activistpost--2020-06-30--The COVID Crisis Supercharged the War on Cash

The corona crisis has already taken a very high toll and caused deep damage in our societies and our economies , the extent of which is yet to become apparent .
We have seen its impact on productivity , on unemployment , on social cohesion and on political division .
However , there is another very worrying trend that has been accelerated under the veil of fear and confusion that the pandemic has spread .
The war on cash , already underway for almost a decade , has been drastically intensified over the last few months .
Over the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cash has escalated , we ’ ve gotten used to hearing certain arguments or “ reasons ” why we should all abandon paper money and move en masse to an exclusively digital economy .
These talking points have been repeated over and over , in most Western economies and by countless institutional figures .
“ Cash is used by terrorists , money launderers , and criminals ” is arguably the most oft repeated one , as it ’ s been widely employed in most debates about the digital transition .
Just a couple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Mario Draghi to support the decision to scrap the 500-euro note .
We didn ’ t get any specific information or data about how many terrorists were actually using this high-denomination note , but we do know that a lot of law-abiding citizens were using it to save , as were small business owners for their operational liquidity needs .
Now , however , the corona crisis has introduced a whole new direction for anti-cash rhetoric and fresh arguments in favor of a digital economy .
Even in the early stages of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concretely known about the virus or its transmission , the seeds of new fears were already being planted by sensational media reports and fear-mongering political and institutional figures .
The insidious idea that “ you can catch COVID through cash ” may have been prematurely spread , but it did stick in most people ’ s minds .
This is , of course , understandable given the extremely high levels of uncertainty and anxiety in the general public .
Wanting to eliminate potential threats was a natural instinct and so was the urge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over our lives after they ’ d been thrown into utter chaos by the global economic freeze .
Another factor that concretely helped the shift away from physical cash was an entirely practical one .
Given the lockdown measures and the new “ social distancing ” directives that were enforced all over the world , it became difficult to use cash even if you really wanted to , or if you had no other means of transaction , as is the case for billions of people .
With physical stores being forced to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ online shops offering contactless delivery ( either as a choice or as a service requirement ) , the need for cash very quickly gave way to digital payments .
See : 177 Different Ways to Generate Extra Income For most of us who have access to online banking , cards , or other digital payment services , this introduced no real inconvenience , and we probably didn ’ t even give it a second thought .
However , for many of our fellow citizens it was a serious impediment that in some cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ essential supplies .
Contrary to the glowing promises of the digital economy , of financial inclusion and convenience , the fact remains that there are still millions of people who simply do not have access to this brave new world .
According to figures by the World Bank , globally there are 2.5 billion people with no bank account , with a high concentration in the developing world .
In the West too , however , there is a very large part of the population that is unbanked and/or has no access to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also to a very large extent “ locked out ” of the digital economy .
For all these billions of people , cash is the only way to save , to transact , and to cover basic needs .
With cash being presented not just as a danger to society and to national security , but also as a direct health hazard due to the coronavirus , the push toward digital alternatives has been massively reinforced over the last few months .
Both international organizations and individual governments have actively participated in and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guidance statements and others through the blunt enforcement of direct rules and measures that leave no real room for citizens to make their own choices .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in its official guidance to retail workers recommended that they “ encourage customers to use touchless payment options , ” while a report by the World Bank highlighted the need to adopt cashless payments for the sake of “ social protection.
” The UAE Central Bank encouraged the use of online banking and digital payments “ as a measure to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residents , ” and the Bank of England has acknowledged that banknotes can hold “ bacteria and viruses ” and recommended that people wash their hands after handling money .
In March , a report from Reuters revealed that the US Federal Reserve was quarantining dollars that it repatriated from Asia and so was South Korea ’ s central bank , while the government forced banks in China to disinfect bills and keep them in a safe for up to fourteen days before putting them in circulation .
A highlight , however , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Forum published an article in its Global Agenda strongly supporting the mass adoption of digital payments for the sake of public health .
In it the authors argue that “ contactless digital payments at the point of sale , such as facial recognition , Quick Response ( QR ) codes or near-field communications ( NFC ) , can make it less likely for the virus to spread to others through cash exchanges.
” They also applauded the efforts of China in digitalizing payments and appeared to hold the country and its measures as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China ’ s path to enabling digital payments should provide some lessons to other countries eager to follow suit.
” Since a number of Western governments may indeed be “ eager to follow suit , ” let us take a closer look at this bright example and examine what it really entails .
The digitalization drive in all aspects of the Chinese state , society , and economy is nothing new and it certainly predated the emergence of COVID-19 .
The country ’ s infamous “ social rating system ” made headlines years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eagerness to use technology , the internet , and all sorts of digital systems to track its citizens ’ behavior and affiliations has long attracted international criticism and widespread condemnation by human rights organizations , privacy advocates , and free speech supporters .
Now , however , the state has been given a reason to accelerate its efforts in the mass adoption of digital payments and the abandonment of cash .
To a large extent , this digitalization of payments task was much easier in China , as digital payments there were already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of consumers already used mobile payments in 2019 according to management consultancy Bain , a sharp contrast with the US , which had adoption rates of less than 10 percent .
So , as the population had already accepted a new form of payment , the new initiative sought to dominate the means of payment too .
Thus , a new “ digital yuan ” was introduced .
This new fiat currency , which has been in development for over five years , was rolled out in April in four Chinese cities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so that it eventually replaces the physical legal tender .
This so-called Digital Currency Electronic Payment ( DCEP ) will be put into circulation through China ’ s big four state banks , and citizens will be able to receive and use it by downloading an electronic wallet application authorized by the People ’ s Bank of China ( PBOC ) , which will be linked to their bank account .
On the surface , it appears to work just like the old currency .
It is issued and backed by the PBOC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as the physical banknotes ; and , thanks to partnerships with Alipay and WeChat Pay , which control 80 percent of the country ’ s payment market , it will be used to pay for anything and be paid by anyone .
In fact , some public servant salaries and state subsidies are already being paid out in this new digital yuan , arriving in their intended recipients ’ digital wallets .
According to China ’ s state media , People ’ s Daily , the new currency is meant to simplify domestic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also facilitate and ease crossborder transactions .
The implication there is clear : it is yet another attempt to challenge the global dominance of the US dollar after the Belt and Road Initiative failed to really move the needle as the Chinese state had hoped .
The strategy of spending huge amounts of Chinese money abroad did provide some leverage over developing countries , but it didn ’ t come anywhere near “ dethroning ” the dollar and internationalizing the renminbi .
Perhaps this initiative will fare better , especially as China now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Entering this “ digital fiat ” arena first is hugely important , and the timing of the digital currency ’ s launch was no coincidence .
The development and the rollout plan were significantly accelerated following Facebook ’ s announcement of the libra , as the Chinese state wouldn ’ t have the private tech giant beat them to the punch .
In fact , the digital yuan resembles the libra in many ways .
Most importantly , neither of them is a cryptocurrency , which is decentralized by design and allows for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or third party .
In this case the issuer is the third party , and all transactions go through a very centralized system that controls and has access to all the data .
In another noncoincidence , just a few years back , China ’ s government banned initial coin offerings ( ICOs ) and placed great burdens on cryptocurrencies and crypto investors , making it very hard to operate in the country , thereby dismantling the threat of potential competition from the private sector and clearing the way for its own digital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ambassador and an independent precious metals advisor based out of Switzerland .
His Austrian approach helps his clients find tailor-made solutions to store their physical precious metals under Swiss law .
ClaudioGrass.ch Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Claudio Grass
The corona crisis has already taken a very high toll and caused deep damage in our societies and our economies, the extent of which is yet to become apparent. We have seen its impact on productivity, on unemployment, on social cohesion and on political division. However, there is another very worrying trend that has been accelerated under the veil of fear and confusion that the pandemic has spread. The war on cash, already underway for almost a decade, has been drastically intensified over the last few months.
The “Problem”
Over the last years, and as the war on cash has escalated, we’ve gotten used to hearing certain arguments or “reasons” why we should all abandon paper money and move en masse to an exclusively digital economy. These talking points have been repeated over and over, in most Western economies and by countless institutional figures. “Cash is used by terrorists, money launderers, and criminals” is arguably the most oft repeated one, as it’s been widely employed in most debates about the digital transition. Just a couple of years ago it was also used by Mario Draghi to support the decision to scrap the 500-euro note. We didn’t get any specific information or data about how many terrorists were actually using this high-denomination note, but we do know that a lot of law-abiding citizens were using it to save, as were small business owners for their operational liquidity needs.
