There are two kinds of US soccer fans:
Those who only watch the World Cup — they have no problem rooting for Mexico 🇲🇽
Those who watch every USMNT game — they can NEVER root for Mexico
SIMPLE AS THAT
250 years ago, our American patriots did not fight and die for secretly counted elections, using secret proprietary software, with secretly preserved ballots. We will continue to fight for verifiable, auditable, recountable and transparent elections, UNTIL WE WIN.
Have a Happy FREEDOM 250 Anniversary!
Balogun was in on goal. He beat the defender and was about to score.
No red card. No penalty. No yellow card. No foul. No review.
The bizarre thing is that Fox Sports showed a replay that began just AFTER the defender let go of the arm. So weird. How could the officials miss this? And how could the TV crew miss it as well? @USMNT
Here is what we know: U.S. taxpayer money, funneled through USAID and NIH, funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. That research likely caused the COVID pandemic that killed millions and cost trillions.
Dr. Fauci personally signed off on these experiments, then lied to Congress about it. Biden tried to protect him with a last-minute pardon. That’s the very definition of a cover-up.
2 minutes of your time.
Western civilization is the one I most admire, though others interesting. Our tradition of freedom, rule of law, respect the human rights Other, separation of powers in a constitutional republic, are the correct principles. Just imperfectly observed.
Fmr CIA officer here.
Let me share how elections get stolen — and the role of intel agencies.
We all know that the CIA and NSA create and execute clandestine operations that are designed to go undetected. That ranges from recruiting human spies, tapping phone systems, and altering devices of all kinds.
Yes, that necessarily includes voting machines.
The CIA and NSA have teams to execute all of these operations and missions at the direction of a President, even those ops that are deemed impossible… like machines locked in rooms that are inside secure facilities, unhooked from the internet or whatever device that could tether them to the outside world.
Those tough intel operations require extensive planning, exquisite trade craft, supporting operations (HUMINT, SIGINT, MASINT), and a degree of luck.
For many years, everything that I’m saying was understood by both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Historic footage from Congressional hearings show both Ds and Rs saying that they were alarmed about voting systems with so-called “unhackable machines.” They knew then — correctly — that such a suggestion or claim was ridiculous. They were briefed by NSA and CIA teams on how they “hack the unhackable” every month without leaving a trace.
This is why Taiwan and others are resolute on conducting elections the old fashioned way: same day voting only, in person, IDs, paper ballots, a counting process that is open to the public to watch and monitor, and results announced that same night.
If Taiwan can do it with ~24M people, any US state can do it. Refusal to do so is an intentional choice to open your electoral systems to vulnerabilities.
That's what we’re now seeing across the United States, and primarily in Democrat-dominated locales. Including Los Angeles. Those politicians choose broken systems.
California’s ~30 day process to tally votes is obviously and intentionally vulnerable that a reasonable person understands that it allows for manipulation and assured electoral outcome by a dominant power (Democrats, in this case).
And like any good intel op, you do it such that there are no fingerprints left behind — whether that be with machines, mail-in ballots, harvested ballots, etc. If you own the ops environment, anything is possible.
Still, mistakes happen in any op. In the event of disclosure, you do what we often see Democrats and the media do: deny, smear, and make counter-accusations to preserve intentionally broken systems.
Folks, this is not about Spencer Pratt. This is about the future of what’s left of our Republic.
Evil, seditious forces have broken our electoral systems and gained great power using them. Mayor Bass is but one, using the machine that her Democrat Party has built to sustain her and Leftist power. It’s the modern, Golden State version of old Chicago, NJ, or Huey Long corruption.
They will deny it, obviously. Because admission means loss of power, money, and likely prison time. There’s no incentive for them to clean up what’s broken.
Bottom line: Mr. Pratt’s earnest desire to run a righteous race to fix his city faces long odds. He didn’t just run against Karen Bass. He ran against a corrupt machine.
But if nothing else, he has shown his fellow Angelinos and the nation that, once again, we have an existential problem in our electoral system with intentional vulnerabilities and electoral fraud that naturally flows from the brokenness.
Now it’s up to the rest of us to fix it.
There are solutions, none easy or polite. But we must do so — and by whatever means necessary — or the Republic falls to Communists and Cuba-trained agitators like Karen Bass.
Those are the stakes. Time is short.
Tu confonds deux choses, et c'est exactement le piège que la French Theory a tendu.
Liberté, égalité, fraternité — égalité *de droits*, égalité *devant la loi*, égalité *de dignité*. C'est la promesse républicaine, et personne ici ne l'attaque.
Le wokisme, ce n'est pas ça. C'est l'égalitarisme des résultats. Et l'égalitarisme des résultats, contrairement à l'égalité des droits, n'est pas un élargissement de la liberté — c'est sa négation.
