Disney and Cartoon Network Show Creator Arrested on Sickening Array of Child Porn Charges
Kyle Carozza, the creator of the Cartoon Network series Mighty Magiswords and Disney’s Doc McStuffins, has been arrested on a sickening array of enhanced child pornography charges following an Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) investigation. […]
The post Disney and Cartoon Network Show Creator Arrested on Sickening Array of Child Porn Charges appeared first on The People’s Voice.
The Party of “Democracy” Will Now Choose Your Candidate For You
On Sunday, July 21, President Biden dropped out of the 2024 presidential campaign via a text-only post on Twitter/X. Less than an hour later, Biden—also via a text-only post on Twitter/X—endorsed vice president Kamala Harris for the presidency.
Thus, in just a few minutes, the ruling party in Washington completely erased the primary election process from one of the country’s major parties. That is, the same Democratic party that tells us it is the party of “democracy” just completely cut ordinary voters out of the selection process for the Democratic nominee.
Instead, the Democratic nominee in 2024 will be chosen by a small group of elite party insiders. We’re told there will be an “open convention” in Chicago to choose the nominee, but all that means is that that there is no pre-determined nominee going into the convention. In any case, however, the nominee will be chosen by delegates and superdelegates (i.e., wealthy party elites like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama) behind closed doors.
The Democratic party’s efforts to circumvent the primary process are quite remarkable for a ruling coalition that lectured the general public endlessly in 2020 about how Donald Trump was allegedly a “threat to democracy” and how “democracy is on the ballot.”
Yet, this is what we’ve come to expect from political elites who use the term “democracy” as a propaganda term. For these people, the term has no objective meaning, it just means “something we like.” “Anti-democratic,” in contrast, just means “something we don’t like.”
Moreover, its use as a propaganda term can be seen in the way that “democracy” is used in the same way as “revolutionary” by Marxist regimes. In such cases “revolutionary” is code for “in favor of the ruling elites” and “something we like.” Similarly, the opposite of “democracy” in a Marxist regime is “counterrevolutionary” or “bourgeois.” Those terms were essentially code for “against the ruling party” and “thing we don’t like.”
Such terms have no actual content in the usual sense of a word. Thus, the term “democracy” simply means “good” and “not democratic” means “evil.”
For example, President Joe Biden delivered two major speeches in 2022 on how “democracy” will supposedly be abolished if his opponents win. In November of that year, former president Barack Obama solemnly intoned that if Republicans win in Arizona, “democracy as we know it may not survive.” This is repeated among the party’s media allies. One writer at Salon chastised voters for daring to let their votes be influenced by economic concerns when “democracy is under threat.” One New York Times headline bemoaned the apparent reality that voters don’t seem interested in “saving democracy” when it’s supposedly all so clear that “democracy is in peril.” At no point in these jeremiads is it ever explained how a vote for the out-of-favor candidate will actually end elections or universal suffrage or any other event or institution associated with democracy.
In Biden’s September 2022 speech in Philadelphia, he went on for twenty minutes about an imagined threat to democracy, without ever actually defining what democracy is. One was reminded of Fidel Castro howling in his multi-hour speeches about the threat to “the revolution” from insidious imperialists and counterrevolutionaries—by which he meant anyone who opposed his regime. The term “revolutionary” had no connection to actual revolution in this context. It simply meant “something my regime likes.”
Meanwhile, the elites have gone to great lengths to ensure that no actual democracy—in the technical or traditional sense—has taken place in the nomination process. The Democratic Party made it clear that it would not allow any presidential hopefuls to challenge Biden to a debate. Early Democratic challengers Congressman Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson were told to get lost. The most significant challenger within the party, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., was effectively expelled from the party in October 2023. He was forced to declare his candidacy as an independent candidate soon after.
So, after denying Democratic voters the chance to vote on Kennedy or anyone else, the party has now also denied the voters the chance to vote on Harris or whoever else the party elites will decide is the nominee in 2024.
I don’t mention any of this to burnish the reputation of the Republican Party, by the way. Those of us who remember the Ron Paul campaigns in 2008 and 2012 remember how the GOP conspired to torpedo his campaign, going so far as to change the convention rules, ex post facto, to deny Paul a prime-time speaking position and to disenfranchise his delegates.
Yet, it’s not the GOP that’s claiming to be the guardian of the vox populi while conspiring to undermine that vox at every turn.
