapidly Cornell was implementing the ideology on campus. 

Ibram A. Kendi, author of “How to Be an Antiracist,” is a leading advocate for training programs in critical race theory.

Kendi has delivered many lectures on anti-racism, including to teachers and leaders in Virginia’s Fairfax County school district, just outside the nation’s capital, where he charged $20,000 for a one-hour lecture in September. 

Kendi defines “anti-racism” as actively working to combat racism in all its forms, arguing that inaction is racism. 

Cornell University last year encouraged students to read Kendi’s book, calling it recommended summer reading. Cornell provided students and faculty with a link to read the book online for free, which Jacobson did. 

“I read it and was actually pretty shocked about it,” Jacobson said. 

Kendi “advocates racial discrimination as a cure for past racial discrimination, which is, of course, illegal,” he said. 

Kendi argues that all people fit into only two categories, Jacobson said: activists working to destroy systemic racism or, “if you are not an activist, … you are a racist.” 

Not allowing for any middle ground, but simply categorizing all humans as activist or racist, was troubling enough, Jacobson said. But what concerned him more was Cornell’s acceptance of the ideology. 

Cornell President Martha E. Pollack issued a letter in July embracing Kendi’s definition of anti-racism and calling on the university’s Faculty Senate to create and implement a “for-credit, educational requirement on racism, bias, and equity for all Cornell students.”

Pollock also announced that Cornell faculty would be required to participate in a lecture series focused on “equity and cultural competency,” and be evaluated on “diversity, equity, and inclusion” practices during performance reviews. 

Pollack’s announcement spurred Jacobson to research the actions of other universities. He soon discovered that Cornell was far from the only school taking steps to implement training programs in critical race theory. 

But Jacobson said his central motivation to create the web platform came when a group of several hundred Cornell students, staff, faculty, and alumni issued a list of demands to the university. The demands included “cluster hires of Black and other faculty of color,” and “recruiting of graduate students of color in clusters.” 

The list of demands, he said, “proved to me that, whatever the president [of Cornell] had intended with regard to the term ‘anti-racist,’ it was interpreted by the campus as being anti-racist in the way Kendi [defines] it and to advocate for discriminatory policies.”

Jacobson’s Critical Race Training in Education website shows that New York University has taken steps to implement anti-racist training for students and Portland State University announced the disarming of campus security. Tufts University, just outside Boston, created a new class for incoming students on civic engagement and racial equality. 

The website and interactive map are intended to be a bipartisan resource, Jacobson said. 

All of the data is information taken directly from the websites of colleges and universities. Students who would like to attend a university that requires training in critical race theory can use the site as easily as those who wish to avoid such requirements. 

“This is not a boycott list,” Jacobson said.“This is simply a database where you can go and find out, ‘Do you like what is going on or do you not like what is going on?’” 

Jacobson is personally familiar with the negative implications of far-left ideology being promoted on many college campuses. 

Last summer, some Cornell students sought to “cancel” Jacobson by encouraging other students to boycott his course after he wrote an honest history of Black Lives Matter. That boycott failed, but Jacobson’s experience opened his eyes to the “hostile atmosphere” at his own university, he told The Daily Signal in December. 

Ultimately, Jacobson said, he hopes to grow the list of schools on the Critical Race Training in Education website to provide information about such training on 500 colleges and universities. 

When asked whether students had expressed their views to him about required training in critical race theory, Jacobson said he believes students are “afraid to speak up.”

“They are afraid to speak their minds,” he said.

The promulgation of cancel culture and the quick embrace of progressive ideologies such as critical race theory, Jacobson said, have created “an ideological orthodoxy on campuses, which is the opposite of what an educational institution should have.”

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email [email protected]om and we will consider publishing your remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. 

Tech Expert Shocks GA Election Fraud Hearing With News He ‘Got Into’ Voting System With WiFi

More Hacks Where The Ballots Are Being Cast! #JovanHuttonPulitzer




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

The man who invented and patented the technology that lets you scan items at the grocery store, create an airport boarding pass, and generate authentication codes just blew the doors off the Georgia State Senate subcommittee hearing on elections.

Tech expert Jovan Hutton Pulitzer claimed that to the extent there were election issues in Georgia, they could be explained by simply looking at the paper ballots. And he claimed to prove in real time that the system was susceptible to manipulation via WiFi because his team had broken in and were in it at the time of the hearing.

Pulitzer basically threw down, telling a Georgia Senate subcommittee looking into voter fraud to show him the ballots, give him two hours, and he’d show them if there was election fraud in Fulton County.

