noqreport--2020-02-21--These be thy gods, O Democrats

These be thy gods, O Democrats

Watching the Democratic debate last night and reading the reactions from today have actually been entertaining endeavors , more so than previous debates .
Perhaps my distaste for Mike Bloomberg fueled the enjoyment .
I don ’ t like any of the remaining Democratic candidates ( I liked Andrew Yang at least a little ) , but Bloomberg strikes an exceptionally foul chord , and not just because his words are like lyrics to a bad rap song .
“ If women wanted to be appreciated for their brains , they ’ d go to the library instead of to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But this is what the Democratic Party has .
This is their moment of desperation .
It ’ s their Trump-Derangement-Syndrome-inspired hail mary at halftime in a game they ’ re losing badly .
That ’ s not to say they can ’ t pull a Frank Reich in the second half of the 2020 election , but they ’ re currently so discombobulated they ’ re leaning towards either a socialist or fake Democrat to be their champion .
It reminds me of the Israelites when Moses was up in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they expected .
They figured he had died and they needed to worship someone , so they turned to Aaron who gave them the golden calf .
The story didn ’ t end well for many of the Israelites .
When Moses came back down after being told by God that his people were going crazy , he took their idols , ground them up , and forced many to eat the golden dust .
It killed them , a sacrifice that prevented the full wrath of God from descending upon all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing , though not quite as dramatic , is happening to the Democratic Party .
They have fashioned themselves new gods to worship , gods who mostly do not adhere to the orthodoxy of the party as it has been known for decades .
These aren ’ t acolytes of Barack Obama , though Joe Biden pretends to be .
They ’ re not following in the footsteps of John F. Kennedy or even Bill Clinton .
The base of the New Democratic Party now adheres to new gods who have established a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were just five or six years ago .
Before , social justice was a tool to promote semi-rational ideas like gay marriage and criminal justice reform .
Today , social justice is no longer a tool but a goal .
They don ’ t look at it as a way of achieving something new , but as an end unto itself .
This is why support for better treatment of illegal aliens has morphed into calls for open borders and abolishing ICE .
It ’ s why they aren ’ t pushing for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s why climate change hysteria has taken hold of millions based on a manufactured sense of urgency .
It ’ s not about “ saving the planet ” any longer .
It ’ s about delivering “ environmental justice , ” whatever that means .
To this day I still get asked why I so fervently support the GOP after leaving the party in 2016 .
Even if we set aside the fact that President Trump has delivered better results than many of us expected , we need only look across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party has produced in an effort to counter him .
There are no common sense candidates .
Other than Bloomberg , they ’ re all woke .
Meanwhile , Bloomberg is a mess , a capitalist who ’ s trying to be a pragmatic vision of what the party thinks it no longer wants to be .
If that sentence didn ’ t make much sense , then you ’ re getting the picture perfectly .
If I didn ’ t appreciate President Trump ( I do ) and if I didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( I do ) , I ’ d still have a difficult time finding a valid reason to vote for any of them .
They are about as inspiring as tooth decay and infinitely less interesting .
They have no message of hope , which is an absolute necessity for a winning presidential candidate .
“ Change we can believe in.
” What are Democrats offering as their inspiring message ?
“ Beat Trump no matter how many pigeons we have to kill in the process.
” It would be foolish to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regardless of who emerges as their candidate .
Some smart people ( though mostly dumb ones ) said that about candidate Trump four years ago .
But when the best thing going for a party is news that distracts the people from looking at their candidates , it ’ s okay to say their chances are minimal .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Subscribe for free to the America First Report newsletter.
Watching the Democratic debate last night and reading the reactions from today have actually been entertaining endeavors, more so than previous debates. Perhaps my distaste for Mike Bloomberg fueled the enjoyment. I don’t like any of the remaining Democratic candidates (I liked Andrew Yang at least a little), but Bloomberg strikes an exceptionally foul chord, and not just because his words are like lyrics to a bad rap song. “If women wanted to be appreciated for their brains, they’d go to the library instead of to Bloomingdale’s,” he sings.
But this is what the Democratic Party has. This is their moment of desperation. It’s their Trump-Derangement-Syndrome-inspired hail mary at halftime in a game they’re losing badly. That’s not to say they can’t pull a Frank Reich in the second half of the 2020 election, but they’re currently so discombobulated they’re leaning towards either a socialist or fake Democrat to be their champion. It reminds me of the Israelites when Moses was up in the mountain talking to God for longer than they expected. They figured he had died and they needed to worship someone, so they turned to Aaron who gave them the golden calf.
And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. – Exodus 32:4
The story didn’t end well for many of the Israelites. When Moses came back down after being told by God that his people were going crazy, he took their idols, ground them up, and forced many to eat the golden dust. It killed them, a sacrifice that prevented the full wrath of God from descending upon all of the people save Moses.
The same thing, though not quite as dramatic, is happening to the Democratic Party. They have fashioned themselves new gods to worship, gods who mostly do not adhere to the orthodoxy of the party as it has been known for decades. These aren’t acolytes of Barack Obama, though Joe Biden pretends to be. They’re not following in the footsteps of John F. Kennedy or even Bill Clinton. The base of the New Democratic Party now adheres to new gods who have established a new ideology that barely resembles where they were just five or six years ago.
Before, social justice was a tool to promote semi-rational ideas like gay marriage and criminal justice reform. Today, social justice is no longer a tool but a goal. They don’t look at it as a way of achieving something new, but as an end unto itself. This is why support for better treatment of illegal aliens has morphed into calls for open borders and abolishing ICE. It’s why they aren’t pushing for LGBTQ rights but LGBTQ superiority. It’s why climate change hysteria has taken hold of millions based on a manufactured sense of urgency. It’s not about “saving the planet” any longer. It’s about delivering “environmental justice,” whatever that means.
To this day I still get asked why I so fervently support the GOP after leaving the party in 2016. Even if we set aside the fact that President Trump has delivered better results than many of us expected, we need only look across the aisle to see the abomination the opposition party has produced in an effort to counter him. There are no common sense candidates. Other than Bloomberg, they’re all woke. Meanwhile, Bloomberg is a mess, a capitalist who’s trying to be a pragmatic vision of what the party thinks it no longer wants to be. If that sentence didn’t make much sense, then you’re getting the picture perfectly.
If I didn’t appreciate President Trump (I do) and if I didn’t despise what the Democrats are becoming (I do), I’d still have a difficult time finding a valid reason to vote for any of them. They are about as inspiring as tooth decay and infinitely less interesting. They have no message of hope, which is an absolute necessity for a winning presidential candidate.
“Make America great again.”
“Change we can believe in.”
“Compassionate conservatism.”
Dr. Joseph Mercola said, “Synthetic meat is the epitome of ultraprocessed food, and it seems naïve to think it won’t have health effects similar to other ultraprocessed junk foods.” For All-American REAL beef raised in pastures, sous vide, then freeze-dried for long-term storage, visit Whole Cows and use promo code “no junk” at checkout.
“It’s the economy, stupid.”
What are Democrats offering as their inspiring message? “Beat Trump no matter how many pigeons we have to kill in the process.”
It would be foolish to say the Democrats have no chance of winning regardless of who emerges as their candidate. Some smart people (though mostly dumb ones) said that about candidate Trump four years ago. But when the best thing going for a party is news that distracts the people from looking at their candidates, it’s okay to say their chances are minimal.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-22--Mainstream media is trying to destroy Bernie Sanders with Russia, too

