Government Authorizes This Is Pure Form Of Evil Earth Congressional Black Caucus & Squad Members U.S.A.

Why Most America Want And Keep Vote For A Democratic Socialism Vs. Communism In USA Socialism and Communism both place much value on creating a more equal society and removing class privilege. The biggest difference between them is that socialism is compatible with liberty and democracy, while communism depends on an authoritarian state to create an “equal society” that denies basic liberties. Political Independents Who They Are, What They Think. ? Independents often are portrayed as political free agents with the potential to alleviate the nation’s rigid partisan divisions. Yet the reality is that most independents are not all that “independent” politically. And the small share of Americans who are truly independent – less than 10% of the public has no partisan leaning – stand out for their low level of interest in politics. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/03/14/political-independents-who-they-are-what-they-think/ The primary difference between communism vs socialism is the nature of ownership of assets. In communism, the ownership of the factories, residential properties, and agricultural lands is state-owned without any private ownership. However, in socialism, the ownership of land, factories, and agricultural land lie with the private sector or individuals. Socialism can exist within the framework of democracy, whereas democracy has no place in communism. In communism, there is no religion besides the state. Socialism allows people to practice their religion. How Are Socialism and Communism Different? Though the terms are often used interchangeably, socialism and communism are different in key ways. Both socialism and communism are essentially economic philosophies advocating public rather than private ownership, especially of the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods (i.e., making money) in a society. Both aim to fix the problems they see as created by a free-market capitalist system, including the exploitation of workers and a widening gulf between rich and poor. But while socialism and communism share some basic similarities, there are also important differences between them. Key Differences Between Communism and Socialism Under communism, there is no such thing as private property. All property is communally owned, and each person receives a portion based on what they need. A strong central government—the state—controls all aspects of economic production, and provides citizens with their basic necessities, including food, housing, medical care and education. By contrast, under socialism, individuals can still own property. But industrial production, or the chief means of generating wealth, is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government. Another key difference in socialism versus communism is the means of achieving them. In communism, a violent revolution in which the workers rise up against the middle and upper classes is seen as an inevitable part of achieving a pure communist state. Socialism is a less rigid, more flexible ideology. Its adherents seek change and reform, but often insist on making these changes through democratic processes within the existing social and political structure, not overthrowing that structure. Today, communism and socialism exist in China, Cuba, North Korea, Laos and Vietnam—although in reality, a purely communist state has never existed. Such countries can be classified as communist because in all of them, the central government controls all aspects of the economic and political system. But none of them have achieved the elimination of personal property, money or class systems that the communist ideology requires. Likewise, no country in history has achieved a state of pure socialism. Even countries that are considered by some people to be socialist states, like Norway, Sweden and Denmark, have successful capitalist sectors and follow policies that are largely aligned with social democracy. Many European and Latin American countries have adopted socialist programs (such as free college tuition, universal health care and subsidized child care) and even elected socialist leaders, with varying levels of success. In the United States, socialism has not historically enjoyed as much success as a political movement. Its peak came in 1912, when Socialist Party presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs won 6 percent of the vote. But at the same time, U.S. programs once considered socialist, such as Medicare and Social Security, have been integrated into American life. What Is Democratic Socialism? https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2022/1/26/democratic-socialism-and-socialism-are-increasingly-salient-among-democrats Democratic socialism, a growing U.S. political movement in recent years, lands somewhere in between social democracy and communism. Like communists, democratic socialists believe workers should control the bulk of the means of production, and not be subjected to the will of the free market and the capitalist classes. But they believe their vision of socialism must be achieved through democratic processes, rather than revolution. Socialism and communism have the same roots in worker exploitation but different characteristics. Communism fully controls the production of goods and services. In contrast, socialism controls only the essential factors of production. But both reject capitalism. There is no democracy, class, religion, or private sector in communism. Whereas socialism is integral to democracy, promoting private ownership, wealth as per efforts, and independent religious beliefs. Market forces are not present in communism, unlike socialism, where the government regulates trade and business through its policies and personnel. What Is Communism? Communism is a form of political doctrine that aims to build a classless society by ending capitalism. It, therefore, emphasizes equalizing wealth distribution. As a result, communism advocated for a global revolution to end the rich and exploitative class to create a classless society. In the communist party, workers control society through a central authority. So, the proletariat or the members of the society have common ownership under communism. Hence, they equally own the factors of production and the produced goods and services. The government acquires all the private property. The government itself becomes a religion. Therefore people worship it. The communist party has full authority and controls everything under the communist regime. So, under the system, people have to contribute to the economy and government as per their abilities. People are given a share in the state livelihood concerning the collective needs of the society. Moreover, the group of heads of the communist party owns the manufacturing factors like land, capital, and entrepreneurship. Although the head group does not own the labor, the central group decides the deployment of the labor. According to historical records, communist systems have always failed to some extent. What Is Socialism? Socialism is a broader concept referring to an economic and political theory where the government, society, and private sector collectively own the the production of goods, dispensation, and interchange equally for homogeneity. Hence, socialism promotes a democratic form of government. Land ownership, agricultural plots, and factories are in private individuals’ hands. So, they can use it to their benefit and earn profits for themselves. However, the government owns all those production factors that positively affect society. Examples include the power sector, railways, health care, and education. Private businesses are also allowed in other sectors that may not be feasible for the government to own, like dairy, crop production, pen, pencil, paper, water supply systems, etc. However, in socialism, capitalism in some sectors exists in some form. It does not require a centrally controlled group to dictate and own everything. Therefore, it also does not require a single party to implement socialism. Therefore, even a democratically elected government can implement and own those aspects of society that may adequately fulfill the basic needs like water, electricity, healthcare, housing, and education. Hence, in a nutshell, one can say that socialism’s prime goal is to promote mixed ownership of all kinds of production. This ownership is also by the public sector instead of completely by the private sector for fulfilling all human beings’ basic economic and social needs. Thus, even if it’s communism vs socialism, these two systems are relatable but not identical. Some striking similarities between communism and socialism are discussed below: The communism vs socialism definition clarifies that both communism and socialism aim at social welfare. The former aims at fair, whereas the latter aims at equal distribution of wealth. Both are political and economic systems. Both the systems want to eliminate class differences and equalize income distribution When it comes to social welfare; every government is slightly communist social welfare. Both beliefs are based on Karl Marx’s notion that capitalism allows the exploitation of workers by the owners. So, they reject capitalism and support equal economic power in society. Both advocate the production of essential services and goods under the government’s control. Moreover, both result from the workers’ opposition to their exploitation by the rich classes during the industrial revolution. Communist and socialist countries include the People’s republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, to name a few. Communism vs Socialism vs Capitalism The prime difference between capitalism from the other two systems is its central aim. The central aim of this system is to maximize profits. Whereas in communism, the prime aim is to maximize social welfare. So, the government completely controls the resources and factors of production. In socialism, the state partially controls the resources. However, in capitalism, the state does not intervene in the markets. It promotes a free market and free economy. Fascism is a dictatorial form of political ideology. Socialism, on the other hand, is an ideology where individuals of a society own the means of production. A fascist ruler wields supreme power and authority over a country. In contrast, rulers of socialist nations distribute power and authority among the states. A dictator does not tolerate any criticism, opposition, or rebellion; freedom of speech takes a back seat. Compared to fascist regimes, socialist states allow more freedom of speech. Dictators control industries; but in socialist states, the ownership of the means of production lies with the public sector. Fascism is an ideology that supports dictatorship and authoritarian reigns. The whole nation is ruled by a single leader who has complete control over industries. Dictators permit private ownership only when it seems beneficial for the state. Under a fascist rule, people don’t have any freedom of speech—any form of criticism or rebellion is suppressed. The origin of fascism can be traced back to 1919. After World War I, Benito Mussolini and his fascist party came to power in Italy. Mussolini believed that a fascist ruler should take firm control over the state; people should not be given the liberty to speak up. It was a ‘nation above everything’ ideology. The primary aim of the fascist ideology is to build a strong nation by prioritizing the country over its people. Some of the basic features of fascism are discussed below: It is a dictatorial rule—run by military regulations. It is a kind of authoritarian leadership that promotes nationalism or patriotism. It is against democratic and capitalist ideologies. It exercises firm control over the public, industries, and society. It doesn’t allow any freedom or right of expression to individuals and suppresses those who raise their voices in criticism. It accepts the difference in social class and doesn’t take any steps to curb this discrimination. What is Socialism? Socialism is a political agenda where public welfare is prioritized over everything else. Here, people own the means of production, trade, and commerce. The nation makes it a priority to ensure that no citizen is deprived of basic necessities. In a socialist country, the central government distributes power and control among the states for better governance. In the 19th century, socialism aimed to discourage widespread industrial revolution—under the capitalist system. The industrial revolution caused widespread unemployment and exploitation of labor across Europe. In that context, socialists Marx and Engels promoted a socialist ideology across Italy. Socialists consider the social class system discriminative and try to eliminate it. Some of the key characteristics of socialism are as follows: All the production factors are government or public-owned. It aims to bring equality in society by prioritizing public welfare; for instance, healthcare facilities are made free for all. Socialists respect all religions and believe that the state is independent of religion. The central government distributes power and responsibilities to the states—for fair governance. It opposes capitalism. Parallels can be drawn between democracy and socialism. Now, let us look at some of fascism vs. socialism similarities. Both fascism and socialism are political ideologies followed by rulers or a ruling party. Despite the contrasts, fascism and socialism share the following similarities: Significant Economic Impact: Both fascism and socialism have the potential to impact the economy significantly. The outcomes could be positive or negative. Requires Strong Leadership: Both ideologies require superior leadership and governance. Discourages Free Market: Fascism and socialism are both anti-capitalist in their philosophy. They are against free-market practices. Fascism restricts private ownership of industries, and socialism emphasizes public ownership of the means of production (instead of private owners). Drives Social Movements: Both ideologies provoke widespread protests and resistance. Massive revolutions and activism coincide with these governance models. Government Involvement: There is extreme government intervention and interference in the nation’s economic activities and social decisions—individual freedom takes a back seat. The primary difference between the ideologies of communism and fascism lies in their motto. The communistic ideology aimed for a classless society where the control of production belonged to the state and there is economic equality between individuals. Fascism is a system, that executes strict class roles in society often controlled by a solo dictator. It relies on extreme nationalism among its people and suppresses all forms of oppositions. It supported private production as long as it served nationalistic purposes. Communism was rooted in the concept of full control of production by a central authority, eliminating economic inequalities. Fascism concentrated more on the idea of building a strong nation, fed by a sense of unity fueled by belongingness and patriotism. Communism did not entertain but rather wanted to abolish the concept of private ownership. Fascism supported private production as long as it supported and contributed to developing a self-reliant nation. Regardless of ideological differences between Communism vs Fascism, they both depart from the concept of democracy. Communism is an ideology that intends to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership. In communism, the community controls the major means of production and the natural resources present in society. It can therefore be described as a higher form of socialism. It is an economic and political philosophy founded by Karl Marx along with Friedrich Engels in the latter half of the 19th century. The belief that the wealthy exploited worker populations and that societies would develop class consciousness was the start of this concept. Leaders believed that it would lead to a conflict that would be resolved by way of a revolutionary struggle. This conflict will make the proletariat (worker population) rise against the bourgeoisie and finally establish a communist society. In a communist society, the aim is to achieve a state where the government would abolish all private ownership. In other words, the means of production belong to the entire community and not be concentrated only in certain pockets. Therefore, a common motto throughout the communist movement is that everyone gave according to their ability and received according to their needs. As a result, the requirements of society would take precedence over the needs of an individual. What is Fascism? Fascism is an ideology that advocates the superiority of the nation. “Nation” here can refer to a group or collection of people with a sense of belonging. It could be based on geography, ethnicity, or culture. All these could follow a fascist path, elevating nationalism above all other forms of loyalty. Here, the goal was to create a strong sense of nationalistic dictatorship that regulated and steered the economy. In addition, it wanted to transform the nation into something magnificent with a self-determined structure and culture. In short, it can be described as a type of authoritarian ultra-nationalism that didn’t mind achieving results by suppressing opposition. It opposed liberal democracy and favored a one-party system. In addition, it was a system that rejected the ideas of socialism and capitalism . Fascism, unlike these ideologies, advocated self-sufficiency through economic control. Besides, history shows that fascism supported violence in the name of politics. This was perceived as legitimate for the purpose of domination. Hence, we can understand that the yearning for national unity under strong leadership was a reason for the rise of fascism. Communism vs Fascism – Similarities Democracy: In a democracy, the political system allows private ownership of goods and services. It allowed private enterprises to have the liberty of producing goods and services. Communism was against this kind of freedom and hence opposed the idea of democracy in this form. Fascism, on the other hand, was hand-rooted in dictatorship and supremacy of the sense of belonging. It overthrew the cries for freedom of the oppressed and therefore opposed democracy. Origin: Communism originated in the second part of the 19th century in Europe. Fascism also emerged in the 19th century after being triggered by the World war in Europe. Sense of individualism: Communism puts society’s needs before the satisfaction of individual needs. On the other hand, fascism wanted to build a nation and wanted people to support it, valuing nationalism beyond a sense of individualism. Free enterprise in economics refers to the private sector that operates at will without government interference. Also referred to as free trade and free-market enterprise, this means an economy where companies can trade, operate, and set prices without restrictions. In other words, the business owners set the regulations themselves. A free enterprise offers the citizens the freedom to utilize their money as they wish and pursue job opportunities they want. Moreover, unlike the government-controlled systems, which limit people to start business opportunities, a free market enables multiple companies to compete with each other. Free enterprise is the freedom of general economic activity within a nation. Free enterprise examples include a private restaurant chain run without government interference or a person starting an online business. Its characteristics include market competition, private property, specialization, voluntary exchange, a price system, and entrepreneurship. Some common types of free enterprises are liberal market economies, coordinated market economies, and mixed market economies. Free enterprise is an economic system that allows citizens to operate it freely. One might have often heard of “laissez-faire ” markets, the French term for “leave-alone .” The idea of free enterprise is pretty much the same, in that the market itself determines the prices. Central to this idea is that competitive markets exist and operate driven by the consumer. Since there is demand for a product, people will create a market to fill the demand. In theory, households and consumers own most of a country’s economic resources and decide what to do with them – not governments. The laws of supply and demand are paramount to the concept of free-market enterprise. Those who believe staunchly in free enterprise believe that governments should allow supply and demand to run their course, regardless of its natural by-products. Let us explore the idea further with two free enterprise examples. First, with nowhere to go and lots of time on their hands, consumers in 2020 largely turned to online shopping to fulfill their daily needs. As a result, free enterprise businesses like Amazon profited greatly. Amazon’s net profit increased 84% during the pandemic. Increased demand for delivery services allowed Amazon to fulfill the supply needed. In reverse, as we all know, retail businesses and restaurants took a devastating hit. With almost no demand for in-house dining and people going to brick and mortar stores, large swaths of businesses were forced to close permanently. Another example of free enterprise can be the competition for cheap labor and manufacturing. A good portion of products sold throughout the world is manufactured in China. Even something as ubiquitous as the iPhone has many of its components manufactured in the country. China has cheaper labor and manufacturing capacities than other, more developed countries. Although the United States is more than capable of producing all of these products domestically, the forces of supply and demand prove it more efficient for companies to produce their goods in China and sell them in the United States for a higher profit margin. Characteristics of Free Enterprise While there are different types of free enterprises, there are six basic principles under which the theory operates. They are: Market Competition Businesses or people competing against each other is considered market competition. It is the basis for the free-market enterprise. The opportunity to compete is the foundation of the free-market movement. Private Property Property is owned by individuals and companies, not the federal government. In other markets run by communist or socialist governments, this is not the case. Specialization People or businesses can focus on producing one specific product or service. Specializing in one area allows businesses to sell products at higher prices and supply higher wages. Voluntary Exchange Also referred to as consumer freedom, the ability for people to buy and sell whatever they want is voluntary exchange. For example, a consumer gives the money in exchange for bread because they feel like it. But in a communist market, for example, the consumer could be given certain amounts of coupons for the bread that is allocated to them. Price System Prices act as the direction of the value between products and services. The higher the price, the higher is the current value of items. It is the cornerstone of demand and of free enterprise businesses. The ability of the supplier and consumer to set price levels based on demand is crucial to free-market movement. Entrepreneurship Entrepreneurship is what allows people to start their own businesses. In a free market, people have limited restrictions for starting their own business. Therefore, the level and ease of business ownership within a country largely reflect the strength of its free-market enterprise. Types of Free Enterprise Although an ideology on its own, free enterprise is essentially the foundation for capitalism . Most of the world’s largest and most developed economies currently function as capitalist societies. Alternatives to capitalism, which we currently see in the international market, are communism, socialism, and some forms of religious dictatorships. These types of markets control the socio-economic affairs of that country, the jobs created, consumer freedom, and goods and services available to citizens. Free enterprise societies as such differ greatly from their more restrictive counterparts. That said, they also differ greatly amongst themselves. The degree of ‘freedom’ each of those societies allows may vary. Free Enterprise Economy Here are the 3 types of Free Enterprise Economy – #1 – Liberal Market Economy One of the best examples of a free market enterprise is a liberal market economy. Liberal market economies are a type of economy that aims to function with the lowest possible amount of government interference to prices and wages. The United States and Great Britain are examples of liberal market economies. #2 – Coordinated Market Economy While arguably labeled a free enterprise economy when compared to communist countries, coordinated market economies have quite a bit of regulatory oversight. As a result, these governments tend to directly influence wages within their unions and manufacturing industries. Often called “Western Christian Democratic Economies,” Germany, Austria, Japan, and Sweden are all examples. #3- Mixed-Market Economy MMEs have components of both a liberal and coordinated market economy. They have both liberal and socialistic elements under which the economies operate. For example, MMEs allow price levels to run their course and allow private property. But large swaths of industry are state-owned. For example, healthcare may be universal and state-run, but pharmaceuticals may be privatized. Also called “Mediterranean market economies,” Greece, Spain, Italy, and Portugal are all examples. Important to Note Free enterprise is a fluid, constantly changing concept. As we see with the different varieties of capitalism, a country and economy are only as “free” as it is compared to another country. If we compare Germany to Cuba, we can call it liberal. However, one might argue Germany is more restrictive compared to the United States. These labels have evolved and changed over the last decade as they continue today. What makes these economies different is the level of government interference or “red-tape” that exists. Even liberal market economies have some degree of government regulation. For example, while the notion of free enterprise is heavily guarded in the United States, there are still market and trading caps, emissions caps, monopoly reducing strategies, legislation that controls who can conduct certain business, etc. Essential to note is that a truly “free” market cannot and does not exist. There is a belief that free enterprise is in and of itself a market failure. If left unregulated, a free market will always result in information asymmetry and be controlled by only certain players, who will try to monopolize and take away its freedom. For these reasons, we can think of free enterprise as a guiding light rather than infallible doctrine. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) What is a free enterprise? A free market functions by the rules and regulations set by itself and experience limited restrictions from the government. A private-sector market that functions without government interference is one of the free enterprise examples. How does the free enterprise system distribute jobs? Free enterprise systems offer individuals the freedom to pursue job opportunities of their liking. It enables people to start their businesses and work in an industry of their choice. The free market also encourages the free learning and distribution of skillsets. What countries have free enterprise economies? Two of the most liberal free enterprise economies are Great Britain and the United States. Although countries like Germany offer free functioning of markets to an extent, they still have more restrictions compared to countries like the U.S.A. Economies of scale is the cost advantage of ramping up production. When a business scales up, production cost per unit comes down—the fixed and variable costs are spread over more number of units. After scaling up, businesses own superior machinery and get volume discounts on raw materials . Larger firms have a competitive edge over smaller players who have limited production capacity and higher production costs . In addition to production, businesses can scale up by investing in advertising or Research & Development. Economies of scale concept state that an increase in production reduces the production cost per-unit. Scaling up could be internal or external. Internal factors include efficient machinery, specialization of labor, container principle, and bulk-purchase discounts. External factors include tax benefits, government subsidies, improved transportation, and joint ventures. Upscaling is very expensive—could require mergers or acquisitions. Most smaller firms cannot raise that much capital. When firms become more efficient in large-scale production, the total production cost increases but their cost per unit declines. This is achieved by using competent machinery and procuring raw material in bulk, at a discounted price. Although there is an increase in production and raw materials, the firm’s fixed cost remains the same. Therefore, the fixed cost distributes evenly across the entire output. Ultimately profit margin increases. In contrast, small businesses price their goods or services higher than large organizations—low scalability. After all, small businesses cannot afford discounts—the cost of production is high. In addition, most small firms employ labor-intensive processes instead of machinery, inflating their per-unit cost. Similarly, some businesses do not get discounts due to low purchase volume. Upscaling resolves all such issues. Supermarkets are the most common example of economies of scale. Since they buy goods in bulk, they avail discounts. Therefore, they enjoy the benefit of reduced average cost . Another example is an airline company that invests millions in buying a new plane. If it had only a few customers, the airline would have to charge very high. Airlines serve millions of customers. By doing so they can recoup expenses despite low charges. Increased volume of production—reduced average cost. The technology giant Intel Corporation is another good example of upscaling advantages. The company invests massively in semiconductor chips and microprocessors. The company manufactures in large quantities. Therefore, Research & Development costs are very low for one unit. Firms can achieve economies of scale by working over internal or controllable factors. Division of Labour and Specialization: Each worker should have a particular task. Specialization improves the efficiency of individual personnel. Commercial: Like Walmart, many companies purchase goods in sizable quantities to avail discounts. Container Principle: If the area of production or storage is increased by 100%, the volume accommodated will increase by 200%. This way, the benefit of expansion is twice that of construction costs. Marketing: Spending heavily on advertising and promotion is another up-scaling strategy. Accelerated sales can easily recover the marketing cost. The marketing expenditure per unit is miniscule. Technical: Technology-based companies spend excessively on Research & Development. But they recover the investment when a successful product or service takes the market by storm. Financial: Large-scale businesses can get leveraged funds at a lower cost due to established relationships and goodwill . Also, big firms can release initial public offerings (IPOs) to raise capital. High Risk: Large-scale firms can afford bigger risks. External Factors Following are external factors that help in upscaling. Tax Reduction: When the government relaxes the tax liabilities on certain products or services—demand can shoot up—higher profits for the business. Government Subsidies: Producers of certain goods or services receive subsidies from the government—low production cost. Superior Transportation Network: Companies can take advantage of transportation facilities by speeding up raw material procurement and finished goods distribution. Skilled and Talented Labour: If labor markets become efficient, companies can employ talented workforce at nominal wages. Joint Ventures and Partnerships: The fastest way to scale up is via mergers and acquisitions . Disadvantages Following are the disadvantages of scaling up. Diversification Risk: When firms expand their business operations across different industries, some of the subsidiaries might underperform. Huge Capital Investment: Scalability is expensive—most small firms cannot raise that much capital. Limited Market Demand: Customer preference is unpredictable; therefore, the demand for a particular product can fall unexpectedly. In such a scenario, ramped-up production can result in huge losses and dead stock. Requires Higher Degree of Control and Management: Scaling up results in a new team of individuals—it takes time for them to function smoothly. Mergers and acquisitions often result in contrasting work cultures. In contrast, the diseconomy of scale occurs due to the inefficiency in existing production methods. As a result, the average cost rises when the output is increased. Sometimes, diseconomies of scale occur when firms outgrow their potential. Employee costs, compliance costs, and administration costs get out of hand. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) What is an example of economies of scale? A small bakery employs five bakers to prepare cakes, the production is low, and so is the profit. Consequently, the firm expands the business by introducing automation into baking. After considerable investment, the bakery increased production by ten times. Over time, the fixed cost spreads over total increased output—per cake upscaling cost is low. Who classified economies of scale into internal and external? It was introduced by Alfred Marshall. Marshall was an English economist from London. He emphasized the distinction between internal and external upscaling. What causes economies of scale? Businesses scale up by ramping up production, specializing in labor, procuring raw materials in bulk, advertising, investing in research, and raising capital. The primary difference explained in capitalism vs communism is that capitalism is an economic system that allows private ownership and promotes the idea of a free market; in contrast, communism favors collective ownership and restricts the free market with government intervention portraying a planned economy. While pure capitalism in a country represents a free market economy, the elements of communism are easily seen in command economies. Furthermore, capitalism motivates entities to work hard and innovate to make a profit, whereas communism does not emphasize or focus on providing an incentive to trigger hard work. The primary difference between capitalism and communism emerges from the ownership of factors of production. In capitalism, it is owned by individuals, whereas in a communist nation, the ownership lies in the hands of the government. Capitalism exhibits private ownership, profit motive, minimal government intervention, competitive market, capital accumulation, class system, etc. Communism exhibits common ownership, central planning, no competition, classless society, etc. In the socialism vs. capitalism vs. communism debate, socialism and communism oppose capitalism and stand to attain collective ownership and equal distribution of resources. Furthermore, socialism additionally allows individuals to own properties, unlike communism. Capitalism Vs communism are two different political and economic ideology that has been existing in the global history for a long time. They are two separate approaches that are used to organize the social, economic and political method of distributing resource and wealth. In the system of capitalism, the means of production is privately owned. The business and industries operate with the aim of making profit. This system depends on the market forces of demand and supply to fix the product prices, where the main criteria is consumer choice and their willingness to pay for the products available in the market. Due to high competition, the factors concentrate on improvement of efficiency and innovation. However, this often leads to disparity in income and wealth. In case of communism, there is a classless society where the factors are commonly owned and allocated as per the ability and need of consumers. There is no private ownership at all and there is no reliance in demand and supply because everything is fixed by the government. However, even though there is equality in the resource distribution it is not based on individual contribution. However, it is essential to note in the capitalism vs communism debate that no country has taken the path of complete capitalism or communism. Most countries have taken up a mix of both so that there is a balance between efficiency, welfare, and freedom. What Is Capitalism? Capitalism occurs when people are allowed to own and control capital assets, use them according to their self-interest, and earn profit by producing valued goods and services utilizing capital resources. In a capitalist economy, government intervention will be minimal; hence, the production of goods and services is driven by supply and demand. It creates an environment that promotes individualism, innovations, competition, efficient allocation of resources, the efficiency of the private sector, presenting consumers with better choices, and improving living standards. capitalism vs communism. On the other hand, capitalism is often blamed for favoring the rich. The opponents of the system advocate that in capitalism, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer instigating the unequal distribution of wealth and inequality, creating social division. Moreover, in the wake of producing profit, the capitalist model exploits the workers, and unfair competition can also lead to the emergence of monopoly in specific sections. All these disadvantages communicate the need for the reformation of capitalism. What Is Communism? Communism ideology aims to establish common ownership and eliminate the private property concept. It simply focuses on replacing private ownership and introducing state-owned organizations, projects, resources, and properties, ensuring economic equality and fairness. Such economies work towards achieving social development, the welfare, and the overall development of all the citizens of a nation. Examples China has long been a significant example of a communist government where the government-controlled major resources, funds, products, and services, but later due to globalization and certain other aspects, has started implementing some elements of capitalism to grow business and take advantage of trade opportunities. Similarly, it has been observed that many nations turn their heads toward capitalism to obtain more opportunities, attain industrialization, and reap the benefits of globalization hence strengthening the capitalism vs communism debate. Capitalism and communism are inherently contrasting concepts. While capitalism propagates individualism, communism is associated with collectivism. Industrial capitalism was popularised in the 18th century, and modern communism was propagated in the 19th century. The instances reflecting the conflict based on these ideologies were prevalent from the old times. For example, ideological conflict, capitalism vs. communism in the Cold War of the 20th century. During the Cold War, the United States and Western European nations were based upon capitalism and democracy. In contrast, the Soviet Union was based upon communism and dictatorship, and Eastern European nations were under Soviet communist control. Many of the significant events in the Cold War contributed to explaining whether capitalism was better than communism or not. Here we find capitalism vs communism simplified and similarities are shown clearly. Communism and capitalism can result in an improved living standard for the people. Capitalism vs Communism explanations indicates that the foreign trade policies differ in both systems. However, both utilize globalization. Which Is Better? Both the concepts of communism and capitalism are forms of social organizations that are related to industry, trade and economy. They discuss the concept of property ownership, either by the government of private owners. However, just as every concept has positive and negative sides and effects, same is the case with the capitalism vs communism activity. It is necessary to understand the effects of both clearly. In case of capitalism, there is private ownership or resources, leading to a profit motive, which again promotes innovation and economic growth. Since consumers have a wide range of choices, there is more competition, and which may lead to innovation but at the same time over utilization of resources. There is personal freedom in the process of decision making, which allows people to exercise choice, creativity, skill and knowledge, but personal choice may be prioritized rather than social welfare. But in the case of communism, there is no income disparity, and resources are evenly distributed, but individual contribution is not looked into. But there is an expectation of community feeling and collective responsibility towards each other. It is not easy to point out any system as better than the other since both capitalism vs communism activity have pros and cons. Their effectiveness depends on the economic situation, implementation method, and cultural, political, and historical factors. Democratic Socialism is a left-wing political philosophy that supports political democracy and some form of a socially owned economy. It emphasizes economic democracy, workplace democracy, and workers' self-management within a market socialist economy or an alternative form of a decentralised planned socialist economy. Democratic socialists believe that capitalism is incompatible with the values of freedom, equality, and solidarity and that these ideals can only be achieved through the realisation of a socialist society. The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, with over 96,000+ members and chapters in all 50 states. They believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few. Capitalism is a system designed by the owning class to exploit the rest of us for their own profit. We must replace it with democratic socialism, a system where ordinary people have a real voice in our workplaces, neighborhoods, and society. We believe there are many avenues that feed into the democratic road to socialism. Our vision pushes further than historic social democracy and leaves behind authoritarian visions of socialism in the dustbin of history. We want a democracy that creates space for us all to flourish not just survive and answers the fundamental questions of our lives with the input of all. We want to collectively own the key economic drivers that dominate our lives, such as energy production and transportation. We want the multiracial working class united in solidarity instead of divided by fear. We want to win “radical” reforms like single-payer Medicare for All, defunding the police/refunding communities, the Green New Deal, and more as a transition to a freer, more just life. We want a democracy powered by everyday people. The capitalist class tells us we are powerless, but together we can take back control. Democratic Socialist Countries 2023 Democratic socialism describes a socialist economy where production and wealth are collectively owned, but the country has a democratic system of government. The goal of democratic socialism is to achieve socialist goals of equality while opposing socialist ideologies. Democratic socialism is opposed to the Soviet economic model, command economies, and authoritarian governance. Under democratic socialism, the ownership of private property is limited. The government regulates the economy. Different programs offer assistance and pensions. What is a Democratic Socialist? A democratic socialist believes that the government should provide a range of essential services to the public for free or at a significant discount, such as health care and education. Unlike socialists, democratic socialists do not believe the government should control all aspects of the economy, only help provide basic needs and help all of its citizens have an equal chance of success. What is Social Democracy? Social democracy and democratic socialism are often used as synonyms; however, there are differences. Social democracy has a mostly capitalistic economy (i.e.: a less-regulated market and fewer rules against private ownership of land, utilities, etc.), but also with large-scale social welfare programs. Social democracy is seen in the Nordic model, which includes a welfare state based on free market capitaliam. The model also include multi-level collective bargaining, a high percentage of the workforce unionized, and a large percentage of the workforce employed by the public sector. The Nordic countries were shaped by social democracy. Many other European countries have social democracies. Socialism vs. Communism Socialism and communism are both built on the premise that individuals contribute to society based on their ability to do so. Both concepts have the government playing a larger role in economic planning, investment, and government control institutions. Both also remove private business as a producer of goods and services. There is a big fundamental difference between socialism and communism. Individuals under a proper communist system would not have money and would be given what the government thinks you need in terms of food, clothing, housing, etc. The people would not need to work harder to receive the same amount as anyone else. Under socialism, individuals are compensated based on their individual contribution; therefore, those who work harder would receive more. Furthermore, communism views all property as public property, while socialism allows individuals to still have their own private property. Communism is an economic and political philosophy, and socialism is an economic philosophy. Lastly, communism abolishes class distinctions as everyone is effectively treated equally, while socialism allows class distinctions to exist, as there is the opportunity for some to achieve more wealth than others. Democratic Socialism vs. Socialism Both democratic socialism and socialism advocate for a redistribution of wealth and power to meet public needs, not make profits for a few. Both aim to weaken the power of corporations and increase the power of the working people. Democratic socialists, however, do not think the government should immediately take control of all aspects of the economy. Democratic socialism focuses more on providing basic needs to all people, such as health care and education. Democratic socialism, unlike socialism, would achieve this through democratic means and not an authoritarian rule. Failed Socialist Countries The largest of the failed socialist countries is the Soviet Union, which fell in 1991. Following World War II, the United States helped rebuild Western European countries, all of whom were free marketing economies that rebuilt rapidly by establishing the European Union and trading with one another. On the other hand, the Soviet Union seized government control of Eastern European nations, all of which became socialist states. These included: Bulgaria, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Belarus, and Ukraine. While East Germany reunified with West Germany and joined the thriving EU economy, the rest of the Eastern European countries faced economic hardship after the Soviet Union fell. Many of these countries remain the poorest European countries today. Additionally, both Cuba and Venezuela are currently socialist states facing their own economic crises deemed a result of socialism. Successful Socialist Countries Some argue that there has been no completely socialist country that has been successful, only countries that have seen success in adopting socialist policies. Bolivia is an example of a prosperous socialist country. Bolivia has drastically cut extreme poverty and has the highest GDP growth rate in South America. Other countries that have adopted and enacted socialist ideas and policies to various degrees, and have seen success in improving their societies by doing so, are Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. Is Sweden Socialist? Scandinavian countries are often touted as socialist paradises whose models should be adopted on a larger scale. However, that idealistic statement tells only part of the story. Sweden is a great example. It has a free-market economy, meaning that the government interferes very little in business. There are very few business regulations, particularly regarding workers; in fact, Sweden and other Scandinavian countries do not have minimum wages for their workers. One area where Sweden does have socialist policies is in its school system. In the United States, the government pays for public schools, and parents who prefer can pay to send their children to private schools instead. Sweden offers school vouchers to all children, meaning that the government will pay for school wherever the parents decide to send the children. The children can go to schools run by religious institutions or those run by the government. Swedish workers do pay more in taxes than workers in non-socialist countries, like the United States. The reason they do so is so that the government has money for generous social services, including maternity and paternity leave for new parents and the school voucher system. There is also more income equality in Scandinavian countries, like Sweden, than in the United States, because of how the government redistributes wealth. However, Sweden is not a “pure” socialist country. It has a free-market economy with very few government regulations, something that is a capitalist’s dream. Perhaps the lesson from Sweden is that both socialism and capitalism can co-exist in such a way that children have equal access to education, no matter their income, while workers can enjoy rights that are inferred to them by the company rather than the government. Is Finland Socialist? Is Finland socialist? The answer really depends on how you define socialism. Finland, like other Scandinavian countries, has a comprehensive social safety net that helps ensure that people have what they need to live productive, healthy, and happy lives. If your definition of socialism is individuals and businesses paying high taxes to ensure that wealth is being distributed equitably across the population, then yes, Finland is socialist. However, Finland runs on a free-market economy, something that is contrary to how many people perceive socialism. If your definition of socialism is heavy government regulation of business, then no, Finland is not socialist. In fact, government regulations are so low that Finland does not even have a minimum wage. The best way to look at Finland’s economy and politics may be to see it as a blend of capitalism and socialism. Some people refer to this as “compassionate capitalism,” meaning that markets can run freely, with minimal government regulation and interference; the role of the government is to ensure social welfare by providing generous benefits to the population through the revenue generated by taxes. Those benefits include free schools, including college, for all students and generous maternity and paternity leave for new parents. This model may seem like something that other countries should replicate. After all, who wouldn’t want a free market that has few government regulations, coupled with government benefits that ensure everyone is healthy and productive? The challenge is applying that model in countries that are less homogenous and have a significantly higher population than Finland, like the United States. Finland’s model may work so well because the country’s population is relatively small and homogenous. However, other countries may benefit from applying aspects of their economic and political system. Is Switzerland Socialist? Many people equate socialism with communism but doing so is a mistake. Communism describes a complete economic and political system in which the state owns all property and means of production; markets have no power to regulate prices or determine what should be produced. Socialism describes an economic system in which taxes are generally high so that the government can provide a broad social safety net for services such as education, healthcare, and public pensions. A country can be both capitalist and socialist, as capitalism refers to free markets that, unlike in communism, can determine prices and modes of production. Those who have capital, or a sufficient level of wealth, can begin businesses that employ people and provide a good or service that the market demands. Switzerland is a prime example of a capitalist country that has some socialist policies. Switzerland’s economy is almost entirely made up of small- and medium-sized businesses because its government promotes policies that are very friendly to entrepreneurship. The education model in Switzerland is also very friendly to businesses, as students are required to gain job training as part of their academic education. It also has relatively low taxes – the average tax rate for individuals is less than 9%, significantly less than in the United States, and even less than countries that are generally classified as socialist. Healthcare in Switzerland can be understood as somewhat socialist. A public insurer cannot turn anyone down for any reason, including a pre-existing condition. However, the insured individual, rather than the employer or the government, is required to pay the premiums. Education in Switzerland is free, and students who pursue an academic route, rather than a vocational one, are given free admission to universities. Generally, Switzerland is too decentralized to be genuinely socialist. Much of the government authority is relegated to the various cantons; while a particular canton can have more socialist policies than another one, the country as a whole is capitalist with some socialist elements. Is Denmark Socialist? Denmark is generally considered to be a Scandinavian country, and the Scandinavian countries – which also include Finland, Norway, and Sweden – are renowned for their socialist policies and overall high rates of happiness and well-being. That said, Denmark has a free-market economy with generous socialist elements, making it a blend of capitalist and socialist. Denmark has a very high tax rate, around one-quarter to one-third of income, depending on the individual’s income. The government uses this income to create a wide array of social programs, including healthcare, education, and job training. Because there are so many social programs to support people, businesses are more willing to engage in risks that can improve their productivity. The Danish economy is thereby able to encourage companies and individuals because they know that one risky venture will not lead to catastrophe. Like other Scandinavian countries, the Danish government has very few regulations on businesses. Instead, its policies are more focused on social programs. As such, there are very few regulations on hiring and firing, and there is no minimum wage. Companies can engage in international trade with very little government interference, thereby giving a boost to the country’s economy and ensuring that its currency remains sound. As a result, Denmark has a very high rating in terms of its free-market index. Denmark is probably more capitalist than the United States because its government encourages businesses to run solely on market principles rather than government policies. Additionally, it has better rates of healthcare, education, and social security than many other capitalist countries because the high tax rates create a redistribution of wealth in the form of social programs. There are concerns that Denmark’s social programs are unsustainable, so within the coming decades, we may see substantial changes in this capitalist country that has many socialist programs. Is France Socialist? France is a country with a socialist party that has long had some level of power within its government. Two recent presidents, François Mitterrand and Francois Hollande, were both from the Socialist Party. The tax revenue to GDP (gross domestic product) ratio is 46.2 percent, the highest in the developed world. This high tax revenue that the government collects is spent on social programs, including unemployment benefits, government-sponsored paid maternity leave, healthcare, and education. However, France is also one of the most successful capitalist countries in the world. One might say that its socialist system provides a cushion to its capitalist mindset, thereby encouraging people to take more risks and providing a higher level of social cohesion. France arguably is a socialist country, considering its high tax rates and extensive social programs. However, it is not communist, as the state does not attempt to control the means of production. Instead, those forces are left to markets, which are remarkably good at regulating themselves. However, some of the largest industries in France have nationalized, meaning that the government owns the largest share in them. Additionally, France’s government has many regulations on businesses, and firing workers is very hard to do. This concept makes hiring workers risky, as they may ultimately cost the company money, but the company may be unable to get rid of them. Unlike many other socialist countries, France’s taxes are considered by some to be regressive. This idea means that instead of the highest tax burden falling on the wealthy, it actually falls on the middle-class and the poor. While these social classes are more likely to use more of the government-funded social programs, the high taxes that they pay mean that wealth is not being redistributed. In a genuinely socialist model, wealth is redistributed across social classes to ensure that the poor and the rich have equitable access to all services. Meanwhile, the wealth that is among the richest in the country remains among those in that social class. Is Germany Socialist? The prospect of calling Germany a socialist country is rather frightening. After all, the Nazis were the Nationalist Socialist party. However, socialism and Nazism are two things so entirely different from each other that they should not be used in the same sentence. Today, Germany is a capitalist, free-market country that has many elements of socialism to help provide people with a safety net. During the Cold War, Germany was divided into East and West, with the Soviet East being communist and falling into dire poverty, and the capitalist West thriving. The capitalist West did away with all price controls that were established under Hitler’s Nazi party and dramatically cut taxes. The result was that markets, which are remarkably good at regulating themselves, were able to thrive. Meanwhile, the German government established enough welfare programs to ensure that individual people were able to leave happy and productive lives. Germany’s economic policies helped to ensure that when the East and West were reunited after the Cold War, the two economies would be able to integrate, and the East would be lifted out of its poverty. Germany today has very few regulations on business, but it does have anti-trust laws that allow the government to intervene if one company begins to monopolize an industry. Germany’s chancellor, Angela Merkel, has promoted many socialist policies to ensure that Germany’s economy remains strong. Healthcare, education, and other social services are universally available. Meanwhile, low levels of government regulation on businesses help ensure that the free-market economy can thrive. Germany is a capitalist country with socialist policies. Those two aspects combined, capitalism and socialism, helped Germany reunite after the fall of the Berlin Wall and keep its economy strong. Is Norway Socialist? The Scandinavian countries – which include Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and sometimes Estonia and Iceland – are often characterized as socialist. However, each of these countries has its own economic and political model, which bears hallmarks of both socialism and capitalism. Norway, like other Scandinavian countries, is nearly fully socialist nor fully capitalist. Norway has some of the strongest social welfare programs in the world. These include free education for all, including university students, and universal healthcare coverage. Workers have public pension plans, which help ensure that they have a livable income should they become unemployed or retired. These services are funded through high taxes. Many people look at these aspects of the Norwegian model and claim that Norway is absolutely a socialist country. However, Norway also embraces free-market capitalism. This idea means that there are very few government regulations on businesses – significantly fewer than in the United States. Most workers belong to labor unions because the government does very little in regards to workers’ rights. In fact, Scandinavian countries, including Norway, do not even have minimum wage laws. Fifty-one percent of workers in Norway are members of labor unions, and labor unions bargain at a national level to ensure that workers have safe working conditions and fair, livable wages. In Norway, taxes are higher than in many other capitalist countries. However, the role of the government is not to regulate business. Instead, those taxes fund public services, such as schools and healthcare. Where the government does intervene in business is to provide retraining for workers that are likely to become unemployed or dislocated due to job obsolescence. Rates of private property ownership are higher than in many capitalist countries. So is Norway socialist? The answer to that question really depends on what your definition of socialism is. Is Canada Socialist? Canada is more socialist than the United States, but by and large, classifying Canada as a socialist country requires a very narrow definition of what socialism is. Socialism refers to a broad spectrum of economic systems in which property and wealth are shared equitably. It is not incompatible with capitalism; though some people may theoretically talk about socialism versus capitalism, Canada is an example of a successful capitalist country with socialist elements. Canada has free healthcare and education, both of which are hallmarks of a socialist system. However, the Canadian economy is seeing more private healthcare and education businesses, which are turning the tide against these socialist elements. The public, government-run healthcare system is underfunded, so people in Canada are looking more to private providers for their healthcare needs. However, because the public healthcare and education systems remain secure, Canadians have better outcomes in both healthcare and education than in the United States. Other than healthcare and education, Canada’s social safety nets are significantly smaller than those in other countries that are generally classified as socialist, such as Scandinavian countries. Unemployment insurance hovers at 40% of a person’s original income. Additionally, at least partially due to underfunding, many government-run social programs are being rolled back. At the same time, Canada has a free-market, capitalist economy, where both small businesses and corporations are flourishing. The tech and AI industries are growing rapidly in Canada, thanks to its business-friendly policies, and skilled workers are migrating there from other countries to contribute to its AI boom. This boom would not be possible without an economic system that favors people who work hard, remain competitive and contribute to the financial success of the industry and the country. There is probably no such thing as a truly socialist country, and Canada is a case in point. Though many American politicians point to Canada as a socialist success story. ?