Rather, the alleged protectors of democracy carry on the tradition of redefining the term “democracy” to serve the interests of the elites whenever it suits their purposes. We see this not only in America, but globally. Any time the “wrong” people win an election—”wrong” according to global elites—the outcome of the election is declared a “threat to democracy.” We see this repeatedly in European politics where “democracy” is defined as support for the unelected European commission. German political elites, meanwhile, have repeatedly declared the rightwing AfD party a “threat to democracy” because party members keep winning elections. In Latin America, “democracy” means to support the social-democratic left. When rightwing Jair Bolsonaro was elected in Brazil, that was denounced as anti-democratic. When leftwing Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff was impeached by a democratically elected legislature, that was denounced as an anti-democratic coup. Democratically elected Javier Milei was denounced by uber-establishment magazine The Economist as “a danger for democracy.”
It is now clear that to be in favor of democracy in 2024 is to support whatever the ruling party elites want you to support. To be “pro-democracy” now apparently means to vote for the candidate selected for you by party elites in secret meetings. According to the ruling elites, in a true “democracy,” there’s no voting allowed.
MESSAGE TO DEEP STATE MINIONS: Don’t Follow Your Orders, Come Out With Your Hands Up & Join The Resistance
NIH’s Latest Desperate Attempt to Incite Fear
The response to the Covid-19 pandemic revealed many concerning aspects of how government functions and how committed individuals and institutions are to maintaining their preferred narratives.
Truth, data, science, evidence…apparently none of those matter relative to the importance of ensuring the public complies with their desired behavior. Perhaps no single individual has been a better representation of the symbiotic relationship between government officials and media members, as well as their ceaseless commitment to ideological priorities, than Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Fauci’s NIAID and its parent organization, the National Institutes of Health, have been two of the most prolific spreaders of ideologically motivated misinformation ever during the pandemic. But Fauci is no longer part of NIH, having departed for the considerable financial rewards available from the private sector.
So as a result of his timely exit, we must finally be witnessing improvements regarding government studies and communication, right? Right?
Not exactly.
Government Covid Misinformation Continues Unabated
A triumphant, breathless press release from the National Institutes of Health was just released in the past week covering a new study that claimed a horrifying new conclusion. Contracting Covid-19 once is bad, but God forbid you experience two bouts of the virus…It’s terrifying.
That’s their claim resulting from utilizing massive volumes of “health data” on over 200,000 Americans who they believe had Covid at least once over a two-and-a-half-year period from 2020-2022.
“Those individuals were originally infected between March 1, 2020-Dec. 31, 2022, and experienced a second infection by March 2023. Most participants (203,735) had Covid-19 twice, but a small number (478) had it three times or more,” the study says.
The conclusion, is at first glance, concerning.
“Using health data from almost 213,000 Americans who experienced reinfections, researchers have found that severe infections from the virus that causes COVID-19 tend to foreshadow similar severity of infection the next time a person contracts the disease. Additionally, scientists discovered that long COVID was more likely to occur after a first infection compared to a reinfection,” the NIH summary claims.
That sounds pretty bad. If you get infected a second time, you’re likely to experience a severe case of Covid. Right?
Except that is a completely inaccurate conclusion based on the limited data presented.
“About 27% of those with severe cases, defined as receiving hospital care for a coronavirus infection, also received hospital care for a reinfection. Adults with severe cases were more likely to have underlying health conditions and be ages 60 or older. In contrast, about 87% of those who had mild Covid cases that did not require hospital care the first time also had mild cases of reinfections,” the researchers write.
And there’s the real story, hidden in plain sight.
We know from years of experience that Covid significantly impacts those who are in poor health, have underlying conditions, or are older AND in poor health. We also know that a very small percentage of Covid cases require treatment in a hospital setting.
All this study shows is that those who are in poor health, have underlying conditions, or are older, are more likely to need additional care if they get Covid a second time. Even then, 73% of those who had a second infection and were hospitalized the first time did not need hospitalization for the second infection. Sure enough, the vast, vast majority of those who had mild Covid cases the first time had mild Covid cases the second time.
The protection from natural immunity is highly important and generally durable, though less so when an individual with poor underlying health has contracted the virus. This is nothing new. But that didn’t stop the new head of the NIH from spouting some impressive fear-mongering and bad science.
NIH Can’t Stop Getting Things Wrong
Dr. Monica Bertagnolli posted a link to the study on X, and a short summary. She repeated the same line about the severity of Covid reinfections, which were intended to undermine the importance of natural immunity.
And more importantly, she claimed that the results underscore “the importance of preventing infection.”
