thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--Surreal 2020 Timeline Portends Danger for America

The only thing leftist Democrat Kamala Harris got right in her October 7 debate with Vice President Mike Pence was that her purpose was not to exhibit any supposed “ superiority ” over Pence , but to use the occasion to contrast herself against President Trump .
Unfortunately for Harris , she succeeded on both counts .
Not only was she quantifiably the big loser of the night going up against Pence , but she also revealed a truly sinister leftist Democrat alternative universe that would inflict horrendous damage on the nation , were it ever to succeed .
Admittedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debate ” forum of recent years has degenerated into a skeletal caricature of what such events were originally intended to be .
Back when Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas agreed to engage in front of the public , the goal was to spotlight the issues of the day , and give voters a clear perspective on where each candidate stood .
This was particularly important at a time when few alternative sources of information existed .
Sadly though the enormity of high-tech communications has made reporting available to all on a vastly larger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this does not translate to any guarantee of truth .
As the scope of political campaigning has expanded , leftists have been compelled to suppress truth in every possible manner , since reality and truth are the greatest obstacles to their perverse agenda .
So it was imperative that “ debates ” be devoid of real , factual discourse .
As a result they have lost any recognizable or useful form .
Even the notion of which candidate “ won ” a debate is itself an absurdity and distraction .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of viewers should not be to determine which candidate has the best “ one liners , ” or does the best job of quick-witted lying on his or her feet .
Rather , it should all be about learning what each candidate actually believes , and consequently what the election of each would mean for the country .
Of course any honest assessment on that basis is poison to leftist Democrats .
So it is guaranteed that they will never allow things to return to such a place .
Still , in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of both “ debates ” we have seen thus far , enough evidence has been revealed to give honest Americans ample warnings as to how each party ’ s candidate would affect the nation ’ s future .
The contrast between two camps could not be more stark , or more scary !
To grasp just how horrendously the leftist Democrats would devastate every decent aspect of our great America , one need only consider the upheaval of the past nine months .
From the moment Americans were made aware of the Wuhan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the place in response to it .
The only thing about which they ’ ve been absolutely consistent is their obvious intent to shamelessly exploit the virus for political gain .
President Trump quickly responded to the looming danger by banning travel from China ; a move that was met with caterwauling from Democrats , who accused him of hatred , bigotry , and overreacting .
Yet the moment they realized that the fear and chaos would play well into their political agenda , Democrats instantly pivoted and began pushing for every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ safety ” of the American people .
“ Lockdowns , ” which are clearly in direct defiance of the Constitution , have been implemented in every “ Blue ” ( leftist Democrat dominated ) state and municipality across the country , under the guise of “ public safety.
” Meanwhile , as honest citizens are being fettered and prevented from functioning in any normal manner , marauding mobs of antifa and BLM anarchists are laying waste to urban areas , looting , vandalizing , assaulting , and even murdering in the name @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response , Democrat politicians are either supportive or totally silent , which is tacit support .
Democrat “ Lockdown ” policies have been onerous and ineffective , driving many Americans out of business , and inflicting unspeakable anguish on those forced into isolation .
Drug and alcohol abuse have spiked horrendously .
And suicide rates in many areas have greatly exceeded actual deaths from the virus .
In New York leftist Democrat governor Andrew Cuomo sentenced literally thousands among the elderly to death from the disease , on account of his insane and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nursing homes where the disease spread .
Yet all those leftist Fake News minions who claim to care about the plight of the “ little guy ” have done nothing to hold Cuomo accountable , and instead have deliberately deflected attention from him by claiming that unnecessary deaths are somehow President Trump ’ s fault .
It is grimly fitting that so many are speculating on the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election as a descent into post-apocalyptic national dystopia .
This is most often asserted by leftists , who are actually threatening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demands that the nation vote Democrat .
But in a much more real , and dangerous sense , the fate of the nation is in grave danger if leftist Democrats ever achieve electoral dominance , either now or at any time in the future .
Given the iron fisted suppression of opposition among leftists wherever they dominate , from schools to the corporate world to the sewer that once was the “ entertainment ” industry , and given the willingness of leftist Democrat governors such as Michigan ’ s Gretchen Whitmer , California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Jay Inslee to obsess with power the moment they were able to seize on the Wuhan virus as an excuse , it is beyond naive to think they would ever relinquish that power on their own .
Thankfully , the individuality of the other states has provided a firewall against this despotic onslaught , at least for the moment .
But that protection would quickly collapse , along with every other constitutional principle of a free nation , in the immediate wake of a Democrat “ victory , ” no matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ G. Adamo is a lifelong conservative from the American Heartland .
He has been involved in grassroots and state-level politics for years .
His recently released book “ Rules for Defeating Radicals , ” subtitled “ Countering the Alinsky Strategy in Politics and Culture , ” is the “ Go To ” guide to effectively overcoming the dirty tricks of the political left .
It is available at Amazon .
COVID-19 may take down an independent news outlet Nobody said running a media site would be easy .
We could use some help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called me the worst fundraiser ever .
My skills are squarely rooted on the journalistic side of running a news outlet .
Paying the bills has never been my forte , but we ’ ve survived .
We have ads on the site that help , but since the site ’ s inception this has been a labor of love that otherwise doesn ’ t bring in the level of revenue necessary to justify it .
When I left a nice , corporate career in 2017 , I did so knowing I wouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But what we do at NOQ Report to deliver the truth and fight the progressive mainstream media narrative that has plagued this nation is too important for me to sacrifice it for the sake of wealth .
We know we ’ ll never make a ton of money this way , and we ’ re okay with that .
Things have become harder with the coronavirus lockdowns .
Both ad money and donations that have kept us afloat for a while have dropped dramatically .
We thought we could weather the storm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or “ 2nd-wave ” that mainstream media and Democrats are pushing has put our prospects in jeopardy .
In short , we are now in desperate need of financial assistance .
The best way NOQ Report readers can help is to donate .
Our Giving Fuel page makes it easy to donate one-time or monthly .
Alternatively , you can donate through PayPal as well .
We need approximately $ 11,500 to stay afloat for the rest of 2020 , but more would be wonderful and any amount that brings us closer to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second way to help is to become a partner .
We ’ ve strongly considered seeking angel investors in the past but because we were paying the bills , it didn ’ t seem necessary .
Now , we ’ re struggling to pay the bills .
This shouldn ’ t be the case as our traffic the last year has been going up dramatically .
June , 2018 , we had 11,678 visitors .
A year later in June , 2019 , we were up to 116,194 .
In June , 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re heading in the right direction and we believe we ’ re ready talk to patriotic investors who want to not only “ get in on the action ” but more importantly who want to help America hear the truth .
Interested investors should contact me directly with the contact button above .
Election year or not , coronavirus lockdowns or not , anarchic riots or not , the need for truthful journalism endures .
But in these times , we need as many conservative media voices as possible .
Please help keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NEW NOQ Report Podcast .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
The coronavirus crisis has prompted many , even some conservatives , to promote authoritarianism .
It ’ s understandable to some extent now , but it must not be allowed to embed itself in American life .
We currently have 8000+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

