thelibertybeacon--2020-08-18--Coronavirus spikes in regions with strict lockdowns

Coronavirus spikes in regions with strict lockdowns re-ignite debate over effectiveness Coronavirus infection rates are spiking in countries and some U.S. communities that imposed strict pandemic mitigation policies , including lengthy lockdowns and stay-at-home orders .
The dynamic is raising fresh questions about how effective those measures ultimately are at halting the spread of the virus .
Governments worldwide began instituting far-reaching laws and executive orders earlier this year in concerted efforts to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus .
Following the Chinese government ’ s lead in that country ’ s Wuhan province , governments in Europe and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , imposed quarantines , stay-at-home orders and lockdowns , shuttering much of the world ’ s economy and ordering tens of millions of people to remain in their homes for months .
In many countries , gradual economic re-openings were accompanied by careful , staggered “ phases ” in which restrictions were lifted , and sometimes re-imposed , according to the level of viral spread in the community .
Many governments also ordered citizens to wear masks in public .
Authorities have argued that these policies were , and continue to be , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the virus .
Yet recent spikes in places where lockdowns have been strictly imposed for months — from Australia to Great Britain and California to Hawaii — suggest that such measures may have more limited effect than health authorities initially anticipated .
The benefit in easing crushes on hospitals has been touted by many but the long-term ability to stop the spread of the disease remains in doubt .
It ’ s a debate that likely won ’ t be settled for at least another year but has found new life in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ A lockdown might delay severe cases for a while , but once restrictions are eased , cases will reappear , ” Johan Giesecke , the former state epidemiologist for Sweden and the former chief scientist at the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control , argued in May .
“ Measures to flatten the curve might have an effect , but a lockdown only pushes the severe cases into the future —it will not prevent them , ” he added .
Bloomberg News recently published a column earlier this month entitled “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that garnered some attention , as did a study in the Lancet online journal EClinicalMedicine , that concluded “ government actions such as border closures , full lockdowns , and a high rate of Covid-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality.
” Professor Mark Woolhouse , an infectious disease expert at Edinburgh University and a member of Great Britain ’ s Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies , has sounded concern that the mitigation efforts had more effect on slowing the global economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reckoning comes we may well find that the cure turned out to be far worse than the disease , ” Woolhouse was quoted in the Daily Mail .
In the U.S. , the states of Hawaii and California have both seen infections rise even after months-long lockdowns and strict mitigation measures .
California Democratic Gov .
Gavin Newsom has kept his state under strong lockdown measures of varying degrees since March ; though Newsom began slowly loosening the restrictions in early May , he reimposed many of them in early July , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ venues in counties where he deemed the spread of COVID-19 too high .
In mid-July he extended those re-closure orders statewide , while further shutting down indoor worship , malls , barbershops and hair salons in counties with high infection numbers .
He also ordered state citizens to wear face masks starting June 18. Review of the state ’ s COVID-19 data indicate that cases in California continued to rise whether it was locked down or partially re-open .
The state ’ s COVID-19 dashboard shows it only began seeing a sustained drop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though those numbers began increasing around Aug. 10 again .
Hawaii has arguably instituted even more aggressive lockdown measures than California : It requires visitors to the island , as well as returning residents , to quarantine upon arriving there , essentially shuttering the state ’ s critical tourism industry .
Gov .
David Ige also instituted a stay-at-home order in late March , one that lasted , with modifications , until the end of June .
The state shut down indoor dining at restaurants ; when Ige began permitting indoor dining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including capacity limits , social distancing requirements and mask orders .
As with California , residents are under a public mask mandate there as well .
Hawaii ’ s lockdown and relative isolation appear to have spared it the worst of the coronavirus crisis from late April onwards .
Yet cases began to go up again in mid-June , and from late July onward they have been spiking , according to the state ’ s coronavirus dashboard .
Unlike the first , smaller wave in March , which was brought on largely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new cases so far have been from community transmission of the virus .
The raw number of COVID-19 cases in the state are still relatively small compared to even the lesser-affected states on the U.S. mainland .
Yet the spike has still been markedly swift , particularly when considering the measures the state undertook to squash the virus .
Notably , the average number of tests conducted by the state has not increased significantly since early July , meaning the spike can not immediately be attributed to an increase in testing .
Indeed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relatively the same statewide since then , the percentage of positive tests has skyrocketed , going from an average of 0.9 % in mid-July to 5.5 % this week .
Jumps in cases have likewise been observed in numerous other countries that have undertaken strong mitigation efforts .
Spain — regions of which in late March and early April were overwhelmed with high rates of coronavirus cases and deaths — largely bottomed out in both fatalities and infection rates starting in late May .
Yet beginning in early July , cases began to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country was recording thousands of new infections every day , though deaths have continued to remain flat .
That spike comes after Spain in May dictated a strict lockdown in which residents for a time were forbidden even to go on walks outside of their residences .
The easing of that lockdown was tempered by a “ new normality ” policy , one in which regions were given some autonomy in determining the extent of local restrictions but which imposes broad health restrictions on industries such as consumer shops and hotels .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spite of a face mask mandate that started at the beginning of April .
The country began easing its lockdown in early June , though measures still remained in place throughout June and July ; in the last week the country began reimposing more restrictions as cases surged there .
Japan , meanwhile , has for months been hailed as a prime example of coronavirus mitigation .
That country has undertaken comparatively few forceful mitigation policies , instead relying on citizens to impose voluntary distancing measures and other mitigation efforts .
Experts and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there has likely played a role in the country ’ s success : An Ipsos poll in April revealed that 77 % of Japanese citizens said they were wearing masks to protect themselves from COVID-19 .
Yet Japan since late July has posted increasingly high COVID-19 counts , dwarfing the short spike it had in April .
Multiple days over roughly the past week have seen more than 1,000 confirmed cases , while the peak earlier this year saw just 743 cases in one 24-hour period .
Part of Japan ’ s apparent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relatively sparse testing .
The country has tested significantly fewer of its citizens than many other nations : By mid-August , for instance , the U.S. was performing nearly 1100 % more tests per thousand citizens than Japan .
The country has increased its daily testing rates by about 300 % since the end of June , which may explain why it has begun to record more coronavirus infections , giving the appearance of a spike where cases had actually been all along .
Lockdown effectiveness will likely be decided months or years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at stopping the spread of COVID-19 will likely not be known for many more months or years until sufficient data can be analyzed .
What may matter significantly in the end is by what measure lockdowns are evaluated .
Most authorities who did so initially undertook shutdowns in order to “ flatten the curve , ” or keep caseloads at manageable levels in order to prevent medical systems from collapsing under the weight of huge patient influxes .
Yet many governments kept mitigation measures in place well after the hospital crush , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to remain in place until a vaccine was developed .
An international team of researchers in June utilized national data from several countries to estimate that lockdowns “ significantly and substantially slowed ” infection rates in those places .
Data from many countries do show a decline in average daily new cases weeks after the lockdowns were imposed .
Yet in some cases , such as California , lockdowns seemed to have little effect , while in other countries the virus resurged after even moderate re-openings with plenty of mitigatory measures in place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has imposed virtually no lockdown measures of any kind , particularly compared to much of the rest of the world—does have a higher death rate than its Nordic neighbors and many other countries .
But he pointed out that its death rate is lower than those of the U.K. and Spain , both of which imposed strict lockdowns .
“ I expect that when we count the number of deaths from COVID-19 in each country in 1 year from now , ” he wrote , “ the figures will be similar , regardless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by 80 percent this summer in vulnerable nursing homes , report ( TLB ) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News Some emphasis and pictorial content added by ( TLB ) Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News

Coronavirus spikes in regions with strict lockdowns re-ignite debate over effectiveness
Some doctors and statistical analyses are re-evaluating the effectiveness of extreme lockdowns after a new wave of infections
By Daniel Payne
Coronavirus infection rates are spiking in countries and some U.S. communities that imposed strict pandemic mitigation policies, including lengthy lockdowns and stay-at-home orders. The dynamic is raising fresh questions about how effective those measures ultimately are at halting the spread of the virus.
Governments worldwide began instituting far-reaching laws and executive orders earlier this year in concerted efforts to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus. Following the Chinese government’s lead in that country’s Wuhan province, governments in Europe and North America, including most U.S. governors, imposed quarantines, stay-at-home orders and lockdowns, shuttering much of the world’s economy and ordering tens of millions of people to remain in their homes for months.
In many countries, gradual economic re-openings were accompanied by careful, staggered “phases” in which restrictions were lifted, and sometimes re-imposed, according to the level of viral spread in the community. Many governments also ordered citizens to wear masks in public.
