Authored by Ben Sellers via Headline USA (emphasis ours),

In a video posted to his YouTube account Saturday, “Dilbert” creator Scott Adams admitted that those who refused to submit to the deadly coronavirus vaccine “appear to be right” based on the latest evidence.

Instead of getting the gene-altering jabs, so-called anti-vaxxers held out for a less virulent strain of the virus to arrive and deliver natural immunity, mimicking the way all earlier vaccines worked prior to the mRNA breakthroughs by Moderna and Pfizer in late 2020.

“Now you’ve got natural immunity and you have no vaccination in you,” Adams noted.

“Can we all agree that that was the winning path?” he continued. “The smartest, happiest people are the ones who didn’t get the vaccination, and they’re still alive.”

As is often the case with comedians, Adams’ tone makes it difficult to discern the extent to which his video may be tonge-in-cheek.

He has developed a sizable following on Twitter, where he largely supports conservative causes and positions, but controversially broke rank with many of his followers in coming out strongly in favor of the vaccines.

The dilemma is a familiar one within MAGA’s anti-vax subculture, where even once-sacred cows like former President Donald Trump and Fox News host Sean Hannity, both of whom crowed about the importance of the vaccine, have been left tarnished, to an extent, by the science.

Adams’s sarcastic intonation seemed to suggest that the recent video was a nod to his many online critics, more a genuflection than a sincere admission of error.

Indeed, since being proven wrong by the data, he has regularly pushed the idea that both sides in the debate use faulty reasoning and information to reach their conclusions.

After saying that he didn’t want to “put any shade … whatsoever” on his acceptance that the vaccines were a mistake, Adams them proceeded in the video to reiterate his defense that drinking the vax Kool-Aid seemed like the right thing to do at the time.

He also downplayed the fact that warning signs about the vaccine’s risks were present almost immediately, along with strong evidence suggesting they had no efficacy in preventing the transmission or contraction of the virus.

Instead, Adams suggested that opponents were simply invested emotionally in a contrarian worldview.

“The anti-vaxxers, I think, were really just distrustful of big companies and big government,” he said. “That’s never wrong.”

Adams then suggested he was the victim for going out on a limb and having the courage to make himself a vaccine guinea pig based on his informed decision-making.

“All of my fancy analytics got me to a bad place,” he said, beckoning back toward a white board that showed a graph of his cost–benefit analysis. “All of your heuristics—‘Don’t trust these guys, it’s obvious’—totally work.”

Naturally, he was met with more backlash online after posting the video.

You will be missed. https://t.co/BZ7S2WKfX7

— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) January 22, 2023

While invoking the psychological concept of heuristics—essentially, the idea that vaccine skeptics relied on their preconceived beliefs and opinions to form a snap judgment,  Adams’s fallacy lies in another clinical concept—the idea of Type I versus Type II errors in hypothesis testing.

The term comes from statistical analyses, in which there exists both a control/null hypothesis and a treatment/alternative hypothesis of some kind, with researchers calculating the probability, based on a given sample, that one’s assumptions are true.

Since there is always a degree of uncertainty, a Type I error results in the rejection of a hypothesis that is, in fact, true. A Type II error result from acceptance of a false hypothesis.

While it seems needlessly complicated due to the use of variables and other jargon, humans instinctively calculate these sorts of risk assessments with every decision we make: Is it better to try something experimental that might offer some unknown benefit or to follow the status quo and risk missing out on something better?

For Adams and his pro-jab cabal, however, there was no such dichotomy. Instead, the vaccine was an all-or-none proposition, and any who reached a different conclusion were not only wrong by default, but evil, selfish, ignorant rubes who rightfully deserved to be punished.

By contrast, vaccine skeptics never demanded that anyone follow their decisions, recognizing the chance of error that existed on either side of the bell curve.

But in reality, another variable was added into the mix—the possibility that the vaccine not only had no effect, but that it had an actively adverse effect on different segments of the population, including healthy young adults and children.

All scientific experiments need a control group, and had everyone agreed to take the jab, we might never know if it worked or not relative to natural immunity. Millions of people would still be getting boosted mindlessly, assuming that the decline in COVID cases was proof positive that Big Pharma had saved the day.

Sadly, the scientific reality is that, as a so-called anti-vax movement, those who adopted the live-and-let-live mentality of staying out of other people’s medical decisions also failed.