See all the latest videos and articles patriots need to watch and read at Discern.tv.
The only thing leftist Democrat Kamala Harris got right in her October 7 debate with Vice President Mike Pence was that her purpose was not to exhibit any supposed “superiority” over Pence, but to use the occasion to contrast herself against President Trump. Unfortunately for Harris, she succeeded on both counts. Not only was she quantifiably the big loser of the night going up against Pence, but she also revealed a truly sinister leftist Democrat alternative universe that would inflict horrendous damage on the nation, were it ever to succeed.
Admittedly, the entire presidential and vice-presidential “debate” forum of recent years has degenerated into a skeletal caricature of what such events were originally intended to be. Back when Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas agreed to engage in front of the public, the goal was to spotlight the issues of the day, and give voters a clear perspective on where each candidate stood. This was particularly important at a time when few alternative sources of information existed.
Sadly though the enormity of high-tech communications has made reporting available to all on a vastly larger scale than even a few decades ago, this does not translate to any guarantee of truth. As the scope of political campaigning has expanded, leftists have been compelled to suppress truth in every possible manner, since reality and truth are the greatest obstacles to their perverse agenda. So it was imperative that “debates” be devoid of real, factual discourse. As a result they have lost any recognizable or useful form.
Even the notion of which candidate “won” a debate is itself an absurdity and distraction. This is not a horse race! The goal of viewers should not be to determine which candidate has the best “one liners,” or does the best job of quick-witted lying on his or her feet. Rather, it should all be about learning what each candidate actually believes, and consequently what the election of each would mean for the country. Of course any honest assessment on that basis is poison to leftist Democrats. So it is guaranteed that they will never allow things to return to such a place.
Still, in the midst of all the chicanery and duplicity of both “debates” we have seen thus far, enough evidence has been revealed to give honest Americans ample warnings as to how each party’s candidate would affect the nation’s future. The contrast between two camps could not be more stark, or more scary!
To grasp just how horrendously the leftist Democrats would devastate every decent aspect of our great America, one need only consider the upheaval of the past nine months. From the moment Americans were made aware of the Wuhan virus, Democrats have been posturing all over the place in response to it. The only thing about which they’ve been absolutely consistent is their obvious intent to shamelessly exploit the virus for political gain.
President Trump quickly responded to the looming danger by banning travel from China; a move that was met with caterwauling from Democrats, who accused him of hatred, bigotry, and overreacting. Yet the moment they realized that the fear and chaos would play well into their political agenda, Democrats instantly pivoted and began pushing for every unconstitutional power grab, ostensibly for the “safety” of the American people.
“Lockdowns,” which are clearly in direct defiance of the Constitution, have been implemented in every “Blue” (leftist Democrat dominated) state and municipality across the country, under the guise of “public safety.” Meanwhile, as honest citizens are being fettered and prevented from functioning in any normal manner, marauding mobs of antifa and BLM anarchists are laying waste to urban areas, looting, vandalizing, assaulting, and even murdering in the name of Marxist/leftist “social justice.” In response, Democrat politicians are either supportive or totally silent, which is tacit support.
Democrat “Lockdown” policies have been onerous and ineffective, driving many Americans out of business, and inflicting unspeakable anguish on those forced into isolation. Drug and alcohol abuse have spiked horrendously. And suicide rates in many areas have greatly exceeded actual deaths from the virus.
In New York leftist Democrat governor Andrew Cuomo sentenced literally thousands among the elderly to death from the disease, on account of his insane and murderous policy of forcing infected patients into nursing homes where the disease spread. Yet all those leftist Fake News minions who claim to care about the plight of the “little guy” have done nothing to hold Cuomo accountable, and instead have deliberately deflected attention from him by claiming that unnecessary deaths are somehow President Trump’s fault.
We’re LIVE and everything is on sale for a limited time! Whole Cows has launched offering freeze-dried beef for long-term storage. Don’t wait for food shortages to get worse. Stock up today. Use promo code “launch15” at checkout for 15% off!
It is grimly fitting that so many are speculating on the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election as a descent into post-apocalyptic national dystopia. This is most often asserted by leftists, who are actually threatening more tantrums if Americans dare defy their demands that the nation vote Democrat. But in a much more real, and dangerous sense, the fate of the nation is in grave danger if leftist Democrats ever achieve electoral dominance, either now or at any time in the future.
Given the iron fisted suppression of opposition among leftists wherever they dominate, from schools to the corporate world to the sewer that once was the “entertainment” industry, and given the willingness of leftist Democrat governors such as Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer, California’s Gavin Newsom, and Washington’s Jay Inslee to obsess with power the moment they were able to seize on the Wuhan virus as an excuse, it is beyond naive to think they would ever relinquish that power on their own.
Thankfully, the individuality of the other states has provided a firewall against this despotic onslaught, at least for the moment. But that protection would quickly collapse, along with every other constitutional principle of a free nation, in the immediate wake of a Democrat “victory,” no matter how fraudulently it is achieved.
Bio
Christopher G. Adamo is a lifelong conservative from the American Heartland. He has been involved in grassroots and state-level politics for years. His recently released book “Rules for Defeating Radicals,” subtitled “Countering the Alinsky Strategy in Politics and Culture,” is the “Go To” guide to effectively overcoming the dirty tricks of the political left. It is available at Amazon.
COVID-19 may take down an independent news outlet
Nobody said running a media site would be easy. We could use some help keeping this site afloat.
Colleagues have called me the worst fundraiser ever. My skills are squarely rooted on the journalistic side of running a news outlet. Paying the bills has never been my forte, but we’ve survived. We have ads on the site that help, but since the site’s inception this has been a labor of love that otherwise doesn’t bring in the level of revenue necessary to justify it.
When I left a nice, corporate career in 2017, I did so knowing I wouldn’t make nearly as much money. But what we do at NOQ Report to deliver the truth and fight the progressive mainstream media narrative that has plagued this nation is too important for me to sacrifice it for the sake of wealth. We know we’ll never make a ton of money this way, and we’re okay with that.
Things have become harder with the coronavirus lockdowns. Both ad money and donations that have kept us afloat for a while have dropped dramatically. We thought we could weather the storm, but the so-called “surge” or “2nd-wave” that mainstream media and Democrats are pushing has put our prospects in jeopardy. In short, we are now in desperate need of financial assistance.
“Nations, states, and central banks are quietly but rapidly shifting their money to precious metals. With bank runs, recession, CBDCs, and worse on the horizon, it’s easy to see why. NOW is the time to learn more about moving portions of your retirement or wealth to a self-directed gold and silver IRA through an America-First, Christian precious metals company.” – JD Rucker (not a financial advisor, just a guy who’s paying attention)
The best way NOQ Report readers can help is to donate. Our Giving Fuel page makes it easy to donate one-time or monthly. Alternatively, you can donate through PayPal as well. We need approximately $11,500 to stay afloat for the rest of 2020, but more would be wonderful and any amount that brings us closer to our goal is greatly appreciated.
The second way to help is to become a partner. We’ve strongly considered seeking angel investors in the past but because we were paying the bills, it didn’t seem necessary. Now, we’re struggling to pay the bills. This shouldn’t be the case as our traffic the last year has been going up dramatically. June, 2018, we had 11,678 visitors. A year later in June, 2019, we were up to 116,194. In June, 2020, we had 614,192. We’re heading in the right direction and we believe we’re ready talk to patriotic investors who want to not only “get in on the action” but more importantly who want to help America hear the truth. Interested investors should contact me directly with the contact button above.
Election year or not, coronavirus lockdowns or not, anarchic riots or not, the need for truthful journalism endures. But in these times, we need as many conservative media voices as possible. Please help keep NOQ Report going.
Check out the NEW NOQ Report Podcast.
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. The coronavirus crisis has prompted many, even some conservatives, to promote authoritarianism. It’s understandable to some extent now, but it must not be allowed to embed itself in American life. We currently have 8000+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--Twitter Locks Account of Ric Grenell over Voter Fraud Warning

Twitter locked the account of former acting Director of National Intelligence Ric Grenell after he shared an image of ballots sent to him by a friend living in California , who says they were addressed to his parents — who he claims have been dead for ten years .
“ He ’ s my friend in California , a very close friend of mine .
It ’ s his parents who were sent these ballots , and he gave me the photo , and he gave me permission.
” “ This is my position .
If Twitter is going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so concerned about community action , and me posting a photo that they ’ re concerned about — their community action focus should be at the Los Angeles County register of voters , who are sending dead people ballots , [ people ] who have been dead for ten years.
” “ Twitter has now responded back to me to say that you can delete the photo and the tweet and repost it after you black out their address .
Well , I ’ m not doing that because I have permission , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me to do that.
” “ I am the son of John and Gertrude Thompson .
Both passed away over ten years ago and got ballots for the upcoming election .
I gave Richard Grenell permission to post these pictures and ask for an investigation as to why they were mailed ballots for the 2020 election.
” Twitter has repeatedly censored discussion about mail-in voting fraud on its platform , including tweets from President Donald Trump .
In September , Twitter censored a tweet from the President urging voters in North Carolina to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to check at the polling locations that the vote has been counted .
In August , Twitter censored a tweet from the President warning that Democrat demands for ballot “ mail drop boxes ” would be a voting security disaster .
Earlier this month , multiple break-ins were reported at USPS mail boxes in Virginia , a swing state .
Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News .
His new book , # DELETED : Big Tech ’ s Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Google , Facebook , and other tech companies , is currently available for purchase .

Twitter locked the account of former acting Director of National Intelligence Ric Grenell after he shared an image of ballots sent to him by a friend living in California, who says they were addressed to his parents — who he claims have been dead for ten years.
“He’s my friend in California, a very close friend of mine. It’s his parents who were sent these ballots, and he gave me the photo, and he gave me permission.”
“This is my position. If Twitter is going to employ someone who is going to be so concerned about community action, and me posting a photo that they’re concerned about — their community action focus should be at the Los Angeles County register of voters, who are sending dead people ballots, [people] who have been dead for ten years.”
“Twitter has now responded back to me to say that you can delete the photo and the tweet and repost it after you black out their address. Well, I’m not doing that because I have permission, and they have no right to ask me to do that.”
I am the son of John and Gertrude Thompson. Both passed away over ten years ago and got ballots for the upcoming election. I gave Richard Grenell permission to post these pictures and ask for an investigation as to why they were mailed ballots for the 2020 election. pic.twitter.com/HcsIzvPk7k — Tom Thompson (@tthompson90277) October 8, 2020
Grenell’s friend, Tom Thompson, confirmed this in a tweet.
“I am the son of John and Gertrude Thompson. Both passed away over ten years ago and got ballots for the upcoming election. I gave Richard Grenell permission to post these pictures and ask for an investigation as to why they were mailed ballots for the 2020 election.”
Twitter has repeatedly censored discussion about mail-in voting fraud on its platform, including tweets from President Donald Trump.
In September, Twitter censored a tweet from the President urging voters in North Carolina to mail in their ballots early, and to check at the polling locations that the vote has been counted.
In August, Twitter censored a tweet from the President warning that Democrat demands for ballot “mail drop boxes” would be a voting security disaster. Earlier this month, multiple break-ins were reported at USPS mail boxes in Virginia, a swing state.
Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. His new book, #DELETED: Big Tech’s Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election, which contains exclusive interviews with sources inside Google, Facebook, and other tech companies, is currently available for purchase.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--Trigger a Liberal Snowflake With a “GET WOKE, GO BROKE” Shirt Available at The Liberty Daily Store!

