Ian DeMartino

On Monday, the National Electoral Council of Venezuela announced that incumbent President Nicolas Maduro had won reelection. The opposition disputed the result and received significant public support from Western countries.

The United States hoped to overthrow Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by supporting a coup. It failed because the people of Venezuela support Maduro and the Bolivarian revolution, researcher and geopolitical analyst Christopher Helali told Sputnik’s The Critical Hour on Wednesday.

“Of course, we’ve seen this playbook before… not only in Latin America, we’ve seen it in Eastern Europe, we’ve seen it in the Caucasus in Georgia, we’ve seen it all throughout Central Asia,” Helali explained. “Anywhere the United States feels that its interests are threatened, or that a country doesn’t kowtow to Washington or Brussels.”

On Monday and Tuesday, supporters of the opposition started violent riots in the streets, utilizing Molotov cocktails and firearms to fight police. By Wednesday, the government had regained control and tens of thousands of Venezuelans from across the country traveled to the capital Caracas, and took to the streets supporting Maduro. The President joined them in what appeared to be a jubilant and peaceful celebration.

[The West] already were giving people the heads up that there was going to be chaos and disorder if President Maduro was reelected. And, lo and behold, it happened. They said it. It happened,” he explained. “They’re trying to spin it as a crackdown by the government, but that’s not the case. In fact, the government is trying to maintain peace and order. It’s the opposition that wants disorder and chaos, [which is] just the recipe for the US to come in and gobble up all of Venezuela’s oil and natural resources and begin plundering the country like they did before Hugo Chavez’s time.”

While the United States has a long history of successfully supporting coups in other countries, it has had a string of failures that raise the question of whether it is as effective as it used to be

[…]

Helali noted that they may not have the support of “the elite” in the countries who have “dreams of plundering the countries once more with the help of the West.” However, the working class is “fighting to defend their sovereignty and their territorial integrity and their own mode of development and prosperity outside of Western imperialism.”

Ultimately, the people decided that they were “not going to allow some gringos from the north to come and take [Venezuela] and plunder it,” Helali said.

The United States has been trying to overthrow the democratically elected government of Venezuela since Hugo Chavez’s time and the leader of the opposition, Maria Corina Machado, was arrested for taking payments from the US-funded Non-Governmental Organization National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in the early 2000s and met with then-US President George W Bush in 2005

[…]

Via https://sputnikglobe.com/20240801/the-us-failed-to-coup-maduro-because-he-has-the-respect-of-the-people-1119590032.html

A very important video of the Trump shooting was released yesterday. It was shot from just south of building 6, and is 9 1/2 long, with the shots fired almost exactly in the middle. The shots start at the 4 minute 55 second mark.

https://x.com/realDJStew724/status/1817781521190662306

The person who shot it said that the local police confiscated his phone and arrested him. The phone was only recently returned. I am intrigued by the center window of “building 6”, the building Crooks was on top of. It’s the one just to the right of the four big vents that stick out of the side of the building and go above the roof.

Here’s what the window looked like a fair amount of time before the shooting. This is the “normal” look. The “5:02” timestamp should probably be considered approximate, as Mr. Stewart added that in as a caption. Most of the 9 1/2 minute video shows “6:10” as the time, so that’s obviously not being updated to match the time exactly.

Mr. Stewart has a little over an hour of time that is not shown in this video. One it starts up again, it runs continuously.

This shot is taken 1 1/2 minutes before shots start being fired. Notice a little bit of red cloth at the top of the window?

One minute before shots. Now the red cloth covers almost all of the window, and it looks like a lot of the weather-stripping on the top of the window has sagged down:

Seven seconds before shots start: The window looks BROKEN. The fallen weather-stripping seems to have disappeared. There’s an almost horizontal white line running across the middle of the window, as well as a diagonal and vertical line we don’t see elsewhere. The red cloth seems to start a little below the top of the window now, but it goes all the way to the bottom.

