The House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on Monday revealed yet another facet of the Biden Administration’s sprawling censorship system that targeted dissenting books. It appears that, as with social media companies, it succeeded in getting the company not to promote disfavored books.
Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan revealed on X that the White House was directly involved in the censorship campaign. That includes a 2021 email from one Biden official asking to discuss “the high levels of propaganda and misinformation and disinformation of [sic] Amazon?”
Amazon in turn appears to ask only how high the Biden White House wants it to jump on censorship: “[i]s the [Biden] Admin asking us to remove books, or are they more concerned about search results/order (or both)?”
After the meeting, Amazon confirmed in an email that it was actively doing what the government demanded in suppressing sales by not promoting disfavored books: “As a reminder, we did enable Do Not Promote for anti-vax books whose primary purpose is to persuade readers vaccines are unsafe or ineffective on 3/9, and will review additional handling options for these books with you.”
This effort notably parallels demands from Democratic leaders who have called for enlightened algorithms to frame what citizens access on the internet. In 2021, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) objected that people were not listening to the informed views of herself and leading experts. Instead, they were reading views of skeptics by searching Amazon and finding books by “prominent spreaders of misinformation.”
Warren blamed Amazon for failing to limit searches or choices: “This pattern and practice of misbehavior suggests that Amazon is either unwilling or unable to modify its business practices to prevent the spread of falsehoods or the sale of inappropriate products.” In her letter, Warren gave the company 14 days to change its algorithms to throttle and obstruct efforts to read opposing views.
It is important to keep in mind that these efforts at censorship targeted scientists who have been vindicated in many of their objections to policies and claims of the government. For example, a new scientific review by 12 researchers from leading universities found little support for the claims that masks reduced Covid exposures.
The Centers for Disease and Control Prevention (CDC) initially rejected the use of a mask mandate. However, the issue became a political weapon as politicians and the press claimed that questioning masks was anti-science and even unhinged. In April 2020, the CDC reversed its position and called for the masking of the entire population, including children as young as 2 years old. The mask mandate and other pandemic measures like the closing of schools are now cited as fueling emotional and developmental problems in children.
The closing of schools and businesses was also challenged by some critics as unnecessary. Many of those critics were also censored. It now appears that they may have been right. Many countries did not close schools and did not experience increases in Covid. However, we are now facing alarming drops in testing scores and alarming rises in medical illness among the young.
Masks became a major social and political dividing line in politics and the media. Maskless people were chased from stores and denounced in Congress. Then-CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said during a Senate hearing that “face masks are the most important powerful health tool we have.”
The head of the World Health Organization even supported censorship to combat what he called an “infodemic.”
A lawsuit opposing these efforts was filed by Missouri and Louisiana and joined by leading experts, including Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya (Stanford University) and Martin Kulldorff (Harvard University). Yet, universities joined social media companies and politicians in targeting dissenters and silencing opposing voices.
Bhattacharya previously objected to the suspension of Dr. Clare Craig after she raised concerns about Pfizer trial documents. Those doctors were the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated for a more focused Covid response that targeted the most vulnerable population rather than widespread lockdowns and mandates. Many are now questioning the efficacy and cost of the massive lockdown as well as the real value of masks or the rejection of natural immunities as an alternative to vaccination. Yet, these experts and others were attacked for such views just a year ago. Some found themselves censored on social media for challenging claims of Dr. Fauci and others.
The media has quietly acknowledged the science questioning mask efficacy and school closures without addressing its own role in attacking those who raised these objections. Even raising the lab theory on the origin of Covid 19 (a theory now treated as plausible) was denounced as a conspiracy theory. The science and health reporter for the New York Times, Apoorva Mandavilli, even denounced the theory as “racist.”
Again, the objection to the censorship system is not that all of these views are correct, but that the public was being actively hampered in reading or hearing opposing views.
The new emails also show direct federal efforts supporting censorship. I testified at the first hearing by the special committee investigating the censorship system. I warned that there was ample evidence of a system based on “censorship by surrogate” where government agencies used academic and media allies to silence those with opposing views.
Despite the determined opposition by Democratic members and the Biden Administration, the investigation has revealed a wide array of grants to academic and third party organizations to create blacklists or to pressure advertisers to withdraw support for conservative sites. The subjects for censorship ranged from election fraud to social justice to climate change.
Now we can add private demands to target dissenting books to suppress sales. It is far more appealing to certain sensibilities than banning publications or removing copies. After all, why burn books if you can bury them?
1- Today we also found out, According to a report the House Judiciary Committee published on Tuesday, the Daily Caller News Foundation reporting on Feb. 19 2023, what the President Joe Biden’s administration spend $38.8 millions of dollars to fund research to suppress online “misinformation” through National Science Foundation (NSF) since Biden’s inauguration by November 2022,
2- To counter so-called “misinformation” The NSF received funding for “research initiatives” in a plan dubbed “Track F”. Track F it’s a investment in ‘media strategy’ on Projects Combating ‘Misinformation’ through grants are Provided to Universities for make analysis, studies and research that help and create propaganda tools to “educate” or “re-educate” of the “dangers of misinformation becomes woven into narratives online”
3- But the real “purpose of these taxpayer-funded projects is”
– to develop artificial intelligence (AI)- powered censorship and propaganda tools
– that can be used by governments and Big Tech
– to shape public opinion by restricting certain viewpoints or promoting others,”
4- And here comes the scariest part of all. For instance, (only 3 University but the ara more)
*the NSF in December 2022 awarded the University of Houston a $50,000 grant for establishing a “social media misinformation interactive dashboard” that would “forecast trends and analysis to help address the misinformation endemic in America,”
*the NSF in July 2019 awarded Syracuse University a $495,478 grant to study the “online dynamics of misinformation,” focusing on how “misinformation becomes woven into narratives online, how technology influences this process, and how design might be used to alter it.”
*Massachusetts Institute of Technology-led researchers informed the NSF awarded $750,000 that “broad swaths of the public cannot effectively sort truth from fiction online” in a project proposal summary, The researchers particularly highlighted “rural and indigenous communities,” “military veterans, older adults, and military families” and “older adults” as being the most vulnerable. MIT-led researchers and it created propaganda tools to educate these demographics because of their vulnerability to “misinformation campaigns,”
But MORE SCARIEST is the President Joe Biden’s administration contemplated concealing its efforts to spend millions of dollars to fund research to suppress online “misinformation” after reporting. NSF program manager Michael Pozmantier sent an email declaring he was “going to see about pulling them [the videos] down or locking the page ASAP” the following day, according to a screenshot in the report.
1-February 19, 2023
‘Serious Threat’: The National Science Foundation Has Spent Millions On Projects Combating ‘Misinformation’
https://dailycaller.com/2023/02/19/nsf-funding-misinformation-disinformation-research-grants/
2- February 06, 2024
Emails Show How Biden Officials Considered Covering Up Censorship Activities In The Wake Of DCNF Report
https://dailycaller.com/2024/02/06/emails-show-how-biden-officials-considered-covering-up-censorship-activities-in-the-wake-of-dcnf-report/
Brilliant piece.
Regarding free speech, and the suppression thereof, this is a good talk between Dave Rubin and Dr. Drew:
OT: the Mayorkas impeachment just failed 216-214.
More proof that Dems are the party of evil and the GOP is the party of stupid.
Nah, it’s proof that the GOP House is both stupid AND evil.
It is merely proof that Republicans do not evaluate the facts, law and constitution identically.
Sequestered carbon can be reused, recycled, repurposed. Electricity is lost as heat with resistance and inductance. Go green, not Green.
