Deranged Jack Smith Files Superseding Indictment Against Trump! Deep State Double Jeopardy Shows They’re Going For Broke
Globalist special counsel Jack Smith has filed a new superseding indictment against Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump including four of the same charges he already introduced.
The new filing comes after the Supreme Court ruled against Smith’s argument that Trump had no presidential immunity.
It appears as if the Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution is being abused by the rogue Hague prosecutor Jack Smith in what equates to election interference.
“What we’re witnessing right now is a HISTORICALLY dangerous and ORCHESTRATED attack on the Republic!” warned Alex Jones.
? ALERT: Special Counsel Jack Smith Reindicts Trump With Narrower Set of Accusations After SCOTUS Immunity Decision
— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) August 27, 2024
Special Video Report INCOMING!
What we’re witnessing right now is a HISTORICALLY dangerous and ORCHESTRATED attack on the Republic!
The Deep State is once… pic.twitter.com/brvzrq12Np
The move is being slammed online:
BREAKING: Jack Smith just FILED a superseding indictment against Trump.
— Ryan Fournier (@RyanAFournier) August 27, 2024
Because they couldn’t win the first go around, they are trying again with a different one.
THIS IS CORRUPTION AT ITS FINEST!
FIRE JACK SMITH! pic.twitter.com/XEkg04mABq
BREAKING:
Jack Smith’s grand jury has brought a new SUPERSEDING indictment against President Donald Trump in an effort to interfere in the 2024 election.
Jack Smith is trying to work around the July 1st SCOTUS ruling on Presidential Immunity. pic.twitter.com/mnt1gk3OO6— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) August 27, 2024
Just two months before the elections, Donald Trump has been indicted yet again by a Washington D.C. Grand Jury, at the request of Special Counsel Jack Smith, who appears to be challenging the Supreme Court’s authority.
— Shadow of Ezra (@ShadowofEzra) August 27, 2024
This latest indictment even cites Trump’s X account as… pic.twitter.com/4fPGJsS2qR
So, less than three months until a presidential election Jack Smith decides to amplify one of the main reasons RFK Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard endorsed Trump. More lawfare. Why are they so afraid of a second Trump term? https://t.co/gOelHd50nn
— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) August 27, 2024
Also:
Peter Schiff: Fed’s Pivot Is Misguided
In this episode, Peter analyzes the Fed’s conference in Jackson Hole and the pivot Jerome Powell signaled in figure monetary policy. He also dives into the hot political topics from this week, namely, the Democratic National Convention and RFK Jr.’s endorsement of Donald Trump for President.
Despite what Powell says, Peter is convinced there’s not sufficient evidence to support rate cuts in September:
“And during the speech, Powell said that now, finally, after all of these months, now I’m convinced that inflation is headed back down to 2%. But why? What data have we seen that has shown a significant improvement that you would think that inflation is headed back down to 2%? It’s 3% right now. … If you look at the actual CPI, 2.9% was the last one.”
The Fed’s dual mandate to fight both inflation and unemployment is proving problematic, since
improving one often worsens the other:
“He [Powell] said that any additional weakness in the labor market is unwelcome. See, before he was saying we wanted some weakness in the labor market, because that’s how we were going to bring down inflation. But now, based on all of the weak data that we got on the labor market— especially that last non-farm payroll report— he’s saying, ‘No, we can’t have any more weakness in the labor market.’ So the Fed has really pivoted now from fighting inflation to fighting unemployment, which is on the rise.”
These problems are inevitable when you tamper with interest rates, which are fundamental to a healthy economy:
“The Fed gets the economy all juiced up on cheap money. They build the entire phony recovery on a foundation of artificially low interest rates, and as a result, everybody goes into debt. And now they think they can raise interest rates without having a collapse. That’s impossible. You can’t have a foundation built on debt and then raise interest rates and expect the foundation not to collapse.”
Moving on to politics, Peter explains what stood out to him about this year’s DNC:
“I’ve watched a number of these over the years. Again, I’ve been to a couple of them— not as a delegate. I was there on a press pass. I’ve never been a delegate. But I’ve never seen a convention where they vilified the opposition and the opponent anywhere near to the degree that they vilified Trump. I thought that they would have backed off on that kind of characterization, given the fact that someone tried to kill him.”
Many of the DNC’s criticisms of Trump are outright lies:
“They spend almost all their time lying about Trump. Most of the things— almost everything, actually— that they accuse Trump of doing or wanting to do, he’s not going to do. And they repeated all these lies where they take things out of context, like the ‘bloodbath’ or ‘bad people on both sides’ or whatever it is or all these quotes that have already been proven were either not said or were taken out of context and don’t even apply to the way they’re using them.”
