Angered Neil Oliver – The Governing Class -vs- The Governed

Perhaps I am wrong, but the tone, disposition and presentation of this monologue by U.K. News pundit Neil Oliver, suggests to me that he is under pressure or threat due to his open commentary supporting a resistance uprising against the ruling class.

Within his weekly outline, there is a notable change in tone from Mr. Oliver as he outlines those voices that have been targeted by censorship, deplatforming and ongoing threats by western aligned media doing the bidding of their government overlords.  Perhaps Mr. Oliver has finally found himself in the crosshairs of the system which will not permit public dissent. WATCH:

.

It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late,
With long arrears to make good,
When the Saxon began to hate.

They were not easily moved,
They were icy — willing to wait
Till every count should be proved,
Ere the Saxon began to hate.

Their voices were even and low.
Their eyes were level and straight.
There was neither sign nor show
When the Saxon began to hate.

It was not preached to the crowd.
It was not taught by the state.
No man spoke it aloud
When the Saxon began to hate.

It was not suddently bred.
It will not swiftly abate.
Through the chilled years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the Saxon began to hate.

~ Rudyard Kipling

Source

New York AG Releases Footage of President Trump Deposition, The Details of the Witch Hunt are Very Visible in Procedural Explanations

New York AG Releases Footage of President Trump Deposition, The Details of the Witch Hunt are Very Visible in Procedural Explanations

The office of New York Attorney General Letitia James released footage on Tuesday of the deposition of former President Donald Trump. The video was intended to create a narrative as President Trump repeatedly invoked privileges under the fifth amendment against self-incrimination. However, if you watch the introductory part of the deposition, to include the statements from the office of the AG, you get a real sense of how this witch hunt is being conducted.

President Trump’s deposition took place on August 10, 2022. The issue is AG James using the process of a civil fraud investigation to construct a criminal case against Donald J Trump. Unfortunately for Ms. James you do not have to be a lawyer to see the “set up” nature of the lawfare as it is being conducted. Just listen to the qualifiers put into place by the Attorney General office.

Pay close attention to the preliminary procedural explanations and questions from state Attorney General Letitia James. That is the set up, technically and legally explained by the New York AG herself. Once you see that part, you realize no one in their right mind would answer any questions from this “investigative inquiry”. After a few minutes, President Trump -together with his lawyer- reads a statement, then repeatedly takes the Fifth Amendment. WATCH:

.

If people actually watch this deposition, not just listen to pundits outline it, this video will backfire against the New York AG.

Source

Must Watch – Mark Houck Recounts the Story of His Fight Against Evil Enterprise and the DOJ

In his own words, Mark Houck appears with Steve Bannon to describe the events that led to him being arrested by the FBI and fighting a legal battle with the DOJ.  An incredible story of valiance against evil enterprise. {Direct Rumble Link} WATCH:

.
Part II Below

Source

The Blitzkrieg On Bill Barr And John Durham Is Just Beginning

The Blitzkrieg On Bill Barr And John Durham Is Just Beginning

The New York Times is terrified of what Special Counsel John Durham has uncovered during his more than three-year investigation into intelligence and law enforcement agencies. There is no other explanation for why the outlet went from publishing “All the News That’s Fit to Print” to piloting a month-long probe to tarnish Durham and former Attorney General William Barr, only to follow a few days later with an op-ed parroting the nonsensical points. 

The first swing at Barr and Durham came on Thursday when The New York Times’ leading Russia-collusion hoaxers, Charlie Savage, Adam Goldman, and Katie Benner, published “How Barr’s Quest to Find Flaws in the Russia Inquiry Unraveled.” As I detailed on Monday, the hit piece consisted of “one part chutzpah and two parts mendacity,” with the authors — among other things — declaring the special counsel’s investigation a failure even before Durham released his final report, and only then by ignoring the already public evidence of misconduct by members of the Crossfire Hurricane team.

The New York Times obviously planned a one-two punch, running on Monday an op-ed penned by editorial board member David Firestone, entitled “Bill Barr’s Image Rehab Is Kaput.” Firestone’s blow failed to land as well, with the former Times reporter and editor merely repeating many of the original misguided attacks on Barr.

For instance, Firestone referenced Savage, Goldman, and Benner’s reporting that Barr would regularly meet with Durham to discuss his progress and would advocate “on his behalf with intelligence officials,” with Firestone declaring such involvement verboten because “attorneys general are not supposed to interfere in a special counsel’s investigation.” 