Reviving the “ Russia Hoax ” seems like a terrible strategy , even for the idiots of mainstream media .
This is why I was confused by yesterday ’ s report about Russia favoring President Trump in the November election .
The timing was off .
The narrative was oddly mild .
For a minute , I even thought they were possibly trying to take a more measured approach to their attacks on President Trump .
Then , today ’ s bombshell dropped and it all made sense .
After All the Trump-Russia Collusion Nonsense , It Turned Out Bernie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we seeing a pattern here yet , liberal media ?
Are we starting to get it when it comes to Russia ?
No .
You people are still a bunch of insufferable morons on this stuff .
For years , you thought the Trump campaign and the Kremlin colluded during the 2016 election , despite there being zero evidence to back up that allegation .
It was a myth .
It was a hoax .
It was based on a shoddy piece of political opposition research funded by the Clinton campaign that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but two reports .
Ex-Special Counsel Robert Mueller trashed it as did the Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz .
Still , the Left has been consumed by Russophobia .
Collusion delusion is still a thing , but now the shots are being fired inside the ship .
U.S. officials informed Sen. Bernie Sanders , the frontrunner for the 2020 Democratic nomination , that the Russians are trying to help his campaign .
According to the Washington Post , Sanders was briefed a month ago about Russia allegedly trying to swing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s the type of fodder perfectly designed to try to derail his campaign and allow a “ reasonable ” “ moderate ” to carry the Democratic mantle into November .
I ’ m skeptical about their influence in the campaign on behalf of Sanders just as I was skeptical yesterday about their influence on behalf of President Trump .
It ’ s not that Russia doesn ’ t want one or the other to win .
It ’ s that their ability to influence the election is so overblown after three years of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump won in 2016 .
The left loves to give Russia way too much credit .
But there ’ s an important and worrisome development that comes out of all of this .
The possibility that one major progressive news outlet , the New York Times , happened to break the story about a congressional briefing the day before a different outlet breaks a story about information given to the Sanders campaign is well beyond any suspension of disbelief .
These were timed .
They were coordinated .
They were manufactured with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chances and the secondary goal of hurting President Trump in the process .
Even people who believe in coincidences should have a very difficult time buying this scenario as random happenstance .
They desperately want to take down President Trump and they believe Sanders is the wrong person to do it .
They also see Sanders as someone whose ideology would put the down-ballot races in jeopardy .
The last thing they want is President Trump to have a second-term mandate from the people and a GOP-controlled Congress to deliver on his agenda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear Trump , so they ’ re going to try to take it out on Sanders .
Here ’ s the video from Abby Phillips , the CNN hack who accused Sanders of lying about Elizabeth Warren .
Democrats hate Bernie Sanders because they think he ’ ll lose to President Trump .
Conservatives should hope that Sanders is the nominee , not because we support him but because this nation needs to see socialistic ideas obliterated in the general election .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ 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.
Reviving the “Russia Hoax” seems like a terrible strategy, even for the idiots of mainstream media. This is why I was confused by yesterday’s report about Russia favoring President Trump in the November election. The timing was off. The narrative was oddly mild. For a minute, I even thought they were possibly trying to take a more measured approach to their attacks on President Trump.
Then, today’s bombshell dropped and it all made sense.
After All the Trump-Russia Collusion Nonsense, It Turned Out Bernie Sanders Was the Real Sleeper Agent Are we seeing a pattern here yet, liberal media? Are we starting to get it when it comes to Russia? No. You people are still a bunch of insufferable morons on this stuff. For years, you thought the Trump campaign and the Kremlin colluded during the 2016 election, despite there being zero evidence to back up that allegation. It was a myth. It was a hoax. It was based on a shoddy piece of political opposition research funded by the Clinton campaign that was exposed as bunk not by one, but two reports. Ex-Special Counsel Robert Mueller trashed it as did the Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz. Still, the Left has been consumed by Russophobia. Collusion delusion is still a thing, but now the shots are being fired inside the ship. U.S. officials informed Sen. Bernie Sanders, the frontrunner for the 2020 Democratic nomination, that the Russians are trying to help his campaign.
According to the Washington Post, Sanders was briefed a month ago about Russia allegedly trying to swing the election in his favor. It’s the type of fodder perfectly designed to try to derail his campaign and allow a “reasonable” “moderate” to carry the Democratic mantle into November. I’m skeptical about their influence in the campaign on behalf of Sanders just as I was skeptical yesterday about their influence on behalf of President Trump. It’s not that Russia doesn’t want one or the other to win. It’s that their ability to influence the election is so overblown after three years of Democrats claiming Russia is the only reason President Trump won in 2016. The left loves to give Russia way too much credit.
But there’s an important and worrisome development that comes out of all of this. The possibility that one major progressive news outlet, the New York Times, happened to break the story about a congressional briefing the day before a different outlet breaks a story about information given to the Sanders campaign is well beyond any suspension of disbelief. These were timed. They were coordinated. They were manufactured with the primary goal of harming Sanders’ chances and the secondary goal of hurting President Trump in the process.
Even people who believe in coincidences should have a very difficult time buying this scenario as random happenstance.
They desperately want to take down President Trump and they believe Sanders is the wrong person to do it. They also see Sanders as someone whose ideology would put the down-ballot races in jeopardy. The last thing they want is President Trump to have a second-term mandate from the people and a GOP-controlled Congress to deliver on his agenda. The Establishment Democrats and mainstream media fear Trump, so they’re going to try to take it out on Sanders.
Here’s the video from Abby Phillips, the CNN hack who accused Sanders of lying about Elizabeth Warren.
Bernie Sanders just slammed the Washington Post for running Russia conspriacy stories one day before the Nevada primary pic.twitter.com/3pzqzpK4TF — Jack Posobiec ?? (@JackPosobiec) February 21, 2020
Democrats hate Bernie Sanders because they think he’ll lose to President Trump. Conservatives should hope that Sanders is the nominee, not because we support him but because this nation needs to see socialistic ideas obliterated in the general election.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-21--China is a complete and total mess

China is a complete and total mess

The coronavirus has crippled the second largest economy in the world , put its people into a precarious situation in which death awaits many of them , and exposed the authoritarians of the CCP in ways few can even comprehend .
But it ’ s getting worse .
There ’ s no way to tell if the coronavirus problem is getting better or not , but the actions of the CCP are clearly taking their nation down a terrible path .
There is so much news that ’ s not coming out of China right now , we can only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rumors of dissension in the ranks against Xi Jinping from within the Communist Party .
And to think , his biggest concerns just a couple of months ago were Taiwan and Hong Kong .
The folks at China Uncensored have put together another excellent video exposing just a portion of the problems the Communist Party of China is facing .
Unfortunately , their people are in even worse peril , but that seems to be secondary to the CCP .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Subscribe for free to the America First Report newsletter.
The coronavirus has crippled the second largest economy in the world, put its people into a precarious situation in which death awaits many of them, and exposed the authoritarians of the CCP in ways few can even comprehend. But it’s getting worse. There’s no way to tell if the coronavirus problem is getting better or not, but the actions of the CCP are clearly taking their nation down a terrible path.
There is so much news that’s not coming out of China right now, we can only assume the worst. There are even rumors of dissension in the ranks against Xi Jinping from within the Communist Party. And to think, his biggest concerns just a couple of months ago were Taiwan and Hong Kong.
The folks at China Uncensored have put together another excellent video exposing just a portion of the problems the Communist Party of China is facing. Unfortunately, their people are in even worse peril, but that seems to be secondary to the CCP.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-21--Will Democrats make the ‘Romney mistake’ by nominating Mike Bloomberg?