Since, as Adams readily acknowledged, the null hypothesis proved true in the end, a truly equivalent situation would have seen anti-vaxxers aggressively attacking those who chose the vaccine and threatening to curtail their rights on the basis that vaccination was a social menace that put pure-bloods at a greater risk.

And let’s not forget the collateral damage to various sectors of the economy after vaccine mandates led to shutdowns and supply-chain failures that led to inflation—which we’re all still paying for.

But as Adams will surely agree, hindsight is 20–20, and all we can do is to take the lessons learned and apply them when the next scandemic comes along. Right?

Ben Sellers is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/realbensellers.

Salesforce Inc shares are up 5% in premarket trading after WSJ reported activist investor Elliott Management had made a multi-billion dollar investment in the cloud-based software firm. 

The activist investor has taken a stake as the business software giant slashed about 10% of its headcount, or about 8,000 employees, and reduced back office space over mounting macroeconomic headwinds. 

“Salesforce is one of the pre-eminent software companies in the world, and having followed the company for nearly two decades, we have developed a deep respect for [Co-Chief Executive] Marc Benioff and what he has built,” Jesse Cohn, managing partner at Elliott, said.

“We look forward to working constructively with Salesforce to realize the value befitting a company of its stature,” Cohn continued. He has previously served on the boards of Twitter, eBay, and Citrix. 

As of Friday’s close, the San Francisco company had a market capitalization of $151 billion, down from $303 billion in November of 2021. 

The activist stake will pressure Salesforce and Marc Benioff, the company’s co-chief executive, to achieve greater profitability. In October, Starboard Value LP bought a stake in Salesforce. The activist investor is very successful at helping companies achieve operational efficiency and margin improvement.

Perhaps one of Salesforce’s overhangs is the massive influx of hiring it has done over the last several years. The latest filings show the company had about 80,000 employees globally, up from 49,000 as of Jan. 31, 2020. 

When Benioff laid off employees earlier this month, he told them in a letter, “… hired too many people leading into this economic downturn we’re now facing, and I take responsibility for that.”

WSJ noted, “Elliott is known for taking on tech companies and others and forcing changes that also include sales and executive shake-ups.”

With two major activists in Salesforce, it wouldn’t shock us if more layoffs were ahead — and it has been the season of tech layoffs as a slowdown in the industry has led tech giants like Amazon and Google to reduce headcount. 

The exodus from Seattle looks like it’s officially on. 

No sooner did we prep a report indicating that Amazon is going to be letting an office lease in Seattle expire for only the second time ever, we also come across news that the Nike Store – which has been open for 26 years on Sixth Avenue and Pike Street in Seattle – has shut down. 

The Nike store has “shut its doors for good”, according to the Daily Mail, right after its neighbor down the street, Regal Cinemas, also announced they would be rejecting the lease to the Meridian 16 multiplex one block away. 

“I’m heartbroken,” one resident told the Seattle Times. “Pretty bummed,” added another customer, who said he shopped at the store on a weekly basis and that it would take him “over an hour” to get to Nike’s new location. 

Business writer Paul Roberts for the Seattle Times noted about the closure: “Its exit sounds an ominous note for a downtown that hasn’t been able to catch its stride since the pandemic.”

For the rest of us, it’s confirmation of what we have all seen with our own two eyes over the last half-decade: U.S. cities are crumbling under the weight of high taxes, combative stances with law enforcement and far left liberal policies. 

Jeffrey Rosen, a commercial real estate broker at Seattle Pacific Realty who specializes in retail, told The Times: “Downtown is a mixed bag. There’s some recovery going on — and there’s some folding up and going away going on as well.”

Nike, meanwhile, hasn’t shared precisely why it was closing its location. It’s befuddling to some customers who noted that the store “always has a line outside of it”. 

We can take a guess. As the Mail noted, “2022 mark[ed] the deadliest year for the homeless population in King County”, with 310 deaths in the homeless community, up 65% from 2021, including 18 homicides and 160 fentanyl-related overdoses.

General crime in the city has also stayed high, with 285 rapes, 1,654 robberies and 3,258 aggravated assaults being reported in 2022 through November. Those numbers were on a par to match the year prior. 

Retail vacancy in Seattle sits at 13.5%, the report says, up from 2% in 2019. 