One silver lining from the week is RFK Jr.’s endorsement of Donald Trump for president. Constituting arguably the first true “unity campaign” in decades, the revitalized Trump ticket is a legitimate threat to the establishment, and hopefully it can take action to end wasteful wars around the world:
“At least Robert Kennedy and Donald Trump care about all these people who are dying, and they want to stop it. Now, secondarily, we’re wasting all this money so all these innocent people could die, and for what reason? Ukraine is in much worse shape now than it was two years ago. For what? For nothing. Again, there was more freedom in Russia than in Ukraine before the whole thing started. We were trying to preserve Ukrainian freedom; they’re less free now than they were before because of this war. … This has been a disaster. So at least you’ve got Kennedy and Trump that are thorns in the side of the political establishment, and that’s what we need. We need to break the stranglehold of the neocons.”
BREAKING: Dr. Peter McCullough Joins Alex Jones In-Studio To Discuss Shocking New Developments Concerning The COVID-19 Injections
Monkeypox Vaccine Being Secretly Shipped Around The Country, Warns Trucking Company Owner
Alex Jones takes a call from a trucking company owner who’s warning that the monkeypox vaccine is already being shipped around the country ahead of the 2024 election. Tune in!
Monkeypox Vaccine Being Secretly Shipped Around The Country, Warns Trucking Company Owner pic.twitter.com/YYXep54UQr
— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) August 27, 2024
British Child Rapist Spared Prison To Save Space for Anti-Mass Immigration Protestors
A convicted child rapist in the UK got away with no jail time because prisons in the UK are overcrowded with the recently arrested anti-mass immigration protestors. Pedophile Ross Newman of Newport was convicted of […]
The post British Child Rapist Spared Prison To Save Space for Anti-Mass Immigration Protestors appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Breaking! Trump Confirms Kamala Harris Debate
“I have reached an agreement with the Radical Left Democrats for a Debate with Comrade Kamala Harris,” wrote Donald Trump on Truth Social Tuesday.
The announcement comes after both presidential campaigns have been sparring over terms for the highly anticipated debate.
Trump slammed the establishment media outlet hosting the event, writing, “It will be Broadcast Live on ABC FAKE NEWS, by far the nastiest and most unfair newscaster in the business, on Tuesday, September 10th, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Rules will be the same as the last CNN Debate, which seemed to work out well for everyone except, perhaps, Crooked Joe Biden. The Debate will be ‘stand up,’ and Candidates cannot bring notes, or ‘cheat sheets.’”
“We have also been given assurance by ABC that this will be a ‘fair and equitable’ Debate, and that neither side will be given the questions in advance (No Donna Brazile!),” he added.
The GOP nominee also pointed out Harris refused to “agree to the FoxNews Debate on September 4th,” but said he’d keep that date open “in case she changes her mind or, Flip Flops, as she has done on every single one of her long held and cherished policy beliefs.”
“A possible third Debate, which would go to NBC FAKE NEWS, has not been agreed to by the Radical Left. GOD BLESS AMERICA!” Trump concluded his message.
Technofascism: The Government Pressured Tech Companies to Censor Users
“Internet platforms have a powerful incentive to please important federal officials, and the record in this case shows that high-ranking officials skillfully exploited Facebook’s vulnerability… Not surprisingly these efforts bore fruit. Facebook adopted new rules that better conformed to the officials’ wishes, and many users who expressed disapproved views about the pandemic or COVID–19 vaccines were ‘deplatformed’ or otherwise injured.”—Justice Samuel Alito, dissenting in Murthy v. Missouri
Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta, has finally admitted what we knew all along: Facebook conspired with the government to censor individuals expressing “disapproved” views about the COVID-19 pandemic.
Zuckerberg’s confession comes in the wake of a series of court rulings that turn a blind eye to the government’s technofascism.
In a 2-1 decision in Children’s Health Defense v. Meta, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a lawsuit brought by Children’s Health Defense against Meta Platforms for restricting CHD’s posts, fundraising, and advertising on Facebook following communications between Meta and federal government officials.
In a unanimous decision in the combined cases of NetChoice v. Paxton and Moody v. NetChoice, the U.S. Supreme Court avoided ruling on whether the states could pass laws to prohibit censorship by Big Tech companies on social media platforms such as Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube.
And in a 6-3 ruling in Murthy v. Missouri , the Supreme Court sidestepped a challenge to the federal government’s efforts to coerce social media companies into censoring users’ First Amendment expression.
Welcome to the age of technocensorship.
On paper—under the First Amendment, at least—we are technically free to speak.
In reality, however, we are now only as free to speak as a government official—or corporate entities such as Facebook, Google or YouTube—may allow.
Case in point: internal documents released by the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government confirmed what we have long suspected: that the government has been working in tandem with social media companies to censor speech.
By “censor,” we’re referring to concerted efforts by the government to muzzle, silence and altogether eradicate any speech that runs afoul of the government’s own approved narrative.
This is political correctness taken to its most chilling and oppressive extreme.
The revelations that Facebook worked in concert with the Biden administration to censor content related to COVID-19, including humorous jokes, credible information and so-called disinformation, followed on the heels of a ruling by a federal court in Louisiana that prohibits executive branch officials from communicating with social media companies about controversial content in their online forums.
