News

Government already playing blame game instead of taking responsibility

A senior NBC News Secret Service source confirmed the agency knew there was a major vulnerability on the rooftop where deceased suspect Thomas Matthew Crooks shot Donald Trump, killed a bystander and injured two others on Saturday.

The USSS insider was “familiar with the planning” of the Trump rally, saying the building Crooks climbed onto was identified as “a well known high priority vulnerability” one day before the event.

NBC reports the Secret Service knew “the roof was a well known, high priority vulnerability. It was identified just the day before during a security walk through.”

There were two sniper teams on site. They did not need approval to shoot. “Prior protocols were not followed.” pic.twitter.com/rzDRnP0ait

— The American Conservative (@amconmag) July 15, 2024

“Someone should have been on the roof or securing the building so no one could get on the roof,” the senior Secret Service agent said.

Secret Service representative Anthony Gugliemi told the New York Times securing the roof of the building was the responsibility of local Pennsylvania police.

USSS reportedly designated the rooftop as being under the jurisdiction of local law enforcement, but Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldinger argued Secret Service was in charge of security outside the venue because it ran all the meetings with local officials. 

“They had meetings in the week prior. The Secret Service ran the show. They were the ones who designated who did what. In the command hierarchy, they were top, they were No. 1. To me, the whole thing is under the jurisdiction of the Secret Service. And they will delineate from there,” Goldinger said.

NBC’s Secret Service source also noted the agency was ultimately responsible for securing the area ahead of and during the speech even if local law enforcement did drop the ball.

“Just because it is outside of the perimeter, it doesn’t take it out of play for a vulnerability, and you’ve got to mitigate it in some fashion,” the source said.

A former FBI agent told The Sun, “I am very surprised that the rooftop used by the gunman was not secured and locked down. The rooftop was the closest high ground point with direct line of sight to the stage on which Trump was speaking. I think there was an error in planning and it would not have taken much resources or manpower to secure that rooftop.”

Locals who live nearby the location of the rally told the New York Post they were shocked no local or federal LEOs contacted them about security ahead of the event.

In other bizarre security issues, CNN reported local police were notified and broadcasted warnings over radio to Secret Service that an individual was acting suspicious by metal detectors placed near the entrance of the rally.

Later, attendees watched, filmed and shouted for police as Crooks climbed onto a roof with a rifle on his back.

One officer reportedly climbed up a ladder and came back down when Crooks pointed his rifle in the cop’s direction.

Seconds later, the shooter opened fire on Trump and the audience.

As one eyewitness stated, “There’s a whole bunch of questions.”

A Whole Bunch Of Questions.
Why was the shooter on the roof for “three to four minutes” before assassination attempt? pic.twitter.com/TU9ZRche10

— Darrin McBreen (@MediaRival) July 14, 2024

Don’t miss:

EMERGENCY ALERT: Deep State Could Attack The RNC And Assassinate Trump By Any Means pic.twitter.com/JVYSDzZiPv

— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) July 15, 2024

Trump Shot: The Gloves Come Off

We’ve crossed the Rubicon as a nation. pic.twitter.com/wGPyUEy42s

— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) July 14, 2024

---

Actress Bette Midler has suggested that Joe Biden arrest House Republicans and execute Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan. Midler was one of many leftists unable to contain their frustration after the Supreme Court ruling earlier this […]

The post Bette Midler Suggests Biden Executes Rep. Jim Jordan & Arrests House Republicans appeared first on The People’s Voice.

Removing Biden is wise and needed for the country’s sake, but it will not solve the growing public anger at the left.

Joe Biden’s escalating dementia and the long media-political conspiracy to hide his senility from the public are the least of the Democrats’ current problems.

Biden’s track record as president may be more concerning than his cognitive decline. He has literally destroyed the U.S. border, deliberately allowing the entry of more than 10 million illegal aliens. His callous handlers’ agenda was to import abjectly poor constituencies in need of vast government services without regard for the current struggles of a battered American middle class and poor.

The widespread poverty of a vast new cohort of illegal immigrants could serve as indictments of a “racist,” “unequal,” and “unfair” America—as if the residents of East Palestine, Ohio or inner-city Chicago had anything to do with the centuries-long corruption and oppression of Mexico and Latin America that daily drives thousands of their own poorest citizens northwards to a society founded on very different ideas than those of their homelands.

Note that the left, neither in Mexico nor in America, never asks why millions of these impoverished people prefer to break into a supposedly racist America. Much less do they even distinguish those principles and values that once made America prosperous, free, and secure from their antitheses that have sadly made much of Latin America mostly poor, without freedom, and insecure.