Authorities have argued that these policies were, and continue to be, successful at stopping or slowing the spread of the virus. Yet recent spikes in places where lockdowns have been strictly imposed for months — from Australia to Great Britain and California to Hawaii — suggest that such measures may have more limited effect than health authorities initially anticipated. The benefit in easing crushes on hospitals has been touted by many but the long-term ability to stop the spread of the disease remains in doubt.
It’s a debate that likely won’t be settled for at least another year but has found new life in the recent resurgence of cases worldwide.
“A lockdown might delay severe cases for a while, but once restrictions are eased, cases will reappear,” Johan Giesecke, the former state epidemiologist for Sweden and the former chief scientist at the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, argued in May.
“Measures to flatten the curve might have an effect, but a lockdown only pushes the severe cases into the future —it will not prevent them,” he added.
Bloomberg News recently published a column earlier this month entitled “When Lockdowns Don’t Work” that garnered some attention, as did a study in the Lancet online journal EClinicalMedicine, that concluded “government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of Covid-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality.”
Professor Mark Woolhouse, an infectious disease expert at Edinburgh University and a member of Great Britain’s Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies, has sounded concern that the mitigation efforts had more effect on slowing the global economy than crushing the virus. “When the reckoning comes we may well find that the cure turned out to be far worse than the disease,” Woolhouse was quoted in the Daily Mail.
Hawaii spikes; California continued steady climb
In the U.S., the states of Hawaii and California have both seen infections rise even after months-long lockdowns and strict mitigation measures.
California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has kept his state under strong lockdown measures of varying degrees since March; though Newsom began slowly loosening the restrictions in early May, he reimposed many of them in early July, closing down indoor dining and other entertainment venues in counties where he deemed the spread of COVID-19 too high.
In mid-July he extended those re-closure orders statewide, while further shutting down indoor worship, malls, barbershops and hair salons in counties with high infection numbers. He also ordered state citizens to wear face masks starting June 18.
Review of the state’s COVID-19 data indicate that cases in California continued to rise whether it was locked down or partially re-open. The state’s COVID-19 dashboard shows it only began seeing a sustained drop in average daily cases in late July, though those numbers began increasing around Aug. 10 again.
Hawaii has arguably instituted even more aggressive lockdown measures than California: It requires visitors to the island, as well as returning residents, to quarantine upon arriving there, essentially shuttering the state’s critical tourism industry. Gov. David Ige also instituted a stay-at-home order in late March, one that lasted, with modifications, until the end of June. The state shut down indoor dining at restaurants; when Ige began permitting indoor dining again, it was with strict regulations, including capacity limits, social distancing requirements and mask orders. As with California, residents are under a public mask mandate there as well.
Hawaii’s lockdown and relative isolation appear to have spared it the worst of the coronavirus crisis from late April onwards. Yet cases began to go up again in mid-June, and from late July onward they have been spiking, according to the state’s coronavirus dashboard. Unlike the first, smaller wave in March, which was brought on largely by travel-related cases, most of these new cases so far have been from community transmission of the virus.
The raw number of COVID-19 cases in the state are still relatively small compared to even the lesser-affected states on the U.S. mainland. Yet the spike has still been markedly swift, particularly when considering the measures the state undertook to squash the virus.
Notably, the average number of tests conducted by the state has not increased significantly since early July, meaning the spike cannot immediately be attributed to an increase in testing. Indeed, though the testing rate has remained relatively the same statewide since then, the percentage of positive tests has skyrocketed, going from an average of 0.9% in mid-July to 5.5% this week.
Spain, Japan, Philippines experience similar spikes
Jumps in cases have likewise been observed in numerous other countries that have undertaken strong mitigation efforts.
Spain — regions of which in late March and early April were overwhelmed with high rates of coronavirus cases and deaths — largely bottomed out in both fatalities and infection rates starting in late May. Yet beginning in early July, cases began to rise again. By early August the country was recording thousands of new infections every day, though deaths have continued to remain flat.
That spike comes after Spain in May dictated a strict lockdown in which residents for a time were forbidden even to go on walks outside of their residences. The easing of that lockdown was tempered by a “new normality” policy, one in which regions were given some autonomy in determining the extent of local restrictions but which imposes broad health restrictions on industries such as consumer shops and hotels.
The Philippines has also seen cases spike in spite of a face mask mandate that started at the beginning of April. The country began easing its lockdown in early June, though measures still remained in place throughout June and July; in the last week the country began reimposing more restrictions as cases surged there.
Japan, meanwhile, has for months been hailed as a prime example of coronavirus mitigation. That country has undertaken comparatively few forceful mitigation policies, instead relying on citizens to impose voluntary distancing measures and other mitigation efforts. Experts and commentators have argued that heavy mask usage there has likely played a role in the country’s success: An Ipsos poll in April revealed that 77% of Japanese citizens said they were wearing masks to protect themselves from COVID-19.
Yet Japan since late July has posted increasingly high COVID-19 counts, dwarfing the short spike it had in April. Multiple days over roughly the past week have seen more than 1,000 confirmed cases, while the peak earlier this year saw just 743 cases in one 24-hour period.
Part of Japan’s apparent earlier success could be explained by its relatively sparse testing. The country has tested significantly fewer of its citizens than many other nations: By mid-August, for instance, the U.S. was performing nearly 1100% more tests per thousand citizens than Japan. The country has increased its daily testing rates by about 300% since the end of June, which may explain why it has begun to record more coronavirus infections, giving the appearance of a spike where cases had actually been all along.
Lockdown effectiveness will likely be decided months or years from now
The ultimate efficacy of lockdowns at stopping the spread of COVID-19 will likely not be known for many more months or years until sufficient data can be analyzed.
What may matter significantly in the end is by what measure lockdowns are evaluated. Most authorities who did so initially undertook shutdowns in order to “flatten the curve,” or keep caseloads at manageable levels in order to prevent medical systems from collapsing under the weight of huge patient influxes. Yet many governments kept mitigation measures in place well after the hospital crush, with some insisting that such measures would have to remain in place until a vaccine was developed.
An international team of researchers in June utilized national data from several countries to estimate that lockdowns “significantly and substantially slowed” infection rates in those places. Data from many countries do show a decline in average daily new cases weeks after the lockdowns were imposed. Yet in some cases, such as California, lockdowns seemed to have little effect, while in other countries the virus resurged after even moderate re-openings with plenty of mitigatory measures in place.
Giesecke noted that Sweden—a country that has imposed virtually no lockdown measures of any kind, particularly compared to much of the rest of the world—does have a higher death rate than its Nordic neighbors and many other countries. But he pointed out that its death rate is lower than those of the U.K. and Spain, both of which imposed strict lockdowns.
“I expect that when we count the number of deaths from COVID-19 in each country in 1 year from now,” he wrote, “the figures will be similar, regardless of measures taken.”
_________
RELATED ARTICLES
THE FACTS INSIDE OUR REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK
Links
*********
(TLB) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News
Some emphasis and pictorial content added by (TLB)
Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-08-18--Walmart Gives Up All Gains After Company Warns Of Revenue Slowdown

Walmart Gives Up All Gains After Company Warns Of Revenue Slowdown Amid Stimulus “ Taper ” ( ZH ) After soaring as much a 6.7 % premarket following blockbuster earnings that saw non-GAAP EPS print above the highest sellside estimate and comp store sales which came in at 9.9 % vs the 6.2 % consensus estimate , Walmart shares turned red as investors were spooked by company commentary about the current quarter .
Specifically , the selling started after the company unveiled that topline performance slowed in July to around 4 % .
According to RBC analyst Scot Ciccarelli , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normalize ” in July “ may suggest that the outsized gains experienced over the last few months may be starting to ebb ” as government stimulus money “ tapered off.
” He adds that while Wall Street should be expecting a slowdown from the quarter ’ s “ nearly 10 % run rate , the magnitude of change may give some investors pause as sales sustainability is one of today ’ s key topics in retail.
” His price target : $ 132 , or just where the company closed on Monday .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Bill Kirk wrote that the retailer ’ s “ strong ” gross margin was a positive sign for peers , he too would be listening for comments on call regarding the “ interruption of stimulus checks ” impact on August and what Walmart intends to do with its ~ $ 17bn cash balance .
Investors aren ’ t likely to show as much patience , and after pushing the stock as high as $ 144 premarket , it was last trading some $ 9 lower .
( TLB ) Editor : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ A Customer ” speaking .
