Successively Worse Bioweapons will Sucker Public into Vaccines
In 2009 Alex Jones predicted that while the ‘new 9/11’ may have a nuclear element to it, the real depopulation endgame will consist of successively more virulent biological weapons releases to lock society down tighter each time, corral the public into quarantine camps and inoculate them with slow-kill vaccines.
Don’t miss:
Avian Influenza Added to Flu Vaccine in 2009
The Five Stages Of Denial When Skeptics Are Faced With Economic Collapse
In light of the recent resurgence of inflation on top of increasingly rigged employments stats, declining manufacturing and stagnant wages I think it’s important to revisit a fundamental question: What does an economic collapse look like?
As I have said for years an economic collapse is NOT an event, it’s a process. When people think of a historic crisis they usually imagine something like the stock market crash of 1929 at the beginning of the Great Depression. However, there were numerous indicators and warning signs leading up to that crash that should have tipped people off. There were even a handful of economists that voiced concerns about impending instability, yet they were ignored.
Then, after the crash occurred numerous establishment economists denied that the system was in any real danger. They continually claimed that recovery was “right around the corner”, but the recovery never materialized. Instead, the crash spiraled onward for over a decade until world war erupted, largely because the Federal Reserve raised interest rates into economic weakness (a disaster they have openly admitted to causing and a policy they are instituting right now).
The point is, the mainstream “experts” are almost always wrong. The skeptics of collapse either ignore the evidence or they don’t comprehend the implications of events. They don’t want to believe that the economy is broken and that consequences are possible. They operate from the limited view of their own personal experience. For most of their lives the system has functioned without catastrophe so that must mean catastrophe is impossible. In truth, catastrophe has merely been deferred to a later date, not prevented.
Our present day predicament has not reached Great Depression levels yet. We are currently in a stagflationary phase similar to what happened in the 1970s. For those that think we have it bad now, the 70s were actually far worse.
House prices nearly TRIPLED from 1970 to 1980 (the median house price was $17,000 in 1970 compared to almost $50,000 in 1980). Annual inflation on most goods and services was in the double digits and the minimum wage was only $1.45 an hour. Unemployment was high and interest rates were eventually hiked to around 20% by 1981.
The point is that these breakdowns in financial structures happen slowly, and then all at once. Much like the build up of an avalanche. For those that know history the signs are easy to see. For those that don’t, they’ll assume that all is well even when the house is burning down around them.
Another factor that makes people oblivious to the danger is the moving of goalposts; they get used to poor economic conditions and the decline is entrenched as the “new normal.” For example, in 2015 the average house rental was $1100. Less than ten years later the average cost is $2150; that’s double the financial burden. But today this price is considered par for the course.
Nothing gets better, the situation only ever gets worse, but since it happens over a period of many years (the process of collapse) the public largely accepts it and will even accuse those of us sounding the alarm of “doom mongering.”
As with any collapse there eventually comes a point of popular intolerance – That moment where people finally realize that the “doom mongers” were right all along and that the weight of the implosion is too much to refute. I believe we’re approaching that moment very quickly. In the meantime. Here are the five stages of denial that people go through before they admit that a fiscal calamity is upon them…
Stage 1: “I Don’t Know What The Conspiracy Theorists Are Talking About – I’m Doing Fine”
There’s an old saying from the Great Depression that goes something like this: “It’s only a depression for the people without jobs.”
If you weren’t a part of the 30% unemployed in the US at that time, then in your narrow world the Great Depression might not have seemed all that bad. In other words, people will ignore the sinking of the Titanic as long as they still have their own lifeboat.
I will say that this is a major problem in the midst of the stagflation crisis today, and it’s the root of what many Zennials are complaining about. In their minds, this is the worst economy in history of the world and they blame “boomers” for their pain. It’s really not (at least not yet), but it’s true that many “boomers” are going into the crisis with the advantage of time. They have had the time to build a lifeboat while Zennials have not.
It’s not about what’s fair, there’s no such thing as “fair” in economics. But older Americans need to realize that even if stagflation is not a crisis for them personally, it is indeed a crisis for younger people in particular. Any person still denying the reality of the collapse because “they’re doing fine” needs to shut up and take stock of the bigger picture.
