Authored by Ben Weingarten via RealClearInvestigations,

The incoming Trump administration scored an early but possibly illusory victory last month in its effort to reform government overreach when it successfully pressured Congress to eliminate what it termed “sweetheart provisions for government censors” from a measure to stave off a government shutdown.

Funding for the State Department’s Global Engagement Center – which Republicans had attacked as a tool of domestic censorship – was stripped from the final bill, and the center announced that it was closed for good on Dec. 23. Days later, however, reporting emerged that the State Department had devised plans to shift the center’s 51 employees and millions of dollars of funding to a separate hub purportedly to counter foreign “information manipulation and interference.”

President-elect Donald Trump has not said how he will respond to this maneuver. But in extensive public comments he has said that targeting what critics have called the Censorship Industrial Complex will be a high priority in his new administration. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s pledge to restore free expression on his platforms and join the Trump administration in its efforts to push back on global censorship, two weeks before inauguration day, indicates speech-policing forces like his may be disarming accordingly.

As the State Department’s move suggests, however, this push will likely face stiff resistance. “There will be a visceral reaction from the bureaucratic state in permanent Washington,” Sen. Eric Schmitt told RealClearInvestigations. As attorney general of Missouri, Schmitt launched the Missouri v. Biden lawsuit against federal government collusion with social media companies and nonprofits to target disfavored speech.

Trump outlined the steps he might pursue in a December 2022 video detailing his “Free Speech Policy Initiative” – a video that, ironically, received less attention originally because YouTube had banned the former president. Responding to what he called “a sinister group of Deep State bureaucrats, Silicon Valley tyrants, left-wing activists, and depraved corporate news media” that have “conspire[d] to manipulate and silence the American People … [and] collaborated to suppress vital information on everything from elections to public health,” Trump vowed to “dismantle and destroy” the “censorship cartel,” including through the use of vigorous executive action starting within hours of his inauguration.

According to the Free Speech Policy Initiative, his administration’s efforts will include:

• A first-day executive order barring federal authorities from colluding with others to abridge Americans’ protected speech
• Preventing federal dollars from being used to classify domestic speech as mis- or dis-information, and from being lavished on nonprofits and academic institutions engaging in similar efforts, including “flagging” posts to social media platforms for suppression
• Identifying and firing bureaucrats across the federal government who have engaged in direct or indirect censorship, while enacting laws imposing criminal penalties on such conduct
• Directing the Department of Justice to probe participants in the “new online censorship regime” for myriad potential violations of law
• Working with Congress to pass legislation modifying Section 230 of the Communications Act to extend its liability shield only to those large online platforms meeting high standards of “neutrality, transparency, fairness, and non-discrimination”
• Helping to pass a digital Bill of Rights, including a right to due process requiring government officials to obtain a court order to remove online content

“The fight for free speech is a matter of victory or death for America – and for the survival of Western civilization itself,” Trump said in announcing his initiative. “When I am President, this whole rotten system of censorship and information control will be ripped out of the system at large. There won’t be anything left.” 

A Sprawling Network

As RealClearInvestigations has reported extensively, a sprawling network of government agencies and connected NGOs have formed a “whole-of-society” partnership aimed at combatting what its constituents consider dangerous “mis-, dis-, and mal-information,” particularly on social media.

Players include counter-disinformation research centers at leading universities and think tanks, fact-checkers and news rating entities, and like-minded for-profits – often funded and/or promoted by government agencies and powerful foundations. Many of these initiatives began in response to perceived threats from abroad. The Global Engagement Center, for example, was created during the Obama administration to combat foreign propaganda and information operations, originally with a focus on terrorist groups. It soon expanded its mission to combat alleged threats in the homeland, using taxpayer dollars to coordinate with counter-disinformation entities that have worked to purge disfavored domestic news and views – including through targeting the business models of U.S. outlets like RealClearPolitics and many others.

Mike Benz of the Foundation for Freedom Online asserts that support for such efforts spans 12 different government departments and 50 different government programs, some of which fund related programs at nearly 100 universities under the banner of “disinformation studies” and related disciplines.

Transparency-focused nonprofit OpenTheBooks calculates that the Biden administration has granted roughly $260 million in awards pertaining to “misinformation.”

President Biden’s National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism codified such efforts. It directed federal authorities to work with “state, local, tribal, and territorial governments and in civil society, the private sector, academia, and local communities, as well as with our allies and foreign partners” to address “the extreme polarization, fueled by a crisis of disinformation and misinformation often channeled through social media platforms, which can tear Americans apart and lead some to violence.”

The trial judge in Missouri v. Biden, which would ultimately land at the Supreme Court as Murthy v. Missouri, found that this public-private partnership  – kicked off with agencies like the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency towards the end of the first Trump administration – engaged in perhaps “the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history” in its efforts to suppress disfavored speech, particularly on election integrity and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Litigation and congressional oversight have exposed the breadth and depth of these activities. Some counter-disinformation entities have, facing public scrutiny, curtailed their work. But the Supreme Court never ruled on the merits of Murthy – finding that the plaintiffs lacked standing – and thereby did not establish that government efforts direct and indirect to press social media companies to suppress protected speech are illegal or unconstitutional. Nor has a divided Congress passed bills prohibiting such activities, defunding them, or penalizing federal officials who might engage in them.

Government-supported nonprofits, often portraying themselves as researchers, including the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, have vowed to continue their work, which they say is pivotal to defending democracy. A spokesperson for the center told RCI that in the face of a threatened reckoning, its personnel “are continuing their work to study how rumors and falsehoods spread online, understand the role of social media platforms and generative AI in shaping those information flows and to educate people about online manipulation, deception and scams.”

Trump and many of his personnel picks so far see these initiatives and collaborations differently. His nominee to chair the Federal Communications Commission, Brendan Carr, has said one of his “top priorities” is to “smash the censorship cartel.”

Under Section 230 of the Communications Act, which falls under the FCC’s purview, social media platforms have been deemed immune from civil liability for taking down certain types of content “in good faith.” Carr recently argued that this provision has been used to “silence divergent speech” and indicated that under his leadership, the commission may “look at implementing that in a way that can promote more speech.” He has also suggested that given that “a cohort of advertising and marketing agencies have been working together … to collude to crack down on free speech,” this might constitute unlawful anti-competitive behavior for his agency to consider.

Trump’s pick to lead the Federal Trade Commission, Andrew Ferguson, called last month for a range of investigative and enforcement actions to “bust … up” “anti-competitive cartels that facilitate or promote censorship.”

Carr and Ferguson alike have both cited NewsGuard as a key player in online censorship. As RealClearInvestigations has reported previously, NewsGuard rates the trustworthiness of websites on a zero to 100 scale based on their staffers’ review of samples of work according to certain criteria. Those subjective ratings attach to sites when one searches them in a browser equipped with NewsGuard’s extension. What’s more, under the banner of “brand safety,” NewsGuard licenses “exclusion lists” of low-rated sources to advertisers to instruct their ad agencies and ad-tech partners to keep their programmatic ads off those sites – starving them of pivotal ad revenue. Evidence suggests NewsGuard disfavors conservative or independent-leaning outlets. Congressional scrutiny and reportage have revealed that NewsGuard has been a recipient of funding from both the defunct Global Engagement Center and the Department of Defense – though it disputes this characterization.

In November, prior to his appointment as FCC commissioner, Carr sent a letter to Alphabet, Apple, Meta, and Microsoft, soliciting information regarding the Big Tech companies’ ties to NewsGuard. Citing its purported biases and noting the for-profit’s partnerships with web browsers and social media companies, Carr suggested that should the firms be relying on NewsGuard’s offerings, such activities might violate the “good faith” standard upon which their Section 230 immunity shield relies. 

Ferguson noted in his December statement that while “NewsGuard is … free to rate websites by whatever metric it wants … antitrust laws do not permit third parties to facilitate group boycotts among competitors.”

NewsGuard has challenged Carr’s premises. In a statement, co-CEO Gordon Crovitz, formerly the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, said that the incoming FCC Commissioner’s letter relied on “unreliable sources,” maintained that “we provide users with apolitical reliability analysis,” and otherwise challenged claims of bias and censoriousness. After Crovitz and co-founder CEO Steven Brill, a lawyer, journalist, and entrepreneur, penned a subsequent rejoinder to Carr, Brill would write in Politico that “I felt like taking a shower after trying to defend my journalism to a threatening regulator, pleading with him to believe that I’m fair.”

In response to a question regarding NewsGuard’s view of the Trump administration’s coming efforts, General Manager Matt Skibinski reiterated the arguments in NewsGuard’s responses to Carr, telling RCI: “We agree that the government should not engage in censorship and that the social media companies should be more transparent. We founded NewsGuard as the apolitical, fully transparent alternative to either government censorship or social media secretly rating news sources and claims.”

Other Trump administration officials likewise seem poised to help the president implement the Free Speech Policy Initiative.

The Office of Management and Budget is likely to be a key hub of such activity. It has broad powers to help the president implement his policies, including in its oversight of executive agencies, clearing of executive orders, review of regulations, and developing of the president’s budget.

President Trump’s nominee for deputy director of the agency, departing North Carolina Republican Rep. Dan Bishop, wrote this month that “the days of the Censorship Industrial Complex are numbered.” 

Others who have expressed aversion to social media company efforts to target disfavored speech include Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy – who will be working hand-in-hand with the Office of Management and Budget through the soon-to-be-created Department of Government Efficiency – and AI czar David Sacks.

Two additional picks have found themselves targeted by social media companies for censorship: Health and Human Services Secretary-designate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and National Institutes of Health Director-designate Jay Bhattacharya. Fighting back, they are both plaintiffs in cases against federal agencies.

Obstacles

Foundation for Freedom Online founder Benz warned in a recent interview on the Joe Rogan podcast that the White House is “going to run into a lot of headwinds” given the size, scope, and scale of the “censorship industry.”

Benz, who worked in cyber policy during President Trump’s first term, suggested resistance would come from the State Department, where he served, and the Defense Department. These agencies, he asserted, will claim they must maintain counter-disinformation capacities to combat foreign threats – capacities that critics say have been trained instead on Americans.

“Trump is going to run into every single regional desk at the State Department, every single equity at the Pentagon, arguing that if you do not allow us to continue this censorship work it will undermine national security.”

“You’re going to have the State Department argue that if we don’t have this counter misinformation capacity, then extremists will win elections around the world or populists will win the election around the world. And that will undermine the power of our democratic institutions,” Benz told Rogan.

Whether and to what extent Congress will seek to codify the president’s efforts in legislation remains an open question.

House Republicans in the last Congress sought to advance legislation to prohibit federal funds from directly or indirectly being used to target Americans’ protected speech; punish federal officials who would collude with third parties or social media companies to censor speech; and prohibit foreign officials targeting Americans’ speech from traveling to America.

Those efforts languished.

Speaker Mike Johnson, in a statement upon passage of the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, touted leadership’s efforts to “prohibit contracts with advertising firms that blacklist conservative news sources, like NewsGuard Technologies Inc.” 

That the Global Engagement Center’s extension made it into the original December stopgap spending bill suggested otherwise. Johnson’s office defended its inclusion by noting that the speaker had “killed multiple efforts to pass a 5-year reauthorization of the GEC during the past year.” It added that the original measure ensured that the incoming administration would have the “maximum ability and authority to determine how to handle the office, its authorities, and funding.”

Neither House nor Senate leaders, Republican or Democrat, responded to RCI’s questions in connection with this story.

Sen. Rand Paul, the new chair of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, has indicated he would like to end the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Reports suggest he is likely to face bipartisan resistance. Acknowledging that termination is unlikely, “at the very least,” he has said, he would like to “eliminate their ability to censor content online.”

Last Congress, Sen. Paul introduced the “Free Speech Protection Act,” which would bar federal employees from directing social media platforms to censor protected speech. That legislation sat dormant.

Sen. Schmitt, a co-sponsor of the bill, recently introduced legislation in the Transparency in Communications Act that would force inspectors general, tasked with overseeing the federal bureaucracy, to provide “a comprehensive reporting of all communications on content moderation, user content, and … companies’ algorithms” between federal agencies and Big Tech companies. 

Asked whether he anticipated there might be bipartisan resistance to legislative remedies to purported public-private censorship efforts, given, for example, some Republicans’ support of extending the life of the Global Engagement Center, Sen. Schmitt replied: “I would hope not.” 

“I think it’s wrong to think of this as a Democrat vs. Republican thing,” Schmitt said. “I’ve been saying this from the beginning, coercive censorship like what we witnessed by the Biden Administration should scare the hell out of every American, regardless of political affiliation. We will need legitimate buy-in from all Republicans to dismantle this vast censorship enterprise built by Joe Biden and the administrative state.”

Reports suggest that those in the counter-disinformation effort are spooked by the Trump administration’s policies.

RCI reached out to notable players in connection with this story with inquiries regarding their perspectives on the Trump administration’s Free Speech Policy Initiative, its likely impacts, and how they and their peers intend to respond to it.

NewsGuard’s Skibinski disputed a suggestion that it was part of any “ecosystem,” adding “we plan simply to continue our apolitical work.”

The Global Disinformation Index, like NewsGuard, has tended to rank conservative and independent outlets as “risky” spreaders of mis- and disinformation and provided “exclusion lists” to ad tech companies and others with the intent of drying up those outlets’ funding. It, too, has received U.S. government funding. The British-based nonprofit did not respond to RCI’s inquiries.

Nina Jankowicz, who was to lead the Biden administration’s Disinformation Governance Board, scrapped under criticism it was to represent an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth,” co-wrote an October piece asserting that amid congressional scrutiny of counter-disinformation initiatives: “Regardless of the outcome of the November election, there is a clear and present danger facing anyone seeking to make the internet a safer place​​ – both inside and outside US borders.”

Jankowicz now heads the American Sunlight Project, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit that exists to “increase the cost of lies that undermine our democracy.” It did not respond to RCI’s inquiries.

Nor did the Center for Democracy & Technology, a prominent proponent of “counter-disinformation initiatives.”

The Complex That Wouldn’t Die

Irrespective of what happens at the federal level, critics fear that foreign and state authorities may fill the vacuum.

As RCI has previously reported, evidence suggests that global legal and regulatory standards may serve as a backdoor method to suppress protected speech at home.

Citing efforts from Europe to Latin America and China to pressure American social media platforms to censor, Meta’s Zuckerberg said in his Jan. 7 announcement of coming free speech-focused reforms that “we’re going to work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world.”

Benz and others have warned that states may seek to pass laws abridging protected American speech on social media as a way to bypass federal resistance.

Elon Musk and X filed suit against California’s AB 2655, which proponents describe as a “flagship anti-disinformation law.”

According to a summary of the law, large online platforms would be required to “block the posting of materially deceptive content related to elections in California” and “label certain additional content inauthentic, fake or false” during periods around elections. 

Musk and X contend in their suit that the “Defending Democracy from Deepfake Protection Act of 2024” would result in the “censorship of wide swaths of valuable political speech and commentary and will limit the type of ‘uninhibited, robust, and wide-open’ ‘debate on public issues’ that core First Amendment protections are designed to ensure.”

A similar bill is working its way through Michigan’s legislature. A federal judge has for now halted a parallel California law, AB 2839, prohibiting the distribution of deceptive content pertaining to candidates around elections, on the ground that it may violate the First Amendment.

Meanwhile, maneuvering by the State Department to mitigate the effects of the GEC’s closure by reassigning its employees to engage in similar work indicates the resistance the Trump administration is likely to face. 

In response to the news, Sen. Schmitt posted on X: “Biden & the Dems are continuing their push to censor American voices, even in Biden’s final hours. Less than 20 days until Trump comes & roots out this madness.”

Authored by Thaddeus McCotter via American Greatness,

In the recent presidential election, one seemingly obvious aspect of President-(re)elect Donald Trump’s victorious campaign was often buried beneath the regime media’s breathless denunciations of his person and his supporters: namely, it was an optimistic appeal – and challenge – to the American people.

The Harris campaign and her “progressive” supporters peddled a dire message that their loss would spell the end of “our democracy.” This was wry, indeed, from the Democrat Party that jettisoned incumbent President Joe Biden and for all intents and purposes installed Vice President Harris as their “new” presidential nominee. By deed, if not word (for obvious reasons), the Democrats sought to save “our democracy” by destroying it, including the weaponization of government against the citizenry, et al.

Thus, it should have proven no surprise that the Democrat presidential campaign was tantamount to a demand to perpetuate their empowerment of an unelected, unaccountable, bureaucratic elite (a.k.a., the “Administrative State”) to rule the nation with minimal interference from the citizenry.

Should the Harris-Walz ticket and their fellow Democrats be electorally defeated, the ensuing end of what they perversely deemed “democracy” would turn America into a fascistic hellscape. In a lack of self-awareness for the ages, the party whose greatest president warned that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself” ran a presidential campaign premised upon fear.

While it proved somewhat successful with the Democrat base, it failed with the majority of the electorate. Why? Because on election day, courage trumped fear. The American character prevailed.

Patent in Mr. Trump and the MAGA/GOP-Populist slogan is both hope and a challenge. The hope is that “Make America Great Again” means we can make America great again.

Once, the conservative philosopher Russell Kirk asked the question: “Is it conceivable that American civilization, and in general what we call ‘Western civilization,’ may recover from the Time of Troubles that commenced in 1914…and in the twenty-first century enter upon an Augustan age of peace and restored order?”

Despite the momentous difficulties besetting our free people in this dangerous age, they have answered with a resounding “Yes!”

Importantly, too, in answering this question in the affirmative, the American people were fully cognizant of Mr. Trump’s challenge.

It is not the government that makes America great. It is We, the People.

It is to the eternal credit of the sovereign citizens of our bastion of liberty, equality, and pluralism that they have embraced his challenge to perpetuate and improve our nation’s revolutionary experiment in self-government.

While daunting to some, as at other times when they have been confronted by momentous challenges, the American people have seized the freedom required to surmount them. It is as Edmund Burke noted:

These are the times in which a genius would wish to live. It is not the still calm of life, or the repose of a pacific station, that great characters are formed… The habits of a vigorous mind are formed in contending with difficulties… Great necessities call out great virtues. When a mind is raised and animated by scenes that engage the heart, then those qualities, which would otherwise lay dormant, wake into life and form the character of the hero and the statesman.

There is no better recent image of a scene that has engaged the heart than the picture of an assassin-wounded Donald Trump raising a fist in the air and vowing to continue to “Fight!”

Doubtless, having witnessed it, sound minds of the republic were raised and animated and accepted Mr. Trump’s challenge to “make America great again.”

Sure, as they have since the 1770s, the craven cynics will superciliously cackle about how only rule by “our betters” can make life bearable. How it is an inviting “mobocracy” to believe We, the people, can make America great again.

In many ways, these recalcitrant, duplicitous skeptics who bemoan the death of their false democracy while loathing the true democracy within our constitutional republic remain opposed to actual self-government as they proffer a trick question.

In reality, America has always been great, though the government has often been far from it. For as once more affirmed in the 2024 election, so long as the genius and gumption of We, the People, endure, America will always be great.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

In December of last year I published an article titled ‘Open Borders Have Created A Terror Attack Time Bomb In The US In 2025’. I noted that there was a significant confluence of events that was, in my view leading to an explosion of terror attacks just as conservatives take political power. I stated:

“Why is 2025 becoming more and more prominent as an inception date for an attack?

Organized criminal gangs crossing the border as migrants.

Foreign agents and terrorists slipping into the US using mass immigration as a cover.

Leftist activists radicalized to believe they are righteous in their violence.

Establishment elites and covert agencies creating false flag events.

The conservative sweep on election day means we inherit all the messes that Joe Biden and his handlers created – Economic, political, social, and geopolitical. There will also be considerable motivation for establishment elites to create chaos from thin air while conservatives hold governmental power…

…I believe an attack is inevitable in 2025 primarily because of the geopolitical brush fires being ignited across the globe right now. There is also always the looming danger of false flag events designed by covert actors trying to trick the public into placing blame on the wrong culprit…”

If the two attempted assassinations of Donald Trump in 2024 didn’t clue some people in, we’re on the verge of a violent year. It wasn’t hard to predict that terror incidents would come to dominate the news feeds, I just didn’t expect that this would happen on the the very first day of 2025.

The incident in New Orleans and the incident in Las Vegas at Trump’s hotel and casino share some rather strange details. Both Shamsud-Din Jabbar and Matthew Livelsberger are military veterans, both were stationed at Fort Bragg (now called Fort Liberty) and both were stationed in Afghanistan around the same time. (Take note that attempted Trump assassin Ryan Routh also lived within an hour’s drive of Fort Bragg up until 2018). Both suspects also used car rental company Turo to obtain the vehicles used for their crimes.

However, authorities say there’s no evidence that the men knew each other and their Army deployment records do not show them working together.

Jabbar’s terror attack in New Orleans killed 15 people and injured dozens more, with reports that he was motivated by Islamic extremism and his goal was to send a message about the war in Gaza. Livelsberger’s message was apparently the opposite – mentioning in notes (which the FBI says are verified) that he wanted a “wake up call” for Americans to support Donald Trump, and warned of a collapse due to sabotage by Democrats.

An interesting side detail: Levelsberger was also a reality TV star on the History Channel show Ultimate Soldier Challenge. And, oddly, there is evidence that Livelsberger was a big Ukraine war proponent and even helped to recruit mercenaries for the Ukrainian side. This is generally not a cause that conservatives support.

I would point out that blowing up a cybertruck outside Trump’s Vegas hotel is an odd way to support Trump’s cause. Investigators claim the man shot himself before the vehicle exploded. I’m not sure how the logistics would work on that or how authorities could make that claim so early in the investigation.

I think it’s important to note that the Cybertruck is a self driving vehicle and that ANYONE could have killed Livelsberger, placed his body inside and then sent the car on its way loaded with explosives. Just a theory that should be taken into account.

Terror Attacks And Storytelling

There’s a lot more to these stories, but I think we need time for the evidence to present itself. I will say that given the current evidence the Vegas incident in particular reads as highly suspicious. The way government agencies have responded seems like narrative building rather than an honest assessment of the crime. They were constructing a story around Livelsberger on day one. Authorities even let reporters snoop around his house the day after the bombing. It’s incredibly odd.

Compare this to trans shooter Audrey Hale and her attack on the Christian school in Nashville in 2023. Look at how agencies tried to hide as much information as possible from the public (the attack was politically and ideologically motivated, yet they never called it terrorism). The government acts differently when a terror attack is real vs when a terror attack is rigged. When it’s a false flag, they try to plant conclusions in the public consciousness as quickly as possible.

The New Orleans incident? It’s hard to say. Maybe all the connections and timing are a coincidence. But if you think the past couple weeks have been strange I suggest you get used to it, because I suspect these kinds of events are about to become the new normal.

Leftists And The Monkey Wrench Gang

As I argued in December there is a serious risk of civil destabilization in 2025 caused by a steady series of terror attacks. Some of them might be planned by legitimate suspects while others could be fabricated by covert interests in order to stir up public fear. I would also warn specifically about far-left groups reverting to Weather Underground-like tactics in order to disrupt conservative reforms.

In terms of seemingly random disasters that benefit the leftist/globalist cause, I often refer to this as the “Monkey Wrench Gang” scenario. In 1975, author Edward Abbey published a politically charged fiction book titled ‘The Monkey Wrench Gang.’ The book portrays a group of environmentalist extremists out to stop the “pollution” of the southwestern US using the sabotage of machines and infrastructure as a means to grind development to a halt.

The Monkey Wrench Gang, published in 1975, has long been considered an inspirational work of fiction for the political left, but it is also treated as a sort of instruction manual for socialist militants – A guide for bringing down the system. It depicts the destruction of minor targets like billboards and bulldozers, up to and including the destruction of bridges, the derailment of trains and the attempted bombing of a dam. It’s sort of like the progressive version of The Turner Diaries, published in 1978.

After witnessing the “fiery but peaceful” activities of groups like Antifa and BLM during the 2020 riots I don’t find it hard to believe that there may also be an activist element in the US right now that’s willing to engage in infrastructure terrorism and political assassination. This is not to say that the leftists themselves are highly organized, but there is evidence that they are managed by calculating people behind the scenes.

In other words, elitist institutions can very easily use far-left actors to carry out terror attacks because leftists only need a “nudge” to go down that path. Just as many Islamic fundamentalists are so easy to nudge into mass violence.

Government Apathy Is A Form Of Terrorism

Another way that the establishment contributes to an atmosphere of instability is by simply doing nothing and letting bad things happen. For example, look at the fires in Southern California and the complete lack of infrastructure and resources needed to stop them. Look at the governmental indifference to preparedness. Now compare this to the calculated incompetence and mismanagement during the disastrous fires in Maui in 2023 and you might start to see a pattern…

In terms of foreign threats, the open border problem over the past four years has made attacks by outside elements a near guarantee. Biden’s apathy on the border was clearly strategic and was designed to create conditions for internal strife.

When the mass deportations start under Trump, be ready for “random attacks” to skyrocket. I have no doubt whatsoever that establishment interests (various think-tanks and globalist institutions) will instigate mass violence in response to deportations as a way to make the American public pay for their support of closed borders.

Problem, Reaction, Solution

Finally, be especially wary of government bureaucrats pretending they care about stopping the violence while using it as a rationale for restrictions and surveillance of American citizens. The laws we have in place are ALREADY more than enough to deal with the migrant problem or with psychotic woke activists. There is no need to diminish privacy rights, property rights, speech rights, self defense rights or institute martial law to accomplish a secure border and safe communities.

There are many Neo-cons within our government that will try to use public anger over lack of safety as a catalyst for further Patriot Act-like violations of our rights.

Anyone who calls for such measures should be immediately treated as suspect, including Donald Trump if it ever comes to that end. There are millions of patriots out there that view a Trump presidency as a “wait and see” scenario, not as a panacea that fixes all our ills.

In other words, patriots see the Trump Administration as a PAUSE on the civil war that would have happened under Kamala Harris and the Democrats. The next four years might just end up being one last deep breath before the plunge if Trump can’t follow through on his promises, or if Neo-cons and Neo-libs are allowed to use chaos as a vehicle to destroy our liberties.

Make The Establishment Mad – Be Proactive

In terms of the immediate threat of increasing terror events, it’s not something that we need to live in fear of but it is something we need to be prepared for. Simple planning changes outcomes – Why not carry an EDC kit in your car? At the very least, have a sidearm, extra mags, a medical kit with tourniquets, blood stopping gauze, Israeli bandages and chest seals. Finally, train for emergencies and learn how to manage panic in yourself and others.

Bad things are going to happen around you, or to you. If you stay calm then you have a chance of eliminating the threat or, at the very least, mitigating the damage.

The goal of national destabilization and terror campaigns is to force the populace into a reactionary mindset (read up on Operation Gladio in Europe for better understanding). The last thing the establishment wants is for Americans to be proactive; they don’t want you to be prepared, they don’t want you to intervene and they certainly don’t want you to organize. What they want is for the public to always turn to a central authority, to always wait for others to fix the problem. They want you to wait for permission to act.

This cannot be the way if we are facing a widespread agenda of national sabotage. Our purpose must be to fix these problems ourselves.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Watch LA Fire Live:

LA Fire Summary:

• Palisades Fire burned 20,000 acres (0% contained), while Eaton Fire has expanded to 10,000 acres (0% contained)

• Newest fire: Sunset Fire in the Hollywood Hills area; Another new fire in Woodland Hills

• Five dead, 180,000 people under evacuation orders 

• Most destructive fire in LA history: Ten of billions of dollars in damage (early estimates) 

• AccuWeather Estimates $135 billion to $150 billion in preliminary damage and economic losses

• Over 5,000 homes, businesses and other buildings have been damaged or destroyed

• Musk Says SpaceX will provide free Starlink terminals to areas hit by LA wildfires

• Arson fears 

Fire Map 

Evacuation areas

 *   *   * 

Update (1942ET):

Where’s the National Guard? 

🚨#BREAKING: HUNDREDS OF LOOTERS INVADE NEIGHBORHOOD

“Cars pull up, doors open, and groups of men running up our street going up to the doors of these houses.”

“There were 100 people came up on scooters and were trying to get into any and all houses.”

REPORTER: “Did you… pic.twitter.com/0ckGivHbpy

— HustleBitch (@HustleBitch_) January 9, 2025

 *   *   * 

Update (1915ET):

At this point the city of Los Angeles needs to fire everyone and start over. https://t.co/JaXHHM8enW

— drefanzor memes (@drefanzor) January 10, 2025

Appears an evacuation warning was just accidentally sent out to all of Los Angeles County. @FOXLA colleague @Elex_Michaelson saying he’s hearing the same.

Not helpful.

A ton of people, including me, just got this alert. pic.twitter.com/Ue48dmObkC

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) January 10, 2025

 *   *   * 

Update (1900ET):

The latest AccuWeather estimate for the total damage and economic loss in LA County has surged to a staggering $135 billion to $150 billion, a massive increase from Wednesday’s estimate of $52 billion to $57 billion.

AccuWeather has increased the preliminary estimate for the total damage and economic loss for the Southern #California #wildfires to a staggering $135 billion to $150 billion.#AccuWeather meteorologists say more gusty winds and an elevated #fire risk are expected next week. pic.twitter.com/6N3DJWSFlg

— Bill Wadell (@BillWadell) January 9, 2025

 *   *   * 

Update (1845ET):

An aerial survey conducted by CalFire has determined that 5,316 structures, including homes, businesses, and smaller buildings such as RVs and sheds, have been destroyed by the fire, making this one of the most destructive wildfires in California’s history.

JPMorgan’s Jimmy Bhullar told clients that potential cost for insurers could easily exceed $20 billion.

 AccuWeather estimated $52 billion to $57 billion in preliminary damage and economic losses earlier. 

🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/jlhBpCZdoW

— Adam Carolla (@adamcarolla) January 9, 2025

It’s time for Californians to hold the leftist LA Mayor Karen Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom accountable.

🚨BREAKING🚨 The City of Los Angeles cut funding for its fire department and allocated thousands of dollars to various progressive programs, including a “Midnight Stroll Transgender Cafe” and a Gay Men’s Chorus. pic.twitter.com/5ik8inY3sA

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) January 9, 2025

DEI = DIE 

 *   *   * 

Update (1436ET):

“I’ve never seen such destruction,” a reporter for ABC7 Eyewitness News said in a live broadcast earlier. 

“I’ve never seen such destruction.” AIR7 got aerial views of the wildfire devastation in Pacific Palisades. 💔

Watch live fire coverage here: https://t.co/gx8OUSXIS6 pic.twitter.com/yt27uIEH5x

— ABC7 Eyewitness News (@ABC7) January 9, 2025

 *   *   * 

Update (1350ET):

At a press briefing, LA County Sheriff Robert Luna said 180,000 people are under evacuation orders.

Meanwhile, a preliminary estimate from Morningstar DBRS points to insured losses in excess of $8 billion, and some scenarios could cost insurers more than $10 billion. This report was first cited by Bloomberg Intelligence analysts. 

 *   *   * 

Update (1300ET):

Comedian Adam Carolla goes on an epic rant claiming that Hollywood leftists will become so frustrated with the rebuilding process of their destroyed homes that they’ll refuse to vote Democrat. 

 *   *   * 

Update (1246ET):

LA County Sheriff Robert Luna told reporters that some wildfire-impacted areas “looked like a bomb went off.”

NEW: Drone footage shows the devastating aftermath of the LA fires which have destroyed thousands of homes.

At this time, five people are deceased, over 2,000 structures have burned down and at least 130,000 residents are under evacuation order.

Unfortunately, forecasters warn… pic.twitter.com/gVeWmeaRWu

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 9, 2025

The Palisades Village Starbucks is unrecognizable after being ravaged by fire.

‘The Business Block’ in Pacific Palisades appears to be completely burned down. The Starbucks building was 100 years old, commissioned in 1924.

The fire has reached 11,000 acres, with over a thousand… pic.twitter.com/edhAMQldHX

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 8, 2025

*   *   * 

The most destructive wildfire in Los Angeles history has burned over 17,000 acres with zero containment, scorching the seaside area between Malibu and Santa Monica. The inferno has destroyed at least 2,000 building structures (damage estimates in the tens of billions of dollars) and forced 130,000 residents to evacuate their homes. Meanwhile, a new fire ignited overnight in the Hollywood Hills area.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s latest update on Thursday morning shows that the Palisades Fire has burned through more than 17,200 acres, while the Eaton Fire has expanded to 10,000. Both fires still have zero containment. 

Also, the Hurst fire has spread to nearly 900 acres, 10% of which are contained, while the Lidia Fire has burned 350 acres, 40% of which are contained. 

The newest, the Sunset Fire, was sparked on Wednesday night in Hollywood Hills and has grown to dozens of acres. 

Driving into LA and ANTOHER fire has started in the Hollywood Hills.

Apparently all fires from Pacific palisades to Altadena are still at 0% containment.

I can’t even keep up at this point 😩 pic.twitter.com/osef7288xz

— Savanah Hernandez (@sav_says_) January 9, 2025

BREAKING: Traffic is gridlock from people trying to evacuate the Sunset Fire in Hollywood, Ca pic.twitter.com/tTszIvKPPC

— TaraBull (@TaraBull808) January 9, 2025

NEW: The Hollywood area is completely gridlocked as residents rush to evacuate as the fire in the Hollywood Hills approaches.

An immediate evacuation order has been issued for residents on “Laurel Canyon Blvd to the west, Hollywood Blvd to the south, Cahuenga Blvd/101… pic.twitter.com/2ybea6eOkg

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 9, 2025

According to Los Angeles County Sheriff Robert Luna, at least 130,000 people are under evacuation warnings or orders due to the Palisades and Eaton fires. 

New drone shot from Pacific Palisades shows entire blocks of homes literally burned to the ground. The Palisades Fire alone could become the “costliest” fire in U.S. history.

Courtesy of @KitKarzen pic.twitter.com/L5z7mvdLTt

— Nahel Belgherze (@WxNB_) January 8, 2025

A new shortwave infrared satellite image by Maxar Technologies shows burning buildings by the Eaton fire in northeast Los Angeles. 

Imagery from Maxar also shows areas of Palisades fire.

Map of Fires 

Over 338,000 energy customers were without power as of early Thursday morning, including 181,000 in LA County. 

Not one word from LA Mayor Karen Bass about the situation. 

‘Do you owe citizens an apology for being absent whilst their homes were burning? Do you regret cutting the fire department’s budget?
@skydavidblevins questions the mayor of LA, Karen Bass, as she faces backlash regarding the California wildfires.https://t.co/Nkz8onjC7V pic.twitter.com/WwRwp6Imqz

— Sky News (@SkyNews) January 8, 2025

Many call for her to be recalled immediately for slashing the fire budgets and lack of leadership. 

Fire Chief complained to the LA Mayor last month about budget cuts limiting her dept. The funds were diverted to help migrants *** pic.twitter.com/BHp5hh3gVw

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) January 9, 2025

Joe Rogan’s LA fire warning six months ago…

LA Fires Predicted with incredible accuracy by Fireman who spoke to Joe Rogan 👀 pic.twitter.com/CgXHHdEwrI

— BAY AREA STATE OF MIND (@YayAreaNews) January 9, 2025

There are mounting fears that some of these fires are intentional…

This is Andrew Huberman first hand seeing arsonists light a fire in LA

I have been told by the LAPD that arson is a major issue in LA right now https://t.co/JxTP0pFoA4

— Shaun Maguire (@shaunmmaguire) January 9, 2025

“The LA fires look like Terrorism … These places are miles apart. … Are you supposed to believe that wind teleports a fire miles away but no where in between?” one X use said.

The LA fires look like Terrorism.

1. Palisades
2. Pasadena
3. ⁠Sunset
4. ⁠Studio City

These places are miles apart.

Are you supposed to believe that wind teleports a fire miles away but no where in between?

Trump will be President in just ~10 days.

There’s more to this. pic.twitter.com/ePptDDZDiS

— Sami Loyal (@samiloyal_) January 9, 2025

*Developing… 

On X Thursday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced that La Niña conditions have officially developed in the equatorial Pacific. This weather phenomenon has the potential to impact weather patterns across the globe, more specifically in the US, in the months ahead. 

“The wait is over and La Niña is officially here,” NOAA wrote on X. 

The wait is over and La Niña is officially here.

There’s a 59% chance La Niña will persist through February–April, followed by a 60% chance of neutral conditions in March–May, according to @NWSCPC.

Read our latest ENSO Blog for more details: https://t.co/LUhJb4jGub pic.twitter.com/iu4nWVWKcJ

— NOAA Climate.gov (@NOAAClimate) January 9, 2025

“La Niña conditions are present and are expected to persist through February-April 2025 (59% chance), with a transition to ENSO-neutral likely during March-May 2025 (60% chance),” the National Weather Service’s Climate Prediction Center wrote on X. 

La Niña conditions are present and are expected to persist through February-April 2025 (59% chance), with a transition to #ENSO-neutral likely during March-May 2025 (60% chance). A #LaNina Advisory is now in effect. https://t.co/5zlzaZ0D9Z pic.twitter.com/J3OSrwmH1w

— NWS Climate Prediction Center (@NWSCPC) January 9, 2025

NOAA meteorologist Michelle L’Heureux told Bloomberg, “La Niña has finally emerged,” adding, “It took its time, but we are there.”

L’Heureux said ocean temps dropped to 0.9F of a degree (0.5C) below normal across the parts of the Pacific tracked by the US.

Though La Niña is arriving later, meteorologists predicted the Pacific surface temps would cool…

• Sept. 2024: La Nina “Favored To Emerge In September-November” & “Persist Through January-March 2025”

La Niña is typically associated with warm and dry winter conditions across parts of the US…

… adding to drought concerns in California (plagued by devastating wildfires around LA County) and the southern US. 

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

A bipartisan group of senators, led by Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), has reintroduced legislation to make daylight saving time permanent year-round. The proposal is opposed by a coalition of sleep medicine organizations, which advocate for “locking the clock” but in standard time mode.

The legislation, called the Sunshine Protection Act, was unanimously passed in the Senate in 2022 during the 117th Congress but it stalled in the House. Now, Scott and 15 other senators have re-introduced the bill, describing it as a common-sense approach that will simplify the lives of U.S. households, citing President-elect Donald Trump’s backing for an end to the practice of twice-yearly clock changes.

“I hear from Americans constantly that they are sick and tired of changing their clocks twice a year – it’s an unnecessary, decades-old practice that’s more of an annoyance to families than benefit to them,” Scott said in a Jan. 8 statement.

“I’m excited to have President Trump back in the White House and fully on board to LOCK THE CLOCK so we can get this good bill passed and make this common-sense change that will simplify and benefit the lives of American families.”

While Trump has advocated for locking the clock, it’s unclear whether the president-elect is in favor of making daylight saving time or standard time permanent. In March 2019, he said he was fine with making daylight saving time permanent. In December 2024, he called for the elimination of daylight saving time, suggesting it’s standard time that he backs, a position aligned with several medical organizations.

The legislation proposed by Scott and the others would establish permanent daylight saving time, meaning clocks would no longer be turned back in the fall, resulting in later sunrises and sunsets throughout the winter. Current federal law allows states to exempt themselves from observing daylight saving time, with Arizona and Hawaii observing year-round standard time, resulting in more morning daylight in the winter months.

Advocates for permanent daylight saving time argue it would eliminate the need to turn clocks back in the fall and provide extended sunlight in the evening, offering more opportunities for outdoor activities.

“Every winter folks in Washington state despair at the prospect of losing an hour of precious sunlight when we are forced off Daylight Saving Time,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said in a statement.

“This is about public health, it is about our economy, and it’s about just putting a little more light in families’ lives so they can spend time together, outdoors, in the sunshine.”

Opponents of daylight saving time, such as the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM), counter that standard time is better for both health and safety. AASM explains in a position statement issued on Jan. 1 that there are numerous benefits to a permanent switch to standard time, including better sleep, less stress, and fewer car accidents.

The AASM position, which is endorsed by nearly two dozen organizations including including the American College of Chest Physicians and the National Safety Council, argues that standard time aligns more closely with the daily rhythms of the body’s natural clock. The groups say that increasing exposure to morning darkness and evening light—which is what daylight saving time does—harms sleep-wake patterns.

“Permanent, year-round standard time is the best choice to most closely match our circadian sleep-wake cycle,” said lead author of the AASM’s position statement, Dr. M. Adeel Rishi, pulmonology, sleep medicine, and critical care specialist at the Mayo Clinic in Eau Claire, Wisconsin.

“Daylight saving time results in more darkness in the morning and more light in the evening, disrupting the body’s natural rhythm.”

Research cited by the AASM highlights acute health impacts of daylight saving time, including a higher risk of strokes, increased hospital admissions, and elevated inflammatory markers, which indicate stress on the body. The group also references studies showing that traffic fatalities increase by as much as six percent in the days following the switch to daylight saving time, and human error-related medical events rise by 18 percent in the first week.

Some research cited in the position statement suggests an increase in fatalities among school-aged children during daylight saving time, likely due to low-light conditions in the morning when children are traveling to school.

Although the AASM’s position statement outlines a range of adverse impacts associated with daylight saving time, it also highlights the harmful effects of the twice-yearly transitions, linking them to sleep disruptions, mood disturbances, and even an increased incidence of suicide.

The AASM position statement also acknowledges a report suggesting that daylight saving time may be associated with decreased crime rates due to increased evening light. The group notes that several other studies have indicated a modest decrease in the risk of car accidents.

However, the AASM argues that the preponderance of evidence indicates the chronic effects of daylight saving time are detrimental to human physiology, health, performance, safety, and even the economy.

Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times,

Texas lawmakers pre-filed around two dozen border and immigration bills ahead of the state’s 2025 legislative session aiming at securing its border with Mexico without relying on the federal government’s progress in tackling illegal immigration.

With some 11 million non-citizens entering the United States under the Biden administration, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and the Republican-led legislature began crafting laws to address what they considered an invasion of the country caused by lax border policies.

While President-elect Donald Trump has vowed a mass deportation operation and praised the state’s efforts to stop illegal immigration through Operation Lone Star (OLS), it appears the GOP-led legislature isn’t taking any chances that future presidents will protect the Texas-Mexico border.

Abbott initiated OLS to counter a rise in illegal immigration, the illegal drug trade, and human smuggling that rose sharply in 2021.

The operation pays for Texas troopers and National Guard members at the border as well as the prosecution and jailing of illegal immigrants, primarily for trespassing and evading arrest.

With the state’s 89th legislative session convening on Jan. 14, notable Texas border bills include renewed attempts to create a Texas Division of Homeland Security, a Texas Border Protection Unit, and bills aiding the incoming president’s efforts to secure the border.

Other bills focus on restricting public assistance for illegal immigrants, while HB 219 and HB 89 would require proof of citizenship to register to vote in Texas.

Texas Sovereignty

The Texas Border Protection Unit Act, HB 354, is similar to HB 20, which was introduced in the 2023 legislative session and died on a point of order. Filed by Republican Rep. Brisco Cain, the bill would give law enforcement officers the authority to arrest those crossing the Texas-Mexico border illegally, just like federal border patrol agents.

Law enforcement in the unit would also have the authority to “deter persons attempting to cross the border unlawfully” with non-lethal crowd control measures.

The bill states the “security of Texans and the sovereignty of this state” have been threatened by transnational cartels, which are trafficking fentanyl and illegal immigrants.

The unit would also manage the construction and maintenance of the state’s border wall and physical barriers, such as buoys in the Rio Grande and razor wire.

“Voters have given us a clear mandate: secure the border and support Trump in achieving these priorities,” Cain told The Epoch Times via a text message.

Cain said even with Trump’s commitment to securing the border, Texas has a constitutional duty to protect its citizens.

“Federal measures can often fall short or fail to address the unique challenges we face as a border state,” he stated.

HB 354 would ensure that the “safety and sovereignty of Texans” aren’t left to the mercy of future administrations, he said.

State Republican Sen. Bob Hall filed Senate Bill (SB) 135 in a second attempt to establish the Texas Division of Homeland Security. It is similar to HB 127, which failed to progress and died in the 2023 legislative session.

The division would coordinate border security and related crimes within the state and with federal law enforcement.

Hall also filed SB 81, which would give Texas DPS officers the authority to arrest and deport people to Mexico who enter Texas illegally.

It would give law enforcement the power to arrest and prosecute criminals attempting to traffic drugs and illegal immigrants.

ICE Agreements

Republicans are also introducing legislation that would require sheriffs to cooperate with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

SB 658 and SB 134 would mandate that sheriffs request and, if offered, enter into written agreements with ICE to help protect the border.

These partnerships are known as 287(g) agreements and would help supply extra manpower and logistical support to crackdown on illegal immigration, and aid mass deportation under Trump.

SB 658 would require sheriffs in counties with a population of 250,000 or more to request and possibly enter into written agreements with ICE to “enforce federal immigration law.”

The measure would also set up a grant fund to reimburse sheriffs for additional costs associated with cooperating with ICE.

SB 134 is broader in scope, requiring all county sheriffs to apply for an agreement with ICE or face a loss in state grant money.

Similarly, HB 1491 would require county commissioners to apply and enter into agreements with ICE if offered to enforce federal immigration laws.

Illegal Immigrant Children

Two other house bills deal with protecting children crossing from Mexico into Texas unlawfully.

Under the proposed HB 256, the state Department of Public Safety (DPS) would conduct rapid DNA tests on those entering the United States illegally who are detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and are suspected of misrepresenting a family relationship.

Likewise, HB 1072 would require OLS officers to fingerprint and interview children unlawfully crossing the border if there is reason to believe they are being trafficked or in danger.

Trump’s incoming border czar Tom Homan recently pledged to help locate children who have lost touch with federal authorities after crossing into the United States during the Biden administration. Estimates put the number of such children at more than 300,000, according to an August 2024 report by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General.

Legal Challenge

After hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants arrived at the U.S. southern border, Abbott in 2024 invoked the invasion clause of the United States and Texas constitutions to justify the state’s ongoing border operations.

The idea of state sovereignty was also behind Texas’s SB 4, which became law in March of 2024 and has remained in limbo pending an appeals court ruling.

Under SB 4, illegal immigrants who enter Texas outside legal ports of entry could be arrested on Class B misdemeanor charges and sentenced to up to six months in jail. Repeat offenders could face second-degree felony charges and sentences of up to 20 years in prison.

Judges are granted leeway under SB 4 to drop the charges if the illegal immigrants agree to return to Mexico.

U.S. Department of Justice and civil rights groups sued to stop SB 4, saying immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government, not the states.

In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Arizona v. United States that federal law preempted state law when it comes to immigration.

Texas is betting the decision could be reversed under a more conservative high court.

The U.S. Supreme Court briefly allowed SB 4 to go into effect in 2024 before sending it back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which once again placed it on hold pending a ruling on the case.

President Biden plans to punt the decision on whether to lift the official terror designation for Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) to President-elect Donald Trump.

Senior US officials speaking to The Washington Post on Thursday said HTS “must demonstrate they have made a clean break with extremist groups, in particular Al-Qaeda before the label can be lifted.” An unnamed official noted that “Actions will speak louder than words.” The report reads:

The Biden administration has decided to maintain the terrorist designation of Syria’s new Islamist rulers for the remainder of President Joe Biden’s tenure, leaving a critical decision about Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham and its leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, to the incoming Trump administration, said three U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

While Washington had already quickly lifted the $10 million bounty which had long been on HTS leader Abu Mohammad al-Julani’s head (or Ahmed al- Sharaa), the terror designation will remain.

The jihadist group which replaced the Assad government after the longtime leader’s fall on December 8 (after which Assad showed up in Moscow) has been lobbying Western capitals to drop US-led sanctions.

Sanctions have decimated the economy, resulted in runaway inflation, and currently major cities have merely an hour of electricity a day amid winter conditions.

But the terror designation is likely to ensure that the bulk of sanctions remain on Syria, which chiefly hurts the already suffering and impoverished common population.

Ironically, the United States had covertly supported radical groups like HTS from the start of the war, which was ultimately a regime change operation imposed from outside.

One regional source reviews the following background:

Days after the fall of the Syrian government and the rise of HTS, Sharaa called on foreigners who joined HTS to receive Syrian citizenship, saying they are “part of the movement that led to the downfall of Assad and should be celebrated.”

As part of the US-backed covert war on the former Syrian government, ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi dispatched his deputy Abu Mohammad al-Julani – Sharaa’s nom de guerre – and a group of extremist fighters from Iraq to Syria in August 2011 to establish the Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda’s official branch in Syria.

Sharaa’s group, which he would later rebrand as HTS, carried out suicide bombing attacks in Damascus in December 2011 and January 2012 before announcing their existence. Thousands of Salafist religious extremists from dozens of countries, including Britain, Belgium, France, China, Chechnya, Tunisia, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Saudi Arabia, joined Sharaa in the fight against Damascus.

A big question for Syria is: what’s next? It could be headed toward being a failed state, with no infrastructure, reconstruction, or resources… or there is also likelihood of more civil wars and infighting. There’s a chance, even if remote, of the country being revived, with future elections. However HTS has declared there won’t be elections for at least four years. 

Also, Israel occupies territory in the south, the US occupies oil and gas areas in the northeast, and Turkey controls much of the north near Aleppo. The situation isn’t look good for the time being.

Via American Greatness,

An Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) advisor has been caught on hidden camera admitting that the outgoing Biden administration is funneling billions of taxpayer dollars to climate organizations as a hedge against the incoming Trump administration.

Brent Efron who is a special advisor for implementation for the EPA, was recorded by Project Veritas bragging about sending tens of billions of dollars in grants to climate nonprofits as “an insurance policy” against Trump’s promises to rein in government spending.

Efron exhibits zero shame as he laughingly equates the frantic effort to get as much money as possible to climate-related allies as “throwing gold bars off the Titanic.”

When asked where that money is going, Efron responds, “Nonprofits, states, tribes,” explaining that the effort would continue, “until the Trump people come in and tell us we cannot give out money.”

BREAKING: @EPA Advisor Admits ‘Insurance Policy’ Against Trump is Funneling Billions to Climate Organizations, “We’re Throwing Gold Bars off the Titanic”

“It was an insurance policy against Trump winning.”

“Get the money out as fast as possible before they [Trump… pic.twitter.com/eaAihuNvAh

— Project Veritas (@Project_Veritas) December 3, 2024

Efron refers to the Inflation Reduction Act as “Biden’s climate law” and describes how the EPA uses aligned nonprofits to implement climate change policy at the local level because, “they’re safer from Republicans taking the money away.”

Efron also describes how he and his colleagues will likely continue working right up until Trump is inaugurated in order to push out as much money as possible to climate allies.

He’s also considering how his efforts to loot the treasury on behalf of these climate nonprofits could translate into a cushy job with one of them when the new administration takes over.

The outgoing Biden administration hasn’t been shy about shoveling as many taxpayer dollars as possible to its favored friends and lobbyists before President-elect Trump can take office on Jan 20.

The Project Veritas report prompted a pointed response from Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) who described Washington as having become empowered to the point that it’s become “dangerous and destructive,” and calling for a return to constitutional government.

The U.S. government is actively working to undermine the American people

We’ve empowered Washington to the point that it’s become dangerous and destructive

It’s too big, too expensive, and too powerful

We must return to constitutional government https://t.co/JW36FWqPYh

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) December 3, 2024

Blackwater USA founder Erik Prince revealed in a recent interview on the Sean Spicer Show that President-elect Donald Trump’s first administration was closer to securing a groundbreaking agreement with Denmark to take control of Greenland than previously known. Prince’s comments come as Trump ramps up his calls to acquire the Arctic landmass, highlighting its strategic military and economic advantages.

SEAN SPICER: From a strategic standpoint how important is Greenland to the United States?

ERIK PRINCE: It is an enormous amount of mineral potential. It is of significant interest to the Chinese Communist Party. And so I think what Trump had proposed last time, last administration, was effectively a 50-50 rev share where the US would take over the overhead costs because it costs Denmark tens of billions of dollars a year for the policing, security, and administration of Greenland. The US would take that on, but then it would basically split the revenue of any mining or energy development together with Denmark. I think it’s a good deal for Denmark and a good deal for the United States.

SEAN SPICER: Does Denmark view themselves right now as potentially being under attack by the Chinese or under threat from them?

ERIK PRINCE: No, but it’s the same CCP approach of show up with a lot of money, buy a lot of influence, and create presence—literally in our attic—that the Canadian government doesn’t do nearly as much of effective patrolling of all those waters and areas. And so, as a defensive play and as a good opportunity for the United States to maximize the reach and the economic development in our own hemisphere, it makes perfect sense. Most importantly, there’s some fantastic back country and helicopter skiing.

SEAN SPICER: I knew there’d be a silver lining, but I mean in all honesty I just can’t imagine Denmark saying oh yeah yeah we’ll give up 50% or 20% even of our sovereign territory because you guys want.

ERIK PRINCE: They were almost ready to do the deal last time. Yes, and because Denmark—I don’t believe Denmark doesn’t come anywhere near to the 2% that they’re supposed to be spending on NATO. Maybe it’s just a false flag by the president to make Denmark spend their 2% on NATO. But it’s an interesting approach and I hope he sees it through.

SEAN SPICER: If you had to make a prediction whether Denmark agrees to some kind of a deal, where would you put it?

ERIK PRINCE: Above 50%. Remember, you know, think about, um, you know, they called the purchase of Alaska Seward’s Folly and it turned out to be absolutely a brilliant purchase. I think it came out to two or three cents per acre in terms of value. Um, the United States, you can imagine, where would we be without Alaska? So maybe in five years or 10 years, we’ll be looking back, where would we be without Greenland?