Jonathan: What would it take for GOP voters to decide not to vote for DJT? Apparently a lot. DJT has already been held liable to the tune of $83.3 million for the rape and defamation of E. Jean Carroll. Even the “family values” wing of the MAGA party doesn’t think that’s enough. What happens when Judge Engoron hits DJT with about $500 million for civil fraud–bilking the citizens of NY? Still not enough for some MAGA voters. And what about the NY Manhattan DA’s case going to trial next month accusing DJT of election interference and the hush money payments to a porn star? Cheating on your wife is still not enough for the “family values crowd. For some of us on this blog either of the three would be a disqualifying factor.
So what would it take for GOP voters to reject DJT? The polls show a majority of GOP voters would turn against DJT if he were convicted of a major crime or crimes. Being a “convicted felon” would finally turn off GOP voters. Barring that GOP voters will not turn on their cult leader. When it comes to cults the leader can do no wrong. A sad commentary on the state of the GOP these days.
A sad commentary on you is that you attribute it to mindless cult following. In fact Trump’s economy was great (low inflation, low interest rates, affordable gas, groceries and housing), crime was under control, the border was enforced against illegal invasion, we had energy independence, no new wars, no pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into pointless forever wars, favorable international trade deals which helped the unions, criminal justice reform, and on and on. With Biden, we have the opposite: a dystopia in which all of the above measures of living are reversed: out-of-control violent crime, an erased southern border, unaffordable groceries, gas and housing, high interest rates, begging Venezuela and other bad actors to produce more oil since we’re no longer energy independent, draining the strategic petroleum reserve, a weaponized justice system in which concerned parents are labeled domestic terrorists and the leading candidate of one party is persecuted by the other party through a corruption of the justice system (making us a literal banana republic), etc.
Given the above, any rational person would favor Trump over Biden. So you have it exactly backwards: Trump supporters are acting rationally, whereas Biden supporters are in thrall to a cult – either that or they have a twisted desire to see themselves and everyone else suffer.
Did you say, “Mindless cult following?”
Joke Biden and the constantly caterwauling communist dependents, leeches, and parasites seeking copious amounts of “free stuff” and “free status” from the taxpaying and meritorious electorate fit the bill.
OldManFromKS,
Well said and thank you for giving Dennis a good dose of reality.
Comparing the two admins, all the chaos and failures of the Biden admin are the reason why our enemies want another four years of Biden. It is in their best interests.
I’m not voting for Trump because I love Trump. I’m voting for Trump because I hate you.
Much more to the point that my longer posts
Thank you
When you actually convict Trump of a REAL crime using REAL evidence in fairly conducted trials – you will find republicans abandon Trump in droves.
The polling that you cite presumed lawful and legitimate convictions.
It should be obvious to all but the brain dead that Trump’s polling goes UP each time you ratchet up the lawfare.
Most people are not stupid. They know what a star chamber, or kangaroo court looks like.
When you parade one in front of people – why do you expect them to trust you ?
Trump is now 10pts ahead in a CBS poll. So how well is that lawfare working ?
Nor is the bias of the courts and prosecutors you are using your only problem – it now appears that Wade and Willis have committed multiple acts of perjury, obstruction and unethical conduct SINCE the Roman motion to disqualify. Documents that Wade provide CONTRADICT his and Willis’s remarks in his and her response briefs. Willis has attacked the defendants, accused them of racism, and conspiring against her in her public appearances – that is improper conduct by a prosecutor – and there is Video of none other than Fanni Willis SAYING such conduct would be unethical.
The damage has already been done. Willis is going to spend the next couple of years in court defending her own conduct regardless of whether she proceedes against Trump. It is likely she will be removed either by the judge or Fulton county or the house or the senate or the GA AG.
But more importantly Willis and Wade appear to be guilty of more heinous conduct than they have accused Trump of.
I would further note that SOME of Willis’s improper conduct is with respect to her prosecution of Trump.
Much of it is just ordinary public corruption and lawlessness. Her conduct would be WRONG regardless of the defendant.
Improperly circumventing normal hiring of a Special Prosecutor, setting his pay engaging in a romanitic relationship, cohabitating with someone you are paying with public funds, Vacationing with someone you are paying with public funds. Poisoning the jury pool, Federal Grant fraud – none of these are unique to the Trump case, Some of them do not even involve the Trump case.
The Willis case is not only imploding – but it is further tainting all the other lawfare against Trump.
We are also learning – from democrats sources, that much of Willis’s legal filings appear to have been ghost written by outside parties.
Ghost Writing briefs is a violation of legal ethics for private lawyers, it is even worse for prosecutors. The government must make its case with its own counsel its own lawyers. E Jean Carroll can have her case funded by billioaires targetting Trump – But Willis and Bragg Can NOT.
There are allegations being made BY DEMOCRATS that various groups including Sorros and the same billionaire funding Carrol have been providing legal work for Willis and Wade. This is in addition to the established coordination with DOJ and the WH.
Again this taints not just Willis’s case – but all cases. Frankly it taints these people far beyond Trump and republicans.
Bragg’s office is in trouble in NYC for Releasing twho illegal immigrants who violently attacked police officers – who on their release flipped us all the bird and then aparently disappeared to California.
If you want people to beleive you – behave trustworthy, transparently and lawfully, and competently.
Allegedly the SC Hurr report on Biden’s classified documents comes out shortly.
There is pretty much nothing Hurr can report that does not make it easier for Trump to get a dismissal in FL.
This while the FL obstruction claim is coming apart.
What would it take ?
It would take a damning case against Trump that people believed.
This is not me saying that – that is the 55% of voters that CBS found are voting for Trump.
Are you saying that 55% of voters are Trump Cultists ?
I have not read the entirety of the DC courts oppinion – but it is absolutely abysmally reasoned and with certaintly going to bite them in the ass.
They essentially concluded that every single one of Trump’s arguments was legitimate, and then used “manufactured” balancing tests, and obviously fallacious reasoning to knock them down – Not on principle or law mind you but by asserting without foundation in law or caselaw that in this particular case Trump has no immunity.
So that we are clear – after disparaging the claim, they subsequently accepted that broad presidential immunity exists, that failure to impeach may constitute double jeopohardy. That impeachment may be required before a criminal prosecution, that allowing prosecutions of ex-presidents would negatively impact the ability of the president to to their job.
And in one of the more stupid and unececescary arguments actually argued that Presidents have a Duty to enforce the actual law.
Presumptively the DC appelate pannel was not thinking about how that conclusion – which is not relevant tot he Trump case would bear on Biden in the TX v CBP case.
Regardless, the decision was a blatant example of politicized reasoning – deciding what the answer would be and then carefully trying to thread the needle to get the outcome you want without actually undermining the foundation of Trump’s appeal.
Why did they follow this route ? That is pretty trivial – Presidential immunity is quite real, and there is no way that any sane court will rule otherwise.
What we have is another of the myriads of courts saying – the law and constitution are as follow …. EXCEPT FOR TRUMP.
While this is a very poorly written oppinion – which is to be expected as they likely rushed it out the door after the left exerted unusual pressure on the court to resolve a very complex matter of first impression is a record little more than a month, when the norm for simple appeals is 4 months.
But it was necescary to violate due process in ordert to have the slightest hope of interfering with the eleciton, while not admitting that the goal is interfering in the election which would be illegal and unconstitutional.
I was also reminded that not only had Pres. Obama ordered the assassination of a US citizen without Due process in Yemen, but that Fast and Furious – where the ATF illegally sold guns to mexican drug cartels, only to have those weapons end up being used to murder an FBI agent.