Among Mitt Romney ’ s long list of failures throughout his political career was one that stands high above all others so far .
He was the 2012 Republican nominee for president , finally getting his turn to try to win the big seat .
But he failed miserably , almost inexplicably .
Almost .
By halfway through 2012 , Obamacare had already lost so much steam as people realized what they were promised wasn ’ t in the same ballpark as what was delivered by the Affordable Care Act .
It wasn ’ t affordable .
Care wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couldn ’ t always keep your doctors .
Of the tiny percentage of people who benefited from the plan , most of them couldn ’ t see tangible benefits because unlike their expectations , it generally wasn ’ t free .
Republicans had come off a massive turnaround in the 2010 midterm elections , taking control of the House of Representatives and stifling the Obama agenda that had done so little with their control of Capitol Hill other than passing the ACA .
They were poised for a big win against a fading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by inaction .
All the GOP needed to do was continue to hit him on Obamacare and the White House would be theirs .
So how did they go about doing it ?
By nominating the architect of Obamacare ’ s predecessor , Romneycare .
They neutered their best attack .
Today , many Establishment Democrats are considering going down the same road as Establishment Republicans did in 2012 .
They are strongly considering nominating Mike Bloomberg as their nominee , the one guy who shares many of President Trump ’ s vulnerabilities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these things to be vulnerabilities , but to the all-important Independent vote , the Democrats have an opportunity to paint them as such .
What do President Trump and Mike Bloomberg share ?
There are too many instances to count , but I ’ ll try… • Inherent New York City Rudeness – Those of us who have lived in New York City know there ’ s a way to talk to each other that can seem rude .
We don ’ t mean anything by it .
That ’ s just how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his rudeness seems to be more abrasive , not because he can out-insult President Trump but because his insults simply aren ’ t funny .
The President ’ s often are .
• Accusations of Misogyny and Sexual Misconduct – The vast majority of accusations against the President and those surrounding him have accumulated in the last four years since he ’ s been a candidate and a president .
Bloomberg ’ s long list of attacks against women are documented with lawsuits that stretch back decades while being as recent as last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump as a misogynist .
Good luck doing that by nominating a known misogynist .
• Accusations of Racism – President Trump ’ s policies as president have created historically low unemployment and high wages for minorities across the board .
Bloomberg ’ s policies as mayor literally had police spending most of their time in minority neighborhoods throwing young Black and Latino men against walls to frisk them .
• Pompous Authority Vibe – Both men have enjoyed power and respect throughout their adult lives .
Both men come across as authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so ” —while having harsh punishments for those who attempt to subvert their power .
These are men who do not like to be questioned .
• Old , White , Straight , Cisgender , Rich Males – In the modern game of intersectionality and wokeness , both men fail miserably .
Again , it ’ s important to stress that I ’ m not suggesting these traits of the President are true weaknesses , but they ’ re vulnerabilities in the eyes of Democrats and left-leaning Independents .
That is why nominating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many ways exceeds the President in their severity—is quite funny to watch .
Trump Derangement Syndrome has so overcome Establishment Democrats that many seem willing to nominate the least “ woke ” candidate since George Wallace .
The guy ’ s rich and willing to spend it , and that ’ s all his supporters see in him .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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.
Among Mitt Romney’s long list of failures throughout his political career was one that stands high above all others so far. He was the 2012 Republican nominee for president, finally getting his turn to try to win the big seat. But he failed miserably, almost inexplicably. Almost.
By halfway through 2012, Obamacare had already lost so much steam as people realized what they were promised wasn’t in the same ballpark as what was delivered by the Affordable Care Act. It wasn’t affordable. Care wasn’t improved in any way. You couldn’t always keep your doctors. Of the tiny percentage of people who benefited from the plan, most of them couldn’t see tangible benefits because unlike their expectations, it generally wasn’t free.
Republicans had come off a massive turnaround in the 2010 midterm elections, taking control of the House of Representatives and stifling the Obama agenda that had done so little with their control of Capitol Hill other than passing the ACA. They were poised for a big win against a fading president whose star power had been hit by inaction.
All the GOP needed to do was continue to hit him on Obamacare and the White House would be theirs. So how did they go about doing it? By nominating the architect of Obamacare’s predecessor, Romneycare.
They neutered their best attack. Today, many Establishment Democrats are considering going down the same road as Establishment Republicans did in 2012. They are strongly considering nominating Mike Bloomberg as their nominee, the one guy who shares many of President Trump’s vulnerabilities.
Personally, I do not consider these things to be vulnerabilities, but to the all-important Independent vote, the Democrats have an opportunity to paint them as such. What do President Trump and Mike Bloomberg share? There are too many instances to count, but I’ll try…
Inherent New York City Rudeness – Those of us who have lived in New York City know there’s a way to talk to each other that can seem rude. We don’t mean anything by it. That’s just how we talk. Unfortunately for Bloomberg, his rudeness seems to be more abrasive, not because he can out-insult President Trump but because his insults simply aren’t funny. The President’s often are. Accusations of Misogyny and Sexual Misconduct – The vast majority of accusations against the President and those surrounding him have accumulated in the last four years since he’s been a candidate and a president. Bloomberg’s long list of attacks against women are documented with lawsuits that stretch back decades while being as recent as last year. Democrats love to hit President Trump as a misogynist. Good luck doing that by nominating a known misogynist. Accusations of Racism – President Trump’s policies as president have created historically low unemployment and high wages for minorities across the board. Bloomberg’s policies as mayor literally had police spending most of their time in minority neighborhoods throwing young Black and Latino men against walls to frisk them. Pompous Authority Vibe – Both men have enjoyed power and respect throughout their adult lives. Both men come across as authority figures—”Trust me because I said so”—while having harsh punishments for those who attempt to subvert their power. These are men who do not like to be questioned. Old, White, Straight, Cisgender, Rich Males – In the modern game of intersectionality and wokeness, both men fail miserably.
Again, it’s important to stress that I’m not suggesting these traits of the President are true weaknesses, but they’re vulnerabilities in the eyes of Democrats and left-leaning Independents. That is why nominating a guy who shares these qualities—and in many ways exceeds the President in their severity—is quite funny to watch.
Trump Derangement Syndrome has so overcome Establishment Democrats that many seem willing to nominate the least “woke” candidate since George Wallace. The guy’s rich and willing to spend it, and that’s all his supporters see in him.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-21--What is so difficult about using leftist instead of liberal when referring to authoritarian socialis

What is so difficult about using leftist instead of liberal when referring to authoritarian socialists?