While Firestone avoided the more comical complaint Savage and his crew presented on Thursday — that Barr and Durham “sometimes dined and sipped Scotch together” — the premise that Barr acted inappropriately in regularly meeting with Durham to discuss his investigation is fatally flawed for two reasons. 

First, Barr did not appoint Durham as a special counsel until Oct. 19, 2020, with Durham’s work from May 2019 until then unrelated to the regulations governing special counsel appointments. And the Times’ original reporting noted that those “weekly updates and consultations about his day-to-day work” were only “at times” and likely ended long before Barr appointed Durham as special counsel.

No Conflict of Interest

But even if Barr continued to meet regularly with Durham from Oct. 19, 2020, to when Barr departed as attorney general two months later, so what? Barr did not grant Durham the protections of a special counsel because of any conflict of interest that required Barr to avoid discussing the investigation with Durham. 

While the pertinent regulation, 28 C.F.R. § 600.1, provides for the appointment of a special counsel when the attorney general determines a “criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted” and the investigation or prosecution “would present a conflict of interest for the Department,” the relevant section also authorizes the naming of a special counsel when “other extraordinary circumstances” exist. 

In appointing Durham as special counsel, Barr expressly stated it was “in light of the extraordinary circumstances relating to these matters,” and the public interest warranted Durham continuing his “investigation pursuant to the powers and independence afforded by the Special Counsel regulations.” 

Because there was no conflict of interest underlying Barr’s appointment of Durham, there would be nothing nefarious about any conversations Barr had with Durham over the last two months of the probe. In fact, Barr could have micromanaged Durham on a daily basis and there would have been no impropriety. 

The op-ed argues otherwise by claiming, “the whole point of the system is to isolate the prosecution of sensitive cases from the appearance of political meddling.” There is no special-counsel-for-sensitive-cases rule, however, and that Durham was investigating whether Crossfire Hurricane was political doesn’t make his investigation political.

Painting It Political

But that is precisely what The New York Times wants Americans to believe: that politics prompted Barr to appoint Durham, and politics pushed Durham to reach whatever negative conclusion he details in his final report. This “it was all political” narrative will provide the foundation for The New York Times and the other media outlets that pushed the Russia-collusion hoax to demand the public disregard the substance of Durham’s final report once it’s released.

To further that narrative, Firestone’s op-ed sought to cement a caricature of Barr as a political creature beholden only to Donald Trump. “During his 22 months in office, he allowed his Justice Department to become a personal protection racket for his boss, Donald Trump,” Firestone declared. The Times editorial board member then went on a question-begging journey through Barr’s service as attorney general and his return to private life.

Barr acted politically here, because he was acting political, Firestone’s logic went. Here, though, the former Attorney General was not acting political, seeking instead to salvage his legal and ethical reputation, by not acting political. But decreeing by fiat that politics motivated Barr or Durham does not make it so.

A Closed Loop

The op-ed further advanced the “it was all political” narrative by parroting several of Savage, Goldberg, and Benner’s charges. And as the Russia-collusion hoax proved, if you repeat innuendos and accusations often enough, the public will believe they are true. 

Firestone also placed his imprimatur on the veracity of Thursday’s attack by telling readers, “The Times published the details of what really happened when Mr. Barr launched a counter-investigation into the origins of Robert Mueller’s report on the 2016 Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.” So that’s that. The Times told Americans what happened, so there’s no need to read further — and especially not the Durham report when it is released.

The Times’ efforts to preempt the special counsel’s report are already gaining ground. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., pledged on Monday that the Senate Judiciary Committee will review Durham’s investigation, premising the supposed need for a congressional inquiry solely on The New York Times’ reporting. 

Sadly, we all know from the Russia-collusion canard what this means: The loop has been closed, and the circular reporting has begun. So now, as proof of the Times’ reporting on Barr and Durham, we have the fact that the Senate Judiciary Committee intends to investigate the special counsel probe.


Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Source

The 2024 GOPe Roadmap Appears Modified to Use Republican Governors Association

The 2024 GOPe Roadmap Appears Modified to Use Republican Governors Association

As I’m watching President Trump doing the familiar targeting of the GOPe roadmap, in this instance hitting the Club for Growth (CfG), my spidey senses are telling me their modified 2024 path will involve increased emphasis on the Republican Governors Association (RGA).