Stage 2: “They’ve Been Talking About Collapse For Years And We’re Still Here”
A lot of people out there have childish notions of what a collapse is, mostly derived from Hollywood films and television. They imagine stock market mayhem, endless soup lines, mass starvation and even Mad Max-style destruction. When these kinds of things do happen it’s always at the END of the collapse process, not at the beginning. The former nation of Yugoslavia suffered through multiple inflation events before it finally exploded with balkanization and war. It didn’t happen overnight, but all the signs were there.
When analysts predict these events years ahead of time they are doing you a favor; they are giving you ample time to prepare. Unlike the banking elites and their proxies who only warn the public right before (or right after) the crisis hits a peak.
Believe it or not I still see deniers arguing that all is well today, even after massive stagflation, attempted nationwide medical tyranny, multiple regional wars around the globe that could trigger WWIII, constant civil unrest, etc. Is the threat of imminent death the only thing that will wake these people up to reality?
Stage 3: “Maybe Things Are Bad Now But The Crisis Is Transitory, It Will Be Over Soon”
This is the stage in which deniers finally accept that there is indeed some instability, but they cope with the issue by claiming the storm will quickly pass and there’s nothing to worry about. The thing is, they spent so much time trying to debunk the economists that were warning them they now fear being proven wrong more than they fear the crisis ahead. It’s a kind of mental sickness common to our culture – The absolute refusal of a large percentage of Americans to admit being wrong and moving on.
It’s okay to be wrong sometimes. It’s not okay to be in denial about it.
The claim that a collapse is “transitory” is a way for skeptics overwhelmed by facts and evidence to continue dismissing reality. If the economic decline doesn’t last very long then they never have to concede defeat to the “conspiracy theorists.”
Stage 4: “No One Saw The Crisis Coming”
I saw this argument thousands of times during the pandemic lockdowns and the initial inflation spike. There were so many people raging about the circumstances and a lot of them were the types of people that used to deny that anything out of the ordinary was going on. They started looking for scapegoats and they came up with the idea that there was no early warning.
If only someone had given them some kind of hint of what was about to happen, they would have prepared better, right?
The media and government officials tend to play into this stage of denial aggressively. In other words, this is the moment they assert that “No one saw this coming.” The event struck like lightning out of the blue. No one could have foreseen this outcome and there’s nothing anyone could have done about it.
Whenever I hear these arguments I’m reminded of the movie trend in the early 2000s of global disaster flicks. There’s always those scenes where the asteroid or the ocean wave or the tornado hits and we see thousands of people scurrying like ants, only to be crushed by a godlike force that they had no power to defend against. I never liked those movies, but I recognize that they play into a hidden element of fatalism in the human mind.
There is a strange mechanism in some people’s thinking that wants to believe they have no power to change their circumstances. They feel better assuming that the tides of fate are beyond their control and that there’s nothing they could have done differently. In reality, all they had to do was listen and think critically and they could have prepared accordingly. Their pain is the result of their own ignorance and ego.
Stage 5: “Everyone Saw The Crisis Coming”
Ah yes, the final stage of denial. This one is my favorite. It is the inevitable moment when skeptics fully concede that the economic collapse is a fact of life and then they claim they “saw it coming all along.” The inability for these people to admit they were wrong debases their ability to make informed decisions about the future.
They know a crisis is upon them and they’ll now pretend as if they knew it was going to happen. Therefore, all the “conspiracy theorists” that tried to warn them are not special or better informed than they are.
Of course, you’ll never see any evidence of these skeptics (and many mainstream economists) actually predicting anything. You will see them predicting the opposite and attacking anyone that suggest they might be wrong. One wonders why it’s so important for them to avoid giving credit where credit is due and learning from their mistakes, but when a person’s identity is so wrapped up in being the “expert,” the idea of completely fumbling the ball on the biggest economic disaster of their lifetime is too much to bear.
POWERFUL — MUST WATCH: The Globalist System Is Collapsing In Real Time, Warns Bilderberg Expert Daniel Estulin
Biden Admin Lifts Weapons Ban On Ukrainian Military’s Nazi Azov Battalion
The Biden administration’s State Department said on Tuesday it will be lifting a ban on providing U.S. weapons and training to the neo-Nazi Azov battalion of the Ukrainian military.