I only care what that piece of paper tells us. The paper, the paper. Verify the vote, verify the vote.

[…] I can determine where ink comes from, where paper comes from, whether it was mailed, whether it was folded, the difference of a duplicated press” and a mass copier.

Pulitzer wants to see the paper ballot because what he’s seen so far looks entirely janky.

He told the lawmakers that it’s not about the code in the machines that caused 93% of them to be set aside to be “adjudicated” by humans; all he needs to do is get a look the “Holy Grail” – the physical paper ballots.

In the nearly hour-long presentation at a special hearing with the subcommittee (see it below), Pulitzer demonstrated the differences between the paper ballots in two different areas of Fulton County that he claims clearly differentiated between Democrat and Republican Party ballots.

A bar code was put on Republican ballots while none was put on Democrat ballots, he claimed. Furthermore, he said, the alignment cues used by a scanner to read the ballot were out of alignment on the Republican ballots but not on the Democrat ones.

If the machine worked according to programming none of us would be standing here. We’re standing here because something broke. I don’t care about the machine. I don’t even care about the code that was written into the machine. What I care about is that physical artifact. That physical artifact has material differences from district to district that should not be there. Why are they there? I’m not talking about code. That’s how this gets derailed.

He said he could tell immediately if a ballot was real or counterfeit.

You could look at every section of the ballot count even the spike and tell if that was a real or counterfeit ballot.

We will tell you instantly what came out of a mass copier versus what came out of a printer. Did a human fill this out? Did a machine fill this out? Was it mailed or was it not mailed? It can be compared against spoilage or adjudicated by number or, last but not least, we will tell you have we seen this number before. Did we see it keep popping back up?

You will see what gets run over and over and over and over again. That is the problem of why we must see – the physical ballot is the Holy Grail, the second one is the digital scan.

I’ve spent the last 24 years studying the way paper and machines and internet react. I’ve spent the last six years studying the paper reading details at the nano level. I can tell you what paper came from China. I can tell you the person who handled it was a smoker. All of it is detectable with the physical ballot.

But the most shocking moment of the hours-long hearing came later when the issue of whether others could break into the voting system and modify the data (the votes) in the voting system came up.

Pulitzer said he was assured there was no way the system could give or send signals but that wasn’t true because, he claimed, his team had penetrated the system using WiFi.

“Look,” he told them, “this is simple.”

“I’m the guy that told the world that that little bar code can talk to the internet. Making the physical world talk to the internet world. This is as simple as scanning a loaf of bread at a grocery store. That’s your vote. You’re handing it to the checker or scanning it yourself that’s basically the polling machine.

“What is sad about this is we’re not even performing at standards expected at grocery stores. … if you complained, [the store] would have to audit it and make it right. But we don’t do this in elections?

But they’re playing hide and seek with the ballots? Why?

Somebody was listening because at the conclusion of the hearing the subcommittee agreed to have a look at some of the ballots from Fulton County that were questionable.

Stay tuned.

Victoria Taft is the host of “The Adult in the Room Podcast With Victoria Taft” where you can hear her series on “Antifa Versus Mike Strickland.” Find it  here.Follow her on Facebook,  TwitterParlerMeWeMinds @VictoriaTaft 

DOJ Adviser Says 368,000 Fraudulent ‘Excess Votes’ Tipped Election to Joe Biden
Major Court Victory Boosts Election Integrity in Georgia Runoffs
The Censored Hunter Biden Laptop Story Is Coming Back to Bite Twitter Big Time

Michigan fraud witness debunks Dominion CEO testimony, says Poulos falsely denied internet connection & ballot dumps

ABOVE: Melissa Carone, who was working for Dominion Voting Services, speaks in front of the Michigan House Oversight Committee in Lansing, Michigan on December 2, 2020. – The president’s attorneys, led by Rudy Giuliani, have made numerous allegations of election fraud. (Photo by JEFF KOWALSKY / AFP) (Photo by JEFF KOWALSKY/AFP via Getty Images)


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 7:01 PM PT – Wednesday, December 16, 2020

Michigan’s top witness of election fraud debunked recent claims that Dominion CEO John Poulos made while under oath to a State Senate Committee.

“He stated none of the machines were connected to the Internet,” election fraud witness Melissa Carone said. “[There is a] 53-minute audio recording of the Dominion training session, in which they admit that all of their hardware is connected to the internet.”

Melissa Carone said the Dominion CEO also lied by saying that election workers had ballots locked in steel boxes. In reality, she said, they had access to the ballots and even ran them through machines several times.