In the 2020 midterms, the RGA headed by Arizona Governor Doug Ducey was positioning: specifically positioning Ron DeSantis.  If the modified establishment roadmap rolls out as it looks right now, I suspect the RGA will play a key role in it.

President Trump hit back against the always insufferable Club for Growth yesterday.  The CfG together with the Business Roundtable and U.S. Chamber of Commerce are the political nexus for all things multinational, Wall Street and globalist.  Republican candidates endorsed by either of these assembled corporate advocacy groups can always be counted on to sell-out the American worker.   This is the insider club activity within the larger Republican network, all aligned with Mitch McConnell and the DeceptiCon crew.

[Trump Truth]

Whenever you see President Trump hit the power dynamic, he generally hits the shadow network, the true motive for the attack, that align with it.   In this case CfG has a long history of paid support for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

It is true that Club for Growth represent the “globalist,” which is to say, ‘America Last’, perspective.   DeSantis long political alignment with CfG to include his support for Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), the tool for the Transpacific Partnership trade deal (TPP), is a part of his legislative record that Ron DeSantis cannot avoid.

However, beyond the corporate alignment, Wall Street banks and hedge fund billionaires, the people managing RdS are trying to avoid confrontation with President Trump on the key issues.  Corporatism and Ukraine are the two biggest Achilles heels of the Florida governor.

The RdS managers have so far kept their principal from the foray.  Preferring to let their recruited surrogates and conservative ‘influencers’ do the wagon-circling on behalf of DeSantis.  This looks to have been a key part of the strategy within the RdS centric roadmap and explains why Christina Pushaw began those recruitment efforts in December 2021, culminating in the first meeting on January 6, 2022.

The second prong of the establishment approach to 2024 (DeSantis) that looks slightly different from 2016 (Jeb!) is the focus on South Carolina as a fulcrum primary race.   As a result, we are seeing South Carolina Nikki Haley and South Carolina Tim Scott now positioning to enter the contest.  Scott will be heading to Iowa later in February [LINK].

President Trump is doing something familiar by hitting DeSantis as the Club for Growth becomes confrontational.  It’s one of the key differences between President Trump as a politician and all others.  Trump remains focused on the non-pretending true beneficiary of the overall roadmap.   Trump did the same thing with Jeb! in 2016.

In addition to Tim Scott and Nikki Haley, it is likely we will see Mike Pompeo, Chris Sununu, Mike Pence and Larry Hogan enter the 2024 contest for the GOP nomination. However, each of them will simply be forming a common line of attack against Godzilla Trump, permitting Ron DeSantis extra time before he needs to stop pretending and actually announce his intent.

If the roadmap holds up, DeSantis will be the last one to enter.

This is where the RGA looks to have been recruited for a larger role in 2024 than was deployed in 2016.  Keep an eye on Republican governors and how they position their advocacy and endorsements.

While the online social media Pushaw group will be trying to attack MAGA voices and create the illusion of overwhelming support for the principal, DeSantis, the mainstream RGA voices will talk high-brow about the need for change and a brand of strategic politics they will claim only Ron DeSantis can provide.  This forms the multiple fronts against the MAGA coalition that we will face later this year.

Trump’s strength in this contest is that he doesn’t need to pretend.  The DeSantis weakness in this contest is that he must pretend he is not running as long as possible.  Thus, in that very specific dynamic you will find the source motive for Pushaw’s early efforts with the “influencers”.   However, on national economic matters as well as Ukraine corruption issues, you will note a comprehensive silence from RdS directly.

President Trump is exceptional at using the literal truth as a weapon against all of the shadowy aligned elements.  Fox News, Paul Ryan, Karl Rove, CfG, the Murdoch clan, as well as the larger multinational billionaires and globalists are following a very transparent program, if you know what to look for.

Enhancing this strategy is where the RGA will come into play.  All of them took a strategic loss when Harmeet Dhillon did not win the RNC chair position, which was particularly noteworthy due to the RdS endorsement.  Once DeSantis enters the race it will be six or seven against one, with each of the individual partipants aligning to drop out in sequence and endorse the principal.

Keep watching… and keep all of the above in mind as you review this discussion about the GOPe dynamic.