Authored by Toby Young via DailySceptic.org,

If you haven’t signed the Free Speech Union’s petition urging the CEO of ITV not to fire Jeremy Clarkson, please do so now.

Meanwhile, Clarkson has written a blistering attack on the woke takeover of Britain in yesterday’s Sunday Times.

Here’s how it begins:

My son came over for a father-and-son pre-football supper the other day, and as he fussed over the Aga, making a particularly fine stir fry, we laughed about what innocuous word had been banned that day and who’d been cancelled. And then, after a pause, he said with a solemn face, “You do know there’s a war going on, don’t you?”

He wasn’t talking about Ukraine. He was talking about a full-on left-wing campaign to unstitch and burn the fabric of Britain. And the genius is that no one really knows that what they’re doing is serious. We laugh as they change the name of the Sir Francis Drake Primary School to something less slavey. We think it’s all a big joke. But it isn’t.

Think about what typically happens in a military operation and then look what the woke left has done here. It’s seized control of our television and radio stations to such an extent that last week Sophie Raworth said, on the BBC News at Six, with a straight face, “And over now to our LGBT and diversity correspondent …”

And TV drama? Unaffected? Right, and when was the last time you saw a fictional police force hunting a gang of Muslim extremists? It’s always the far right. And it’s the same story in comedy. Say anything you like about Boris or Rishi and the laughter track is turned up to 11. Make a joke about she/him pronouns or Greta Thunberg and they’ll blow a piece of tumbleweed across the stage.

In sport we sometimes have three women doing the punditry at a men’s football match, and if anyone remarks on this on Twitter, they are immediately singled out for the india-rubber treatment. And who’s doing the erasing? Who’s making the rules? That’s just it. We don’t have a clue. What we do know is that, having taken control of the television stations, without a shot being fired, they turned their attention, like any conquering army, to the schools. Here they went fully Pol Pot, doing a comprehensive year-zero job on the curriculum so that kids would know their parents were all racists. Apart from those with “unconscious bias”. Who were racists as well.

You probably think, because you don’t know this war is going on, that when you drop little Johnny off at the school gates he’s going to learn the nine times table that day. No, he isn’t. He’s learning that he might actually be a girl, which is why there are probably tampon dispensers in the boys’ lavatories.

With all this in place, they set about the police, and here they’ve done a tremendous job. Because, so far as I can tell, almost all the officers in the Met — apart from the terrifying number of sexual perverts — are now more wide awake than a frightened fox.

When some young people with green hair glue themselves to the road, large numbers of officers are dispatched to stand around looking at them. And they are only ever removed from the tarmac if they promise to go immediately to the nearest art gallery and throw some soup at a painting.

Has Clarkson been red-pilled by his recent punishment beating at the hands of the progressive thought police?

Worth reading in full.

Here’s Paul Joseph Watson’s take…

And don’t forget to sign the petition!

Days after widespread reports that Russia had erected Pantsir-S1 anti-air defense systems on top of some key buildings in Moscow, which triggered speculation that Russia is expecting more attacks from Ukraine on its soil, the Kremlin ramped up anti-air exercises outside Moscow.

The defense ministry confirmed in a Saturday statement, “In the Moscow region, a training session was held with the personnel of the anti-aircraft missile brigade of the Western Military District on repelling air attacks on important military industrial and administrative facilities.”

The combat exercise was centered on operation of a S-300 anti-aircraft missile system. “As they marched, soldiers repelled an attack by a mock enemy sabotage group on a military convoy,” the statement continued.

“Under the cover of a smoke screen, the air defense convoy was able to get out of the attack and continue fulfilling its tasks,” the defense ministry said in reference to the 150 soldiers that participated. 

Russia has suffered several drone attacks on its soil coming from Ukraine, including multiple strikes in past months on Engels military airfield in the Saratov region, which lies 600km deep inside Russia.

While Moscow itself hasn’t seen any such ariel strikes, there has been speculation that key facilities in the region have been hit with sabotage attacks – but this has remained unconfirmed from the Russian side, which is unlikely to admit such attacks when they do occur.

⚡️Another “Pantsir-S1” was placed on the roof of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Moscow. pic.twitter.com/8mKzNF8CJY

— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) January 21, 2023

As Russian forces make gains this month in the east and south of Ukraine, particularly in the southern Zaporizhzhia region as well as near city of Bakhmut in Donetsk, it appears the Kremlin could be making preparations for possible counter-attacks directly on its soil, and as NATO countries deepen their involvement in the conflict.