You might change your minus -income flow if you would take away your “ silly ass ” requirement to wear a MASK and Stand Away from each other like we were complete strangers .
I along with thousands of other EX-Walmart Customers would return to happily push our carts down open and free isles .
( Yes , the ‘ One Way ’ arrows have to go also . )
We customers understand how ‘ insulated ’ you Corporate Folks can become having to set hours at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into a machine so you can see “ The Tail of The Tape.
” So here are a few facts you may want to consider about Masks and the associated subject .
The Covid-19 virus is less dangerous/contagious than the Flu or Common Cold .
Yet we don ’ t see Walmart enforcing a mask requirement during the Cold and Flu season .
Many Medical Doctors have stated that Masks are unhealthy to use ; and in many cases may be deadly to some people , depending on their health issues .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responsibility of it ’ s customers health outcome from wearing a Mask ?
We will stop there as we have opened a can of worms that only your Corporate Legal Beagles can appreciate .
Oops , we just changed the Tail of The Tape again .
Tell you what Walmart… let ’ s make a deal .
You stop telling us how to run our life and take care of our health and we will stop telling you how to run your Corporation .
( TLB ) published this article from ZeroHedge as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all your support and your considerations … ( TLB ) Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

A (TLB) Editors note: At the bottom of this article see ATTENTION WALMART!!! This is “A Customer” speaking.
Walmart Gives Up All Gains After Company Warns Of Revenue Slowdown Amid Stimulus “Taper”
(ZH) After soaring as much a 6.7% premarket following blockbuster earnings that saw non-GAAP EPS print above the highest sellside estimate and comp store sales which came in at 9.9% vs the 6.2% consensus estimate , Walmart shares turned red as investors were spooked by company commentary about the current quarter. Specifically, the selling started after the company unveiled that topline performance slowed in July to around 4%.
According to RBC analyst Scot Ciccarelli, WMT comments that sales begin to “normalize” in July “may suggest that the outsized gains experienced over the last few months may be starting to ebb” as government stimulus money “tapered off.”
He adds that while Wall Street should be expecting a slowdown from the quarter’s “nearly 10% run rate, the magnitude of change may give some investors pause as sales sustainability is one of today’s key topics in retail.” His price target: $132, or just where the company closed on Monday.
Separately, Bloomberg notes that while MKM’s Bill Kirk wrote that the retailer’s “strong” gross margin was a positive sign for peers, he too would be listening for comments on call regarding the “interruption of stimulus checks” impact on August and what Walmart intends to do with its ~$17bn cash balance.
Investors aren’t likely to show as much patience, and after pushing the stock as high as $144 premarket, it was last trading some $9 lower.
_________
(TLB) Editor: ATTENTION WALMART!!! This is “A Customer” speaking. You might change your minus -income flow if you would take away your “silly ass” requirement to wear a MASK and Stand Away from each other like we were complete strangers.
I along with thousands of other EX-Walmart Customers would return to happily push our carts down open and free isles. (Yes, the ‘One Way’ arrows have to go also.)
A Corporate Guide
We customers understand how ‘insulated’ you Corporate Folks can become having to set hours at a time at your desks punching numbers into a machine so you can see “The Tail of The Tape.” So here are a few facts you may want to consider about Masks and the associated subject.
The Covid-19 virus is less dangerous/contagious than the Flu or Common Cold. Yet we don’t see Walmart enforcing a mask requirement during the Cold and Flu season.
Many Medical Doctors have stated that Masks are unhealthy to use; and in many cases may be deadly to some people, depending on their health issues. So is Walmart ready to assume and take responsibility of it’s customers health outcome from wearing a Mask?
And, in the event you need a little more information>>>Masks Don’t Work: A Review of Science Relevant to COVID-19 Social Policy
We will stop there as we have opened a can of worms that only your Corporate Legal Beagles can appreciate.
Oops, we just changed the Tail of The Tape again.
Tell you what Walmart… let’s make a deal. You stop telling us how to run our life and take care of our health and we will stop telling you how to run your Corporation.
(TLB)
(TLB) published this article from ZeroHedge as compiled by Tyler Durden
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-08-18--How Billionaires Took Over Liberalism & Destroyed It

How Billionaires Took Over Liberalism and Destroyed It They ’ ve done it via the ‘ news ’ -media — their propaganda-operations .
So , this is about how billionaires do that ; how they ’ ve done it .
Ever since at least the time of Thucydides in the 5th century BC , the wealthiest have ruled , and did it by conquest and plunder .
The acquisition of exceptional wealth was by theft : it was coercion , which could be either physical against the body ( violence ) , or mental against the mind ( deception ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ form of theft .
The wealthiest controlled the government , which then enforced that theft as legal “ ownership.
” That ’ s how the economy worked .
The government is the ultimate authority on who owns what .
None of this has changed over the millennia .
However , the technologies today are different , depending less on the wielding of steely weapons , and more on the statement of stealthy words , than in the ancient past .
Increasingly , control is being achieved by deceiving the public .
( For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politician , Joe Biden , was one of the U.S. Senate ’ s leading segregationists and back-room opponents of the NAACP , but claims to be a supporter of “ civil rights ” , and is thus voted for by the overwhelming majority of America ’ s Blacks — but America ’ s press hides his segregationist record , and so they don ’ t know about it .
Those voters ’ ignorance is that politician ’ s strength , and it all comes from America ’ s billionaires . )
Today ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlling ) the public are considerably more sophisticated and professional than in the past .
The aristocracy ( the billionaires ) do it nowadays mainly by means of their buying and selling , and hiring and firing , of the news-media , which thus have far more importance than in ancient times , because deceit is today ’ s main way to control the public .
Whereas conservative media rely unashamedly upon the existing popular mythology , liberal media need to rely upon that but to pretend not to , and to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ in a more tolerant and open-minded sense : they specialize in hypocrisy — it ’ s liberal aristocrats ’ particular style of art-form ; they ’ re the ‘ not conservative ’ type of aristocrats .
They pretend to be what they aren ’ t ( champions of democracy — which they actually despise and crave to overcome , if it exists at all ) .
Progressive media ( to the extent they exist at all , which is only very slight , anywhere ) avoid both hypocrisy and mythology : they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any mythology — they are populist , while not affirming the popular ( or any ) mythology .
( By contrast : conservative ‘ populists ’ are committed to the existing popular mythology , and can therefore be manipulated by openly conservative aristocrats — they can be “ Tories , ” or even “ Nazis , ” and they can therefore vote against their own “ class interests.
” It ’ s stupid , but conservative ‘ populists ’ nonetheless do it routinely . )
As a result of this ( since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aristocracy and the mythology — is so small ) , politics almost invariably pits conservatives against liberals , and therefore promotes dictatorship ( rule of the nation by its aristocracy ) , either way .
This means that , almost invariably , it ’ s either the conservative aristocrats , or else the liberal aristocrats , who rule a country .
( Democracy — rule by the public — is thus very rare . )
Perhaps the most famous of all liberal news-media during the Twentieth Century was Britain ’ s Guardian newspaper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a core component of progressivism , because the aristocracy derive wealth not only by exploiting their domestic public , but also ( if they are internationally successful , meaning control vassal-nations ) by exploiting foreign publics .
These aristocrats exploit foreign publics by controlling foreign governments .
That ’ s called “ imperialism.
” The Guardian newspaper was widely considered , until recently , to be not only liberal , but even progressive .
It promoted government-expenditures for the benefit of the people , instead of for international conquest ( which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the aristocracy hated it , and wanted to take it over .
Tragically , that newspaper was , in fact , taken over , culminating in 2016 , by American billionaires ’ ‘ charities ’ , and promptly it became perhaps the world ’ s most-rabidly pro-imperialistic propaganda-sheet ( even worse than America ’ s own Washington Post and New York Times , both of which were infamous villains , which had , for example , helped to promote George W. Bush ’ s lies to invade and destroy Iraq for WMD that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own lies about the matter — and those were definitely lies , not mere errors such as the liars and their propaganda-media claimed afterward ) .
They are constantly whipping up hatred against Russia ’ s Government and against any nations ( like Iraq 2003 , Libya 2011 , Syria 2012 , Ukraine 2014 , and Venezuela 2015 , were , and like China and Iran are now ) that were friendly toward Russia — because Russia is the main country that America ’ s billionaires want to conquer and control that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So , they constantly propagandize against Russia , where they all want “ regime change ” ( meaning , actually , conquest ) .
Just as for at least the past 2,500 years , conquest is the aristocracy ’ s chief goal .