There is a cold civil war being waged between the pro-liberty right and the authoritarian socialist-left .
It ’ s a war of words that could change into a real conflict if certain issues aren ’ t resolved .
Leftists have learned how to weaponise the language to deceive the people and frame the debate to their advantage .
That is why they are very careful in the terms they use to describe themselves and the issues at hand .
They have done this by hijacking certain labels that are antithetical to their true belief system .
“ The champions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they recommend a system which is characterized by rigid observance of routine and by a resistance to every kind of improvement .
They call themselves liberals , but they are intent upon abolishing liberty .
They call themselves democrats , but they yearn for dictatorship .
They call themselves revolutionaries , but they want to make the government omnipotent .
They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden , but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office .
Every man but one a subordinate clerk in a bureau @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a noble cause to fight !
” Ludwig von Mises While they like to cast themselves as liberators , they seek to enslave the population under socialism .
They call themselves ‘ progressives ’ while perpetrating collectivist ideas that are as old as time .
Their base ideology always sets up an authoritarian elite that dictates how everyone is supposed to live their life while pretending to be ‘ democratic ’ .
But one of their most egregious language transgressions is the use of the term liberal .
This particular language deception on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places , most notably by Dennis Prager in a 5 minute video dissertation along with this column entitled : Leftism Is Not Liberalism .
Here Are the Differences .
Here ’ s the first thing to know : The two have almost nothing in common .
On the contrary , liberalism has far more in common with conservatism than it does with leftism .
The left has appropriated the word “ liberal ” so effectively that almost everyone—liberals , leftists , and conservatives—thinks they are synonymous .
It ’ s easy to use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same length and begin with the letter ‘ l ’ When you consider that both words start with the letter ‘ l ’ and are the same length , there is no reason to use the wrong word .
Leftist properly describes the authoritarian socialists without any false implication of their true nature .
It ’ s just a question of discipline , choosing one word and sticking to it , instead of displaying a lack of intellect with the ‘ word salad ’ approach .
Most knowledgeable people look down upon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then ‘ progressive ’ the next , followed by liberal in another instance .
One word covers the left side of the political spectrum , using several shows a decided lack of thought .
Note that both liberty and liberal have the same roots in the Latin word libertas , the Roman personification of freedom .
This is in response to those who claim that word meanings have changed .
The word liberty still means the same thing and wrongly applying this to the authoritarian left falsely implies they are champions of liberty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Using the wrong term insults potential allies in liberty Glenn Beck had the author on the inspiring # WalkAway article reported here by Lorie Wimble recently .
At one point in the conversation , he tip-toed around the discussion of her political identity as to whether she fit into the true meaning of the word as being all about the rights of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights .
She responded that she believes in our fundamental liberties , being a centrist with some libertarian leanings .
In other words , she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the authoritarian left .
It is clearly evident from her article on medium and the interview shows that she really belongs over on the right side of the political spectrum .
The burgeoning # WalkAway movement shows that there are many like her .
Incorrectly using the term liberal as a pejorative – or any variation thereof , such as ‘ libs ’ – needlessly insults those who agree with the right in the conservation of liberty .
There is no reason to do this , it ’ s just a case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another word of the same length than begins with the same letter .
What is so difficult in that ?
Taking away one of the left ’ s favorite false labels rhetorically cuts them off at the kneecaps .
They love to think of themselves as liberators when they are really out to enslave society in authoritarian socialism .
Using the correct word for them takes away their false sense of moral superiority , while it also deprives them of the ability to lie to the world as champions of liberty .
Isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leftist instead of liberal ?
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Discern Report is the fastest growing America First news aggregator in the nation.
There is a cold civil war being waged between the pro-liberty right and the authoritarian socialist-left. It’s a war of words that could change into a real conflict if certain issues aren’t resolved.
Leftists have learned how to weaponise the language to deceive the people and frame the debate to their advantage. That is why they are very careful in the terms they use to describe themselves and the issues at hand. They have done this by hijacking certain labels that are antithetical to their true belief system.
“The champions of socialism call themselves progressives, but they recommend a system which is characterized by rigid observance of routine and by a resistance to every kind of improvement. They call themselves liberals, but they are intent upon abolishing liberty. They call themselves democrats, but they yearn for dictatorship. They call themselves revolutionaries, but they want to make the government omnipotent. They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden, but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office. Every man but one a subordinate clerk in a bureau. What an alluring utopia! What a noble cause to fight!”
Ludwig von Mises
[Emphasis added]
While they like to cast themselves as liberators, they seek to enslave the population under socialism. They call themselves ‘progressives’ while perpetrating collectivist ideas that are as old as time. Their base ideology always sets up an authoritarian elite that dictates how everyone is supposed to live their life while pretending to be ‘democratic’.
But one of their most egregious language transgressions is the use of the term liberal. This particular language deception on their part has been discussed a number places, most notably by Dennis Prager in a 5 minute video dissertation along with this column entitled:
Leftism Is Not Liberalism. Here Are the Differences.
Here’s the first thing to know: The two have almost nothing in common. On the contrary, liberalism has far more in common with conservatism than it does with leftism. The left has appropriated the word “liberal” so effectively that almost everyone—liberals, leftists, and conservatives—thinks they are synonymous. But they aren’t.
[Emphasis added]
It’s easy to use leftist instead of liberal, both are the same length and begin with the letter ‘l’
When you consider that both words start with the letter ‘l’ and are the same length, there is no reason to use the wrong word. Leftist properly describes the authoritarian socialists without any false implication of their true nature.
It’s just a question of discipline, choosing one word and sticking to it, instead of displaying a lack of intellect with the ‘word salad’ approach. Most knowledgeable people look down upon people who use leftists one moment, then ‘progressive’ the next, followed by liberal in another instance. One word covers the left side of the political spectrum, using several shows a decided lack of thought.
Note that both liberty and liberal have the same roots in the Latin word libertas, the Roman personification of freedom. This is in response to those who claim that word meanings have changed. The word liberty still means the same thing and wrongly applying this to the authoritarian left falsely implies they are champions of liberty when this clearly is not the case
Using the wrong term insults potential allies in liberty
Glenn Beck had the author on the inspiring #WalkAway article reported here by Lorie Wimble recently. At one point in the conversation, he tip-toed around the discussion of her political identity as to whether she fit into the true meaning of the word as being all about the rights of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. She responded that she believes in our fundamental liberties, being a centrist with some libertarian leanings.
This America First, veteran-owned company is ready to help you eat well today and eat well tomorrow. Use promo code “big15” for 15% off at checkout. Don’t wait for beef to become more scarce. Stock up on freeze-dried cubes made from Ribeyes, NY Strips, and Premium Cuts.is ready to help you eat well today and eat well tomorrow. Use promo code “big15” for 15% off at checkout.
In other words, she doesn’t belong in the camp of the authoritarian left. It is clearly evident from her article on medium and the interview shows that she really belongs over on the right side of the political spectrum. The burgeoning #WalkAway movement shows that there are many like her.
Incorrectly using the term liberal as a pejorative – or any variation thereof, such as ‘libs’ – needlessly insults those who agree with the right in the conservation of liberty. There is no reason to do this, it’s just a case of having the self control to use another word of the same length than begins with the same letter. What is so difficult in that?
The bottom line: Rhetorically knee-capping the authoritarian-left
Taking away one of the left’s favorite false labels rhetorically cuts them off at the kneecaps. They love to think of themselves as liberators when they are really out to enslave society in authoritarian socialism.
Using the correct word for them takes away their false sense of moral superiority, while it also deprives them of the ability to lie to the world as champions of liberty. Isn’t that worth using the word leftist instead of liberal?
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-21--Lithuanian immigrant has a message for Bernie Sanders supporters

How many times have you heard or read someone say , “ socialism has never really been tried ” or “ how can we know if socialism will work or not until we try it ?
” This is the common response among fans of Senator Bernie Sanders whose presidential campaign is predicated on the notion that we need to be more like the various socialist countries around the world .
Of course , they love to cherry pick the countries they claim as their model , and invariably it ’ s countries that are either new to socialism or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ socialistic principles .
When Breitbart caught up with a Lithuanian immigrant who has experienced socialism first hand , she gave a far-from rosy picture of the Sanders dream .
She told of being forced to watch movies with the windows covered and concerns about laziness amongst those who heralded the practice .
“ If they really want to experience socialism they should go to the socialist country and live there for a while so they know what it is , ” she said .
The biggest takeaway is from listening to someone who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people who vehemently supported the practice in Lithuania were lazy .
Is it possible that ( gulp ) many of Bernie ’ s supporters are simply lazy as well ?
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Subscribe for free to the America First Report newsletter.
How many times have you heard or read someone say, “socialism has never really been tried” or “how can we know if socialism will work or not until we try it?”
This is the common response among fans of Senator Bernie Sanders whose presidential campaign is predicated on the notion that we need to be more like the various socialist countries around the world. Of course, they love to cherry pick the countries they claim as their model, and invariably it’s countries that are either new to socialism or who have walked back most of their socialistic principles.
When Breitbart caught up with a Lithuanian immigrant who has experienced socialism first hand, she gave a far-from rosy picture of the Sanders dream. She told of being forced to watch movies with the windows covered and concerns about laziness amongst those who heralded the practice.
“If they really want to experience socialism they should go to the socialist country and live there for a while so they know what it is,” she said.
“They should go to [a] socialist country and live there for a while so they know what it is.” pic.twitter.com/PhdPqhe8Tg — Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) February 21, 2020
The biggest takeaway is from listening to someone who lived through socialism is that most of the people who vehemently supported the practice in Lithuania were lazy. Is it possible that (gulp) many of Bernie’s supporters are simply lazy as well?
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-21--The New York Times, the Russia narrative and other nonsense