Trigger a Liberal Snowflake With a “GET WOKE, GO BROKE” Shirt Available at The Liberty Daily Store! Get Yours Today!

Use left/right arrows to navigate the slideshow or swipe left/right if using a mobile device

Every piece of our merchandise is made with your values in mind. And a patriotic spirit lives within ALL of our customers, so wear your patriotism proudly.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--Billionaire Depopulationist Bill Gates on Track to Grow His Fortune Through Foundation’s Ties to Vac

Billionaire Depopulationist Bill Gates on Track to Grow His Fortune Through Foundation’s Ties to Vaccine Makers

Bill Gates on Track to Grow His Fortune Through Foundation ’ s Ties to Vaccine Makers A telling piece in The Nation this week reports some of the conflicts of interest the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation holds in the world ’ s quest for a COVID-19 vaccine .
According to the article , the foundation ’ s investments in companies working to develop COVID-19 vaccines put Gates “ in a position to potentially reap considerable financial gains from the COVID-19 pandemic.
” The Nation cites the example of the foundation ’ s $ 40 million stake in CureVac , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 400 % after going public in August .
A similar Nation article from earlier this year reported the Gates Foundation also holds corporate stocks and bonds in drug companies Merck , GlaxoSmithKline , Novartis and Sanofi , and the foundation gives these same companies charitable grants for projects like developing new drugs .
AstraZeneca , the British pharmaceutical company that gained an exclusive license to control the COVID-19 vaccine produced by Oxford University research , is considered a frontrunner in the vaccine race .
According to The Nation : “ Gates himself described @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partnership between AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford.
” Gates had the leverage to push the university … because the foundation is one of the founders and largest funders of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations , which in turn funds the University of Oxford ’ s vaccine development ( to the tune of some $ 384 million ) .
” AstraZeneca also received $ 750 million from the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization , an organization the Gates Foundation helped set up and continues to fund to this day .
Despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine , governments worldwide have already bought it , on the taxpayers dime .
Also notable is the Gates Foundation ’ s grants , totaling $ 20 million , to Moderna , whose vaccine has also been described as a COVID-19 frontrunner .
The foundation has a “ global health project framework agreement ” with the company , agreeing to give it up to $ 100 million to develop its mRNA technology , in exchange for receiving “ certain non-exclusive licenses , ” which have yet to be publicly specified .
Even with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ publicly disclose his conflicts of interest when appearing on TV as an expert on COVID-19 .
And , as The Nation reports , when Gates wrote an article in the New England Journal of Medicine , he simply listed his conflicts of interest as “ numerous.
” According to Forbes , Gates has seen his personal net worth increase by more than $ 10 billion since the onset of the pandemic .
Despite the Gates Foundation ’ s candid declaration to pursue “ mutually beneficial opportunities ” with vaccine manufacturers , it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the foundation ’ s conflicts of interest .
This may be because the foundation funds a number of major media outlets , including NPR , BBC , ABC and Al Jazeera , as well as publications like The Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times .
The Guardian ’ s entire “ Global Development ” section is made possible through a partnership with the Gates Foundation .
The foundation also invests in journalism training programs .
According to the Seattle Times , “ experts coached in Gates-funded programs write columns that appear in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Huffington Post , while digital portals blur the line between journalism and spin.
” According to Robert F. Kennedy , Jr. , chairman of Children ’ s Health Defense , The Nation ’ s exposé “ is a refreshing change for those searching for critical reporting on the self-declared ‘ biggest funder of vaccines in the world .
’ ”

Bill Gates on Track to Grow His Fortune Through Foundation’s Ties to Vaccine Makers
By Jeremy Loffredo Link copied
A telling piece in The Nation this week reports some of the conflicts of interest the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation holds in the world’s quest for a COVID-19 vaccine. According to the article, the foundation’s investments in companies working to develop COVID-19 vaccines put Gates “in a position to potentially reap considerable financial gains from the COVID-19 pandemic.”
The Nation cites the example of the foundation’s $40 million stake in CureVac, a German pharmaceutical company whose stock soared 400% after going public in August. A similar Nation article from earlier this year reported the Gates Foundation also holds corporate stocks and bonds in drug companies Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis and Sanofi, and the foundation gives these same companies charitable grants for projects like developing new drugs.
AstraZeneca, the British pharmaceutical company that gained an exclusive license to control the COVID-19 vaccine produced by Oxford University research, is considered a frontrunner in the vaccine race. According to The Nation: “Gates himself described his foundation as intimately involved in the partnership between AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford.” Gates had the leverage to push the university … because the foundation is one of the founders and largest funders of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, which in turn funds the University of Oxford’s vaccine development (to the tune of some $384 million).”
AstraZeneca also received $750 million from the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, an organization the Gates Foundation helped set up and continues to fund to this day. Despite questions on the safety of the AstraZeneca vaccine, governments worldwide have already bought it, on the taxpayers dime.
Also notable is the Gates Foundation’s grants, totaling $20 million, to Moderna, whose vaccine has also been described as a COVID-19 frontrunner. The foundation has a “global health project framework agreement” with the company, agreeing to give it up to $100 million to develop its mRNA technology, in exchange for receiving “certain non-exclusive licenses,” which have yet to be publicly specified.
Even with all this, Gates doesn’t publicly disclose his conflicts of interest when appearing on TV as an expert on COVID-19. And, as The Nation reports, when Gates wrote an article in the New England Journal of Medicine, he simply listed his conflicts of interest as “numerous.” According to Forbes, Gates has seen his personal net worth increase by more than $10 billion since the onset of the pandemic.
Despite the Gates Foundation’s candid declaration to pursue “mutually beneficial opportunities” with vaccine manufacturers, it is rare to find reporting in mainstream media on the foundation’s conflicts of interest. This may be because the foundation funds a number of major media outlets, including NPR, BBC, ABC and Al Jazeera, as well as publications like The Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times. The Guardian’s entire “Global Development” section is made possible through a partnership with the Gates Foundation.
The foundation also invests in journalism training programs. According to the Seattle Times, “experts coached in Gates-funded programs write columns that appear in media outlets from The New York Times to the Huffington Post, while digital portals blur the line between journalism and spin.”
According to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense, The Nation’s exposé “is a refreshing change for those searching for critical reporting on the self-declared ‘biggest funder of vaccines in the world.’”
Jeremy Loffredo is a reporter for Children’s Health Defense.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--Punk Icon John Lydon Says He Is Voting for President Trump

John Lydon , punk icon front man of the Sex Pistols and Public Image Ltd. , told the BBC in an interview that aired Thursday he is voting for President Trump in November ’ s presidential election , saying the Democrats have destroyed his home state of California .
Lydon immigrated from the United Kingdom years ago and became a U.S. citizen in 2013 , citing his support for Obamacare .
Lydon said he thought Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden is senile , basing that observation on his experience being a caregiver for his wife Nora Forster who has Alzheimer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : President Trump Announces He Will Not Participate in Next Debate After Presidential Debate Commission Changes Debate Format to Virtual to Help Joe Biden ( VIDEO ) On the lockdowns : “ I don ’ t think lockdown is doing any good for anybody .
Wrecking an economy is not the smartest move to cure any illness or virus or disease .
I mean we ’ re all capable of wearing masks .
We ’ re all smart enough not to want to give each other filthy horrible viruses .
Give people the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just close everything down…We ’ re being imprisoned , slowly but surely.
” On not working : “ What bothers me quite a lot , and I don ’ t mean to sound selfish with this cuz it directly affects everybody equally , is that I can ’ t function .
Live performance was the essence of Public Image Ltd. And to be denied that , well that ’ s , that ’ s crippling us and no doubt at some point if that continues will kill us off .
And will kill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all industries .
If we can ’ t work , right , well , us working class are going to get up and do something about that at some point.
” On Democrats : “ Seems to me that what the Democrats here in America are promising will be tax hikes beyond belief , more lockdowns , more confusion , more bureaucracy and less answers…Yes , I am ( voting Republican ) , oh I ’ m going to definitely…I have seen what Democrats have done to California .
They have destroyed this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Well , he ’ s , he ’ s an individual thinker , I ’ ll give him that for a start .
He ’ s not the most lovable fellow on God ’ s earth .
But I can not see the opposition as offering me anything by way of a solution .
Joe Biden is , is in all practicality senile .
And delinquently senile .
My wife has Alzheimer ’ s , I know the symptoms , bugger that… ” “ Yes , of course I ’ m voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person or not .
I don ’ t want a politician running this world anymore…A businessman is a challenge to me .
Because I could definitely do with some , quite a few tips on how to run me home a little more efficiently !
” Video from 2018 of Lydon talking about why he became an American citizen : Lydon was seen in New Orleans on tour in 2018 wearing a MAGA shirt .