Additionally, Carone added Poulos falsely denied ballot dumps at Detroit’s TCF Center. She noted there is documented evidence of the ballot dumps.

“These pictures are crazy,” Carone said. “They are from outside the Department of Elections on the third and the fourth and there are Penske moving trucks. The back of them are open.”

She noted that trucks belonging to the city of Detroit were allegedly parked behind the moving trucks to guard them.

MORE NEWS: Dominion CEO Poulos Denies Vote Manipulation Despite Evidence


'Sassy' Dominion IT Whistleblower Melissa Carone Has Secret Video Evidence!


DHS and FBI say hackers from Islamic Republic of Iran are targeting state election websites, pushing disinformation



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

The mullahs had it so good from 2009 to 2017, they’re working hard to restore the status quo ante.

“DHS and FBI warn Iranian hackers are targeting state election websites and pushing disinformation,” by Jerry Dunleavy, Washington Examiner, October 31, 2020:

An Iranian cyber group was responsible for the targeting of U.S. election websites, the voter intimidation emails sent to potential voters, and the dissemination of election-related disinformation on voter fraud through a propaganda video this month, according to the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI.

DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the bureau issued a joint cybersecurity advisory related to an Iranian “advanced persistent threat” hacker organization just a few days before Tuesday’s presidential election, saying the U.S. analysis indicated that the Iranians had also “scanned state websites, to include state election websites” in late September and that it was also observed “attempting to exploit websites to obtain copies of voter registration data” in September and October. CISA and the FBI confirmed that the Iranian hackers “successfully obtained voter registration data in at least one state” and that “a review of the records that were copied and obtained reveals the information was used in the propaganda video.”

An FBI FLASH Alert also noted that Iranian cyber actors “are likely intent on influencing and interfering with the U.S. elections to sow discord among voters and undermine public confidence in the US electoral process” and “are creating fictitious media sites and spoofing legitimate media sites to spread anti-American propaganda and misinformation about voter suppression.” The FBI said that the Iranians “had taken specific actions to influence public opinion relating to the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election” and advised that the Iranian-backed propaganda video that has circulated online “is almost certainly intended to make U.S. voter information and the voting process appear insecure and susceptible to fraud.”

There is no indication that the Iranian hackers have changed any votes or that they have the ability to interfere with any tallies….


Giuliani: Hunter Biden’s Hard Drive Contains Pics of Underage Girls, Text to Father That Says He’s “Very Unsafe” for Kids



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

Such were the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop hard drive that Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani didn’t want the thing in his possession.

The hard drive contains photographs of underage girls, the former mayor of New York told NewsMax’s Greg Kelly. And in a text message from Hunter Biden to his father, Giuliani said, the younger Biden confessed that he was accused of being “sexually inappropriate” with a 14-year-old girl.

And so Giuliani turned the incriminating evidence over to authorites in Delaware, who immediately gave it to the FBI.

When news of the laptop appeared in the New York Post, the dirty pics were somewhat secondary to the main story: An e-mail proved that Hunter Biden introduced his father to a top official from Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy company at the center of the Biden-Burisma influence-peddling scandal.

But Giuliani’s allegations suggest something far worse than routine political corruption. If the text is authentic, the Democrat candidate for president knew his son was accused of sex crimes against underage girls.

“Sexually Inappropriate”
Giuliani received the hard drive of the MacBook Pro from the owner of a computer repair store, John Paul Mac Isaac, a Trump supporter who says Hunter Biden dropped the machine at his store and never returned. Mac Issac gave the hard drive to the FBI and a copy to Giuliani.

Giuliani, in turn, provided a copy to the New York Post, which published a major story about the incriminating e-mail. It was a thank-you note from a Burisma executive to Hunter Biden for arranging a meeting with then-Vice President Joe Biden in 2015.

Biden famously bragged that he forced Ukraine to fire the Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating Burisma Holdings for corruption. Burisma paid Hunter Biden an exorbitant salary to sit on its board. With his record as a drug addict and no experience in the energy business, Hunter Biden’s lucrative position is inexplicable — except for his connection to Biden senior.

But now Joe Biden’s activities when he was point man for the Obama administration in Ukraine might be secondary, if what Giuliani said is true.

Speaking with Kelly, Giuliani divulged the text message Hunter wrote to his father.

“This is really a very, very sensitive one,” Giuliani began. “There’s a text message to his father, in which he says the following, and he’s discussing his sister-in-law, who for quite some time was his lover.”

Giuliani then read the message:

She told my therapist that I was sexually inappropriate [Giuliani: This would be with an unnamed 14-year-old girl].