Accused Capitol Rioter Riley Williams' sentencing delayed, could face up to 7 years in jail. Williams is accused of stealing Speaker Pelosi's said her laptop had over 18,000+ documents and over 368,000+ pages of emails that were uploaded to who? or hacked by who? before shy got back to her office during the Jan. 6 insurrection. Riley June Williams, 22 was found guilty of six federal counts in November of 2022. Democrats woman of house wearing all white at state of the new world order speech rather than Republicans with red shoe lace who are the true saviors of the new world order and other civil liberties. A laptop stolen from the offices of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi during the U.S. Capitol attack has not been recovered from the home or car of a Pennsylvania woman accused of helping steal it, the woman’s lawyer said Tuesday. Yes its still missing or sold to who ? Public defender A.J. Kramer told a federal judge that investigators searched the car and Harrisburg residence of Riley June Williams but did not locate the computer. Assistant U.S. Attorney Mona Sedky said during a hearing in Washington that she was reluctant to say more about what she described as an ongoing and fluid investigation, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported. “I’m very uncomfortable discussing the facts of the case at this stage,” Sedky said. “I’m concerned that talking about what we do and don’t know and what we’re running down could jeopardize the investigation.” Williams, 22, is accused of helping steal the laptop, which a Pelosi aide has said was only used for presentations. She is on electronic monitoring and largely confined to her home to await trial on that charge, along with obstruction, trespassing and violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds. Sedky told the judge there is evidence Williams has directed others to delete data after the attack, the paper said. U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui restricted Williams’ internet access while she awaits trial. The FBI has said an unidentified former romantic partner of Williams tipped them off that she appeared in video from the Jan. 6 rioting and the tipster claimed she had hoped to sell the computer to Russian intelligence. Her lawyers have said the tipster’s accusations are overstated. Video from the riot shows a woman matching Williams’ description exhorting invaders to go “upstairs, upstairs, upstairs” during the attack. The FBI has said Williams was recorded on closed-circuit cameras in the Capitol going into and coming out of Pelosi’s office. An FBI affidavit said a cellphone video likely shot by Williams showed a man’s gloved hand lifting an HP laptop from a table, and the caption read, “they got the laptop.” That is how it is going to go down, the timeline might be a bit off. You will have one world faith, which is what the ecumenical movement is about. One world government, and all under control of the New World Order by July 4th 2026 on this the day of America’s up coming 250nd year of independence, unveiled a new updated flag which better reflects the nation in its present form, signaling the aspirations it has for its ever bright future. Confiscating Entire Wealth of All The Billionaires and Kill Them and Family Too! There are 724 (billionaires) in the U.S., and more overseas according to the 2021 Forbes billionaires list, released in April,” the Journal reports. “At that point their collective net worth was $4.4 trillion, although that figure has presumably since risen along with the stock market. So Per 60% Death taxes are taxes imposed by the federal and some state governments on someone's estate upon their death - Death taxes are also called death duties, estate taxes, or inheritance taxes. After getting the money maybe in 20 weeks or so - Own Government plan's are to kill rest of the family member for more estate taxes, or inheritance taxes. Also Government Plan's are to Kill and or Black Mail for Lot's of Money All Epstein’s and Maxwell Private Pedophile Islands Visitor Log's including video equipment and sex tape's of rich people and with DNA Sample Testing and secret video tapes and missing body in underground lairs and a bizarre teen sex temple from Pedophile Islands Guestbook and Visitor List They Do Not Want You to See Ever! Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell Said We Have 1,000's Video Tape's and have 1,000 Forensic DNA Test's, Blood Test's and Hair Sample's DNA Testing all ready Done Now. Podesta’s email account was hijacked and the hackers took his entire private library of emails. This sucked hard for Podesta because the hackers had tons of high ranking-sensitive information. From October through November 20,000+ pages of emails were uploaded to wiki-leaks. Hillary Clinton at a campaign event last month. Cybersecurity experts said that her private email account from when she was secretary of state was probably hacked 38,000+ pages of emails were uploaded Benghazi panel had discovered that Clinton exclusively used her own private pedophile email server rather than a government-issued one throughout her time as Secretary of State, and that her aides took no action to preserve emails sent or received from her personal accounts as required by law. Hunter Biden when he came into a repair shop in Wilmington, Delaware, the Bidens' hometown, and handed over three laptops After two years of scrutiny, the laptop has produced mountains of material about Hunter Biden's personal struggles, and his foreign business ventures in Ukraine and with China. It has produced direct evidence President Biden benefited from his son's business dealings. Similar incidents involving Hunter Biden's use of drugs and hiring of prostitutes featured on his laptop that was exposed just before the US elections by the New York Post. Vatican private pedophile trial for sex abuse of 10,000+ kids in pope's youth seminary opens scandal is particularly grave because the true abuse and yes allegedly occurred within Vatican City and All over the World, and the true allegations were known since at least 1960s Thru 2021 pedophile's but were covered up by the Vatican and other church authorities until the victim and his roommate went public. Their stories greatly undermined Pope Francis’ pledges of “zero tolerance” for abuse because the alleged crimes occurred in his own backyard and had gone unpunished for years. The report also criticized the way the media reported sexual crimes, stating that the New World Order media reported on sexual abuse allegations against Catholic clergy but ignored such allegations against Protestant churches and Jehovah's Witnesses. Stephen Joseph Rossetti, a Catholic priest, reported that the frequency of pedophilia amongst the Catholic clergy is no higher than among general population, and a Catholic priest is no more likely to be a pedophile than an average male. The 21 Points of Manifesto of the New World Order and Plan to Control and Enslave the World by July 4th 2026 on this the day of Old America’s up coming 250nd year of independence. One world government, and all under control of the New World Order and to unveiled a new updated flag which better reflects the nation in its present form, signaling the aspirations it has for its ever bright future. 1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. 4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. 10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. 11. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature. 12. Guide reproduction wisely—improving fitness and diversity. 13. Unite humanity with a living new language. 14. Rule Passion—Faith—Tradition—and all things with tempered reason. 15. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts. 16. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court. 17. Avoid petty laws and useless officials. 18. Balance personal rights with social duties. 19. Prize truth—beauty—love—seeking harmony with the infinite. 20. Be not a cancer on the earth—Leave room for nature—Leave room for nature. 21. What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie? Secret societies have been in existence all throughout history. Elites, crazed by power and money, band together to exert maximum control over the masses. In 2026 their influence is greater than ever – their tentacles reaching all aspects of our daily life through control of the economy, religion, education and politics. While the world may seem chaotic and confusing to those who are not in the know, those who have studied the history of international secret societies are blessed with an understanding of the evil agenda pushed by the cabal. Why is it a blessing to understand the evil that is in our midst? Wouldn’t it be better to be naïve and live with our heads in the sand? No. It is only through understanding this evil that we can fight back and reject the New World Order they are working towards. This list of ten New World Order secret societies includes the Illuminati, Knights Templar, Freemasons and others, and exposes the perverted rituals they perform, revealing their true history and agenda. Anonymous News reports: 1. Skull And Bones Founded in 1832 by Yale University students, Skull and Bones is surrounded by conspiracy theories; the most popular being that the CIA founders were members of this secret society and that they still control it. The society has been criticized for everything — weird sexual acts, the Kennedy assassination, espionage and drug smuggling. 2. The Bilderberg Group The Bilderberg was started in 1954 in the Netherlands “to create an aristocracy of purpose,” mainly in the United States and Europe. Its members include some of the most powerful and highly influential people in the world — from the IMF’s top officials to presidents and EU leaders. The most famous conspiracy theories say, the group is run by the Nazis, it is trying to impose a one world government, and it runs the US Republican party. 3. The Freemasonry The all-male group, formed in 1717 in London, has six million powerful members across the world. It is alleged that George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Winston Churchill, Mozart, and Harry Houdini were Freemasons. They are infamous for secret passwords, secret handshakes, designing the Pyramids, and plotting the French Revolution. 4. The Knights Templar In 1119, nine knights founded the Knights Templar: a Catholic military order created to protect pilgrims traveling through the Holy Land, as well as guard the most sacred Christian treasures. Its non-combatant members developed the earliest forms of banking throughout Christendom, and built fortifications across Europe and the Holy Land. Though it was disbanded in 1312, it is said that the Freemasons are keeping the flame alive for the Knights Templar. 5. The Hashashin The Hashashins, or the Assassins, one of the most fearsome of all the secret societies in the world, are known for assassinating their religious and political enemies, regardless of the number of security personnel guarding their targets. It is said that the group of legendary contract killers, formed in the late 11th century, were vanquished by the end of the 13th century but left its dangerous legacy in today’s Syria and Iran. 6. The Cadaver Society A secret society of students at Washington and Lee University. It is rumored that underground passageways — which its members use to remain undetected — span the campus. It is speculated that the Cadaver Society serves as a branch of the Illuminati, a group that has control over powerful systems like banks and governments. 7. Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn Founded in the late 19th century, the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn was dedicated to the study of the occult, the paranormal, and metaphysics — and everything considered magical. The order, also known as the “Golden Dawn”, has been one of the single biggest influences on 20th century western occultism such as Wicca. 8. Ordo Templis Orientis An international fraternal and religious society, Ordo Templis Orientis is modeled after the Freemasonry structure and centered on a degree of occultism. Many Ancient Egyptian Gods and the Devil are invoked during the rituals, which are sometimes performed naked, and use virgin priestesses, children, and priests. 9: Rosicrucians Founded by a group of German Protestants in the early 15th century, the philosophical secret society was perceived as very dangerous at the time, as they reportedly used occult practices to bring about a global transformation. It is claimed they are the guiding force behind every significant revolution in modern history. 10. The Illuminati Perhaps the most infamous cult of modern society, the Illuminati was formed to end superstition, obscurantism, religious influence over public life, and abuses of state power. Made mostly of atheists, it is alleged that they conspire to establish a New World Order and gain political power by using the media to brainwash the masses.

Death To You And Your Family... Its For The Greater Good. Death To You And America... Its For The Greater Good. Its A Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated People Will Threaten The Live Of Vaccinated People... Yes Its For The Greater Good. You Will Never Trust Another Celebrity After Watching This Covil-19 Corrupt U.S.A. Governments... Yes Its For The Greater Good. Yes Its A Plandemic For New World Order... Yes Its For The Greater Good. The Great Awakening Another Powerful Documentary From What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie? Yes Its For The Greater Good. Yes Thank You For Killing Yourself Too... We The Sheeple People's Republic Of United State Of America... Yes Its For The Greater Good. With Love From Your Uncle Sam... Yes Its For The Greater Good, Greater Good, Greater Good, And God Bless You ALL... Yes Its For The Greater Good. For the greater good refers to the benefit or betterment of the majority of people, especially at the cost of smaller or individual concerns. It is a general advantage that can only be gained by losing or harming something that is considered less important. Some wars are fought for the greater good. The cutbacks that a company must face will be difficult, but they are for the greater good. The benefit of the public, of more people than oneself. What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie? All Info. shared in this channel is for non-hate and non-race and historical purposes to educate, elevate, entertain, enlighten, and empower through old and new film and document allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use. Welcome To The New World Order - The Year Zero - The Real Origin of the World - National Anthem of the United States of America and Confederate States of America National Anthem and New World Order National Anthem Is "The Ostrich" Lyrics by Steppenwolf from the album 'Rest In Peace' 1967-1972 A.C.E. The Conspiracy to Rule Your Mind chronicles how the ruling elite have established global domination and the ability to effect the thoughts, decisions, and world view of human beings across the globe by systematically infiltrating the media, academia, industry, military and political factions under the guise of upholding democracy. Learn how this malevolent consortium has dedicated centuries to realize an oppressive and totalitarian rule through any means necessary, not limited to drug trafficking, money laundering, terror attacks and financial crisis within the world economy. Worldwide tyranny is already in full effect, the food we eat and the air we breathe are not off limits. Will we be able to stop this madness before we become an electronically monitored, cashless society wherein ever man, woman and child is micro chipped? The New World Order is Upon Us - Preserve your liberty by being Prepared ! - We The People of the New World Order Thank You. The Left/Right paradigm isn't only exposed by race and immigration issues. The Left and Right are in lockstep on every issue that really matters: The IRS. Income tax. Federal Reserve system. Endless wars. Endless expansion of tyranny and ever contracting liberty. Chronically wide-open borders. Suicidal immigration policies. Don't you see? The democrats and republicans exist only to provide the illusion of choice. A strong "us versus them" simulation in every election. It's ritualized tribalism. But the joke is, it doesn't matter which team wins, because both sides have the same agenda. God, guns and gays are phony "issues" to bolster the illusion of "difference" between the parties. The only thing that makes all this possible is that people aren't aware of the scam. Just knowing they are either "Team Red" or "Team Blue" liberates them from the responsibility of having to actually know or think anything. Then they feel righteous when their team wins, or despondent when they loose. It's no coincidence that the system works exactly like sports. There comes a point when ignorance and apathy become treason. We are past that point, people. It's so easy to be overwhelmed and feel beaten by the amount of negative and discouraging information being spread by the mainstream (fake stream) media. There are truly awful people in WEF and WHO, who want to reduce us to the level of serfs or chattel, but we can resist, indeed, we must resist. Be calm, be objective and be positive. Right is Might. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.” Nobody Is Safe From People's Republic Of The Tyrannical We The Sheeple People of The United States of America and A Real True Bill of State Rights Of Government July Forth 1776 The Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, which limit the power of the federal government and guarantee certain freedoms and rights to all colour of people and for the citizens of All America. For the greater good refers to the benefit or betterment of the majority of people, especially at the cost of smaller or individual concerns. It is a general advantage that can only be gained by losing or harming something that is considered less important. Some wars are fought for the greater good. The cutbacks that a company must face will be difficult, but they are for the greater good. The benefit of the public, of more people than oneself. From Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English the greater good the greater good a general advantage that you can only gain by losing or harming something that is considered less important Some wars are fought for the greater good. great Examples from the Corpus the greater good This, I learned, was standard practice when a customer was about to be sacrificed for the greater good of Salomon. For the greater good of the parish or because he knew something? If an act promotes happiness for the most amount of people, it is good. If it decreases overall happiness, it is bad. The goal of our actions is to create the greatest happiness for the most amount of people. Since everyone’s happiness counts equally, utilitarianism considers maximizing the good from an impartial perspective, meaning that the interests of people close to you should not count higher than those of strangers. To illustrate, Plato imagined an ideal state in which private goods and nuclear families would be relinquished for the sake of the greater good of a harmonious society. Aristotle defined it in terms of a communally shared happiness, whose key constituents were wisdom, virtue and pleasure. World War One poster with the famous phrase "I want you for U. S. Army" (Get Your Covid-19 Shot Now) shows Uncle Sam pointing his finger at the viewer in order to recruit soldiers for the American Army during World War I. The printed phrase "Nearest recruiting station" (Get Your Covid-19 Shot Now) has a blank space below to add the address for enlisting. Parallel Worlds - NAZI vs U.S.A. - COVID-19 - ANTIFA - SS vs FBI vs DEATH Parallel worlds are hypothetical self-contained planes of existence that coexist with one's own. They are also known as alternate universes, parallel worlds, parallel dimensions, or alternate realities.0 The sum of all potential parallel universes that constitute reality is often called a "multiverse". "Parallel Worlds A Journey Through Creation, Higher Dimensions, and the Future of the Cosmos" covers the Big Bang, the early development of the Universe, and parallel universes is in fiction or is it true today right now. Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the rules. Report any suspicious users to the yes I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. These are rules that visitors must follow to participate. They can be used as reasons to report or ban posts, comments, and users. Communities can have a maximum of 15 rules. 1. No uncivil, bigoted, misogynist, misandrist, racist comments or posts. - 2. No Misinformation - 3. No Memes - 4. No language error posts - 5. No jokes/satire/trolls posts - 6. Remove identifying personal information - 7. No 'likes"/"shares" posts - 8. No "Reddit Meta" Posts - 9. No posts about politicians being politicians - 10. No posts attacking a political party or side. You forgot that people also get shot for legitimately no reason now. For example, knocking on a door. Or, trying to help someone. Imagine being an American soldier in 1945 Europe, getting a glimpse into the future and you see these guys walking the Streets of your hometown. Reminds me of a few months ago, when there was a tweet going around about a question a journalist asked Harrison Ford "How would Indiana Jones feel about the rise of modern Nazis?" and Harrison's response was "Indy would push people aside to deliver the first punch." And people genuinely got upset about that? Saying nonsense about how violence isnt the answer. I'm sorry, but if you get upset about people wanting to punch Nazis, you're a Nazi sympathizer. Nazis always deserve to be punched. Always. These look to be young black people. How much of a loser do you have to be to believe all your problems are due to "other people" at that age? If it wasn't for Jews, minorities, me and my 8th grade education would be on easy street? Because freedom of speech entails allowing anyone to demonstrate, regardless of whether their beliefs are agreeable. The mistake people are making is thinking that allowing them to demonstrate is somehow an endorsement of their beliefs. It is not. Nazis are the most reviled ideology by far in the USA. These people have zero political power and are viewed with scorn. They are accomplishing nothing by marching but ousting themselves as bigots. Free speech, our first amendment grants a lot of latitude. And something like "Kill all person X" or incitement of violence is not protected, and is punished, nor is it depicted here. None of us agree with what they are doing, but many many many law suits and judgements have been argued and the law always erred on the side of Free speech. German Jews' Passports Declared Invalid On October 5, 1938, the Reich Ministry of the Interior invalidates all German passports held by Jews. Jews must surrender their old passports, which will become valid only after the letter “J” has been stamped on them. The government required Jews to identify themselves in ways that would permanently separate them from the rest of the German population. In an August 1938 law, authorities decreed that by January 1, 1939, Jewish men and women bearing first names of “non-Jewish” origin had to add “Israel” and “Sara,” respectively, to their given names. All German Jews were obliged to carry identity cards that indicated their heritage, and, in the autumn of 1938, all Jewish passports were stamped with an identifying red letter “J”. As Nazi leaders quickened their war preparations, antisemitic legislation in Germany and Austria paved the way for more radical persecution of Jews. Vs. Excelsior Pass Plus As of July 28, 2023, the Excelsior Pass Plus (EPP) and the NYS Wallet Apps will no longer be available. Following the reduced demand for access to digital COVID-19 test and vaccine records through the epass.ny.gov portal and the official end of the COVID-19 public health emergency on May 11, 2023, the NYS Wallet that hosts the Excelsior Pass Plus COVID vaccine credential, will be discontinued. Excelsior Pass Plus provided a secure, digital copy of your COVID-19 vaccination record. Your Vaccination Pass Plus provided safe access to your vaccination information and included vaccine type, site and date of vaccination, just like your CDC Vaccination Card, validated by the State of New York. Your data collected for Excelsior Pass Plus continues to be private and secure. New York has gained knowledge on digital credentialing from this effort and remains interested in the potential this type of technology could bring in the future. Vs. No shot? No service. A New Jerseyan's guide to dining in NYC with vaccination now required New York City took the unprecedented step of requiring patrons of restaurants, bars, theaters, museums and many other venues to show proof of COVID-19 vaccination for entry beginning Tuesday, Aug. 17. Although many New Jerseyans still work from their dining room tables, hundreds of thousands commute daily into New York and grab lunch there or descend on the city for some weekend fun and fine dining. Here's what you need to know about the city's "Key to NYC" vaccine mandate: What venues now require proof of vaccination? There are three main areas where proof of vaccination must be shown for entry: indoor dining, indoor entertainment and indoor fitness. But that encompasses plenty of different businesses. They include: Indoor dining: restaurants, bars, coffee shops, fast-food joints, nightclubs, catering halls, grocery stores with indoor dining, hotel banquet rooms and cafeterias. Indoor entertainment: movie theaters, museums, Broadway theaters, concert venues, sports arenas galleries, bowling alleys, arcades, pool halls, convention centers, aquariums and zoos. Indoor fitness: gyms, pools and dance studios. No shot, no proof, no service: NYC businesses begin checks No shot, no shoes, no service. Japanese American internment and America’s Concentration Camps And Covid-19 Camps Today depicts an in American history that too few know or understand the mass incarceration of loyal Americans without charge or trial solely on the basis of race. During World War II more than 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry—2/3 of whom were American citizens—were incarcerated in hastily built camps in America's deserts and wastelands. A broad outline to this experience, this exhibit tells a story of injustice and sorrow, perseverance and courage. It tells the story through words, photographs, home movies, artwork and artifacts of those who lived it. Silent and silenced for decades, they share their memories in hopes that the more we learn about what happened over fifty years ago, the less likely such an injustice will happen again to any other people. Vs. On January 6, 2021, following the defeat of President Donald Trump in the 2020 U.S. presidential election, the leadership of the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, two far-right militias, plotted to use force to stop the peaceful transition of power, culminating in an attack on the United States Capitol Building. January 6 Capitol riots latest defendants held without bail and with out charges filed in 2021 1,000+ Capitol Riot defendants are being held without bond before their trials. A landmark decision on American internment and America’s Concentration Camps And Covid-19 Camps Today with No bond ever for Capitol Riot suspects handed down by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is part of the reason why. WASHINGTON D.C., DC — The Department of Justice has arrested more than 1984+ people for taking part in the January 6 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol building. Some of those trials are months, possibly 2 to 3 years away. Verify viewer Kelley from Alexandria, Virginia asked the Verify team if some of the accused remain behind bars nearly six months later. “Is it true people arrested [for crimes on January 6th] are still being held in jail with no bail," she asked in an email. "What are the charges?" Let's Verify. THE QUESTION Are people accused of participating in the January 6th insurrection on the U.S. Capitol still being held in jail without bail? If so, what are their charges? OUR SOURCES Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Court: United States v. Munchel THE ANSWER Yes, several 1,000+ people are being held without bail in the D.C. Jail for crimes they allegedly committed during the Capitol riots. WHAT WE FOUND Our Verify team turned to Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor now at West Coast Trial Lawyers, who said several Capitol Riot defendants remain in jail awaiting trial, even though some were arrested months ago. “Of the hundreds and hundreds of folks who have been arrested in the Capitol riots, the majority of them, most of them have received some sort of bail,” Rahmani said. “But the folks that engaged in the most violent acts, they are being detained without bond.” A landmark decision on bond for Capitol Riot suspects handed down by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is part of the reason why. In the case of United States v. Munchel, a three judge panel ruled those who “actually assaulted police officers and broke through windows, doors, and barricades, and those who aided, conspired with, planned, or coordinated such actions, are in a different category of dangerousness than those who cheered on the violence or entered the Capitol after others cleared the way.” The ruling instructed judges to release Capitol riot suspects, even if charged with serious crimes, unless the Department of Justice demonstrates a specific threat that defendant poses to the community. “The Court of Appeals said...the mere fact that you have these very strong political beliefs, that you had what may be considered a weapon on your person, that's not sufficient to hold someone indefinitely if they didn't engage in the most violent acts,” Rahmani said. "The court did, however, distinguish between folks that actually did assault police officers did, you know, break windows force open doors and those types of things.” Which is why people like Julian Khater and George Tanios are still in jail on charges of Assault on Federal Officer with Dangerous Weapon and Conspiracy to Injure an Officer, among others, for allegedly spraying pepper spray into the faces of law enforcement like Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. Thomas Sibick is being held until his trial without bond on charges that include Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers and Taking from a Person Anything of Value by Force and Violence, because he’s accused of being part of the savage attack on DC Police Officer Mike Fanone and ripping Fanone’s badge and radio right off his uniform. A number of the Proud Boys militia, and even an Oath Keeper named Jessica Watkins, have also been denied pre-trial release, not because they assaulted police, but because they are charged with conspiracy with other members of their militias to pre-plan the attack on the Capitol. Conspiracy is also one of those thresholds the courts have decided you cannot cross if a judge is going to rule someone is not a threat to the community and eligible for pre-trial release. Rahmani said that for prosecutors arguing for defendants to be held without bond, it goes beyond protecting the safety of the community. “The biggest reason why federal prosecutors want to hold someone without bail is that it's much easier to get a plea agreement and a deal when someone's already in federal prison,” Rahmani said. “It's very difficult, especially for someone who has no criminal history, to sign that plea agreement and agree to surrender and go to federal prison. So, some of it is actually danger to the community, but some of it is actually strategy and tactics to get folks to plead guilty.” Still, judges have discretion to interpret the law as they see fit and some defense attorneys argue the decisions about who is released and who is detained aren’t always consistent. “Different judges have very different views on whether this conduct is dangerous,” Rahmani. “And it's a random rotation, and it's the luck of the draw.” A judge cited that same court of appeals ruling in ordering the release of Federico Klein, a State Department appointee of former President Donald Trump who is facing charges he assaulted police officers with a riot shield. That judge ruled that it was a "close call" but in his opinion, that judge deemed Klein does not pose a "substantial threat to the community" despite his "demonstrated willingness to use force to advance his personal beliefs." So we can Verify, yes, some people arrested for crimes on January 6th are still being held in jail without bail, all of which are being housed at the D.C. Jail. The Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki are founding documents of modern medical ethics that articulate a core set of ethical principles regarding human experimentation and clinical care. The Nuremberg Code focuses on the human rights of research subjects, the Declaration of Helsinki focuses on the obligations of physician-investigators to research subjects, and the federal regulations emphasize the obligations of research institutions that receive federal funds. Both the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki served as models for the current U.S. federal research regulations, which require not only informed consent of the research subject but also prior peer review of research protocols by a committee that includes a representative of the community. The Nuremberg Code was formulated 50 years ago, in August 1947, in Nuremberg, Germany, by American judges sitting in judgment of Nazi doctors accused of conducting murderous and torturous human experiments in the concentration camps. The Declaration of Helsinki dealt with clinical research more directly, but was portrayed as a weakening of the stringent protections of Nuremberg. Issued by the Nuremberg Military Tribunal in 1947, the Nuremberg Code is a 10-point statement meant to prevent future abuse of human subjects. It states that, above all, participation in research must be voluntary. The other points are as follows: The results of the research must be useful and unobtainable by other means. The study must be rationally based on knowledge of the disease or condition to be studied. It must avoid unnecessary suffering. The study cannot include death or disabling injury as a foreseeable consequence. Its benefits must outweigh its risks. The study must use proper facilities to protect participants. The study must be conducted by qualified individuals. Participants may withdraw from the study if they wish. Investigators must be prepared to stop the study should participants die or become disabled as a result of participation. The Nuremberg Code was created by opining on the testimony of physician witnesses and was said to represent current thoughts on the topic of human experimentation. Although intended to refer to this particular trial and never formally adopted by any state or international agency, the Nuremberg Code has been tremendously influential—becoming the basis of later documents that are highly relevant to research today. https://www.wma.