“The U.S. had banned the regiment from using American weapons, citing the neo-Nazi ideology of some of its founders,” reports ABC News.
Since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2022, Russian authorities have decried the “Nazification” of their neighboring nation.
Western media has cried Ukraine cannot have a Nazi problem because its NATO-controlled puppet President Volodymyr Zelensky is Jewish.
Infowars and other alternative media outlets have extensively covered the neo-Nazi military brigade, from their numerous war crimes to their pagan “blood and soil” rituals.
Ending the ban on U.S. training and funding the group, the State Department claimed it found “no evidence” of human rights violations by Azov.
In March 2022, deceased Ukrainians in the Donetsk People’s Republic were found with swastikas carved into their skin, with the Russian Defense Ministry claiming the Azov brigade tortured them to death.
Locals interviewed by journalists have repeatedly claimed the Azov unit “only shoot civilians.”
Just this week, a U.S. State Department-connected group published an online list of Americans criticizing Ukraine, accusing them of pushing “Kremlin propaganda” and blaming them for recent setbacks in the ongoing fight with Russia.
Infowars, Alex Jones, other prominent journalists and even GOP politicians were listed as “enemies” by the website, which writes of Infowars, “The articles on the site describe how Russian war crimes were staged, including the massacre of civilians in Bucha, Kyiv region, in February-March 2022; how American biolabs were deployed in Ukraine, and the activities of ‘Nazis’ including the ‘Nazi Azov’ regiment.”
The timing of the “enemies list” release just happened to align with the State Department’s decision to continue funding the Nazi military unit.
Check out some of the video reports below exposing Ukraine’s Nazi infestation as well as how the entire New World Order establishment has bizarrely defended the group.
- Watch: Ukrainian Citizens Say ‘Fascist’ Neo-Nazi Azov Brigade ‘Only Shoot Civilians’
- Western Media Clubs Together to White-Wash Ukrainian Neo-Nazis
- Facebook Allows Support Of Neo-Nazis As Long As They’re Fighting Putin
- 2017 Guardian Mini-Doc Exposed Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Azov Youth Camps
- Senior U.S. Policy Advisor Shows Off Nazi Patch In Support Of Ukraine, Quickly Deletes
- American Fighting For Ukraine Defects to Russia, Blows Whistle On Nazism, War Crimes
- Key Flashback: CIA Secretly “Nazifying” Ukraine Since 1953
- Watch: What They Won’t Tell You About the Russia-Ukraine Conflict
- Zelensky ‘Grateful’ to Azov Neo-Nazis, Claims Ukraine Hardly Has Any Radicals
Disgusting: Woman Accused of Stabbing 3-Year-Old to Death in Grocery Store Parking Lot Smirks, Giggles in Court
A female suspect accused of stabbing a toddler to death in an Ohio supermarket parking lot sparked outrage after she was seen smiling and smirking in court.
Footage showed murder suspect Bionca Ellis, 33, giggling and unable to contain smiles as charges against her were read by a judge during an arraignment Monday.
PURE EVIL: Bionca Ellis, woman accused of stabbing 3-year-old Ohio boy to death in grocery store parking lot, smirks and giggles as the charges are read to her
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) June 10, 2024
(Video via WEWS) pic.twitter.com/R2TTZLr2WZ
The murder suspect was criticized on X over her appalling courtroom behavior.
If you’re christian like myself, you have to believe in demons / spirits. Probably just a terrible scummy human but I believe all major criminals should have a priest bless them and expel any potential demons as a contingency for being possessed
— Lord Miles (@real_lord_miles) June 10, 2024
Demons walk amongst us
— Tammie McDonald ?? (@TammieMcDonal17) June 10, 2024
only one of them was called pure evil and labelled racist by CNN and the rest of the Big Media.
— batu (@qtomris) June 10, 2024
guess which one? pic.twitter.com/epPJ7yU750
throw the damn book at this evil woman!!
who agrees?— AmericanPapaBear (@AmericaPapaBear) June 10, 2024
Ellis’ charges, including one count of aggravated murder and two counts of murder, stemmed from an unprovoked June 2 incident at a Giant Eagle supermarket near Cleveland.
3-year-old Julian Wood died following the incident.
