tyb
the shills have been trying to amp up anons for some violence and stuff.
how do you think that has been working out?
Fair arbiter? CNN’s Jake Tapper trashed Trump for years, now he’s moderating presidential debate
While the network has long been regarded as left-leaning, Tapper’s particular history of covering Trump has been notably critical. Can he put his bias aside to manage a fair debate?
CNN’s Jake Tapper and Dana Bash will moderate the first presidential debate between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump.
The role is typically meant to be that of a neutral custodian of the conversation between the participants, though Tapper’s long history of harshly criticizing Trump while on the air raises questions about his ability to remain even-handed.
Trump and Biden agreed to participate in two debates yesterday through a series of social media posts. The CNN debate is scheduled for June 27, while ABC News will hold a second debate on Sept. 10.
“Donald Trump lost two debates to me in 2020,” Biden posted on Wednesday. “Since then, he hasn’t shown up for a debate. Now he’s acting like he wants to debate me again. Well, make my day, pal.”
“Anywhere. Anytime. Any place. Let's see if Joe can make it to the stand-up podium,” was Trump’s response.
The CNN debate will take place in Atlanta, Ga., and will not include a live audience. While the network has long been regarded as generally left-leaning, Tapper’s particular history of covering Trump has been notably critical.
Tapper censors footage of pro-Trump crowd in Miami
After Trump entered a not guilty plea in special counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents case last June, the former president visited a Cuban restaurant where he greeted an enthusiastic crowd.
CNN initially showed the footage of Trump, though Tapper told staff in the control room not to continue showing it. “The folks in the control room: I don’t need to see any more of that. He’s trying to turn this into a spectacle, into a campaign ad. That’s enough of that. We’ve seen it already,” Tapper said while on the air.
The remarks drew direct rebuke from Trump, who suggested he had cut the footage to avoid highlighting the support for the former president.
“Fake Tapper just demanded that his broadcast be closed down from Miami because there was far too much enthusiasm on the streets for ‘Trump.’ The good news is, he was the only one to do so, perhaps a good explanation as to why CNN’s ratings are so low!” Trump posted in June 2023.
MSNBC’s Nicole Wallace also asked to keep the footage from the public at the time.
Tapper tirade over Trump’s “Gaetz-McBreitbart nonsense”
1/2
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/holdcnns-jake-tapper-has-trashed-trump-years-now-hes-moderating-debate
2/2
In late October of 2020, Tapper went on a lengthy diatribe linking Trump to an array of conservative media outlets and politicians, suggesting he had run a superlatively negative campaign.
“The Gaetz-McBreitbart nonsense that Trump spews, like these little code words that make [Sean] Hannity’s pins shine at specific moments when he utters them,” Tapper said, in apparent reference to conservative news outlet Breitbart and Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz. Tapper then editorialized, saying “He is running the single most negative, sleazy campaign in American history for a major party candidate."
“The campaign that Trump and his allies in the media and members of his family and Trump-allied websites and such are leveling with charges so heinous I’m not even going to say them,” he went on. “Just nonsense, crap tied into QAnon, tied into Pizzagate, tied into the worst things you could say about a person. It’s so disgusting and so beneath what this election should be.”
Tapper mocked Trump over own COVID-19 diagnosis
Earlier that month, Trump checked into Walter Reed National Military Medical Center following his diagnosis with COVID-19.
"Out of an abundance of caution, and at the recommendation of his physician and medical experts, the President will be working from the presidential offices at Walter Reed for the next few days," the White House said at the time.
Tapper, who had long criticized Trump’s handling of the pandemic, signaled that Trump’s disregard for pandemic guidelines had resulted in the diagnosis and that both Trump and his staffers had potentially spread the disease to many others.
"Make no mistake, this was not just reckless behavior, this was a demonstration of a wanton disregard for human life. President Trump, now in quarantine, has become a symbol of his own failures," Tapper editorialized in October 2020.
"Trump was right" about Hunter Biden
Not all of Tapper’s coverage of Trump has been blindly critical. In August of last year, Tapper conceded in a roundtable on “The Lead” that the former president had been right to claim that Hunter Biden had received money from China during the 2020 debates.
"Trump was right. I mean, he did make a fortune from China, and Joe Biden was wrong," Tapper said. "I don't know that he was lying about it. He might not have been told by Hunter. But this blind spot is a problem."
During the exchange, Tapper highlighted a fact-check from the Washington Post that pointed to Hunter Biden’s own admission of receiving funds from China.
“This directly goes against what Joe Biden said in the debate in 2020 with Donald Trump,” he said, before rolling the clip.
Neither CNN nor the Trump campaign responded to requests for comment as of press time.