That Also tool place under Obama.
Knowingly selling guns to drug cartels in a foreign country is a CRIME. Doing so also makes you guilty of conspiring to murder the FBI agent, just as people who sell guns to felons who use them to kill police officers are guilty of conspiracy to commit murder – as well as other crimes.
These judges were NOT complete morons – While there decision boils down to “Except for Trump” – the decision IS written such that it accepts every single immunity claim That Trump made. The core of the decision is that in every claim supporting immunity that Trump made – some detail tips a never before formulated balancing test such that in this specific instance prosecution of Trump remains possible.
Smith also filed a whinny brief in FL attempting to respond to Trump’s demand for broader discovery.
The Gist of the response was – Please do not make us turn over discovery from all the different agencies and offices that participated int he efforts to “get Trump” – because we do not want to, and you can trust us that it is not relevant – as our own recitation of facts proves it is.
Whils Smith’s response is FULL of Spin, and efforts to downplay the significance of the facts that SMITH provides in his own timeline the fact is that his own exposition of facts, not only exposes why the case should be dismissed, but why if it is not, Trump must be provided broad discovery.
Smith also CONSTANTLY makes the error of citing various laws regarding classified documents and WH records while IGNORING the fact that there is caselaw on how these laws apply with respect tot he constitution and the president.
The most glaringly damning fact in Smith’s execis is that neither JW v NARA nor the long serioes of cases that preceded it are mentioned.
This is actually an ethical violation. Lawyers are not permitted in their briefs to omit caselaw that is applicable to the issues at hand that is damaging to their case.
Smith can ignore JW v NARA if it has subsequently been overruled – it has not. Otherwise he is OBLIGATED to cite it when it bears on the US code that he cites, only then can he argue why it is not applicable to the current case.
What Smith has done before Cannon is very similar to Cohen’s fiasco citing AI generated caselaw that does not exist.
This is particularly damning since JW V NARA looms throughout Smith’s recitation of the interactions between Trump and NARA.
At each and every assertion by Smith of interactions between Trump and NARA the question – “why didn’t NARA seek a court order to take possession of these documents” begs for an answer. By omitting the question, Smith makes clear the answer – because under JW V. NARA the courts would have told NARA to pound sand.
So after lots of back and forth between Trump and NARA, NARA decided – on the advise of DOJ and the WH – which had no business being involved, to refer this to DOJ for criminal prosecution rather than to seek possession from the courts.
If the actual law is as Smith Claims it is, then on Jan 21, 2021 NARA could have gone to court and gotten an order requiring Trump to turn over the records in his possession. They did not – because they would have lost.
And because that was NOT the objective. The entire objective from the start was to fit Trump up for the criminal prosecution we are seeing right now.
So that we are clear there is LOTS of caselaw that says that NARA can go to court for ACCESS to records in the posession of an expresident.
While there is no carte blanche grant of such access – NARA must provede a justification for access beyond – We want these.
All of the caselaw where NARA sought access is NOT because NARA whated the records, That alone will NOT persuade the courts.
They are all because the current executive needed access to documents from the prior administration.
So that we are clear – even when the prior administrations documents are in NARA’s posession – they are NOT accessible to the current administration. Trump could not rummage through Obama’s records, The Biden admin can not rummage through trumps.
Whether those records are with NARA or the former president, the current administration must go to court to access them and must provide a reason sufficient to persuade the courts.
Neither NARA nor the United States – contra to Smith are ever the owner of ex presidents WH records. At best they are custodians.
If the U owned the records, NARA would have to provide ex presidents records to the current president without going to court or enven notifying the expresident.
Dennis – None of the many suits against Trump can be taken seriously..
E. Jeanne Carrol – the fact that the SOL was removed destroys the validity of this proceeding.
SOLs are designed to protect citizens against stale, vague, and essentially unprovable claims (except by the testimony of the claimant).
Book entry regarding money paid to Ms Stormy – a joke.
Overvaluation of financial assets – again not serious. Valuations are opinions, and no serious bank would have accepted Trump’s valuations at face value. Further, no bank complained and no bank complained.
Retention of classified documents – a document dispute that could have been resolved by discussions between lawyers if the FBI and DOJ had not decided to escalate the dispute into a crisis. Both Biden and Obama had possession of more classified documents for longer periods of time without any complaint from The National Archives or anyone else.
Fani Willis and the wide-ranging conspiracies in Georgia – she doesn’t know what she is doing, except for funneling money to herself.
Jack Smith and Trump’s conspiracy to overturn the election – Trump acted legally in challenging the election results just as Democrats had done in the past. He believed, with some justification, that the 2020 election had been rigged.
So, in answer to your question, that is my brief explanation of why the DNC”s Lawfare campaign against Trump will fail to persuade Republican voters.
No one Bilked the citizens of NY – are you completely clueless ?
What is it that you think this trial is about ?
The claim in this case – the ONLY claim is that by allegedly overvaluing his assets Trump got a better deal on his mortgages with Deutche Bank than he would otherwise. If this claim were True – DB would have sued Trump and won years ago.
If I decide tomorow that my collected property is worth $2T – who will be harmed by that ?
Will the citizens of my state be harmed because I “overvalue” my property ?
Will they lose tax revenue ?
I have two rental properties – every single day someone calls me and wants to buy them. When they ask how much I want I give them a very high number. Mostly I want them to go away and leave me alone.
At the same time once the caller cam close to offering me the very high amount I asked.
Did I commit fraud ?
2 years ago I got a line of credit on one property – much like Trump did.
I was asked how much the property was worth – I gave the bank a number. They sent an appraiser out – his number was substantially lower than mine – did I commit fraud ?
I know that you clueless left wing nuts who have never negotiated any deal in your lives and who sign boilerplate contracts with banks and creit companies without reading them have no clue about any of this.
But anyone who has bought or sold anything on Craigslist or Facebook knows this is a farce.
Value is subjective.
No one was defrauded.
Super majorities of people understand that.
When Engron slams Trump – which we all expect – it will just be more proof to most of the country how corrupt democrats are.
Dennis, only leftist believe you can find a person liable for an act that never has no specific time or space. Only leftist abandon the rule of law to advance their politics.
Go Green. Sequester.
Jonathan: And there is more bad news for DJT. In the NY civil fraud case brought by AG Letitia James, Judge Engoron is about to issue a decision hitting DJT with probably a half billion dollar judgment. The decision was expected last week. Why the delay? I think we now know why.
It should be recalled that Alan Weisselberg, CFO for the DJT org., testified before Judge Engoron that he knew nothing about the boss’s cooking of the financial books. He tried his best to cover for the boss. Now it appears through reporting by the NY Times that Weisselberg is in talks with Letitia James’ office to plead guilty to perjury–particularly relating to his testimony before Judge Engoron.
In a remarkable move Judge Engoron wants to know what is going on with Weisselberg. So the judge just sent a letter to DJT’s attorneys asking for clarification. He wants to know whether there is a possible plea deal. The letter states, in part: “As the presiding magistrate, the trier of fact, and the judge of credibility, I of course want to know whether Mr. Weisselberg is now changing his tune, and whether he is admitting he lied under oath in my courtroom at this trial”. Engoron has given DJT’s lawyers until 5 pm tomorrow to respond. If Weisselberg is going to plead guilty to perjury that means everything he told Judge Engoron on the witness stand can be disregarded. That would be devastating for DJT because Weisselberg was one of the main defense witnesses.
Just when you think things couldn’t get worse–they get worse! Another nail in DJT’s legal coffin!
