In a wartime situation, a general might create a diversion on one side of the battlefield in order to perform a flanking movement on the enemy and take advantage of the element of surprise.
In Desert Storm, General Norman Schwarzkopf employed a series of deceptions in his battle plans.
He used many tactics to fool the Iraqi army. He would create publicized military maneuvers and release “news” to the press to throw a smoke screen as to his true intentions for his next attack.
In this way, he practiced deception and attacked at a completely different area, confusing his enemies. http://articles.latimes.com/1991-02-28/news/mn-2834_1_war-plan
The Florida election voter recount is an example of very devious sleight of hand with nefarious intentions. It would seem that the 2000 Presidential election was once again upon us.
Oh wait, maybe it is, Brenda Snipes is still in charge of the election process. Wouldn’t you think that she would have been canned for that 2000 boondoggle and if not, then destroying the ballots in the 2016 election for Debbie Wasserman Schultz. The total incompetence and or alleged corruption of Brenda Snipes is well known. She and her team have defied recent court orders nonchalantly with a blatant disregard for law as in previous instances.
The Governor’s race and the Senate race recount antics are a diversionary tactic to camouflage the Democrats real need to change the voting results of the Department of Agriculture Commissioner.
Why would such a big deal be made over a relatively minor position you might ask?
It is well known that the Democratic agenda is to one day abolish the 2nd amendment and disarm the populace.
Obama made it very clear that he was for gun control and expected to have prevented the people from defending themselves by the end of his terms. Hillary was to carry on this desire and finish the 2nd amendment off when she won the election they tried to rig in her favor.
2nd amendment followers did not acquiesce to their desires, in fact, most went out and bought several more firearms and more ammunition.
The Department of Agriculture is where the process is started to apply for open carry and concealed carry of firearms.
The department that owns the PROCESS has the power to slow walk anyone’s application.
It is reminiscent of the IRS scandal with non-profit organizations during the previous Democratic administration.
On November 8, 2018, Democrat Nikki Fried trailed Republican Matt Caldwell by more than four thousand votes. By end of day she was leading by two thousand, nine hundred and fourteen votes. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article221362645.html
Fried has called for emergency donations and expects to lead the race to victory.
Has anyone heard anything about this particular race on the news?
While the public is focused on Scott and DeSantis, the crooked Snipes team is working its wiles on the Commissioner’s race for a Democratic win.
The people of Florida made their desires well known by the way they cast their votes on November 6, 2018.
Why is it so hard for the Democratic Party to accept the will of the people and try to gain power and position by ANY MEANS NECESSARY?
The races will be decided for Scott and DeSantis the way the people wanted. While the election committee grinds and dances, Nikki Fried will have been pushed up. Who knows if it is for real or if the race has now been contrived?
FAKE NEWS OR PROPAGANDA
President Trump has run a constant fight against what he calls the Fake News since the day he came down the elevator in Trump Tower to announce his candidacy.
He has good reason as many of the networks and periodicals have published information on the President, and later are forced to recant it and apologize because the information was incorrect, or just an outright lie.
There is no doubt that they handle the truth carelessly, but is that all that it really is?
It is possible that the news media along with the government in collaboration are trying to spread fake news or propaganda to the American people.
Isn’t that against the law?
It was up until 2013, the year that it all changed. The NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) removed a 1948 ban on the United States government allowing them to release propaganda on its citizens. This action neutralized the Smith – Munt Act of 1948 and the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987.
The NDAA was created with the “purpose” of protecting citizens here and abroad from undue influence of foreign governments on the Internet. What it didn’t mention (outloud) was that it also allowed the government to create and release propaganda on its own citizens.
Most people were not dismayed at the time with this as there was no funding for the government to create and distribute any propaganda.
WAIT – THERE’S MORE
Then President, Barrack Obama signed a bill into law in 2016 for the NDAA that included what was called “Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016.” Though designed to protect the US from foreign entities such as Russia and China, it also allowed the release of propaganda to US citizens. It set up a grant funding for non-governmental originations and others that were already engaged in counter propaganda related work.https://freedomoutpost.com/is-the-us-engaging-in-propaganda-against-its-own-people/
This provided the funding needed to propagate propaganda.