All aristocrats support imperialism .
( Any who would oppose it would no longer be accepted within the aristocracy .
It would hurt them in their business-dealings with other aristocrats .
Amongst their fellow aristocrats , they would be rejected . )
This journalistic transformation at the Guardian , from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Military-Industrial Complex ( which is owned and controlled by the billionaires ) , is typical .
Understanding this transformation toward pure propaganda is helpful in order to understand the functioning of today ’ s most destructive Government , the U.S. Government — the country ( whose Government is controlled by its billionaires — no democracy ) that has perpetrated far more invasions and coups , and done far more damage in and to the world , than all other Governments in the world combined , ever since the end of World War @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions of people , not only via invasions , but by coups that were followed by U.S.-imposed brutal dictatorships ( which served the U.S. aristocracy ) — and all the while with the U.S. regime pretending to advance ‘ democracy ’ and ‘ human rights ’ ( such as in Iraq 2003- , Libya 2011- , and Syria 2012- ) .
( After all : it ’ s liberal ; it is hypocritical — it pretends to be progressive but isn ’ t . )
Though this incredibly hypocritical global-tyrannical U.S. regime is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t today ’ s equivalent of Nazi Germany ( only bigger than that ) , it is by far the world ’ s most evil Government , much as Nazi Germany ’ s Government was , in its time .
Whereas America under President FDR ( who was sincerely an enemy of Nazi Germany ) was largely a democracy , America is now an aristocracy of its billionaires — a dictatorship by its own super-rich ( and they are vicious , comparable to what Germany ’ s Nazis were , though using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example of today ’ s Guardian ( which is no longer a newspaper but just an online propaganda-site funded by those billionaires ’ ‘ charities ’ , and by readers who are stupid enough to donate and pay in order to be deceived by ‘ news ’ they read there ) is two ‘ news ’ -reports that were published in the Guardian on the same day , and unconnected with one-another except that they were both fact-less , undocumented , and rabidly hateful against Russia ’ s Government — that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of American-and-allied ( such as UK ) billionaires .
On 16 July 2020 , the Guardian headlined both “ Russian state-sponsored hackers target Covid-19 vaccine researchers ” and “ UK says Russia sought to interfere in 2019 election by spreading documents online ” .
Both were probably lies , but certainly unverified by any clear facts — totally uninformative , and just strings of allegations , pure war-propaganda — much of it stenographically citing from official government sources in the U.S. and UK dictatorships ( just like the “ WMD in Iraq ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now a typical liberal ‘ news ’ -medium , which means that it is at least as imperialistic as the openly conservative ‘ news ’ -media ( such as Rupert Murdoch ’ s Times of London ) are .
To show how such propaganda is created and spread , and has been used with enormous success by the millions of hired agents ( including publicly elected governmental officials ) of the U.S. aristocracy , a few examples will be cited here that have already been sufficiently studied and exposed to be frauds — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ -stories in the July 16th Guardian have not yet been exposed , but ( based on that ‘ news ’ -medium ’ s record ) probably also are frauds .
On August 7th , I headlined “ ‘ Russiagate ’ Hoax Unravels , but Their Anti-Russia Sanctions Don ’ t , ” and documented , in considerable detail , the fraudulence of the main U.S. Government hoax against Russia , a hoax that was promulgated in the Mueller Report and in all of the Democratic-Party-created “ Russiagate ” case against America ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump ( accusing him of being ‘ a puppet of Putin ’ ) .
What ’ s stunning there is that , with such a horrid President as Trump , the Democrats selected this hoaxed case to bring against him , in order to force him out of office — as if there weren ’ t authentic crimes that he had been perpetrating during his Presidency ( and even before ) .
They refused to bring any of the authentic cases against him , because they — the Democratic Party itself , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic National Committee — were themselves participating in those crimes ( such as this and this and this and this ) .
So , they instead brought this “ Russiagate ” case ( which had been manufactured by the prior , Democratic Party , President ’ s Administration , in conjunction with MI6 ; and , so , Democratic Party officials could bring it ) , which is entirely disprovable .
All of their ‘ news ’ -media ( such as the New York Times , and the Washington Post , and even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hoaxiness of the charges , so as to sucker the Democratic Party ’ s voters ( their readers ) into supporting their own Democratic-Party-billionaire-serving politicians , instead of the Republican Party ones , who instead represented Republican Party billionaires .
The villain was Russia ( their bête noire ) , instead of Hillary Clinton and their own controlling aristocracy .
That “ Russiagate ” case in the United States was co-created by America ’ s CIA and Britain ’ s MI6 ; so , not only was it a real crime by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its own American public , but it was a fictitious crime also by a foreign Government ( Russia , ‘ the enemy ’ ) , against the American people .
And , as I have also documented , there are many such governmental crimes .
And the more that they can be blamed against countries that America ’ s aristocracy wants to conquer ( such as “ Russiagate ” was ) , the better it is for America ’ s aristocrats .
So , this is the routine reality now ( and under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran and China ) , so as to pump up the Military-Industrial Complex , which is virtually owned by the aristocracy .
I document many things that are consistently denied in America ’ s mainstream ‘ news ’ -media , and therefore none of those media will publish these articles ( though all of my articles are submitted to all of them ) ; but , just today as I am writing , a webmaster at a non-mainstream site objected because I provide “ too many ” links .
Even though he operates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know or respect the fact that ONLY online text-articles possess even the ability to enable their readers to check out easily — just by the reader ’ s clicking onto a link — the evidence for any reasonably questionable allegation that is being made in the given article ( such as this one ) .
Broadcast journalism doesn ’ t do that .
Paper-and-ink journalism also doesn ’ t .
Therefore , all of the traditional ‘ news ’ -media don ’ t empower their audiences to be intelligently skeptical , and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behind any reasonably questionable assertion that is being put forth by them .
Furthermore , even when traditional ‘ news ’ -media establish online sites , any links there are often uninformative , such as to that site ’ s own archive of references to a given term that is being linked in their article .
They assume that you trust one Party or the other , and they provide no easy means of digging deeper — because they don ’ t want their audience to be able to understand .
Those are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So , all of them lie routinely , in order to advance the business-interests of those owners and control their audience .
It ’ s like they are just nonstop advertisements instead of real news-media .
And , since there are no links to their ultimate sources , those audiences would have to become investigators , themselves , in order to separate out which allegations are facts and which allegations are frauds .
Readers don ’ t have the time to do that ; and listeners don ’ t have any way in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if they did have the time .
In other words : those audiences will choose to believe and to disbelieve whatever they want .
This is the reason for the increasing political-Party polarization .
It has become so bad in America now , so that the current U.S. Presidential election is between two rabidly racist contenders : the openly conservative one , Donald Trump , who hardly even tries to hide his racism , versus the other , Joe Biden , who does try to hide the fact that he was one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and was even allied on segregation-issues with the Senate ’ s leading segregationist , the Republican Party ’ s Senator Jesse Helms .
Only by means of the ‘ news ’ -media ’ s hiding Biden ’ s White-supremacist background , can they pretend that the two Parties are offering the electorate a ‘ progressive ’ option , in the billionaires ’ 2020 Presidential ( s ) ‘ election ’ .
Non-racist Americans are offered , by the billionaires ’ two Parties , only White-supremacist options ( the overtly segregationist Trump , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote for to become the next President .
The entire national public then increasingly consists of people who are prejudiced in whatever ways that they are — increasingly set in their existing false beliefs — their existing myths .
To allow billionaires to place their heavy thumbs upon the scales of truth and justice that they own , by means of their control over ‘ news ’ -media , is a sure way for any democracy to degenerate into dictatorship , so that the public are fighting more against each other than against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want and what has happened .
Some things change , but others remain the same .
And rule-by-the-richest seems to be in the latter category .
So : this is how one of the very few remaining progressive news-media became switched , in just the past few years , to being whored to the liberal aristocracy .
The Guardian , RIP , was almost the opposite of today ’ s Guardian .
On August 10th , Jonathan Cook , who used to be a Guardian journalist when it was its previous , progressive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ betrayed not only Corbyn but the last vestiges of British democracy ” , and he exposed his former employer as the opposite of what it had been and as having become perhaps even the chief tool by billionaires to destroy the post-Tony-Blair Labour Party which had been led by the progressive Jeremy Corbyn , and as having reflected the Labour Party billionaires ’ preference instead to defeat Corby ’ s Labour Party , in order to help to install as Prime Minister the far-right Tory Boris Johnson so as to restore , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the pro-imperialist Labour Party that had joined itself full-force to George W. Bush ’ s lie-based invasion of Iraq in 2003 .