Six seconds before shots: Instead of the white lines forming horizontal, diagonal and vertical lines, they now make two curves. The “broken window” appearance is gone.

Four seconds before shots: the window looks “normal”.

Less than a second after the last picture: There is a light oval shaped area in the window, on the left, toward the top. What’s going on? Did someone open the door in the room, allowing us to see the hallway?

One second to go: the window looks pretty normal.

When shots start, the photographer starts running, not surprisingly. So the next few seconds show scenes that are changing so rapidly one would have to look frame by frame to see if there is anything of use.

The next picture is taken within a second after shot 8.

The window is a LOT more reflective here than it was in previous pictures.

The window looks like it’s bowed out a little. In addition, in the first of these pictures there is a dark triangle in the bottom left of the window. There is a second shot I saved, but I decided to not include it since the differences may only be a result of the camera moving, or the compression algorithm. The second picture does not show the dark triangle.

The 9th shot – presumably the one that local snipers took of Crooks and missed – happens at 5:01.

Immediately afterward the window starts becoming less reflective.

At 5:04 the window goes to being not reflective, but has a mysterious bright flash:

Right after that the window looks pretty normal, except for the line across the middle that looks kind of like a stock price graph:

But wait, there’s another flash:

And then it’s back to normal.

Needless to say, I’m quite suspicious that there might have been a shooter in this window. Chris Martenson proposes that hypothesis in his first acoustic analysis video, from July 19. He put out a video analyzing this video yesterday, but it almost exclusively was focused on what the shots sounded like. I don’t care about that too much, because it’s pretty obvious from prior videos that shots 1-3 and 4-8 came from different rifles. The two series sound less different from each other in this video than in other videos, but they still sound different.

So, three big questions:

1)How could a shooter shoot through a window that appears to be closed the whole time?

2) Would someone in this position have a clear view to the stage?

3) If someone shot the first three shots from this window, would that be consistent with the first shot grazing Mr. Trump’s ear and then hitting the railing of the right hand bleachers? (We are pretty sure that bullet did go on to hit a person in the stands and the railing in the stands, although not necessarily in that order.)

For the first question, I think there might have been some kind presto-chango magic act going on. It’s pretty obvious the red curtain went up to obscure someone behind the window. The weird effects like the “drooping weatherstripping”, the “broken glass appearance” and the increased reflectivity and bowing of the window suggest to me that the actual glass in the window was replaced with some kind of plastic that would be reflective (so no one could look in) and would have some kind of self healing qualities. That doesn’t seem too far “out there” considering that this is exactly the kind of thing CIA researchers would create.

What then of the flashes of light a few seconds after shot 8 but before shot 10? Maybe it was a government employee killing the sniper – tying up a loose end. A good candidate for that second sniper would be Maxwell Yearick. The white van with explosives was registered to him. See George Webb’s substack or X posts for more on this georgewebb.substack.com. A word of caution though, some of his hypotheses are too far out there even for me, and he really likes to make cheesy and annoying AI illustrations.

Or maybe the light flashes were camera flashes. I wouldn’t think so, though, because camera strobes only last 1/60 of a second, so they should have shown up in more than one frame of a video.

Second question: would a shooter have a clear view of the stage? I was up until 4AM this morning (past my bedtime of 1:30) looking for videos and diagrams that would show this. I believe the answer is yes.

I took this screenshot from one of Chris Martenson’s videos. If you hold a straightedge from a spot about three feet behind the screen on the stage to that middle window in building six, you will see that the only thing in the way would be that hydraulic lift that’s holding the speaker bank. So the next question is – how tall is that thing?

Thanks to another of Mr. Stewart’s videos, I grabbed another still that shows it pretty well.