R.I.P. Julian Wood ? pic.twitter.com/cfRDCkCg39
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) June 10, 2024
The Daily Mail has more on the deadly attack on Julian and his mother, Margot, who was wounded:
Julian Wood spent the last moments of his life playing in his mother’s shopping cart as they went on a Monday afternoon grocery run.
Then a woman walked towards them at the crowded Giant Eagle in North Olmstead, Cleveland, holding a kitchen knife in her right hand.
The three-year-old boy’s mom Margot, 38, wheeled them past, but the woman stopped dead in her tracks, turned around, and followed them.
Less than six minutes later, Julian was bleeding to death on the parking lot asphalt as a badly wounded Margot pleaded with paramedics: ‘don’t worry about me’.
As first responders desperately gave the little boy CPR, his alleged murderer, Bionca Ellis, 32, was arrested a short walk away – still holding the bloodied knife.
Much of those minutes of terror from 2.58 to 3.04pm on June 2, and the chilling scenes that came before and after, were laid bare in newly released surveillance footage and police bodycam.
Ellis stole two knives earlier that day, police said, from a nearby Volunteers of America Thrift Store, and was caught on camera pacing back and forth in front of Giant Eagle.
At 2.58pm she headed inside, brandishing it as if it was a half-eaten chocolate bar, walking straight ahead and forcing Margot to swerve around her.
Barely as they passed, she immediately stopped, turned around, and followed – her sinister stalking documented from four camera angles.
Twenty-five seconds passed before Ellis emerged from a blind spot alone, and loitered awkwardly near the doors for them to catch up.
As they turned for the exit, Ellis waited for them to pass her, and was filmed on two more cameras following them outside.
Margot wheeled Julian to their red hatchback in the busy car park and popped the trunk to load the groceries inside.
Suddenly, out of nowhere, Ellis allegedly unleashed her vicious attack on a mother and child she never met, and for no reason police can discern.
“I hear a scream, I look back, and she’s just stabbing,” one witness reportedly recalled.
In a solemn statement read in court, Wood’s father condemned Ellis for brutally cutting his son’s life short.
“There’s nothing that could ever replace my son, or anything my wife and I and our other kids are going through. It’s horrendous,” said Jared Wood.
A county court judge set Ellis bond at $5 million and she could potentially face the death penalty if convicted.
A Court Victory Over Vaccine Mandates
Health Freedom Defense Fund (HFDF), California Educators for Medical Freedom, and individual plaintiffs have won their appeal in the Ninth Circuit on LAUSD’s Employee Covid Vaccination Mandate.
Health Freedom Defense Fund et. al, led by the exceptional legal team of John Howard and Scott Street at JW Howard Attorneys, has won a significant victory in the Ninth Circuit, which reversed the dismissal of their lawsuit challenging the Los Angeles Unified School District’s (“LAUSD”) mandatory vaccination policy for all employees.
Reversing the decision of the Central District of California in Los Angeles, the Ninth Circuit majority held that, first, the case was not mooted by LAUSD’s rescission of the mandate after an oral argument last September, 2023. The majority called out LAUSD’s gamesmanship for what it was – a bald-faced attempt at avoiding an adverse ruling by trying to create an issue of mootness.
Unfortunately for LAUSD, they had already done this once in the trial court. Applying the voluntary cessation doctrine, the majority doubted LAUSD’s sincerity in rescinding the mandate immediately after an unfavorable oral argument in September of last year.
On the merits, the majority ruled that the district court had misapplied the Supreme Court’s 1905 decision in Jacobson v. Massachusetts when it dismissed LAUSD’s lawsuit on grounds that the mandate was rationally related to a legitimate state interest. In Jacobson, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a smallpox vaccination mandate because it related to “preventing the spread” of smallpox.
The majority, however, noted that HFDF had alleged in the lawsuit that the Covid jabs are not “traditional” vaccines because they do not prevent the spread of Covid-19 but only purport to mitigate Covid symptoms in the recipient. This, HFDF had alleged in its complaint, makes the Covid jab a medical treatment, not a vaccine.
The court recognized that mitigating symptoms rather than preventing the spread of disease “distinguishes Jacobson, thus presenting a different government interest.” Based on this reasoning, the majority disapproved the trial court’s contention that, even if the jabs do not prevent the spread, “Jacobson still dictates that the vaccine mandate is subject to, and survives, the rational basis test.”