This is going to be fun again… Again!

Source

Something’s Buggin’ Tucker Carlson, Food Production is a National Security Issue

Something’s Buggin’ Tucker Carlson, Food Production is a National Security Issue

This is a topic we have covered extensively, and it is great to see Tucker Carlson questioning the sudden alignment of various elements that are creating a very real food insecurity problem.

The #1 factor in the shortage of food production is the newly emboldened ‘western energy policy‘ and the impact energy has on everything from field (fertilizer) to fork (distribution).  Other factors include government policy that blocks food development (Dutch, Irish and Sri Lanka Farmers), a sudden uptick in food facilities having major fires and damage, and a series of issues with the feed that goes into the production of proteins.

This is all happening as the advancement of insects as a more “sustainable” protein replacement is being advanced by the same western governments.  However, if you happen to notice that all of the issues travel in the same direction, you are a conspiracy theorist, or something.  WATCH:

We have been watching the predictable outcomes surrounding the western government shift to change energy policy for almost two years.  Approximately a year ago we first said, “the absence of food will change things.”

As energy resources like natural gas were curtailed the resulting price increase and subsequent shortage of fertilizer was discussed in great detail well in advance.

Now, we are starting to see exactly what those warning voices were talking about.

An interesting article in ZeroHedge Saturday [SEE HERE] draws attention to how the media can no longer try to ignore the created global food crisis.

ZeroHedge – People on the other side of the planet are dropping dead from starvation right now, but most people don’t even realize that this is happening.  Unfortunately, most people just assume that everything is fine and dandy.  If you are one of those people that believe that everything is just wonderful, I would encourage you to pay close attention to the details that I am about to share with you.  Global hunger is rapidly spreading, and that is because global food supplies have been getting tighter and tighter. 

If current trends continue, we could potentially be facing a nightmare scenario before this calendar year is over. (read more)

The article then goes on to detail the issues and food shortages in Pakistan, India and the entire African continent.  Factually, according to media reports on the region, the worst food crisis in history is happening – yet most U.S. and European Union media are avoiding it.  The famine is happening in almost complete western silence.

Keep in mind, none of this is unexpected.  In fact, the G7 countries discussed the pending problem in mid 2022, yet no one took any steps to avoid it.

Vladimir Putin’s military action against eastern Ukraine had nothing to do with the severe food shortages and inflation in Sri Lanka {link}.  Nor did Russia have any influence over the Dutch government trying to stop food production {link}.  Additionally, Putin had no control over Justin Trudeau’s decision to limit harvest yields by blocking the use of nitrogen-based fertilizer {link}. More importantly, it was not Vladimir Putin who forced all the western politicians to sign up for a new ‘climate friendly’ energy program that is destroying the ability of western farms to generate higher yield crops.

You do not need to be a farmer to understand that nitrogen/phosphorus-based industrial fertilizer has been the reason why farm yields have generated massive amounts of food on a global basis.  The United States, Canada, the U.K. and places like the Netherlands have massively increased their ability to generate food for export, in large part due to the success of improved fertilizer and crop saving modern pesticides.  Take those farming advancements away under the guise of climate change and you get Sri Lanka, Pakistan and now the African Continent.

Those western climate and energy policies create downstream consequences.  The decision to chase a new global energy policy under the name “Build Back Better,” in combination with short-sighted EU sanctions against Russia, and you get food shortages.

It was not Vladimir Putin who told British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz their proactive recommendation to switch from crop-based biofuels to human food would be blocked.  That G7 decision was made by Justin Trudeau and Joe Biden. {link} Even more significantly, it was not Russia who threatened the multinational energy companies about investing in Africa for expanded natural gas supplies for their fertilizer needs. That threat came from the same western government alliance, per their instructions from the World Economic Forum group {link}.

It was predictable {JUNE 21st} {June 30th} and {July 6th} that western government leaders would seek to avoid responsibility for the food crisis they created, and throughout the latter part of 2022 we saw western media trying, desperately, to frame Russia for global food shortages in order to protect western politicians.

I said this in July of last year and as the consequences now surface it is even more critical to understand.

Joe Biden, NATO, the G7, the European Union, the World Bank, USAID, and every western leader in the United States and Europe stated in early and mid 2022 there will be food shortages in 2023.

They did not say there might be shortages; their statements were emphatic, there will be shortages.