Now, however, the corona crisis has introduced a whole new direction for anti-cash rhetoric and fresh arguments in favor of a digital economy. Even in the early stages of the pandemic, when essentially nothing was concretely known about the virus or its transmission, the seeds of new fears were already being planted by sensational media reports and fear-mongering political and institutional figures. The insidious idea that “you can catch COVID through cash” may have been prematurely spread, but it did stick in most people’s minds. This is, of course, understandable given the extremely high levels of uncertainty and anxiety in the general public. Wanting to eliminate potential threats was a natural instinct and so was the urge to take back at least some control over our lives after they’d been thrown into utter chaos by the global economic freeze.
Another factor that concretely helped the shift away from physical cash was an entirely practical one. Given the lockdown measures and the new “social distancing” directives that were enforced all over the world, it became difficult to use cash even if you really wanted to, or if you had no other means of transaction, as is the case for billions of people. With physical stores being forced to shut down and with more and more online shops offering contactless delivery (either as a choice or as a service requirement), the need for cash very quickly gave way to digital payments.
For most of us who have access to online banking, cards, or other digital payment services, this introduced no real inconvenience, and we probably didn’t even give it a second thought. However, for many of our fellow citizens it was a serious impediment that in some cases blocked their access to basic goods and essential supplies. Contrary to the glowing promises of the digital economy, of financial inclusion and convenience, the fact remains that there are still millions of people who simply do not have access to this brave new world. According to figures by the World Bank, globally there are 2.5 billion people with no bank account, with a high concentration in the developing world. In the West too, however, there is a very large part of the population that is unbanked and/or has no access to digital solutions, while the elderly are also to a very large extent “locked out” of the digital economy. For all these billions of people, cash is the only way to save, to transact, and to cover basic needs.
The “Solution”
With cash being presented not just as a danger to society and to national security, but also as a direct health hazard due to the coronavirus, the push toward digital alternatives has been massively reinforced over the last few months. Both international organizations and individual governments have actively participated in and encouraged this push, some through public guidance statements and others through the blunt enforcement of direct rules and measures that leave no real room for citizens to make their own choices.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in its official guidance to retail workers recommended that they “encourage customers to use touchless payment options,” while a report by the World Bank highlighted the need to adopt cashless payments for the sake of “social protection.” The UAE Central Bank encouraged the use of online banking and digital payments “as a measure to protect the health and safety of UAE residents,” and the Bank of England has acknowledged that banknotes can hold “bacteria and viruses” and recommended that people wash their hands after handling money. In March, a report from Reuters revealed that the US Federal Reserve was quarantining dollars that it repatriated from Asia and so was South Korea’s central bank, while the government forced banks in China to disinfect bills and keep them in a safe for up to fourteen days before putting them in circulation.
A highlight, however, came in May when the World Economic Forum published an article in its Global Agenda strongly supporting the mass adoption of digital payments for the sake of public health. In it the authors argue that “contactless digital payments at the point of sale, such as facial recognition, Quick Response (QR) codes or near-field communications (NFC), can make it less likely for the virus to spread to others through cash exchanges.” They also applauded the efforts of China in digitalizing payments and appeared to hold the country and its measures as a model to be emulated: “China’s path to enabling digital payments should provide some lessons to other countries eager to follow suit.” Since a number of Western governments may indeed be “eager to follow suit,” let us take a closer look at this bright example and examine what it really entails.
Fiat Money 2.0
The digitalization drive in all aspects of the Chinese state, society, and economy is nothing new and it certainly predated the emergence of COVID-19. The country’s infamous “social rating system” made headlines years ago, and the government’s eagerness to use technology, the internet, and all sorts of digital systems to track its citizens’ behavior and affiliations has long attracted international criticism and widespread condemnation by human rights organizations, privacy advocates, and free speech supporters. Now, however, the state has been given a reason to accelerate its efforts in the mass adoption of digital payments and the abandonment of cash.
To a large extent, this digitalization of payments task was much easier in China, as digital payments there were already very widespread. More than 80 percent of consumers already used mobile payments in 2019 according to management consultancy Bain, a sharp contrast with the US, which had adoption rates of less than 10 percent. So, as the population had already accepted a new form of payment, the new initiative sought to dominate the means of payment too. Thus, a new “digital yuan” was introduced. This new fiat currency, which has been in development for over five years, was rolled out in April in four Chinese cities, with a plan for national adoption soon so that it eventually replaces the physical legal tender.
This so-called Digital Currency Electronic Payment (DCEP) will be put into circulation through China’s big four state banks, and citizens will be able to receive and use it by downloading an electronic wallet application authorized by the People’s Bank of China (PBOC), which will be linked to their bank account. On the surface, it appears to work just like the old currency. It is issued and backed by the PBOC; it’s valued the same as the physical banknotes; and, thanks to partnerships with Alipay and WeChat Pay, which control 80 percent of the country’s payment market, it will be used to pay for anything and be paid by anyone. In fact, some public servant salaries and state subsidies are already being paid out in this new digital yuan, arriving in their intended recipients’ digital wallets.
According to China’s state media, People’s Daily, the new currency is meant to simplify domestic transactions and trade, but it will also facilitate and ease crossborder transactions. The implication there is clear: it is yet another attempt to challenge the global dominance of the US dollar after the Belt and Road Initiative failed to really move the needle as the Chinese state had hoped. The strategy of spending huge amounts of Chinese money abroad did provide some leverage over developing countries, but it didn’t come anywhere near “dethroning” the dollar and internationalizing the renminbi. Perhaps this initiative will fare better, especially as China now has the “first-mover” advantage.
Entering this “digital fiat” arena first is hugely important, and the timing of the digital currency’s launch was no coincidence. The development and the rollout plan were significantly accelerated following Facebook’s announcement of the libra, as the Chinese state wouldn’t have the private tech giant beat them to the punch. In fact, the digital yuan resembles the libra in many ways. Most importantly, neither of them is a cryptocurrency, which is decentralized by design and allows for peer-to-peer transactions without need of an intermediary or third party. In this case the issuer is the third party, and all transactions go through a very centralized system that controls and has access to all the data. In another noncoincidence, just a few years back, China’s government banned initial coin offerings (ICOs) and placed great burdens on cryptocurrencies and crypto investors, making it very hard to operate in the country, thereby dismantling the threat of potential competition from the private sector and clearing the way for its own digital coin.
Originally published at ClaudioGrass.ch.
Contact Claudio Grass
Source: Mises.org
Claudio Grass is a Mises Ambassador and an independent precious metals advisor based out of Switzerland. His Austrian approach helps his clients find tailor-made solutions to store their physical precious metals under Swiss law. ClaudioGrass.ch
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-06-30--Car Owners Forced To Breathe Into A Breathalyzer To Start Their Vehicles

The NHTSA has been trying to put breathalyzers in new cars since at least 2015 and new legislation suggests they may finally succeed .
As Landline Media explains , “ an already large bill has developed into an enormous one .
House Democrats merged the nearly $ 500 billion highway bill , or INVEST in America Act , into a larger infrastructure package with a $ 1.5 trillion price tag.
” A press release reveals that this new bill would treat every American like a potential criminal and force them to breathe into a breathalyzer every time they get behind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that part of the new act , forcing car manufacturers to install breathalyzers in new cars , will be voted on this July !
In less than five years , the “ Moving Forward Act ” will require all passenger vehicles be equipped with drunk driving-detection technology .
Not later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this section , the Secretary shall prescribe a final rule containing the motor vehicle safety standard required under this sub-section .
The final rule shall specify an effective date that provides at least 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years , to allow for manufacturing compliance .
This bill would accelerate the development of breathalyzers in new cars .
The bill would also allow the Feds to install “ advanced drunk driving prevention technology ” or Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety ( DADDS ) in every new car .
Become an Activist Post Patron for $ 1 per month at Patreon .
• The term “ advanced drunk driving prevention technology ” means a passive system which— • a similar system which detects impairment and prevents or limits vehicle operation ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ page 1446 ) .
DADDS and the NHTSA are working together to put breathalyzers and touch sensors in every new car .
Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky ’ s press release revealed how excited MADD is about putting DADDS in new cars .
The Morning Sun also revealed how thrilled former consultant to the American Automobile Policy Council and former president of the General Motors Foundation , U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell is : Treating people like suspected criminals every time they get behind the wheel is not about traffic and automotive safety , it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until proven innocent .
This bill and others like it only serve to increase Big Brother ’ s ever-expanding reach into Americans ’ daily lives .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By MassPrivateI
The NHTSA has been trying to put breathalyzers in new cars since at least 2015 and new legislation suggests they may finally succeed.
As Landline Media explains, “an already large bill has developed into an enormous one. House Democrats merged the nearly $500 billion highway bill, or INVEST in America Act, into a larger infrastructure package with a $1.5 trillion price tag.”