The court held that “[t]his misapplies Jacobson,” which “did not involve a claim in which the compelled vaccine was ‘designed to reduce symptoms in the infected vaccine recipient rather than to prevent transmission and infection.”’ Jacobson does not, the majority concluded, extend to “forced medical treatment” for the benefit of the recipient.
The court declined to give any deference to pronouncements by the CDC that the “Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective.” As the court asked rhetorically, “safe and effective” for what? The majority pointed to HFDF’s allegation that the CDC had changed the definition of “vaccine” in September 2021, striking the word “immunity” from that definition. The court also noted HFDF’s citations to CDC statements that the vaccines do not prevent transmission, and that natural immunity is superior to the vaccines.
In a separate concurrence, Judge Collins wrote that the district court “further erred by failing to realize that [HFDF’s] allegations directly implicate a distinct and more recent line of Supreme Court authority” for the proposition that “a competent person has a constitutionally protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment[.]” Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Washington v. Glucksberg, Judge Collins noted that the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment is “entirely consistent with this Nation’s history and constitutional traditions,” and that HFDF’s allegations in this case “are sufficient to invoke that fundamental right.”
The Ninth Circuit ruling today demonstrates that the court saw through LAUSD’s monkey business, and in so doing, it made clear that American’s cherished rights to self-determination, including the sacred right of bodily autonomy in matters of health, are not negotiable. This is a great triumph for the truth, decency, and what is right.
Hunter Biden Found Guilty As Democrats Prepare To Flush His Poopy Pants Father Before DNC
The Socialist Road to Destruction amid So-Called Good Intentions
When socialist schemes fail, as they inevitably do, our attention is immediately drawn away from the destruction they cause to the “good intentions” behind the schemes.
They meant well. Their good intentions override their disastrous results. One reason why good intentions are important to both sides of the political divide is that good intentions play well to voters. A good example of this is the national debt crisis in the United States. The economist Samuel Gregg points out that while both parties pledge to resolve the growing national debt, both parties regard the measures necessary to resolve the situation as electoral suicide: “America’s National Debt challenge constitutes a political iron cage for Democrat and Republican legislators alike. While they can talk a big game about courageously tackling the problem, the political consequences of actually doing so are deeply unattractive for both parties.” The politicians’ desire to present voters with some obviously well-intentioned schemes overrides their commitment to resolving the problem. They are well-aware that any subsequent failures will be overlooked or forgiven in light of their good intentions.
In his book Socialism, Ludwig von Mises argues that socialist good intentions are “nothing but a grandiose rationalization of petty resentments.” They depict the politics of envy as a quest for justice, and they discount any cost as necessary for the pursuit of the higher goal of justice. However, as Mises points out, the assertion that socialism promotes justice is “merely an arbitrary assertion.” He explains:
In fact Socialism is not in the least what it pretends to be. It is not the pioneer of a better and finer world, but the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilization have created. It does not build; it destroys. For destruction is the essence of it. . . . [It] raises the consumption of the masses at the cost of existing capital wealth, and thus sacrifices the future to the present. . . . The increasing difficulties of maintaining the higher standard of living are ascribed to various causes, but never to the fact that a policy of capital consumption is being followed.
In highlighting the inherently destructive nature of socialism, Mises’s point is not that socialists necessarily set out to destroy society but that this is the inevitable result of their schemes: “Socialism has not consciously willed the destruction of society. It believed it was creating a higher form of society. But since a socialist society is not a possibility every step towards it must harm society.” Faced with the destruction of society, it is futile to divert our intention to the supposedly good intentions behind the destruction.
Mises’s concept of “destructionism” refers to “the consumption of capital” and ultimately the “destruction of what already exists.” He observes that “the policy of destructionism is the policy of the spendthrift who dissipates his inheritance regardless of the future.” The destructionism of socialism is pervasive: “Our whole life is so given over to destructionism that one can hardly name a field which it has not penetrated.” The contemporary significance of this concept is illustrated by Tom DiLorenzo in “Misesian Destructionism: Then and Now,” showing how destructionism takes effect through the “cultural Marxism” of the Frankfurt School. DiLorenzo observes:
One of my first observances of such idiocy was in the mid-1980s when that great intellectual giant Jesse Jackson led mob of Stanford University students chanting “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Civ Has Got to Go.” They wanted the university to drop its courses on Western Civilization and replace them with courses on “race, class, and gender studies.” The Stanford administration dutifully complied.