You can see people’s heads over all of that thing except for the part where operator would sit when moving it. It’s pretty close, but when I hold that straightedge up, it looks like the line of sight would be just forward of the part where the operator would be (which shows in black overhead photo). The line of site passes through the yellow part of that lift, so I think he would have a clear shot. Remember, Mr. Trump was on a stage that was about 4 feet high, and he is 6’ 3”, so the elevation would be almost 10 feet above the ground.

Third question – elevation. Google earth (which is not to be trusted, especially several days after an event like this, but it’s all I have) says:

Base of building 6 near the center building is 1340 feet, peak of roof is 1355 feet.

Ground level of stage is approximately 1342 feet.

The ground under the right bleachers is 1341 feet. These numbers are all approximate, and they come from a verified left leaning and CIA aligned source. (I mean google doesn’t do google maps, google streets and google earth out of their own resources, just to get a few more people using their search engines).

[…]

Via https://skepticalactuary1348.substack.com/p/zapruder-film-of-the-trump-shooting

Leo Cashman

Mercury is one of the most harmful substances among the seemingly limitless pollutants present in a modern industrial nation. From the early “Mad Hatter” archetypes based on hatters using mercury in their work, to massive mercury pollution in Japan in the 20th Century, this substance has had a devastating impact on human health. Now Europe has stepped up with a ban on mercury-containing amalgam dental fillings.

World-wide momentum for a ban

On May 30th, 2024, we received confirmation that the European Union is banning dental amalgam fillings, which are about half mercury. The use and export of amalgam must end on January 1, 2025, and the manufacture and the import are banned as of July 1, 2026. The EU action applies to all 27 of its member states. The EU’s action comes on the heels of increasing crackdowns on dental amalgam in Europe, with bans by Sweden, Norway, and Denmark in 2009 and, in more recent years, moves by Finland, Ireland, Netherlands, Italy, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Moldova to also ban amalgams. There are ten other countries that are discouraging amalgam use, adding to the world-wide momentum against dental amalgam, a momentum that the US and its closest allies, Canada, the UK and Australia have so far resisted. That leaves the question: what is wrong with the US and its close allies? Can’t they see the same science and the same abundant clinical evidence that amalgam fillings, which are half mercury, are harmful? It is estimated that of all the people who have dental restorations, at least half of them have mercury amalgam fillings.

Alfred Stock’s important research

There has been a pitched battle in the US over the amalgam issue for three or four decades. Looking back even farther, we can also mention the work of Professor Alfred Stock, a prominent German chemist who, in the 1920s, discovered that his forgetfulness and brain fog were being caused by his own dental amalgam fillings. Stock’s health improved after he had his own amalgams removed, and he then diagnosed many friends’ problems and encouraged them to have their amalgams removed. He published more than thirty scientific papers on the subject, until his laboratory and most of his records were destroyed by allied bombing raids in World War II. That unfortunate bombing ended his research, and he died in near obscurity. (1)

But the torch never went out

A Brazilian dentist named Pinto incorporated Professor Stock’s science into his own investigations, and he passed on the information to his dentist son, Dr. Olympio Pinto. The latter met up with American dentist Dr. Hal Huggins at a conference in Mexico City in 1973. Pinto revealed that mercury from dental amalgams does leak, and Hal Huggins became a leading investigator of the issue in North America. On into the 1980s and 1990s, Dr. Huggins became a leading critic of amalgams, the head of a busy biological dental clinic in Colorado Springs, CO, and a favorite target of the American Dental Association’s (ADA’s) hostile attacks.