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Wiesing-DoH-Helsinki-20141111.pdf https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/2011/04/BMJ_No_7070_Volume_313_The_Nuremberg_Code.pdf A number of callers have asked whether compulsory vaccination breaches the Nuremberg Code. The short answer is no and it is laughable to suggest so. Following the Allied victory over Germany, the Allied powers enacted the International Military Tribunal on 19th November 1945. As part of the Tribunal, a series of legal trials were held against major war criminals and Nazi sympathisers. Crimes Against Humanity The first trial conducted under the Nuremberg Military Tribunals in 1947 became known as The Doctors’ Trial. In that trial, some 23 doctors from the German Nazi Party were tried for crimes against humanity. These doctors conducted atrocious experiments on unwilling prisoners of war, many taking place in the infamous Auschwitz concentration camp holding Jewish prisoners later to become known as the Holocaust. The point of the Nuremberg Code was to stamp out and protect humans involved in medical experiments and trials from cruel and life-threatening medical and surgical procedures. The 10 Elements of the Nuremberg Code are: Voluntary consent is essential. The results of an experiment must be for the greater good of society. Human experiments should be based on previous animal experimentation. Experiments should be conducted by avoiding physical/mental suffering and injury. No experiments should be conducted if it is believed to cause death/disability. The risks should never exceed the benefits. Adequate facilities should be used to protect subjects. Experiments should be conducted only by qualified scientists. Subjects should be able to end their participation at any time. The scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment when injury, disability, or death is likely to occur. Vaccinations for Covid-19 are not experimental. In producing the Astrazeneca, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccine the makers followed well-established protocols during clinical trials. To even suggest that compulsory Covid-19 vaccination comes anywhere near what people went through during the Holocaust simply shows the complete ignorance of some. Nuremberg Code Emergency Laws Mandatory Covid-19 vaccinations do not fall under the Nuremberg Code. In any event, emergency laws promulgated in the various States and Territories prevail. COVID-19 Compulsory Vaccination Legal and Bioethical Controversies The imposition of compulsory health treatments has always been a subject of animated legal and bioethical debate. What is at stake are two opposing interests that are in their own way protected by international treaties and constitutional provisions: the right to individual self-determination and the duty to defend and preserve collective safety. The global health crisis related to the COVID-19 pandemic has placed the issue of the legitimacy of imposing compulsory vaccination at the center of the multifaceted debate on pandemic health policies. Indonesia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and the Federated States of Micronesia are currently the only four countries in the world where the COVID-19 vaccine is mandatory for all citizens. Italy was the first country in the European Union to introduce this obligation, effective from 8 January 2022 by virtue of the decree-law approved on 5 January 2022, which imposed vaccination compulsory for everyone over the age of 50. Similar paths have been undertaken by Greece and Austria, where the obligation will start respectively on 16 January 2022 (for citizens aged over 60) and 1 February 2022 (for citizens of all ages). However, in many civilized countries, “selective” forms of compulsory vaccination, i.e., aimed at specific categories of individuals, especially healthcare professionals, are already provided for. The present work aims to offer a concise and as much as possible exhaustive overview of the main ethical and legal issues related to compulsory COVID-19 vaccination, with reference to both the Italian and the international context, mainly European. Introduction On 4 November 2021, the World Health Organization officially declared the entry into the fourth pandemic wave, identifying Europe as the epicenter of the new epidemic phase. Although the proportion of the population fully vaccinated against COVID-19 is encouraging in industrialized countries (70% of the population in the US and Canada, 67% in South America, 64% in Asia and 62% in Europe have received at least one dose) (1), the impact of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy could be a major hindrance to this delicate phase of the pandemic fight. The international epidemiological trend has brought the issue of compulsory vaccination, temporarily neglected during the summer break, back to the attention of national institutions. COVID-19 vaccination is already compulsory in many countries for specific categories of workers, mostly healthcare professionals, but a mandatory vaccination extended indiscriminately to the entire population is still largely unprecedented. There are currently four countries in the world where COVID-19 vaccine is mandatory for all citizens: Indonesia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and the Federated States of Micronesia. On 5 January 2022, the Italian government approved a decree-law imposing compulsory vaccination for all citizens over the age of 50, which came into force on 8 January 2022. Italy was thus the first European country to adopt a form of compulsory vaccination extended to the entire population (albeit with a fixed age limit). On November 19, 2021, Austrian Chancellor Alexander Schallenberg announced that in Austria the COVID-19 vaccine will be mandatory for all citizens from February 2022. On 30 November 2021, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis declared that vaccination against COVID-19 will be compulsory in Greece from 16 January 2022 for all citizens over the age of 60. Although the subject of hundreds of years of jurisprudential and bioethical reflection, the issue of the imposition of compulsory health treatment is still, in 2021, very far from seeing an unambiguous and shared key to interpretation. Striking a fair balance between the protection of individual autonomy and the protection of collective health is in fact extraordinarily complex, especially when set in the peculiar epidemiological and scientific context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This is because the COVID-19 vaccine has completely new features, from the technology used to make it to the particular way in which it combats the disease. This unique profile makes the discussion on compulsory vaccination particularly intriguing and raises legal and bioethical issues that have never before been addressed. At the Dawn of Compulsory Vaccination: the Fight Against Smallpox The first compulsory vaccination policy in history dates back to the late 18th century, during the American Revolutionary War, when General George Washington required his troops to be inoculated with the smallpox virus in 1777. Of all the diseases affecting the continental army, smallpox was one of the most fearsome threats, as it had a mortality rate of 10 to 60% in non-immune hosts. According to historians' estimates, at the end of the 7-year war, nine times as many soldiers died of the disease consequences (63,000) as died in battle (7,000). Washington had the merit of recognizing the seriousness of the disease early on and devising an effective immunization strategy for his army, which gave his troops a significant physical and psychological advantage over their opponents. A few years later, in 1796, English physician and naturalist Edward Jenner officially tested the first vaccine against smallpox by injecting a child's arm with a small amount of pus taken from the bumps of a woman suffering from cowpox, a form of smallpox that affects cows and, to a lesser extent, humans. Jenner concluded that cowpox inoculation was a safe alternative to human smallpox virus inoculation and equally effective in terms of protection against smallpox disease. After the scientific community recognized the efficacy and safety of the vaccine, the practice of smallpox vaccination spread widely in Europe, and several countries introduced mandatory vaccination requirements for their citizens, such as Norway in 1811, Russia in 1812 and Sweden in 1816. The first western nation to introduce free, universal, and compulsory smallpox vaccination was England with the Vaccination Acts of 1840, 1853 and 1867. The 1840 text provided for the smallpox vaccine to be free of charge and prohibited the variolation procedure, i.e., the inoculation of the subject to be immunized with human smallpox virus taken from an infected subject (the immunization technique practiced before Jenner's smallpox vaccine was developed). The 1856 Act made vaccination compulsory for all children up to 3 months and established penalties for non-compliance. The 1867 text tightened up the penalties for those who refused to vaccinate their children and introduced imprisonment for practicing variolation. In the following decades, the outbreak of new smallpox epidemics triggered by the Franco-Prussian war prompted many European states to introduce compulsory vaccination. In the United States of America, in 1905 the Supreme Federal Court issued a landmark judgement that legitimized the authority of states to “reasonably” violate personal liberties during a public health crisis by fining those who refused vaccination. In the late 1960s, the World Health Assembly (WHA) initiated a strategic plan for the definitive eradication of the smallpox virus, which led to Resolution 11.54, adopted in 1958 by the Eleventh World Health Assembly. On 1 January 1967, the World Health Organization launched the smallpox eradication programme, which led to the eradication of the virus in 1980. The worldwide effort to combat the disease made it possible to eradicate a virus that was responsible for 500 million deaths between the XIX and XX centuries, mainly through compulsory vaccination. Compulsory Vaccination in the European Regulatory Context The primary legal reference for the protection of fundamental human rights in the European regulatory context is the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), signed in Rome in 1950, in force since 1953, and adopted by the 47 member states of the Council of Europe. Article 8 (“Right to respect for private and family life”) states that “1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others”. According to the Convention, therefore, forms of interference with the right to individual privacy are permitted whenever necessary to protect the public health of a democratic society. This principle found a recent practical application in judgement no. 116/2021 of 8 April 2021 (Vavrička and others v. Czech Republic) by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which rejected the appeal of the parents of some Czech minors against national legislation prohibiting non-vaccinated children from enrolling in nursery school. The Strasbourg Court interpreted the imposition of compulsory vaccination against the 10 vaccine-preventable childhood infectious diseases (diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, Haemophilus influenzae type b infections, poliomyelitis, hepatitis B, measles, mumps, rubella and–for children with specified health indications–pneumococcal infections) for admission to nursery school as a means of protecting public health, and as such not violating Article 8 of the ECHR. The judgement sets out in detail the seven requirements that justify the interference in private life by national legislation: 1. The primary objective of compulsory vaccination must be to protect public health. 2. The imposition of compulsory vaccination must be based on a “pressing social need”, e.g., due to a low rate of spontaneous vaccination against a specific disease that could threaten public health. 3. “Relevant and sufficient reasons” are needed to impose mandatory vaccination. 4. The safety level of vaccines must be carefully evaluated in relation to scientific evidence. 5. The obligation cannot apply to persons with contraindications to the administration of the vaccine. 6. The obligation must be enforced through penalties for non-compliance, and may not provide for the forced administration of the vaccine. 7. The possibility for persons contesting penalties arising from non-compliance with the obligation to initiate appeals should be guaranteed. Another important normative reference is represented by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, signed in Nice in 2000 and legally binding for the European institutions and member states with the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2007. Article 1 (Human dignity) states: “Human dignity is inviolable. It must be respected and protected”. Article 3 (Right to the integrity of the person) establishes: “Everyone has the right to respect for his or her physical and mental integrity. In the fields of medicine and biology, the following must be respected in particular: the free and informed consent of the person concerned, according to the procedures laid down by law; the prohibition of eugenic practices, in particular those aiming at the selection of persons; the prohibition on making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain; the prohibition of the reproductive cloning of human beings”. The concept of free and informed consent expressed in Article 3 is borrowed from the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (Oviedo Convention), the first international treaty on bioethics, signed in Oviedo (Spain) on April 4, 1997, and entered into force on December 1, 1999, following ratification by the first five member states of the European Union. Article 5 of the Oviedo Convention states: “An intervention in the health field may only be carried out after the person concerned has given free and informed consent to it. This person shall beforehand be given appropriate information as to the purpose and nature of the intervention as well as on its consequences and risks”. The Legal bases of Compulsory Vaccination in the Italian Legal System In the Italian legal system, the right to health is enshrined in the Constitution, which in Article 32 states that “The Republic safeguards health as a fundamental right of the individual and as a collective interest, and guarantees free medical care to the indigent. No one may be obliged to undergo any health treatment except under the provisions of the law. Under any circumstances, the law may not violate the limits imposed by respect for the human person”. Therefore, health is not only a “fundamental right of the individual” but also a “collective interest”. The Italian Constitution aims on the one hand to protect the individual's right to self-determination, and on the other to guarantee the health of the community. The protection of public health may entail the imposition of compulsory health treatments, which would not be permitted under normal conditions, but which becomes legitimate if provided for by specific laws. The Italian Constitutional Court, the main constitutional guarantee body, which is called upon to verify the conformity of state and regional laws and acts having the force of law with the Constitution, fully illustrated the concept of balancing the protection of the right to individual self-determination and the safeguarding of public health in judgement no. 307 of 22 June 1990, concerning the constitutional legitimacy of compulsory polio vaccination for children within the first year of life: “… the law imposing a medical treatment is not incompatible with article 32 of the Constitution if the treatment is aimed at improving or preserving the state of health of those subject to it, but also at preserving the state of health of others, since it is precisely this further purpose, pertaining to health as an interest of the community, which justifies the compression of that self-determination of man which is inherent in the right of everyone to health as a fundamental right”. Similarly, in 1994, the same Court held that the protection of collective health “implies and includes the duty of the individual not to damage or endanger the health of others through his or her own behavior, in observance of the general principle that each person's right is limited by mutual recognition and equal protection of the coexisting rights of others”. In that judgment, no. 218 of 2 June 1994, the Court declared unconstitutional Article 5 of Law no. 135 of 5 June 1990 on AIDS (18), which provided that no one could be tested for HIV infection without his or her consent except on the grounds of clinical necessity in his or her own interest. In fact, the judges considered that the provision represented a prejudice to collective health, since “Article 32 of the Constitution implies the duty to protect the right of third parties who come into necessary contact with the person for activities involving a serious risk, not voluntarily assumed, of contagion”. Another recent confirmation of the non-incompatibility of the imposition of compulsory vaccination with Article 32 of the Constitution came again from the Italian Constitutional Court in 2018. With judgement no. 5 of January 18, 2018, the Italian Constitutional Court declared partly inadmissible and partly unfounded the question of constitutional illegitimacy raised by the Veneto region in relation to the vaccination requirement introduced by Law 119/2017 (transition from 4 to 10 mandatory vaccines for children from 0 to 16 years of age). The reasons for the judgement state: “The law imposing a health treatment is not incompatible with Art. 32 Cost. This is the case if the treatment is intended not only to improve or preserve the state of health of the person undergoing it, but also to preserve the state of health of others; if it is provided that it does not adversely affect the state of health of the person who is obliged to undergo it, except only for those consequences that appear normal and, therefore, tolerable; and if, in the hypothesis of further damage, the payment of an equitable indemnity in favor of the damaged party is provided for, and this regardless of the parallel protection of compensation …”. Regarding the last sentence of the judgment extract, the reference is to Law 210/1992 (“Economic indemnity for persons affected by irreversible pathological impairment following compulsory vaccinations, transfusions, and administration of hemoderivatives”), which protects victims of permanent damage deriving from compulsory health treatments, offering them the possibility of receiving adequate financial compensation after an appropriate medical-legal evaluation. Another constitutional principle of central importance in qualifying the imposition of compulsory health treatments is that set out in Article 2: “The Republic recognizes and guarantees the inviolable rights of the person, both as an individual and in the social groups where human personality is expressed. The Republic expects that the fundamental duties of political, economic and social solidarity be fulfilled”. Article 2 enshrines the principle of social solidarity between the individual and the community, according to which the citizen, as a member of a community, is called upon to act not only for his own personal interests, but also to protect collective interests. Thus, the combined provisions of Articles 32 and 2 of the Italian Constitution make the legitimacy of compulsory vaccination conditional on an appropriate balance between protecting the health of the individual and the community. In the near future (since the official publication of the decree-law passed on 5 January 2022), the vaccine will be compulsory in Italy for all citizens over the age of 50. Until 31 December 2021, the COVID-19 vaccine was compulsory in Italy for all healthcare professions and workers, pursuant to Article 4 of Decree-Law no. 44/2021. This was, in fact, a “selective” vaccination requirement, in that it was intended for a specific category of workers, and a “temporary” one, operating until 31 December 2021. According to the provisions of the law, failure to comply with the vaccination requirement by those who “carry out their activities in public or private health, social and health care and social assistance structures, in pharmacies or parapharmacies and professional offices” results in the suspension of the right to perform services or tasks involving interpersonal contacts. As a matter of fact, SARS-CoV-2 is classified as a human pathogenic agent of risk group 3) according to Art. 267 of Legislative Decree no. 81/2008 (the so-called “Unified Text on Occupational Safety and Health”), i.e., the category that “includes pathogenic microorganisms that can cause disease in humans and pose a serious risk to workers; they can spread in the community but effective prophylactic or therapeutic measures are usually available”. In line with this principle, EU Directive 2020/739 of 3 June 2020 also included SARS-CoV2 among the biological agents against which protection in the workplace is mandatory. On the basis of the combined provisions of Article 267 of Legislative Decree 81/2008 and Article 2087 of the Civil Code (which states that the employer is obliged to protect the physical integrity of employees), on 19 March 2021 the Court of Belluno issued an ordinance declaring legitimate the conduct of the management of a nursing home that had deemed unfit for duty and forced to take leave 10 healthcare workers who had refused to undergo the COVID-19 vaccine. The ordinance, therefore, rejected the appeal filed by the claimants, who argued the constitutional illegitimacy of Article 4 of Decree-Law no. 44/2021 insofar as it obliged healthcare workers to vaccinate. The Court held that the question was manifestly unfounded, since the imposition of medical treatment aimed at protecting the health of others is entirely compatible with the Italian Constitution, provided that the subject is guaranteed fair compensation in the event of damage beyond normal foreseeability. Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccine: the Reasons for Controversy The vast majority of civilized countries require their citizens to undergo a series of compulsory vaccinations starting from childhood. In Italy, for example, all minors between zero and 16 years of age and unaccompanied foreign minors must undergo 10 vaccinations. Children who are not up to date with vaccinations cannot access school services. The imposition of compulsory health treatments such as childhood vaccinations was always accompanied by a lively bioethics debate, which however never reached even remotely the proportions of the dispute regarding the compulsory vaccine against COVID-19. This is because COVID-19 vaccines have characteristics that make their mandatory imposition particularly controversial, chief among them the lack of final approval by regulators in many countries. With particular reference to the European context, any pharmaceutical company wishing to market a drug within the European Union must first apply for marketing authorization by submitting an application to the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Based on recommendations provided by the EMA, which carefully evaluates the drug efficacy and safety profiles, the European Commission can issue 3 types of authorization: emergency use authorization (EUA), conditional marketing authorization (CMA), and standard marketing authorization (SMA). So far, the European Commission has granted four conditional marketing authorizations for vaccines developed by BioNTech and Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, after the EMA gave a positive assessment of their safety and efficacy. The other vaccines are at different stages of evaluation. Conditional marketing authorization is granted in cases where not all the clinical data for a drug required for standard authorization are available, but the benefit of placing the drug on the market immediately is considered to outweigh the risks related to the temporary incompleteness of the data. Conditional marketing authorization is granted when 4 requirements are simultaneously met: there is a favorable benefit-risk ratio for the drug; all conditions are in place to believe that the pharmaceutical company will be able to provide complete data after authorization; the medicine meets an unmet medical need; and the benefit of the drug's immediate availability to patients outweighs the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still needed. Conditional marketing authorization is valid for 1 year and may be renewed. The conditional marketing authorization imposes several obligations on the authorization holder that must be fulfilled within defined time frames, such as collecting additional data to demonstrate that the drug is effective and safe. The marketing authorization can be converted to a standard marketing authorization once the marketing authorization holder meets the imposed obligations and complete data confirm that the drug's benefits continue to outweigh the risks. The procedure for authorizing the marketing of a drug under the American regulatory authority, the FDA (Food and Drug Administration), has similar characteristics, but is carried out more quickly due to the implementation of streamlined procedures such as “fast track”, “priority review”, and “accelerated approval”. This procedural simplification enabled the US FDA to grant final approval of the mRNA vaccine developed by BioNTech and Pfizer on 23 August 2021 for everyone over 16. Until then, commercialization of the vaccine in the United States had been granted by virtue of an emergency use authorization dated 11 December 2020. The vaccines developed by Moderna and Janssen Pharmaceutica NV are still marketed in the US due to an emergency authorization issued by the FDA on 18 December 2020 and 27 February 2021, respectively. The relatively unknown nature of the etiological agent responsible for the COVID-19 disease and the development of vaccines in an extraordinarily short timeframe make the described criticalities in the path to final approval of vaccines quite natural. In any case, it should be noted that, regardless of the marketing approval process, the COVID-19 vaccine is the first drug in history to have benefited from a “real-life” test of exceptional proportions, having been administered to over 5.5 billion people and having shown absolutely satisfactory efficacy and safety profiles. Regarding safety, according to EMA data, as of 28 October 2021, 412,571 adverse effects have been reported in 428,000,000 doses of Comirnaty vaccine administered to European citizens (0.09%), 214,528 in 68,800,000 doses of Vaxzevria (0.31%), 94,636 in 61,600,000 doses of Spikevax (0.15%) and 28,244 in 16,300,000 doses of Janssen (0.17%). The vast majority of recorded adverse effects were mild or moderate. Regarding efficacy, although COVID-19 vaccines show relatively modest effectiveness in preventing the contraction of viral infection, their overall ability to control the onset of serious illness requiring hospitalization and intensive care has been proven by the world's most authoritative clinical studies. Important decisions on compulsory vaccination against COVID-19 have been taken within the European institutions. The Council of Europe, the main international organization committed to protecting human rights, separate and independent from the European Union, signed Resolution no. 2361 on 27 January 2021 (“Covid-19 vaccines: ethical, legal and practical considerations”). The text clearly rules out the possibility of individual states making the COVID-19 vaccine compulsory and prohibits its use as a means of discrimination. In points 7.3.1 and 7.3.2, the Resolution requires member states to: “… ensure that citizens are informed that the vaccination is not mandatory and that no one is under political, social or other pressure to be vaccinated if they do not wish to do so; ensure that no one is discriminated against for not having been vaccinated, due to possible health risks or not wanting to be vaccinated”. However, this Resolution, being issued by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, is not a source of law, and is therefore neither binding nor mandatory for individual member states. A possible conflict between the domestic law of one of the European States and the Council of Europe Resolution never implies illegality of the national rules. This is not the case for the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, which is called upon to check whether national laws comply with the principles laid down in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The Strasbourg Court has so far ruled on cases related to the COVID-19 pandemic on three occasions. In the first case (Le Mailloux v. France, 5 November 2020, declaration of inadmissibility), concerning a French citizen who claimed that national legislation had failed to comply with the positive obligations to protect life and health of persons enshrined in Article 2 ECHR by not providing citizens with adequate means of defense against the spread of the virus (masks and tests), the Court dismissed the application because the applicant did not have “victim” status. The second case concerns a Romanian citizen's appeal against the imposition of lockdown, which allegedly violated Article 5 of the ECHR, protecting personal freedom (Terheş v. Romania, 13 April 2021, declaration of inadmissibility). The Court dismissed the appeal because the lockdown does not impose restrictions that can be regarded as a “deprivation of liberty” within the meaning of Article 5 ECHR. The third case concerns an application for provisional measures made by 672 French firefighters, who invoking Articles 2 and 8 of the ECHR asked the Strasbourg Court to suspend as an interim measure the provisions of the French law no. 2021–1040 of 5 August 2021 imposing on their category the vaccination requirement to work (Abgrall and 671 Others v. France, 24 August 2021, rejection of requests for interim measures). The Court rejected the appeal of the 672 firefighters as being outside the scope of Article 39 of the Rules of Court, which governs the conditions for adopting interim measures. Indeed, the Court stated that granting interim measures is possible only in exceptional circumstances, when the applicants would otherwise face “a real risk of irreversible harm”. However, it must be emphasized that this judgment excludes the existence of conditions suitable for the adoption of emergency protective measures, and in no way precludes the possibility that the Court may subsequently declare the admissibility of the firemen's action concerning the compatibility of the French legislation with the principles of the ECHR. In summary, therefore, in none of the three decisions of inadmissibility the Strasbourg Court tackled head-on the question of the legitimacy of compulsory vaccination. How to Enforce a Potential Obligation? Another central issue regarding the actual applicability of a direct vaccination obligation to all nation citizens concerns how this obligation would be enforced. Basically, two compulsory vaccination policies are conceivable. The first consists of a highly coercive strategy, a “hard” compulsory vaccination, whereby the drug is administered against the individual's will through the intervention of law enforcement. The second, decidedly softer, option is to bar people who have not been vaccinated from participating in social and working life by adopting a vaccination passport. The policy of forced inoculation presents countless critical elements in its hypothetical application and must therefore be considered as merely abstract. On the other hand, the vaccine passport strategy is far more feasible and is in fact already partially applied in EU countries. The application is “partial” because not only vaccinated citizens, but also citizens who have recovered or tested negative to a molecular swab carried out within the last 72 h can obtain the EU digital COVID certificate. Shifting from a partial application of the digital COVID certificate to an extensive application, i.e., a vaccination passport granted only to those who have been vaccinated, would in fact represent the imposition of a vaccination obligation. However, according to this provision, there would be a thorny new issue to be addressed, that of the actual usefulness of vaccinating people who have recovered from COVID-19, and are therefore naturally immunized. Scientific evidence suggests that healed individuals with adequate antibody levels are more protected from reinfection than vaccinated people. Vaccination against COVID in recovered individuals may even be burdened with a higher probability of adverse effects. In accordance with these scientific data, it would not be unreasonable to grant vaccination passports not only to those who have been vaccinated, but also to those who can prove that they have recovered from the infection, as is the case in Switzerland. However, it should be noted that the introduction of a vaccine passport as a prerequisite for access to social and working life would have a paradoxical effect, i.e., it would exacerbate restrictions on the personal freedom of the population instead of restoring the freedoms of all (the primary objective of vaccination). In the light of this reflection, the choice of basing the compulsory vaccination policy on the immunity passport would therefore be counterproductive. This would open up a third way in which the compulsory vaccination could be enforced: the imposition of fines on individuals who do not wish to be vaccinated. The idea of creating a specific offense and the related criminal consequences (arrest and imprisonment) to punish those who do not intend to undergo vaccination is to be discarded, for the simple reason that no judicial system would be able to withstand the impact of such a measure. Italy, for example, had around 5.5 million unvaccinated people at the beginning of 2022, for which an equal number of criminal prosecutions should be initiated. A financial penalty for those who do not comply with the vaccination requirement would be much more feasible. This fine, however, to fulfill the task at hand, should be of such a magnitude as to have a substantial impact on the person's economic status. In other words, a system of economic penalties that provides for monetary sanctions commensurate with the income of the person sanctioned would be effective, as is already the case in some countries (Switzerland and Finland). In Italy, the size of economic sanctions is not related to the financial resources of the individual, and the definition of a fixed monetary amount as a fine to be paid in case of non-compliance with the vaccination obligation would lead to an obvious social inequity, with rich people willing to pay in order to preserve their non-vaccinated status and poor people forced to comply with the legal obligation. Conclusion The alarming rate of progression of the fourth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in Europe, has placed the issue of compulsory vaccination at the center of the international legal and bioethical debate. As shown by the brief collection of principles enshrined in international treaties and jurisprudential pronouncements proposed, the right to individual self-determination is not configurable as intangible, being subordinate to the duty to ensure public safety. In this sense, in accordance with the legal guidelines outlined above, we consider the legal bases for imposing a generalized vaccination obligation to be sufficiently sound. Obviously, such an obligation must be based on reliable scientific data attesting to the absolute safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine. Although authorizations for these vaccines are still largely conditional (only in the United States has one vaccine obtained final approval), it cannot be forgotten that more than 2 years after the pandemic broke out, SARS-CoV2 is putting even the most advanced health systems in serious difficulty. Vaccines have proved a great way to kill you and family's and to be an extraordinarily effective tool in containing the spread of the infection and limiting hospitalizations and planned for your deaths. Their safety and efficacy have been widely proven in studies carried out all over the world. These safety and efficacy profiles have enabled these drugs to obtain conditional approvals from the major regulatory agencies. These authorizations, although “conditional”, were granted after a thorough and scrupulous process of verifying the existence of a benefit-risk balance in favor of the benefits. As for adverse events, although their existence is undeniably documented, it is absolutely impossible to imagine that a worldwide vaccination campaign could result in an absolute absence of undesirable effects. Although it may therefore seem anomalous to impose a compulsory requirement for drugs that have not yet been definitively approved, in our opinion 4 the greater good and the extraordinary and exceptional nature of the plandemic situation makes it fully justifiable. In our view 4 the greater good, waiting for the final authorizations to be granted by new world order before imposing compulsory vaccination (or death its your choose) 4 the greater good of earth... it would pose a serious danger of delay in the fight against the fourth plandemic wave. The Great Awakening Another Powerful Documentary From What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie? Yes Its For The Greater Good. Yes Thank You For Killing Yourself Too... We The Sheeple People's Republic Of United State Of America... Yes Its For The Greater Good. With Love From Your Uncle Sam... Yes Its For The Greater Good, Greater Good, Greater Good, And God Bless You ALL... Yes Its For The Greater Good.