After analyzing data from 200K Americans who had #COVID19 twice, researchers found that a severe #COVID case tended to foreshadow a similarly severe infection the second time, underscoring the importance of preventing infection[.]
Except that’s an impossibility. SARS-CoV-2 is an endemic virus. It will never be eliminated. It will never be stopped. Infection cannot be avoided. Vaccinations don’t prevent it, masks surely are ineffective, and any public interaction may result in an infection.
There simply is no way to prevent infection, which is why some countries have now reported that roughly 70% of their population, even with masking and vaccination, have tested positive. Telling those at risk to try to avoid infection is irresponsible and inaccurate. So why is this coming from the NIH?
Sure enough, these researchers also accidentally made the case for natural immunity. When studying the nonexistent phenomenon of “long Covid,” they found that those who had typical, longer-lasting effects from viral infections had bigger reactions after their first infection.
“Scientists also discovered that regardless of the variant, long Covid cases were more likely to occur after a first infection compared to a reinfection,” the study says.
Why is that? Because of natural immunity.
Under Anthony Fauci, they spent years downplaying it. They continue to undermine it in 2024. But the reality and the science continue to prove that natural immunity is protective and durable, and this is especially true for those in good health and younger age groups. Imagine if government agencies had been willing to admit this in 2020 instead of pointlessly locking down all of society in order to somehow prevent a virus that cannot be prevented.
That would have been the correct evaluation and communication.
But since when have government agencies handled a single aspect of Covid correctly?
BOMBSHELL: Secret Service Told To Stand Down In Butler, Pennsylvania, Says Trump Event Head
Unelected Technocrats Are Now The Nation’s Chief Executives
President Biden has not been seen in public since announcing he would not seek re-election on Sunday. Biden’s “resignation” was nothing more than a text-only post on Twitter/X—and we know that the president does not manage his own social media accounts. There has been no video of the president making an announcement, and the White House is apparently planning no press conference or official act of any kind. Biden has not been seen by anyone except his inner circle in days. (We can contrast this situation with Lyndon Johnson’s televised address announcing his withdrawal from the 1968 presidential campaign.)
This is, in the words of Glenn Greenwald, “strange.” Moreover, Biden’s silence is inexplicable if Biden actually made the decision to withdraw from the race. After all, Greenwald, notes, if Biden is “well enough to decide, then he’s well enough to speak.” Yet, following one of the most important announcements of his political career, Biden has disappeared, and few things could better illustrate how irrelevant Biden now is to the matter of who is actually running the executive branch of the United States government. (We do have some audio of him speaking on a Monday phone call.)
A chain of events like this is characteristic of a palace coup—something along the lines of the 1991 August Coup in the Soviet Union, had it succeeded. In such cases, the chief executive is marginalized and replaced at the discretion of high-ranking bureaucrats and elites from within the ruling government itself.
It’s too early to get many facts about the details of what threats may have been used against Biden to get him to effectively step aside in favor of Kamala Harris. What we do know, however, is that the president is essentially absent and it is Harris who is conducting public events at the White House.
So, who is running the executive branch and the White House?
The fact that Biden himself is clearly not equipped for such a task has been undeniable since his performance at the presidential debate with Donald Trump last month. Since then, the official gaslighting propaganda about how Biden is “sharp as a tack“ has been exposed as an obvious lie.
Biden’s lack of any meaningful presence on the public stage does make it clear that someone other than Biden is running the White House, and someone is making decisions about policy. This could be an individual who is the de facto president, or it could be a group of people. If it is agroup of people it is unknown if this group if coordinating decisions, of if these people are simply making decisions haphazardly as needed. Joe Biden’s inability to answer even basic questions during the debate makes it clear that Biden is not the one making these decisions, and he’s not equipped to manage the federal bureaucracy in any meaningful sense.
For example, the White House yesterday released a memorandum further outsourcing the president’s duties to the State Department and the Treasury Department. That is, according to the memo, “the functions and authorities vested in the President by sections … of the Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity for Ukrainians Act” are delegated to technocrats. The president apparently can’t even personally make decisions in areas that the White House calls a priority.
For all the regime’s talk about “democracy,” it is undeniable at this point that the White House is actually run by unseen, unelected personnel who function in the shadows and are accountable only to the elites within their own ruling coalition. Some call it the “deep state.” Others call it “the headless fourth branch of government.” In any case, we are reminded that the United States is a technocracy and not a democracy, a republic, or whatever word one wants to use to describe a system that is in some meaningful way answerable to the taxpayers who pay all the bills.