Quelques exemples concrets :
— San Francisco supprime les classes de maths avancées au collège pour "réduire les inégalités". Résultat : les écarts entre élèves explosent, les familles aisées prennent des cours privés, les pauvres se font enterrer. L'égalitarisme a creusé l'inégalité.
— Les politiques de discrimination positive à Harvard : étudiants admis avec des scores très en dessous de leurs camarades, taux d'échec dispropportionné, sentiment d'imposture, ressentiment généralisé. On a saboté ceux qu'on voulait aider.
— L'aide humanitaire qui distribue du riz gratuit pendant 30 ans en Afrique : effondrement des filières agricoles locales, dépendance institutionnalisée. Donner un poisson, c'est empêcher d'apprendre à pêcher.
Le wokisme ne détruit pas l'humanité dans le sens dramatique. Il fait pire : il dessert systématiquement ceux qu'il prétend protéger, et il génère du ressentiment des deux côtés — ceux qu'on infantilise et ceux qu'on culpabilise.
La fraternité républicaine dit : tu es mon égal, donc je te traite en adulte capable.
Le wokisme dit : tu es ma victime, donc je dois te protéger de toi-même.
L'un élève. L'autre infantilise. Ce n'est pas la même chose, et confondre les deux est exactement le tour de passe-passe qu'on dénonce.
The year is 1950. Your doctor lights a cigarette and tells you smoking is fine. He read it in a study. He is telling the truth about having read it. He does not know, or is not saying, that the study was funded by the tobacco industry.
The year is 1958. Your doctor tells you to eat less fat. The evidence is contested. The contestation is not in the public messaging. The food industry has been helpful in clarifying which findings deserve attention. Some researchers who published contradictory data have been quietly defunded. Ancel Keys is on the cover of Time magazine.
The year is 1962. Your doctor prescribes thalidomide to your pregnant wife for morning sickness. It has been approved. The FDA gave it the green light in Europe. Twelve thousand children will be born with severe limb malformations before anyone in an official capacity acknowledges the problem. The families are told the drug was safe. The drug was approved. Both of these things remain true.
The year is 1972. Your doctor prescribes Valium. Britain is in the grip of a benzodiazepine wave that will last two decades. The dependency risk is known internally. It is not shared. Your doctor is not lying to you. He was not told either.
The year is 1999. Your doctor prescribes Vioxx for your arthritis. It is newer than ibuprofen, well-tolerated, and Merck has a study showing it works. Merck also has internal data suggesting it roughly doubles the risk of heart attack. This data will not reach your doctor for four more years. Fifty thousand people are estimated to have died in the interim. Merck eventually settles for 4.85 billion dollars. No criminal charges are brought.
The year is 2002. Your doctor prescribes OxyContin. Purdue Pharma trained its sales representatives to tell doctors the addiction risk was less than one percent. That figure came from a letter, not a study. The letter was about patients with terminal cancer on short-term doses in hospital settings. Your doctor is a GP with a patient who has a bad back. Nobody draws a distinction. Nobody is required to.
The year is 2008. Your doctor checks your cholesterol. Your LDL is elevated. You are prescribed a statin. Nobody mentions that the number needed to treat for primary prevention is approximately 250. Nobody mentions that the muscle deterioration you'll notice over the next two years is listed as a rare side effect rather than a documented pattern affecting a meaningful percentage of patients. The trial that informed the prescription was funded by the manufacturer.
Now it is today.
Your doctor has new guidelines. New studies. New consensus.
He is confident.
He has always been confident.
The confidence has never been the problem.
The confidence is, in fact, precisely the problem.
Source: COVID19 VACCINE VICTIMS AND FAMILIES
my conspiracy theory is that all the anti-israel posts are actually from israel and pro israel people and their goal is to make people hate them so much they defend israel
I really appreciate @glennbeck continuing the tradition of narrated audio and theatre of the mind
Spiritual Firestorm: How the First Great Awakening Rewired America | The American Story | Ep 3 - The Glenn Beck Podcast https://t.co/NbQbsKRsaf
Scientist Gregg Braden warns that efforts to dramatically reduce atmospheric CO₂ could take us dangerously close to the extinction threshold, endangering all life on Earth.
"If we were to meet the [the UN's climate] goals... we would see a CO₂ level right around 220 or so parts per million."
"Extinction level CO₂ on this planet—when the CO₂ drops below a certain level, forests die and life does no longer thrive—that is 180 parts per million."
"It's not good for us. Those proposals are not good for humans."
Once again Lloyds bank is mired in scandal along with Santander bank . Iran used UK bank accounts to evade Western sanctions.
There is no way UK intelligence services ( MI5, MI6) weren’t aware of these banks allowing the Iranian regime to break the US led sanctions. This explains why President Trump is so annoyed with Starmer. The UK Gov has stabbed the US in the back.
Will bank executives be arrested ?
https://t.co/Iu6GQi7LUe