CBS 60 Minutes was a rare truthful media event

In 1990, CBS 60 Minutes did a resounding episode on the dental amalgam issue that was seen on TV by 30 million viewers. The ADA agreed to be interviewed on the show provided that Hal Huggins was not included in the program as one of the amalgam critics. The program catapulted the amalgam issue into public prominence and fueled the growth of holistic dental practices, the growth of scientific investigations, and a surge in consumer activism. DAMS, Dental Amalgam Mercury Solutions was formed in 1990, to educate the public, complementing the work already being done by the professional academies, IAOMT, IABDM and Holistic Dental Association. All of these groups emphasize the importance of having your amalgams removed safely, by a well-trained, well-equipped biological dentist, if they are going to be removed at all. (2)

 Witchhunts of the 1990s

But the 1990s saw major attacks by state dental boards against Hal Huggins in Colorado and against many other dentists in many other states. In 1995, the Colorado Dental Board took away Huggins’ license to practice, and the boards in many other states acted similarly. It was an era of “witchhunts,” with dentists who were removing dental amalgams of their patients being accused of practicing outside of the “standard of care” and of being “unethical.” The local media generally went along with the portrayal of Huggins and his followers as both being driven by greed and going against what the science says – science as described by the ADA.

The Watson-Burton bill

In 2003 a Congressional panel held hearings on the dental amalgam issue and what science actually says. Republican Dan Burton and Democrat Diane Watson jointly became chief authors of a bill to phase out dental amalgam fillings. It was assigned to the House Commerce Committee where it languished and died because it did not get nearly enough co-sponsors to get it a hearing in the committee. Sadly, the media let the issue whither for lack of attention; ever since the CBS 60 Minutes show in 1990, the major media has either ignored the issue or tells the ADA’s biased side of it.

The CATs media multimillion dollar blitz

In April of 2006, some very biased NIH-sponsored studies known as the Children Amalgam Trials (CATS) were completed and published, followed by an immediate media/public relations campaign claiming that, with the two studies, dental amalgams had definitely been shown to be safe for children (the implication being that they must be safe for everyone, so what should adults be worried about?). The DAMS newsletter published a detailed analysis showing that the study’s toxicological questions had not even been completed yet, and the data itself showed signs of mercury retention, particularly in boys. Critics of the studies said that these clinical trials were highly unethical pointing to the experimentation on young children from an orphanage, lured into participation with incentive gifts. But the big media ran with it without mentioning the research defects.

2009 FDA issues an amalgam rule

For decades, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had been dancing around the dental amalgam issue, failing to classify it (i.e., moderate risk, highest risk -requiring a proof of safety?), and finally on July 28, 2009, it did come out with an amalgam “rule.” It offered no protection to the public, and it looked like it had been written by the amalgam industry and the ADA.

The rule said: there was no reason to be careful of amalgam use in children (citing the defective CAT studies); no reason to be cautious about its use in pregnant women; no need for caution for people with neurological disorders (mercury is a notorious neurotoxin) or kidney problems; and no need to inform the patient that amalgam fillings contain mercury.

Obama appointee, Dr Margaret Hamburg, MD, was the FDA commissioner at the time, and she participated in shaping the rule even though she had a glaring conflict of interest: she had served on the board of Henry Schein, Inc, America’s largest amalgam distributor and had received several hundreds of thousands of dollars for serving on its board.

The Global Mercury Ban Treaty

For many years, the countries of the world met annually to hammer out a global ban on mercury. In October 2013, 139 countries gathered in Minimata, Japan, to sign the treaty. While the treaty did help the environment by cracking down on mercury in thermometers, thermostats, and other industrial uses, it was very weak in its mention of dental amalgam. It also totally sidestepped mercury in vaccines, where it is injected directly into the human body as thimerosal, a preservative. So, it was a sweetheart deal for the ADA and for big pharma and its toxic vaccines. As far as protecting the public from its worst exposures to mercury, amalgams and vaccines, the reality was that the treaty missed the mark. But the annual global meetings were productive in giving a chance for the people gathered to share information about the dental amalgam issue and gave many of them the resolve to go back home and work for an amalgam ban in their own countries.