Biden inherited near-zero real interest rates and inflation at 1.4 percent. Almost immediately, in nihilistic fashion, Biden did to a sound economy what he had done to a secure border. So, he recklessly printed money at a time of spiraling, quarantine-ending demand and supply chain disruption. Middle-class wages never caught up with Biden’s inflation, as prices for key staples are nearly 30 percent higher than when he took office.

The cost of servicing the ballooning national debt at high interest is now nearly $1 trillion per year. The world abroad is aflame, lit by Biden’s inexplicable withdrawal from Kabul, his mixed signals to Vladimir Putin on the eve of his invasion of Ukraine, his deliberate alienation of Israel, his appeasement of Iran and China, and his cuts in the defense budget, coupled with his woke war on mythical “racists” in the military.

Energy prices soared, even as Biden’s green agenda proved unworkable and prompted draining the strategic petroleum reserve and begging foreign oil despots before key elections. The “unifier” Biden by design needlessly alienated nearly half the country, and in his debate, he reiterated why Trump supporters do not deserve his concern. And more ominously and recently, Biden grossly told hundreds of his donors that “it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye”—just days before the attempt on Trump’s life.

The greatest absurdity of the Biden White House is the gaslighting talk of Biden’s “achievements.” Biden’s actions over the last four years are not offsets for his senility that warrant his continuance in office, but again, sadly, they serve as force multipliers, furthering claims of his dementia and for his removal.

Joe Biden is not just non compos mentis and in a sane world, he would be subject to 25^th Amendment removal. He also increasingly seems unpleasant and obnoxious, if not sometimes simply weird. To achieve momentary clarity, Biden either shouts at his audience or stoops over and whispers in an eerie fashion.

He insults reporters and his own staff. Every few sentences, without warning, he begins screaming. His face is fixed in a permanent, angry contortion. As a result, the public sees their president as an off-putting, angry old man—and in his selfish dotage, an increasingly unsympathetic one. Even after more than 40 months of media hagiography, Joe Biden still cannot poll over a 40 percent approval rating, given that his rudeness is fueled further by the day due to escalating mental confusion.

Biden is, to be candid, a serial prevaricator. It is not just his ad nauseam repetition of Trump’s supposed slurs—the Charlottesville “both sides” lie, the “suckers” lie, or the “bloodbath” lie. He continues to peddle absolute falsehoods like the mythical nine-percent inflation he inherited and Trump’s supposed intention to ban all abortions, or his whopper that after welcoming in 10 million illegal aliens, Biden would have had a closed, secure border if not for those selfish Republicans who, for some reason, did not trust his ridiculous eleventh-hour, election-timed immigration proposal.

When he hammers Trump as a “convicted felon,” Biden has no clue that a majority of Americans equate that charge with Biden’s own warped lawfare assault on ancient customs, as well as a reminder that his now closest advisor is likewise a “convicted felon.”

When Biden rants near daily about the rich “paying their fair share,” he reminds us that his son is also facing federal tax evasion charges for unreported foreign income in the millions of dollars and that as soon as Biden himself leaves office, as a recipient of the same foreign cash, he may find himself in the same legal jeopardy. So, to use a Bidenism, “how dare he” accuse affluent Americans of the very crimes that his own family is knee deep in?

Biden’s prefaces of “no lie,” “here’s the deal,” “no kidding,” and “no joke” are little more than tics that forewarn us of complete fabrications about to follow, from the ridiculous story of an uncle supposedly eaten by New Guinea cannibals to his supposed heroics during the Civil Rights movement and his near childhood adoption by various minority communities.

In this regard, senility served oddly as a crutch for Biden. In the past, he paid dearly for his plagiarism, cheating, racist rants, and prevarications, losing three presidential bids and earning a reputation as the empty-suit blowhard of the Senate. Now his press handlers conveniently chalk up his long-standing habitual untruth as momentary mental “confusion.”

Given all the above, remember that Biden was to be the “savior” of the Democratic Party. To this day, celebrities demanding his withdrawal from the race throw him the bone that “he saved the country by stopping Trump”—as if no wars, stability abroad, no inflation, low interest, and low energy costs were something to fear.

Yet Biden’s four years pale in comparison to what in 2016 might have been a Harris, Buttigieg, Warren, Booker, or Sanders candidacy or presidency. No wonder Democrats concluded that there were no viable alternatives to a cognitively challenged Biden, precisely because Biden was the only available fig leaf to the new Democratic Party and its neo-socialist agenda—that, if transparent, would have terrified the country that it was soon to nearly destroy.