Via The Cradle,

A Kurdish delegation representing the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) concluded a visit to Damascus on Friday after meeting with several representatives of the Syrian government over the prior few days, Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar reported.

The delegation was headed by the foreign relations chief of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), Badran Jia Kurd, and arrived in the capital on January 17. According to the report, the last few meetings did not result in anything significant, but the “prevailing impression” is that both sides are willing to continue along the path of dialogue, despite US warnings.

“These are preliminary understandings between the two sides, on things such as Syrian territorial integrity, the national flag, and the presidency of Bashar al-Assad,” it states.

It adds that Washington has repeatedly warned the SDF “not to engage in bilateral dialogue with the Syrian government [and not to] think of any military solutions with it,” even if the reconciliation process fails. This is based on the “realization that any military solution [between the two] may turn into a war of a civil and ethnic nature,” it adds, which could be referring to a potential outbreak of direct clashes between Turkish and Kurdish ground forces, or even Syrian and Turkish ground forces.

Nonetheless, sources have told the newspaper that the overall atmosphere of the visit to Damascus and the Kurdish-Syrian talks were “positive,” particularly for the SDF, which reportedly appreciated Syria’s firm position not to go forward with reconciliation until there is a clear and official Turkish intent to withdraw its military forces from the country.

“There is a consensus between the two sides on the need to maintain the course of dialogue while searching for points of convergence to take advanced steps in the future,” the sources were quoted to have said.

In the aftermath of the 18 January meeting between US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu, the SDF has expressed renewed fear over Turkey’s long-promised ground offensive.

These fears were reinforced by the joint US-Turkish statement released shortly after the meeting, vowing the continuation of Washington and Ankara’s fight against “Daesh, PKK, Al Qaeda, and all other terrorist organizations and their extensions.”

The Kurdish fears have also been exacerbated by the Turkish military bombardment and a significant escalation of tensions in Ain al-Arab and other areas across northern Syria, beginning on January 13 and persisting onwards. As a result, the SDF bombarded a Turkish base and the positions of Turkish-backed militants on January 20.

Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

In the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church convinced the commoners to buy indulgences to alleviate their sins. And they made a fortune in the process.

Similarly, today, our overlords—the mainstream media, central bankers, and their political allies—are working overtime to convince the commoners to pay for their alleged climate sins.

Enter carbon credits, government-issued permits that grant you the privilege to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide.

Although advocates promote them as a way to “save the environment,” in reality, carbon credits are nothing more than a devious mechanism to tax, regulate, and control you.

It’s not a coincidence that the most philosophically and ethically bent people are promoting them.

For example, at a recent World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, participants revealed and touted an “individual carbon footprint tracker.” It will track where people travel, how they travel, what they eat, and what they consume.

Carbon accounting is already creeping into many places, like Google Flights.

A federal carbon tax is already a reality in Trudeau’s Canada, and it’s causing the price of food and other goods and services to soar. But Canadians haven’t seen anything yet—the federal carbon tax will triple by 2030.

In short, there’s a growing push to implement the carbon credit scam worldwide. And that’s not a coincidence.

Remember, central banks only exist to harvest wealth from the populace through inflation and redirect it to the politically connected, an insidious practice known as seigniorage.

Fiat currency is the usual mechanism central banks use to perpetuate this fraud. They get most people to run on a hamster wheel most of their lives chasing after confetti money they create with no effort.

However, there is a limit to this process.

For example, the governments in Venezuela and Zimbabwe have debased their currencies to such an extent that they are worthless. They have squeezed as much wealth out of their populations through seigniorage as possible.

Governments in the US, Canada, the EU, and others still benefit from seigniorage, but they sense they are not getting as much juice from the squeeze as they used to. Price increases are hitting multi-decade highs, and the US dollar, the euro, and other fiat currencies are quickly losing their luster.

In other words, central banks are debasing fiat currencies to the point where they can no longer extract as much seigniorage as they used to. That presents bankrupt Western governments with a big financial problem and is why they need to find a new way to harvest wealth from their citizens.

That’s where carbon credits come in. They’re the new mechanism of seigniorage designed to transfer wealth from you to the politically connected.

The idea is to get people to run on the hamster wheel chasing carbon credits, an artificial construct governments create with no effort.