Conclusion 

The dental-medical/political-media establishment in the USA is very wedded to what appears to be a dental amalgam mercury cover-up. The media seems to have a pact to stay on message with the cover-up. Deep motives for this misconduct could possibly include: 1) avoiding the embarrassment and shame of being wrong on a hugely important public health issue and the resulting loss of funding and power, 2) a possible desire to  boost the profits of big pharma (people with illnesses and disorders provide a steady flow of customers for big pharma, and you can note that the biggest contributors to the ADA Health Foundation, in the million dollar category, are Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline), 3) possible population reduction (mercury is a reproductive toxin, causing birth defects and miscarriages), and 4) possibly mind control (mercury weakens a person’s mental clarity, perhaps making a person more willing to be a cog in a machine, guided by media messages, and by governmental authority figures).

Getting America, Canada, and the UK to ban amalgam mercury fillings looks daunting. Getting the media to cover the important issues of mercury and other major toxins also appears daunting. But many people out there are hungry for truth and for protecting freedom. Perhaps together we can all vow to carry on, so that the torch of truth and freedom never die.

[…]

Via https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2024/07/31/what-are-the-prospects-for-the-u-s-since-eu-has-banned-dental-mercury-amalgams/

Dr Eddy Betterman

Almost everywhere around the world right now deserts are shrinking as greening accelerates, prompting climate fanatics to change course by demanding that something now be done to “Save the deserts!”

Climate fanatics have long complained about desertification caused by climate change and the excess release of “greenhouse gases” like carbon dioxide (CO2). These deranged people are so scared of CO2 that they have tried every which way to essentially ban the natural gas so the planet can be “cooled.”

The Guardian (United Kingdom) ran a headline about how “Desertification is turning the Earth barren,” the narrative being that expanding drylands are leaving entire countries “facing famine.” It turns out the opposite is true: greenhouse gases are greening the planet as vegetation is growing faster and faster.

Yale Environment 360 ran a piece about the world’s shriveling deserts, which will only shrivel further in the coming years.

Now that we know CO2 is causing plants to grow and spread, the narrative has changed to one of climate change causing the deserts to recede. As such, climate fanatics are launching a new movement to “save” the world’s deserts from becoming green, lush and fertile.

You may recall from elementary science class that CO2 functions as “plant food.” The more of it that gets released, the greener everything becomes as plants thrive on CO2. There is absolutely nothing to worry about with CO2, of course, but the greenies are petrified by it.

How will climate fanatics try to spin the benefits of greening?

According to Yale University researchers, increasing CO2 levels are “fast-tracking” photosynthesis in plants. What CO2-rich air does is allow plants to more efficiently use scarce water, functioning as a fertilizer in even the driest of deserts.

Scientists have been aware of this CO2 greening effect for some time, which they should be, seeing as how children used to learn this basic scientific fact in elementary science class. Somehow, elementary science facts have become new revelations in today’s “woke” scientific establishment.

Carbon Brief is another media source that has long complained about how climate change is supposedly expanding the world’s deserts. Now that we know the opposite is true, will the outlet adjust its narrative or double down?

Carbon Brief, by the way, is funded by green activist billionaires like Sir Christopher Hohn, a past provider for recently jailed Roger Hallam, and so-called “Extinction Rebellion.”

Even Yale, which admits the world’s deserts are shrinking, is still clinging to climate fearmongering by claiming that all the greening will “obliterate arid-land ecosystems.” In other words, they are now pushing an “arid ecosystems matter” type of campaign to defend their crumbling climate narrative.

Chinese scientists recently discovered that over the past 20 years, about 55 percent of the world’s land masses showed an “accelerated rate” of vegetation growth. Four different datasets reveal that nearly 60 percent of the globe has been greening since around 2000.

“Global greening is an indisputable fact,” these scientists declared.

Daily Sceptic environment editor Chris Morrison reports that plants in general thrive at about three times the current atmospheric levels of CO2. This means that a whole lot more greening is still to come, assuming current trends continue.

“This recovery of CO2 levels in the atmosphere holds out hope for higher food resources in many parts of the world that suffer from periodic famines,” Morrison writes about the benefits of greening.