DM I trust your recitation of facts about as much as I would trust satan himself.
I have no idea what Weisselberg testified to in this case – he has already been convicted in another case of Defrauding the Trump organization.
I also know that you have no idea either.
Regardless, Weisselberg can change his testimony to anything you want – it would change nothing.
There was nothing wrong with Trump’s valuations.
Regardless, both by disclaimer on the documents and law, no one is legally permitted to rely on those valuations.
The bank involved had no problems writing the loans and would have done so even if Trump had half the assets he claimed.
The Bank sought out Trump – not the other way arround.
The mortgages were written, payments made, and they were paid off.
There is no fraud.
No amount of testimony by anyone can change those FACTS.
I would further noted as a matter of law – the trial is over.
What I hear you saying is that James and Engron are engaged in an awful lot of illegal ex parte communications.
If as you claim something is going on regarding Weiselberg – James can move for a new trial, or she can go forward with the case that was submitted to Engron.
What neither she nor Engron can do at this time is start taking new evidence in a case where closing arguments have been made.
This case is essentially in the same position as a case put before a jury, and Engron is the jury.
Jurors can not conduct their own investigations (nor can judges).
If Prosecutors or defense beleives that some malfeasance has taken place in a case they can move for a mistrail.
That is the extent of their options.
If Engron is communicating with James or anyone else about this case without Trump’s attorney’s present – that is unethical conduct and grounds for removal and a mistrial.
If Weisselberg lied under oath – then James can prosecute him.
Regardless Weisselberg has already been convicted of tax fraud – actually of defrauding Trump, so I am not sure where theis is going to get you.
But have fun.
As Best as I can tell Engron is claiming that if Weisselberg is pleading to perjury that as the finder of Fact, Engron can reject his testimony.
Legally that is false, but the standard is subjective so Engron can get away with that.
But it would not matter in the slighttest. Weisselberg is just one of 40 wittnesses for Trump.
All of which said this is Bullschiff.
But the FACT is this never should have made it to court.
None of the witnesses matter at all.
There is no fraud.
This is the typical idiocy of you left wing nuts.
Fraud is NOT a synonym of “lie”, Actual fraud is a lie, where there is a duty to tell the truth, and where the lie causes actual harm.
The duty to get property valuations correct is on the lender not the borrower.
That is an established fact of law. It is also as a practical matter a requirement for doing business.
Because of another FACT of economics – the only actual value to anything is what a willing buyer and a willing sellor agree to.
This is a 250 year old FACT of economics – first expressed by Adam Smith at the time of the Revolution.
This MUST be the only true value of anything.
If you would use the mind god gave you that would be obvious.
How much would you be willing to pay for a drug that cured cancer in me ?
How much would you be willing to pay for a drug that cured cancer in your wife or daughter ?
Most anyone understands you would not pay much to benefit a random stranger, but you would give everything you own to save a wife or child.
VALUE IS SUBJECTIVE.
Only the bank can decide how much money they are going to loan for a mortgage.
There is no objective value of anything.
I pay $10 for a box of 40 packetts of popcorn – that is about $0.25 ea at Costco.
If I go to a movie theater I pay $10.00 for the same popcorn that I can get for $0.25 at home.
I am not being defrauded by the theater. I can choose not to buy the popcorn at the theater. I can choose not to go to the theater at all and watch the movie at home with all the popcorn I want.
Fraud requires a lie. You can not lie about the value of anything – because value is subjective.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value
Fraud requires a duty – the duty to value something being sold ALWAYS rests with the buyer, not the sellor.
That has been true since ancient Rome.
Fraud requires actual harm. Trump borrowed money. He paid it back with interest. No one was harmed. In fact the banks made millions.
No one’s testimony is nescecarry to establish any of this.
The entire world expects that Engron is going to do his damnedest to slam Trump.
No one will be surprised by a massive decision.
Only you will be surprised when it is overturned on appeal as it will be with absolute certainty.
Real estate markets accross the country would seize completely if courts decided they could meddle in the valuation of property.
The appeals courts can hate Trump. They are not going to uphold this.
The only fraud here is on the part of James.
I would futher note that any monetary penalty at all by Engron would be a violation of the 5th amendment.
Government can not confiscate your property without fair compensation.
Even if there was actual fraud here – Government can not punish that Fraud beyond the actual harm.
Further Government can not confiscate money from Trump for alleged fraud to Deutche Bank.
Any money’s collected from Trump would have to go to DB for the actual harm done to them.
Having looked into this further the actual issue is that the size of Trump’s appartment in NY was listed incorrectly on some form.
Weiselberg testified that he was not aware of that and that the error would have been deminimus anyway as the apartment was a miniscule portion of Trump’s wealth. James/Bragg’s attack on Weisselberg is because a Forbes reporter has said that he had an exachange with Weisselberg years ago noting that the size of the Trump apartments was in error.
So the claim is that Weisselberg perjured himself when he said he was unaware of the error.
This claim of perjury presumes that Weisselberg paid the slightest attention to what some reporter said to him years earlier.
Weisselberg is not even close to one of the main defense witnesses – the Bank is the most important defense witness.
But more important than the witnesses is the facts and the law – the law requires the lender to value property. And the fact is that money was borrowed and it was repaid. There is no fraud without harm incurred as a result of reliance on a representation by another who owed you a duty.
Engron can disregard everything Weisselberg said – he can disregard everything every Trump witness said – Engron is the finder of fact and responsible of assessing credibility. But Engron can not disregard the actual facts.
The bank loaned Trump money and was paid bank, and to this day has never alleged fraud – and never will.
Ultimately that is the end of this case.
As to this nonsense that Weisselberg is the main witness. That is poppycock. Weisselberg is a Trump employee.
Neitehr plentiffs nor defendants rely primarily on people who work for them as witnesses.
The most important witnesses in any trial are those that do not work for either the defense or the prosecution.
In this case – while the facts and the law are the critical evidence and why there never should have been a case,
Of those who testified, the people from DB are far and away the most critical defense witnesses.
When do we get to prosecute Engron and James for lying in court ?
Dennis, I hope that Engron hits Trump with a $2B award – the bigger the better.
Why – because the more shocking the award is the more obvious the bias and fraud of the court.
$10M, $100M, $1B it really does not matter – this is going nowhere.
But the bigger the award Engron signs off on the more Trump’s poll numbers will rise.
All you are doing is telling voters how high a price Trump is willing to pay to be president.
In agreement with all his arguments, especially that “the value of the product is not defined by the market, the value is defined by what the customer is willing to pay” in commercial law had important weight to contractual law that stipulates the agreements freely agreed between the parties.
Since Babylonian times, the law of contract in the Code of Hammurabi (currently in force in many jurisdictions), the judge only intervened if a dispute arose, but if the parties did not become plaintiffs, he did not intervene, he only observed what the parties agreed to. parties and even if the judge did not agree with what was stipulated, he ruled in favor of the agreement.
In general, trade law has progressively adapted in a global or internationalized manner to international commercial law. That’s why I can’t understand the NY State fraud laws. That harm trade and move so far away from modern adaptive laws towards an International trade law, a distance as much as 68 years.
Executive Law 63(12)
*A finding of fraud under the New York’s statute, known as Executive Law 63(12), does not require any misrepresentations or flat-out lies resulting in anyone getting duplicated or losing money.
– I am not a lawyer, and I do not understand this part “does not require any misrepresentations or flat-out lies” and that is what I want to
explain me.
1- What are the guidelines required to demonstrate a finding of Fraud?
2- How can a civilian/company be accused of fraud without citing actual victims or losses?