A press release reveals that this new bill would treat every American like a potential criminal and force them to breathe into a breathalyzer every time they get behind the wheel.
To honor the Abbas family’s legacy to stop drunk driving by directing NHTSA to prescribe a motor vehicle safety standard requiring passenger motor vehicles to be equipped with an advanced drunk driving prevention system that detects if the driver is intoxicated.
The Morning Sun reveals that part of the new act, forcing car manufacturers to install breathalyzers in new cars, will be voted on this July!
In less than five years, the “Moving Forward Act” will require all passenger vehicles be equipped with drunk driving-detection technology.
Not later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall prescribe a final rule containing the motor vehicle safety standard required under this sub-section. The final rule shall specify an effective date that provides at least 2 years, and no more than 3 years, to allow for manufacturing compliance.
This bill would accelerate the development of breathalyzers in new cars.
The Secretary shall work directly with manufacturers of passenger motor vehicles, suppliers, safety advocates, and other interested parties to accelerate the development of the drunk driving prevention technology required to prescribe a motor vehicle safety standard.
The bill would also allow the Feds to install “advanced drunk driving prevention technology” or Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADDS) in every new car.
Become an Activist Post Patron for $1 per month at Patreon.
The term “advanced drunk driving prevention technology” means a passive system which— monitors a driver’s performance to identify impairment of a driver; a system which passively detects a blood alcohol level exceeding .08 blood alcohol content; or a similar system which detects impairment and prevents or limits vehicle operation (for more information read Section 32005, page 1446).
DADDS and the NHTSA are working together to put breathalyzers and touch sensors in every new car.
The DADSS research program brings together the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety, which represents the world’s leading automakers, and the NHTSA in one of the most important government and private sector partnerships in recent years.
Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky’s press release revealed how excited MADD is about putting DADDS in new cars.
MADD applauds Chairman Frank Pallone and Chairwoman Jan Schakowsky for their leadership to save lives in this legislation,” said MADD National President Helen Witty. “This bill makes traffic and automotive safety a top priority. We also commend Rep. Debbie Dingell for her steadfast commitment to drunk driving prevention. The bill includes her HALT Act which sets a reasonable time frame to equip all new passenger vehicles with passive, advanced drunk driving prevention systems.
The Morning Sun also revealed how thrilled former consultant to the American Automobile Policy Council and former president of the General Motors Foundation, U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell is:
“We need the installation of advanced drunk driving prevention systems in all passenger vehicles. For decades, working together with MADD and other advocates we’ve pushed for legislation. Including my drunk driving legislation in House Democrats’ comprehensive infrastructure package is a huge step forward in curbing drunk driving on American roads,” Dingell said.
Treating people like suspected criminals every time they get behind the wheel is not about traffic and automotive safety, it is about perpetuating an atmosphere of being guilty until proven innocent.
This bill and others like it only serve to increase Big Brother’s ever-expanding reach into Americans’ daily lives.
Source: MassPrivateI Blog
Image: Pixabay
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-06-30--The Purge: The Natural Progression Of “Woke” Censorship Is Tyranny

As I have noted in the past , in order to be a conservative one has to stick to certain principles .
For example , you have to stand against big government and state intrusions into individual lives , you have to support our constitutional framework and defend civil liberties , and you also have to uphold the rights of private property .
Websites are indeed private property , as much as a person ’ s home is private property .
There is no such thing as free speech rights in another person ’ s home , and there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a website .
That said , there are some exceptions .
When a corporation or a collective of corporations holds a monopoly over a certain form of communication , then legal questions come into play when they try to censor the viewpoints of an entire group of people .
Corporations exist due to government-sponsored charters ; they are creations of government and enjoy certain legal protections through government , such as limited liability and corporate personhood .
Corporations are a product of socialism , not free market capitalism ; and when they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regulation and possible demarcation .
Many corporations have also received extensive government bailouts ( taxpayer money ) and corporate welfare .
Google and Facebook , for example rake in billions in state and federal subsidies over the course of a few years .
Google doesn ’ t even pay for the massive bandwidth it uses .
So , it is not outlandish to suggest that if a company receives the full protection of government from the legal realm to the financial realm then they fall under the category of a public service .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ monopolize communication while also being coddled by the government as “ too big to fail ” , then they become a public menace instead .
This is not to say that I support the idea of nationalization .
On the contrary , the disasters of socialism can not be cured with even more socialism .
However , monopolies are a poison to free markets and to free speech and must be deconstructed or abolished .
Beyond corporate monopolies , there is also the danger of ideological monopolies .
Consider this – The vast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lion ’ s share of social media platforms are run by extreme political leftists and globalists that are openly hostile to conservative and moderate values .
Case in point : Three of the largest platforms on the internet – Reddit , Twitch , and YouTube just acted simultaneously in a single day to shut down tens of thousands of forums , streamers and video channels , the majority of which espouse conservative arguments which the media refers to as “ hate speech ” .
To be sure , at least a few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a position of race superiority .
However , I keep seeing the mainstream media making accusations that all the people being silenced right now deserve it due to “ racism ” and “ calls for violence ” , and I have yet to see them offer a single piece of evidence supporting any of these claims .
Become an Activist Post Patron for $ 1 per month at Patreon .
A recent article from the hyper-leftist Salon is a perfect example of the hypocrisy and madness of the social justice left in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Twitch , YouTube And Reddit Punished Trump And Other Racists – And That ’ s A Great Thing For Freedom ’ .
Here are a few excerpts with my commentary : Salon : “ Freedom is impossible for everyone when viewpoints prevail that dehumanize anyone .
And it appears that several big social media platforms agree , judging from recent bans or suspensions of racist accounts across YouTube , Twitch , and Reddit.
” Freedom can not be taken away by another person ’ s viewpoint .
Every individual has complete control over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marginalized and no amount of disapproval can silence a person unless they allow it to .
If you are weak minded or weak willed , then grow a backbone instead of expecting the rest of the world to stay quiet and keep you comfortable .
Remember when the political left was the bastion of the free speech debate against the censorship of the religious right ?
Well , now the leftists have a religion ( or cult ) of their own and they have changed their minds on the importance of open dialogue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are dehumanized — whether by racism , sexism , classism , ableism , anti-LGBTQ sentiment or any other prejudices — their voices are diminished or outright silenced , and in the process they lose their ability to fully participate in our democracy .
We all need to live in a society where hate is discouraged , discredited and whenever possible scrubbed out completely from our discourse .
This doesn ’ t mean we should label all ideas as hateful simply because we disagree with them ; to do that runs afoul of President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ In a democracy debate is the breath of life ” .
When actual hate enters the dialogue , however , it acts as a toxic smoke in the air of debate , suffocating some voices and weakening the rest.
” Where do I begin with this steaming pile of woke nonsense ?
First , it ’ s impossible to be “ dehumanized ” by another person ’ s opinion of you .
If they are wrong , or an idiot , then their opinion carries no weight and should be ignored .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ opinion .
No one can be “ silenced ” by another person ’ s viewpoint unless they allow themselves to be silenced .
If they are right about you and are telling you something you don ’ t want to hear , then that is your problem , not theirs .
No one in this world is entitled to protection from other people ’ s opinions .
Period .
It should not surprise anyone though that leftists are actively attempting to silence all dissent while accusing conservatives of stifling free speech .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the victim while they seek to victimize .
They have no principles .
They do not care about being right , they only care about “ winning ” .
Under the 1st Amendment , ALL speech is protected , including what leftists arbitrarily label “ hate speech ” .
Unless you are knowingly defaming a specific person or threatening specific violence against a specific person , your rights are protected .
Interpreting broad speech as a “ threat ” because of how it might make certain people feel simply will not hold up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at least , it should not hold up… Political leftists have declared themselves the arbiters of what constitutes “ hate speech ” , the problem is they see EVERYTHING that is conservative as racist , sexist , misogynistic , etc .
No human being or group of human beings is pure enough or objective enough to sit in judgment of what encompasses fair or acceptable speech .
Therefore , all speech must be allowed in order to avoid tyranny .
If an idea is unjust , then by all means , the political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with their own ideas and arguments .
“ Scrubbing ” all opposing ideas from the public discourse is unacceptable , and this is exactly what the social justice movement is attempting to do .
If you want to erase these ideas from your own home , or your personal website , then you are perfectly within your rights to do so , but you DO NOT have the right to assert a monopoly on speech and the political narrative .
Generally , when a group of zealots is trying to erase opposing ideals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own ideals don ’ t hold up to scrutiny .
If your ideology is so pure and correct in its form , there should be no need to trick the masses into accepting it by scrubbing the internet .
Finally , America was not founded as a democracy , we are a republic , and with good reason .