When Andrew Klavan refers to a story in the New York Times on his daily podcast he always adds the qualifier “ a former newspaper ” .
They seem determined to prove him correct .
In their zeal to control the narrative , they are beclowning themselves , again .
Clearly they assume everyone takes the view that history started in November of 2016 .
Yesterday the paper breathlessly reported a leak from a classified briefing of Congress about election interference .
We are clearly back to the RUSSIA , RUSSIA , RUSSIA portion of the narrative and they learned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , the rest of the demented press dutifully picked up the story as well as their spin .
However a reading of the actual text leaves questions .
First , their subtitle makes it clear the culture of leaking is far from fixed .
One has to wonder how many of Eric Ciaramella ’ s friends have the cellphone number of a Times reporter , but I digress .
However , since many of them now work for failed screen writer and Chair of the House Intelligence Committee , Adam Schiff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in front of said committee is hardly surprising .
Especially since the frustrated bard can ’ t help but tweet about the exact same issues leaked to the Times .
Weird , yet almost thoroughly predictable at this point .
Second important point , the Democrats could not weaponize this briefing fast enough despite the framing of President Trump ’ s concerns as unfounded .
Third thing to note is the text of the story hardly matches the headline .
Here is how this “ new information ” was characterized in the body @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information ?
Russia has been interfering in our domestic politics since the end of World War II .
We lived through a national nightmare beginning in 2016 because the Clinton campaign and the DNC injected Russian disinformation into our electoral and law enforcement processes .
Reporting on Russian interference online demonstrated they sought to increase division through posts .
The majority of these ads were purchased after the election according to Facebook executive Rob Goldman .
The only place “ Putin wanted Trump ” appeared was as one of the 4,357 reasons Hillary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ Intelligence Community Assessment ” that was cobbled together like a peanut butter and jelly sandwich as Obama was packing his bags .
However , after a lengthy investigation , Special Counsel Robert Mueller could not make the case in court for interference in 2016 being tied to Putin or the Russian government .
Yet that narrative persists today ignoring the actual testimony of the social media companies and others .
Like John Durham , I am acutely interested on how this “ assessment ” was made .
Especially since left-wing heroine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different view .
If you begin reading on page 386 of the transcript she is clear in her response to Representative Raskin .
Russia ’ s goal is to amplify divisions in our politics .
Race , religion and corruption are all examples she gives of information the Russians and others , such as China , will exploit to keep us angry and fighting .
On page 399 , she explicitly states : Hill ’ s view is supported by hacking attempts aimed at the RNC in the same timeframe as the DNC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ erased from public memory .
However : The New York Times notes that Republican objections to the newest assessment were made during the classified hearing .
None of these objections are wrong .
Several Twitter users added additional commentary : Or a Bloomberg , a Buttigieg or a Biden .
Any of the Democrat contenders have far less aggressive foreign policy views on countries like Iran .
Many have vowed to cut military spending .
And just about all of them want to implement policies that would impair our recently acquired energy independence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has to wonder why this “ briefing ” was given and why the leak of the contents of a classified briefing happened in such close proximity to outgoing Director of National Intelligence being replaced by Acting Director Richard Grenell .
One of the first priorities for Acting Director Grenell and his assistant Kash Patel needs to be closing down the leak factory currently operating in the halls of D.C .
The preemptive “ bombshell ” by the Times is clearly seeking to discredit any of the work these two men do .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the last paragraphs of a long read is typically the most accurate .
They count on their readers being lazy and just ingesting a horribly misleading headline .
So it looks like Dr. Hill and Rob Goldstein were probably the most accurate in their assessments of Russian activities in 2016 .
It also appears The New York Times is doing the Russians ’ work for them by selecting a narrative that does exactly what our intelligence agencies have warned about .
Serving up a whispered narrative from unethical staffers to serve as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the President .
Meanwhile , lawmakers await the details that support the “ intelligence ” community ’ s preferred narrative .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Discern Report is the fastest growing America First news aggregator in the nation.
When Andrew Klavan refers to a story in the New York Times on his daily podcast he always adds the qualifier “a former newspaper”. They seem determined to prove him correct. In their zeal to control the narrative, they are beclowning themselves, again. Clearly they assume everyone takes the view that history started in November of 2016.
RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA
Yesterday the paper breathlessly reported a leak from a classified briefing of Congress about election interference. We are clearly back to the RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA portion of the narrative and they learned nothing from Bolton’s book leak. However, the rest of the demented press dutifully picked up the story as well as their spin. However a reading of the actual text leaves questions.
First, their subtitle makes it clear the culture of leaking is far from fixed.
One has to wonder how many of Eric Ciaramella’s friends have the cellphone number of a Times reporter, but I digress. However, since many of them now work for failed screen writer and Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, this continued drip out of hearings in front of said committee is hardly surprising. Especially since the frustrated bard can’t help but tweet about the exact same issues leaked to the Times. Weird, yet almost thoroughly predictable at this point.
Second important point, the Democrats could not weaponize this briefing fast enough despite the framing of President Trump’s concerns as unfounded. Third thing to note is the text of the story hardly matches the headline. Here is how this “new information” was characterized in the body:
History Didn’t Start Yesterday
Does anyone think this is new information? Russia has been interfering in our domestic politics since the end of World War II. We lived through a national nightmare beginning in 2016 because the Clinton campaign and the DNC injected Russian disinformation into our electoral and law enforcement processes. Reporting on Russian interference online demonstrated they sought to increase division through posts. The majority of these ads were purchased after the election according to Facebook executive Rob Goldman.
The only place “Putin wanted Trump” appeared was as one of the 4,357 reasons Hillary says she lost. And of course the “Intelligence Community Assessment” that was cobbled together like a peanut butter and jelly sandwich as Obama was packing his bags. However, after a lengthy investigation, Special Counsel Robert Mueller could not make the case in court for interference in 2016 being tied to Putin or the Russian government. Yet that narrative persists today ignoring the actual testimony of the social media companies and others.
Like John Durham, I am acutely interested on how this “assessment” was made. Especially since left-wing heroine and Russia expert Fiona Hill took a different view. If you begin reading on page 386 of the transcript she is clear in her response to Representative Raskin. Russia’s goal is to amplify divisions in our politics. Race, religion and corruption are all examples she gives of information the Russians and others, such as China, will exploit to keep us angry and fighting. On page 399, she explicitly states:
I firmly believe he was also targeting President Trump, and he was targeting all of the other campaigns as well. And I think that that was the mistake when the 2016 investigations were launched, not to take it from the point of view what Russia was doing to target Americans, no matter who they were in the system.
Hill’s view is supported by hacking attempts aimed at the RNC in the same timeframe as the DNC. These have been dutifully ignored or erased from public memory. However:
RNC emails were stolen through the same spearphishing scams used against Democrats,” a senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the investigation told RealClearInvestigations. “In fact, prominent Republicans were targeted and similarly victimized by the disclosure of sensitive emails during the campaign.
Republicans “Pounce”
The New York Times notes that Republican objections to the newest assessment were made during the classified hearing.
This America First, veteran-owned company is ready to help you eat well today and eat well tomorrow. Use promo code “big15” for 15% off at checkout. Don’t wait for beef to become more scarce. Stock up on freeze-dried cubes made from Ribeyes, NY Strips, and Premium Cuts.is ready to help you eat well today and eat well tomorrow. Use promo code “big15” for 15% off at checkout.
None of these objections are wrong. Several Twitter users added additional commentary:
Or a Bloomberg, a Buttigieg or a Biden. Any of the Democrat contenders have far less aggressive foreign policy views on countries like Iran. Many have vowed to cut military spending. And just about all of them want to implement policies that would impair our recently acquired energy independence in homage to Gaia.
One also has to wonder why this “briefing” was given and why the leak of the contents of a classified briefing happened in such close proximity to outgoing Director of National Intelligence being replaced by Acting Director Richard Grenell. One of the first priorities for Acting Director Grenell and his assistant Kash Patel needs to be closing down the leak factory currently operating in the halls of D.C. The preemptive “bombshell” by the Times is clearly seeking to discredit any of the work these two men do.
The Last Paragraphs
As is typical with The New York Times, the last paragraphs of a long read is typically the most accurate. They count on their readers being lazy and just ingesting a horribly misleading headline.
So it looks like Dr. Hill and Rob Goldstein were probably the most accurate in their assessments of Russian activities in 2016. It also appears The New York Times is doing the Russians’ work for them by selecting a narrative that does exactly what our intelligence agencies have warned about. Serving up a whispered narrative from unethical staffers to serve as a cudgel for their own political target, the President. Meanwhile, lawmakers await the details that support the “intelligence” community’s preferred narrative.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-21--Is Russia feeding false intelligence about election interference to polarize us further?