[…]

Via https://dreddymd.com/2024/08/01/climate-change-global-greening-fanatics-save-deserts/

By Rosanne Lindsay, Naturopath

Updated from February 2022

Living in the material world means an attachment to wireless technology. When does an attachment become an addiction?

Can you do without a cellphone? Watching TV? Scrolling social media? How much time in a day does wireless occupy? What do you consider excessive use? Do you experience withdrawal symptoms (moodiness, irritability, depression) by going without? Would you consent to the imposition of technology at the risk of harming your health and potentially all biological life?

Unfortunately, the emotional and physical effects of invisible electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) are not listed on the package. If you have two or more of the following devices; cell phones, computers, GPS, Smart appliances, electric cars, wearables, and Smart™ TVs, or electric cars, then there are symptoms you may never hear about.

The manufacturer does not disclose that EMFs activate the hidden world of yeast, fungus, mold, mycoplasma, Lyme spirochetes, and protozoan parasites to unhealthy levels in the human body.

The consequence of WiFi is a rise in chronic infections that can be misdiagnosed.

The industries responsible for creating this silent connection between EMFs and infection fail to take responsibility. The line between what will protect you, and what will not, has never been less clearly defined.

As 5G towers become compatible with 6G, 7G and beyond, who is responsible for the consequences?

Symptoms from exposure to mold toxins include:

• Fatigue
• Weakness
• Muscle cramps
• Headache and pain
• Light sensitivity
• Sinus problems
• Abdominal pain
• Diarrhea
• Joint pain and stiffness
• Cognitive issues
• Mood dysregulation
• Temperature regulation or dysregulation problems
• Excessive thirst
• Increased urination
• Nervous system issues

The parasitic origin of cancer is not a new concept.  J. Collins Warren, M.D. wrote about it all the way back in 1891 in the Boston Medical and Surgical Journal.  A bacterial origin has also been considered and at one time cancer was considered infectious.  Per usual, many of these theories are trumped and then forgotten due to powerful lobbyists for Big Pharma.

http://

In Vitro Experiment

Dr. Klinghardt shows that unprotected mold multiplies and releases 600 times more potent biotoxins than mold that is protected from electromagnetic fields (EMF).  Klinghardt postulates that mold, mycotoxin, parasites including worms, and Lyme reacts more defensively when exposed to EMF and that in 2011, the amount of cell phone radiation in a cubic inch of air is several million times higher than it had been a decade before that, and it’s only creased even more now.

[…]

Via https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2024/07/31/mold-parasites-emfs-cancer/

Episode 6 Mongol Institutions under Chinggis Khan

The Mongol Empire

Dr Craig Benjamin (2020)

Film Review

The administrative structure Chinggis Khan created for the Mongol Empire is described by Persian historian Jervaini (1226-1283 AD), an administrator in the Mongol government of its founder’s successors.

Under Chinggis Khan’s administrative success stemmed in part from reorganizing Mongol society along military lines, in part from a successful tax regime and in part from his new law code, known as the Great Yasa. Borrowing from the Chinese, he began by dividing his empire into 1000 Miquan (extended families), with each responsible for supporting (with funding and recruits) 1000 troops. Each Miquan was subdivided into 10 Jaghams of 100 families, which were further subdivided into Anban of 10 families. When the Mongols defeated new tribes, they were assigned to existing Miquon.

Miquon leaders could only communicate with the great khan directly (not with each other). Mongol men who chose not to enlist in the military were assigned to hard, unpaid physical labor.

The Mongol Military

In 1206, Chinggis Khan established a new 10,000-man military unit called the Keshing bodyguard. All were sons of military officers. This provided a training ground for new officers and political administrators. Following enlistment, warriors were expected to report for duty with their gear and horse fit for duty or they could be fined. If they failed to report, their wives could be forced to replace them.