Think of it like this…

Imagine if Tony Soprano forced everyone in his neighborhood to buy “breathing credits” from him, which grant you the privilege to breathe a certain amount of air. And that, naturally, it would cost Tony Soprano nothing to create as many of these “breathing credits” as he wanted. He could also hand them out to his friends and others who did favors for him, creating a corrupt patronage system.

This is basically what governments plan to do with carbon credits. Except they are also gaslighting you by telling you they are helping save the planet. Without that patina of propaganda—which the media, academia, and the rest of the establishment reinforce—there’s a good chance the people would revolt.

What To Do

The foundation is being laid to create a totalitarian system to track, control, and tax carbon—an element that touches every activity of human life.

Carbon credits are merely a way for governments, central bankers, and their allies to control the populace and secure continued seigniorage as the fiat currency system flounders.

It’s the biggest scam since the indulgences of the Middle Ages.

The good news is that there is still time to fight back. The bad news is that there isn’t much time.

The most effective thing the average person can do is to not store their life savings in fiat currencies and thus starve governments of seigniorage. That way, central bankers and their allies cannot use inflation to siphon off your monetary energy to fund the carbon credit system and other aspects of their nefarious agenda.

In other words, don’t put your life savings into something that someone else can create with little or no effort.

How do you go about doing that?

I just released an urgent report with three specific steps anyone can take today.

Click here to download the PDF now.

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone,

Critics of the US empire have spent months compiling mountains of evidence showing that the empire knowingly provoked the war in Ukraine. Supporters of the US empire have spent months posting dog memes and accusing strangers of being paid by Putin. It’s clear who’s in the right.

So does everyone else in the world get a vote on whether their lives should be risked in an offensive to control who governs Crimea? Or will the Biden administration just be making that call on behalf of all living creatures?

It’s so crazy how the fate of everyone alive and everyone who could potentially be born in the future is riding on the way two governments choose to navigate a conflict in Ukraine, just because those two governments have most of the world’s nuclear weapons. It’s like two people in a bar getting into a brawl that kills everyone in their city. Nobody else in the world gets a vote on the decisions being made that could kill everyone alive and end humanity forever; just a few people within those two governments and their militaries.

❖

The US empire is telling Moscow “I’m the craziest motherfucker around, I’ll keep ramping up the brinkmanship looking you right in the eye and daring you to use nukes,” while telling the rest of the world “I am the voice of sanity that you should all look to for leadership.”

One of the empire’s faces is the virtuous upholder of freedom and democracy, while the other face puts on an intimidating show of viciousness like a prisoner biting off someone’s cheek in the prison yard. At least one of those faces is necessarily lying.

❖

Literally the only reason mainstream westerners are fine with the US empire’s nuclear brinkmanship with Russia is because most don’t understand it, and those who do understand it don’t think very hard about it. They avoid contemplating what nuclear war is and what it would mean.

Whenever I touch on this subject I get a bunch of replies like “Yeehaw! That’s right bitch, we’re standing up to Putin!” They’re not approaching the subject with anything like the gravity they would if they understood what’s happening and had seriously thought about what could be. They don’t understand how horrifyingly dangerous it is that the empire is considering backing a Crimea offensive, and they haven’t sincerely contemplated what it would be like for every living creature to die horribly and for no one else to ever be born again for all of time.

Whatever position you have on this whole conflict, you should be approaching the possibility of nuclear annihilation with the most profound solemnity imaginable, because it is without exaggeration the single worst thing that could possibly happen. Take it seriously, or be silent.

❖

If a nuclear war between Russia and NATO erupts, the answer to the question “Was it worth it?” will be a decisive “No.” Not just for people like me, but for everyone, no matter how sympathetic they are to the western power structure and no matter how much they hate Russia. If their answer isn’t “no” immediately, it will be their answer in a matter of hours. If people don’t immediately understand the horror that’s been unleashed upon our world and how nothing could possibly have been worth it, they will understand it in short order.

❖

The term Mutually Assured Destruction was first coined by Hudson Institute’s Donald Brennan in 1962, but he used it ironically, spelling out the acronym “MAD” in order to argue that it’s insane to hold weapons that can cause armageddon. These games of nuclear chicken are insane.

The argument for nukes is that the threat of their use wards off the large-scale conventional wars we saw in WWI and WWII, but that only works if the fear of their use deters conventional attacks. The US empire is getting more and more brazen with its proxy warfare against Russia.

It used to be undisputed conventional wisdom that hot warfare against Russia must be avoided at all costs because they’re a nuclear superpower. Now the idea of backing full-scale offensives to carve off pieces of the Russian Federation is gaining widespread mainstream traction. This disintegrates the uneasy stability that MAD is theoretically supposed to create, because MAD assumes the other side won’t be crazy enough to launch conventional offensives against a nuclear superpower due to fear of rapidly spiraling escalation into full-scale nuclear war.

If you’ve got two people pointing pistols at each other, an exchange of gunfire might be avoided for fear of retaliation. But if one of the gunmen breaks the standoff by walking toward the other holding a knife in his other hand, odds are the other guy pulls the trigger.

❖

I hate it when I get people saying “I hope we do nuke ourselves off the map, we’re horrible.” It’s not okay for a few idiots to be playing games with every life on this planet. Just because you’re unhappy with life here doesn’t mean all the innocents around the world are, doesn’t mean the animals are, the bugs, the trees. Your disaffected feelings are not a valid reason not to fight this thing tooth and claw. Keep your omnicidal ideations to yourself.

❖

Westerners frame the idea of nations like Russia and China “attacking their neighbors” as though that’s somehow less moral than the US attacking nations on the other side of the planet who cannot possibly pose any threat to US national security. At least Russia can make an argument that its invasion of Ukraine was in its national security interests due to US/NATO militarization there, and China could make similar arguments if it ever attacks Taiwan. US wars are done solely to defend US planetary domination, not the US.

❖

Liberals are all about examining privilege except when it comes to western privilege. Then they’re more than happy to blow up everything and everyone for their belief in their inherent ideological superiority and their right to rule over every single country on earth.

❖

Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp are no longer designating the neo-Nazi Azov Regiment as a “dangerous organization.” To be clear, nothing has actually changed about the Azov Regiment. It’s still the same people with the same ideology. All that changed is the Official Narrative.

For years and years, up until just last year, the mass media had no problem acknowledging that Ukraine has a Nazi problem and calling Azov neo-Nazis what they are. All that changed is we moved into an information ecosystem of aggressive war propaganda.

No amount of PR rebranding will magically transform Azov neo-Nazis into wholesome moderates. You can change Kentucky Fried Chicken to KFC, but it’s still the same stuff in the bucket.

*  *  *

My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube, throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal, or buying an issue of my monthly zine. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

Tucker Carlson provides an excellent 12 minute report about the CIA’s removal of President Kennedy and President Nixon. I recommend that you watch it 2 or 3 times until it sinks in and forward it to all of your friends and relatives. There is nowhere else  you can get so much solid and important information in 12 minutes.

Carlson believes that Biden, no longer useful to the establishment, is currently undergoing removal.

I have reported the truth about the removal of Presidents Kennedy and Nixon from office for decades.  It was thrilling to me to see after a half century Tucker Carlson give the same explanations to such a large audience.  If Americans could only wake up and become involved it might be possible to save our country and the liberty of Americans.

President John F. Kennedy was murdered by the CIA and US Joint Chiefs of Staff once he realized that the government he headed was not the real government.  His predecessor President Eisenhower, a 5-star general, warned about the threat to democratic government posed by the military/industrial complex.  President Kennedy intended to do something about it while the president still had some power, but he was struck down before he could do more than fire CIA Director Allen Dulles and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Lyman Lemnitzer.  President Kennedy wasn’t able to get rid of General Lemnitzer, who transitioned to Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Both Dulles and Lemnitzer are suspected of directing the plot against Kennedy’s life.

President Nixon was the best informed and best respected abroad president of any in US history.  He kept in touch with foreign leaders and was well informed about historical and current events.  But he also, like Kennedy and Trump, over estimated the power of the president.

Nixon incurred the wrath, as I once again reported on January 19 of the military/security complex with his arms control agreements with the Soviet Union and his opening to China.  The assassination of  President Kennedy was so obviously an in-house murder, covered up by the CIA’s media whores and the Warren Commission, that the CIA dared not murder a second president.  Instead, the CIA saw that one of its operatives was placed as a journalist at the Washington Post, a long-time CIA asset, never a newspaper, to head the “Watergate” investigation of President Nixon which was used to drive him from office despite Nixon being reelected by the largest margin in US history.