When a falsehood is repeated many times on a form of media trusted by the people, it can become the accepted truth by the public.
When the “fake” news networks repeat “impeachment” 222 times, like they did one day, it makes one feel that some law had been broken and the President was sure to be impeached. On what grounds no one could really say, but that was not important. The repetition convinced many that it was inevitable.
Of course, since the Mueller Report has been released, OBSTRUCTION, is the new catch word.
It is hard for any lawyer to explain how one can obstruct justice, when no crime has been committed. Probably in the LaLa land of Washington D.C., the rules are made up and the law doesn’t matter.
So, if propaganda is okay, how far behind can full censorship and the removal of the First Amendment be?
Actually, it isn’t too far away.
Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have recently banned Alex Jones and his conspiracy theory show and commentary from their platforms, citing hate speech, violence etc. https://www.npr.org/2018/08/06/636030043/youtube-apple-and-facebook-ban-infowars-which-decries-mega-purge They claim that they are fine with opinions but all must be courteous to each side. Who decides what is courteous or respectful? Who died and made them king of free speech?
Many might think that Alex Jones is a kook, so who cares? Everyone should care, as this sets a precedence for anyone with an odd idea or theory to be shut down.
The parents of a young man in a Connecticut high school are suing his school because he offered an opinion about a Shakespearean character who was transgender in one of the Bard’s plays.
His conservative views on transgender and same sex marriage were “offensive” to some others in his class. He refused to apologize or submit to suspension as he has First Amendment rights.
Everyone has First Amendment rights to free speech. It is guaranteed in the Constitution.
No one who is offended has the right to usurp another’s free speech rights.
They have the right to be offended, but they also have the right to ignore it or walk away.
The American People must stand up to censorship and propaganda. It is like water on stone, if allowed to continue, it will break down the hardest surface.
CAN BILLIONAIRES STILL BUY BERNIE?
In Asheville, NC, a traditionally artsy town that was once home to many citizens of extremely old money, such as George Vanderbilt, a 2016 bumper sticker is still displayed on an SUV that said, “Billionaires Can’t Buy Bernie.”
In 2016, Hillary Clinton carried the state in the primary, but Bernie Sanders has a large following as well. He appeals to the young, the alternative life stylers and those who believe Utopia could be achieved if only Conservatives, Capitalists and Republicans would get out of the way.
This bumper sticker raises the question:
Who might possibly pay for Bernie Sanders’ campaign? He is not self-funded, so he must have some backers.
Who is Bernie Sanders and what is he about as a Senator, Congressman and presidential hopeful?
Bernie Sanders is serving his second term in the US senate after winning reelection in 2012 with 71% of the vote. His 16 years in the House of Representatives makes him the longest serving independent in Congressional history.
He graduated from college in 1964, but not much is mentioned about his early career before becoming a politician. His first job was at 40 years old when he became Mayor of Burlington Vermont.
However, he denies being a career politician, even though he has 25 years of service between the terms in the Senate and the House.
Being that donations to campaigns are of public knowledge, it might be that billionaires are the ones supporting Bernie, along with the affiliates of the many, many unions who are contributing money to his campaigns.
The conclusion could be drawn that Sanders has the support of the working person looking at these lists of donors as union members make these donations, not the actual union.
How is that accomplished? Are there funds withheld from paychecks earmarked for political campaigns? Are there fund-raising rallies in which members of the union are invited to and encouraged to donate?
The final question is, who are the heads of these unions, et. al?
One donor on the list for $5000.00 and $10,000 respectively is MoveOn.org.
This is a George Soros backed group. The MoveOn.org organization has been tied to training some of the rioters that shut down Donald Trump’s Chicago rally.
Hmmm, George Soros is a billionaire. Isn’t that is interesting? That’s one billionaire.
Another controversial point is that Sanders swears that his followers didn’t go to disrupt Trump’s rally. Perhaps not directly, maybe these Sanders followers could be guilty by association.
Another donor is Microsoft Corporation. Isn’t Bill Gates a billionaire?
Where is the money and power behind these respective unions, whose “affiliates” have made donations?