A democracy is tyranny by the majority ; a collectivist hell where power is centralized into the hands of whoever can con 51 % of the population to their side .
Marxists and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and speak about it often because they think they are keenly equipped to manipulate the masses and form a majority .
But , in a republic , individual rights are protected REGARDLESS of what the majority happens to believe at any given time , and this includes the right to free speech .
In the same breath , Salon pretends to value free discussion , then calls for the destruction of free speech and opposing ideas in the name of protecting people ’ s thin-skinned sensitivities .
In other words , free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a viewpoint they don ’ t like , then it becomes hate speech and must be suppressed .
Salon : “ Reddit referred Salon to a statement explaining , ” We committed to closing the gap between our values and our policies to explicitly address hate ” and that “ ultimately , it ’ s our responsibility to support our communities by taking stronger action against those who try to weaponize parts of Reddit against other people.
” ” In other words , they don ’ t like conservatives using their platforms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left is unable to present any valid arguments to defend their beliefs and they are losing the culture war , they are going for broke and seeking to erase all conservatives from their platforms instead .
The “ hate speech ” excuse is merely a false rationale .
Social justice warriors stand on top of a dung heap and pretend it ’ s the moral high ground .
Salon : “ No one who understands Constitutional law can argue that these corporate decisions violate the First Amendment which only protects speech from government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ University of California , Irvine Law School told Salon by email that “ private companies running websites are not subject to being sued for violating the First Amendment .
The companies are private actors who can include whatever content they want unless there is a law preventing them from doing so.
” Again , this is not entirely true .
Corporations are constructs of government and receive special privileges from government .
If corporations form a monopoly over a certain form of communication and they attempt to censor all opposing views from that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by government to prevent destruction of the marketplace .
Also , government can rescind the limited liability and corporate personhood of these companies as punishment for violating the public trust .
And finally , any company that relies on taxpayer dollars or special tax break incentives to survive can and should have those dollars taken away when attempting to assert a monopoly .
Yes , there are alternative platforms for people to go to , but what is to stop leftist/globalist monopolies from buying up every other social media and standard media platform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the past decade ) ?
What is to stop leftist/globalist interests from using the “ hate speech ” argument to put pressure on ALL other web platforms including service and domain providers to cancel conservatives ?
Finally , just because something is technically legal does not necessarily make it right .
Corporations exploit government protection , yet claim they are not subject to government regulation ?
The left hates corporate America , yet they happily defend corporations when they are censoring conservatives ?
This is insane .
The Salon author then goes on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once a victim of racism ( all SJWs measure personal value according to how much more victimized someone is compared to others ) .
His claims are irrelevant to the argument at hand , then he continues… Salon : “ Trump threatening to use the government power to retaliate against those companies , on the other hand , is a threat to both the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment .
He and his supporters are not being stopped from disseminating their views on other platforms… ” Here is the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
All of my readers know I do not put any faith in Donald Trump to do the right thing , mostly because of the elitists he surrounds himself with in his cabinet .
When it comes down to it , Trump will act in THEIR best interests , not in the public ’ s best interests .
Giving him ( or the FCC ) the power to dictate speech rules on the internet is a bad idea .
Also , for those that think the election process still matters , what if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today and then the political left enters the White House tomorrow ?
Yikes !
Then we ’ ll have no room to complain as they will most certainly flip-flop and use government power to silence their opposition .
Of course , if the roles were reversed and corporations were deplatforming thousands of social justice forums and videos , the leftists would be screaming bloody murder about “ corporate censorship ” and “ discrimination ” .
For now , in their minds , racial discrimination = bad .
Politicial discrimination = good .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and an ideological monopoly coupled with a unified corporate monopoly is a monstrosity that can not be tolerated .
Government can and should break up such monopolies without going down the rabbit hole of nationalization .
Yes , we can go to small startup platforms and leave Twitter , Facebook , Reddit , YouTube , etc .
behind .
I have been saying for years that conservatives with the capital should start their own alternative social media .
In fact , that is exactly what is finally happening .
There has been a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lately .
I say , let the SJWs have their echo chambers and maybe these companies will collapse .
Get Woke Go Broke still applies .
But , government can no longer protect these corporations , either .
With the government raining down bailout cash and corporate welfare on media companies , voting with your feet and your wallet does not have the same effect or send the same message .
The future of this situation is bleak .
I have no doubt that leftists and globalists will attempt to purge ALL conservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point of attempting to shut down private conservative websites through service providers .
The final outcome of the purge is predictable : Civil war ; an issue I will be discussing in my next article .
Leftists accuse conservatives of hate , but social justice adherents seem to hate almost everything .
I don ’ t think I ’ ve ever witnessed a group of people more obsessed with visiting misery on others , and they will never be satisfied or satiated .
That which is normal speech today will be labeled as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to justify its own existence .
I for one am not going to live my life walking on eggshells around a clique of narcissistic sociopaths .
Cancel culture is mob rule , and mob rule is at its core the true evil here ; far more evil than any mere words spoken by any “ white supremacist ” on any forum or video ever .
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda , subscribe to our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Learn more about it HERE .
After 8 long years of ultra-loose monetary policy from the Federal Reserve , it ’ s no secret that inflation is primed to soar .
If your IRA or 401 ( k ) is exposed to this threat , it ’ s critical to act now !
That ’ s why thousands of Americans are moving their retirement into a Gold IRA .
Learn how you can too with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group .
It reveals the little-known IRS Tax Law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ k ) into gold .
Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold .
You can contact Brandon Smith at : [ email protected ] Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

Op-Ed by Brandon Smith
As I have noted in the past, in order to be a conservative one has to stick to certain principles. For example, you have to stand against big government and state intrusions into individual lives, you have to support our constitutional framework and defend civil liberties, and you also have to uphold the rights of private property. Websites are indeed private property, as much as a person’s home is private property. There is no such thing as free speech rights in another person’s home, and there is no such thing as free speech rights on a website.
That said, there are some exceptions. When a corporation or a collective of corporations holds a monopoly over a certain form of communication, then legal questions come into play when they try to censor the viewpoints of an entire group of people. Corporations exist due to government-sponsored charters; they are creations of government and enjoy certain legal protections through government, such as limited liability and corporate personhood. Corporations are a product of socialism, not free market capitalism; and when they become monopolies, they are subject to regulation and possible demarcation.
Many corporations have also received extensive government bailouts (taxpayer money) and corporate welfare. Google and Facebook, for example rake in billions in state and federal subsidies over the course of a few years. Google doesn’t even pay for the massive bandwidth it uses. So, it is not outlandish to suggest that if a company receives the full protection of government from the legal realm to the financial realm then they fall under the category of a public service. If they are allowed to continue to monopolize communication while also being coddled by the government as “too big to fail”, then they become a public menace instead.
This is not to say that I support the idea of nationalization. On the contrary, the disasters of socialism cannot be cured with even more socialism. However, monopolies are a poison to free markets and to free speech and must be deconstructed or abolished.
Beyond corporate monopolies, there is also the danger of ideological monopolies. Consider this – The vast majority of Silicon Valley companies that control the lion’s share of social media platforms are run by extreme political leftists and globalists that are openly hostile to conservative and moderate values.
Case in point: Three of the largest platforms on the internet – Reddit, Twitch, and YouTube just acted simultaneously in a single day to shut down tens of thousands of forums, streamers and video channels, the majority of which espouse conservative arguments which the media refers to as “hate speech”.
To be sure, at least a few of the outlets shut down probably argue from a position of race superiority. However, I keep seeing the mainstream media making accusations that all the people being silenced right now deserve it due to “racism” and “calls for violence”, and I have yet to see them offer a single piece of evidence supporting any of these claims.
Become an Activist Post Patron for $1 per month at Patreon.
A recent article from the hyper-leftist Salon is a perfect example of the hypocrisy and madness of the social justice left in action. It’s titled ‘Twitch, YouTube And Reddit Punished Trump And Other Racists – And That’s A Great Thing For Freedom’. Here are a few excerpts with my commentary:
Salon: “Freedom is impossible for everyone when viewpoints prevail that dehumanize anyone. And it appears that several big social media platforms agree, judging from recent bans or suspensions of racist accounts across YouTube, Twitch, and Reddit.”
My Response
Freedom cannot be taken away by another person’s viewpoint. Every individual has complete control over whether or not they “feel” marginalized and no amount of disapproval can silence a person unless they allow it to. If you are weak minded or weak willed, then grow a backbone instead of expecting the rest of the world to stay quiet and keep you comfortable.
Remember when the political left was the bastion of the free speech debate against the censorship of the religious right? Well, now the leftists have a religion (or cult) of their own and they have changed their minds on the importance of open dialogue.