So To All My Fellow Americans From Both Political Parties We Are Going to Kill You. The Legality Of Targeting And Killing U.S. Citizens Abroad And In Your Own Country By & With Poisoning And Herbicides And Drugs And Food For A 100 Years Now. See Also So Video Links Below. When A U.S. Citizen heard he was on his own country’s drone target list, he wasn’t sure he believed it. After five near-misses, he does and is suing the United States to contest his own execution. Us political parties Here is a list of political parties in the United States: Major Parties: Democratic Party: Founded in 1828, the Democratic Party is one of the two major parties in the United States. It is known for its liberal or progressive platform, which emphasizes social justice, economic equality, and government intervention in the economy. Republican Party: Founded in 1854, the Republican Party is the other major party in the United States. It is known for its conservative or right-wing platform, which emphasizes limited government, free market economics, and traditional values. Minor Parties: Libertarian Party: Founded in 1971, the Libertarian Party is a libertarian party that advocates for limited government, individual freedom, and a free market economy. Green Party: Founded in 1984, the Green Party is a left-wing party that emphasizes environmentalism, social justice, and non-violent conflict resolution. Constitution Party: Founded in 1992, the Constitution Party is a conservative party that advocates for a strict interpretation of the US Constitution and limited government. Independent Party: Founded in 1995, the Independent Party is a centrist party that emphasizes fiscal responsibility, limited government, and individual freedom. The U.S. government’s involvement in the 1970s with regards to poisoning drugs was primarily focused on the use of herbicides, such as Paraquat, to destroy marijuana crops in Mexico. This was done as part of the country’s anti-drug efforts, with the intention of reducing the supply of illegal drugs. However, this practice was met with controversy and criticism, as it was seen as a violation of human rights and a potential health risk to those who consumed the contaminated crops. During Prohibition, which lasted from 1920 to 1933, the U.S. government intentionally poisoned industrial alcohol to discourage people from drinking. This practice, known as “denaturing,” involved adding toxic chemicals to the alcohol to make it undrinkable. However, instead of achieving its intended goal, this policy led to a significant number of deaths and injuries. The government’s efforts to poison the alcohol supply were motivated by a desire to reduce drinking and its associated social problems. However, the practice was poorly implemented, and many people were unaware that the alcohol they consumed was poisonous. As a result, thousands of people died from methanol poisoning, which can cause blindness, seizures, and even death. One of the most notable incidents of poisoned alcohol occurred during the Christmas season in 1926, when over 60 people were hospitalized and eight died after consuming poisoned alcohol in New York City. This incident was widely reported and led to widespread outrage and criticism of the government’s policy. The government’s decision to poison the alcohol supply was also criticized for its lack of effectiveness in reducing drinking and its disproportionate impact on poor and marginalized communities. Many people, particularly those living in urban areas, were forced to turn to illegal and dangerous sources of alcohol, which often contained even higher levels of toxic chemicals. In the end, the government’s policy of poisoning the alcohol supply was widely seen as a failure and was eventually abandoned. Prohibition was repealed in 1933, and the production and sale of alcohol were once again legalized. True Story How US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical - https://rumble.com/v2ath8q-true-story-how-us-government-tried-to-kill-weed-smokers-with-a-toxic-chemic.html How U.S. Government (Killed Us Again) U.S.A. Poisoned Alcohol During Prohibition - https://rumble.com/v2atam4-how-u.s.-government-killed-us-again-u.s.a.-poisoned-alcohol-during-prohibit.html CIA Killing 100,000> Year Selling Heroin In U.S.A. Our Troops Protecting Opium-Heroin - https://rumble.com/v2fg19o-cia-killing-100000-year-selling-heroin-in-u.s.a.-our-troops-protecting-opiu.html Five Billion Slaughter-bots Weapon AI based drone weapon are ready be launched now - https://rumble.com/v28znek-five-billion-slaughter-bots-weapon-ai-based-drone-weapon-are-ready-be-launc.html CIA Mind Control and CIA Secret Experiments use of biological and chemical materials. - https://rumble.com/v28z81i-cia-mind-control-and-cia-secret-experiments-use-of-biological-and-chemical-.html The U.S. government’s MK-Ultra program was a secret research project that aimed to develop techniques for controlling human behavior through mind control and brainwashing. The program was initiated in the 1950s and continued until the 1960s. Development and Purpose MK-Ultra was created in response to the Soviet Union’s alleged use of mind control techniques on American prisoners of war during the Korean War. The CIA, led by Director Allen Dulles, approved the project in 1953, with the goal of developing methods to counter Soviet and Chinese mind control techniques. Methods and Techniques The MK-Ultra program involved a range of techniques, including: Drug experimentation: The use of LSD, mescaline, and other drugs to alter human behavior and induce mind-altering states. Electroshock therapy: The use of electroconvulsive therapy to alter brain function and induce amnesia. Sensory deprivation: The use of isolation tanks and other techniques to deprive individuals of sensory stimuli and induce a state of consciousness. Hypnosis: The use of hypnosis to induce a state of suggestibility and control. Controversies and Consequences The MK-Ultra program was shrouded in secrecy, and many of its activities were illegal and unethical. The program was eventually shut down in the 1960s due to public outcry and congressional investigations. AOC Celebrate Restarting MK-Ultra Program With Progress Psychedelics Treatment. - https://rumble.com/v3045j8-aoc-celebrate-restarting-mk-ultra-program-with-progress-psychedelics-treatm.html Legacy The MK-Ultra program has had a lasting impact on the field of psychology and the public’s perception of government experimentation. The program has also been linked to various conspiracy theories, including claims that the government is still using mind control techniques on individuals today. New World Order National Anthem "The Ostrich" Lyrics by Steppenwolf 1968 A.C.E. https://rumble.com/v27t6qc-new-world-order-national-anthem-the-ostrich-lyrics-by-steppenwolf-1968-a.c..html Compensation and Apologies In the 1980s, the CIA settled lawsuits with some of the victims of the MK-Ultra program, providing compensation to their families. The CIA-Contra-Crack Cocaine Controversy refers to a series of allegations and investigations that suggest the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was involved in the Nicaraguan Contras’ cocaine trafficking operations during the 1980s, and that some of the profits from these illegal activities were used to fund the Contras. The controversy also involves claims that the CIA and other government agencies turned a blind eye to the drug trafficking and even collaborated with the Contras to distribute cocaine in the United States, particularly in urban areas with high concentrations of African American populations. Key Allegations: The CIA was aware of and supported the Contras’ involvement in drug trafficking, including the sale of cocaine to fund their military activities. The CIA and other government agencies, including the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), failed to investigate and prosecute Contra-connected drug traffickers, despite having evidence of their illegal activities. The CIA and Contras collaborated to distribute cocaine in the United States, particularly in urban areas with high concentrations of African American populations, in order to fund their anti-Sandinista activities. The CIA and other government agencies used drug money to fund the Contras, despite the illegal nature of the activities. Despite the lack of evidence, the allegations of CIA involvement in the Contra-cocaine scandal have had a lasting impact on public perception of the CIA and the US government’s role in the drug trade. The controversy has also led to ongoing debates about the ethics and morality of US foreign policy and the CIA’s role in it. Some of the key points to note about the CIA-Contra-Crack Cocaine controversy include: The CIA and the Contras were involved in a covert war in Nicaragua during the 1980s, and the Contras were known to have received funding and support from the CIA. Cocaine was a major source of revenue for the Contras, and some Contra leaders were involved in drug trafficking. The CIA was aware of the Contras’ involvement in drug trafficking, but did not take action to stop it. The CIA’s Inspector General conducted an internal investigation, which concluded that there was no evidence of a conspiracy by CIA officials to bring drugs into the US. The US Department of Justice conducted an investigation, which found no evidence of a conspiracy. The controversy has led to ongoing debates about the ethics and morality of US foreign policy and the CIA’s role in it. It’s important to note that the CIA-Contra-Crack Cocaine controversy is a complex and controversial topic, and different sources may have different perspectives on the events and allegations surrounding it. What’s wrong with the U.S.’ targeted killing policy? The notion that the U.S. can execute its own citizens anywhere in the world, far from any battlefield, without a legal determination of guilt and without firm and public standards is repugnant to our democracy. Both the Constitution and international law prohibit the use of lethal force against civilians outside of armed conflict except in very narrow circumstances: as a last resort to prevent an imminent attack that is likely to cause death or serious physical injury. A targeted killing policy under which names are added to a “kill list” after a secret bureaucratic process and remain there for months at a time appears not to be limited to imminent threats. Allowing the use of warlike tactics far from any battlefield — using drones or other means — turns the whole world into a war zone and sets a dangerous example for other countries which might feel justified in doing the same. If the U.S. claims it can kill suspected enemies of the U.S. anywhere — using unmanned drones or otherwise — then other countries will regard killing their enemies within our borders as justified. We wouldn’t be okay with the prospect of other countries executing their suspected enemies within U.S. borders. The targeted killing of individuals who are suspected — but not proven — to be guilty of crimes also risks the deaths of innocent people. Over the last decade, we have seen the U.S. government wrongly imprison hundreds of men as terrorists based on weak, wrong or unreliable evidence, only to eventually free them. The consequence of such mistakes is far greater when the end result is death; there is no recourse for killing the wrong person. Why is targeted killing a civil liberties issue for the ACLU? It is the ACLU’s job to hold the government accountable to the Constitution and international law and to defend individuals’ rights against government abuse of power. A program of targeted killing far from any battlefield, without charge or trial, violates the constitutional guarantee of due process. It also violates international law, under which lethal force may be used outside armed conflict zones only as a last resort to prevent imminent threats, when non-lethal means are not available. Putting people on a “kill list” for months at a time is clearly not limited to last resort or imminent threats. How does the targeted killing program operate? There is very little information available to the public about the U.S. targeting of people far from any battlefield, so we don’t know when, where and against whom targeted killing can be authorized. According to news reports, names are added to a “kill list,” sometimes for months at a time, after a secret internal process. In effect, U.S. citizens and others are placed on “kill lists” on the basis of a secret determination, based on secret evidence, that a person meets a secret definition of threat. What are the standards for being placed on the targeted killing list and who is on it? No one knows what the standards are for being placed on the list because the government has not disclosed them. We do know that people on the list are suspects who have not been found guilty of any crimes. The secrecy and lack of standards for sentencing people to death, resulting in a startling lack of oversight and safeguards, is one of our prime concerns with this program. We don’t know how many people are on the government’s kill lists — we don’t even know how many Americans are on the lists. And equally troubling, we don’t know on what basis people are added to the list. How much evidence does the government have before it adds a name to the kill list? Who reviews that evidence? The government should not be imposing the death penalty on the basis of standards that are secret. Who maintains the targeted killing list? According to government officials, the C.I.A. and the Pentagon maintain lists of suspected terrorists linked to Al Qaeda and its affiliates who are approved for capture or killing, but the inclusion of Americans on those lists must be approved by the National Security Council. How many Americans have been targeted for death? It’s impossible to know because the list is secret. In response to a question about the procedures used to order lethal strikes against U.S. citizens abroad, White House Terrorism advisor John Brennan suggested that “dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world” were “very concerning.” It is unclear how many of these citizens are on the kill list. Why should being a U.S. citizen be a shield? Once you decide to fight against America, don’t you give up that protection? There are very narrow circumstances under which the government is authorized to use lethal force against a person without due process. If a U.S. citizen takes up arms against the U.S. on a battlefield, or if he poses an imminent threat off the battlefield, citizenship will not protect him. But the government appears to be claiming the authority to use lethal force against U.S. citizens who are merely suspected of terrorist crimes, even if they are civilians far from any battlefield. Aren’t you challenging a military strategy? Shouldn’t the military be able to do what’s necessary to keep us safe? War time authority must be limited to active conflict zones, but the U.S. is reportedly targeting people located far from any battlefield. The entire world is not a battlefield, and we don’t want to replace the laws of peace with the laws of war everywhere and anywhere the government believes a suspect may be located. If we give the executive branch the authority to define a global battlefield and to describe any terrorism suspect as a combatant, then we are effectively allowing government officials to make life-or-death decisions without the time-tested procedural protections of the Constitution. How the U.S. responds to the threat of terrorism will in large measure determine the rules that govern every nation’s conduct in similar circumstances. If the U.S. claims it can kill suspected enemies of the U.S. anywhere — using unmanned drones or otherwise — then other countries will regard killing their enemies within our borders as justified. Why should someone be protected just because he isn’t in an armed-conflict zone? Would this be ok if he was hiding out in Iraq or Afghanistan? Under very narrow circumstances, the government can use lethal force without due process, including against people engaged in armed conflict on the battlefield and people who pose an imminent threat off the battlefield. But unless those criteria are met, the government cannot lawfully execute someone without charge or trial. Why should we care that the U.S. government is trying to kill bad people who are far away? Targeting people who are suspected of terrorism for execution, far from any war zone, turns the whole world into a battlefield. If the U.S. starts sending drones after its suspected enemies all over the world, there’s nothing to stop other countries from doing the same. Americans certainly don’t want other countries to start sending drones after their own enemies who might be located within U.S. borders. Our proposed legal challenge is not about the guilt or innocence of individual suspects; it’s about defending the Constitution and the rule of law. The President simply does not have the authority under our Constitution to create a program that gives him the secret, unchecked authority to designate citizens for death. If we allow the President to violate some individuals’ constitutional rights unopposed, then everyone’s constitutional rights are at risk. Does al-Aulaqi know you plan to file a lawsuit on his behalf? We have never communicated with Anwar Al-Aulaqi. Our only contact has been with his father. Our planned lawsuit is about the principle of giving the executive branch unilateral authority to impose an extrajudicial death sentence on American citizens. What are you asking for in your lawsuit? We are asking a court to declare that, except in cases of concrete, imminent threat when there are no other means besides lethal force available to stop the threat, intentionally targeting and killing of U.S. citizens violates the Constitution and international law. We are also asking the court to order the government to disclose the criteria it uses to determine when a U.S. citizen can be targeted and killed, and to block the government from killing Anwar Al-Aulaqi unless he is found to present a concrete, imminent threat and there are not other means besides lethal force that could be used to stop the threat. Are you trying to get Anwar al-Aulaqi off the targeted killing list? We are asking a court to block the government from killing any U.S. citizens, including Anwar Al-Aulaqi, unless they are found to present a concrete, imminent threat and there are not other means besides lethal force that could be used to stop the threat. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1330&context=vlr Targeted Killing and the Rule of Law: The Legal and Human Costs of 20 Years of U.S. Drone Strikes In a 9 February 2022 hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Crisis Group’s Chief of Policy Stephen Pomper recommended legal reform to reinvigorate Congress’s decision-making role in the current legal and structural status quo on U.S. counter-terrorism operations. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Grassley and members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today about the United States’ use of force in countering terrorism and more broadly as a tool of U.S. foreign policy. It is a privilege to be speaking before this distinguished committee. I am currently the Chief of Policy for the International Crisis Group, an international non- governmental organization dedicated to conflict prevention; we currently cover more than 50 conflict situations around the world. From 2002 until 2017, I worked for the U.S. government in a variety of roles including as the Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights at the National Security Council, where I helped to develop U.S. policy with respect to civilian casualties, and as the Assistant Legal Adviser for Political-Military Affairs at the Department of State, where my focus was on international and domestic law regulating the use of force and the law of armed conflict. My testimony today will argue that recent revelations about civilian casualties in U.S. counterterrorism operations should prompt an examination of how the United States came to be involved in a temporally and geographically unbounded twenty-year conflict with an undisclosed and evolving list of terrorist groups. It will explore why it is problematic that the executive branch has been permitted such broad discretion about how to define the scope of this conflict and the legal and structural factors that contributed to the status quo. My principal recommendation will be to reinvigorate Congress’s constitutional role with respect to decision- making on matters of on war and peace. This will require legislative reform – in particular amending and updating the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (“2001 AUMF”) and 1973 War Powers Resolution (“1973 WPR”) – to increase checks and balances on the use of military force as an instrument of foreign policy. A Problematic Status Quo In September 2021, President Biden told the United Nations that “I stand here today for the first time in 20 years, with the United States not at war. We’ve turned the page.” But in fact the United States is still very much waging war. While last year marked the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan, it did not mark the end of the conflict in which they fought. That conflict continues on, for the most part conducted under the 2001 AUMF. The enemy is an amalgamation of groups that includes al-Qaeda, certain affiliates known as “associated forces,” and ISIS. It is colloquially referred to as the “war on terror,” which is how I will refer to it today. Much about the war on terror is hidden. We hear about it when there is a big success, as with the raid that led to the death of ISIS leader Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Quraishi in Idlib, Syria last week. We also sometimes hear when something goes terribly wrong, as with the deaths of four U.S. servicemembers at Tongo Tongo, Niger, in 2017, or when stories emerge in the media about previously undisclosed mass civilian casualties. Counter-terrorism has come to mean light foot-print operations in remote locations that evade easy monitoring. But much of the time we do not hear about it at all. We do not know exactly who the U.S is fighting or where. We do not know what success in this conflict is supposed to look like. We do not have a reliable sense of who is being killed or why they are being killed. This is in part for operational reasons: counter-terrorism has come to mean light foot-print operations in remote locations that evade easy monitoring. There is also an institutional explanation, however. The development, prosecution and oversight of this war has largely been handed over to the executive branch. Successive administrations have developed legal and policy doctrines that allow them to expand the scope of the conflict unilaterally. Rather than seek authority from Congress, they turn to their own lawyers to seek interpretations of pre-existing statutes that Congress never contemplated. They decide what sorts of safeguards are appropriate to guard against civilian casualties and too often fail to apply them rigorously. This approach is problematic. From the rule of law perspective, it is problematic because it has been characterized by a lack of transparency and seemingly ad-hoc rule-making in the absence of effective checks and balances. From the humanitarian perspective, it is problematic because it may unnecessarily expose innocent civilians to harm. From a strategic perspective, it raises the question of whether the United States is over-extended militarily at a time when it faces so many global and strategic challenges. And from the perspective of wanting to turn the page, it is problematic because it has allowed the executive branch substantial latitude to perpetuate and expand the present war without a robust discussion of its costs. A Three-part Problem 1. An elastic legal framework While there is an extensive body of law that governs the use of force by the executive branch, it has been aggressively interpreted by successive administrations to the point where it is now far easier for the executive branch unilaterally to start or expand a war than it is for Congress to end one. Although Article I of the Constitution vests in Congress the power to declare war, the executive branch takes a very broad view of the President’s unilateral war-making powers under Article II’s Commander-in-Chief clause. According to the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), there are certain checks on this power. Namely, the president must be able to establish that a unilateral use of force serves a “national interest” and that the “nature, scope and duration” of the anticipated hostilities will not rise to the level of “war in the constitutional sense”. The national interest test, however, has been deemed to include everything from an expansive conception of self-defense to regional stabilization, leading a growing chorus of experts to characterize it as nearly meaningless. For its part, the “nature, scope and duration” test is both pliant and unevenly applied. In the run-up to the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts, for example, OLC issued opinions that President George W. Bush would have the unilateral authority to launch those hugely consequential wars even in the absence of congressional authorization. Despite the urging of scholars and former senior government lawyers from both parties, these opinions remain on the books. Second, the 1973 WPR has largely been gutted as a constraint on presidential powers. Although intended to reinvigorate Congress’ role on matters of war and peace, a combination of executive branch interpretation, court decisions and congressional acquiescence have left it all but ineffective as a mechanism for regulating executive war-making. To be sure, the statute still notionally requires the president to withdraw U.S. forces introduced into “hostilities” within 60 days (or 90 under certain circumstances) absent congressional authorization to keep fighting. But since 1975, successive administrations have read the term “hostilities” very narrowly and also developed counting methods that delay reaching the 60-day threshold. Even the notification provisions under the 1973 WPR, which have historically been fairly effective, have become less functional. The Supreme Court’s 1983 INS v Chadha decision has also cast constitutional doubt over the capacity of Congress to order the withdrawal of troops through a concurrent resolution, as originally contemplated by the 1973 WPR. This leaves Congress without a reliable way to end a war through simple majority vote. While in theory it can deny funding to a war already in progress, or override a presidential veto to enact a joint resolution of disapproval, the practical and political obstacles are forbidding. Third, beyond the president’s constitutional powers, the 2001 AUMF has been transformed into a deep well of unilateral authority for the executive branch. While on its face, the 2001 AUMF approves the use of force against groups the president determines to have “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11 attacks (as well as those who harbored such groups or persons) successive administrations of both parties have looked past the statutory language requiring a connection to those events. Through the executive branch’s interpretive gloss, groups can be unilaterally deemed targetable under the AUMF if they constitute “associated forces” of al-Qaeda because they are viewed as having entered the war alongside it. In 2014, the executive branch also deemed ISIS to be targetable under the AUMF even though ISIS leaders had broken with al-Qaeda and were, in certain instances, in direct conflict. Finally, the United States’ approach to international law renders it a less than fully reliable constraint on executive action. International law is widely understood to require that in order for a state to use force on another state’s territory, it must act with the territorial sovereign’s consent, a UN Security Council authorization, or in self-defense. But the United States’ approach to anticipatory self-defense and its reliance on the contested “unwilling or unable” test create significant operational latitude for the executive branch and can be applied in a way that brings the United States into potential conflict with other nation states. In some instances, administrations of both parties have simply dispensed with an international legal justification for the threat or use of force – as the Clinton administration did with respect to operations in Kosovo (1999), the Obama administration did in threatening to use force against Syria (2013) and the Trump administration did in the context of its Syria strikes (2017 and 2018). 