Likening the government’s heavy-handed attempts to pressure social media companies to suppress content critical of COVID vaccines or the election to “an almost dystopian scenario,” Judge Terry Doughty warned that “the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth.’”
This is the very definition of technofascism.
Clothed in tyrannical self-righteousness, technofascism is powered by technological behemoths (both corporate and governmental) working in tandem to achieve a common goal.
The government is not protecting us from “dangerous” disinformation campaigns. It is laying the groundwork to insulate us from “dangerous” ideas that might cause us to think for ourselves and, in so doing, challenge the power elite’s stranglehold over our lives.
Thus far, the tech giants have been able to sidestep the First Amendment by virtue of their non-governmental status, but it’s a dubious distinction at best when they are marching in lockstep with the government’s dictates.
As Philip Hamburger and Jenin Younes write for The Wall Street Journal: “The First Amendment prohibits the government from ‘abridging the freedom of speech.’ Supreme Court doctrine makes clear that government can’t constitutionally evade the amendment by working through private companies.”
Nothing good can come from allowing the government to sidestep the Constitution.
The steady, pervasive censorship creep that is being inflicted on us by corporate tech giants with the blessing of the powers-that-be threatens to bring about a restructuring of reality straight out of Orwell’s 1984, where the Ministry of Truth polices speech and ensures that facts conform to whatever version of reality the government propagandists embrace.
Orwell intended 1984 as a warning. Instead, it is being used as a dystopian instruction manual for socially engineering a populace that is compliant, conformist and obedient to Big Brother.
In a world increasingly automated and filtered through the lens of artificial intelligence, we are finding ourselves at the mercy of inflexible algorithms that dictate the boundaries of our liberties.
Once artificial intelligence becomes a fully integrated part of the government bureaucracy, there will be little recourse: we will all be subject to the intransigent judgments of techno-rulers.
This is how it starts.
First, the censors went after so-called extremists spouting so-called “hate speech.”
Then they went after so-called extremists spouting so-called “disinformation” about stolen elections, the Holocaust, and Hunter Biden.
By the time so-called extremists found themselves in the crosshairs for spouting so-called “misinformation” about the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines, the censors had developed a system and strategy for silencing the nonconformists.
Eventually, depending on how the government and its corporate allies define what constitutes “extremism, “we the people” might all be considered guilty of some thought crime or other.
Whatever we tolerate now—whatever we turn a blind eye to—whatever we rationalize when it is inflicted on others, whether in the name of securing racial justice or defending democracy or combatting fascism, will eventually come back to imprison us, one and all.
Watch and learn.
We should all be alarmed when any individual or group—prominent or not—is censored, silenced and made to disappear from Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram for voicing ideas that are deemed politically incorrect, hateful, dangerous or conspiratorial.
Given what we know about the government’s tendency to define its own reality and attach its own labels to behavior and speech that challenges its authority, this should be cause for alarm across the entire political spectrum.
Here’s the point: you don’t have to like or agree with anyone who has been muzzled or made to disappear online because of their views, but to ignore the long-term ramifications of such censorship is dangerously naïve, because whatever powers you allow the government and its corporate operatives to claim now will eventually be used against you by tyrants of your own making.
As Glenn Greenwald writes for The Intercept:
The glaring fallacy that always lies at the heart of pro-censorship sentiments is the gullible, delusional belief that censorship powers will be deployed only to suppress views one dislikes, but never one’s own views… Facebook is not some benevolent, kind, compassionate parent or a subversive, radical actor who is going to police our discourse in order to protect the weak and marginalized or serve as a noble check on mischief by the powerful. They are almost always going to do exactly the opposite: protect the powerful from those who seek to undermine elite institutions and reject their orthodoxies. Tech giants, like all corporations, are required by law to have one overriding objective: maximizing shareholder value. They are always going to use their power to appease those they perceive wield the greatest political and economic power.
Be warned: it’s a slippery slope from censoring so-called illegitimate ideas to silencing truth.
Eventually, as Orwell predicted, telling the truth will become a revolutionary act.
If the government can control speech, it can control thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.
As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, it’s happening already.
With every passing day, we’re being moved further down the road towards a totalitarian society characterized by government censorship, violence, corruption, hypocrisy and intolerance, all packaged for our supposed benefit in the Orwellian doublespeak of national security, tolerance and so-called “government speech.”
What we are witnessing is the modern-day equivalent of book burning which involves doing away with dangerous ideas—legitimate or not—and the people who espouse them.
Seventy-plus years after Ray Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451 depicted a fictional world in which books are burned in order to suppress dissenting ideas, while televised entertainment is used to anesthetize the populace and render them easily pacified, distracted and controlled, we find ourselves navigating an eerily similar reality.
BREAKING: Dr. Peter McCullough Joins Alex Jones In-Studio To Discuss Shocking New Developments Concerning The COVID-19 Injections