Salon: “For those who are dehumanized — whether by racism, sexism, classism, ableism, anti-LGBTQ sentiment or any other prejudices — their voices are diminished or outright silenced, and in the process they lose their ability to fully participate in our democracy. We all need to live in a society where hate is discouraged, discredited and whenever possible scrubbed out completely from our discourse. This doesn’t mean we should label all ideas as hateful simply because we disagree with them; to do that runs afoul of President Dwight Eisenhower’s famous statement, “In a democracy debate is the breath of life”. When actual hate enters the dialogue, however, it acts as a toxic smoke in the air of debate, suffocating some voices and weakening the rest.”
My Response
Where do I begin with this steaming pile of woke nonsense? First, it’s impossible to be “dehumanized” by another person’s opinion of you. If they are wrong, or an idiot, then their opinion carries no weight and should be ignored. Your value is not determined by their opinion. No one can be “silenced” by another person’s viewpoint unless they allow themselves to be silenced. If they are right about you and are telling you something you don’t want to hear, then that is your problem, not theirs. No one in this world is entitled to protection from other people’s opinions. Period.
It should not surprise anyone though that leftists are actively attempting to silence all dissent while accusing conservatives of stifling free speech. This is what they do; they play the victim while they seek to victimize. They have no principles. They do not care about being right, they only care about “winning”.
Under the 1st Amendment, ALL speech is protected, including what leftists arbitrarily label “hate speech”. Unless you are knowingly defaming a specific person or threatening specific violence against a specific person, your rights are protected. Interpreting broad speech as a “threat” because of how it might make certain people feel simply will not hold up in a court of law. Or at least, it should not hold up…
Political leftists have declared themselves the arbiters of what constitutes “hate speech”, the problem is they see EVERYTHING that is conservative as racist, sexist, misogynistic, etc. No human being or group of human beings is pure enough or objective enough to sit in judgment of what encompasses fair or acceptable speech. Therefore, all speech must be allowed in order to avoid tyranny.
If an idea is unjust, then by all means, the political left has every right to counter it with their own ideas and arguments. “Scrubbing” all opposing ideas from the public discourse is unacceptable, and this is exactly what the social justice movement is attempting to do. If you want to erase these ideas from your own home, or your personal website, then you are perfectly within your rights to do so, but you DO NOT have the right to assert a monopoly on speech and the political narrative.
Generally, when a group of zealots is trying to erase opposing ideals from the discussion, it usually means their own ideals don’t hold up to scrutiny. If your ideology is so pure and correct in its form, there should be no need to trick the masses into accepting it by scrubbing the internet.
Finally, America was not founded as a democracy, we are a republic, and with good reason. A democracy is tyranny by the majority; a collectivist hell where power is centralized into the hands of whoever can con 51% of the population to their side. Marxists and communists love the idea of “democracy” and speak about it often because they think they are keenly equipped to manipulate the masses and form a majority. But, in a republic, individual rights are protected REGARDLESS of what the majority happens to believe at any given time, and this includes the right to free speech.
In the same breath, Salon pretends to value free discussion, then calls for the destruction of free speech and opposing ideas in the name of protecting people’s thin-skinned sensitivities. In other words, free speech is good, unless it’s a viewpoint they don’t like, then it becomes hate speech and must be suppressed.
Salon: “Reddit referred Salon to a statement explaining,”We committed to closing the gap between our values and our policies to explicitly address hate” and that “ultimately, it’s our responsibility to support our communities by taking stronger action against those who try to weaponize parts of Reddit against other people.””
My Response
In other words, they don’t like conservatives using their platforms against them, and since the political left is unable to present any valid arguments to defend their beliefs and they are losing the culture war, they are going for broke and seeking to erase all conservatives from their platforms instead. The “hate speech” excuse is merely a false rationale. Social justice warriors stand on top of a dung heap and pretend it’s the moral high ground.
Salon: “No one who understands Constitutional law can argue that these corporate decisions violate the First Amendment which only protects speech from government repression. Professor Rick Hasen at the University of California, Irvine Law School told Salon by email that “private companies running websites are not subject to being sued for violating the First Amendment. The companies are private actors who can include whatever content they want unless there is a law preventing them from doing so.”
My Response
Again, this is not entirely true. Corporations are constructs of government and receive special privileges from government. If corporations form a monopoly over a certain form of communication and they attempt to censor all opposing views from that platform then they can be broken up by government to prevent destruction of the marketplace. Also, government can rescind the limited liability and corporate personhood of these companies as punishment for violating the public trust. And finally, any company that relies on taxpayer dollars or special tax break incentives to survive can and should have those dollars taken away when attempting to assert a monopoly.
Yes, there are alternative platforms for people to go to, but what is to stop leftist/globalist monopolies from buying up every other social media and standard media platform (as they have been doing for the past decade)? What is to stop leftist/globalist interests from using the “hate speech” argument to put pressure on ALL other web platforms including service and domain providers to cancel conservatives?
Finally, just because something is technically legal does not necessarily make it right. Corporations exploit government protection, yet claim they are not subject to government regulation? The left hates corporate America, yet they happily defend corporations when they are censoring conservatives? This is insane.
The Salon author then goes on a blathering diatribe about how he was once a victim of racism (all SJWs measure personal value according to how much more victimized someone is compared to others). His claims are irrelevant to the argument at hand, then he continues…
Salon: “Trump threatening to use the government power to retaliate against those companies, on the other hand, is a threat to both the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment. He and his supporters are not being stopped from disseminating their views on other platforms…”
My Response
Here is the only area where I partially agree with Salon. All of my readers know I do not put any faith in Donald Trump to do the right thing, mostly because of the elitists he surrounds himself with in his cabinet. When it comes down to it, Trump will act in THEIR best interests, not in the public’s best interests. Giving him (or the FCC) the power to dictate speech rules on the internet is a bad idea. Also, for those that think the election process still matters, what if we gift such powers to the government today and then the political left enters the White House tomorrow? Yikes! Then we’ll have no room to complain as they will most certainly flip-flop and use government power to silence their opposition.
Of course, if the roles were reversed and corporations were deplatforming thousands of social justice forums and videos, the leftists would be screaming bloody murder about “corporate censorship” and “discrimination”. For now, in their minds, racial discrimination = bad. Politicial discrimination = good.
The monopoly issue still stands, though, and an ideological monopoly coupled with a unified corporate monopoly is a monstrosity that cannot be tolerated. Government can and should break up such monopolies without going down the rabbit hole of nationalization.
Yes, we can go to small startup platforms and leave Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, YouTube, etc. behind. I have been saying for years that conservatives with the capital should start their own alternative social media. In fact, that is exactly what is finally happening. There has been a mass exodus of users from mainstream websites lately. I say, let the SJWs have their echo chambers and maybe these companies will collapse. Get Woke Go Broke still applies.
But, government can no longer protect these corporations, either. With the government raining down bailout cash and corporate welfare on media companies, voting with your feet and your wallet does not have the same effect or send the same message.
The future of this situation is bleak. I have no doubt that leftists and globalists will attempt to purge ALL conservative discussion from the internet, to the point of attempting to shut down private conservative websites through service providers. The final outcome of the purge is predictable: Civil war; an issue I will be discussing in my next article.
Leftists accuse conservatives of hate, but social justice adherents seem to hate almost everything. I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed a group of people more obsessed with visiting misery on others, and they will never be satisfied or satiated. That which is normal speech today will be labeled as hate speech tomorrow. The cult must continue to justify its own existence. I for one am not going to live my life walking on eggshells around a clique of narcissistic sociopaths. Cancel culture is mob rule, and mob rule is at its core the true evil here; far more evil than any mere words spoken by any “white supremacist” on any forum or video ever.
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE.
After 8 long years of ultra-loose monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, it’s no secret that inflation is primed to soar. If your IRA or 401(k) is exposed to this threat, it’s critical to act now! That’s why thousands of Americans are moving their retirement into a Gold IRA. Learn how you can too with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group. It reveals the little-known IRS Tax Law to move your IRA or 401(k) into gold. Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold.
You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-06-30--America’s Revolutionary Founders Would Be Anti-Government Extremists Today

Had the Declaration of Independence been written today , it would have rendered its signers extremists or terrorists , resulting in them being placed on a government watch list , targeted for surveillance of their activities and correspondence , and potentially arrested , held indefinitely , stripped of their rights and labeled enemy combatants .
This is no longer the stuff of speculation and warning .
In fact , Attorney General William Barr recently announced plans to target , track and surveil “ anti-government extremists ” and preemptively nip in the bud any “ threats ” to public safety and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t matter that the stated purpose of Barr ’ s anti-government extremist task force is to investigate dissidents on the far right ( the “ boogaloo ” movement ) and far left ( Antifa , a loosely organized anti-fascist group ) who have been accused of instigating violence and disrupting peaceful protests .