For example, the CWA is actively behind Bernie. The Communications Workers of America represent more than 70,000 different companies in different fields. Workers, the Print and Publishing and Media workers, the National Association of Broadcasting Employees and Technicians to name a few.
There is a real possibility that some billionaires own or have interest in some of these companies that provide airline services, and media services, etc.
Rupert Murdoch is a billionaire. He founded Fox News Channel, News Corporation and more. That would encompass media and communications.
Richard Dean Anderson is the CEO of Delta Airlines, but only receives $17.6 million a year from this carrier. He is, however, associated with 251 board members, in 10 different organizations across 11 different industries. His net worth is only $31 million, so he isn’t a billionaire, yet. Delta would have a union of flight attendants and pilots.
So far, at least 3 billionaires, just for examples.
Perhaps this bumper sticker was false advertising, as three examples of individuals whose net worth is over a billion would qualify as Billionaires.
It remains to be seen if the same billionaires will support Bernie in 2020. His recent tax returns show that he is a millionaire in his own right.
Seems rather hypocritical to use the rhetoric that he is only for the working person.
Food for thought!
BIDEN AND SON
Traditionally the United States, in an effort to stabilize countries with warring factions, has long since adopted the habit of funding terror, the idea being that we pick the “lessor of two evils” and try to push out the worst evil by supporting its’ opposition.
The funding of any and all terrorist groups should stop. At the very least, the US should be more prudent of whom it is funding. Our investment in Afghanistan vs. the Russians seemed to initially pay off, but later gave us a sucker punch in the form of 9/11/2001.
That being said, another group the US has funded are the rebels in Ukraine. There is a separatist movement in eastern Ukraine that has gained and lost momentum. This group is in an ongoing conflict with the Ukrainian government.
The most ironic thing about our funding of these rebels is coincidental hiccup with Burisma Holdings Ltd, a natural gas company tied to ousted Ukrainian president, Victor Yanukovych.
Paul Manafort and Richard Gates worked in the Ukraine as unregistered agents for Victor Yanukovych and his Party of Regions, during which time they accrued millions of dollars which they moved around in various ways to avoid paying taxes. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/yanukovych-manafort-indictment-trump_n_59f72e5ae4b03cd20b82fe20
A former Ukrainian Parliamentary lawmaker, Nikolai Zolochevsky, previously a member of Yanukovych’s Party of Regions and his minister of environmental resources, minister of ecology and natural resources, as well as the deputy secretary of the Ukrainian National Defense Counsel, until Yanukovych was ousted, has control of Burisma Holdings Ltd.
Interestingly, Hunter, the son of Joe Biden, former vice president, and Devon Archer, college roommate of Christopher Heinz, the stepson of John Kerry joined the board of Burisma Holdings Ltd. Both Biden and Archer are employees of Rosemount Seneca Partners, a U.S. investment company tied to Rosemont Capital, a private investment firm that Archer and Heinz founded.
This isn’t the first or the worst of this misalliance of the children of public figures.
Their firm struck a one billion dollar investment deal called Bo Hai with the Bank of China.
Ironically, the Bank of China is literally funding a business co-owned by the sons of two powerful politicians in the United States. https://nypost.com/2018/03/15/inside-the-shady-private-equity-firm-run-by-kerry-and-bidens-kids/a
The Bank of China is unlike American banks as China has ownership of the bank. A deal with this bank is a direct connection to Communist China.
Of course, Hunter Biden et al, are private citizens and can accept employment wherever they find opportunity. It seems that being highly connected often brings a great deal of opportunity sometimes. It certainly appears to be a plus, even though there has been some question of an extreme conflict of interest.
The sale of natural gas is a source of conflict between Ukraine and Russia. The Ukrainians purchase the bulk of their natural gas from the Russian government majority owned gas company, Gazprom. They feel that the prices were raised to Ukraine as a punishment for wanting a closer association with the European Union.
Vice President Biden visited the Ukraine in April of 2014 to offer U.S. expertise in expanding their natural gas production. Did he register as a foreign agent or did he use his position as Vice President to exert influence on the Ukrainian country?
Is he any different than Paul Manafort? That remains to be seen, but it is possible that this man, who is now steeped in controversy about his handsy ways with women and young girls, could be the leading Democratic nominee for President?
It is a disturbing thought.