Donald Trump, being a real estate mogul, knew nothing of Washington or who really rules it.

By declaring his intention of normalizing relations with Russia, he blindly took on the CIA and the subterranean rulers of the US.  

And again the media was used to get rid of him:  “Russiagate,” two impeachment attempts, “January 6 Insurrection,” and now “Documents gate.”

The President isn’t even protected by the Secret Service.  As the tourist video clearly shows, the Secret Service men along the side of President Kennedy’s open limo in Dallas were called away by a Secret Service superior.  The video shows the resistance of one of the Secret Service agents to the order.  Once the Secret Service agents were removed, the video shows that Kennedy was killed from a bullet from in front that blew out the back of his head. The video shows his wife reaching out on the back of the limo to get the back of his blown away head.

Despite this clear cut undeniable evidence  the Warren Commission ruled that Kennedy was shot from behind by Oswald, the patsy that the CIA had lined up to take the blame. Before Oswald could talk or be questioned he was killed in police custody by Jack Ruby  (Jacob Leon Rubensein), a person whose presence is inexplicable,  who was permitted by the police to be armed next to Oswald.

The bulk of the insouciant American population fell for this most improbable of all accounts, but many intelligent people did not.  

So the CIA did not dare murder Nixon physically. They used their Washington Post asset to murder him politically, as they used media to get rid of Donald Trump.

Americans who think they live in a democracy are out to lunch. Americans, so easily fooled time and again, are the reason we have lost our country and the freedom and the hope that it once represented in the world.

How many Americans understand that they no longer live in a free country,  that they are the ruled subjects of they know not who? Voting is a cloak, a deception.  No one the people prefer can be elected to the office of president.  If, like Trump, he gets there unexpected, he is removed.

The founder of American civil liberty, Thomas Jefferson, warned us that freedom cannot exist more than 200 years before it has to be refreshed by bloody revolution. He overestimated the life of freedom.  

Over the course of my life the meaning of freedom has changed.  It no longer means what the Founding Fathers, today denounced as racists, meant, which was self-rule and freedom from oppressive government. Today freedom is the freedom of blacks to rob stores without prosecution,  the freedom of the government and its media whores to censor and suppress truth, free expression, and free association, the freedom of government to arrest and imprison people who exercise their civil liberties as “insurrectionists,” the freedom of government and its media whores to brand truth-tellers as “threats to democracy” who are guilty of spreading “misinformation,” the freedom to take away the medical licenses of doctors who saved lives by using medicines banned by Big Pharma’s treatment protocols.

People born in recent decades have no idea how off the wall this is to someone who lived in the real America in the past.  When my  generation passes, there will be no one alive who knows what America once was.

Covid supply chain snarls turned millions of Americans into “preppers” overnight. The run on toilet paper, food, guns, ammunition, and other essential items for survival pushed millions to consider preparedness for a crisis.

Remember all those old-school preppers? The media used to refer to them as “extreme” and even called them “tin-foil hat conspiracy” folks, but during the shutdowns, those folks were right, and the mainstream media got it wrong. 

The next shortage underway is eggs. Readers have seen our notes on supermarkets nationwide running out of eggs. The egg shortage is so severe that last week the US Customs and Border Protection reported that egg smuggling from Mexico erupted. 

And why is that? Well, a dozen Grade A eggs in the US have topped $4.25 at supermarkets. In Mexico, a 30 count of eggs is about $3.40. 

US egg prices have topped the national average gasoline per gallon price at the pump. 

As a result of the egg crisis, internet search trends on Google show Americans are panic searching where to find egg-laying hens for their backyard. 

The search trend “where to buy chickens near me” erupted to a near multi-decade high. 

“Buy chickens near me” searches explode across the US. 

Besides the Covid spike, “how to raise chickens” has spiked to levels not seen in a decade. 

Over the last several years, food insecurity has pushed many Americans to create ‘little backyard farms’- something their parents or grandparents did more than half a century ago. Living off the land was standard decades ago, but as metropolises sprung up, people relied more on a corporation (or even the government) to provide food. 

Soaring distrust in government and corporations had transformed many into preppers following the pandemic shutdowns when some supplies were impossible to find. People don’t want to be left empty-handed when the next crisis arises. This has led to a new generation of preppers and the normalization of being prepared.