It is these unelected, unknown figures who are deciding the nation’s foreign policy, its immigration policy, and its political appointments. We simply have no idea who is deciding US policy in Ukraine, in the Levant, or in east Asia—three regions that are in danger of flaring up into major conflicts. Who really controls the nuclear launch codes? It seems only the oligarchs and some high-ranking technocrats know. Nor do we know who is crafting the present open-border policy that funnels billions of dollars to hundreds of thousands of unemployed foreign nationals who receive blank checks to live in luxury hotels in American cities.
This legislative capriciousness is all the more dangerous now that the United States is no longer governed primarily by legislation debated and passed by an elected legislature. Instead, most new policy in the United States is a matter of rule-by-decree in which presidential executive orders are handed down and enacted by the technocrats.
In practice, it looks like the United States has now degenerated into the ideal technocracy—from the technocrat’s viewpoint. There is no political figure at the head of this bureaucracy to offer resistance to whatever it is that the technocrats feel like inflicting on the public at any given time. Rather, the bureaucracy is free to live out its collective vision for the country learned from Marxist humanities professors at places like Vassar and Harvard.
After all, the technocrats don’t have to run for re-election, and it’s virtually impossible to fire them. But who would fire them in any case? With someone like Joe Biden at the helm, it’s all smooth sailing for the deep state.
Naturally, the deep state would like to make sure this state of affairs continues. Thus, Biden has been replaced by the party elites with a candidate who is likely to be nearly as easy to manipulate and control as Biden: Kamala Harris. The technocrats have cunningly managed to appoint Harris as the Democratic nominee without a single primary debate or primary election. Consequently, Harris has no political organization loyal to her personally, and she has no independent constituency she can call on for political support outside the permanent government.
That is, her “base” is the technocracy itself. Under these conditions, Harris is likely to do as she is told, and that’s just how the deep state likes it.
MESSAGE TO DEEP STATE MINIONS: Don’t Follow Your Orders, Come Out With Your Hands Up & Join The Resistance
Democrat Voters Tell MSNBC They Distrust Kamala For Covering Up Biden’s Mental Decline
A panel of Wisconsin Democrats joined MSNBC this week to voice their opinions on the 2024 presidential election now that Joe Biden has stepped down as the Democrat Party candidate.
NEW – Voters are concerned Kamala covered up Biden’s mental decline: “If she’s willing to hide that type of information… once she’s in office, now what’s she willing to hide for herself?”pic.twitter.com/LhUQuvXnR2
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) July 24, 2024
The group was asked who they blame for Biden currently “being in office in this condition,” and one man said his “close staff” are responsible.
A woman in the group chimed in, saying, “So, I think that’s what also makes me nervous about the Vice President Harris. So, yes she is going to be in it but she also helped keep him where he’s at right now. And if he’s really as bad as they’ve been saying, I think if he steps down as president and she steps into the presidency before the end of his term, it almost makes me question a little bit more why it didn’t happen sooner.”
The other guests on the panel nodded as the woman continued, “She’s worked with him, she’s been – to my understanding – with him daily or at least a couple days a week. Why hasn’t this been brought to attention? If she’s willing to hide that type of information, once she’s in office what’s she willing to hide for herself?”
The observation by the Democrat panel is a common-sense take as Harris clearly knew about Joe’s dementia-ridden brain and lied to the public up until the very last minute.
Flashback: Kamala Harris Cackles About Murdering Trump
The Democratic Party’s new presumptive presidential nominee Kamala Harris “joked” and maniacally laughed on national TV about killing President Donald Trump and then VP Mike Pence in 2018.
The clip comes from an appearance on Ellen DeGeneres’ show in 2018 before Harris had announced her own doomed presidential campaign.
“If you had to be stuck in an elevator with either President Trump, [Vice President] Mike Pence, or [Attorney General] Jeff Sessions, who would it be?” Ellen asked her.
Harris replied, “Does one of us have to come out alive?” before bursting out laughing.
FLASHBACK: In 2018, Kamala cackles hysterically after fantasizing about killing President Trump. pic.twitter.com/B3KpfPaPuZ
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) July 24, 2024
Harris’ remarks are particularly disturbing now that she’s the Democrats’ presidential nominee and Trump just survived an assassination attempt nearly two weeks ago.
Just imagine how the left would react if Trump had made similar remarks about Harris.
Watch the full exchange: