Reform UK is Taking Votes From Labour, Too
The media narrative through this election campaign has been that Reform will secure votes from non-voters and disgruntled Conservative Party supporters. But Britons who backed Labour in 2019 are choosing to back Nigel Farage instead of Sir Keir Starmer, too.
New polling suggests that Reform is taking 7% of the 2019 Labour vote. And that’s after both the Tories and Labour, as well as the mainstream media, spent about a week bashing Farage over his belief that the war in Ukraine was in part “provoked” by NATO and EU expansion.
Fieldwork for the JLP polling of just over 2,000 voters also took place after Channel 4 released its exposé of what it described as a Reform canvasser saying deeply offensive things about migrants and Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. Reform reported the broadcaster to the elections watchdog after it emerged that the individual is an actor who specialises in both “rough speaking” and “secret filming.” The party has also now claimed that Channel 4’s undercover plants attempted to “trap” Reform volunteers into commenting on Tommy Robinson, the founder of the English Defence League (EDL), and George Floyd.
The figure of 7% seems low, but it is—as pollster James Johnson pointed out—“a statistically significant increase” from the 3% of 2019 voters switching to Reform recorded the week before.
NEW: ? Labour to Reform switchers on the rise ?
Reform UK is now taking 7% of the Labour 2019 vote, a statistically significant increase from 3% last week
28th June – 1st July, 2,028 GB adults, @JLPartnersPolls for @restispolitics— James Johnson (@jamesjohnson252) July 1, 2024
It is also worth noting that reports pointing to the percentage of Tory voters choosing to back Reform this time around (32% according to one recent poll) describe those who voted for the party in 2019 as Conservatives. But many of these individuals are likely to be traditional Labour voters—those in so-called ‘Red Wall’ seats who switched to the Tories for the first time at the last general election in the hope of ‘getting Brexit done’ under Boris Johnson.
All that is to say that Reform is taking more votes from Labour than many are giving them credit for. Not—given Britain’s large-party-favouring electoral system—that this will mean they’ll win any more than a handful of seats in Parliament.
Swiss Bishop: Covid Jabs Have Led To Turbo Cancer, Excess Deaths, Other Harmful Side Effects
Swiss Bishop Marian Eleganti has slammed the Catholic hierarchy’s acceptance of COVID mandates as a ‘declaration of bankruptcy of faith.’ Bishop Eleganti also expressed his profound sorrow that the so called covid vaccines have caused […]
The post Swiss Bishop: Covid Jabs Have Led To Turbo Cancer, Excess Deaths, Other Harmful Side Effects appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Germany: AfD Members Banned From Owning Guns in New Court Ruling
A new court ruling in Germany’s most populous state, North Rhine-Westphalia, bans Alternative for Germany (AfD) members from owning firearms. The judges from the Düsseldorf Administrative Court said their ruling was based on the classification of Germany’s domestic intelligence service, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), which listed the party as a “suspected” threat to democracy.
The case was initially brought by a married couple that owned over 200 firearms and held a legal permit to do so. Their permit was, however, revoked due to their membership in the AfD. The couple initially sued and lost this case. However, they have now also lost their appeal, as the court argues that members of the party are suspected of anti-constitutional activities and therefore “unreliable” based on current gun laws, according to the court.
??❌Will Germany’s AfD party be banned?@Dieter_Stein, the editor-in-chief of @Junge_Freiheit, discusses how the German establishment’s strategy is designed to create a toxic atmosphere around the anti-immigration AfD party, with Stein describing it as a “war of attrition.” pic.twitter.com/KV54nHKl57
— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) May 6, 2024
The court’s ruling means the married couple must either hand over their firearms to the authorities or destroy them, as well as any ammunition. The husband owns 197 firearms, while the wife owns 27. However, the court is still allowing the case to move forward on appeal to the highest court in the state, the Münster Higher Administrative Court, “due to (the case’s) fundamental importance.”
According to the latest court ruling, the judges said that the ban on weapons for AfD members does not violate the party privilege provided for in Article 21 of the German constitution, known as the Basic Law.
Earlier this year, that same Münster court already confirmed the BfV’s classification of the AfD as a “suspected threat” to democracy after the AfD challenged this classification.
??☪️ Germany’s top spy chief: An Islamic caliphate is “is one conceivable form of government among many that exist around the world.” pic.twitter.com/tsn1UE9cKV
— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) June 27, 2024
The BfV is a highly politicized intelligence agency targeting domestic “threats” to the constitutional order, while critics contend it is designed to snuff out political opposition. The agency is currently monitoring AfD members in a number of states, including tapping their phones and surveilling their internet communications, all without a warrant. Currently, their membership in the party offers enough legal grounds to target what is the second-largest party in the country.
It is unclear how the current ruling, if it is later affirmed by the higher court in Münster, will affect civil servants in the military and police forces who regularly handle firearms.
Despite the ruling in North-Rheine Westphalia, other state courts have come to different conclusions regarding the legality of AfD members owning firearms. Last year, the Gera Administrative Court ruled that the Thuringian Ministry of the Interior cannot revoke firearms licenses of AfD members in a blanket measure; however, it left the door open for individual cases.
Trump is NOT a Dictator— The Deep State is, Alex Jones Responds
On the Tuesday show Alex Jones discussed how the deep state Democrats are acting dictatorial, not Trump.
Don’t miss:
Experts: Hunter Biden’s Failure to Register as a Foreign Agent Could Finally Land Him in Jail
According to experts, Hunter Biden’s failure to register as a foreign agent during his years of overseas business dealings could finally land him in jail.
The federal Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) passed in 1938 requires individuals acting as “an agent, representative, employee, or servant … at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a ‘foreign principal,’” to register with the U.S. government. Failure to do so is a crime punishable by up to five years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.
“Foreign principal” is broadly defined, and can include government officials, foreign corporations, political organizations, influential private interests and more. Thus, the FARA has been employed in recent years to shine a light on foreign advocacy and lobbying in the United States. In this case, the presidential son’s dealings with Ukraine, China and other nations necessitated his compliance with the FARA’s stipulations.
“The recent disclosures of additional foreign contacts has only strengthened what was already a strong case. Indeed, in the last few weeks, the compelling basis for a FARA charge has become unassailable and undeniable,” said Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University. “The influence peddling schemes directly reference the president and [Joe Biden] is repeatedly cited as a possible recipient of funds.”
Meanwhile, FARA expert Craig Engle recounted the presidential son’s tenure at the board of Ukrainian energy firm Burisma. Hunter introduced Vadym Pozharskyi – one of the company’s top executives – to his father, according to emails found in the so-called “laptop from hell.” Less than a year after this introduction, the elder Biden – who was already vice president – pressured government officials in Ukraine to fire prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who was investigating Burisma, in March 2016.
“If Hunter relayed the request for U.S. government assistance [to fire Shokin], then that would be a FARA-registrable event,” said Engle, who heads the political law practice at the Washington, D.C.-based firm Arent Fox Schiff. “Given the nature of the client, given the nature of the work, and given his relationship with Joe as demonstrated on his calendar, it makes it likely that FARA is part of an investigation.”
Sen. Johnson doubts if Hunter will be held accountable for FARA violations
According to the New York Post, the presidential son’s overseas exploits have run the gamut of potential behavior possibly violating FARA. In China, Hunter’s work for energy company CEFC and its now-disgraced boss Ye Jianming dovetailed with the company’s interest in gaining influence in the United States. Further revelations from the Post in 2020 promoted Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to send a letter to the Department of Justice (DOJ) demanding a review of possible FARA violations.
Emails from the controversial laptop also revealed that Hunter and Rosemont Seneca Partners (RSP) President Eric Schwerin even discussed their worries over domestic and foreign lobbying rules. The first son and the head of RSP, which Hunter owns, purportedly chose to remain unregistered.
But at least one lawmaker expressed skepticism over the possibility of Hunter being brought to justice for FARA violations.
“Unless the person indicted is a Republican, FARA has historically been a difficult law to prosecute and obtain a conviction for,” lamented Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI). “I have always been suspicious that the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden is another example of the unequal application of justice, with Democrats and their elite allies getting kid glove treatment.”
(Related: Hunter Biden DEFIES House Oversight Committee subpoena.)
“My concern is that [the] DOJ will indict Hunter on watered-down charges, and then enter into a plea agreement that includes sealing the records on the case. That would be a travesty, because it would deny the American people of knowing the truth and full extent of Biden family corruption.”
Ohio House Passes Bill Banning Gender-Confused Students From Using Opposite Sex Bathrooms
(LifeSiteNews) — The Ohio House of Representatives passed legislation that prevents gender-confused students from using opposite-sex bathrooms and locker rooms.
House Bill 183 was added as an amendment to Senate Bill 104 last Wednesday during the chamber’s final session before summer recess. The measure passed 60-31 along party lines, with two Republicans voting with Democrats against it.
The proposal, which GOP Gov. Mike DeWine has said he would sign, is aimed at K-12 students enrolled in public and charter schools as well as at universities. It also prevents co-ed high schoolers and younger students from sharing overnight accommodations.
Bill co-sponsor and Republican State Rep. Beth Lear of Galena plainly argued in a statement that “boys and girls should not be in locker rooms together.”
As pointed out by several Ohio-based media outlets, similar measures have been passed in GOP-leaning states. ABC-affiliate News 5 Cleveland reported that Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota,Florida, and Utah have approved bills that prohibit gender-confused persons from using opposite-sex bathrooms.
In January, Ohio lawmakers overrode DeWine’s veto of a bill that bans transgender drugs and surgeries for minors. According to the Ohio Capital Journal, lawmakers discussed whether to do so for about an hour before ultimately agreeing to proceed. Republican Sen. Kristina Roegner said at the time that “gender is not fluid” and that “there is no such thing as a gender spectrum.”
Despite their override, officials were stymied due to a Franklin County judge temporarily halting the measure from going into effect in April. The decision was handed down after the ultra-liberal American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit.
Other courts across the U.S. have ruled on similar laws, with several of them being struck down. In January, the U.S. Supreme Court opted not to hear a case decided by the Chicago-based 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that allowed a female student in Indiana to use the boys’ bathroom.
As reported by LifeSite, “detransitioners,” the name for individuals who used to present themselves as the opposite sex, have often spoken out against the procedures they underwent. Parents of students at public schools have likewise confronted school boards after passing pro-LGBT politics that have resulted in their children being attacked or sexually assaulted by gender-confused classmates in the bathroom.