When news broke yesterday that an intelligence community official , Shelby Pierson , briefed the House Intelligence Committee on Russia ’ s alleged attempt to influence the 2020 election in President Trump ’ s favor , the “ Russia Hoax ” was reborn .
“ This is it , ” editors and producers in newsrooms across the nation thought .
“ This is how we get him.
” After over two years of trying and failing to connect 2016 election interference between Russia and the Trump campaign , Democrats and mainstream media were shell-shocked by the Mueller Report and Robert @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They had trumpeted the same talking points and claimed the walls were closing in on the President .
Some were bold enough to say President Trump would be gone before the midterm elections .
Others expected the list of people going to jail to be in the dozens if not hundreds .
With such failure , we almost can ’ t blame them for latching onto this new story so quickly .
Almost .
Mainstream media and , predictably , House Democrats are accepting this speculation as facts above reproach .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the same intelligence community that told us they weren ’ t spying on Americans until Edward Snowden showed they were .
It ’ s the same people who hacked into the Senate Select Intelligence Committee ’ s computers and Senators ’ emails during the last administration .
It ’ s the same intelligence community that swore there were WMDs in Iraq .
Surely they ’ re right this time !
After all , we have the most sophisticated intelligence apparatus in the world .
What are the chances that they ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the odds are high for one reason and one reason only : They WANT to believe whatever the Russians are feeding them .
Let ’ s take a closer look at what ’ s being claimed .
When trying to determine the validity of intelligence , experts will ask two basic questions about a data set .
First , they ’ ll ask what ’ s possible .
Then , they ’ ll assess what ’ s possible and determine the probability of the various hypotheses on the table .
The intelligence community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia ’ s intention to influence the 2020 presidential election in favor of President Trump .
Based on what we know , there are three possibilities .
The first is that it must be taken at face value and seen as accurate .
The second is that the data itself is inaccurate .
The third is that the data is accurate , but it ’ s being misinterpreted .
Given the intelligence community ’ s recent track record , I ’ d put options one and two at 15 % each and option @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Because the first two options don ’ t make much sense and the third option , misinterpreted data , is the one that jibes best with the information we have available .
Let ’ s start with why option two , inaccurate data , is unlikely .
The intelligence community knows much more than they ’ ve told us about 2016 election interference .
They can ’ t tell us everything because they need to be able to use what they know to identify and stop future election interference .
Based on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were confident enough in the data to present it to Congress .
Therefore , the data itself is likely accurate , though not necessarily sincere .
Option one , helping President Trump , makes very little sense prima facie .
President Trump has been much harder on Russia than his predecessor .
Moreover , the frontrunners among Democrats are all more favorable to Russia ’ s short- and long-term agendas than President Trump .
Bernie Sanders has always been sympathetic to Russia—he took his honeymoon in Moscow—and his leanings towards socialism would greatly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mike Bloomberg is friend of both Russia and China .
He represents the capitalist partner the two nations would want because they ’ ve dealt with him in the past .
Moreover , he ’ s against sanctions and tariffs .
Then there ’ s Joe Biden ; he ’ s practically family to the oligarchs .
As for President Trump , Russia has watched policies and foreign affairs victories they definitely do not like .
The left conflates the President ’ s respect for a strong Russian leader , Vladimir Putin , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They refuse to look at clear evidence that the President ’ s politeness towards Russia ’ s leader does not and has never translated into actual benefits for Russia .
Unlike the Democrats who made a sweetheart deal for Russia ’ s Middle East ally , Iran , President Trump has crippled them to the point they ’ re no longer an actual asset to Russia .
Based on the options available to Russia , President Trump is far less conducive to their agenda than any of his Democratic opponents .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a high probability of being based on disinformation intentionally fed to them so they would come to the conclusion they desire .
The fact that it ’ s likely the wrong conclusion is secondary because the Deep State has an agenda of its own , and it doesn ’ t include President Trump winning a second term .
Russia is very clever .
Unlike the Chinese , North Koreans , and Iranians , Russia has decades of high-level experience that allows them to manipulate any intelligence community , including our own , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re doing based on bias .
Considering the data was enough for the intelligence community to brief Congress about it , we must assume a high probability that it was intended to mislead .
Unlike most American endeavors that are quick and intended to deliver short-term results , Russia is willing to take its time .
They ’ ve been seeding discontent and division in America for decades .
By merely giving off the impression through leaked intelligence that they ’ re going to try to help President Trump win in November , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They really don ’ t have to do much other than let Democrats and mainstream media deliver false interpretations of the data .
If their goal is to polarize the nation , this is exactly how they ’ d do it .
If Democrats , mainstream media , and the intelligence community would take off their Trump Derangement Syndrome blinders for a while , they ’ d see they ’ re getting played like fiddles by Russia .
But they won ’ t .
They like the false intelligence they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Subscribe for free to the America First Report newsletter.
When news broke yesterday that an intelligence community official, Shelby Pierson, briefed the House Intelligence Committee on Russia’s alleged attempt to influence the 2020 election in President Trump’s favor, the “Russia Hoax” was reborn. “This is it,” editors and producers in newsrooms across the nation thought. “This is how we get him.”
After over two years of trying and failing to connect 2016 election interference between Russia and the Trump campaign, Democrats and mainstream media were shell-shocked by the Mueller Report and Robert Mueller’s subsequent testimony before Congress. They had trumpeted the same talking points and claimed the walls were closing in on the President. Some were bold enough to say President Trump would be gone before the midterm elections. Others expected the list of people going to jail to be in the dozens if not hundreds. With such failure, we almost can’t blame them for latching onto this new story so quickly. Almost.
Mainstream media and, predictably, House Democrats are accepting this speculation as facts above reproach. They aren’t questioning any of it from the same intelligence community that told us they weren’t spying on Americans until Edward Snowden showed they were. It’s the same people who hacked into the Senate Select Intelligence Committee’s computers and Senators’ emails during the last administration. It’s the same intelligence community that swore there were WMDs in Iraq.
Surely they’re right this time! After all, we have the most sophisticated intelligence apparatus in the world. What are the chances that they’ve been duped once again? Unfortunately, the odds are high for one reason and one reason only: They WANT to believe whatever the Russians are feeding them.
Let’s take a closer look at what’s being claimed. When trying to determine the validity of intelligence, experts will ask two basic questions about a data set. First, they’ll ask what’s possible. Then, they’ll assess what’s possible and determine the probability of the various hypotheses on the table.
The intelligence community has compiled evidence they believe points to Russia’s intention to influence the 2020 presidential election in favor of President Trump. Based on what we know, there are three possibilities. The first is that it must be taken at face value and seen as accurate. The second is that the data itself is inaccurate. The third is that the data is accurate, but it’s being misinterpreted.
Given the intelligence community’s recent track record, I’d put options one and two at 15% each and option three at 70%. Why? Because the first two options don’t make much sense and the third option, misinterpreted data, is the one that jibes best with the information we have available.
Let’s start with why option two, inaccurate data, is unlikely. The intelligence community knows much more than they’ve told us about 2016 election interference. They can’t tell us everything because they need to be able to use what they know to identify and stop future election interference. Based on the patterns they’ve uncovered, they were confident enough in the data to present it to Congress. Therefore, the data itself is likely accurate, though not necessarily sincere.
Option one, helping President Trump, makes very little sense prima facie. President Trump has been much harder on Russia than his predecessor. Moreover, the frontrunners among Democrats are all more favorable to Russia’s short- and long-term agendas than President Trump. Bernie Sanders has always been sympathetic to Russia—he took his honeymoon in Moscow—and his leanings towards socialism would greatly empower Russia on the world stage. Mike Bloomberg is friend of both Russia and China. He represents the capitalist partner the two nations would want because they’ve dealt with him in the past. Moreover, he’s against sanctions and tariffs. Then there’s Joe Biden; he’s practically family to the oligarchs.
As for President Trump, Russia has watched policies and foreign affairs victories they definitely do not like.
Massive Sale on beef. Freeze dried Ribeye, NY Strip, and Premium beef cubes. Promo code “jdr” at checkout for 15% off! WholeCows.com
Trump has been tougher on Russia than any President since Reagan Denounced annexation of Crimea Strengthened NATO, isolating Russia Ukrainian forces armed against Putin's wishes Diplomats expelled Sanctions imposed Trump is tough on Russia, unlike Obama who colluded! — Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) February 21, 2020
The left conflates the President’s respect for a strong Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, as some form of puppet-to-puppetmaster relationship. They refuse to look at clear evidence that the President’s politeness towards Russia’s leader does not and has never translated into actual benefits for Russia. Unlike the Democrats who made a sweetheart deal for Russia’s Middle East ally, Iran, President Trump has crippled them to the point they’re no longer an actual asset to Russia.
Based on the options available to Russia, President Trump is far less conducive to their agenda than any of his Democratic opponents. This is why the claims by the intelligence community have a high probability of being based on disinformation intentionally fed to them so they would come to the conclusion they desire. The fact that it’s likely the wrong conclusion is secondary because the Deep State has an agenda of its own, and it doesn’t include President Trump winning a second term.
Russia is very clever. Unlike the Chinese, North Koreans, and Iranians, Russia has decades of high-level experience that allows them to manipulate any intelligence community, including our own, that refuses to see what they’re doing based on bias. Considering the data was enough for the intelligence community to brief Congress about it, we must assume a high probability that it was intended to mislead.
Unlike most American endeavors that are quick and intended to deliver short-term results, Russia is willing to take its time. They’ve been seeding discontent and division in America for decades. By merely giving off the impression through leaked intelligence that they’re going to try to help President Trump win in November, they are splitting us apart even further. They really don’t have to do much other than let Democrats and mainstream media deliver false interpretations of the data. If their goal is to polarize the nation, this is exactly how they’d do it.
If Democrats, mainstream media, and the intelligence community would take off their Trump Derangement Syndrome blinders for a while, they’d see they’re getting played like fiddles by Russia. But they won’t. They like the false intelligence they’re being fed.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-22--Cherry picking 3 NDAs to release is a horrific mistake by Mike Bloomberg