“ Racism was endemic in the language and behaviours of Labour ’ s senior , rightwing officials , ” whom today ’ s Guardian had helped to make the Labour Party ’ s current leaders .
This new Guardian was the opposite of the old Guardian , which had given a voice “ for control of the Labour party so that it might really represent the poor and vulnerable against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Guardian was instead instrumental in killing–off that Labour Party , and thereby leaving UK with no progressive party at all , and without even a single Party that has any actually functioning progressive wing to it , at all .
The way that billionaires took over liberalism and destroyed it is by their having taken control over non-conservative media ( most of which were liberal , but a few of which were even progressive , as the Guardian used to be ) and stripped out of them any opposition that those media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replaced that by championing imperialism , so long it ’ s of the ‘ right ’ kind , namely sanctions and coups and invasions by ‘ our ’ country , against countries that never even threatened one ’ s own country ( but that are friendly toward Russia ) .
By definition , attempting to conquer a country that isn ’ t attempting to conquer that aggressor-country is the biggest of all international war-crimes ; it ’ s “ aggressive war ” — and Nazi leaders were hanged for it at Nuremberg — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world ’ s most powerful country ( and its allies ) are doing it , such as now .
A popular term for it ( i.e.
, for the supreme crime that was being prosecuted at the Nuremberg Tribunals ) today is “ neoconservatism , ” and the only way in which it differs from the Nazi Party is that America ’ s aggression ’ s are aiming at different targets to destroy .
The easiest way to end democracy is to take control over the news-media so as to make them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , therefore , that ’ s the way it has been done .

How Billionaires Took Over Liberalism and Destroyed It
By: Eric Zuesse
They’ve done it via the ‘news’-media — their propaganda-operations. So, this is about how billionaires do that; how they’ve done it.
Ever since at least the time of Thucydides in the 5th century BC, the wealthiest have ruled, and did it by conquest and plunder. The acquisition of exceptional wealth was by theft: it was coercion, which could be either physical against the body (violence), or mental against the mind (deception). Exceptional wealth was acquired by some form of theft. The wealthiest controlled the government, which then enforced that theft as legal “ownership.” That’s how the economy worked. The government is the ultimate authority on who owns what. None of this has changed over the millennia. However, the technologies today are different, depending less on the wielding of steely weapons, and more on the statement of stealthy words, than in the ancient past. Increasingly, control is being achieved by deceiving the public. (For example, America’s leading liberal politician, Joe Biden, was one of the U.S. Senate’s leading segregationists and back-room opponents of the NAACP, but claims to be a supporter of “civil rights”, and is thus voted for by the overwhelming majority of America’s Blacks — but America’s press hides his segregationist record, and so they don’t know about it. Those voters’ ignorance is that politician’s strength, and it all comes from America’s billionaires.) Today’s methods of deceiving (and thus controlling) the public are considerably more sophisticated and professional than in the past. The aristocracy (the billionaires) do it nowadays mainly by means of their buying and selling, and hiring and firing, of the news-media, which thus have far more importance than in ancient times, because deceit is today’s main way to control the public.
Whereas conservative media rely unashamedly upon the existing popular mythology, liberal media need to rely upon that but to pretend not to, and to be instead ‘humanitarian’ and ‘enlightened’ in a more tolerant and open-minded sense: they specialize in hypocrisy — it’s liberal aristocrats’ particular style of art-form; they’re the ‘not conservative’ type of aristocrats. They pretend to be what they aren’t (champions of democracy — which they actually despise and crave to overcome, if it exists at all).
Progressive media (to the extent they exist at all, which is only very slight, anywhere) avoid both hypocrisy and mythology: they are openly anti-aristocratic, and rejecting also any mythology — they are populist, while not affirming the popular (or any) mythology. (By contrast: conservative ‘populists’ are committed to the existing popular mythology, and can therefore be manipulated by openly conservative aristocrats — they can be “Tories,” or even “Nazis,” and they can therefore vote against their own “class interests.” It’s stupid, but conservative ‘populists’ nonetheless do it routinely.)
As a result of this (since the progressives’ appeal — rejecting both the aristocracy and the mythology — is so small), politics almost invariably pits conservatives against liberals, and therefore promotes dictatorship (rule of the nation by its aristocracy), either way.
This means that, almost invariably, it’s either the conservative aristocrats, or else the liberal aristocrats, who rule a country. (Democracy — rule by the public — is thus very rare.)
Perhaps the most famous of all liberal news-media during the Twentieth Century was Britain’s Guardian newspaper, which was anti-imperialist — and that’s a core component of progressivism, because the aristocracy derive wealth not only by exploiting their domestic public, but also (if they are internationally successful, meaning control vassal-nations) by exploiting foreign publics. These aristocrats exploit foreign publics by controlling foreign governments. That’s called “imperialism.”
The Guardian newspaper was widely considered, until recently, to be not only liberal, but even progressive. It promoted government-expenditures for the benefit of the people, instead of for international conquest (which billionaires much prefer). Consequently, the aristocracy hated it, and wanted to take it over.
Tragically, that newspaper was, in fact, taken over, culminating in 2016, by American billionaires’ ‘charities’, and promptly it became perhaps the world’s most-rabidly pro-imperialistic propaganda-sheet (even worse than America’s own Washington Post and New York Times, both of which were infamous villains, which had, for example, helped to promote George W. Bush’s lies to invade and destroy Iraq for WMD that didn’t even exist except in their own lies about the matter — and those were definitely lies, not mere errors such as the liars and their propaganda-media claimed afterward). They are constantly whipping up hatred against Russia’s Government and against any nations (like Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Syria 2012, Ukraine 2014, and Venezuela 2015, were, and like China and Iran are now) that were friendly toward Russia — because Russia is the main country that America’s billionaires want to conquer and control that they don’t yet control. So, they constantly propagandize against Russia, where they all want “regime change” (meaning, actually, conquest).
Just as for at least the past 2,500 years, conquest is the aristocracy’s chief goal. All aristocrats support imperialism. (Any who would oppose it would no longer be accepted within the aristocracy. It would hurt them in their business-dealings with other aristocrats. Amongst their fellow aristocrats, they would be rejected.)
This journalistic transformation at the Guardian, from anti-imperialist, to becoming a champion of the Military-Industrial Complex (which is owned and controlled by the billionaires), is typical.
Understanding this transformation toward pure propaganda is helpful in order to understand the functioning of today’s most destructive Government, the U.S. Government — the country (whose Government is controlled by its billionaires — no democracy) that has perpetrated far more invasions and coups, and done far more damage in and to the world, than all other Governments in the world combined, ever since the end of World War II. It has mass-murdered tens of millions of people, not only via invasions, but by coups that were followed by U.S.-imposed brutal dictatorships (which served the U.S. aristocracy) — and all the while with the U.S. regime pretending to advance ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’ (such as in Iraq 2003-, Libya 2011-, and Syria 2012-). (After all: it’s liberal; it is hypocritical — it pretends to be progressive but isn’t.)
Though this incredibly hypocritical global-tyrannical U.S. regime is accepted world-wide, as if it weren’t today’s equivalent of Nazi Germany (only bigger than that), it is by far the world’s most evil Government, much as Nazi Germany’s Government was, in its time. Whereas America under President FDR (who was sincerely an enemy of Nazi Germany) was largely a democracy, America is now an aristocracy of its billionaires — a dictatorship by its own super-rich (and they are vicious, comparable to what Germany’s Nazis were, though using far more-liberal rhetoric).
A typical example of today’s Guardian (which is no longer a newspaper but just an online propaganda-site funded by those billionaires’ ‘charities’, and by readers who are stupid enough to donate and pay in order to be deceived by ‘news’ they read there) is two ‘news’-reports that were published in the Guardian on the same day, and unconnected with one-another except that they were both fact-less, undocumented, and rabidly hateful against Russia’s Government — that’s to say, against the bête noire of American-and-allied (such as UK) billionaires.
On 16 July 2020, the Guardian headlined both “Russian state-sponsored hackers target Covid-19 vaccine researchers” and “UK says Russia sought to interfere in 2019 election by spreading documents online”. Both were probably lies, but certainly unverified by any clear facts — totally uninformative, and just strings of allegations, pure war-propaganda — much of it stenographically citing from official government sources in the U.S. and UK dictatorships (just like the “WMD in Iraq” lie was).
The Guardian is now a typical liberal ‘news’-medium, which means that it is at least as imperialistic as the openly conservative ‘news’-media (such as Rupert Murdoch’s Times of London) are.