Biden’s Democratic critics have it all wrong: removing Biden is wise and needed for the country’s sake, but it will not solve the growing public anger at the left. Without the veneer of even a tottering old Joe from Scranton, there will be no camouflage. And then, the true leftist agenda will be served raw to the American people—open borders, woke/DEI racial polarization, transgendered obsessions, inflation/stagflation, wars a plenty abroad, an inert Pentagon, unaffordable energy, partial-birth abortions, and crazy ideas like packing the court and making Puerto Rico and Washington, DC, states.

So, what is the Democratic strategy to win the 2024 election? Certainly, an “open” convention would not produce a moderate Democratic nominee or even a suitable replacement façade. There are no moderates in contention. If there were any hale candidates to offer cover, the party would be in permanent war with its shrill and angry woke base. Joe is the last of his generation to offer a credible front. There are no more Diane Feinsteins or Bill Clintons to package the hard-left agenda. If Harris cannot serve as Biden’s replacement, someone like her or further to the left would appear on spec.

The Democrats have no plans to run on their record. Their tripartite strategy is as simple as it is tired and worn. First, expect a third chapter to follow the 2016 Russian collusion caper and the 2020 laptop disinformation ruse—likely some October revelation from the administrative state’s “experts” and “authorities” that Trump is a criminal, a traitor, or a spy or plans a coup, to destroy NATO or nuke something. Perhaps there is another Access Hollywood tape, a porn star on ice, anything to avoid discussing the damage done since 2017.

Second, there is still a last gasp to a dying lawfare. Never underestimate the last-gasp judicial effort to inactivate, gag, bankrupt, or jail Trump, however counterproductive such attempts so far have proved.

Third, when all else fails, remember that in many of the swing states, 70 percent of the electorate will not be voting on Election Day and will not be presenting IDs. Millions of their ballots will be harvested or cured by third-party activists. Last time around, the leftist journalist Molly Ball bragged about their “cabal” and “conspiracy” of big money and big tech that had “saved” Americans from Trump.

Those post-election confessions were not just high-fiving but also a confident forewarning of what is to come.

---

Emergency Alert: Deep State Could Attack The RNC And Assassinate Trump By Any Means

---

New assembly would lead bloc’s de-dollarization efforts and bolster its global influence.

The BRICS group of nations is continuing its development into a geopolitical world power. On Thursday, the bloc announced its plans to create its own parliament to oversee the alliance and its initiatives. 

BRICS, originally founded in 2006 as a group for investment strategies for emerging nations by Brazil, Russia, India, and China, has since expanded and now includes South Africa and—since January 2024—Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates. An additional 40 nations have expressed interest in becoming members, including Serbia and Turkey. Over 20 countries have formally applied for membership.

At a BRICS meeting in St. Petersburg on Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said, “Thus far, BRICS does not have its own institutionalized parliamentary structure. But I believe that in the future this idea will definitely be realized.” He said formalizing a parliament would help the bloc “achieve the maximum implementation of the economic, investment, technological, and human potential of our countries, and strengthen the constructive influence of BRICS on global processes”—while making the world “safer and more harmonious.”

The BRICS bloc is in the process of creating its own payment system, an alternative—and a challenge—to trading in U.S. dollars. Iran told Russian state media that it has completed connecting national payment systems with Russia and its central bank, and will “extend this mechanism” to other BRICS nations. On Wednesday, India announced plans to integrate its RuPay with the same Russian payment system. 

The motivation for BRICS’ de-dollarization efforts, The European Conservative’s economic expert said last year, is “a combination of economic growth and a desire to shield one’s own country from the wrath of dollar-attached sanctions, should one’s domestic policies happen to displease the American government.”

---

Emergency Alert: Deep State Could Attack The RNC And Assassinate Trump By Any Means

---

In a Senate hearing Thursday, ex-CDC Director Robert Redfield said mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are “toxic” and should not have been mandated. He also called for a pause on gain-of-function research.

Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Robert Redfield confirmed the dangers of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in a U.S. Senate hearing Thursday, calling them “toxic” and saying they should never have been mandated.

Redfield’s admissions came during a Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing on government oversight of taxpayer-funded high-risk virus research.

The late admission of vaccine injuries underscores the failure of public health agencies and the medical establishment to provide informed consent to the billions of vaccine recipients worldwide.

“It’s important that he is telling the truth now,” vaccine researcher Jessica Rose, Ph.D., told The Defender. “Adverse events were hidden and still are being hidden to prevent injection hesitancy.”

Redfield, who led the CDC from 2018 to 2021, didn’t stop there. He declared biosecurity “our nation’s greatest national security threat,” calling for a halt to gain-of-function research pending further debate.