There are dozens , perhaps hundreds of women who are locked into non-disclosure agreements with billionaire Mike Bloomberg ’ s company .
The exact number is unknown , as is the nature of NDAs .
They normally specify that the very existence of the NDA is not to be disclosed .
One thing is clear : the presidential candidate is hiding things .
Everyone knows that .
Why else would women who filed complaints to the company , their attorneys , or law enforcement need to be forced to not disclose whatever deal they made with the company ?
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he wouldn ’ t have had them sign a non-disclosure agreement as part of their settlement .
Today , he authorized three women to be released from their NDAs .
It ’ s the most boneheaded campaign move since Elizabeth Warren ’ s campaign thought it would be good to release her DNA test .
By cherry-picking three NDAs , the campaign is essentially saying , “ We found some that are harmless enough to release , but you definitely can ’ t see the other ones.
” What ’ s in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flying that there ’ s at least one accusation of rape against a Bloomberg LP executive and several sexual harassment accusations against Bloomberg himself .
And unlike President Trump ’ s various accusations from women , Bloomberg ’ s are spread out over decades .
Nearly all of those who have accused President Trump of sexual misconduct have come out since he became a presidential nominee in 2016 , hinting at clear political motives behind them .
Bloomberg would have been better of releasing none of the NDAs .
By releasing three out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that are out there , the focus should be on why the others were deemed too damaging to release at all .
This is the likely Democratic nominee .
Bloomberg is a punchline .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Discern Report is the fastest growing America First news aggregator in the nation.
There are dozens, perhaps hundreds of women who are locked into non-disclosure agreements with billionaire Mike Bloomberg’s company. The exact number is unknown, as is the nature of NDAs. They normally specify that the very existence of the NDA is not to be disclosed.
One thing is clear: the presidential candidate is hiding things. Everyone knows that. Why else would women who filed complaints to the company, their attorneys, or law enforcement need to be forced to not disclose whatever deal they made with the company? If Bloomberg wanted the information to go public, he wouldn’t have had them sign a non-disclosure agreement as part of their settlement.
Today, he authorized three women to be released from their NDAs. It’s the most boneheaded campaign move since Elizabeth Warren’s campaign thought it would be good to release her DNA test. By cherry-picking three NDAs, the campaign is essentially saying, “We found some that are harmless enough to release, but you definitely can’t see the other ones.”
What’s in the other ones? Rumors have been flying that there’s at least one accusation of rape against a Bloomberg LP executive and several sexual harassment accusations against Bloomberg himself. And unlike President Trump’s various accusations from women, Bloomberg’s are spread out over decades. Nearly all of those who have accused President Trump of sexual misconduct have come out since he became a presidential nominee in 2016, hinting at clear political motives behind them.
Bloomberg would have been better of releasing none of the NDAs. By releasing three out of the dozens (at least) that are out there, the focus should be on why the others were deemed too damaging to release at all. This is the likely Democratic nominee. Bloomberg is a punchline.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-23--E. Jean Carroll blames President Trump, not her insane rape comments, for being fired by ELLE

When President Trump accused E. Jean Carroll of lying about being raped by him decades ago , he claimed she was trying to bolster book sales .
It made sense ; people often invoke the President in some negative light to try to sell more books .
Unfortunately for Carroll , it didn ’ t work .
Not only did she not sell many books , but she ended up losing her job after a series of unhinged interviews and strange observances , including telling Anderson Cooper in a live interview , “ I think most people think of rape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fantasies.
” In a lawsuit filed against the President , Carroll is blaming all of her woes on him .
In her court filings , she revealed something that hasn ’ t really been touched by conservative media : ELLE , the publication she has written a column for since 1993 , fired her in December .
The reason it hasn ’ t been reported is that most conservatives no longer care about her and never really cared about ELLE , but with her lawsuit demanding a DNA sample from the President of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taking this seriously .
Though it ’ s unlikely there is an election motive at play here—she ’ s almost certainly just looking for attention and a new job somewhere—the President ’ s opponents could try to use this as a # MeToo complaint against him .
Defamation is difficult to demonstrate when the results were clearly prompted by the actions of a third party .
But in the case of E. Jean Carroll , it seems nearly impossible in light of her outrageous perspectives on sex .
ELLE fired her because she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ 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.
When President Trump accused E. Jean Carroll of lying about being raped by him decades ago, he claimed she was trying to bolster book sales. It made sense; people often invoke the President in some negative light to try to sell more books. Unfortunately for Carroll, it didn’t work.
Not only did she not sell many books, but she ended up losing her job after a series of unhinged interviews and strange observances, including telling Anderson Cooper in a live interview, “I think most people think of rape as being sexy. Think of the fantasies.”
In a lawsuit filed against the President, Carroll is blaming all of her woes on him. In her court filings, she revealed something that hasn’t really been touched by conservative media: ELLE, the publication she has written a column for since 1993, fired her in December.
The reason it hasn’t been reported is that most conservatives no longer care about her and never really cared about ELLE, but with her lawsuit demanding a DNA sample from the President of the United States, we should be taking this seriously. Though it’s unlikely there is an election motive at play here—she’s almost certainly just looking for attention and a new job somewhere—the President’s opponents could try to use this as a #MeToo complaint against him.
Because Trump ridiculed my reputation, laughed at my looks, & dragged me through the mud, after 26 years, ELLE fired me. I don't blame Elle. It was the great honor of my life writing "Ask E. Jean." I blame @realdonaldtrump.https://t.co/vYIVL6yDIp — E. Jean Carroll (@ejeancarroll) February 18, 2020
Defamation is difficult to demonstrate when the results were clearly prompted by the actions of a third party. But in the case of E. Jean Carroll, it seems nearly impossible in light of her outrageous perspectives on sex. ELLE fired her because she’s unhinged.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-23--Friends of Philip Haney: ‘No way he would have taken his own life’