Boogaloo and Antifa have given the government the perfect excuse for declaring war ( with all that entails : surveillance , threat assessments , pre-crime , etc . )
against so-called anti-government extremists .
Without a doubt , America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the top of Barr ’ s list .
After all , the people who fomented the American Revolution spoke out at rallies , distributed critical pamphlets , wrote scathing editorials and took to the streets in protest .
They were rebelling against a government they saw as being excessive in its taxation and spending .
For their efforts , they were demonized and painted as an angry mob , extremists akin to terrorists , by the ruler of the day , King George III .
Of course , it doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremist ( a.k.a .
domestic terrorist ) today .
If you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution ( namely , your right to speak freely , worship freely , associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views , criticize the government , own a weapon , demand a warrant before being questioned or searched by the police , or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government , racist , bigoted , anarchic or sovereign ) , you ’ re at the top of the government ’ s terrorism watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s new task force , I and every other individual today who dares to speak truth to power could also be targeted for surveillance , because what we ’ re really dealing with is a government that wants to suppress dangerous words—words about its warring empire , words about its land grabs , words about its militarized police , words about its killing , its poisoning and its corruption—in order to keep its lies going .
This is how the government plans to snuff out any attempts by “ we the people ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under the pretext of rooting out violent extremists , the government ’ s anti-extremism program will , in many cases , be utilized to render otherwise lawful , nonviolent activities as potentially extremist .
Become an Activist Post Patron for $ 1 per month at Patreon .
Keep in mind that the government agencies involved in ferreting out American “ extremists ” will carry out their objectives—to identify and deter potential extremists—in concert with fusion centers , data collection agencies , behavioral scientists , corporations , social media , and community organizers and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , facial recognition , predictive policing , biometrics , and behavioral epigenetics ( in which life experiences alter one ’ s genetic makeup ) .
This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it ’ s been a long time coming .
For example , in 2009 , the Department of Homeland Security ( DHS ) released two reports , one on “ Rightwing Extremism , ” which broadly defines rightwing extremists as individuals and groups “ that are mainly antigovernment , rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and one on “ Leftwing Extremism , ” which labeled environmental and animal rights activist groups as extremists .
Incredibly , both reports use the words terrorist and extremist interchangeably .
That same year , the DHS launched Operation Vigilant Eagle , which calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq , Afghanistan and other far-flung places , characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “ disgruntled , disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war .
These reports indicate that for the government , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re Left , Right or somewhere in between—can be labeled an extremist .
Fast forward a few years , and you have the National Defense Authorization Act ( NDAA ) , which Congress has continually re-upped , that allows the military to take you out of your home , lock you up with no access to friends , family or the courts if you ’ re seen as an extremist .
Now connect the dots , from the 2009 Extremism reports to the NDAA , the National Security Agency ’ s far-reaching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collect and share surveillance data between local , state and federal police agencies Add in tens of thousands of armed , surveillance drones that are beginning to blanket American skies , facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go and whatever you do .
And then to complete the circle , toss in the real-time crime centers being deployed in cities across the country , which will be attempting to “ predict ” crimes and identify criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance , complex mathematical algorithms and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting the picture , which is how easy it is for the government to identify , label and target individuals as “ extremist.
” And just like that , we ’ ve come full circle .
Imagine living in a country where armed soldiers crash through doors to arrest and imprison citizens merely for criticizing government officials .
Imagine that in this very same country , you ’ re watched all the time , and if you look even a little bit suspicious , the police stop and frisk you or pull you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance you ’ re doing something illegal .
Keep in mind that if you have a firearm of any kind ( or anything that resembled a firearm ) while in this country , it may get you arrested and , in some circumstances , shot by police .
If you ’ re thinking this sounds like America today , you wouldn ’ t be far wrong .
However , the scenario described above took place more than 200 years ago , when American colonists suffered under Great Britain ’ s version of an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when the colonists finally got fed up with being silenced , censored , searched , frisked , threatened , and arrested that they finally revolted against the tyrant ’ s fetters No document better states their grievances than the Declaration of Independence , drafted by Thomas Jefferson .
A document seething with outrage over a government which had betrayed its citizens , the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4 , 1776 , by 56 men who laid everything on the line , pledged it all— “ our Lives , our Fortunes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they believed in a radical idea : that all people are created to be free .
Labeled traitors , these men were charged with treason , a crime punishable by death .
For some , their acts of rebellion would cost them their homes and their fortunes .
For others , it would be the ultimate price—their lives .
Yet even knowing the heavy price they might have to pay , these men dared to speak up when silence could not be tolerated .
Read the Declaration of Independence again , and ask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Jefferson don ’ t bear a startling resemblance to the abuses “ we the people ” are suffering at the hands of the American police state .
If you find the purple prose used by the Founders hard to decipher , here ’ s my translation of what the Declaration of Independence would look and sound like if it were written in the modern vernacular : There comes a time when a populace must stand united and say “ enough is enough ” to the government ’ s abuses , even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parties in power .
Believing that “ we the people ” have a natural and divine right to direct our own lives , here are truths about the power of the people and how we arrived at the decision to sever our ties to the government : All people are created equal .
All people possess certain innate rights that no government or agency or individual can take away from them .
Among these are the right to Life , Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness .
The government ’ s job is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights to Life , Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness .
The government ’ s power comes from the will of the people .
Whenever any government abuses its power , it is the right of the people to alter or abolish that government and replace it with a new government that will respect and protect the rights of the people .
It is not wise to get rid of a government for minor transgressions .
In fact , as history has shown , people resist change and are inclined to suffer all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become accustomed .
However , when the people have been subjected to repeated abuses and power grabs , carried out with the purpose of establishing a tyrannical government , people have a right and duty to do away with that tyrannical Government and to replace it with a new government that will protect and preserve their innate rights for their future wellbeing .
This is exactly the state of affairs we are suffering under right now , which is why it is necessary that we change this imperial system of government .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a history of repeated abuses and power grabs , carried out with the intention of establishing absolute Tyranny over the country .
To prove this , consider the following : The government has , through its own negligence and arrogance , refused to adopt urgent and necessary laws for the good of the people .
The government has threatened to hold up critical laws unless the people agree to relinquish their right to be fully represented in the Legislature .
In order to expand its power and bring about compliance with its dictates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impossible for the people to make their views and needs heard by their representatives .
The government has repeatedly suppressed protests arising in response to its actions .
The government has obstructed justice by refusing to appoint judges who respect the Constitution and has instead made the Courts march in lockstep with the government ’ s dictates .
The government has allowed its agents to harass the people , steal from them , jail them and even execute them .
The government has directed militarized government agents—a.k.a.
, a standing army—to police domestic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turned the country into a militarized police state .
The government has conspired to undermine the rule of law and the Constitution in order to expand its own powers .
The government has allowed its militarized police to invade our homes and inflict violence on homeowners .
The government has failed to hold its agents accountable for wrongdoing and murder under the guise of “ qualified immunity.
” The government has jeopardized our international trade agreements .
The government has overtaxed us without our permission .
The government has denied us due process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The government has engaged in extraordinary rendition .
The government has continued to expand its military empire in collusion with its corporate partners-in-crime and occupy foreign nations .
The government has eroded fundamental legal protections and destabilized the structure of government .
The government has not only declared its federal powers superior to those of the states but has also asserted its sovereign power over the rights of “ we the people.
” The government has ceased to protect the people and instead waged domestic war against the people .
The government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coasts , and destroyed the lives of the people .
The government has employed private contractors and mercenaries to carry out acts of death , desolation and tyranny against other nations , totally unworthy of a civilized nation .
The government through its political propaganda has pitted its citizens against each other .
The government has stirred up civil unrest and laid the groundwork for martial law .
Repeatedly , we have asked the government to cease its abuses .
Each time , the government has responded with more abuse .
An Imperial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not fit to govern a free people .
We have repeatedly sounded the alarm to our fellow citizens about the government ’ s abuses .
We have warned them about the government ’ s power grabs .
We have appealed to their sense of justice .
We have reminded them of our common bonds .
They have rejected our plea for justice and brotherhood .
Thus , our fellow citizens are equally at fault for the injustices being carried out by the government .
Thus , for the reasons mentioned above , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America declare ourselves free from the chains of an abusive government .
Relying on the Creator ’ s protection , we pledge to stand by this Declaration of Independence with our lives , our fortunes and our honor .
See what I mean ?
The abuses meted out by an imperial government and endured by the American people have not ended .
They have merely evolved .
Two hundred and forty-four years after a group of anti-government extremists declared their independence from tyranny , the American people have once again managed to work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s thumb .