The Trouble With World Government
A court in Australia has told the government’s own eSafety Commission that Elon Musk is correct: One country cannot impose censorship on the world. The company X, formerly known as Twitter, must obey national law but not global law.
Mr. Musk seems to have won a very similar fight in Brazil, where a judge demanded not just a national but global takedown. X refused and won. For now.
This really does raise a serious issue: How big of a threat are these global government institutions?
Dreamy, dopey, and often scary intellectuals have dreamed of global government for centuries. If you are rich enough and smart enough, the idea seems to be the perennial temptation. The list of advocates includes people who otherwise have made notable contributions: Albert Einstein, Isaac Asimov, Walter Cronkite, Buckminster Fuller, and many others.
Often the dream comes alive following huge upheavals such as war and depression. Or a pandemic period such as the one we’ve just gone through. The use of “disinformation” as a cross-border test case of global government power is designed to deploy a new strategy of governance in general, one that disregards national control in favor of global control.
That has always been the dream. In history, for example, following the Great War, we saw the creation of the League of Nations, which was a forerunner to the United Nations, at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson. Both were seen by the intellectual class as necessary building blocks for what they really wanted, which was a binding world state.
This is not a conspiracy theory. It’s what they said and what they wanted.
In 1919, H.G. Wells, inspired by the League, became so excited about the idea that he wrote a sweeping reinterpretation of world history that extended from the ninth century B.C. until that present moment. It was called “The Outline of History.”
The goal of the book was to turn on its head the popular Whig theory from the previous century, which saw history as the story of ever more freedom for individuals and away from powerful states. Wells told a story of tribes turning to nations and then to regions, with ever less power to the people and ever more to dictators and planners. His purpose was to chronicle and defend exactly this.
It was a huge bestseller at a time when the appetite for books was voracious because they were becoming affordable and there was a burning passion in the population for universal education. The thesis of his book, however valuable in some historical respects, was genuinely bizarre. He imagined a future world state ruled by a tiny elite of the smartest people who would plan all economies, information flows, migration patterns, and governance systems while crushing national ambitions, free enterprise, traditions, and constitutions.
It was crazy stuff and didn’t really happen. But the efforts never stopped among a certain class of intellectuals. Following World War II, we saw similar efforts, the U.N. being only one. In the agreement hammered out at Bretton Woods in 1944, we had forged the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), which were seen as the basis of a global planning apparatus, together with a new world monetary system.
1/2
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trouble-world-government
2/3
None of this worked out either. The IMF and World Bank ended up being well-funded sinecures for elite academics but not really the financial basis of a world state. The U.N. turned into a disappointment for many. The efforts at global management of trade finally came to fruition with the World Trade Organization, but that machinery has proven mostly toothless and unable to stop the sweeping turning back on free trade that has taken place over the past five years. Today, no nation really fears that entity.
The drive to unite Europe was advertised as a liberal move to inspire cooperation on trade and travel and to make economic cooperation possible. But that was just the pitch. The reality of the European Union was the creation of a mean bureaucracy in Brussels that would override the sovereignty of nations and force deference to a new central state in Europe that actually had no historical precedent. It was an experiment in region-wide government planning.
Britain was always a reluctant member, but when its worst fears were realized, the people voted to leave the whole thing. The result was Brexit, a political movement that panicked elites all over the world. They saw the plans of decades going up in smoke. Boris Johnson became prime minister with the task of making Brexit happen, but his rule was confounded at every step. Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic came along to upend his entire tenure.
One way to understand the COVID-19 pandemic response is as a further experiment in world government, a way for the elites to broadcast to the entire planet that they can achieve global cooperation when they want to.
In most every nation, the response was the same in terms of timing and protocol. Social distancing was everywhere, and masks, too. The breakup of gatherings including worship, along with idiotic schemes such as one-way grocery aisles, were imposed everywhere. The slogans (“We are all in this together”) and signage (wash hands, keep distance, mask up) were also the same.
It was creepy in the extreme, especially when you consider the way it all happened at once, even though we knew for sure that there are huge hemispheric differences in the way respiratory pathogens spread. Something can be a problem in New York but not in Sydney. Why did this happen all at once? The message seemed to be: This is just what we do in a global pandemic.
What they did not tell anyone is that none of this constituted “common sense public health measures” but rather amounted to an experiment without any precedent in the history of humanity. Nowhere had all this cockamamie stuff ever been implemented. Only crazy people had recommended them in the past, but the crazies somehow carried the day. There was a message behind the entire effort: We are the government, and we rule the world, populists’ resentment be damned.