2. A permissive legal culture The normalization of war as a tool by which the United States advances its counterterrorism policies has placed an enormous weight on the shoulders of the U.S. government’s national security lawyers, who are generally required to vet proposals that reach the president’s or the cabinet secretaries’ desks. As a former State Department lawyer, I have deep respect and admiration for the government’s national security legal corps. At the same time, however, there are sometimes misperceptions about the decision space in which those lawyers operate. It tends to be narrow. While national security lawyers can and do say “no” when they cannot see a legal justification for a proposed operation, the U.S. approach to national security lawyering creates an expectation that the lawyers will exercise significant creativity in offering what is generally unreviewable legal advice, often making them an agent for the expansion of executive powers rather than a bulwark against it. To begin with, executive branch lawyers are for the most part not required (with the exception of OLC under its guidelines) to confine their advice to the best understanding of what the law requires. Instead, without explicit standards for rendering legal advice, lawyers across the government often default to whether a position is “legally available.” This can in some instances mean taking positions that are contrary to the weight of authority, scholarly opinion, or even the United States’ own prior positions. Some reports suggest, for example, that the Obama administration reached the conclusion that the 2001 AUMF authorizes military force against ISIS – a group that fits neither within the plain language of the 2001 AUMF nor the definition of associated forces developed by the executive branch – even though none of the senior lawyers involved regarded this to constitute the best interpretation of the statute. The point here is not that the United States should not have used force against ISIS. Rather, it is that the executive branch was able to launch a military campaign this consequential based on a contested legal theory about what was even then a more than ten- year-old statute—rather than obtaining prior authorization from Congress consistent with its constitutional role. The need to justify events that have already happened, can be another driver of expansive executive branch lawyering. For an operating agency, the implications of conceding error – for example by determining that lives have been unlawfully taken – are potentially profound from the perspective of reputation, morale and legal liability. In some cases, reporting suggests, accounts of problematic activities become buried in the system. But other times lawyers in Washington are asked to justify facts on the ground. Under those circumstances, there can be significant pressure to adopt new and expansive legal positions. Much of the doctrine relating to U.S. operations in the war on terror can trace its roots to positions that the U.S. government took to justify the detention of ‘enemy combatants’. Perhaps the most salient example of this kind of retrospective national security lawyering arises in the context of the Guantanamo detainee litigation. Much of the doctrine relating to U.S. operations in the war on terror can trace its roots to positions that the U.S. government took to justify the detention of “enemy combatants” seized both on and off the battlefield in the early years of the conflict. Indeed the U.S. government’s interpretation that the AUMF extends to “associated forces” with no nexus to the September 11 attacks appears to have at least partly developed out of the need to retrospectively justify – first to the Combatant Status Review Tribunals that reviewed the legality of detentions during the George W. Bush administration and ultimately to the federal courts – why the United States was entitled to capture and hold members of groups other than al-Qaeda. Successive administrations then applied that definition prospectively to open new fronts in the war on terror against groups that did not exist on the day of the September 11 attacks and on battlefields far from Afghanistan. Finally, there are limits to how much strong executive branch process can be relied on to counter these drivers of expansive legal doctrine. While bringing together lawyers from across the national security community in a “lawyers group” to discuss important issues is a valuable exercise, and can help ensure that diverse viewpoints are aired, those gatherings are generally convened with a view toward getting to “yes” on a proposed campaign or operation. In these circumstances, dissenting voices may find themselves focusing on how they can maintain points of principle, even as they are yielding to operational preferences as a practical matter. 3. Flexible safeguards Through several administrations, the executive branch has committed to the protection of civilians through safeguards that it views as exceeding legal requirements imposed by the law of war. Yet the evidence suggests that the safeguards are flexible, the technical capacity to implement them is unreliable, and the U.S. government’s internal systems for tracking and correcting its own failures in this area are lacking. This hearing is in many respects framed by a series of reported system failures in Afghanistan and Syria that surfaced only because journalists uncovered them and brought them to the attention of the public. Why, after 20 years of war using systems designed for precision, under safeguards intended to minimize risks to civilians and encourage operational transparency, are incidents like this still surfacing? Part of the answer to the first question surely lies in General Frank McKenzie’s explanation that “combat ... is an inherently messy, imprecise, bloody business.” If a country goes to war, it must expect that there will be civilian casualties. Part of the problem may also relate to the specific circumstances of some of the strikes – whether the United States has a ground presence to help guide targeting, or the depth of its intelligence base in a particular locale. But it is hard to imagine that the pliancy of the safeguards that the United States has relied on to prevent civilian harm is not also a factor. Perhaps most important, the ultimate guardrail for the protection of civilians in the U.S. system is adherence to the law of war, which requires the parties to a conflict to distinguish between civilians, who enjoy immunity from targeting, and combatants, who can be killed or detained based on their status. But law of war protections still allow for civilian casualties – provided they are not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated – meaning that simple adherence to these standards can lead to situations where significant numbers of civilians are killed, even knowingly, in combat. Whereas other militaries commit to take ‘all feasible’ precautions to protect civilians to be part of their international legal commitments, the U.S. only commits to take ‘feasible precautions.’ Moreover, in the context of a non-international armed conflict with a non-state actor such as ISIS or al Qaeda, at least some parts of the U.S. government have taken a relatively flexible approach as to who qualifies as a combatant. The Defense Department’s Law of War Manual offers illustrative examples of what constitutes “formal” and “functional” membership in an armed group – which it regards as the equivalent of combatancy – without articulating meaningful limits on who can fall within these terms. Further, unlike many partner militaries, the Pentagon’s manual does not contain a presumption that individuals are civilians in cases of doubt. In addition, whereas other militaries commit to take “all feasible” precautions to protect civilians to be part of their international legal commitments, the U.S. only commits to take “feasible precautions.” While the U.S. has created coordination and consultation requirements for the war on terror that are intended to create an additional layer of safeguard, there are loopholes. Reports of the 2019 Baghuz strike that appears to have led to mass casualties suggest that operators could skirt these safeguards through the dubious invocation of “self-defense”. U.S. operators in Somalia have also reportedly long considered “collective self-defense” strikes in support of partner forces to lie beyond the reach of normal coordination and consultation requirements. Systems for reporting civilian casualty incidents, learning lessons and ensuring they are incorporated into the military’s approach to future operations also appear to be lacking. As noted, many of the major civilian casualty incidents to be reported over the course of the war on terror, have been reported not by the U.S. government, but by journalists and civil society organizations. In recent weeks, the administration has given signals that it will make an effort to correct some of these problems. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s memo of January 27 mandates a “Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Plan” within 90 days. The administration has suggested that it conducted last week’s special operations raid that killed the top ISIS leader in Idlib, Syria with particular attention to mitigating the risk to civilians. But the depth and durability of any reforms remains to be seen. As one commentator recently observed, U.S. mitigation efforts in the war on terror have followed a “cycle of learning and forgetting.” Restoring Congress’s Constitutional Role in War and Peace For the reasons I have described, the legal and prudential safeguards meant to constrain both the scope and the conduct of the war on terror are insufficient. While it is important to pursue reforms that can help preserve innocent life that could be lost as a consequence of U.S. operations, it is also important to address the risk that this twenty-year-old war persists indefinitely without sufficient examination of its costs and effectiveness, and to begin restoring balance between the political branches with respect to matters of war and peace. As concerns civilian casualties, the Department of Defense has long been urged by scholars and civil society to adjust its “feasible precautions” standard to match the “all feasible precautions” benchmark that many U.S. allies regard as a requirement of international law. It should do so, while also tightening its definition of who is targetable, and adjusting its protocols so that there is more reliable reporting and investigation of civilian casualty incidents. Because of the institutional challenges the Pentagon has faced in the latter task, it should consider bringing in experts from outside the chain of command – even from outside the executive branch – to ensure the work is rigorously done. But changes like these are no surrogate for a broader inquiry about the war itself, and about the executive branch’s war-making powers. That will require Congress to reassert its Constitutional prerogatives on matters of war and peace. The Framers invested this body with the Declare War power for a reason: It is the most representative of the three branches of government and, because of its deliberative nature, the most apt to place a brake on imprudent war. Congress should begin to reclaim this role with two mutually reinforcing steps. First, Congress should debate and decide the extent to which the U.S. must remain on a war- footing in order to meet the terrorist threats that it faces. Depending on the outcome of that discussion, it should replace the 2001 AUMF with a more narrowly targeted law that identifies the specific groups Congress authorizes war against, the locations where that war may be conducted, and the mission that the war is seeking to achieve. The revised statute should remove the capacity of the executive branch to change the scope of the war by adding new “associated” or “successor” forces without first obtaining congressional permission. To ensure that elected officials are required to examine whether the conflict is actually achieving its stated objectives, it should include a date no more than two or three years into the future by which the statute will lapse absent reauthorization. Second, taking the longer view, Congress should replace the 1973 WPR with a revised statute that narrows the executive branch’s discretion to wage unilateral war to the realm of true self- defense. The bipartisan draft National Security Powers Act introduced over the summer by Senators Lee, Murphy and Sanders would be a good place to start. In addition to common sense changes (such as changing the 60-day withdrawal clock to a 20-day clock that would be more difficult to manipulate), the Act would clearly define “hostilities,” effectively narrow the realm for unilateral executive branch war-making to true self-defense, require much more robust reporting of conflicts once underway, and deny funding should the executive branch seek to wage war without Congress’s approval. One overdue step that the executive branch should take in support of this reform effort would be to review the inventory of OLC opinions that relate to unilateral executive branch war-making authorities and revoke those that stand out as extreme. The two above-referenced opinions from 2001 and 2002 would be a good place to start. Conclusion Legal reforms that require Congress and the executive branch to agree on the scope of the current and future wars are the only way to ensure the kind of public airing that these conflicts deserve, remove the power to decide the contours of the nation’s wars from unelected lawyers and policymakers, and place responsibility with the elected officials who are accountable to the nation’s voters. There is no guarantee that structural changes requiring greater cooperation between the two political branches on matters of war and peace will lead to more of the latter than the former. The U.S. Congress did, after all, authorize the Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq wars. But if U.S. elected officials are to fully learn the lessons of those wars, and put them into practice, then they must have a vehicle for doing so. Policy formed in the insular world of the executive branch is unlikely to be such a vehicle. Inter-branch debate – in view of the public, and subject to democratic accountability – is more likely to serve the interests of the United States and the ends of global peace and security. Lies, Lies, Lies Top CIA, FBI, DOJ Officials Grilled Abuse Section 702’s Mass Surveillance - https://rumble.com/v2u1w5w-lies-lies-lies-top-cia-fbi-doj-officials-grilled-abuse-section-702s-mass-su.html Executive Orders Can’t Save The U.S.A. ? It's “WE THE PEOPLE” Who Own America ? - https://rumble.com/v2cgic2-executive-orders-cant-save-the-u.s.a.-its-we-the-people-who-own-america-.html Executive Orders associated with FEMADC that would suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These Executive Orders have been on record for nearly 30 years and could be enacted by the stroke of a Presidential pen: EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports. EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media. EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals. EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to seize all means of transportation, including personal cars, trucks or vehicles of any kind and total control over all highways, seaports, and waterways. EXECUTIVE ORDER 10999 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of the nation. UN Invasion, Martial Law, Rex 84 Death Camps, Globalist Purge, Operation Cable Splicer. This Is Part One... https://rumble.com/v41h3zp-un-invasion-martial-law-rex-84-death-camps-globalist-purge-operation-cable-.html Guide To Understanding Globalist Purge FEMA Quarantine Re-Education Death Camp - https://rumble.com/v41deia-guide-to-understanding-globalist-purge-fema-quarantine-re-education-death-c.html Federal Emergency Management Agency Death Camp's Purchase 30,000 Guillotines - https://rumble.com/v2cfd3c-federal-emergency-management-agency-death-camps-purchase-30000-guillotines.html https://rumble.com/v27tdu5-the-district-of-columbia-organic-act-of-1871-41st-us-congress-sold-out-the-.html https://rumble.com/v280ewg-your-momma-sold-you-into-slavery-who-owns-your-citizenship-you-or-your-gove.html https://rumble.com/v27x230-the-united-states-government-is-a-foreign-corporation-with-respect-to-a-sta.html https://rumble.com/v27wcq7-the-act-of-1871-the-united-states-is-a-corporation-there-are-two-constituti.html https://rumble.com/v29quxm-united-states-is-a-corporation-and-corporate-origins-of-modern-constitution.html https://rumble.com/v2dau7c-birth-certificate-equals-slavery-bondage-understanding-how-admiralty-mariti.html https://rumble.com/v2dmnio-meet-your-strawman-your-birth-certificate-is-worth-millions-swindled-by-u.s.html Lab-Grown And Real Human Meat Was FDA Approved Cannibalism A Sprit Cooking - https://rumble.com/v2mnkmi-lab-grown-and-real-human-meat-was-fda-approved-cannibalism-a-sprit-cooking.html Truth Behind Meat Production Chicken Waffle Beef Burger An Eye-Opening Exploration - https://rumble.com/v2mmrac-truth-behind-meat-production-chicken-waffle-beef-burger-an-eye-opening-expl.html 600 Billion Dollars Poison Ingredient Making Your Food Toxic To Eat Processed Food - https://rumble.com/v2mesq8-600-billion-dollars-poison-ingredient-making-your-food-toxic-to-eat-process.html Human Meat Project - New Shake 'N Bake Fetus - Campbell Cream of Fetus Soup? - https://rumble.com/v2qkf5y-human-meat-project-new-shake-n-bake-fetus-campbell-cream-of-fetus-soup.html GMO Genetically Modified Organisms Transgenic Crops and Recombinant DNA Technology - https://rumble.com/v2dn1zu-gmo-genetically-modified-organisms-transgenic-crops-and-recombinant-dna-tec.html This Is How Beef, Chickens, Cats, Dogs, Fish, Human Meat Hot Dogs Are Really Made - https://rumble.com/v31wtya-this-is-how-beef-chickens-cats-dogs-fish-human-meat-hot-dogs-are-really-mad.html Baby Chicks Ground Up Alive I'm Not A Chicken Nuggets And Eggs Educational Film - https://rumble.com/v327fsc-baby-chicks-ground-up-alive-im-not-a-chicken-nuggets-and-eggs-educational-f.html Everything You Need To Know About Eating Live Insects Wild Edibles Of The World - https://rumble.com/v341blk-everything-you-need-to-know-about-eating-live-insects-wild-edibles-of-the-w.html Nothing to See Here “Accidental Destruction” Food Processing Plant Fire Suspicious - https://rumble.com/v2axqu6-nothing-to-see-here-accidental-destruction-food-processing-plant-fire-suspi.html CIA Killing 100,000> Year Selling Heroin In U.S.A. Our Troops Protecting Opium-Heroin - https://rumble.com/v2fg19o-cia-killing-100000-year-selling-heroin-in-u.s.a.-our-troops-protecting-opiu.html More than a Million Americans Kill Themselves With Drug Suicide have died from overdoses during the opioid epidemic. Its very easy to not die... Stop buy your drugs from the black market and someone sell drugs from a car... So how to get a drug prescription in U.S.A., only physicians, dentists, podiatrists, or veterinarians can issue prescriptions... so if you want drugs do it the right way. And stop killing yourself from drugs from the black market now. Understanding the Opioid Overdose Epidemic ? Why More People Are Turning to the Black Market for Medication ? Preventing Drug Suicide and New research released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found roughly 932,000 fatal overdoses from 1999-2020. Preliminary data shows another 100,000 deaths this year. https://ycsg.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/we_can't_go_cold_turkey.pdf https://www.unodc.org/res/wdr2022/MS/WDR22_Booklet_1.pdf Deaths due to drug overdose have topped a million for the first time since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began collecting data on the problem more than two decades ago. A study released Thursday by the National Center for Health Statistics, a division of the CDC, found that 932,364 people died in the U.S. from fatal overdoses from 1999 through 2020. Separate preliminary data from the CDC shows another 100,000 drug deaths expected in 2021. The Truth About Gain-Of-Function Covid-19 Vaccines U.S.A. Bioweapon And Terrorism - https://rumble.com/v2kpsyc-the-truth-about-gain-of-function-covid-19-vaccines-u.s.a.-bioweapon-and-ter.html You Will Never Trust Another Celebrity After Watching This Corrupt U.S.A. Governments - https://rumble.com/v2kq5mw-you-will-never-trust-another-celebrity-after-watching-this-corrupt-u.s.a.-g.html Docs Worldwide Warn You to Not Take the Covid 19 Vaccine Will Kill You Dead Soon - https://rumble.com/v2ksf52-docs-worldwide-warn-you-to-not-take-the-covid-19-vaccine-will-kill-you-dead.html Unlike the COVID-19 pandemic, which hit elderly Americans hardest, researchers found drug deaths have risen fastest among the young and middle-aged adults struggling with addiction. Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated People Will Threaten The Live Of Vaccinated People? - https://rumble.com/v2qf2nk-pandemic-of-the-unvaccinated-people-will-threaten-the-live-of-vaccinated-pe.html Male to Female Sex Reassignment Surgery Live ** Very Graphic ** Think Twice Guys ? - https://rumble.com/v2hpw3e-male-to-female-sex-reassignment-surgery-live-very-graphic-think-twice-guys-.html WoW This Looks Fun Lady's Keyhole Top Surgery For Female to Male Transgender -- https://rumble.com/v2zsoao-wow-this-looks-fun-ladys-keyhole-top-surgery-for-female-to-male-transgender.html New Mandate Law To Force All U.S.A. Female To Get Sex Genital Mutilation Survivors - https://rumble.com/v2hjog8-new-mandate-law-to-force-all-u.s.a.-female-to-get-sex-genital-mutilation-su.html Evidence Shows Hillary Clinton Is A Robot And Clinton's 100s Dead Body Count Info. - https://rumble.com/v2hx6cg-evidence-shows-hillary-clinton-is-a-robot-and-clintons-100s-dead-body-count.html Secrets Meeting Biden Said New U.S.A. Laws Coming Age of Consent Is To Be 8 Yrs. Old - https://rumble.com/v2j9os4-secrets-meeting-biden-said-new-u.s.a.-laws-coming-age-of-consent-is-to-be-8.html Secret Pedophile's Watch Child Beauty Pageant Glitter Girls Age 4 Thru 8 Yrs. Old - https://rumble.com/v36e1uw-secret-pedophiles-watch-child-beauty-pageant-glitter-girls-age-4-thru-8-yrs.html What’s The True Pedophile's Blood Killings Story Behind Joe-Hunter Biden’s Laptop - https://rumble.com/v2ro7po-whats-the-true-pedophiles-blood-killings-story-behind-joe-hunter-bidens-lap.html Disney Pedophile's Branson Necker Island 40 Miles To Epstein Orgy Island Global Elite - https://rumble.com/v2dim5k-disney-pedophiles-branson-necker-island-40-miles-to-epstein-orgy-island-glo.html Joe-Hunter Biden's Insane Laptop Exposed Sex, Drugs, Shady Deals, Child Killing 4 Sex - https://rumble.com/v2rnowy-joe-hunter-bidens-insane-laptop-exposed-sex-drugs-shady-deals-child-killing.html Pedophile and A Pizza Secret Human Trafficking and Child Sex Ring Evidence ** GRAPHIC ** - https://rumble.com/v2bbfv2-pedophile-and-a-pizza-secret-human-trafficking-and-child-sex-ring-evidence-.html List of Visitors and Guestbook and Epstein Island They Do Not Want You to See Ever - https://rumble.com/v2d2l2c-list-of-visitors-and-guestbook-and-epstein-island-they-do-not-want-you-to-s.html Biden's Crime Family And Kids​ With Sex Crime Against Young Girls And 13 Dead Body's - https://rumble.com/v2te3tg-bidens-crime-family-and-kids-with-sex-crime-against-young-girls-and-13-dead.html CIA-DOJ-FBI Pizza-Gate Secrets Sex Multi-Billion Dollar Human Trafficking Industry - https://rumble.com/v2q8g8s-cia-doj-fbi-pizza-gate-secrets-sex-multi-billion-dollar-human-trafficking-i.html Biden's Chinese Sex & Business Secrets Enriched Biden Family At America's Expense - https://rumble.com/v2tehzo-bidens-chinese-sex-and-business-secrets-enriched-biden-family-at-americas-e.html Can Pedophile's Have Sex With Real Kid's Humanoids and Other Adult AI Robot's - https://rumble.com/v2hui5e-can-pedophiles-have-sex-with-real-kids-humanoids-and-other-adult-ai-robots-.html Creepy Pedophile's Uncle Joe Played Out Over 33 Million Dollars Sexual Assault Claims - https://rumble.com/v2rp4bc-creepy-pedophiles-uncle-joe-played-out-over-33-million-dollars-sexual-assau.html Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated People Will Threaten The Live Of Vaccinated People? - https://rumble.com/v2qf2nk-pandemic-of-the-unvaccinated-people-will-threaten-the-live-of-vaccinated-pe.html Decoding 100's Illuminati Symbolism Pyramid All Seeing Eye And 666 Hand Gesture - https://rumble.com/v2s1tkm-decoding-100s-illuminati-symbolism-pyramid-all-seeing-eye-and-666-hand-gest.html Ted Cruz Play Game - Real Story Is Human Trafficking & Sex Slaves Is U.S.A. Planned - https://rumble.com/v3lm9yp-ted-cruz-play-game-real-story-is-human-trafficking-and-sex-slaves-is-u.s.a..html U.S.A. Government Largest Middleman & Suppliers Of Sex Slave Trafficking Operation - https://rumble.com/v3m43w6-u.s.a.