“ We the people ” are still being robbed blind by a government of thieves .
We are still being taken advantage of by a government of scoundrels , idiots and monsters .
We are still being locked up by a government of greedy jailers .
We are still being spied on by a government of Peeping Toms .
We are still being ravaged by a government of ruffians , rapists and killers .
We are still being forced to surrender our freedoms—and those of our children—to a government of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And we are still being held at gunpoint by a government of soldiers : a standing army in the form of a militarized police .
The bipartisan coup that laid siege to our nation did not happen overnight .
It snuck in under our radar , hiding behind the guise of national security , the war on drugs , the war on terror , the war on immigration , political correctness , hate crimes and a host of other official-sounding programs aimed at expanding the government ’ s power at the expense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear in my book Battlefield America : The War on the American People , the building blocks for the bleak future we ’ re just now getting a foretaste of—police shootings of unarmed citizens , profit-driven prisons , weapons of compliance , a wall-to-wall surveillance state , pre-crime programs , a suspect society , school-to-prison pipelines , militarized police , overcriminalization , SWAT team raids , endless wars , etc.—were put in place by government officials we trusted to look out for our best interests and by American citizens who failed to heed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.
” For too long now , we have suffered the injustices of a government that has no regard for our rights or our humanity .
We ’ ve suffered in silence for too long .
Frankly , what this country desperately needs is more anti-government extremists willing to take the government to task for its excesses , abuses and power grabs that fly in the face of every principle for which America ’ s founders risked their lives .
Constitutional attorney and author John @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
His new book Battlefield America : The War on the American People is available at .
Whitehead can be contacted at [ email protected ] .
John W. Whitehead ’ s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge .
Please contact [ email protected ] to obtain reprint permission .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By John W. Whitehead
“It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government.”—Thomas Paine “When the government violates the people’s rights, insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of the rights and the most indispensable of duties.”—Marquis De Lafayette
Had the Declaration of Independence been written today, it would have rendered its signers extremists or terrorists, resulting in them being placed on a government watch list, targeted for surveillance of their activities and correspondence, and potentially arrested, held indefinitely, stripped of their rights and labeled enemy combatants.
This is no longer the stuff of speculation and warning.
In fact, Attorney General William Barr recently announced plans to target, track and surveil “anti-government extremists” and preemptively nip in the bud any “threats” to public safety and the rule of law.
It doesn’t matter that the stated purpose of Barr’s anti-government extremist task force is to investigate dissidents on the far right (the “boogaloo” movement) and far left (Antifa, a loosely organized anti-fascist group) who have been accused of instigating violence and disrupting peaceful protests.
Boogaloo and Antifa have given the government the perfect excuse for declaring war (with all that entails: surveillance, threat assessments, pre-crime, etc.) against so-called anti-government extremists.
Without a doubt, America’s revolutionary founders would have been at the top of Barr’s list.
After all, the people who fomented the American Revolution spoke out at rallies, distributed critical pamphlets, wrote scathing editorials and took to the streets in protest. They were rebelling against a government they saw as being excessive in its taxation and spending. For their efforts, they were demonized and painted as an angry mob, extremists akin to terrorists, by the ruler of the day, King George III.
Of course, it doesn’t take much to be considered an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) today.
If you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched by the police, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you’re at the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.
Indeed, under Barr’s new task force, I and every other individual today who dares to speak truth to power could also be targeted for surveillance, because what we’re really dealing with is a government that wants to suppress dangerous words—words about its warring empire, words about its land grabs, words about its militarized police, words about its killing, its poisoning and its corruption—in order to keep its lies going.
This is how the government plans to snuff out any attempts by “we the people” to stand up to its tyranny: under the pretext of rooting out violent extremists, the government’s anti-extremism program will, in many cases, be utilized to render otherwise lawful, nonviolent activities as potentially extremist.
The danger is real.
Become an Activist Post Patron for $1 per month at Patreon.
Keep in mind that the government agencies involved in ferreting out American “extremists” will carry out their objectives—to identify and deter potential extremists—in concert with fusion centers, data collection agencies, behavioral scientists, corporations, social media, and community organizers and by relying on cutting-edge technology for surveillance, facial recognition, predictive policing, biometrics, and behavioral epigenetics (in which life experiences alter one’s genetic makeup).
This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it’s been a long time coming.
For example, in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released two reports, one on “Rightwing Extremism,” which broadly defines rightwing extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” and one on “Leftwing Extremism,” which labeled environmental and animal rights activist groups as extremists.
Incredibly, both reports use the words terrorist and extremist interchangeably.
That same year, the DHS launched Operation Vigilant Eagle, which calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq, Afghanistan and other far-flung places, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.
These reports indicate that for the government, anyone seen as opposing the government—whether they’re Left, Right or somewhere in between—can be labeled an extremist.
Fast forward a few years, and you have the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which Congress has continually re-upped, that allows the military to take you out of your home, lock you up with no access to friends, family or the courts if you’re seen as an extremist.
Now connect the dots, from the 2009 Extremism reports to the NDAA, the National Security Agency’s far-reaching surveillance networks, and fusion centers that collect and share surveillance data between local, state and federal police agencies
Add in tens of thousands of armed, surveillance drones that are beginning to blanket American skies, facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go and whatever you do. And then to complete the circle, toss in the real-time crime centers being deployed in cities across the country, which will be attempting to “predict” crimes and identify criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance, complex mathematical algorithms and prognostication programs.
Hopefully you’re getting the picture, which is how easy it is for the government to identify, label and target individuals as “extremist.”
And just like that, we’ve come full circle.
Imagine living in a country where armed soldiers crash through doors to arrest and imprison citizens merely for criticizing government officials. Imagine that in this very same country, you’re watched all the time, and if you look even a little bit suspicious, the police stop and frisk you or pull you over to search you on the off chance you’re doing something illegal.
Keep in mind that if you have a firearm of any kind (or anything that resembled a firearm) while in this country, it may get you arrested and, in some circumstances, shot by police.
If you’re thinking this sounds like America today, you wouldn’t be far wrong.
However, the scenario described above took place more than 200 years ago, when American colonists suffered under Great Britain’s version of an early police state. It was only when the colonists finally got fed up with being silenced, censored, searched, frisked, threatened, and arrested that they finally revolted against the tyrant’s fetters
No document better states their grievances than the Declaration of Independence, drafted by Thomas Jefferson.
A document seething with outrage over a government which had betrayed its citizens, the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776, by 56 men who laid everything on the line, pledged it all—“our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor”—because they believed in a radical idea: that all people are created to be free.
Labeled traitors, these men were charged with treason, a crime punishable by death. For some, their acts of rebellion would cost them their homes and their fortunes. For others, it would be the ultimate price—their lives.
Yet even knowing the heavy price they might have to pay, these men dared to speak up when silence could not be tolerated.
Read the Declaration of Independence again, and ask yourself if the list of complaints tallied by Jefferson don’t bear a startling resemblance to the abuses “we the people” are suffering at the hands of the American police state.