The hearing, which featured contentious exchanges between senators and witnesses, also touched on controversial topics such as the COVID-19 origins lab-leak theory and allegations that health agencies suppressed data.

mRNA vax ‘should have been open to personal choice’

During the hearing Redfield, who oversaw the CDC during the crucial early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, elaborated on his recent statements about mRNA vaccine safety.

“I do think one of the greatest mistakes that was made, of course, was mandating these vaccines,” Redfield said. “They should have never been mandated. It should have been open to personal choice.”

Redfield went further, admitting that the spike protein produced by mRNA vaccines is “toxic to the body” and triggers “a very strong pro-inflammatory response.”

He noted that in his own medical practice, he doesn’t administer mRNA vaccines, preferring “killed protein vaccines” instead.

Redfield’s statements stand in stark contrast to the CDC’s official stance during his tenure, which strongly promoted mRNA vaccine uptake as safe and effective.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) pressed Redfield on the issue, highlighting concerning data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Johnson presented figures showing over 37,000 deaths reported following COVID-19 vaccination, with 24% occurring within two days of injection.

Redfield acknowledged there was “not appropriate transparency from the beginning about the potential side effects of these vaccines.” He criticized attempts to “underreport any side effects because they argued that would make the public less likely to get vaccinated.”

‘FDA should release all of the safety data’

Redfield’s criticism of data withholding extended beyond vaccine side effects. He expressed disappointment in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration‘s (FDA) handling of vaccine safety information.

“The FDA should release all of the safety data they have,” Redfield said. “I was very disappointed to hear that they were planning to hold on to that until 2026. That really creates a sense of total lack of trust in our public health agencies towards vaccination.”

Johnson echoed these concerns, revealing his frustration with the lack of follow-through by health agencies and the committee itself.

“I’m not getting cooperation out of the chairman of the permanent subcommittee investigation to issue subpoenas to get this,” Johnson said, referring to unreleased data and documents.

The senator displayed a chart comparing adverse event reports for various drugs, including ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, to those for COVID-19 vaccines. The stark contrast in reported deaths from these therapeutics — with COVID-19 vaccines showing significantly higher numbers — fueled Johnson’s demand for more transparency.

“As important as the cover-up of the origin story is, there’s a lot more that’s being covered up,” Johnson asserted. “The public has a right to know. We pay for these agencies. We pay their salaries. We fund these studies.”

Redfield agreed with Johnson’s assessment, stating that withholding the information is “counterproductive.”

Redfield doubtful of ‘any benefit from [gain-of-function] research’

Redfield’s testimony took another controversial turn when he called for a pause on gain-of-function research, experiments that involve making pathogens more infectious or deadly.

“I’m not aware of any advanced therapeutic or vaccine that has come to pass because of gain-of-function research,” Redfield said. “I do think there has to be a very aggressive debate of whether there’s any benefit from that research.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) seized on this point, introducing his Risky Research Review Act. The bill aims to establish an independent board within the executive branch to oversee federal funding for high-risk life sciences research.

“If the Risky Research Review Act had been in place, it might have prevented the COVID-19 pandemic,” Paul said, citing Redfield’s endorsement.

MIT’s Kevin Esvelt, Ph.D., inventor of a technique for rapidly evolving proteins and other biomolecules who was also instrumental in developing CRISPR gene-editing technology, reinforced these concerns.

Highlighting gaps in current oversight, he described an experiment where his team — with FBI approval — successfully ordered DNA fragments of the 1918 influenza virus from 36 of 38 providers.

“Everything that we did and the companies did was entirely legal,” Esvelt said, underscoring the potential for misuse. “There are no laws regulating DNA synthesis, even though the industry group, the International Gene Synthesis Consortium, has requested congressional regulation.”

The hearing revealed a growing consensus among witnesses for stricter oversight of potentially dangerous research, with Redfield suggesting such studies should be “highly regulated” to protect national security.

Redfield reaffirms COVID lab-leak theory

The hearing reignited debate over the origins of COVID-19, with Redfield reaffirming his belief in thelab-leak theory.

“Based on my initial analysis, I believe then, and I still believe today, that the COVID infections were the direct result of a biomedical research experiment and subsequent lab leak,” Redfield stated.

This assertion led to a heated exchange between Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Carrie Wolinetz, Ph.D., former chief of staff to then-director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins. Hawley accused NIH officials of deliberately suppressing the lab-leak theory.

“Your office, Dr. [Anthony] Fauci and others tried to actively censor them,” Hawley said. “There was a propaganda effort that this paper was the center of, and now everybody says, ‘Oh, well, we just weren’t sure at the time.’”