In the aftermath, the World Health Organization (WHO) has picked up the mantle to goad the nations of the world to give up their sovereignty and agree to implement the same protocols anytime that the WHO demands it. They have this treaty or agreement that they have been shopping around the planet for signers. At first, it seemed to be in the bag. But with the calamity of the COVID-19 pandemic response in the rearview mirror, it turned out to not be so easy.
The group REPPARE started looking carefully at this agreement and the amendments and saw that the entire thing rested on faulty premises, twisted thinking, and fiscal profligacy. Governments around the world are now flat-out rejecting the offer to give up their control over nations. It appears now that the World Health Organization’s agreement is in trouble. We are even starting to see movements in the direction of leaving the WHO completely, just as President Donald Trump attempted to do back in 2017.
No question that a nascent world government is in operation today. It is hugely influential over media, technology, and the operation of the internet. It is managing global money flows and asset prices. It aims to reduce national sovereignty to mere brand names of the same thing and make it impossible for the will of the voters to prevail in any policy outcomes. It consists of large and well-funded elites that swim between the public and private sectors and operate through foundations and nongovernmental organizations. It is utterly detached from democratic processes.
“Nothing more disastrous could happen in the field of international economic relations than the realization of such plans,” Ludwig von Mises wrote in 1944. “It would divide the nations into two groups—the exploiting and the exploited; those restricting output and charging monopoly prices, and those forced to pay monopoly prices. It would engender insoluble conflicts of interests and inevitably result in new wars.”
3/3
In other words, like all government actions, the results of a world government would end in the opposite of the promise: not peace but war, not prosperity but poverty, not health but sickness, not a better environment but a worse one. It would be a prison for the world and utterly unworkable. People of the world need to be on the lookout for what is happening and reject it whenever the opportunity presents itself to do so.
For this reason, we should cheer anytime global government impositions such as censorship experience a setback. Government in one country causes enough trouble. A unitary government ruling all countries would doom what’s left of civilization.
filturd
EU Actively Monitoring 'Fake News' On Slovak Prime Minister Assassination Attempt
Before Slovakia national authorities could even come out with a confirmed motive for Wednesday's assassination attempt against its prime minister Robert Fico, the following disturbing quote from EU leadership was reported via Bloomberg:
The European Commission said it’s "actively monitoring" the spread of fake news about Wednesday’s shooting of Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and warned it can slap Big Tech platforms with fines for failing to tackle disinformation.
The regulator "is equipped with wide-ranging investigatory and supervisory powers, including the power to impose sanctions and remedies," it said in an emailed statement.
Properly translated, this is the EU in effect wanting to control the narrative, or at least make sure there are no inconvenient 'conclusions'. What kinds of stories might they be worried about?…
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/eu-actively-monitoring-fake-news-slovak-prime-minister-assassination-attempt
moar
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/eu-actively-monitoring-fake-news-slovak-prime-minister-assassination-attempt
https://www.rferl.org/a/slovakia-veto-ukraine-membership-fico-uzhorod-zelensky/32786330.html
We know very little. It happened around 11.600 yrs ago. We know sea level rose over 100 meters when the ice-caps melt.
Most believe it was a meteor/comet, but some point to a massive solar-flare.
Angkor Wat is a "young" site, much younger than stuff in Egypt, S-America and most other ancient stuff concerning this.
https://videa.hu/videok/nagyvilag/the-revelation-of-pyramids-720p-HeGAywnbaTNmq6X5
Yes, the axis thing is a riddle. I don´t think a comet or a meteor could have so much power to tilt the Earth. That would be too much, greater impact than the dinosaur-meteor.
In the link above, 'relevation of pyramid', they point out a line over many of the ancient sites. Was that the old equator? It´s 30 degrees off the current one.
Polarshifts tilting the Earth? Did it tilt?
Riddles in the dark.
the point being the impact would have waayy more energy that 'supposed', let´s say, dinasaur meteor
so much energy it would kill all life on earth
>The object would have to be massive
Way too massive. If a meteor/comet was so massive to tilt the Earth, the impact would destroy all life on Earth. We wouldn´t be here talking about it if that happened.
So why did it tilt then? If it did…
Riddles
We have theories but we don´t know. The whole climate of Earth changed around 11.600 yrs.ago. Last ice-age ended. Sea level rose over 100 meters.
Did polar-shifts take place then? We don´t know.
Could also be explained with meteor impact. We know everything changed, but we´re not sure why. Many point to meteor impact, f.ex. Graham Hancock. That could explain it, but not the supposed tilt of the Earth.
(Randall Carlsson is also a good one to follow)
Yes, if it tilted this would be my guess, i.e. polar-shifts flipping the current and the effects of that flip could effect the Earth, tilting it a bit.
Then there´s also the earth crust moving theory. Could that happen like this? during polar-shifts?
Riddles.