To show how such propaganda is created and spread, and has been used with enormous success by the millions of hired agents (including publicly elected governmental officials) of the U.S. aristocracy, a few examples will be cited here that have already been sufficiently studied and exposed to be frauds — such as those two ‘news’-stories in the July 16th Guardian have not yet been exposed, but (based on that ‘news’-medium’s record) probably also are frauds.
On August 7th, I headlined “‘Russiagate’ Hoax Unravels, but Their Anti-Russia Sanctions Don’t,” and documented, in considerable detail, the fraudulence of the main U.S. Government hoax against Russia, a hoax that was promulgated in the Mueller Report and in all of the Democratic-Party-created “Russiagate” case against America’s current atrocious (Republican-Party-billionaire-representing) President, Donald Trump (accusing him of being ‘a puppet of Putin’).
What’s stunning there is that, with such a horrid President as Trump, the Democrats selected this hoaxed case to bring against him, in order to force him out of office — as if there weren’t authentic crimes that he had been perpetrating during his Presidency (and even before). They refused to bring any of the authentic cases against him, because they — the Democratic Party itself, its own Senators and Representatives and the Democratic National Committee — were themselves participating in those crimes (such as this and this and this and this). So, they instead brought this “Russiagate” case (which had been manufactured by the prior, Democratic Party, President’s Administration, in conjunction with MI6; and, so, Democratic Party officials could bring it), which is entirely disprovable. All of their ‘news’-media (such as the New York Times, and the Washington Post, and even the formerly British Guardian) therefore hid the hoaxiness of the charges, so as to sucker the Democratic Party’s voters (their readers) into supporting their own Democratic-Party-billionaire-serving politicians, instead of the Republican Party ones, who instead represented Republican Party billionaires. The villain was Russia (their bête noire), instead of Hillary Clinton and their own controlling aristocracy.
That “Russiagate” case in the United States was co-created by America’s CIA and Britain’s MI6; so, not only was it a real crime by the (traitorous) U.S. Government against its own American public, but it was a fictitious crime also by a foreign Government (Russia, ‘the enemy’), against the American people. And, as I have also documented, there are many such governmental crimes. And the more that they can be blamed against countries that America’s aristocracy wants to conquer (such as “Russiagate” was), the better it is for America’s aristocrats. So, this is the routine reality now (and under Trump it has increasingly been also against Iran and China), so as to pump up the Military-Industrial Complex, which is virtually owned by the aristocracy.
I document many things that are consistently denied in America’s mainstream ‘news’-media, and therefore none of those media will publish these articles (though all of my articles are submitted to all of them); but, just today as I am writing, a webmaster at a non-mainstream site objected because I provide “too many” links. Even though he operates an online news-site, he fails to know or respect the fact that ONLY online text-articles possess even the ability to enable their readers to check out easily — just by the reader’s clicking onto a link — the evidence for any reasonably questionable allegation that is being made in the given article (such as this one). Broadcast journalism doesn’t do that. Paper-and-ink journalism also doesn’t. Therefore, all of the traditional ‘news’-media don’t empower their audiences to be intelligently skeptical, and to have easy access to the actual evidence behind any reasonably questionable assertion that is being put forth by them.
Furthermore, even when traditional ‘news’-media establish online sites, any links there are often uninformative, such as to that site’s own archive of references to a given term that is being linked in their article. They assume that you trust one Party or the other, and they provide no easy means of digging deeper — because they don’t want their audience to be able to understand. Those are all billionaire-controlled ‘news’-media. So, all of them lie routinely, in order to advance the business-interests of those owners and control their audience. It’s like they are just nonstop advertisements instead of real news-media. And, since there are no links to their ultimate sources, those audiences would have to become investigators, themselves, in order to separate out which allegations are facts and which allegations are frauds. Readers don’t have the time to do that; and listeners don’t have any way in which they can do it, even if they did have the time. In other words: those audiences will choose to believe and to disbelieve whatever they want. This is the reason for the increasing political-Party polarization. It has become so bad in America now, so that the current U.S. Presidential election is between two rabidly racist contenders: the openly conservative one, Donald Trump, who hardly even tries to hide his racism, versus the other, Joe Biden, who does try to hide the fact that he was one of the U.S. Senate’s leading segregationists and was even allied on segregation-issues with the Senate’s leading segregationist, the Republican Party’s Senator Jesse Helms. Only by means of the ‘news’-media’s hiding Biden’s White-supremacist background, can they pretend that the two Parties are offering the electorate a ‘progressive’ option, in the billionaires’ 2020 Presidential (s)‘election’. Non-racist Americans are offered, by the billionaires’ two Parties, only White-supremacist options (the overtly segregationist Trump, or else the covertly segregationist Biden) to vote for to become the next President.
The entire national public then increasingly consists of people who are prejudiced in whatever ways that they are — increasingly set in their existing false beliefs — their existing myths. To allow billionaires to place their heavy thumbs upon the scales of truth and justice that they own, by means of their control over ‘news’-media, is a sure way for any democracy to degenerate into dictatorship, so that the public are fighting more against each other than against the aristocracy. This is what billionaires want and what has happened. Some things change, but others remain the same. And rule-by-the-richest seems to be in the latter category.
So: this is how one of the very few remaining progressive news-media became switched, in just the past few years, to being whored to the liberal aristocracy. The Guardian, RIP, was almost the opposite of today’s Guardian.
On August 10th, Jonathan Cook, who used to be a Guardian journalist when it was its previous, progressive newspaper, headlined “How the Guardian betrayed not only Corbyn but the last vestiges of British democracy”, and he exposed his former employer as the opposite of what it had been and as having become perhaps even the chief tool by billionaires to destroy the post-Tony-Blair Labour Party which had been led by the progressive Jeremy Corbyn, and as having reflected the Labour Party billionaires’ preference instead to defeat Corby’s Labour Party, in order to help to install as Prime Minister the far-right Tory Boris Johnson so as to restore, as being that Conservative Party’s opposition, the pro-imperialist Labour Party that had joined itself full-force to George W. Bush’s lie-based invasion of Iraq in 2003. “Racism was endemic in the language and behaviours of Labour’s senior, rightwing officials,” whom today’s Guardian had helped to make the Labour Party’s current leaders. This new Guardian was the opposite of the old Guardian, which had given a voice “for control of the Labour party so that it might really represent the poor and vulnerable against rule by the rich.” Today’s Guardian was instead instrumental in killing–off that Labour Party, and thereby leaving UK with no progressive party at all, and without even a single Party that has any actually functioning progressive wing to it, at all.
The way that billionaires took over liberalism and destroyed it is by their having taken control over non-conservative media (most of which were liberal, but a few of which were even progressive, as the Guardian used to be) and stripped out of them any opposition that those media previously had had toward imperialism, and replaced that by championing imperialism, so long it’s of the ‘right’ kind, namely sanctions and coups and invasions by ‘our’ country, against countries that never even threatened one’s own country (but that are friendly toward Russia). By definition, attempting to conquer a country that isn’t attempting to conquer that aggressor-country is the biggest of all international war-crimes; it’s “aggressive war” — and Nazi leaders were hanged for it at Nuremberg — but it’s entirely unpunished when the world’s most powerful country (and its allies) are doing it, such as now. A popular term for it (i.e., for the supreme crime that was being prosecuted at the Nuremberg Tribunals) today is “neoconservatism,” and the only way in which it differs from the Nazi Party is that America’s aggression’s are aiming at different targets to destroy.
The easiest way to end democracy is to take control over the news-media so as to make them instead ‘news’-media; and, therefore, that’s the way it has been done.
••••
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-08-18--The Civil Rights Movement Had a “Moral Authority” Black Lives Matter Lacks

The civil rights and Black Power movements existed in the same space and time , but they had radically different beliefs and experienced very different levels of success .
In new footage from his interview with PragerU ’ s Will Witt , Project 21 member Derryck Green proved the importance of studying history as he contrasted the two 1960s movements , and noted that today ’ s Black Lives Matter movement has chosen the historically losing path .
Derryck told Witt : “ I ’ ve always said that Black Lives Matter is an ideological heir to the Black Power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Derryck said that “ people have to make a decision ” on whether or not to support this radical modern movement .
And , despite the rhetoric suggesting opposition to the Black Lives Matter organization is akin to racism , Derryck claimed its fringe behavior allows for rational dissent : Derryck said that the tactics used by the civil rights movement and its leader , Dr. Martin Luther King , Jr. , created a compelling moral case for the movement ’ s goals .