DHS whistleblower Philip Haney is dead .
News reports are attributing his death to a self-inflicted gunshot wound , but certain things do not seem to jibe with that narrative .
Could he be the victim of foul play ?
Haney , 67 , had many enemies .
An outspoken critic of the Obama administration and supporter of President Trump , the Middle East expert has been fighting against radical Islamic terrorism since becoming a founding member of the Department of Homeland Security in 2002 .
He was reportedly in the middle of independent investigations to help “ protect America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was found dead near his car outside of San Francisco .
He was scheduled to be married later this year .
Friends who talked to him before his disappearance on February 19th say he ’ d “ never been happier ” and that there ’ s “ no way he would have taken his own life.
” But law enforcement appears to be treating this as a suicide .
Hopefully , this is a smokescreen and they ’ re at least considering the possibility he was murdered .
If this is really a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an odd time but also by an odd means .
Nearly all suicides by firearms are committed at home .
Allegedly , Haney drove out to the area of Highway 124 and Highway 16 , got out of his car , and shot himself in the chest .
The gun was found next to him and his car .
No note has been reportedly found , nor are there social media posts indicating any preconceived notions of depression , let alone suicide .
His last Facebook post was a meme ridiculing the impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who did not want to be identified claim Haney said he feared being “ suicided ” and would never take his own life .
“ If I am found dead , it wasn ’ t suicide , ” he told multiple people , confirmed by two anonymous sources .
Representative Steve King ( R-IA ) also claims Haney had an archive of information he considered to be an “ insurance policy ” in case he was over found dead of an apparent suicide .
The Congressman said Haney did not kill himself .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the past by the Department of Justice after he claimed the Obama administration was erasing known connections between Muslim Americans and terrorist groups .
He has been outspoken about the Muslim Brotherhood and conducted an investigation into Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison .
His book , “ See Something , Say Nothing , ” is a bestseller that claimed domestic terrorist attacks could have been prevented if the Obama administration hadn ’ t tried to hide connections between the terrorists and radical Islamic terrorist groups .
Philip Haney said his enemies may try @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suicide .
Shortly after that , he allegedly committed suicide .
Who commits suicide at the side of the road by shooting themselves in the chest ?
None of this makes sense .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Subscribe for free to the America First Report newsletter.
DHS whistleblower Philip Haney is dead. News reports are attributing his death to a self-inflicted gunshot wound, but certain things do not seem to jibe with that narrative. Could he be the victim of foul play?
Haney, 67, had many enemies. An outspoken critic of the Obama administration and supporter of President Trump, the Middle East expert has been fighting against radical Islamic terrorism since becoming a founding member of the Department of Homeland Security in 2002. He was reportedly in the middle of independent investigations to help “protect America from progressive leftist socialists” when he was found dead near his car outside of San Francisco.
He was scheduled to be married later this year. Friends who talked to him before his disappearance on February 19th say he’d “never been happier” and that there’s “no way he would have taken his own life.” But law enforcement appears to be treating this as a suicide. Hopefully, this is a smokescreen and they’re at least considering the possibility he was murdered.
Sheriff's office quick to rule his death a "suicide"… yeah right. pic.twitter.com/th5p5rmFM5 — Machiavelli (@TheRISEofROD) February 23, 2020
Somebody I deeply respected and considered a friend Phil Haney – a DHS whistleblower during the Obama Admin was apparently killed yesterday in Southern California. Pray for his family and pray they find the person who murdered him. Still trying to get confirmation on details — Sara A. Carter (@SaraCarterDC) February 22, 2020
DHS whistleblower on Obama administration, terrorism in America found dead. “The current indications point to him being shot to death” https://t.co/nzVn26Vuef pic.twitter.com/ZJF0BnVA0D — Andrew Bostom (@andrewbostom) February 22, 2020
If this is really a suicide, it comes at not only an odd time but also by an odd means. Nearly all suicides by firearms are committed at home. Allegedly, Haney drove out to the area of Highway 124 and Highway 16, got out of his car, and shot himself in the chest. The gun was found next to him and his car. No note has been reportedly found, nor are there social media posts indicating any preconceived notions of depression, let alone suicide. His last Facebook post was a meme ridiculing the impeachment saga.
Friends of Haney’s who did not want to be identified claim Haney said he feared being “suicided” and would never take his own life. “If I am found dead, it wasn’t suicide,” he told multiple people, confirmed by two anonymous sources. Representative Steve King (R-IA) also claims Haney had an archive of information he considered to be an “insurance policy” in case he was over found dead of an apparent suicide. The Congressman said Haney did not kill himself.
Phil Haney was a friend & patriot. He was a target because of all he knew of Islamic terrorist coverups. He insured his life by archiving data that incriminated the highest levels of the Obama administration. Phil Haney didn’t kill himself. RIP, Phil. https://t.co/pvy7MflFwc — Steve King (@SteveKingIA) February 23, 2020
Haney has been investigated three times in the past by the Department of Justice after he claimed the Obama administration was erasing known connections between Muslim Americans and terrorist groups. He has been outspoken about the Muslim Brotherhood and conducted an investigation into Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison.
His book, “See Something, Say Nothing,” is a bestseller that claimed domestic terrorist attacks could have been prevented if the Obama administration hadn’t tried to hide connections between the terrorists and radical Islamic terrorist groups.
Philip Haney said his enemies may try to make it seem like he committed suicide. Shortly after that, he allegedly committed suicide. Who commits suicide at the side of the road by shooting themselves in the chest? None of this makes sense.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]


noqreport--2020-02-23--Mike Bloomberg’s biggest risk is… Tom Steyer?

Tom Steyer isn ’ t done in the presidential race .
At least he ’ s not done making an impact .
While his chances of actually getting the nomination would only break above the longshot-level if most of the other candidates inexplicably dropped out , he does have a very clear path to influence the election and spin it in Bernie Sanders ’ direction .
Currently , Steyer is polling at a very strong third place in the South Carolina primary this week .
He also happens to be outspending everyone there , making a play for the Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic voters there .
Though his chances of winning the primary are low , he should get delegates .
The same can ’ t be said for fellow billionaire Mike Bloomberg who isn ’ t even on the ballot .
Bloomberg has put all of his eggs into the Super Tuesday basket .
It ’ s a brokered convention strategy ; if he can keep Sanders from winning the nomination outright , he believes he can unify ( ie buy ) support for the nomination at the convention .
It ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but the person who stands in the way the most ( other than Sanders if he gets a majority of delegates ) is Steyer .
The key to this is the math surrounding the new rules from the DNC .
Candidates must get 15 % in local and/or state races to qualify for any delegates .
Sanders is polling strongly in most Super Tuesday states , but not necessarily strong enough to get a majority of the delegates .
That ’ s where Steyer comes into play .
He ’ s spending more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ multiple television markets important on Super Tuesday .
A strong third place finish in South Carolina will give him something ( other than delegates ) that Bloomberg won ’ t have : momentum .
Bloomberg is banking ( literally ) on flooding the market with so many ads that his name is echoing in people ’ s dreams as they sleep .
He ’ s trying to out-muscle the field and the only person who can get traction otherwise is Steyer .
If the “ lesser ” billionaire can take a strong finish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ads into a contentious Super Tuesday , there ’ s a good chance he could get to 15 % in some states .
But more importantly , he could prevent Bloomberg , Joe Biden , Pete Buttigieg , Elizabeth Warren , and Amy Klobuchar from reaching the threshold .
Currently , FiveThirtyEight shows Sanders as the only candidate meeting the threshold in California : All Steyer has to do is keep Bloomberg under 15 % in some of the Super Tuesday states and both billionaires ’ campaigns will be essentially done .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions spent on ads ) may make Steyer the Bloomberg-killer .
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism .
We have two priorities until election day : Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates .
We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time .
If you are interested , please join us to receive updates .

Subscribe for free to the America First Report newsletter.
Tom Steyer isn’t done in the presidential race. At least he’s not done making an impact. While his chances of actually getting the nomination would only break above the longshot-level if most of the other candidates inexplicably dropped out, he does have a very clear path to influence the election and spin it in Bernie Sanders’ direction.
Currently, Steyer is polling at a very strong third place in the South Carolina primary this week. He also happens to be outspending everyone there, making a play for the Black vote that makes up 6-in-10 of the Democratic voters there. Though his chances of winning the primary are low, he should get delegates. The same can’t be said for fellow billionaire Mike Bloomberg who isn’t even on the ballot.
Bloomberg has put all of his eggs into the Super Tuesday basket. It’s a brokered convention strategy; if he can keep Sanders from winning the nomination outright, he believes he can unify (ie buy) support for the nomination at the convention. It’s a strategy that may very well work, but the person who stands in the way the most (other than Sanders if he gets a majority of delegates) is Steyer.
The key to this is the math surrounding the new rules from the DNC. Candidates must get 15% in local and/or state races to qualify for any delegates. Sanders is polling strongly in most Super Tuesday states, but not necessarily strong enough to get a majority of the delegates. That’s where Steyer comes into play. He’s spending more than anyone other than Bloomberg in the multiple television markets important on Super Tuesday. A strong third place finish in South Carolina will give him something (other than delegates) that Bloomberg won’t have: momentum.
Bloomberg is banking (literally) on flooding the market with so many ads that his name is echoing in people’s dreams as they sleep. He’s trying to out-muscle the field and the only person who can get traction otherwise is Steyer. If the “lesser” billionaire can take a strong finish in South Carolina plus huge spending on ads into a contentious Super Tuesday, there’s a good chance he could get to 15% in some states. But more importantly, he could prevent Bloomberg, Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy Klobuchar from reaching the threshold. Currently, FiveThirtyEight shows Sanders as the only candidate meeting the threshold in California:
All Steyer has to do is keep Bloomberg under 15% in some of the Super Tuesday states and both billionaires’ campaigns will be essentially done. A strong showing in South Carolina (plus millions spent on ads) may make Steyer the Bloomberg-killer.
American Conservative Movement
Join fellow patriots as we form a grassroots movement to advance the cause of conservatism. We have two priorities until election day: Stopping Democrats and supporting strong conservative candidates. We currently have 7500+ patriots with us in a very short time. If you are interested, please join us to receive updates.
[yikes-mailchimp form=”1″]