When she says that I Facetime naked with [the unnamed 14-year-old girl] and the reason I can’t have her out to see me is because I walk around naked smoking crack talking [to] girls on face time. When she was pressed she said that [the unnamed 14-year-old girl] never said anything like that but the bottom line is that I created and caused a very unsafe environment for the kids.

The message “is supported by numerous pictures of underage girls,” Giuliani continued.

“Bernie Kerik and I turned it over to the Delaware State Police because I’m very uncomfortable with this,” he told Kelly. “And I’m very uncomfortable with the fact that these underage girls were not protected.”

“This was sent to the vice president,” Giuliani said. “What did he do about it?”

Delaware Online reported that Giuliani “visited a New Castle County police station Monday to share files from what he said was Hunter Biden’s laptop,” and that the local cops gave the information to the state’s attorney general, Kathy Jennings.

Jennings handed it to the FBI.

No Russian Disinformation
Unsurprisingly, the Democrats and their information ministry, the hard-left social and mainstream media, are terrified the revelations will derail Joe Biden’s third and final bid for the White House. They say the e-mails on the laptop are Russian disinformation.

“We know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin,” leftist Representative Adam Schiff of California told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “That’s been clear for well over a year now that they’ve been pushing this false narrative about the vice president and his son.”

John Ratcliffe, the director of U.S. intelligence, says Schiff is trying to conscript the intelligence community to serve the Democrats.

“It’s funny that some of the people who complain the most about intelligence being politicized are the ones politicizing the intelligence,” Ratcliffe told Maria Bariromo of Fox News on Monday. 

“Unfortunately, in this case, it is Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, who as you pointed out on Friday, said that the intelligence community believes the Hunter Biden’s laptop and emails on it are part of a Russian disinformation campaign.”

Continued Ratcliffe:

Let me be clear: the intelligence community doesn’t believe that because there is no intelligence that supports that. And we have shared no intelligence with Chairman Schiff, or any member of Congress, that Hunter Biden’s laptop is part of some Russian disinformation campaign.

It’s simply not true.

Ratcliffe said Schiff is using the intelligence community to support a “political narrative” that will protect his “preferred political candidate,” Joe Biden. 

“Hunter Biden’s laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign,” he said.

Ratcliffe said the FBI’s probe of the laptop has nothing to do with Russian disinformation.

A senior intelligence official backed Ratcliffe, Fox reported: “Ratcliffe is 100% correct. There is no intelligence at this time to support Chairman Schiff’s statement that recent stories on Biden’s foreign business dealings are part of a smart campaign that ‘comes from the Kremlin.’”


Was Child Pornography Found on Hunter Biden's Laptop?

This Tiny Detail Buried in Federal Subpoena May Bolster Giuliani's Claim That Hunter's Laptop Contained Pics of Underage Girls



On Tuesday, Rudy Giuliani dropped the bombshell on Newsmax TV, alleging that “numerous pictures” of underage girls were found on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Text messages also suggest that Hunter Biden may have been “sexually inappropriate” with a 14-year-old girl, and had told Joe Biden about ---.


NY Post Publishes pic of Biden With Hunter's Kazak Partner

Hunter and Joe Biden with Kenes Rakishev (far left), and Kazakhstan’s former prime minister, Karim Massimov.






Trump DOJ Takes Google to Court Over Search Near-Monopoly



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

The Department of Justice (DOJ) under President Donald Trump will file an antitrust lawsuit against Google on Tuesday. Both Republicans and Democrats have accused Google of engaging in anticompetitive conduct to preserve monopolies in search and search advertising. Psychologist Robert Epstein has long warned about the potential political impact of Google Search, claiming that Google bias may have been responsible for Hillary Clinton’s lead in the popular vote in 2016.

The DOJ will allege that Google, a unit of Alphabet Inc., is maintaining its status as a gatekeeper to the internet “through an unlawful web of exclusionary and interlocking business agreements that shut out competitors,” DOJ officials told The Wall Street Journal in an exclusive.

“The government will allege that Google uses billions of dollars collected from advertisements on its platform to pay mobile-phone manufacturers, carriers and browsers, like Apple Inc.’s Safari, to maintain Google as their preset, default search engine,” WSJ reported.

As a result of such practices, Google dominates search on hundreds of millions of American devices “with little opportunity for any competitor to make inroads, the government will allege.”

The lawsuit will also fault Google for arrangements in which Google’s Search application is preloaded and cannot be deleted from mobile phones running the Android operating system. The DOJ will claim that such arrangements unlawfully edge out competing search engines.