*The law gives the Attorney General of New York broad powers to investigate and prosecute cases of civil fraud. Due to its broad definitions, section 63(12) provides the AG with far-reaching powers to issue subpoenas, as well as low legal hurdles to do so.
1. What is the red line that delimits a prosecutor’s “broad powers”?
2. What are the parameters of this “powerful tool” given to a prosecutor, who in itself is practically unpunished from any claim of malpractice?
*Section 63(12) have determined that proof of fraud or deceptive conduct requires only a “capacity or tendency to deceive.” It “does not require” the Attorney General to “establish the elements of fraud” at common law in order to issue subpoenas and otherwise proceed under this law.
1. By what criteria and how is “capacity or tendency” measurably demonstrable?
2. What does it mean to “proceed otherwise in accordance with this law”?
3. “what law”?
4. Doesn’t it require you to establish the elements of common law fraud?
Under the statute, “fraudulent” conduct includes
– “any device, plan or artifice to defraud and
— any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression,
— false pretense, false promise or unconscionable contractual provisions.”
1- Aren’t all these questions subjective assumptions?
2- Doesn’t this seem like an inquisitorial law?
3-many of the protections that would normally be granted to the target of a criminal investigation are not absent?
OT
Plenty of Reid Hoffman’s money?
E. Jean Carroll – No rape complaint. No rape kit. No evidence. No witnesses. No Bergdorf Goodman surveillance video.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“What Was Reid Hoffman’s Role In Funding E. Jean Carroll’s Case?”
“Billionaire LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman funded E. Jean Carroll’s prosecution alleging former President Donald Trump raped her, through a nonprofit group the major Democratic donor backs; now that a jury has found Trump guilty of sexual abuse, some have questioned Hoffman’s role in the process—here’s what it looked like.”
– Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2023/05/10/what-was-reid-hoffmans-role-in-funding-e-jean-carrolls-case/?sh=311e1d1e3e15
Bury the Anti-Vax Books. Why? Because the leftists did not want the public to know the truth about the side effects of the vaccines? And today we learn that those who got the vaccines want to know how they can undo the Spike Proteins that were injected into them and now causing heart ailments, including death.
I got the COVID vaccines x 2. it has made me look 20 years younger, removed all of my wrinkles, my grey hair disappeared, my physique is far more muwcular, my IQ increased by 30 points (MENSA sent me an application to join), my sexual performance is that of a toro 🐂, and I seem to radiate brilliance 💡 confidence 👍🏾 and good looks👸 considering 3 years ago I was dumb as Dennis 🤡cowardly like Gigi 😳 and fugly like elvis bug 🦟.
😜
You just made my day, Estovir! Thank you, I needed that.
Grey hair does disappear as a natural part of the aging process, but if your physique is muy “muwcular” you might want that IQ score checked with a Geiger counter.
Estovir,
Simply awesome!
Jonathan: I have BREAKING news for those on this blog who think DJT is immune from criminal prosecution. The DC Court of Appeals just ruled today that DJT is “burned” and “buried” from making that claim. In a 56-page unanimous decision the 3-judge ruled DJT is not immune from criminal prosecution and gave DJT until Monday to indicate whether he will appeal to the US SC. Otherwise, the case goes back to Judge Chutkan to set a new trial date.
You don’t have to be abetting man to know DJT will appeal to the highest court. The SC has two choices. Either refuse to hear the appeal or grant cert. I seriously doubt the SC wants to get into this messy case of DJT’s own creation–especially Chief Justice Roberts who presides over the DC Circuit. He doesn’t want to give the right-wing conservative majority on the Court a chance to find that a President can order Seal Team-6 to assassinate a political opponent and get away with it! That would be Roberts’ sad legacy and he doesn’t relish that prospect!
Wasn’t former Trump administration official Mike Gill recently murdered in a carjacking in D.C.? Fine town. Looks like the biased and feckless D.C. Court of Appeals is as corrupt as the Supreme Court of 1973, which was corrected and censured by the Supreme Court of 2022. Crime doesn’t pay, Den. Oh, and your communism is an absolute crime against fundamental law. Just sayin’!
Dennis McIntyre, Bribery Biden’s Designated Liar, cosplaying as Professor Turley’s close friend, posted this
Jonathan: I have BREAKING news for those on this blog who think DJT is immune from criminal prosecution… a chance to find that a President can order Seal Team-6 to assassinate a political opponent and get away with it!
BREAKING NEWS that Soviet Democrat liars were sent here to deflect from… there’s a new whistleblower that just popped up: Soviet Democrat police state fascist Fani Willis who promised if elected she would send to jail… she’s going to go to jail for corruption:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/willis-fired-whistleblower-who-warned-her-about-mishandled-funds/ar-BB1hL5Rv
It’s noticeable that Dennis McIntyre/Baghdad Bob has abruptly ceased attacking Trump’s lawyers since Bribery Biden’s hitman, Fani Willis, has been revealed to be a corrupt prosecutor using public funds to pay her unqualified prosecutor to hump her fat ass and take her on expensive vacations. So Dennis/Baghdad Bob is attempting to move on.
And nobody is surprised to know that this court that Bolshevik Barack stacked and packed with additional Soviet Democrat police state fascists on it’s bench would support their fellow Soviet Democrat police state fascist, Judge Chutkan.
But wait! Does Dennis/Baghdad Bob believe that Trump would use Seal Team 6 to take out his opponents like Bolshevik Barack and his main man, Bribery Biden, ordered the DoJ and Jack Smith to take out his opponents during their reelection campaign? Remember that 9-0 unanimous SCOTUS reversal of Jack Smith, Soviet Democrat liars?
Does Dennis/Baghdad Bob believe that Trump would use Seal Team 6 to take out his opponents like Bolshevik Barack and his main man, Bribery Biden, ordered the FBI to use the fraudulent “Russia Dossier” they commissioned, wrote, and paid for to try and take out Trump?
It’s like a tattoo that Soviet Democrat police state fascists like Bolshevik Barack, Bribery Biden, and their scum assigned here put on display: accuse those who stand in their path of doing exactly what they have been doing since long before Trump ever ran for office.
These Soviet Democrat police state fascists and their equally vicious poblicity apparatchiks are failed human beings and scum.
Actually, yes, as stated by other posters, I would love to see if the dems/pravda/amazon are going to try to ban the Professor’s book. This is like cellophane at this point with the left, even though the Professor is a self-proclaimed one of them. This is pure projection, but I’m sure it absolutely KILLS them that he has a remaining ounce of objectivity. I would not be surprised either, if there is a segment of conservatives that praise the book. This automatically, and unrepentantly makes the Professor a nazi to them. You can’t win with the brainwashed. It is absolutely mental illness. Our current administration actually does know better, but they will exploit like exploiting is going out of style. It is not a good look.
James,
Well said.
What is even more dangerous is the brainwashed are zealots too.
OT
NOTE TO D.C. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS:
A SITTING PRESIDENT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY IMMUNE FROM INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, DOJ
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution
Date of Issuance: October 16, 2000
Headnotes
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.
In 1973, the Department of Justice concluded that the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unduly interfere with the ability of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned duties, and would thus violate the constitutional separation of powers. No court has addressed this question directly, but the judicial precedents that bear on the continuing validity of our constitutional analysis are consistent with both the analytic approach taken and the conclusions reached.
Our view remains that a sitting President is constitutionally immune from indictment and criminal prosecution.