Accept this basic cornerstone.  Then ask why not a single proactive step has been taken by any of the aforementioned institutions or governments to alleviate what they declare is a certainty.  Why?

Simple question, “why?”

If all of the western nations, non-govt organizations and heads of state, are aware of a coming food crisis, why is there no proactive response?

It is a question that even the most hardcore leftists will not answer, because there is only one answer.  No action is being taken because they do not want to take action.  No effort to avoid the crisis is being done, because they do not want the crisis avoided.

Peel all the layers of obfuscation and causation away, and what we find is the epicenter of the food shortage is directly the result of the Build Back Better agenda.  A post-pandemic western government deliberate decision to radically change global energy development.  In succinct terms, the climate change agenda.

However, regardless of how you feel about the validity of “climate change,” the cause of diminished food supplies is purposeful.  It is not climate change causing food shortages. It is the purposeful action taken under the guise of mitigating climate change that is causing the shortage of food.

The collective Build Back Better energy policy of western governments’ is the reason for massive increases in energy costs, massive oil price jumps, gasoline price increases, significant increases in chemical costs, increases in diesel fuel costs, shortages of fertilizer created using natural gas, and the end result is lower crop yields, higher farming costs and eventually, food shortages.  They knew this.

All of the organizations and government who have been decrying the future shortage of food, know it is the radical shift in energy resource development that is creating the crisis.  This acceptance of reality begins the framework to understand just how entrenched and committed these western leaders are toward their beloved climate change agenda.

We are only just now beginning to see the first aspects of the food shortage.  However, once the issue becomes unavoidable the western leaders will not and cannot accept the blame for what they have done.  They will blame-cast, excuse and justify what is surfacing.

Food shortages will be blamed on the Ukraine conflict, Russian aggression, climate change and any various iteration of justification that does not identify the true cause, their energy ideology.

I’m not so sure that people fully understand what the entire system of western government would be willing to do to avoid being blamed for avoidable death on a potential scale that is quite alarming.  All of the western leaders, institutions and governments are on the same boat.   They are all in this together.

(June 22, 2022) – (Reuters) – The European Union is divided on how to help poorer nations fight a growing food crisis and address shortages of fertilizers caused by the war in Ukraine, with some fearing a plan to invest in plants in Africa would clash with EU green goals.

The need for food “clashes with EU green goals.”…  Let that sink in.

Priorities!

Nothing to see here comrade, nothing to see….

Source

New Emails Suggest Twitter Misled Public On ‘Hamilton 68’ Data Pushing Russia Hoax

New emails released as part of the “Twitter Files” show the company appears to have misled reporters, politicians, and the public, allowing a high-level disinformation operation to fester in government and media. A comparison of emails uncovered by Matt Taibbi with the company’s public statements in 2018 reveals serious discrepancies.

This operation, known as Hamilton 68, was founded by former FBI agent and current MSNBC contributor Clint Watts. It functions as a digital “dashboard” where journalists and academics can gauge alleged “Russian disinformation” being spread by specific lists of people online.

Taibbi’s latest report on internal Twitter documents included emails from former Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth proving the company knew the anti-Trump dashboard was spreading false information that wrongfully classified Americans as Russian bots. This allowed the data dashboard to fuel false media and Democrat claims that President Donald Trump had treasonously colluded with Russia, hamstringing Trump’s execution of his presidential duties.

Taibbi discovered that Twitter “reverse-engineered” Hamilton 68’s methodology to recreate its highly publicized list of alleged Russian bots. Publicly, though, Twitter was feigning ignorance.

In a Jan. 3, 2018 email, Roth said his reverse-engineering proved Hamilton 68’s claims of providing data to prove Russian disinformation was festering on social media were “totally bogus.”

“They don’t know that we have the list, though, and they’ve refused to release it,” he wrote.

Roth recommended hitting the Alliance for Securing Democracy, one of the groups behind Hamilton 68, with an ultimatum: “either you release the list, or we will.”

The timeline here is important. Roth reverse-engineered the list on Oct. 3, 2017, and emailed it to his colleagues in a Google Doc. Over the next several months, Twitter employees repeatedly vented their frustrations with Hamilton 68 over email. The amount of media attention the project was generating created a public relations headache for Twitter, so they were eager to expose the truth about the dashboard.