The same destructionism can be seen in attempts to “decolonize” history, art, culture, and all fields of academic inquiry. That the “decolonize” movement is destructive is clear from the violent rhetoric that accompanies it. Yet this too is spun in the language of good intentions. As explained by Ross Douthat in the New York Times:
A key project of the 21st-century left has been to revive and mainstream language associated with violent revolutionary struggle by turning it to mostly therapeutic uses. . . .
. . . insisting, as in the work of Frantz Fanon, that revolutionary violence itself was therapeutic, a means by which the colonized can achieve self-assertion, dignity and wholeness. . . .
. . . a promise that all the rhetoric is therapeutic and psychological, that when we talk about stolen land and ending “whiteness” and decolonizing everything, we are, of course, merely speaking culturally, symbolically, metaphorically.
The excesses of wokery are provocative, but wokery is by no means the only contemporary emanation of socialist destructionism. The same destructive effect is seen in welfare schemes such as labor legislation and social insurance that now threaten to bankrupt welfare states. Samuel Gregg observes that “spending on major entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and what is called Income Security . . . constituted 68 percent of Federal Government spending in 2023.” These welfare schemes may seem relatively beneficial compared to other forms of government spending, but they too are “a means of destructionism” as they rely on the “consumption of capital” while creating more incentives to consume and destroying all incentives to produce. Mises explains that social welfare “produces nothing, it only consumes what the social order based on private ownership in the means of production has created.”
Socialist legislative schemes are often lauded not only for their worthy social ideals and goals, but also because of the widespread fear that such well-meaning legislation is all that stands between vulnerable people and disaster. Even if it does not work, so the reasoning goes, it will signal the right aspirations and show what society stands for. This is the rationale behind “hate speech” legislation that is intended to “root out hate.” Hate may or may not be rooted out of the hearts wherein it lurks, but at least we will have signaled that hate is “unacceptable.” Similarly, employment protection and antidiscrimination legislation are supported by both political sides. All parties are resistant to abolishing the special “protection” given to various identity groups by legislation intended to “protect” them. In the absence of market opportunities and in the absence of charity, both of which are derided by socialists, it seems that welfare legislation and virtue signaling assume great importance as the means by which human life will flourish. In this way, destructive legislation is attributed with a lifesaving and life-affirming function, and the prospect of abolishing it becomes unthinkable.
The destructive effects of these measures, which are touted for their beneficial qualities, go unacknowledged. The causes of economic and social problems are not self-evident, and many people do not link cause and effect. The same destructive policies are repeatedly introduced as they are not viewed as causally linked to the disasters that lie in their wake. No lessons are learned. Mises explains:
To see the weakness of a policy which raises the consumption of the masses at the cost of existing capital wealth, and thus sacrifices the future to the present, and to recognize the nature of this policy, requires deeper insight than that vouchsafed to statesmen and politicians or to the masses who have put them into power. As long as the walls of the factory buildings stand, and the trains continue to run, it is supposed that all is well with the world. The increasing difficulties of maintaining the higher standard of living are ascribed to various causes, but never to the fact that a policy of capital consumption is being followed.
Mises argues that the fight against this destructionism requires more than simply correcting socialists concerning the facts:
Facts per se can neither prove nor refute anything. . . . From the socialist point of view, Capitalism alone is responsible for all the misery the world has had to endure in recent years. Socialists see only what they want to see and are blind to anything that might contradict their theory.
Thus, the rising cost of living is ascribed to corporate greed and profiteering, with the left-leaning Guardian informing its readers that inflation is caused by “energy prices and corporate profits” and the 2020 global economic recession was caused by covid. Simple explanations for economic crises play well to the voters, who are in that way well-primed to accept that all measures taken by the government to tackle the crises are well-intentioned.
In response, it is necessary to persuade our compatriots of the true causes of the destructionism they see unfolding around them by joining what Mises calls “the battle of ideas,” a battle based not only on pointing out the correct facts, but more so on “the interpretation and explanation of the facts, by the ideas and the theories.”
Hunter Biden Found Guilty As Democrats Prepare To Flush His Poopy Pants Father Before DNC