Quite simply , King ’ s followers were more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activists because they promoted and kept a “ moral authority ” in their advocacy for an America that lived up to the goals of its founders .
Speaking of Dr. King in particular , Derryck said : This is an important distinction from Black Power then and Black Lives Matter now .
Derryck added : Also noteworthy is that civil rights activists “ wanted to integrate into American society.
” As such : And when it came to embracing racial identity , race was part of a larger agenda rather than the fulcrum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Black Power movement the model for today ’ s Black Lives Matter agenda , and said that neither of these movements “ want [ s ] race-neutrality.
” They want separatism… And they were about violence… They didn ’ t want to overcome .
They wanted to overrun .
And so they were going to meet violence with violence because of the frustrations of the younger radicals that were coming up in the Black Power movement .
As such , the Black Power movement made few gains in comparison to Dr. King @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Today , the nation ’ s attention is focused on Black Lives Matter and its allegedly commanding popular support .
But , as the protests turn from a noble agenda to riots and looting – with a goal of ripping down and remaking America into a radical image – people will historically be asking themselves if the movement has moral authority .
And that will determine its success or failure .
To see the entire clip on Will Witt ’ s Facebook page , click here .
To see the rest of the @ @ @ @

Civil Rights Movement Had a “Moral Authority” Black Lives Matter Lacks
By: David Almasi
The civil rights and Black Power movements existed in the same space and time, but they had radically different beliefs and experienced very different levels of success.
In new footage from his interview with PragerU’s Will Witt, Project 21 member Derryck Green proved the importance of studying history as he contrasted the two 1960s movements, and noted that today’s Black Lives Matter movement has chosen the historically losing path.
Derryck told Witt: “I’ve always said that Black Lives Matter is an ideological heir to the Black Power movement.”
Having staked this claim, Derryck said that “people have to make a decision” on whether or not to support this radical modern movement. And, despite the rhetoric suggesting opposition to the Black Lives Matter organization is akin to racism, Derryck claimed its fringe behavior allows for rational dissent:
Rejecting Black Lives Matter as a movement isn’t rejecting the quality and care for black lives. It’s rejecting the way they’re going about doing what they’re doing.
Derryck said that the tactics used by the civil rights movement and its leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., created a compelling moral case for the movement’s goals. Quite simply, King’s followers were more popular and more successful than Black Power activists because they promoted and kept a “moral authority” in their advocacy for an America that lived up to the goals of its founders.
Speaking of Dr. King in particular, Derryck said:
He was about nonviolence. He was about going and silently protesting, but not meeting violence with violence.
This is an important distinction from Black Power then and Black Lives Matter now. Derryck added:
If you meet violence with nonviolence, people have to make a moral distinction between one or the other – and then they have to decide who they want to choose.
Also noteworthy is that civil rights activists “ wanted to integrate into American society.” As such:
[Dr. King] wanted to force the country – to morally persuade them – to live up to the ideals in the Declaration of Independence and the laws of the Constitution: integration, equality and race neutrality.
And when it came to embracing racial identity, race was part of a larger agenda rather than the fulcrum upon which everything balances:
There was no intrinsic good or bad with race. It was neutral. Give us an opportunity. Let us prove that we are equal with the people who have been oppressing us for a hundred years.
Derryck called the Black Power movement the model for today’s Black Lives Matter agenda, and said that neither of these movements “want[s] race-neutrality.”
Paraphrasing Black Power’s race-conscious messaging, Derryck explained its confrontational agenda:
We are going to redefine what it means to be black, and then we want mainstream America to deal with us how we’ve redefined ourselves.
He continued:
They want separatism… And they were about violence… They didn’t want to overcome. They wanted to overrun. And so they were going to meet violence with violence because of the frustrations of the younger radicals that were coming up in the Black Power movement.
As such, the Black Power movement made few gains in comparison to Dr. King and his civil rights movement supporters.
Today, the nation’s attention is focused on Black Lives Matter and its allegedly commanding popular support. But, as the protests turn from a noble agenda to riots and looting – with a goal of ripping down and remaking America into a radical image – people will historically be asking themselves if the movement has moral authority. And that will determine its success or failure.
To see the entire clip on Will Witt’s Facebook page, click here. To see the rest of the interview click here.


thelibertybeacon--2020-08-18--Adam Schiff’s inaccurate Russia tweets raise Twitter double-standard question

Twitter has on more than one occasion appended or flagged President Trump ’ s tweets as misleading .
But so far , it has not done the same with several posts by House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff that are demonstrably false or misleading , raising questions of a double standard .
For instance , Schiff tweeted in July 2018 that “ the release of the Carter Page FISA application makes clear , once again , the FBI acted lawfully and appropriately ” in reference to the surveillance warrant the bureau used to spy on the Trump adviser during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FISA application that Schiff referred to in the tweet contained 51 statements that were inaccurate , misleading or undocumented , and included 17 violations of FBI rules ranging from false and unverified information to omissions of exculpatory evidence of innocence , the Justice Department inspector general reported last December .
Likewise , DOJ officials withdrew two of the four Page FISA applications , and the chief judge of the FISA court ruled in March that the FBI has misled the court .
“ There is thus little doubt that the government breached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with respect to those applications , ” U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said .
And last week , an ex-FBI lawyer agreed to plead guilty to a felony and admitted he falsified a document to deceive the court .
In other words , the FBI acted unlawfully and inappropriately in the Page FISA debacle .
And to date , Twitter hasn ’ t flagged or appended Schiff ’ s tweet even though he has enormous influence on the platform with 2.4 million followers .
Patrick Boland , a spokesman for Schiff , did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comment .
Earlier this month , for instance , Schiff tweeted out a claim that Trump had not taken action to stop Russia from interfering in elections .
“ Donald Trump has never deterred Russia from interfering in U.S. elections .
Far from it .
The sum total of Trump ’ s words and actions has only encouraged Russian meddling in our elections , ” Schiff wrote .
While it is true Trump as a candidate once encouraged Russia to find and make public Hillary Clinton ’ s emails , he has as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for 2016 and 2018 election meddling .
In all , the Trump administration has taken more than four dozen actions to punish Russia for activities ranging from cyberhacking to aggression in the Crimea region of Ukraine , according to a tally kept by the left-leaning Brookings Institute .
Those actions include the Trump Justice Department issuing two separate indictments against Russian citizens for election interference activities in the 2016 and 2018 elections , signing into law new legislation to punish foreign actors who try to influence elections , and imposing multiple sanctions against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instance , the Trump Treasury Department sanctioned 11 entities and individuals in Russia last September for interference in the mid-term elections .
The punishments targeted “ Russian actors that attempted to influence the 2018 U.S. midterm elections , ” Treasury said .
So Schiff ’ s tweet is demonstrably false .
But no action has been taken by Twitter .
Several times , Schiff has tweeted claims that there is evidence Trump ’ s campaign colluded with Russia to hijack the 2016 election .
For instance , the California Democrat posted a tweet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ when in plain sight — evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
” Multiple investigations ranging from the Senate Intelligence Committee to Special Counsel Robert Mueller have concluded there is no evidence any Trump campaign official – or any other American – colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election .
“ The investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired to coordinate it with the Russian government in its election interference activities , ” Mueller wrote , saying extensive contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Then-Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr last year came to a similar conclusion .
“ We don ’ t have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia , ” he announced .
In 2017 , Schiff also accused former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos of meeting with Russians to discuss stolen emails .
Papadopoulos “ was secretly discussing stolen Clinton emails with the Russians , ” Schiff tweeted out in February 2018 .
But the final Mueller report did not cite a single instance in which Papadopoulos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , instead noting he had discussion with a Maltese-born professor named Josef Mifsud in April 2016 .
Mueller claimed Mifsud had links to the Kremlin without providing any specifics .
Mifsud and his lawyer deny being tied to the Kremlin , saying instead the professor had long ties to Western intelligence and worked for an Italian education institution whose visitors include the FBI and many other Western law enforcement and intelligence agencies .
Papadopoulos also talked about Mifsud ’ s claim about the Russians having Clinton emails with an Australian and a Greek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Trump adviser ever talked to the Russians about it .
More importantly , recently declassified transcripts show Papadopoulos was recorded by an FBI informer in fall 2016 saying the Trump campaign had nothing to do with hacking the Democratic Party .
“ It ’ s illegal , you know , to do that sh-t , ” Papadopoulos said to the FBI confidential source in a statement that further undercuts the Schiff tweet ’ s insinuation Papadopolous was trying to work with the Russians .
FBI officials have said they disregarded Papadopoulos ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and did not tell the FISA court .
The DOJ inspector general concluded that omission violated the bureau ’ s requirement to be scrupulously transparent with the court .
Papadopoulos said Sunday night in an interview from Italy that Schiff ’ s tweets should be taken down or flagged by Twitter .
“ I want those comments retracted or censored from Twitter , ” he said .
“ Those tweets have been archived and viewed by thousands … of people and have left a bad legacy for myself and it has been hurtful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Likewise , Schiff indirectly peddled in a summer 2017 tweet a long-debunked conspiracy theory in the Russia case that Alfa Bank had secretly helped the Trump campaign communicate with Putin .
He did so while criticizing the administration ’ s appointment of a former Alfa Bank lawyer .
“ President nominates lawyer for Alfa Bank to head criminal division at DOJ .
Really ?
Was counsel for Russia ’ s Vnesheconombank unavailable ?
” Schiff tweeted .
The Alfa Bank computer pings conspiracy has been repeatedly knocked down as false , starting in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through Mueller ’ s testimony to Congress last summer .
Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

Adam Schiff’s inaccurate Russia tweets raise Twitter double-standard question
While Twitter has flagged some of President Trump’s tweets, they have not done the same with Schiff tweets that declassified memos show are misleading
By John Solomon
Twitter has on more than one occasion appended or flagged President Trump’s tweets as misleading. But so far, it has not done the same with several posts by House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff that are demonstrably false or misleading, raising questions of a double standard.
For instance, Schiff tweeted in July 2018 that “the release of the Carter Page FISA application makes clear, once again, the FBI acted lawfully and appropriately” in reference to the surveillance warrant the bureau used to spy on the Trump adviser during the Russia collusion probe.
Wrong again, Mr. President. It confirms the FBI acted appropriately and that Russian agents approached two of your advisors, and informed your campaign that Russia was prepared to help you by disseminating stolen Clinton emails. https://t.co/G128SNicdn — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) February 24, 2018
In fact, the FISA application that Schiff referred to in the tweet contained 51 statements that were inaccurate, misleading or undocumented, and included 17 violations of FBI rules ranging from false and unverified information to omissions of exculpatory evidence of innocence, the Justice Department inspector general reported last December.
File DOJ IG report on Russia FISAs
Likewise, DOJ officials withdrew two of the four Page FISA applications, and the chief judge of the FISA court ruled in March that the FBI has misled the court. “There is thus little doubt that the government breached its duty of candor to the Court with respect to those applications,” U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said.
And last week, an ex-FBI lawyer agreed to plead guilty to a felony and admitted he falsified a document to deceive the court.
In other words, the FBI acted unlawfully and inappropriately in the Page FISA debacle. And to date, Twitter hasn’t flagged or appended Schiff’s tweet even though he has enormous influence on the platform with 2.4 million followers.
A Twitter spokesman did not immediately return a message Sunday seeking comment.
Patrick Boland, a spokesman for Schiff, did not immediately return a call Sunday seeking comment.
Just the News identified more than a dozen tweets that Schiff has posted since 2017 that are inaccurate or misleading based on the declassified information that has been made public over the last year by the Justice Department, FBI, and intelligence community.
Earlier this month, for instance, Schiff tweeted out a claim that Trump had not taken action to stop Russia from interfering in elections.
“Donald Trump has never deterred Russia from interfering in U.S. elections. Far from it. The sum total of Trump’s words and actions has only encouraged Russian meddling in our elections,” Schiff wrote.
Donald Trump has never deterred Russia from interfering in U.S. elections. Far from it. The sum total of Trump’s words and actions has only encouraged Russian meddling in our elections. Insecure, unscrupulous and transactional, Trump is Putin’s ideal American president. pic.twitter.com/x61qph1Z95 — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) August 10, 2020
While it is true Trump as a candidate once encouraged Russia to find and make public Hillary Clinton’s emails, he has as president taken sweeping actions to punish Russia for 2016 and 2018 election meddling.
In all, the Trump administration has taken more than four dozen actions to punish Russia for activities ranging from cyberhacking to aggression in the Crimea region of Ukraine, according to a tally kept by the left-leaning Brookings Institute.
Those actions include the Trump Justice Department issuing two separate indictments against Russian citizens for election interference activities in the 2016 and 2018 elections, signing into law new legislation to punish foreign actors who try to influence elections, and imposing multiple sanctions against Russians accused of election meddling.
For instance, the Trump Treasury Department sanctioned 11 entities and individuals in Russia last September for interference in the mid-term elections. The punishments targeted “Russian actors that attempted to influence the 2018 U.S. midterm elections,” Treasury said.
So Schiff’s tweet is demonstrably false. But no action has been taken by Twitter.
Several times, Schiff has tweeted claims that there is evidence Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia to hijack the 2016 election. For instance, the California Democrat posted a tweet in April 2018 accusing Republicans of ignoring “when in plain sight — evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.”
Throughout the investigation, Committee Republicans chose not to seriously investigate — or even see, when in plain sight — evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. pic.twitter.com/1aa1tmX9Zb — Adam Schiff (@AdamSchiff) April 27, 2018
Multiple investigations ranging from the Senate Intelligence Committee to Special Counsel Robert Mueller have concluded there is no evidence any Trump campaign official – or any other American – colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
“The investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired to coordinate it with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” Mueller wrote, saying extensive contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russians did not amount to a conspiracy.
Then-Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr last year came to a similar conclusion. “We don’t have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia,” he announced.
In 2017, Schiff also accused former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos of meeting with Russians to discuss stolen emails. Papadopoulos “was secretly discussing stolen Clinton emails with the Russians,” Schiff tweeted out in February 2018.
Quite the opposite, Mr. President. The most important fact disclosed in this otherwise shoddy memo was that FBI investigation began July 2016 with your advisor, Papadopoulos, who was secretly discussing stolen Clinton emails with the Russians. https://t.co/2rGOE1jGg2 — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) February 3, 2018
But the final Mueller report did not cite a single instance in which Papadopoulos talked directly with Russians about the emails, instead noting he had discussion with a Maltese-born professor named Josef Mifsud in April 2016. Mueller claimed Mifsud had links to the Kremlin without providing any specifics.
Mifsud and his lawyer deny being tied to the Kremlin, saying instead the professor had long ties to Western intelligence and worked for an Italian education institution whose visitors include the FBI and many other Western law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
Papadopoulos also talked about Mifsud’s claim about the Russians having Clinton emails with an Australian and a Greek official, but Mueller offered no evidence the Trump adviser ever talked to the Russians about it.
More importantly, recently declassified transcripts show Papadopoulos was recorded by an FBI informer in fall 2016 saying the Trump campaign had nothing to do with hacking the Democratic Party. “It’s illegal, you know, to do that sh-t,” Papadopoulos said to the FBI confidential source in a statement that further undercuts the Schiff tweet’s insinuation Papadopolous was trying to work with the Russians.
FBI officials have said they disregarded Papadopoulos’s statement of innocence in the recording and did not tell the FISA court. The DOJ inspector general concluded that omission violated the bureau’s requirement to be scrupulously transparent with the court.
Papadopoulos said Sunday night in an interview from Italy that Schiff’s tweets should be taken down or flagged by Twitter.
“I want those comments retracted or censored from Twitter,” he said. “Those tweets have been archived and viewed by thousands … of people and have left a bad legacy for myself and it has been hurtful personally and damning towards my reputation.”
Likewise, Schiff indirectly peddled in a summer 2017 tweet a long-debunked conspiracy theory in the Russia case that Alfa Bank had secretly helped the Trump campaign communicate with Putin. He did so while criticizing the administration’s appointment of a former Alfa Bank lawyer.
“President nominates lawyer for Alfa Bank to head criminal division at DOJ. Really? Was counsel for Russia’s Vnesheconombank unavailable?” Schiff tweeted.
President nominates lawyer for Alfa Bank to head criminal division at DOJ. Really? Was counsel for Russia’s Vnesheconombank unavailable? https://t.co/EN8JXBnxjL — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) July 28, 2017
The Alfa Bank computer pings conspiracy has been repeatedly knocked down as false, starting in October 2016 by the FBI and continuing through Mueller’s testimony to Congress last summer.
_________
THE FACTS INSIDE OUR REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK
Documents
File DOJ IG report on Russia FISAs
Links
Other Media
Adam Schiff @RepAdamSchiff ********* (TLB) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News Some emphasis and pictorial content added by (TLB) Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News •••• •••• Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.