Frenzied politicians desperately clinging to the Russia-collusion narrative started to pressure Facebook and Twitter in early 2018. When Republicans on the House Intelligence committee penned a now-vindicated internal report on FBI abuses, a hashtag that said “#ReleaseTheMemo” went viral on Twitter.

“When the hashtag went viral, [Rep. Adam] Schiff had a theory that it wasn’t the American public that was interested in abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,” Mollie Hemingway noted all the way back in 2018. “Nope, it was Russians! Secret Russian bots were trying to make it look like Americans were interested in FISA abuse against a Trump campaign affiliate.”

Citing Hamilton 68, Schiff and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, wrote a letter to Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg demanding their companies crack down on alleged Russian bots. Twitter responded with a letter defending its work to police foreign interference. An analysis of #ReleaseTheMemo, General Counsel Vijaya Gadde wrote back, “has not identified any significant activity connected to Russia.”

Worse, Gadde claimed Twitter could not evaluate Hamilton 68’s claims. “Because the Hamilton Dashboard’s account list is not available to the public, we are unable to offer any specific context on the accounts it includes,” he wrote. “There may be individual cases where Twitter accounts are operating within our rules but are included in the Dashboard. We have offered to review the list of accounts contained in the Dashboard and this offer remains open.”

Yet the emails Taibbi uncovered five years later show Twitter had the list for months before that point. Roth himself wrote, “They don’t know that we have the list,” three weeks earlier.

In mid-February, Emily Horne wrote, “we’re working extensively with reporters [off-the-record] and on background to explain the flaws in Hamilton 68’s methodology (without getting into our full knowledge of it),” before adding, “we have to be careful in how much we push back on ASD publicly.”

Horne’s concern, along with that of a colleague who was “frustrated” but understood the need to “play a longer game,” was that Twitter couldn’t kill critical media stories with off-the-record warnings if it didn’t also go public with what it knew. Both former Twitter employees now work in the Biden administration.

Hamilton 68 intentionally concocted junk science and concealed important parts of their methodology to bolster a narrative against their political opponents. The intended end result was to silence and discredit all dissent. A stunning number of journalists at allegedly top publications and even researchers at allegedly elite universities took the bait, as Taibbi’s story shows.

Twitter’s internal records raise questions about what key Democratic politicians like Schiff and Feinstein knew about Hamilton 68. Did Twitter brief them privately on its public knowledge of the list? Were any reporters briefed on that as well? Was Gadde seriously unaware that Roth had the list for months at the time of his letter?

The evidence suggests clearly that Twitter employees — who never counted on Elon Musk buying the company and releasing their emails — actively misled the public about a powerful political hoax.


Emily Jashinsky is culture editor at The Federalist and host of Federalist Radio Hour. She previously covered politics as a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner. Prior to joining the Examiner, Emily was the spokeswoman for Young America’s Foundation. She’s interviewed leading politicians and entertainers and appeared regularly as a guest on major television news programs, including “Fox News Sunday,” “Media Buzz,” and “The McLaughlin Group.” Her work has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Real Clear Politics, and more. Emily also serves as director of the National Journalism Center, co-host of the weekly news show “Counter Points: Friday” and a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Forum. Originally from Wisconsin, she is a graduate of George Washington University.

Source

Retired Col. Douglas MacGregor Discusses Status of Ukraine War and Background of Biden Sending Abram M-1 Tanks

Col. Doug MacGregor appears with Judge Andrew Napolitano to explain the complexity of the tanks Biden has pledged to Ukraine.  Additionally, MacGregor gives a different perspective than western media about the status of the war in Ukraine, the position and motive of the Russians and the overall status of the EU and NATO coalition.

MacGregor emphasizes that what the western public are told about the war is not consistent with the reality what is taking place on the ground in Ukraine.  The term ‘hybrid warfare,’ which includes the U.S. State Dept. pushing a very specific propaganda message to the media, eventually runs into the reality of actual war fighting on the ground that is far more conventional.

The U.S. led NATO alliance may be winning the narrative, as outlined by media; however, the Russians are winning the actual fighting on the ground in Ukraine.  In addition to noting the Russian cultural aspects of the conflict, Col MacGregor gives some somber analysis about how dangerous this is becoming as the U.S. political voices are not willing to concede or admit anything that runs counter to their promoted narrative.  WATCH (prompted):

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)