Taxation

Initially Chinggis Khan established two basic tax structures: 1) the alba, pastoralists paid to the military and administrative elites and 2) the kuptua, a 1% levy enacted to finance special projects. The kuptua eventually became a permanent 10% tithe.

This would prove a far more stable source of income than plunder. Late in his reign, Ghinggis Khan divided the the empire into four regional fiscal and taxation regions – Mongolia, Turkistan, northern China and Khwarazmian-Mazandaran (modern day Iran).

Although merchants were exempt from the kuptua, they paid a transaction tax (tamgha) of 5% on all goods and services. Religious organization and leaders were exempt from all taxes.

The Great Yasa

The laws Chinggis Khan enacted were known as the Great Yasa, Reportedly recorded in Uighur script, archeologists have never found the document. In general, they systematized existing Mongol taboos:

• livestock had to be killed on their back to ensure now blood was wasted.
• striking a horse in anger, wounding or stealing, resting a whip on it or touching it with a sword was punishable by death.
• young birds were protected.
• it was forbidden to extinguish a fire touching it with a knife.
• it was forbidden to wash in a running steam in spring or summer or to urinate in a stream at any time
• it was forbidden to spill liquid on the ground
• spitting food on the ground was punishable by death
• it was forbidden to step on the threshold of the great khan’s tent because it was sacred.
• Military pillaging without permission or failing to pick a fallen comrade’s weapon was punishable by death. Likewise if Mongol divisions lost too many warriors in battle, their comrades could be put to death for lack of effort.*

*The Spartans enacted similar laws in Greece.

Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/12373094/12373106

Paul Craig Roberts

The assassination issue has been reduced to operational failure and insufficient budgetary resources for the Secret Service, and the assassination has been moved aside by Kamala’s emergence as the Democrat candidate for President. The presstitutes are again speaking with one voice preparing the narrative of a close election that makes it possible to use the election theft mechanisms that have been legalized by the Democrats in the swing states.

Biden had to go because he was too discredited as a viable candidate for the Democrats to be able to steal the election in his behalf. Kamala, previously soundly rejected by Democrats as a presidential candidate is now being hyped as the candidate able to defeat Trump. Rigged polls are now showing a neck and neck contest, with Trump sometimes ahead by one point and Kamala ahead by 3 points. The purpose of these rigged polls and the media emphasis on what a viable and challenging opponent Kamala presents is to prepare the public’s acceptance of another stolen election.

In 2020 Trump got more votes than he got in 2016. Yet somehow he lost to Biden whose few campaign rallies attracted minimal attendance, but despite the lack of interest Biden got more votes than Hillary in 2016 and, if memory serves, the largest number of votes in US electoral history. Clearly no such thing happened.

Trump supporters take for granted that Trump is already elected. This confidence is not justified. They, and Trump himself, need to pay attention to how the presstitutes and the elite are creating a winning persona for Kamala. By implanting a close election in the voting public’s mind, the Democrats can steal the election. I think that is what will happen, thus ridding the ruling establishment of Trump’s threat to take away their power.

Lies and election theft have always been part of American politics. Power, not ideas, is what is important to the contestants and their backers. However, in 2016 a major change occurred. In his campaign Trump said he intended to normalize relations with Russia. This was a direct threat to the power and budget of the military/security complex which needs Russia as an enemy to justify its power and budget.

Trump also said in his inauguration speech that he was taking power away from the ruling establishment and giving it back to the people. No president had ever spoken in this way. Trump revealed himself as an existential threat to the ruling elite. The power elite assembled at his speech smiled and laughed at the unaware clown and soon began their political assassination of Trump with Russia-gate, two impeachments in the House of Representatives, pornstar-gate, documents-gate, and an “insurrection” that has put 1,000 of Trump’s supporters in prison as “insurgents” as a warning to others.

Trump’s challenge to the ruling elite and the massive support he received from the traditional American population scared the ruling elite whose control over America had been gradually tightened. The ruling elite decided on a coup. The Republican Party, whose voters stood with Trump, had to go. What we have witnessed in the Biden regime is the elite’s decision to install a one-party state completely under their control.

Rino Republican response is to continue in existence by out-competing Democrats in serving the interests of the ruling elite. Unsure of their ability to whore as well as Democrats is why the Republican Senate leader hates Trump. Trump has brought matters to a fight or surrender decision that Republicans prefer to avoid.

Concerning the assassination, we have no idea what effect it will have on Trump. Will he pull in his horns in order to continue his life?

What we do know is that like the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, 9/11 and other such CIA/FBI/Joint Chiefs events, there will be no real investigation. No important evidence will even be mentioned–such as the acoustic evidence of the shots and their location, such as the upward trajectory of the bullet that struck the person in the corner at the top of the stand above Trump. How did Crooks’ shot allegedly fired at Trump, which would have had a downward trajectory strike a person above Trump? FBI director Wray prepares the cover by saying that Trump was not struck by a bullet but by shrapnel. In other words a bullet disintegrated and flew upward. Examination of the person’s wound would reveal whether it was a bullet or shrapnel. We will be told whatever fits the official narratives if we are told anything at all.

Having watched many coverups in my lifetime, I tried to prevent this one by early reporting the ignored real evidence before Republicans, delighted in giving Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheaters a verbal beating, a mistake as it outraged women, moved the issue off target. Once a coverup is set in stone with an official narrative, it is immune to evidence, like the assassinations of John and Robert Kennedy and 9/11. Evidence does not count once an official narrative has been established.

It was important that the acoustic and bullet trajectory evidence be immediately introduced prior to the establishment of the official narrative, but Republicans could not meet the challenge. Now we have a narrative without the real evidence.

The House of Representatives has voted unanimously to set up an investigative task force over the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. The fact that it is unanimous means that it will touch no real issue. Indeed, the investigation is limited to determining the nature of the failures of the Secret Service that permitted the assassination attempt by Thomas Matthew Crooks. The most likely result will be a larger budget for the Secret Service and, perhaps, a ban on such outdoor events.

In other words the narrative is that the Secret Service failed to stop Crooks. There is to be no examination if there were other shooters, if Crooks was merely a patsy, no examination of acoustic evidence, no explanation for an upward bullet trajectory. Nothing but a verification of the official narrative.

Who will the House rely on for the investigation? The House will rely on the suspects themselves–the Secret Service, the FBI, Homeland Security. FBI Director Wray, a Trump appointee, will respond to the House in keeping with the official narrative. The Republicans will be made impotent by being submerged in the official explanation.

At this point we do not know if Crooks fired a single shot. Despite Crooks being overlooked by Secret Service from two directions there are no videos of Crooks firing. Indeed, he was killed by a shot a quarter of a minute after all firing had stoped by a bullet that caused instant death. If he was in position firing his rifle, why is his dead body 7 feet away from the rifle?

Don’t expect questions like this to be part of the investigation.

How likely is it that Trump will be permitted to be elected? If he is elected and does not pull in his horns, will he serve out his term?

His appointees will be concerned mainly with their own careers. Their careers are non-existent if they are hard-nosed like Trump, but if they “moderate” Trump and can claim credit for making him reasonable and unifying, they will move up in the establishment. To “moderate” Trump means to defeat his and his supporters’ agenda.

In 2016 with their candidate, Hillary, defeated, the ruling establishment decided that there would be no more fair elections, that their control was more important.

The elite worked to institutionalize election theft so that it was no longer an issue.

The ruling elite have no concern or comprehension of the unintended consequences of their desperate hold on power. They have split the country worse that it was split by the tariff of 1861 that caused the so called “Civil War.” How does a split country stand up to the enemies the US government has created for America?

A government that bases itself on lies will eventually be discredited.

This will be America’s fate.

[…]

Via https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2024/07/28/where-matters-stand/