RANDOLPH D. MOSS
Assistant Attorney General
Office o f Legal Counsel
Department of Justice
https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/sitting-president%E2%80%99s-amenability-indictment-and-criminal-prosecution
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHARGES: TRUMP MOUNTED WIDE-RANGING CAMPAIGN TO SUBVERT BIDEN’S RIGGED “VICTORY”
IN THE TWO MONTHS BETWEEN ELECTION DAY TO JAN. 6, 2021, TRUMP WAS A SITTING PRESIDENT
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“The Federal Election Interference Case”
“U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia”
“In the two months between Election Day in 2020 and Jan. 6, 2021, Trump mounted a wide-ranging campaign to subvert Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election. Trump and his advisers spread false information about voter fraud, urged Republican state officials to undermine the results in states that Biden won, assembled false slates of electors and pressured Mike Pence, the vice president, to unilaterally toss out the legitimate results. The effort culminated on Jan. 6, when a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol and disrupted the peaceful transfer of power. Federal prosecutors led by special counsel Jack Smith have charged Trump with four federal crimes stemming from his attempts to derail the transfer of power.”
– POLITICO
Trump is a former President, not a sitting President, the OLC memo only applies while the person is in office, and the OLC memo only binds the DOJ, not the courts.
TRUMP WAS A SITTING PRESIDENT BETWEEN ELECTION DAY IN 2020 AND JAN. 6, 2021.
If only you had the facts in your possession (above).
Jack Smith’s charges against Trump:
“In the two months between Election Day in 2020 and Jan. 6, 2021, Trump mounted a wide-ranging campaign to subvert Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election.”
– Politico
Again: Trump is NOW a former President, and the OLC memo only protects a sitting President from being indicted — that is, it only protects the person from indictment while the person is in office, not NOW; moreover, the OLC memo only binds the DOJ, not the courts.
AGAIN:
TRUMP WAS A SITTING PRESIDENT BETWEEN ELECTION DAY IN 2020 AND JAN. 6, 2021.
If only you had the facts in your possession (above).
Jack Smith’s charges against Trump:
“In the two months between Election Day in 2020 and Jan. 6, 2021, Trump mounted a wide-ranging campaign to subvert Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election.”
– Politico
It’s irrelevant that he WAS President then. He is not protected from being indicted NOW that he is out of office. And for the third time: the OLC memo only binds the Justice Dept., NOT the courts.
Jack Smith’s charges against Trump:
“In the two months between Election Day in 2020 and Jan. 6, 2021, Trump mounted a wide-ranging campaign to subvert Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election.”
– Politico
I’m well aware of the charges.
I’m also well aware that the OLC memo only protects the President WHILE HE’S IN OFFICE; it does NOT and has NEVER suggested that the person cannot be indicted after leaving office for actions carried out while in office. Trump is out of office, ergo, he can be prosecuted NOW.
Jack Smith charged exclusively within the time frame of election, 2020, and Jan. 6, 2021, when Trump was a sitting president.
Read it. Don’t ignore it.
Trump retains immunity for the particular time frame charged, a time frame when he was the sitting president.
Trump is not stating or implying that the president is provided immunity after his term, when he is no longer in office and no longer a sitting president.
I’m well aware that “Jack Smith charged exclusively within the time frame of election, 2020, and Jan. 6, 2021, when Trump was a sitting president.”
With respect to the OLC memo — which was raised in the very first comment in this thread at 2:11 PM, and which has been a focus of every single one of my replies — that’s not key to the indictment, because Trump is no longer a sitting President. Any president can be indicted once out of office for actions carried out while in office. And Trump HAS been indicted for such actions.
As for “Trump retains immunity for the particular time frame charged, a time frame when he was the sitting president,” both the district court and the appeals court disagree with you. We’ll see whether SCOTUS grants cert or just allows the DCCA ruling to stand.
You’re mistaken that “Trump is not stating or implying that the president is provided immunity after his term, when he is no longer in office and no longer a sitting president.” He has, in fact, argued that as a former President he is immune *now* — after his term — for actions taken while in office. If you instead meant something like “Trump is not stating or implying that a former president is provided immunity for actions taken after his term, when he is no longer in office and no longer a sitting president,” no one suggested that he had argued that, nor is that the issue being discussed here.
The discussion is George’s false argument that the OLC memo continues to protect Trump once he is out of office. It does not. The only thing it does is protect a President from indictment while in office. After the term ends, the former President can be indicted if there’s sufficient evidence for it, including indictment for actions carried out while in office.
From the DCCA ruling: “Former President Trump moved to dismiss the Indictment and the district court denied his motion. Today, we affirm the denial. For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution.” (emphasis added)
Another Anonymous Coward posted: Trump is a former President, not a sitting President, the OLC memo only applies while the person is in office, and the OLC memo only binds the DOJ, not the courts.
The Anonymous Coward left a few things out. One being that this court has said a party’s political hitman i.e. Jack Smith brought back to take out Biden’s opponents as he did Obama’s, can prosecute a president after he’s out of office for decisions and deliberations with his staff made in office. The alleged attempt at insurrection while in office as just one example.
Of course, if Republicans would never launch their own political hitmen similar to Jack Smith to take out their political enemies once they’re out of office, then this is a safe decision by the Soviet Democrats that Bolshevik Barack packed this court with as additional justices on this court. If Republicans remain reliably feckless, Soviet Democrats have nothing to fear – as long as a federal prosecutor hitman is only launched in this court’s jurisdiction.
But if a prosecutor in a different jurisdiction uses this ruling to go after Soviet Democrats as Jack Smith has gone after Republicans starting during Bolshevik Barack’s first term, now this court has said Soviet Democrats’ actions, consultations with staff, etc are now fair game, just as Trump is.
Let’s see:
Bolshevik Barack for advising his AG, Eric Holder, to ignore a subpoena.
Bolshevik Barack for advising Louis Lerner to ignore the subpoena.
Bolshevik Barack being a party to Hillary Clinton’s four years of Espionage Act felonies.
Eric Holder, Louis Lerner, and Hillary Clinton…
And The Big Guy, Bribery Biden… a state that launched a Jack Smith McDonnell/Trump prosecution… well, they’d have to go on a hiring binge to drag all those Soviet Democrats into court with this green light.
They merely have to be just as imaginative in interpreting the law as Jack Smith has been his entire career. And if they’re reversed in 9-0 unanimous SCOTUS decisions afterward as Smith has been… oh well, they dragged their Soviet Democrat targets through lawfare and the news for years.
But that would probably end up in front of SCOTUS as this will once it gets out of this stacked and packed court of Bolshevik Barack’s.
LOL.
Source: Politico…..no response needed. 🤣
How many copies of “The Real Anthony Fauci” would RFK, Jr have sold if this book’s algorithms hadn’t been attacked? Also, you’d be hard-pressed to find an indpendent book dealer who stocked this book. Still, depsite not one mainstream news organization reviewing the book, it was the No. 1 non-fiction best-seller in the world for months. But the book should have sold – and would have sold – 3X as many copies if it wasn’t censored.
“Was Robert Kennedy Responsible for Marilyn Monroe’s Death?” (excerpted)
“After breezing past her relationship with Joe DiMaggio, The Unheard Tapes connects Monroe with both Robert and John F. Kennedy. Hildi and Joan Greenson—the wife and daughter of Monroe’s psychiatrist—describe “girly talk” with Monroe, in which the icon gossiped about a new man she was seeing called ‘The General.’ This was Attorney General Robert Kennedy, the start of her affairs with the famed political family. Actor and socialite Peter Lawford dedicated his time to ‘pimping for both Kennedys,’ he says, which resulted in the connection between Monroe and the pair of brothers. ‘You don’t think the brothers were sharing a lady?’ Summers asks Jeanne Martin, Dean Martin’s wife, who used to attend Kennedy parties.”