Hawley referred to the 2020 “Proximal Origin” paper that argued against the lab-leak hypothesis.

Wolinetz defended the NIH’s actions. “I do not believe censorship took place, sir.” She maintained that discussions about the virus’s origins were part of normal scientific discourse.

Redfield, however, criticized the lack of thorough investigation into both natural origin and lab-leak hypotheses. “Unfortunately, this didn’t happen,” he said, adding that four years later, he believes there’s no meaningful evidence supporting a natural origin.

The former CDC director also revealed that he did not learn about concerning biodistribution studiesof the vaccine’s lipid nanoparticles until as late as the summer of 2021, suggesting a delay in critical information reaching top health officials.

‘Biosecurity is our nation’s greatest national security threat’

Redfield emphasized the critical importance of biosecurity in national defense.

“In 2024, 2025, biosecurity is our nation’s greatest national security threat,” Redfield stated. “You need to think of it the same way we thought about the verge of nuclear atomic [sic] in the late 40s, 50s, and 60s.”

He called for a proportional response to the threat, suggesting the creation of a dedicated agencywithin the U.S. Department of Energy to address biosecurity concerns.

“We have a $900 billion Defense Department for the threat of China, North Korea and Russia,” Redfield noted. “We don’t have really any systematic agency or network of private sector contractors to help us with the biosecurity threat.”

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) echoed this sentiment. “In my humble mind, a viral biosecurity issue is a bigger issue than China’s military threat to us.”

Gerald Parker, DVM, Ph.D., associate dean for Global One Health at Texas A&M University, supported the call for enhanced oversight, recommending “an independent authority to consolidate secure functions in a single entity with a dedicated mission.”

The hearing also touched on the potential for future pandemics, with Redfield repeating his warningsabout the potential spread of H5N1 bird flu.

As the hearing concluded, senators from both parties expressed concern over the lack of transparency and oversight in high-risk research.

Paul summarized the sentiment: “We cannot stand idly by. We must demand accountability, strive for transparency and ensure the safety of our citizens is never again compromised by negligence or deceit.”

---

Emergency Alert: Deep State Could Attack The RNC And Assassinate Trump By Any Means

---

Twitter/X wouldn’t accept under-the-table arrangements censoring content, enraging Eurocrats.

The European Commission and Twitter/X billionaire Elon Musk look like they are once again on a collision course this week, after the billionaire CEO took to the platform to condemn an “illegal secret deal”—where social media companies were allegedly pressured to censor political opinions online.

This is not the first time the tech mogul has gone to war with Brussels bigwigs. His online outburst came after the European Commission charged Twitter with empowering the spread of so-called misinformation under the terms of the Digital Services Act (DSA), which fines companies 6% of their annual income for non-compliance.

The European Union is taking specific umbrage with Twitter’s lenient use of blue ticks for verified users, as Eurocrats also complained that the site was withholding information from EU-sponsored “researchers.”

Despite the threat of EU fines, Musk was jovial at the prospect, saying that “we look forward to a very public battle in court, so that the people of Europe can know the truth.” 

He went on to add that EU regulatory authorities offered Twitter an “illegal secret deal” if it “quietly censored speech,” as French Commissioner for the Internal Market Thierry Breton downplayed the prospect of a legal battle with Twitter. Instead, he accused Musk’s team of trying to cut deals with Brussels.

Since taking control of Twitter (and renaming it X), Musk has been at odds with EU regulatory authorities for his libertarian stances on content regulation. The platform was previously targeted under the DSA, alleged to have enabled the spread of misinformation following the Hamas pogrom against Israel- last year.

Responding to the threats, American journalist Michael Shellenberger—author of the ‘Twitter Files’, which documented collusion between censorious governments and social media platforms—accused the EU of a form of ‘foreign interference,” blasting certain “intelligence officials” for taking charge of a new censorship machine, underpinned by the DSA and similar laws.

Shellenberger then went on to point out publicly the professional links between Commissioner Breton and the French intelligence community, with the EU official making the regulation of American corporations a landmark initiative of his term in office.

It is now expected that Twitter and the Commission will engage in a mediation process to solve the dispute with the EU, which can even seize the company’s assets and ban its operation within the EU should the platform refuse to comply with the DSA.

The regulatory spat could be complicated by Musk’s other economic interests. He influences the electric vehicle industry through Tesla, while the EU itself relies on SpaceX’s satellite system.

The European Commission’s press service did not respond with a comment about its next steps in dealing with Twitter at the time of publication. Any potential legal hearing between the tech platform and the EU would be expected to be aired at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Luxembourg.

---

Emergency Alert: Deep State Could Attack The RNC And Assassinate Trump By Any Means

---