John Lydon, punk icon front man of the Sex Pistols and Public Image Ltd., told the BBC in an interview that aired Thursday he is voting for President Trump in November’s presidential election, saying the Democrats have destroyed his home state of California. Lydon immigrated from the United Kingdom years ago and became a U.S. citizen in 2013, citing his support for Obamacare.
Lydon said he thought Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden is senile, basing that observation on his experience being a caregiver for his wife Nora Forster who has Alzheimer’s disease.
Lydon railed against the COVID lockdowns.
Book cover for John Lydon’s latest book, released 2020.
Lydon promoted the interview on Twitter:
John Lydon interview – BBC World Service, Newsday, October 8th 2020
(Scroll to 16:37-23:00 mins)https://t.co/7BiOB1i3qf — John Lydon Official (@lydonofficial) October 8, 2020
Direct link (16:37-23:00)
Excerpts.
On the lockdowns: “I don’t think lockdown is doing any good for anybody. Wrecking an economy is not the smartest move to cure any illness or virus or disease. I mean we’re all capable of wearing masks. We’re all smart enough not to want to give each other filthy horrible viruses. Give people the chance to work. Don’t just close everything down…We’re being imprisoned, slowly but surely.”
On not working: “What bothers me quite a lot, and I don’t mean to sound selfish with this cuz it directly affects everybody equally, is that I can’t function. Live performance was the essence of Public Image Ltd. And to be denied that, well that’s, that’s crippling us and no doubt at some point if that continues will kill us off. And will kill off everything. It will kill off all industries. If we can’t work, right, well, us working class are going to get up and do something about that at some point.”
On Democrats: “Seems to me that what the Democrats here in America are promising will be tax hikes beyond belief, more lockdowns, more confusion, more bureaucracy and less answers…Yes, I am (voting Republican), oh I’m going to definitely…I have seen what Democrats have done to California. They have destroyed this place.”
On voting for Trump: “Well, he’s, he’s an individual thinker, I’ll give him that for a start. He’s not the most lovable fellow on God’s earth. But I cannot see the opposition as offering me anything by way of a solution. Joe Biden is, is in all practicality senile. And delinquently senile. My wife has Alzheimer’s, I know the symptoms, bugger that…”
“Yes, of course I’m voting for Trump, it’s bad person or not. I don’t want a politician running this world anymore…A businessman is a challenge to me. Because I could definitely do with some, quite a few tips on how to run me home a little more efficiently!”
Transcribed by TGP.
Video from 2018 of Lydon talking about why he became an American citizen:
Lydon was seen in New Orleans on tour in 2018 wearing a MAGA shirt.
Public Image video, song that bracketed the interview.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--WATCH: Reagan’s 1964 Speech Perfectly Describes 2020’s ‘Democratic Socialists’

The Left never quite understood why we hold Reagan in such high regard .
They think it has something to do with taxes and the economy .
Or the military .
Or the Berlin Wall .
It ’ s more than that .
With uncommon clarity , Ronaldus Magnus understood the choice that lay before us then and — by extension — which continues to lay before us now .
The siren song of socialism isn ’ t merely a minor adjustment to the system we now have .
It ’ s a dismantling and rebuilding it in a different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Even back then , when Bernie Sanders was still young , the left tried to slap the word ‘ democratic ’ onto the socialist promises .
But Reagan saw through the high language to the root ideas .
Trending : Mob Forms Outside Christian Leader ’ s West Texas Home After Chinese Agent Calls For His Murder Here is a portion of the Great Communicator ’ s now-famous ‘ A Time For Choosing ’ Speech , a speech so memorable that it is often referred to as simply ‘ The Speech ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee , a businessman who had escaped from Castro , and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said , “ We don ’ t know how lucky we are.
” And the Cuban stopped and said , “ How lucky you are ?
I had someplace to escape to.
” And in that sentence he told us the entire story .
If we lose freedom here , there ’ s no place to escape to .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And this idea that government is beholden to the people , that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people , is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man ’ s relation to man .
This is the issue of this election : whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increasingly we have to choose between a left or right .
Well I ’ d like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right .
There ’ s only an up or down : [ up ] man ’ s old — old-aged dream , the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order , or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism .
And regardless of their sincerity , their humanitarian motives , those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use terms like the “ Great Society , ” or as we were told a few days ago by the President , we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people .
But they ’ ve been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves ; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print .
These are not Republican accusations .
For example , they have voices that say , “ The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The profit motive has become outmoded .
It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state.
” Or , “ Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century.
” Senator Fulbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded .
He referred to the President as “ our moral teacher and our leader , ” and he says he is “ hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he “ can do for us ” what he knows “ is best.
” And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania , another articulate spokesman , defines liberalism as “ meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government.
” Well , I , for one , resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me , the free men and women of this country , as “ the masses.
” This is a term we haven ’ t applied to ourselves in America .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ power of centralized government ” — this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize .
They knew that governments don ’ t control things .
A government can ’ t control the economy without controlling people .
And they know when a government sets out to do that , it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose .
They also knew , those Founding Fathers , that outside of its legitimate functions , government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – as Patriots do now — that Americans are free citizens , and not ‘ the masses ’ .
Which goes to the point of the matter .
Patriots bled the ground red in 1776 , in 1812 , in the Civil War , through the 20th Century and beyond explicitly because we REJECTED the idea that a powerful cluster of men could wield overwhelming control over the a nation of citizens .
The only way a government can even attempt to make good on that socialist promise is to exert control .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the state .
The more power and authority we place in the hands of a few decision-makers in government buildings somewhere , the less control a free citizen has over his own options .
Unlike money , political power truly IS a zero-sum game .
Whenever the government gets more , it is only because the individual now has less .
The Framers put as much of that power as possible in the hands of an individual .
Socialists shift that into the hands of a few cloistered decision-makers and power-brokers in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem with that exchange .
Traditional red-blooded Americans are NOT an example of such people .

The Left never quite understood why we hold Reagan in such high regard. They think it has something to do with taxes and the economy. Or the military. Or the Berlin Wall. It’s more than that.
With uncommon clarity, Ronaldus Magnus understood the choice that lay before us then and — by extension — which continues to lay before us now.
The siren song of socialism isn’t merely a minor adjustment to the system we now have. It’s a dismantling and rebuilding it in a different image, according to vastly different principles.
Even back then, when Bernie Sanders was still young, the left tried to slap the word ‘democratic’ onto the socialist promises. But Reagan saw through the high language to the root ideas.
Here is a portion of the Great Communicator’s now-famous ‘A Time For Choosing’ Speech, a speech so memorable that it is often referred to as simply ‘The Speech’.
Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, “We don’t know how lucky we are.” And the Cuban stopped and said, “How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to.” And in that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there’s no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth. And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man’s relation to man. This is the issue of this election: whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves. You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I’d like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There’s only an up or down: [up] man’s old — old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course. In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the “Great Society,” or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they’ve been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say, “The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism.” Another voice says, “The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state.” Or, “Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century.” Senator Fulbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as “our moral teacher and our leader,” and he says he is “hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document.” He must “be freed,” so that he “can do for us” what he knows “is best.” And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as “meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government.” Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as “the masses.” This is a term we haven’t applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, “the full power of centralized government” — this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don’t control things. A government can’t control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy. — Full Transcript here
Reagan understood – as Patriots do now — that Americans are free citizens, and not ‘the masses’.
Which goes to the point of the matter.
Patriots bled the ground red in 1776, in 1812, in the Civil War, through the 20th Century and beyond explicitly because we REJECTED the idea that a powerful cluster of men could wield overwhelming control over the a nation of citizens.
The only way a government can even attempt to make good on that socialist promise is to exert control. Force and coercion are the blunt instruments of the state.
The more power and authority we place in the hands of a few decision-makers in government buildings somewhere, the less control a free citizen has over his own options.
Unlike money, political power truly IS a zero-sum game. Whenever the government gets more, it is only because the individual now has less.
The Framers put as much of that power as possible in the hands of an individual.
Socialists shift that into the hands of a few cloistered decision-makers and power-brokers in back rooms.
Some people see no problem with that exchange.
Traditional red-blooded Americans are NOT an example of such people.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--Mob Forms Outside Christian Leader’s West Texas Home After Chi-Com Agent Calls For His Murder

Why does religious liberty matter ?
Because in socialist dictatorships , ‘ cancel culture ’ means much more than having your social media presence go dark .
Just ask Chinese Pastor Bob Fu .
Democrats have been strangely silent when angry mobs threatening violence target the private homes of those whose political slant they hate .
Tucker Carlson and Mitch McConnel come to mind .
One of the Republican senators mentioned the window in his home being broken since the Amy Coney Barrett nomination .
We have seen similar BLM and Antifa mobs harassing elected officials in their homes over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ personalizing political disagreements sets a dangerous precedent .
It takes us one step closer to the kind of world that Soviet Russia and Communist China know all too well — the kind of threat that Hong Kong students were fighting so desperately to stop from swallowing their part of the world .
Latest : Is Biden Coming For Your Guns ?
To Quote Beto , 'Hell Yes ' -- It 's Right There On His Website The founder of Chinese Christian human rights group China Aid , Pastor Bob Fu , is in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calls by a Chinese billionaire to kill him and a “ protest ” outside his Texas home .
…Fu is the founder of China Aid , a nonprofit that offers support to persecuted Chinese Christians and raises awareness regarding specific acts by the Communist Party to erase Christianity from the country .
Estimates suggest China is home to as many as 97 million Christians , more than the number of formal members of the Communist Party .
Fu and his wife are former political prisoners , imprisoned in 1996 for openly practicing Christianity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fu personally participated in the June 1989 Tiananmen Square protests .
The pastor commonly attends events in favor of religious freedom in China and has not been the focus of any significant controversy in his career as an activist .
According to the Midland Reporter-Telegram , Fu ’ s hometown newspaper , an independent translation of several Guo GTV videos show that he has openly called for his followers to kill Fu .
Guo reportedly called for a “ global kill cheaters campaign ” to kill people like Fu , who he claimed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fully support our comrades who take actions to kill those cheaters , ” Guo said .
Some appear to have responded to Guo ’ s call .
A mob of Guo fans appeared in front of Fu ’ s home in late September , a week after Guo released his first rap single , and then again on Monday .
In a statement , China Aid explained the situation .
What is China Aid ?
A screencap of their website might give you a clue… Not exactly something China ’ s Communist Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case you were wondering whether the President ’ s attitude toward China in this next term matters for things like Guo has posted several videos to GTV ’ s social media pages “ exposing ” Fu and others he claims are working with the CCP .
English subtitles of some of the videos provided by ChinaAid , a nonprofit founded by Fu , show Guo telling his followers about a “ global kill cheaters campaign , ” which includes Fu .
“ We will fully support our comrades who take actions to kill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one video , according to the subtitles .
The accuracy of the subtitles was verified for the Reporter-Telegram by a third-party Mandarin speaker .
In another video , Guo refers to those he has launched campaigns against and allegedly says , “ How can we kill CCP if we can not kill them first ?
” Fu said he ’ s never met Guo and believes he might be a target because of his work with ChinaAid , which provides legal assistance to Christians who have been arrested in China .
There are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from religious or ethnic minorities currently in Chinese internment camps .
The alleged threats against Fu are being investigated by the FBI and CIA , Payton said Monday .
“ I think that this is a wake-up call for us , ” Fu said .
“ Knowing that we need to be vigilant and not take our freedom for granted.
” …Fu thanked Midlanders for supporting him and said he and his family are safe .
For those who have asked how to help , he urged community members to learn more about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government .
The ChinaAid office has been closed as a precaution but staff are continuing to work remotely , Fu said.–MRT Rules For Radical Christians is not a survival devotional designed to help the young Christian adult limp through life .
Rather , it is a road-tested , dominion blueprint that will equip the young adult with leadership skills and sufficient motivation to rise to a place of influence in an overtly non-Christian culture .
Rules For Radical Christians gives the reader the keys to become strategically equipped to move into an anti-theistic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ glory of God .
You can choose either the classic Paperback to trigger your college professors and quasi-communist classmates , or the Kindle edition to always have it on hand .

Why does religious liberty matter? Because in socialist dictatorships, ‘cancel culture’ means much more than having your social media presence go dark. Just ask Chinese Pastor Bob Fu.
Democrats have been strangely silent when angry mobs threatening violence target the private homes of those whose political slant they hate. Tucker Carlson and Mitch McConnel come to mind.
One of the Republican senators mentioned the window in his home being broken since the Amy Coney Barrett nomination.
We have seen similar BLM and Antifa mobs harassing elected officials in their homes over political disagreements. Normalizing this behavior and personalizing political disagreements sets a dangerous precedent. It takes us one step closer to the kind of world that Soviet Russia and Communist China know all too well — the kind of threat that Hong Kong students were fighting so desperately to stop from swallowing their part of the world.
The founder of Chinese Christian human rights group China Aid, Pastor Bob Fu, is in hiding with his family this week following calls by a Chinese billionaire to kill him and a “protest” outside his Texas home. …Fu is the founder of China Aid, a nonprofit that offers support to persecuted Chinese Christians and raises awareness regarding specific acts by the Communist Party to erase Christianity from the country. Estimates suggest China is home to as many as 97 million Christians, more than the number of formal members of the Communist Party. Fu and his wife are former political prisoners, imprisoned in 1996 for openly practicing Christianity (“illegal evangelism”); Fu personally participated in the June 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. The pastor commonly attends events in favor of religious freedom in China and has not been the focus of any significant controversy in his career as an activist. According to the Midland Reporter-Telegram, Fu’s hometown newspaper, an independent translation of several Guo GTV videos show that he has openly called for his followers to kill Fu. Guo reportedly called for a “global kill cheaters campaign” to kill people like Fu, who he claimed was a communist. “We will fully support our comrades who take actions to kill those cheaters,” Guo said. Some appear to have responded to Guo’s call. A mob of Guo fans appeared in front of Fu’s home in late September, a week after Guo released his first rap single, and then again on Monday. In a statement, China Aid explained the situation.
Ted Cruz threw his support behind Fu.
Shameful: CCP is targeting an American citizen @BobFu4China, in America, for harassment at his home. Bob is a fearless voice for human rights in China & Xi and the other despots fear him. The Chinese Communist Party is the new Evil Empire & we must stand united against them. https://t.co/5sSz0v5Te1 — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) October 8, 2020
What is China Aid? A screencap of their website might give you a clue…
Not exactly something China’s Communist Party would approve of, eh?
Fu and his family were evacuated from their home Monday morning and moved to a safe location after a group of about 50 protesters arrived on a bus outside their residence. Midland Mayor Patrick Payton said during a press conference that afternoon that local and federal agencies were investigating alleged threats on Fu’s life. —MRT
In case you were wondering whether the President’s attitude toward China in this next term matters for things like
Guo has posted several videos to GTV’s social media pages “exposing” Fu and others he claims are working with the CCP. English subtitles of some of the videos provided by ChinaAid, a nonprofit founded by Fu, show Guo telling his followers about a “global kill cheaters campaign,” which includes Fu. “We will fully support our comrades who take actions to kill those cheaters,” Guo says in one video, according to the subtitles. The accuracy of the subtitles was verified for the Reporter-Telegram by a third-party Mandarin speaker. In another video, Guo refers to those he has launched campaigns against and allegedly says, “How can we kill CCP if we cannot kill them first?” Fu said he’s never met Guo and believes he might be a target because of his work with ChinaAid, which provides legal assistance to Christians who have been arrested in China. There are estimated to be over 1 million people from religious or ethnic minorities currently in Chinese internment camps. The alleged threats against Fu are being investigated by the FBI and CIA, Payton said Monday. “I think that this is a wake-up call for us,” Fu said. “Knowing that we need to be vigilant and not take our freedom for granted.” …Fu thanked Midlanders for supporting him and said he and his family are safe. For those who have asked how to help, he urged community members to learn more about the CCP and persecution by the Chinese government. The ChinaAid office has been closed as a precaution but staff are continuing to work remotely, Fu said.–MRT
Get Doug Giles’ new book:
Rules For Radical Christians is not a survival devotional designed to help the young Christian adult limp through life. Rather, it is a road-tested, dominion blueprint that will equip the young adult with leadership skills and sufficient motivation to rise to a place of influence in an overtly non-Christian culture. Rules For Radical Christians gives the reader the keys to become strategically equipped to move into an anti-theistic environment and effectively influence it for the glory of God.
Get yours today!
You can choose either the classic Paperback to trigger your college professors and quasi-communist classmates, or the Kindle edition to always have it on hand.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-10--Socialist-Themed Vegan Meat Company Learns Marxism Works Better in Theory Than Practice

With products like Comrade Cluck ( a plant meat , not actual chicken ) , No Evil Foods has had success casting itself as a “ revolutionary ” food company that embodies progressive values .
But the company is learning marketing progressive ideas is easier than implementing socialist-style economics .
For months , company leaders have been resisting a unionization effort by workers at their Weaverville , North Carolina plant .
“ I sincerely believe that right now a union would be a terrible thing for you and for No Evil Foods , ” Mike Woliansky , the co-founder and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his employees earlier this year .
“ You could get the same thing you currently have .
You could get less than you currently have .
I don ’ t think you need a union voice here.
” The unionization effort at No Evil Foods , a vegan foods brand whose foods can be found in more than 5,500 retail stores ( including Whole Foods ) , lost .
On Feb. 13 employees voted 43-15 against unionizing .
But the battle wasn ’ t over .
Two of the union organizers were later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and dress policies .
Earlier this month , VICE News reported that the National Labor Relations Board issued a federal complaint saying the claim that the employees were unlawfully terminated had merit , saying No Evil Foods fired the workers because they `` assisted a union '' and `` circulat [ ed ] a petition seeking hazard pay ... for the purposes of mutual aid and protection . ''
No Evil Foods denied the firings were retaliatory .
Workers disagreed , saying the company was not truly progressive .
“ They ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ causes , ” Jon Reynolds , an ex-employee of No Evil Foods who was one of the fired workers , told Jacobin .
It ’ s possible No Evil Foods employees are right and the revolutionary themes are simply a marketing ploy intended to attract progressive customers .
On the other hand , another scenario is possible : Mike Woliansky and fellow No Evil Foods co-founder Sadrah Schadel are deeply progressive but also self-interested humans trying to make a business succeed .
It wouldn ’ t be the first time economic reality collided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Media was forced to cut 200 bloggers at SB Nation after California passed Assembly Bill 5 , legislation that forced numerous industries to change the status of workers from freelancers to actual employees .
Some astute observers pointed out that the firings came just a few months after Vox , a progressive media brand , had championed AB5 as a “ victory for workers everywhere.
” A similar scenario could be at play at No Evil Foods .
Woliansky might be someone who is progressive but also realizes unionization could cause serious problems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While firing workers in retaliation for organizing is indeed against the law—the 1935 National Labor Relations Act makes it unlawful for employers to retaliate against workers attempting to form unions—there is nothing wrong with attempting to persuade workers that forming a union could harm both the company and their own interests .
One of the ways unions hurt labor is they actually decrease overall wages .
Economists have long pointed out that wages are tied to productivity .
As Milton Friedman has observed , in a free market wage growth comes from increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raised wages—either by labor unions or minimum wage—can only come at the expense of other workers who find their opportunities reduced .
“ When unions get higher wages for their members by restricting entry into an occupation , those higher wages are at the expense of other workers who find their opportunities reduced , ” Friedman explained .
But reduced employment is not the only cost .
As economist George Reisman has observed , labor unions decrease wages because they decrease productivity .
“ From the perspective of most of those lucky enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious consequence of the unions is the holding down or outright reduction of the productivity of labor .
With few exceptions , the labor unions openly combat the rise in the productivity of labor .
They do so virtually as a matter of principle .
They oppose the introduction of labor-saving machinery on the grounds that it causes unemployment .
They oppose competition among workers .
As Henry Hazlitt pointed out , they force employers to tolerate featherbedding practices , such as the classic requirement that firemen , whose function was to shovel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on diesel locomotives .
They impose make-work schemes , such as requiring that pipe delivered to construction sites with screw thread already on it , have its ends cut off and new screw thread cut on the site .
They impose narrow work classifications , and require that specialists be employed at a day ’ s pay to perform work that others could easily do — for example , requiring the employment of a plasterer to repair the incidental damage done to a wall by an electrician , which the electrician himself could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the role of the productivity of labor in raising real wages , it should be obvious that the unions ’ policy of combating the rise in the productivity of labor renders them in fact a leading enemy of the rise in real wages .
However radical this conclusion may seem , however much at odds it is with the prevailing view of the unions as the leading source of the rise in real wages over the last hundred and fifty years or more , the fact is that in combating the rise in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actively combat the rise in real wages !
” Are Woliansky and Schadel familiar with the economic theories of Friedman and Reisman ?
Perhaps not .
But as business owners they likely are keenly aware that raising wages without increasing productivity would result in a loss of workers , less production , and less capital investment .
The Marxist theory of labor rejects all of this , of course .
In his seminal work Capital ( 1867 ) , Marx explained his theory : a commodity ’ s value can be measured simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it takes to produce .
If it takes twice as long to produce an iPhone as an Apple Watch , then the iPhone is twice as valuable as the Apple Watch .
Hence , the competitive price of an iPhone will be twice that of the Apple Watch , in the long run , regardless of the physical inputs required .
Marx ’ s labor theory of value was debunked more than a century ago , of course .
Yet his ideas live on .
It ’ s unclear if the leaders of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call themselves Marxists , but the showdown has all the marks of the endless struggle Marx saw between the bourgeois and the proletariat .
Unfortunately for the owners of No Evil Foods , they 're learning the hard way that socialist principles are as problematic in practice as they are in theory .

With products like Comrade Cluck (a plant meat, not actual chicken), No Evil Foods has had success casting itself as a “revolutionary” food company that embodies progressive values.
But the company is learning marketing progressive ideas is easier than implementing socialist-style economics.
For months, company leaders have been resisting a unionization effort by workers at their Weaverville, North Carolina plant.
“I sincerely believe that right now a union would be a terrible thing for you and for No Evil Foods,” Mike Woliansky, the co-founder and CEO of No Evil Foods, told his employees earlier this year. “You could get the same thing you currently have. You could get less than you currently have. I don’t think you need a union voice here.”
Woliansky’s words apparently had an impact.
The unionization effort at No Evil Foods, a vegan foods brand whose foods can be found in more than 5,500 retail stores (including Whole Foods), lost. On Feb. 13 employees voted 43-15 against unionizing. But the battle wasn’t over.
Two of the union organizers were later fired, allegedly for violating social distancing and dress policies.
Earlier this month, VICE News reported that the National Labor Relations Board issued a federal complaint saying the claim that the employees were unlawfully terminated had merit, saying No Evil Foods fired the workers because they "assisted a union" and "circulat[ed] a petition seeking hazard pay...for the purposes of mutual aid and protection."
No Evil Foods denied the firings were retaliatory. Workers disagreed, saying the company was not truly progressive.
“They’re pretending they’re allies of leftist causes,” Jon Reynolds, an ex-employee of No Evil Foods who was one of the fired workers, told Jacobin.
When Economic Reality Collides With Ideals
It’s possible No Evil Foods employees are right and the revolutionary themes are simply a marketing ploy intended to attract progressive customers. On the other hand, another scenario is possible: Mike Woliansky and fellow No Evil Foods co-founder Sadrah Schadel are deeply progressive but also self-interested humans trying to make a business succeed.
It wouldn’t be the first time economic reality collided with progressive values. Last year Vox Media was forced to cut 200 bloggers at SB Nation after California passed Assembly Bill 5, legislation that forced numerous industries to change the status of workers from freelancers to actual employees.
Some astute observers pointed out that the firings came just a few months after Vox, a progressive media brand, had championed AB5 as a “victory for workers everywhere.”
I kinda hate this meme but this is too perfect
Shot / Chaser pic.twitter.com/quAPTaG3w7 — Eric Boehm (@EricBoehm87) December 17, 2019
A similar scenario could be at play at No Evil Foods. Woliansky might be someone who is progressive but also realizes unionization could cause serious problems for both his company and workers.
While firing workers in retaliation for organizing is indeed against the law—the 1935 National Labor Relations Act makes it unlawful for employers to retaliate against workers attempting to form unions—there is nothing wrong with attempting to persuade workers that forming a union could harm both the company and their own interests.
One of the ways unions hurt labor is they actually decrease overall wages. Economists have long pointed out that wages are tied to productivity.
As Milton Friedman has observed, in a free market wage growth comes from increased productivity and greater capital investment. Artificially raised wages—either by labor unions or minimum wage—can only come at the expense of other workers who find their opportunities reduced.
“When unions get higher wages for their members by restricting entry into an occupation, those higher wages are at the expense of other workers who find their opportunities reduced,” Friedman explained.
But reduced employment is not the only cost. As economist George Reisman has observed, labor unions decrease wages because they decrease productivity.
“From the perspective of most of those lucky enough to keep their jobs, the most serious consequence of the unions is the holding down or outright reduction of the productivity of labor. With few exceptions, the labor unions openly combat the rise in the productivity of labor. They do so virtually as a matter of principle. They oppose the introduction of labor-saving machinery on the grounds that it causes unemployment. They oppose competition among workers. As Henry Hazlitt pointed out, they force employers to tolerate featherbedding practices, such as the classic requirement that firemen, whose function was to shovel coal on steam locomotives, be retained on diesel locomotives. They impose make-work schemes, such as requiring that pipe delivered to construction sites with screw thread already on it, have its ends cut off and new screw thread cut on the site. They impose narrow work classifications, and require that specialists be employed at a day’s pay to perform work that others could easily do — for example, requiring the employment of a plasterer to repair the incidental damage done to a wall by an electrician, which the electrician himself could easily repair. To anyone who understands the role of the productivity of labor in raising real wages, it should be obvious that the unions’ policy of combating the rise in the productivity of labor renders them in fact a leading enemy of the rise in real wages. However radical this conclusion may seem, however much at odds it is with the prevailing view of the unions as the leading source of the rise in real wages over the last hundred and fifty years or more, the fact is that in combating the rise in the productivity of labor, the unions actively combat the rise in real wages!”
Are Woliansky and Schadel familiar with the economic theories of Friedman and Reisman? Perhaps not.
But as business owners they likely are keenly aware that raising wages without increasing productivity would result in a loss of workers, less production, and less capital investment.
The Marxist theory of labor rejects all of this, of course. In his seminal work Capital (1867), Marx explained his theory: a commodity’s value can be measured simply by breaking down the number of hours it takes to produce.
If it takes twice as long to produce an iPhone as an Apple Watch, then the iPhone is twice as valuable as the Apple Watch. Hence, the competitive price of an iPhone will be twice that of the Apple Watch, in the long run, regardless of the physical inputs required.
Marx’s labor theory of value was debunked more than a century ago, of course. Yet his ideas live on.
It’s unclear if the leaders of No Evil Foods or their workers would call themselves Marxists, but the showdown has all the marks of the endless struggle Marx saw between the bourgeois and the proletariat.
Unfortunately for the owners of No Evil Foods, they're learning the hard way that socialist principles are as problematic in practice as they are in theory.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-10--Swiss City Geneva Votes for World-Record $25 Hourly Minimum Wage

Debate over the minimum wage has been at the forefront of American politics in recent years .
Progressives argue that we need to mandate a “ living wage ” of $ 15 an hour under federal law , and this is now the official position of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden .
Meanwhile , most Republicans argue against increasing the minimum wage .
Conservative critics point to studies and real-world examples showing how wage floors backfire and hurt workers .
Yet the American debate over a $ 15 minimum wage looks rather quaint compared to the extreme minimum wage policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the latest example of Europe ’ s embrace of progressive economic policy , the Swiss city of Geneva just voted to implement a minimum wage that translates to $ 25 an hour , or $ 4,100 a month .
“ The introduction of a minimum wage is a fundamental requirement of justice , and an essential measure against precariousness , ” said Alexander Eniline of the left-wing Swiss Labor Party , the Guardian reports .
The measure is intended to combat poverty in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing economic crisis .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ massive minimum wage hike will only reduce employment and hurt many workers it ’ s meant to help .
People tend to think of labor differently from other goods , but the labor market essentially works the same as any other market .
Labor is the “ good ” being provided by workers , and the wages are the “ price ” being paid by employers .
“ Minimum wage laws make it illegal to pay less than the government specified price for labor , ” famed free-market economist Thomas Sowell explained in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the simplest and most basic economics , a price artificially raised tends to cause more to be supplied and less to be demanded than when prices are left to be determined by supply and demand in a free market .
The result is a surplus , whether the price that is set artificially high is that of farm produce or labor.
” Think about it like this .
Imagine that you went to the convenience store to buy a can of Red Bull , and it was worth up to $ 5 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saw that the price tag was set at $ 20 due to a government mandate .
What would you do ?
You ’ d almost certainly just put the can back down and walk away without purchasing it , not shell out $ 20 .
Or , maybe you ’ d buy a Coca-Cola instead .
Labor really is no different .
If you mandate that employers pay more for labor than it is worth to them , they will buy less of it .
“ Making it illegal to pay less than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worker ’ s productivity worth that amount— and , if it is not , that worker is unlikely to be employed , ” Sowell writes .
“ Unfortunately , the real minimum wage is always zero , regardless of the laws , and that is the wage that many workers receive in the wake of the creation or escalation of a government-mandated minimum wage , because they either lose their jobs or fail to find jobs when they enter the labor force.
” A 2017 study of Seattle ’ s $ 13 minimum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worked by 9 percent , leading total income for impacted workers to actually decrease on net .
So , it ’ s no surprise that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office ( CBO ) found that enacting a $ 15 minimum wage nationwide would destroy up to 3.7 million jobs and decrease total income for Americans below the poverty line by roughly $ 16 billion .
The Washington Examiner ’ s Tiana Lowe wrote that the research “ disproves the idea that a $ 15 federal minimum wage creates any net benefit ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problems plaguing our economy , on the whole creating more new problems than it solves.
” “ The main finding of economic theory and empirical research over the past 70 years is that minimum wage increases tend to reduce employment , ” the Cato Institute concluded in a research review .
“ While minimum wages ostensibly aim to improve the economic well-being of the working poor , the disemployment effects of minimum wages have been found to fall disproportionately on the least skilled and on the most disadvantaged individuals , including the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigrants , and ethnic minorities.
” This brings to mind the words of the late Nobel-prize-winning economist Milton Friedman : “ The real tragedy of minimum wage laws is that they are supported by well-meaning groups who want to reduce poverty .
But the people who are hurt most by higher minimums are the most poverty stricken.
” Decades later , most economists still agree with Friedman .
A 2019 survey by the Employment Policies Institute found that 75 percent of professional economists oppose increasing the minimum wage to $ 15 an hour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In an interesting twist , almost all the responding economists identified as Democrats or Independents , with just 12 percent identifying as registered Republicans .
Some might look at the Swiss example and say , okay , sure , we can ’ t have a crazy $ 25 minimum wage… but why not something more modest like Biden ’ s $ 15 ?
Surely that wouldn ’ t be as bad , right ?
It ’ s true that the economic harm of minimum wage laws increases the higher the cap .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minimum wage doesn ’ t work applies to a $ 15 minimum wage or any other , really .
Minimum wage proponents have no good answer to a simple question : Why just $ 25 an hour ?
If creating wealth and defeating poverty is as simple as passing a government wage mandate , why not make it $ 100 an hour and have us all swimming in prosperity ?
The reality is that artificially mandating higher wages can not force employers to pay more than workers are worth to them , particularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or embracing automation .
This is just as true for Biden ’ s $ 15 minimum wage as it is for Geneva ’ s record-setting $ 25 hourly mandate .
It applies to any minimum wage above the market rate .
This is a rare issue where there remains clear consensus among economists and experts regardless of partisan or political affiliation .
So why do politicians keep pushing minimum wage hikes ?
It ’ s simple : Broad swaths of the public still naively support hiking the minimum wage .
( Although , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the policy ’ s costs ) .
In fact , the $ 25 minimum wage in Geneva was voted in by the city ’ s residents in a landslide ballot referendum , after voters had more wisely rejected it in the past .
So , until the public wises up to the counterproductive realities of minimum wage hikes , the flawed policies will continue to advance in our politics—despite the mountains of economic evidence screaming out for the opposite approach .

Debate over the minimum wage has been at the forefront of American politics in recent years. Progressives argue that we need to mandate a “living wage” of $15 an hour under federal law, and this is now the official position of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden. Meanwhile, most Republicans argue against increasing the minimum wage. Conservative critics point to studies and real-world examples showing how wage floors backfire and hurt workers.
Yet the American debate over a $15 minimum wage looks rather quaint compared to the extreme minimum wage policies being implemented across the Atlantic. In the latest example of Europe’s embrace of progressive economic policy, the Swiss city of Geneva just voted to implement a minimum wage that translates to $25 an hour, or $4,100 a month.
“The introduction of a minimum wage is a fundamental requirement of justice, and an essential measure against precariousness,” said Alexander Eniline of the left-wing Swiss Labor Party, the Guardian reports.
Geneva to raise minimum wage to £3,500 a month https://t.co/ZR0Ght7wns — The Guardian (@guardian) September 30, 2020
The measure is intended to combat poverty in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing economic crisis. But economics teaches us that such a massive minimum wage hike will only reduce employment and hurt many workers it’s meant to help.
Why Minimum Wage Laws Can’t Work
People tend to think of labor differently from other goods, but the labor market essentially works the same as any other market. Labor is the “good” being provided by workers, and the wages are the “price” being paid by employers.
“Minimum wage laws make it illegal to pay less than the government specified price for labor,” famed free-market economist Thomas Sowell explained in his book Basic Economics. “By the simplest and most basic economics, a price artificially raised tends to cause more to be supplied and less to be demanded than when prices are left to be determined by supply and demand in a free market. The result is a surplus, whether the price that is set artificially high is that of farm produce or labor.”
Think about it like this. Imagine that you went to the convenience store to buy a can of Red Bull, and it was worth up to $5 to you. But upon arriving, you saw that the price tag was set at $20 due to a government mandate. What would you do? You’d almost certainly just put the can back down and walk away without purchasing it, not shell out $20. Or, maybe you’d buy a Coca-Cola instead.
Labor really is no different. If you mandate that employers pay more for labor than it is worth to them, they will buy less of it.
“Making it illegal to pay less than a given amount does not make a worker’s productivity worth that amount— and, if it is not, that worker is unlikely to be employed,” Sowell writes. “Unfortunately, the real minimum wage is always zero, regardless of the laws, and that is the wage that many workers receive in the wake of the creation or escalation of a government-mandated minimum wage, because they either lose their jobs or fail to find jobs when they enter the labor force.”
Evidence and Experts Agree: Minimum Wage Hikes Don’t Work
A 2017 study of Seattle’s $13 minimum wage hike found that it reduced hours worked by 9 percent, leading total income for impacted workers to actually decrease on net.
So, it’s no surprise that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that enacting a $15 minimum wage nationwide would destroy up to 3.7 million jobs and decrease total income for Americans below the poverty line by roughly $16 billion. The Washington Examiner’s Tiana Lowe wrote that the research “disproves the idea that a $15 federal minimum wage creates any net benefit” and shows how the policy “simply reshuffles the problems plaguing our economy, on the whole creating more new problems than it solves.”
"The fight for $15 is nothing more than a Band-Aid over generations of our education system's failure."
Fight for $15 and kill up to 3.7 million jobs in the process https://t.co/OdtZhAltTS via @TianaTheFirst: — Brad Polumbo 🇺🇸⚽ 🏳🌈 (@brad_polumbo) July 9, 2019
“The main finding of economic theory and empirical research over the past 70 years is that minimum wage increases tend to reduce employment,” the Cato Institute concluded in a research review. “While minimum wages ostensibly aim to improve the economic well-being of the working poor, the disemployment effects of minimum wages have been found to fall disproportionately on the least skilled and on the most disadvantaged individuals, including the disabled, youth, lower-skilled workers, immigrants, and ethnic minorities.”
This brings to mind the words of the late Nobel-prize-winning economist Milton Friedman: “The real tragedy of minimum wage laws is that they are supported by well-meaning groups who want to reduce poverty. But the people who are hurt most by higher minimums are the most poverty stricken.”
Decades later, most economists still agree with Friedman. A 2019 survey by the Employment Policies Institute found that 75 percent of professional economists oppose increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour. This wasn’t political: In an interesting twist, almost all the responding economists identified as Democrats or Independents, with just 12 percent identifying as registered Republicans.
There’s No Limiting Principle to Minimum Wage Advocates’ Logic
Some might look at the Swiss example and say, okay, sure, we can’t have a crazy $25 minimum wage… but why not something more modest like Biden’s $15? Surely that wouldn’t be as bad, right?
It’s true that the economic harm of minimum wage laws increases the higher the cap. But the logic for why a $25 minimum wage doesn’t work applies to a $15 minimum wage or any other, really.
Minimum wage proponents have no good answer to a simple question: Why just $25 an hour? If creating wealth and defeating poverty is as simple as passing a government wage mandate, why not make it $100 an hour and have us all swimming in prosperity?
The reality is that artificially mandating higher wages cannot force employers to pay more than workers are worth to them, particularly when employers have alternatives like cutting hours or embracing automation. This is just as true for Biden’s $15 minimum wage as it is for Geneva’s record-setting $25 hourly mandate. It applies to any minimum wage above the market rate.
This is a rare issue where there remains clear consensus among economists and experts regardless of partisan or political affiliation. So why do politicians keep pushing minimum wage hikes?
It’s simple: Broad swaths of the public still naively support hiking the minimum wage. (Although, support drops when they are educated about the policy’s costs). In fact, the $25 minimum wage in Geneva was voted in by the city’s residents in a landslide ballot referendum, after voters had more wisely rejected it in the past.
So, until the public wises up to the counterproductive realities of minimum wage hikes, the flawed policies will continue to advance in our politics—despite the mountains of economic evidence screaming out for the opposite approach.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-10--Trigger a Liberal Snowflake With a “GET WOKE, GO BROKE” Shirt Available at The Liberty Daily Store!


thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--The Fake News Media’s Best Meltdowns to President Trump Surviving the Chi-Com Virus

MELTDOWN : The BEST media reactions to Trump surviving COVID-19 , according to Slightly Offens*ve

A lot of people in the media were actually upset to see that President Donald Trump did not die from COVID-19. A few even had a full blown meltdown when our president left the hospital and returned to the White House — and these are the people who are supposed to be in charge of informing the American people?
This week on "Slightly Offens*ve," BlazeTV host Elijah Schaffer presents his collection of the best media meltdowns over President Trump surviving the coronavirus. Watch the video below:
Want more from Elijah Schaffer?
Subscribe to Elijah's 'Slightly Offens*ve' channel on YouTube for FREE access to his man-on-the-street interviews, protest coverage and more craziness that happens everyday in the USA.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-09--If Biden Wins, Democrat Eric “Nuke Gun Owners” Swalwell has a Plan for Gun Confiscation

In a recent opinion piece that ran in Newsweek , U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell , a Democrat from California ’ s San Francisco Bay area , renewed his call for a national policy that most gun controllers likely support , but are unwilling to say out loud : that the federal government should have the power to confiscate our legally purchased and owned AR-platform rifles and countless other semi-automatic rifles , pistols and shotguns .
He also wants to be able to charge otherwise law-abiding people with federal crimes if they refuse to give up these guns .
Swalwell is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Policy Committee .
He also serves on the House Judiciary Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence .
And , he ran a brief , unremarkable campaign to be the Democrat nominee to run against Donald Trump for President of the United States .
In May 2019 , he introduced the “ Freedom from Assault Weapons Act.
” This bill never got beyond consideration from congressional committees .
But Swalwell hopes to push the bill forward in the near future ( no doubt hoping for a Biden-Harris win to bolster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As he said in Newsweek : “ My bill builds upon assault weapon bans that have been introduced previously in Congress , defining assault weapons in the same way .
But it would not ‘ grandfather in ’ weapons already in circulation ; instead , after a period in which the Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco , Firearms and Explosives would develop a price , ATF would buy back the banned guns from people or businesses .
All guns bought back would be destroyed.
” Let ’ s leave aside the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ buyback , ” as the federal government didn ’ t sell people these firearms in the first place .
But let us assume millions of owners of newly banned semi-automatic firearms would not want to sell the government their guns .
Then what ?
“ Owners would have two years in which to sell their weapons in the buyback program ; after that , the possession , sale and transfer of these banned assault weapons would become illegal and subject to criminal prosecution .
The bill contains exceptions for law enforcement , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hunting/shooting clubs.
” He also said that the guns he wants to ban are “ the murder tools of choice for hateful extremists or untrained law enforcement and military wannabes.
” Right now , Americans own an estimated 16-plus million AR-platform , and similar , semi-automatic rifles .
These rifles , of course , are not “ assault rifles.
” Assault rifles are automatic rifles .
Yes , machine guns ; not semi-automatics that fire one round with each pull of the trigger .
As John Lott ’ s Crime Prevention Research Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used in a tiny percentage of crimes .
As Lott noted regarding the national ban that was in effect from 1994-2004 : “ The percentage of firearm murders with rifles was 4.8 % prior to the ban starting in September 1994 , 4.9 % from 1995 to 2004 when the ban was in effect , and just 3.6 % after that ( 3.9 % if you look at just the first ten years after the ban ended ) .
” ( These numbers come directly from the FBI ’ s Uniform Crime Reporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ buy back , ” his euphemistic term for confiscate , would likely turn millions of Americans into criminals , would completely violate the Second Amendment and would do nothing to make us safer .
Maybe it ’ s idiotic ideas like this that resulted in Swalwell ’ s failure to gain even a single percentage point in polls during the runup to his party ’ s primaries , which led to him dropping out before the first primary ballot was even cast .

In a recent opinion piece that ran in Newsweek, U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democrat from California’s San Francisco Bay area, renewed his call for a national policy that most gun controllers likely support, but are unwilling to say out loud: that the federal government should have the power to confiscate our legally purchased and owned AR-platform rifles and countless other semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns. He also wants to be able to charge otherwise law-abiding people with federal crimes if they refuse to give up these guns.
Swalwell is the co-chair of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee. He also serves on the House Judiciary Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. And, he ran a brief, unremarkable campaign to be the Democrat nominee to run against Donald Trump for President of the United States.
In May 2019, he introduced the “Freedom from Assault Weapons Act.”
This bill never got beyond consideration from congressional committees. But Swalwell hopes to push the bill forward in the near future (no doubt hoping for a Biden-Harris win to bolster support for this anti-Second Amendment proposal).
As he said in Newsweek: “My bill builds upon assault weapon bans that have been introduced previously in Congress, defining assault weapons in the same way. But it would not ‘grandfather in’ weapons already in circulation; instead, after a period in which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives would develop a price, ATF would buy back the banned guns from people or businesses. All guns bought back would be destroyed.”
Let’s leave aside the fact that this would not be a “buyback,” as the federal government didn’t sell people these firearms in the first place. But let us assume millions of owners of newly banned semi-automatic firearms would not want to sell the government their guns. Then what?
“Owners would have two years in which to sell their weapons in the buyback program; after that, the possession, sale and transfer of these banned assault weapons would become illegal and subject to criminal prosecution. The bill contains exceptions for law enforcement, and allows citizens to possess these weapons at hunting/shooting clubs.”
He also said that the guns he wants to ban are “the murder tools of choice for hateful extremists or untrained law enforcement and military wannabes.”
Right now, Americans own an estimated 16-plus million AR-platform, and similar, semi-automatic rifles. These rifles, of course, are not “assault rifles.” Assault rifles are automatic rifles. Yes, machine guns; not semi-automatics that fire one round with each pull of the trigger.
As John Lott’s Crime Prevention Research Center has documented, these semi-automatic rifles are used in a tiny percentage of crimes. As Lott noted regarding the national ban that was in effect from 1994-2004: “The percentage of firearm murders with rifles was 4.8% prior to the ban starting in September 1994, 4.9% from 1995 to 2004 when the ban was in effect, and just 3.6% after that (3.9% if you look at just the first ten years after the ban ended).” (These numbers come directly from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program.)
Swalwell’s plan to “buy back,” his euphemistic term for confiscate, would likely turn millions of Americans into criminals, would completely violate the Second Amendment and would do nothing to make us safer.
Maybe it’s idiotic ideas like this that resulted in Swalwell’s failure to gain even a single percentage point in polls during the runup to his party’s primaries, which led to him dropping out before the first primary ballot was even cast.
Article by Brian McCombie