‘I do,’ she responds, without any hesitation.
“This brotherly love—try not to shudder at the thought—was only the start. Because of feuds between union leader Jimmy Hoffa and the Kennedys, the film alleges there were ‘numerous tapes’ made of Monroe and JFK ‘in the act of lovemaking,’ and even more featuring Robert. On the tapes, the film contends, Monroe is captured doing ‘cuddly talk,’ ‘taking off her clothes,’ and ‘the sex act in the bed.’ This seems to have been an open secret in Hollywood. Still, tensions continued to grow as Monroe’s suspected ties with the Communist Party started to be whispered about. In fear of Monroe exposing their political chats, the Kennedys cut all ties with the star.”
– The Daily Beast https://www.thedailybeast.com/obsessed/was-robert-kennedy-responsible-for-marilyn-monroes-death
I just can’t believe another day has gone by and Biden has not been impeached. This was front page news on JT for months, Any day now the hammer would fall we were told. Any day. Any day. Any day. Yet, here we are and…nothing. What gives?
Bill,
I do not want Biden impeached.
I want the Republicans to bring forth all the evidence for all to see, for all of Biden’s failed domestic policies to include the illegal immigration crisis, the failed Bidenomics, failed green energy policies, soft on crime policies via soft on crime Democrat DAs, and then for all of Biden’s failed foreign policies like support for the war in the Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas war, the fact the third world Houthis are challenging the US military and by economic measures, are beating us.
Let us see it all, all of the failures. How the Biden admin supports illegals while ignoring the Black community. How the Biden admin would punish Asians for being successful. How antisemitism has flourished during the Biden admin.
Yes. Do not impeach him.
Just point out Biden’s gross failures. Right up to the election.
DEJA VU
PRESSES WERE SMASHED – SPEECH WAS ABRIDGED – OPPONENTS JAILED
LINCOLN WAS A DICTATORIAL COMMUNIST WHO VOIDED THE CONSTITUTION
_______________________________________________________________________________________
“After Bull Run, Abraham Lincoln Fought a New Battle in the Civil War: Home-Front Journalism” (excerpted)
His administration turned a blind eye to the First Amendment in the interest of national security.
The New York Tribune’s Horace Greeley privately thought Lincoln timid in the run-up to First Bull Run. But if Lincoln’s so-called timidity ever existed, it vanished quite soon after that battle—at least toward a new foe he judged nearly as dangerous as armed Rebels: Antiwar, anti-administration, anti-recruitment newspaper editors. Against these foes, the Union government commenced an additional war, which Greeley eventually came to support almost as ardently as the fight to restore the Union.
Eventually, the military and the government began punishing editorial opposition to the war itself. Authorities banned pro-peace newspapers from the U.S. mails, shut down newspaper offices and confiscated printing materials. They intimidated, and sometimes imprisoned, reporters, editors and publishers who sympathized with the South or objected to an armed struggle to restore the Union. For the first year of the war, Lincoln left no trail of documents attesting to any personal conviction that dissenting newspapers ought to be muzzled. But neither did he say anything to control or contradict such efforts when they were undertaken, however haphazardly, by his Cabinet officers or military commanders. Lincoln did not initiate press suppression and remained ambivalent about its execution, but seldom intervened to prevent it.
– Historynet https://www.historynet.com/stop-the-presses-lincoln-suppresses-journalism/
“CRAZY ABE’S” CO-CONSPIRATORS
HORACE GREELEY WAS THE COMMUNIST PUBLISHER OF THE TRIBUNE
_____________________________________________________________________________
“Reading Karl Marx with Abraham Lincoln – Utopian socialists, German communists, and other republicans”
“Horace Greeley’s sympathetic zeal was that of a distinct breed of nineteenth-century social reformer, who was not satisfied merely with the repair of the breach created when the founders of the American experiment failed to keep faith with their initial recognition of the self-evident truth “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” He was profoundly concerned, as was Lincoln, with the question of how to maintain a measure of economic equality in a time of unprecedented and overwhelming accumulation of wealth—not merely by southern planters but by northern bankers and businessmen. These concerns led him to embrace the teachings of Charles Fourier, the French utopian socialist who complained: “Once upon a time people talked about the infallibility of the pope; today it is that of the merchant which they wish to establish.” In Fourier’s view, the promise of equality was an idle one unless it was coupled with economic protections for the great mass of working men and women. The French socialist held”:
‘Equality of rights is another chimera, praiseworthy when considered in the abstract and ridiculous from the standpoint of the means employed to introduce it in civilization. The first right of men is the right to work and the right to a minimum [income]. This is precisely what has gone unrecognized in all the constitutions. Their primary concern is with favored individuals who are not in need of work.’
“Lincoln did not merely consume Greeley’s words, however. He devoured the whole of his weekly Tribune, as he did every other newspaper he could get his hands on. “What Lincoln really liked to read were newspapers, reading them, a friend said, ‘more than books,’” writes Lincoln biographer John C. Waugh. “Another friend said he ‘never saw a man better pleased’ than when Lincoln was appointed postmaster, because he could read [newspapers from around the country] before delivering them to their subscribers.”
“Horace Greeley believed that 1848’s European revolts and their aftermath revealed ‘boundless vistas’ along with the outlines of the ‘uprising which must come.’ Predictably, his paper covered the revolutionary ferment of Europe with an intensity that made it virtually a local story for radicals in places like Springfield, Illinois. They pored over their copies of the Tribune for the latest from the front in what the paper’s editor portrayed as a global struggle for ‘the larger liberty’ of ‘the Rights and Interests of Labor, the Reorganization of Industry, the Elevation of the Working-Men, the RECONSTRUCTION of the Social Fabric.’”
– International Socialist Review https://isreview.org/issue/79/reading-karl-marx-abraham-lincoln/index.html
ALL OF LINCOLN, IN ITS ENTIRETY, MUST BE REVERSED, RESCINDED, AND REMOVED FROM THE AMERICAN POLITICAL LANDSCAPE.
REPREHENSIBLE SLAVERY MUST HAVE BEEN ABROGATED BY DULY ELECTED LEGISLATIVE BODIES – LONG-SUFFERING ABDUCTEES MUST HAVE BEEN COMPASSIONATELY REPATRIATED.
THE “RECONSTRUCTION” OF AMERICAN FREEDOM, UNDER SEVERELY LIMITED AND RESTRICTED GOVERNMENT, MUST BEGIN.
Carbon sequestration is a proffered solution to climate change…. mama, don’t let your fetal deposits force climate change.
Wake up and smell the communism.
Sure is easy to smell the communism’s malign effects around here for sure. Why else, besides the tireless efforts of Russian Intelligence Services, would people support an insurrectionist criminal sociopathic rapist for president?
You don’t have enough air in your little WH cubicle.
I ask the same question all the time. For instance. How 909 people killed themselves on November 18, 1978 when their leader Jim Jones told them to literally drink the kool aid. Why would people do that? They did. So why do millions of people follow a man that has been found liable for sexual abuse in a court of law, been accused of rape by several other women, spends 10s of millions of dollars on lawyers defending himself for all sort of criminal and civil claims. The list goes on.
Human psychology gives us clues. I think it also points to how dumb our education system has become. How else to describe people that reject known facts for an orange man spouting BS day in and day out.
Sad, really sad.
People do not “follow” trump, some support him, more will vote for the lessor of two evils.