-government-largest-middleman-and-suppliers-of-sex-slave-trafficking-.html For Greater Good Its A Pandemic Unvaccinated People Threaten Vaccinated People - https://rumble.com/v3g39q7-for-greater-good-its-a-pandemic-unvaccinated-people-threaten-vaccinated-peo.html Pizza Gate New Clues Pedophile Paintings Modern Art Or Disturbing Pizza Clues W0W - https://rumble.com/v2bbt6i-pizza-gate-new-clues-pedophile-paintings-modern-art-or-disturbing-pizza-clu.html How FISC-DOJ-CIA-FBI Secret Pedophile's Courts, Justice System, Government Works - https://rumble.com/v2ghpce-how-fisc-doj-cia-fbi-secret-pedophiles-courts-justice-system-government-wor.html U.S. Government Is Selling Child Pornography and False Charges Against U.S. Citizens - https://rumble.com/v2gonq2-u.s.-government-is-selling-child-pornography-and-false-charges-against-u.s..html How U.S.A. Government Payed CIA Asset Jeffrey Epstein Got Away With It As Planned - https://rumble.com/v405v1q-how-u.s.a.-government-payed-cia-asset-jeffrey-epstein-got-away-with-it-as-p.html Black Sex Slave Fight For Sexual Justice During Reconstruction Female Slave Owners - https://rumble.com/v2fxav6-black-sex-slave-fight-for-sexual-justice-during-reconstruction-female-slave.html Per U.S.A. Government Everyone Is A Criminal Confiscation All Property & All Assets - https://rumble.com/v3t6igt-per-u.s.a.-government-everyone-is-a-criminal-confiscation-all-property-and-.html Sex Slave 4 Sale Remember Men Buy, Sell, Or Trade, Rape Illegals Arrive Ghost Flights - https://rumble.com/v3lnmc5-sex-slave-4-sale-remember-men-buy-sell-or-trade-rape-illegals-arrive-ghost-.html Epstein Island Guestbook and Visitor List They Do Not Want You to See Ever ! - https://rumble.com/v293sb4-epstein-island-guestbook-and-visitor-list-they-do-not-want-you-to-see-ever-.html U.S. Government Is Selling Fentanyl Laced w-Xylazine To Kill Us - Its Not From Mexico - https://rumble.com/v2giyy1-u.s.-government-is-selling-fentanyl-laced-w-xylazine-to-kill-us-its-not-fro.html Welcome To Our Channel In 2024 What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie? Yes We All The People Of The U.S.A. So If You Our Black-White-Yellow-Brown-Red-Woke-Trans-Etc. We At This Channel Do Not Care About Anyone Skin Color At All Now Or In The Past Time. All Info. shared in this channel is for non-hate and non-race and historical purposes to educate, elevate, entertain, enlighten, and empower through old and new film and document allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use. Note: The content on this channel may cover controversial topics and explore differing perspectives. It is intended for informational and discussion purposes only. Views expressed by guests or in comments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the channel owner. We encourage respectful dialogue and open-mindedness. However, viewers are advised to conduct their own research and exercise critical thinking when engaging with the content. This channel does not endorse or condone any form of hate speech, discrimination, or violence. Viewer discretion is advised. Welcome To The New World Order - The Year Zero - The Real Origin of the World - National Anthem of the United States of America and Confederate States of America National Anthem and New World Order National Anthem Is "The Ostrich" Lyrics by Steppenwolf from the album 'Rest In Peace' 1967-1972 A.C.E. The Conspiracy to Rule Your Mind chronicles how the ruling elite have established global domination and the ability to effect the thoughts, decisions, and world view of human beings across the globe by systematically infiltrating the media, academia, industry, military and political factions under the guise of upholding democracy. Learn how this malevolent consortium has dedicated centuries to realize an oppressive and totalitarian rule through any means necessary, not limited to drug trafficking, money laundering, terror attacks and financial crisis within the world economy. Worldwide tyranny is already in full effect, the food we eat and the air we breathe are not off limits. Will we be able to stop this madness before we become an electronically monitored, cashless society wherein ever man, woman and child is micro chipped? We live in the world where sex is free and love costs, where losing a phone is scarier than losing morale, where it is fashionable to get drunk and using drugs, because if you don’t do that, you’re old and out, where men cheat on their wives with girls and if they don’t, it’s for fear of being caught, where girls are more afraid of being pregnant than getting AIDS, where pizza delivery is faster than an ambulance, where clothes decide a person’s value and money is more important than friends and family... This is not my world. Where has my true world gone? The New World Order Is Upon Us - Preserve Your Liberty By Being Prepared ! - We The People of the New World Order Thank You. The Left/Right paradigm isn't only exposed by race and immigration issues. The Left and Right are in lockstep on every issue that really matters: The IRS. Income tax. Federal Reserve system. Endless wars. Endless expansion of tyranny and ever contracting liberty. Chronically wide-open borders. Suicidal immigration policies. Don't you see? The democrats and republicans exist only to provide the illusion of choice. A strong "us versus them" simulation in every election. It's ritualized tribalism. But the joke is, it doesn't matter which team wins, because both sides have the same agenda. God, guns and gays are phony "issues" to bolster the illusion of "difference" between the parties. The only thing that makes all this possible is that people aren't aware of the scam. Just knowing they are either "Team Red" or "Team Blue" liberates them from the responsibility of having to actually know or think anything. Then they feel righteous when their team wins, or despondent when they loose. It's no coincidence that the system works exactly like sports. There comes a point when ignorance and apathy become treason. We are past that point, people. Everything you want to know what could be more terrifying than being trafficked for sex? Being murdered in a ritual sacrifice. And even worse than that would be being murdered in a ritual sacrifice so wealthy elite cabalists can harvest your adrenal glands to get the compound Adrenochrome they need to prolong their decrepit lives! It's so easy to be overwhelmed and feel beaten by the amount of negative and discouraging information being spread by the mainstream (fake stream) media. There are truly awful people in WEF and WHO, who want to reduce us to the level of serfs or chattel, but we can resist, indeed, we must resist. Be calm, be objective and be positive. Right is Might. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.” Nobody Is Safe From People's Republic Of The Tyrannical We The Sheeple People of The United States of America and A Real True Bill of State Rights Of Government July Forth 1776 The Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, which limit the power of the federal government and guarantee certain freedoms and rights to all colour of people and for the citizens of All America. Thanks For Calling and Remember the U.S. Government Leave No Witnesses Alive Behind Them. If You See Fraudulent or Criminal Activities by U.S. Government. Please Call Us (ASAP) So We Can Send Someone Out To Kill You! Thanks Again For Calling. The Presidential Hotline Pedophile and Secret Human Trafficking and Child Sex Ring Etc. Call 1-866-4-5455-968 ( 1-866-I-Kill-You ) should be used when all your attempts to get assistance from a government department, province, municipality or state agency have failed. It is not only a complaints line. You can call to share your views or provide solutions to the challenges in your community. We also list the help line numbers of non-governmental organization's working with government. You may call at 987-654-3210 ext. new world order!

Joe and Jill Biden's Share Their Inspiring A Pedophile's True Enduring Love Story And Ashley Biden Admits Details In Her Diary Are True About Her Father Showers With My Dad. Joe Biden Eleven-Year-Old Daughter From (Ashley Biden Diary) Who Said I Had To Wash And Soap Up My Dad Hard Naked Body By Hand ? Joe Biden Said Cum On Man... Its Not True... See How Congress Really Works And Its A Joke. Kathleen Buhle Biden “Guns, Drugs, Alcohol, Alive And Dead Prostitutes, Strip Clubs, Sexual Relations With Kids” A Pedophile's Family Look At Creepy Joe Biden Nose In Own Kid's Hair! So Did Hunter Biden Really Kill Two Prostitutes ? Yes Our Pedophile President and first lady of the United States pride themselves on their close and loving relationship, which has weathered tragedy, the spotlight and decades on the campaign trail. Learn more about their long-lasting romance below in all the true video's linked below today. Minutes before he would be sworn in as the 46th president of the United States, Joe Biden posted a very personal Instagram: A short video clip depicting a sweet, private moment between himself and wife Dr. Jill Biden in which she reaches for and rubs his hand. Captured on Tuesday, as the then-president-elect bade an emotional farewell to his home state of Delaware, it encapsulated what the Bidens' marriage is known for: support, affection and acknowledgment. And Joe returned the favor with his post, writing in the caption, "I love you, Jilly, and I couldn't be more grateful to have you with me on the journey ahead." The couple's path from a widower and college student beginning to date, to first couple of the United States, is an inspiring one. And though Joe, now 78, had to propose to Jill, now 69, five times before she accepted, it's clear the two have a lasting bond. The Early Years Six weeks after he was elected a senator of Delaware in 1972, Joe Biden got a devastating phone call: His wife and college sweetheart, Neilia, had been killed when a tractor-trailer crashed into the station wagon she was driving with their three children. Daughter Naomi, 1, was also killed, while sons Beau, 4, and Hunter, 3, were badly injured and would be in the hospital for months. (Biden would famously be sworn in at Beau's hospital bedside.) https://www.neiliabiden.com/ At 30, he became a single parent to his sons, taking the train home from Washington to Wilmington every night, until meeting Jill (née Jacobs, then a college student at the University of Delaware) three years later. In his 2007 memoir Promises to Keep, Joe wrote of Jill, "She gave me back my life. She made me start to think my family might be whole again." In an interview with Vogue, Jill recalled their first date, after being set up by Joe's brother: "I was a senior, and I had been dating guys in jeans and clogs and T-shirts. He came to the door and he had a sport coat and loafers, and I thought, 'God, this is never going to work, not in a million years.' He was nine years older than I am! But we really hit it off ... I went upstairs and called my mother at 1:00 a.m. and said, 'Mom, I finally met a gentleman.' " The couple became serious very quickly, with Jill taking Joe's sons under her wing right away: "When Joe worked late, I would go over to make dinner and keep them company," she wrote in her memoir, Where the Light Enters, as excerpted in TIME. "I would help pick them up from school sometimes, or we'd pass an evening watching TV. We started to build our own relationship separate from their dad." But despite her love for Joe and his children, she would turn down his marriage proposals five times, she said. Recently split from first husband Bill Stevenson, she was wary of marriage generally (and her former husband would go on to speak out to the media about his side of their relationship); Jill also wanted her own career and feared losing herself to the role of a political spouse. What's more, she was very aware of the gravity of taking on parenthood to two children who lost their mother at a young age. "[To each proposal], I said, 'Not yet. Not yet. Not yet.' Because by that time, of course, I had fallen in love with the boys, and I really felt that this marriage had to work. Because they had lost their mom, and I couldn't have them lose another mother," Jill told Vogue. "So I had to be 100 percent sure." In 1977, the couple married even taking the boys on their honeymoon and in 1981 they welcomed daughter Ashley together. Their Early Marriage Jill received her Masters of Education degree from West Chester University in 1981, and after taking several years off following the birth of her daughter, returned to teaching English while also pursuing a Master of Arts in English from Villanova University (which she earned in 1987, pictured). Also in 1987, Joe who had been serving as a senator for almost two decades announced his intention to seek the Democratic nomination for the 1988 presidential race. Jill campaigned alongside him, but the bid wasn't successful and he withdrew in September of that year. Several months later, Joe underwent surgery to repair a brain aneurysm. During recovery, he suffered a pulmonary embolism; several months later, he had a second aneurysm surgically repaired. Jill said her tendency to be the stoic one (in contrast to Joe's more open, affectionate manner) served her well during this difficult time for their family. "In 1988, when Joe's first presidential campaign started to look bleak, people were constantly looking for cracks in our team ... I refused to show weakness. I [was] ...always fighting to keep control of myself, especially in times of hardship and adversity," she wrote in her book, according to TIME. "[Our kids] never saw me cry when Joe was lying near death at Walter Reed hospital after his two aneurysms in 1988, or when EMTs carried him down the steps of our house on a stretcher after he had a pulmonary embolism that same year." Joe (pictured after being discharged from the hospital) recovered well, and the two moved onto the next phase of their careers and relationship. https://people.com/politics/joe-and-jill-biden-love-story/ An Enduring Love The Bidens continued to pursue their individual careers (he moved up the ranks in the Senate, while she continued to teach) while raising their family. In 2007, she successfully defended her thesis to earn her doctorate in education from the University of Delaware, and returned home to signs in the driveway that read "Congratulations Dr. Jacobs-Biden" and "Dr. and Senator Biden live here." When Joe was announced as the vice presidential nominee on Barack Obama's ticket in 2008, he introduced Jill by saying, "My wife, Jill, who you'll meet soon, [is] drop-dead gorgeous. My wife, Jill, she also has a doctorate degree, which is a problem." Despite his teasing, Joe is incredibly supportive of his wife's career; she will be the first First Lady to remain in her job (as a professor of English at Northern Virginia Community College). While working full-time, Jill also fulfilled her duties as a partner on the campaign trail and eventually, as the Second Lady (above, the couple dance at the 2009 Inaugural Ball). Far from the rigors of the campaign trail taking their toll on their marriage, the couple seemed happier than ever; Joe even had a plaque installed on a tree at the Vice President's residence to commemorate their love. And when tragedy struck again, they continued to face challenges as a unit. In May 2015, their son Beau died of brain cancer at age 45, just two years after his diagnosis. "It was totally shattering," Jill said in an interview. "My life changed in an instant. All during his illness, I truly believed that he was going to live, up until the moment that he closed his eyes, and I just never gave up hope." Together they rallied around their family and faith, and the entire Biden family emerged stronger and more bonded than ever. "Family comes first. Over everything," son Hunter said of his father's guiding principle, in an interview after Beau's death. "I can't think of anything that has been more pervasive and played a larger part in my life than that simple lesson. He didn't have to teach it by saying it. It was just in his actions." The New First Couple As time passed and the Bidens healed from their grief, Joe decided to pursue the presidency once again, in 2020. Jill was along for the ride, battling for her husband once quite literally, when she fiercely blocked a protestor from approaching him onstage during the early days of race. He continued to be his wife's biggest booster, publicly praising her on the Democratic National Convention as "the strongest person I know. She has a backbone like a ramrod. She loves fiercely, cares deeply." In a CBS interview, Joe said of his wife, "I adore her. I'm gonna sound so stupid I was saying the other day, when she comes down the steps and I look at her, my heart still skips a beat." The two share devoted messages about each other on social media frequently, but nowhere is their love more evident than in those small, private moments, like the one Joe highlighted on his Instagram just before taking his oath of office or in the encouraging squeeze she gave him afterwards. First Lady Dr. Jill Biden embraces U.S. President Joe Biden after he delivered his inaugural address on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol on January 20, 2021 in Washington "We have had our hearts wrung and broken. But the only place we are safe from all the dangers of love is hell," Jill wrote in Where the Light Enters. "And one thing in my life has stayed the same: Joe and I have always had each other." Ashley Biden Admits Details In Her Diary Are True About Her Father "Showers With My Dad" - https://rumble.com/v4za4mo-ashley-biden-admits-details-in-her-diary-are-true-about-her-father-showers-.html Here Are All The Times Pedophile Joseph R. Biden Jr. A Rapist-Sex With Kids Has Been Accused Of Acting Inappropriately Toward Women And Girls And Taking Naked Showers With Age 11 To 16 Year Old Daughter Ashley Biden Writing In Her Diary And Later Getting A Abortion (So Who Baby Is It ?) And Swimming Naked 100 Of Times Yes Creepy Joe Biden Likes To Swim Naked In Front Of The Secret Service Women And Yes This Man And His Family Are One Sick Group Of People With Our Nation Young Children. A Closer Look At Who's Who In Pedophile And Rapist President Joe Biden's Family. The president is a proud husband, father, and grandfather. Here are all the details on Joe and Dr. Jill Biden's extended family link to video's below. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2712943/Female-secret-service-agents-hate-assigned-Joe-Biden-love-SKINNY-DIPPING-consider-second-worse-assignment-Hillary.html Kathleen Buhle Biden Said Why Joe Biden Keep Having Sexual Relations With Family Ashley Biden Diary Said As A Child Contains a Line About ‘Showers With My Dad Joe Biden & 100's Kids And Young Women And Not Go To Jail ? https://www.docdroid.net/AHRA5wJ/alleged-ashley-biden-diary-full-release-nf-wm-rev2-pdf Why Did Joe Biden Take Lots Of Showers And Use Date Rape Drug With His Eleven-Year-Old Daughter From (Ashley Biden Diary) Who Said I Had To Wash And Soap Up My Dad Hard Naked Body By Hand ? Joe Biden Said Cum On Man... Its Not True... #metoo Movement Believe All Women ? So Biden Date rape drugs, also known as “date-rape drugs,” are substances used to incapacitate individuals without their knowledge or consent, often for sexual assault. These drugs can cause memory loss, confusion, and loss of consciousness, making it difficult for victims to recall the events that occurred while they were under the influence. Joseph R. Biden Jr. Rapist-Sex With Kids Common Date Rape Drugs with Memory Loss: Rohypnol (Flunitrazepam): A benzodiazepine drug that can cause memory loss, dizziness, and loss of muscle control. It is often used to incapacitate individuals, making them more susceptible to sexual assault. GHB (Gamma-Hydroxybutyric Acid): A central nervous system depressant that can cause dizziness, nausea, and loss of consciousness. It is often used to incapacitate individuals, making them more susceptible to sexual assault. Ketamine: A dissociative anesthetic that can cause hallucinations, disorientation, and loss of memory. It is often used to incapacitate individuals, making them more susceptible to sexual assault. So Did Hunter Biden Really Kill Two Prostitutes ? Kathleen Buhle Biden “Drugs, Alcohol, Prostitutes, Strip Clubs, Sexual Relations” - https://rumble.com/v4s4h4l-kathleen-buhle-biden-drugs-alcohol-prostitutes-strip-clubs-sexual-relations.html All Hell Breaks Loose When Marjorie Taylor Greene Displays Shocking Alleged Pics From Hunter Records. See How Congress Really Works And Its A Joke. Kathleen Buhle Biden “Guns, Drugs, Alcohol, Alive And Dead Prostitutes, Strip Clubs, Sexual Relations With Kids” A Pedophile's Family Look At Creepy Joe Biden Nose In Own Kid's Hair! So Did Hunter Biden Really Kill Two Prostitutes ?, the youngest son of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, has become a familiar name in the 2024 presidential campaign. Kathleen Buhle Biden, then the estranged wife of Hunter Biden, alleged in a court filing that Biden had spent “extravagantly on his own interests” including “drugs, alcohol, prostitutes, strip clubs, and gifts to women with whom he has sexual relations,” the whole family is above the law according to the Associated. Here are all the times Joe Biden has been accused of acting inappropriately toward women and girls... Former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, is facing heightened scrutiny over his past conduct towards women. Eight women have alleged that Biden either touched them inappropriately or violated their personal space in ways that made them uncomfortable. One of those women, Tara Reade, alleges that Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993. Biden has unequivocally denied assaulting or harassing Reade. Biden has also been criticized for repeatedly commenting on the physical appearance of women on the campaign trail, and for refusing to explicitly apologize for his behavior. Over the last year, former Vice President Joe Biden has faced scrutiny over his interactions with women, as well as his refusal to apologize for his controversial behavior. In March 2020, former Senate aide Tara Reade alleged that Biden sexually assaulted her while she worked for his office in 1993. Biden has unequivocally denied assaulting or harassing Reade. Eight women, including Reade, have accused Biden of touching them inappropriately or invading their personal space in ways that made them feel uncomfortable. Seven of the women said Biden's behavior did not amount to sexual harassment or assault. Biden released a two-minute video after the initial allegations were made public in April 2019, but he was criticized for giving what critics deemed a "non-apology apology," in which he said he would try to do better moving forward. He later said he's "not sorry for anything that I've ever done." The Delaware Democrat was further criticized for repeatedly making light of the allegations, and for commenting on the physical appearance of young girls he met on the 2020 campaign trail. Here are all of the allegations against Biden: Tara Reade alleged in April 2019 that Biden touched her in ways that made her feel uncomfortable while she worked in his Senate office in 1993. In March 2020, Reade alleged that Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993. Reade first alleged in April 2019 that Biden would repeatedly "put his hand on my shoulder and run his finger up my neck" while she was employed in his Senate office from December 1992 to August 1993. She also alleged that she was asked to serve drinks at a work event because Biden liked her legs. Reade said when she refused to serve the drinks, her work responsibilities were reduced and she left her job. In March 2020, Reade first publicly alleged that Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993, pressing her against a wall in a Capitol Hill corridor, reaching under her skirt, and digitally penetrating her. Reade said she filed a complaint with the Senate personnel office concerning Biden's alleged "sexual harassment and retaliation," but didn't mention the alleged assault. Lucy Flores alleged in March 2019 that Biden grasped her shoulders from behind and kissed the back of her head without her consent during a campaign event in 2014. Flores, a Democratic politician from Nevada, made her allegations in an essay published in New York Magazine's The Cut in late March 2019. Flores said that while she was preparing to go onstage at a 2014 rally during her race for lieutenant governor, Biden came up behind her, put his hands on her shoulders, smelled her hair, and kissed the back of her head. "My brain couldn't process what was happening. I was embarrassed. I was shocked. I was confused," she wrote. "The vice-president of the United States of America had just touched me in an intimate way reserved for close friends, family, or romantic partners — and I felt powerless to do anything about it ... Even if his behavior wasn't violent or sexual, it was demeaning and disrespectful." Ally Coll, a former Democratic staffer, told The Washington Post in April 2019 that when she met Biden in 2008, he complimented her smile, squeezed her shoulders, and held her "for a beat too long." Coll initially brushed off the incident, but she told The Post that reflecting on it now, she believes Biden's actions were inappropriate. "There's been a lack of understanding about the way that power can turn something that might seem innocuous into something that can make somebody feel uncomfortable," Coll told The Post in April 2019. Sofie Karasek, a progressive organizer, was photographed holding hands and touching foreheads with Biden at the 2016 Academy Awards. Karasek said she felt Biden violated her personal space in that interaction. Karasek was one of dozens of sexual-assault survivors who stood on stage while Lady Gaga performed, "Til It Happens To You," a song concerning rape and sexual assault, at the 2016 Academy Awards. A photograph from the event of the then-22 year old and Biden holding hands and touching foreheads went viral, but Karasek told The Washington Post in 2019 that she felt Biden had encroached on her personal space. She also said she didn't think Biden's 2019 apology video adequately addressed the allegations against him. Biden never explicitly apologized for his actions, and Karasek said he "didn't take ownership in the way that he needs to." "He emphasized that he wants to connect with people and, of course, that's important," she said. "But again, all of our interactions and friendships are a two-way street … Too often it doesn't matter how the woman feels about it or they just assume that they're fine with it." Amy Stokes Lappos alleges Biden pulled her face close to him during a 2009 political fundraiser. Lappos, a small business owner and Democratic political activist, told the Hartford Courant in April 2019 that Biden "put his hands behind my head and pulled me close and I thought, 'he's going to kiss me.'" Lappos said her interaction with Biden occurred at a Greenwich, Connecticut fundraiser for Democratic Rep. Jim Himes in 2009. Caitlyn Caruso said that after she shared her story of sexual assault at a University of Nevada event in 2016, Biden hugged her "just a little bit too long" and put his hand on her thigh. It doesn't even really cross your mind that such a person would dare perpetuate harm like that," Caruso told The New York Times in April 2019. "These are supposed to be people you can trust." DJ Hill alleges Biden rested his hand on her shoulder and moved it down her back at a 2012 fundraising event in Minneapolis. Hill said the encounter made her "very uncomfortable." "Only he knows his intent," Hill told The New York Times in April 2019. "If something makes you feel uncomfortable, you have to feel able to say it." Vail Kohnert-Yount, a former White House intern, said when she met Biden in 2013, he "put his hand on the back of my head and pressed his forehead to my forehead." Kohnert-Yount also said Biden called her a "pretty girl." Kohnert-Yount told The Washington Post in April 2019 she was "so shocked" by her encounter with Biden that "it was hard to focus on what he was saying." She said she wouldn't classify Biden's actions as sexual misconduct, but added that it's "the kind of inappropriate behavior that makes many women feel uncomfortable and unequal in the workplace." In June 2019, Biden told the brothers of a 13-year-old girl to "keep the guys away" from her at a campaign event. The Boston Globe reported that the interaction occurred when Biden met a voter at a coffee shop before a campaign event in Iowa. When Biden met the voter's granddaughter, he asked her age. After she replied that she was 13 years old, Biden turned to her brothers and said, "You've got one job here, keep the guys away from your sister." At a May 2019 campaign event, Biden told a 10-year-old girl, "I bet you're as bright as you are good-looking." The girl's teacher and mother defended Biden, but progressive critics argued the comments were further evidence of the candidate's sexism. Creepy Pedophile's Uncle Joe PAID Out Over 33 Million Dollars Sexual Assault Claims - https://rumble.com/v2rp4bc-creepy-pedophiles-uncle-joe-played-out-over-33-million-dollars-sexual-assau.html Creepy Pedophile's Uncle Joe Biden Has Been Accused 696 Times of Sexual Assault And Some Whistle blowers Are Dead Now. Where Is the #TimesUp Movement? The controversy over Joe Biden’s treatment of women, explained An old-school politician in a #MeToo world. A former staffer of Joe Biden has come forward, alleging that he sexually assaulted her while he was a Senator. She had initially approached the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund but they turned her away, citing fears over accusing politicians. This reveals the inherent contradictions of Time’s Up. Holding the Federal Government Accountable for Sexual Assault Clams As Of Oct. 01 2022 U.S. Government Has PAID Out Over 6+ Billion Dollars For Rape, Sexual Assault, Kids Out Of Wedlock and Sex With Kids And The List Goes On And On On. UN Report Calls For Decriminalization Of Sex Between Adults/Children Age 8+Up https://rumble.com/v2qo62c-un-report-calls-for-decriminalization-of-sex-between-adultschildren-age-8-u.html UN New Legal Principles Launched On International Women’s and Trans Women Day to advance decriminalization efforts In March 2023, UNAIDS and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), along with the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) published a group of "new legal principles" that would advance "decriminalization efforts" globally. Principle 16, titled "consensual sexual conduct," stated that sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual. https://icj2.