If you find the purple prose used by the Founders hard to decipher, here’s my translation of what the Declaration of Independence would look and sound like if it were written in the modern vernacular:
There comes a time when a populace must stand united and say “enough is enough” to the government’s abuses, even if it means getting rid of the political parties in power. Believing that “we the people” have a natural and divine right to direct our own lives, here are truths about the power of the people and how we arrived at the decision to sever our ties to the government: All people are created equal. All people possess certain innate rights that no government or agency or individual can take away from them. Among these are the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The government’s job is to protect the people’s innate rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The government’s power comes from the will of the people. Whenever any government abuses its power, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish that government and replace it with a new government that will respect and protect the rights of the people. It is not wise to get rid of a government for minor transgressions. In fact, as history has shown, people resist change and are inclined to suffer all manner of abuses to which they have become accustomed. However, when the people have been subjected to repeated abuses and power grabs, carried out with the purpose of establishing a tyrannical government, people have a right and duty to do away with that tyrannical Government and to replace it with a new government that will protect and preserve their innate rights for their future wellbeing. This is exactly the state of affairs we are suffering under right now, which is why it is necessary that we change this imperial system of government. The history of the present Imperial Government is a history of repeated abuses and power grabs, carried out with the intention of establishing absolute Tyranny over the country. To prove this, consider the following: The government has, through its own negligence and arrogance, refused to adopt urgent and necessary laws for the good of the people. The government has threatened to hold up critical laws unless the people agree to relinquish their right to be fully represented in the Legislature. In order to expand its power and bring about compliance with its dictates, the government has made it nearly impossible for the people to make their views and needs heard by their representatives. The government has repeatedly suppressed protests arising in response to its actions. The government has obstructed justice by refusing to appoint judges who respect the Constitution and has instead made the Courts march in lockstep with the government’s dictates. The government has allowed its agents to harass the people, steal from them, jail them and even execute them. The government has directed militarized government agents—a.k.a., a standing army—to police domestic affairs in peacetime. The government has turned the country into a militarized police state. The government has conspired to undermine the rule of law and the Constitution in order to expand its own powers. The government has allowed its militarized police to invade our homes and inflict violence on homeowners. The government has failed to hold its agents accountable for wrongdoing and murder under the guise of “qualified immunity.” The government has jeopardized our international trade agreements. The government has overtaxed us without our permission. The government has denied us due process and the right to a fair trial. The government has engaged in extraordinary rendition. The government has continued to expand its military empire in collusion with its corporate partners-in-crime and occupy foreign nations. The government has eroded fundamental legal protections and destabilized the structure of government. The government has not only declared its federal powers superior to those of the states but has also asserted its sovereign power over the rights of “we the people.” The government has ceased to protect the people and instead waged domestic war against the people. The government has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, and destroyed the lives of the people. The government has employed private contractors and mercenaries to carry out acts of death, desolation and tyranny against other nations, totally unworthy of a civilized nation. The government through its political propaganda has pitted its citizens against each other. The government has stirred up civil unrest and laid the groundwork for martial law. Repeatedly, we have asked the government to cease its abuses. Each time, the government has responded with more abuse. An Imperial Ruler who acts like a tyrant is not fit to govern a free people. We have repeatedly sounded the alarm to our fellow citizens about the government’s abuses. We have warned them about the government’s power grabs. We have appealed to their sense of justice. We have reminded them of our common bonds. They have rejected our plea for justice and brotherhood. Thus, our fellow citizens are equally at fault for the injustices being carried out by the government. Thus, for the reasons mentioned above, we the people of the united States of America declare ourselves free from the chains of an abusive government. Relying on the Creator’s protection, we pledge to stand by this Declaration of Independence with our lives, our fortunes and our honor.
See what I mean? The abuses meted out by an imperial government and endured by the American people have not ended. They have merely evolved.
Two hundred and forty-four years after a group of anti-government extremists declared their independence from tyranny, the American people have once again managed to work their way back under the tyrant’s thumb.
“We the people” are still being robbed blind by a government of thieves. We are still being taken advantage of by a government of scoundrels, idiots and monsters. We are still being locked up by a government of greedy jailers. We are still being spied on by a government of Peeping Toms. We are still being ravaged by a government of ruffians, rapists and killers.
We are still being forced to surrender our freedoms—and those of our children—to a government of extortionists, money launderers and corporate pirates. And we are still being held at gunpoint by a government of soldiers: a standing army in the form of a militarized police.
The bipartisan coup that laid siege to our nation did not happen overnight. It snuck in under our radar, hiding behind the guise of national security, the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on immigration, political correctness, hate crimes and a host of other official-sounding programs aimed at expanding the government’s power at the expense of individual freedoms.
As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the building blocks for the bleak future we’re just now getting a foretaste of—police shootings of unarmed citizens, profit-driven prisons, weapons of compliance, a wall-to-wall surveillance state, pre-crime programs, a suspect society, school-to-prison pipelines, militarized police, overcriminalization, SWAT team raids, endless wars, etc.—were put in place by government officials we trusted to look out for our best interests and by American citizens who failed to heed James Madison’s warning to “take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.”
For too long now, we have suffered the injustices of a government that has no regard for our rights or our humanity.
We’ve suffered in silence for too long.
Frankly, what this country desperately needs is more anti-government extremists willing to take the government to task for its excesses, abuses and power grabs that fly in the face of every principle for which America’s founders risked their lives.
ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute . His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People is available at www.amazon.com . Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.
Publication Guidelines / Reprint Permission
John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission.
Image: DaisyLuther.com
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-06-30--New Jersey AG Charges City Councilman, Elected City Councilman, and 2 Others with Voter Fraud During

New Jersey AG Charges City Councilman, Elected City Councilman, and 2 Others with Voter Fraud During Mail-In Election

Last night CBS 60 Minutes aired a segment about the increasingly heated American debate over mail-in voting .
Some Americans don ’ t want to vote by mail – they don ’ t put any trust in it .
That doesn ’ t seem so silly considering what recently happened in New Jersey .
The New Jersey Attorney General ’ s office announced voter fraud charges Wednesday against four individuals , including a city councilman and an elected city councilman , according to a press release .
Paterson City Councilman Michael Jackson , Councilman-elect Alex Mendez , and two other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail-in voting process in the May 12th Special election in Paterson , New Jersey .
The investigation was opened when U.S .
Postal Inspection Service found hundreds of mail-in ballots stuffed in a single mailbox in Paterson and a number of additional ballots in a mailbox in Haledon .
“ Today ’ s charges send a clear message : if you try to tamper with an election in New Jersey , we will find you and we will hold you accountable , ” said Attorney General Grewal .
“ We will not allow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public ’ s confidence in our democratic process.
” Jackson , who represents the City ’ s 1st Ward and is the Vice President of the City Council , is alleged to have solicited voters to hand over their ballots and is alleged to have turned in ballots without being the authorization bearer to do so .
His charges include election fraud , fraud in casting mail-in vote , unauthorized possession of ballots , false registration or transfer , tampering with public records , and falsifying or tampering with records .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right to free and fair elections , and we will ensure that happens , ” said OPIA Director Thomas Eicher .
“ Our office ’ s criminal investigations complement a number of other safeguards that New Jersey has implemented to ensure the integrity of our elections.
” Governor Phil Murphy ordered that elections be conducted by mail in New Jersey , according to a March 19th executive order .
Murphy did so over concerns of the spread of the novel coronavirus .
Since the order was placed , however , there have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the elections .
For example , Passaic County Board of Elections commissioners failed to count 800 ballots , a county spokesperson earlier told NJ.com .
RIGGED 2020 ELECTION : MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES , AND OTHERS .
IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES !
President Donald Trump and Attorney General William Barr have expressed concerns over widespread mail-in voting , and have warned that the process could lead to fraud .
On Monday , The President wrote on Twitter , “ RIGGED 2020 ELECTION : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES , AND OTHERS .
IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES !
”

By B.N. Frank
Last night CBS 60 Minutes aired a segment about the increasingly heated American debate over mail-in voting. Some Americans don’t want to vote by mail – they don’t put any trust in it. That doesn’t seem so silly considering what recently happened in New Jersey.
From Sara A Carter:
NJ politicians, 3 others charged with voter fraud mail-in election
The New Jersey Attorney General’s office announced voter fraud charges Wednesday against four individuals, including a city councilman and an elected city councilman, according to a press release.
Paterson City Councilman Michael Jackson, Councilman-elect Alex Mendez, and two other men are alleged to have exploited the mail-in voting process in the May 12th Special election in Paterson, New Jersey.
The investigation was opened when U.S. Postal Inspection Service found hundreds of mail-in ballots stuffed in a single mailbox in Paterson and a number of additional ballots in a mailbox in Haledon.
“Today’s charges send a clear message: if you try to tamper with an election in New Jersey, we will find you and we will hold you accountable,” said Attorney General Grewal. “We will not allow a small number of criminals to undermine the public’s confidence in our democratic process.”
Jackson, who represents the City’s 1st Ward and is the Vice President of the City Council, is alleged to have solicited voters to hand over their ballots and is alleged to have turned in ballots without being the authorization bearer to do so. His charges include election fraud, fraud in casting mail-in vote, unauthorized possession of ballots, false registration or transfer, tampering with public records, and falsifying or tampering with records.
“The residents of New Jersey have a right to free and fair elections, and we will ensure that happens,” said OPIA Director Thomas Eicher. “Our office’s criminal investigations complement a number of other safeguards that New Jersey has implemented to ensure the integrity of our elections.”
Governor Phil Murphy ordered that elections be conducted by mail in New Jersey, according to a March 19th executive order. Murphy did so over concerns of the spread of the novel coronavirus.
Since the order was placed, however, there have been many mistakes that threaten the integrity of the elections. For example, Passaic County Board of Elections commissioners failed to count 800 ballots, a county spokesperson earlier told NJ.com.
RIGGED 2020 ELECTION: MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, AND OTHERS. IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 22, 2020
President Donald Trump and Attorney General William Barr have expressed concerns over widespread mail-in voting, and have warned that the process could lead to fraud. On Monday, The President wrote on Twitter, “RIGGED 2020 ELECTION: MILLIONS OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS WILL BE PRINTED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, AND OTHERS. IT WILL BE THE SCANDAL OF OUR TIMES!”