Why did tens of millions of people buy the collusion delusion ? or the Russian disinformation nonsense ?
Joe Biden is credibly accused of Rape. Carrol has never been credible.
John Say,
Well said.
Zealots like Bob will believe anything ARM tells them.
Trump’s poll have gone UP after the Carrol verdict.
That is not “followers”.
That is tens of millions of ordinary people – people who do not like Trump,
Who are looking at YOUR lawfare and rejecting it.
You do not seem to grasp that it is NOT sufficient to “convict” Trump, you actually must prove your case to the overwhelming majority of people who increasingly beleive that you are unhinged and reject your massively politically biased lawfare.
This is NOT my judgement. This is NOT the judment of tens of millions of “Trump followers”.
This is the judgment of tens of millions of people – many of whom have never voted for Trump, voted for Biden, or did not vote.
It is THEIR judgement that YOU are the Jim Jones crowd.
A recent CBS poll had Trump at 55% – that is a 10pt lead over Biden.
That is an outlier – though it is also far outside the margin of error.
Trump’s Base is at best 30% of voters who will vote for him no matter what.
Slightly larger than the 25% of voters who will vote for Biden no matter what.
This requires that Trump get more than half independents.
It is the failure of our education system that REQUIRED Trump’s election.
The “dumb” people are those who vote for various forms of socialism – despite the overwhelmning evidence that socialism is a disasterous and morally evil system that nearly always ends in bloodshed.
The “dump” people are those who think that free markets – the system that has doubled standard of living every generation for about 400 years is somehow evil.
Free markets are not perfect, they are just the best that we have ever had bar none and it is not even close.
Free markets even implemented badly result in improvementg of the human condition – ALWAYS.
Conversely socialism (or statism more broadly) NEVER produces good outcome and the outcome is WORSE the more strongly it is implimented.
I am using systems as an example – because they are the perfect reflection of the absymal education of people today.
They are indications that the stupidity and failure is on the LEFT.
Because it’s him or people that you like…and no one wants that, look at what people you like have done to most major cities in the US, look at what they have done around the world, look at what they have done to the border, look at what they have done to education.
Are you out of your freaking mind? Do you honestly think that anny real person believes any of that reid hoffman/soros generated bullcrap? Only idiots that like the people that you like would think there was any realistic possibility of truth in any of the crap you swallow everyday as truth.
The people that tell you what to think are evil and you are the worst possible version of yourself for believing them.
My god, were you in some kind of industrial accident or pharmaceutical trial?
They did. So why do millions of people follow a man that has been found liable for sexual abuse in a court of law,
Because I dismiss the crooked judge, and his crooked jury instructions.
How can a person be found liable for an action that the accuser refuses to provide a specific time and location.
So according to you, if an adult cannot remember the date he was raped as a child by a priest, the priest cannot be held liable.
And Carroll did provide a specific location.
How much more stupid can one be?
So according to you, if an adult cannot remember the date he was raped as a child by a priest, the priest cannot be held liable.
Ignoring the statute of limitations. Yes, charges cannot be brought, lacking facts for the defendant to defend.
I wasn’t ignoring the SoL. NY State passed the Child Victims Act and the Adult Survivors Act at the same time, and they change the SoL in the same way. Good to know that you think if an adult cannot remember the date he was raped as a child by a priest, the priest cannot be held liable.
Just a guess, but some things that may sway people to vote for Trump is that, under his administration: there was low inflation, gas, groceries and housing were affordable, violent crime was under control, the border was under control, America had energy independence and was a net energy exporter, there were no pointless forever wars that we were sinking hundreds of billions of dollars into indefinitely, the justice system had not been weaponized for political purposes, concerned parents and faithful Catholics were not labeled domestic terrorists, the military was not ruined by wokeism, and China and Russia did not act aggressively on the world stage. I’m just scratching the surface of how much more competent of a president he was than Biden, but you get the point. But hey, some people object to Trump’s skin tone (“orange man”) and he issued mean tweets, so I guess we’re better off under Biden (/sarc).
Oldman,
I say much the same to my Trump hating cousins and it seems to make jo impression whatsoever. I ask what Trump did wrong to deserve their hate and I get silence. Remarkable samples of brainwashing though.
Young – it really does seem like a type of derangement.
Progress is being made SLOWLY.
A recent CBS poll had Trump at 55% – that is AFTER the Carrol verdict.
As Trump keeps repeating – he is one more indictment short of a landslide.
Months ago we could debate the impact of this lawfare against Trump.
Months ago we could debate whether people would be persuaded.
It is CLEAR today that ordinary independent voters – whether they like or dislike Trump,
Are NOT buying this lawfare nonsense.
Young,
Got a friend who says the same.
Despite all the discussion in the end she stubbornly says, “I just hate him!”
She has admitted she regrets voting for Biden and will likely not vote this year.
Upstate,
Now you have me wondering if Trump Hate is a form of social contagion like the insane conviction of so many young girls that they are transgender. They can’t express a rational basis for it but they also can’t think clearly or look at facts that go counter to the delusion–at least not until too late.
Young and Upstate, Groupthink is mighty. Some people cannot make up their minds and do not have the knowledge or the personal strength to disagree with those around them. They are more interested in being with the right crowd, whether or not that crowd has any common sense. The media creates an illusion that the good people act in a certain way. Women should know better because many of those good people in the media have abused other women.
The people on the blog we disagree with here are different. They are nothing but miscreants, plain and simple. They do not react intelligently to anything, and they survive based on lying without any remorse. All they deserve from us is our insult.
S. Meyer,
I think you are right that some are simply desperate to be with what they think is the right crowd. The same impulse led many women in the late Fifties to buy and wear those ridiculous sack dresses. It had to be going along with the right crowd because it certainly didn’t make them attractive to men. Miniskirts did, though, so the right crowd doesn’t always get it wrong.
OldManFromKS,
Those facts are beyond them.
They are so consumed by hate and rage, so brainwashed by the ARM, the reality we all see they deny.
You assume Russia supports Trump win in 2024.
No. They do not.
They, and China and Iran all want four more years of gross incompetence, weakness that is the Biden admin.
Voila!
Go tell the Supreme Court!
What the —- do those communists think they’re doing?
COMMUNISM IS ANTITHETICAL AND ANTI- AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
No longer surprising that many Democrats/Progressives are thinly disguised Fascists.
Young,
And when they get caught, they no longer even try to deny it.
Upstate,
No, some don’t deny it. They seem to glory in it because Fascism and Communism have worked so well in the past so long as you ignore mass murder and turning a country into a vast prison run by guards who are freaks, perverts and lunatics, a description that comes nearer the present administration every day.
Isn’t this rich? The Democrat Left hollers about the Maga’s being fascist, and all the while they are the ones doing the whole Nazi news banning thing. You see, in Nazi Germany (and I think North Korea), a person could be put to death for listening to BBC broadcasts,
“Listening to BBC broadcasts (or any other banned broadcasts) in occupied countries was often punishable by death. In Poland it was illegal to even possess a radio. For these audiences the BBC broadcast a special news service in morse code, so that sympathisers could publish the reports in their illegal newspapers.”
To make it worse, the Democrats also carry on about Democracy being threatened by Trump and Republicans. Yet, idiots still vote for Democrats. Maybe that is how decent Germans ended up murdering a bunch of Jews and others? They just kept ignoring the obvious.
“THE DEMOCRAT LEFT DOING THE WHOLE NAZI NEWS-BANNING THING!”
Right?
Who’d a thunk it?
“The whole Nazi news-banning thing!”
“Lincoln’s Forte”