Google owns or controls search distribution channels for about 80 percent of search queries in the U.S. According to the lawsuit, that means Google’s competitors cannot get a meaningful number of search queries to build the scale needed to compete, leaving consumers with less choice and less innovation and advertisers with less competitive prices.

The company has defended its prime position, arguing that its competitive edge comes from offering a product that billions of people freely choose to use each day. Google has argued that it faces vigorous competition across its different operations and that its products and platforms help both small and large businesses to reach new customers.

Google offers its services at little or no cost, undercutting the traditional antitrust argument around potential price controls.

Even so, the company’s massive search footprint has attracted legal challenges from both sides of the aisle. Democrats on a House antitrust subcommittee released a report this month, claiming that Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google wield monopoly power and recommending congressional action.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigated Google for more than a year but decided against bringing an antitrust case in 2013. That case focused on claims that Google engaged in “search bias” by favoring its own services and demoting rivals like Yelp and Tripadvisor, which have long complained about Google’s search power. The FTC ultimately concluded that such a case would be hard to win because while the company desires to hobble rivals, it also pursues its policies to advance quality products and services for consumers.

The DOJ’s case will not focus on a search-bias theory, officials told WSJ.

The DOJ has investigated Google for more than a year. Nearly all state attorneys general are separately investigating the search company, while Amazon, Apple, and Facebook also face antitrust scrutiny. More than ten state attorneys general are expected to join the DOJ’s case.

The case will likely take years to resolve. If Google loses, a court may mandate changes to its business operations in order to create new openings for rival companies. The DOJ lawsuit will not specify particular remedies yet — this kind of recommendation will be addressed later in the case. If Google wins, a court ruling could hobble the government’s attempts to rein in Big Tech. However, a Google victory may spur Congress to take legislative action.

Former Google Engineer Says Google Will Try to Prevent Trump’s Reelection

The impact of Google’s near-monopoly

Google’s search engine has achieved such a near-monopoly that Americans will use the verb “to google” rather than “to search.” This seems innocent enough — after all, Google does provide an excellent search engine. Yet critics have long raised concerns that Google’s near-monopoly on internet search could have hidden impacts on Americans.

Ph.D. psychologist Robert Epstein, who supported Hillary Clinton in 2016, has long warned about Google’s power to manipulate elections. In 2017, he wrote a white paper arguing that Clinton’s popular vote margin was almost entirely attributable to pro-Clinton bias at Google.

“Extrapolating from the mathematics introduced in this report … the lead author of the PNAS study [Epstein himself] predicted that a pro-Clinton bias in Google’s search results would, over time, shift at least 2.6 million votes to Clinton. She won the popular vote in the November election by 2,864,974 votes,” Epstein wrote with his co-author Ronald E. Robertson.

“Without the pro-Clinton bias in Google’s search results, her win margin in the popular vote would have been negligible,” Epstein wrote.

A 2018 survey found that conservative employees in Silicon Valley tech companies live in fear that their political beliefs will be found out. James Damore said conservatives at Google are “in the closet” and that Google executives are digging through a secret email list in order to out them.

Last month, a Google whistleblower told Project Veritas that Google News results are intentionally biased against Trump. This seemed to confirm the results of an unscientific test on Google News bias run by PJ Media editor Paula Bolyard last year (tweeted out by Trump himself), and a more scientific study also suggesting bias. The Google News slant is not a conspiracy theory, though Google of course denies manipulating results. After all, Google employees heavily favor Democrats in their political donations.

More than 90 percent of political contributions from employees of Alphabet, Google’s parent company, have gone to Democrats since 2004. In 2018, 96 percent went to Democrats.

Yet Google bias may not always be liberal. All Americans should be concerned about Google’s ability to interfere in elections, and a former Google engineer said the company will try to prevent Trump’s reelection. This should worry all Americans, no matter what they think about Trump.

Google’s near-monopoly should worry Americans, and this lawsuit may be a step in the right direction. Even so, Americans should also worry about a government take-over of Big Tech. Antitrust actions against Google may be necessary, but if politicians and regulators get their hands on the kind of power Google possesses, the prospects might be far worse than the threat Google currently poses.

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

Trump: Google ‘Should Be Sued’ for Manipulating ‘from 2.6 Million to 16 Million Votes for Hillary’
New Movie Claims Google Handed the Popular Vote to Hillary Clinton in 2016
RNC Files FEC Complaint: Twitter Gave ‘In-Kind Contribution’ to Biden Campaign
Election Interference? Big Tech Censored Trump More Than 60 Times, Left Biden Unscathed