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/8-MARCH-Principles-FINAL-printer-version-1-MARCH-2023.pdf U.S. Government Is Selling Child Pornography and False Charges Against U.S. Citizens https://rumble.com/v2gonq2-u.s.-government-is-selling-child-pornography-and-false-charges-against-u.s..html I Was Raped By Politicians, Your Fathers Your Mother Other Family Members and U.S. Government Is Selling My Photos XXX Child Pornography (also called CP, child sexual abuse material, CSAM, child porn, or kiddie porn) is pornography that is unlawfully to some and not-unlawfully to other global elite who exploits children for sexual stimulation. It may be produced with the direct involvement or sexual assault of a child (also known as child sexual abuse images) or it may be simulated child pornography. Abuse of the child occurs during the sexual acts. Secrets Meeting Biden Said New U.S.A. Laws Coming Age of Consent Is To Be 8 Yrs. Old https://rumble.com/v2j9os4-secrets-meeting-biden-said-new-u.s.a.-laws-coming-age-of-consent-is-to-be-8.html In A Secrets Meeting Per U.S.A. New Sharia Law Rules 2022 and Kids Gender Affirming Hormone Therapy Rules 2023 Kids Can Now Start At Age 8 Yrs. Old Puberty Blockers Drugs Per President Joe Biden's Administration has confirmed that the legal age of consent for sex and marriage will be lowered to 8 yrs old starting February 16th. 2023 During a speech Tuesday afternoon, Biden stated ‘We have to do it... The age, the kids, they should be about this old.’ He then held up a gesture suggesting the historic decrease. Puberty typically starts between the ages of 8 and 13 for girls and AFABs and New Age of Consent, specifically one young person's question about whether or not to wait until she reaches to have sex, is complicated. There are many nuances to the law depending on where you live and the law itself can be harmful when it's intent is to help. Social media users are sharing screenshots of articles claiming Joe Biden has lowered the age of sexual consent to 8 years by laws. Over the last week, social media users have been pushing claims that President Joe Biden had lowered the age of sexual consent to 8 years. Kathleen Buhle Biden Said Before You Vote For Creepy Joe Biden In Nov. 2024. See A True Pedophile's Family At Work... You Must See All Video's Listed & Linked Below Thanks ! Kathleen Buhle Biden Said Why Do You Ditched Hunter Biden Gun In A Trash Can ? Or Why Do You Hide A Gun In A Lake After You Kill Someone ?... So Did Hunter Biden Really Kill Two Prostitutes ? Yes Maybe No ? Secret Service ‘protected’ Biden family in Hunter gun probe A trove of new emails raises new questions about whether the Secret Service “protected” the Biden family and obscured the agency’s alleged involvement in a police probe after Hunter Biden’s girlfriend ditched his gun in a trash can. Conservative nonprofit Judicial Watch obtained via Freedom of Information Act request 487 pages of Secret Service records about the October 2018 incident — when Hunter’s brother’s widow and then-girlfriend, Hallie Biden, left his .38 handgun on in a supermarket garbage can in Wilmington, Delaware. The Secret Service emails began in October 2020 when an agent, whose name was redacted, shared a link to a colleague to an article from The Blaze about the gun incident in an email chain with other agents. Another official, whose name is redacted, responded: “Oh dear…” A specialist in the agency’s Protective Intelligence and Assessment Division then wrote to their colleagues: “It’s kind of odd that we were involved in the missing gun investigation when neither Hunter or Joe were even receiving USSS protection at the time? Hmmm.” And another replied: “Maybe we were asked for a favor?” As a former vice president, Joe Biden and his family were not receiving Secret Service protection at the time of the incident. “The Secret Service is being cagey about what it did for Hunter and I believe Hunter when he said the FBI and Secret Service had intervened for him,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told The Post. “In my view this is another example of Hunter and the Bidens getting taken care of and getting protected from the consequences of bad behavior — in this case this domestic issue which led to this gun being disposed of in an unsafe manner.” Hunter’s 2018 gun purchase is believed to be part of a years-long investigation into his personal and professional activities by the Department of Justice. The probe is being led by Delaware US attorney David Weiss, who was appointed to the post by former President Trump. On a federal transaction record recording the gun purchase, Hunter Biden responded “no” to a question which read, “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?” His drug and alcohol abuse during this period have been copiously documented in news reports. Hallie Biden allegedly tossed the gun across from a local high school because she feared Hunter would kill himself, Politico reported in March 2021. Local police began investigating after Hallie went back for the pistol and found it missing. That’s when the Secret Service also reportedly inserted itself into the fray, contacting the gun store where Hunter purchased the piece and asked for the sale paperwork. undercover sources included someone “briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact,” Wow. Biden's Crime Family And Kids​ With Sex Crime Against Young Girls And 13 Dead Body's - https://rumble.com/v2te3tg-bidens-crime-family-and-kids-with-sex-crime-against-young-girls-and-13-dead.html The Corruption of the Biden Crime Family is staring us right in the face. From Hunter Biden’s drug and gun crimes to whistleblower reports alleging that Joe Biden sold out U.S. policy to foreign agents, the level of corruption is staggering. A woman's body was found inside a freezer on biden family property and now the whistleblower is dead now and body is moved and now its missing ? wow. Despite the overwhelming evidence no one will be charged in this crime at all?, Republican politicians do nothing but promise one dead-end investigation after the other. It’s time to take matters into our own hands. Kathleen Buhle Biden Said Why Joe Biden Keep Having Sexual Relations With Family Ashley Biden Diary Said As A Child Contains a Line About ‘Showers With My Dad Joe Biden & 100's Kids And Young Women And Not Go To Jail ? https://www.docdroid.net/AHRA5wJ/alleged-ashley-biden-diary-full-release-nf-wm-rev2-pdf Why Did Joe Biden Take Lots Of Showers With His Eleven-Year-Old Daughter Who Said I Had To Wash And Soap Up My Dad Hard Naked Body By Hand ? Joe Biden Said Cum On Man... Its Not True... #metoo Movement Believe All Women ? My Follow American I'm Name Is Joseph R. Biden Jr. And This Is My Record Wow - https://rumble.com/v4mzd0n-my-follow-american-im-name-is-joseph-r.-biden-jr.-and-this-is-my-record-wow.html Joseph R. Biden Jr. And This Is My True Video's Record As Your President So Far Over Last 40 Years And All American Need To Remember Is "No One Is Above The Law" In 2024 Wow ! In 1998, Biden’s daughter Ashley was arrested for cannabis possession in Louisiana. While others arrested for the same offense faced sentences sometimes spanning decades, Ashley Biden was never convicted of any drug-related crime. In 2014, Hunter Biden was discharged from the Navy after testing positive for cocaine. Like his daughter, no charges were ever filed against Biden’s son. Pedophile Joe Biden Said About His Son Hunter Biden Is A Parasitic Monsters - https://rumble.com/v4hhtyk-pedophile-joe-biden-said-about-his-son-hunter-biden-is-a-parasitic-monsters.html A Gun Belonging To President’s Son Was Dumped In A Trash Can Behind A Grocery Store Why ? https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/?p=2640344 Hunter Biden, a dead beat dad has agreed to plead guilty to federal two criminal tax charges & felony gun charges and no dead women body found. The "Fix was In" all of the time and we all knew it and here is the proof that we have a two tier justice system: So after Hunter Biden Paid 2 Prostitutes for sex and drugs etc. The 2 women are missing and or dead now... So if you kill 2 hookers in a bad drug deal this is why or maybe why hunter biden drop the gun into a trash can to hide to gun ? who know this ? and without the two hookers body for a investigation by the police... Who gun maybe used to kill them... who know this info. and who care's in the first place hunter biden ? All Hunter Biden Sex Crime Report On My Laptop Missing 100s Prostitutes Body's - https://rumble.com/v4hir8u-all-hunter-biden-sex-crime-report-on-my-laptop-missing-100s-prostitutes-bod.html Hunter Biden also has agreed to enter a pretrial diversion agreement in connection with a felony charge of possession of a firearm by a person who is a user/or addict of illegal drugs which is a $250,000 fine and 5 years "mandatory" sentence in prison. New leaked footage shows a naked Hunter Biden waving around a handgun and even pointing it at the camera while partying with a prostitute in 2018 who are now dead or missing and hunter is tied to more than 30 gigabytes of photos, videos, and messages from Hunter Biden's iPhone over a four-month span. Meanwhile, Hunter Biden's lawyer filed an ethics complaint against Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene for displaying explicit photos of him during a hearing, sparking immediate protests from other members of the panel. Greene questioned why the Justice Department hadn't investigated Biden more aggressively, and Biden has agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges. The images clearly depict Biden nude and engaging in sex, but use black boxes to obscure his genitals and the faces of the people who aren't Biden. https://bidenlaptopreport.marcopolousa.org/report_viewer/index.html#p=1 The Mann Act is a federal law in the United States that criminalizes the transportation of women or girls for the purpose of prostitution or any other immoral purpose. The law was passed in 1910 and is also known as the White-Slave Traffic Act. https://bidenlaptopmedia.com/ - 6,900 Hunter Photo's, Drugs, XXX, Sex Works Etc. The Mann Act makes it a felony to engage in interstate or foreign commerce transport of “any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose.” The law was originally intended to target the sex trade and prevent the exploitation of women and girls. Over time, the law has been amended to expand its scope and include protections for boys and minors. In 1978, the law was amended to specifically prohibit the interstate- or foreign-commerce transportation of minors with the intent that “such minor[s] engage in prostitution” or any other “prohibited sexual conduct.” In 1986, the law was further amended to make the entire law gender-neutral and replace references to “debauchery” and “immoral” purposes or practices with the phrase “any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense.” The Mann Act has been used to prosecute a wide range of cases, including cases involving prostitution, human trafficking, and child exploitation. The law has also been used to prosecute cases involving the transportation of individuals for the purpose of sexual exploitation, even if the individuals are not necessarily being forced into prostitution. "I do remember her telling me that Joe Biden had put her up against a wall and had put his hands up her skirt and had put his fingers inside her," LaCasse said. Reade, as detailed in a previous NPR report, has accused Biden of pinning her against a wall in the hallway of a Capitol Hill building and penetrating her vagina with his fingers in the spring of 1993. https://www.kcrw.com/news/shows/morning-edition/npr-story/848872182 The Biden campaign denies the alleged incident, as do longtime Biden staffers whom Reade worked for at the time. Joe Biden Is Trying To Kill Me Tara Reade, who claims she was sexually assaulted by President Joe Biden and has lived in Russia for nearly a year, continues to seek aid from House Republicans who can provide her an outlet to publicly testify her complaints under oath. Reade, who served as a Biden aide when he represented Delaware as a U.S. senator, made headlines during his 2020 presidential campaign when she filed a criminal complaint with the Washington Metropolitan Police Department alleging that he pushed her against the wall in a Senate corridor in 1993 and penetrated her with his fingers. The president strongly denied the accusations and continues to do so. The reaction to her complaint ultimately led her to seek refuge in Moscow in May 2023. As of December, she was granted asylum in an expedited process, but remains intent on wanting to share the totality of her story and allegations with Republicans—though interest in making the testimony a public spectacle has seemingly waned. "I'm angry that nobody is helping me," Reade, who describes herself as a political independent, told Newsweek via phone last week from her Moscow residence. A letter was sent by Reade's attorney, Jonathan Levy, on March 21 to Ohio Republican Representative Jim Jordan, who chairs the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. The letter, which was shared by Reade and Levy with Newsweek, explains Reade's intent to testify remotely from any mutually agreeable location regarding her experiences "as the target of an unconstitutional FBI special operation to silence her. https://www.newsweek.com/biden-accuser-tara-reade-angry-shes-being-ignored-republicans-1883078 "Unlike Stormy Daniels and E. Jean Carroll, Tara reported the sexual assault by President Biden when it occurred and it was contemporaneously documented in 1993 by congressional investigators," the letter reads. "The records, however, remain sealed and locked at the behest of President Biden." Levy said it's "obvious" why Daniels and Carroll have gained notoriety, describing affinity towards their accounts as "unofficial sponsorship" by Biden supporters. Reade's claims were not taken as seriously and led to her being victimized and not telling the entirety of her own story, he added. "Frustrated is how I feel about the whole investigation, especially when I watch things like Stormy Daniels getting a documentary and prancing on The View," Reade said. "You know, she's a porn star and acting like she's a victim. It's disgusting. Secret Pedophile's Watch Child Beauty Pageant Glitter Girls Age 4 Thru 8 Yrs. Old - https://rumble.com/v36e1uw-secret-pedophiles-watch-child-beauty-pageant-glitter-girls-age-4-thru-8-yrs.html A child beauty pageant is a beauty contest featuring contestants starting at age 4 to under 16 years of age. Competition categories may include talent, interview, sportswear, casual wear, swimwear, western wear, theme wear, outfit of choice, decade wear, and evening wear. Depending on the type of pageant system (glitz or natural), contestants may be found wearing anything from makeup to fake teeth, known as flippers, as well as elaborate hairstyles and custom-designed fitted outfits to present their routines on stage. https://bidenlaptopreport.marcopolousa.org/report_viewer/index.html#p=1 The Biden, Clinton, Obama, FBI , and CIA Crime Syndicate will have no other choice than to have Trump killed before he is elected president. Otherwise once Trump does get elected he will be holding all accountable and aggressively drain the Washington swamp. He's been the President of the United States since January 2021, and is the former Vice President, but how much do you know about Joe Biden's strong bond with his family? Pres. Biden has a reputation for being a man whose family has always been central to his very being. He's a parent and a grandparent. Pres. Biden is also a man whose family has suffered profound loss and heartbreak. Now that Pres. Biden is running for re-election in 2024, it's time to get to know the President's family. That includes his wife Dr. Jill Biden, as well as their children Hunter, Beau, Ashley, and his late daughter Naomi. Between them, they have seven grandchildren: Naomi, Finnegan, Maisy, Natalie, Robert, and Beau, born the year the President was elected, 2020. Hunter Biden also has another child, born in 2018. Who Is Dr. Jill Biden? In 1975, then Jill Jacobs met Joe Biden on a blind date arranged by Biden's brother Frank. At the time, Biden was a U.S. Senator from Delaware and a widower. He sadly lost his first wife, Neilia Hunter Biden, and their 1-year-old daughter, Naomi, in a tragic car accident in 1972. The tragedy left him a single dad to their two sons Beau and Hunter who were just about to turn 4 and 3 at the time. Meeting Jill was a game-changer for the grieving senator. In his 2007 memoir Promises to Keep, Biden wrote, "She gave me back my life. She made me start to think my family might be whole again." His sons ended up loving Jill, a teacher and University of Delaware graduate, just as much as their father, famously telling Joe at one point, "Dad, we think it's time we married Jill." The senator proposed five times before Jill agreed. The doctor of education explained in her speech at the Democratic National Convention why she held off on saying yes: "I loved the boys so much. I had to be sure that it had to be forever." She realized it was forever, and the two tied the knot on June 17, 1977. In 1981, their daughter Ashley Biden was born. In addition to being a wife and mom, Dr. Jill Biden is a dedicated, lifelong educator. She began her career as an English teacher in local public schools, earned two Master's degrees in reading and English, and went on to get her Doctorate in Education in 2007. She taught English and worked as a reading specialist in Delaware public schools, and later taught English Composition at Delaware Technical and Community College, a position she held for 15 years. She proudly continued teaching at Northern Virginia Community College while serving as Second Lady. Joe Biden's Children Naomi Biden In 1972, at just 1 year old, Joe's first daughter tragically died in a car accident alongside her mother Neilia. Joseph "Beau" Biden Joe Biden's eldest son Beau tragically lost his battle with brain cancer in 2015. From 2007 to 2015, he served as the attorney general of Delaware, a position in which he met and became friends with the woman who would later become Vice President—Kamala Harris. Harris was the attorney general of California at the time. Before that, Beau was in the Army National Guard as a major. He had planned to run for governor of Delaware before his passing. "After our son, Beau, died of cancer, I wondered if I would ever smile or feel joy again. It was summer, but there was no warmth left for me," Jill said during her 2020 Democratic National Convention speech. "Four days after Beau's funeral, I watched Joe shave and put on his suit. I saw him steel himself in the mirror, take a breath, put his shoulders back, and walk out into a world empty of our son. He went back to work. That's just who he is." Beau is survived by his wife, Hallie Olivere, and their children, Natalie Biden and Robert Hunter Biden II. Robert "Hunter" Biden Beau's younger brother Hunter is an attorney and founder of the venture capital firm Eudora Global. He has made tabloid headlines for his struggles with substance abuse and for tying the knot just days after meeting his now-second wife Melissa Cohen. He was previously married to Kathleen Buhle, with whom he shares three children: Naomi (named after her late aunt), Finnegan, and Maisy Biden. When he was younger, he would often accompany his brother Beau and father to Washington, D.C. when Congress was in session. Hunter told The New Yorker of his experience standing by his dad's side, “Beau and I have been there since we were carried in baskets during his first campaign. We went everywhere with him. At every single major event and every small event that had to do with his political career, I was there." Ashley Blazer Biden Biden's youngest child graduated from Tulane University. She has dedicated her career to public service, serving as a social worker in Delaware for 15 years. Ashley is the executive director of the Delaware Center for Justice, a criminal justice reform-oriented nonprofit. "The passion started at a very young age," she told Glamour in 2017. "My dad is a lifelong public servant; my mom was a public school teacher—it’s in my DNA." While she has generally kept a low profile, more recently, Ashley has become more outspoken as her father looks toward a second term as President. In a recent interview with Elle, Ashley said she "never wanted to be in the public eye." She's also seeking to earn a doctorate in clinical social work at the University of Pennsylvania. Ashley is already doing work in Philadelphia. In the interview with Elle, she says she wants to open a "wellness space for women impacted by trauma." She has also been helping a group of 15 formerly incarcerated women. She is currently married to Howard Krein, a physician at Jefferson University in Philadelphia. He is double board-certified in Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Joe Biden's Grandchildren Naomi Biden Naomi is named for her late aunt and is the eldest child born to Hunter and his first wife Kathleen. She graduated from Columbia Law School, and Joe gave a socially-distant keynote speech at her commencement. She notably accompanied her grandpa on trips to New Zealand, Australia, Turkey, and Mongolia while he served as VP. Naomi and her husband Peter Neal were married at the White House in November 2022. Finnegan Biden Born in 2000, Naomi's younger sister, Finnegan, was named for her great-grandmother, Joe's late mother, Catherine Eugenia "Jean" Finnegan Biden. She graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 2021. Maisy Biden Naomi and Finnegan's little sister, Maisy, is famously best friends with Sasha Obama. They graduated together from Sidwell Friends School in Washington, D.C. In a DNC video interview, alongside her sisters and cousin, Maisy said of her grandpa, "He always calls with the same energy even after he's just done 15 interviews in a row." Natalie Biden Natalie is the eldest child of Beau and his widow Hallie, born in 2004. She was just 10 years old when her father died. She said of her grandma Dr. Jill Biden at the DNC, "I would say she’s not your average grandmother. She's a prankster, she's very mischievous. When she goes on a run, sometimes she'll find like a dead snake and she'll pick it up and put it in a bag and she'll use it to scare someone." Natalie was able to vote for the first time in 2022, joining her grandfather to cast her vote early in Wilmington, Delaware. Robert "Hunter" Biden II Beau and Hallie's second child goes by Hunter like his uncle. He is Pres. Biden's first grandson and was born in 2006. Beau Biden Hunter and his second wife Melissa Cohen welcomed a baby boy together in March 2020. They named him Beau after Hunter's late brother. Baby Beau made his first appearance at the President's inauguration. Hunter Biden's Child with Lunden Roberts In 2018, a child was born to an Arkansas woman named Lunden Roberts. She claimed Hunter Biden was the father. Hunter Biden initially denied the claim, but a DNA test proved otherwise. According to a report in The Miami Herald, the little girl and her mother are estranged from the Biden family. Biden's Chinese Sex & Business Secrets Enriched Biden Family At America's Expense - https://rumble.com/v2tehzo-bidens-chinese-sex-and-business-secrets-enriched-biden-family-at-americas-e.html Uncover Joe Biden and His Family's Secret Relationship with China People and the Sinister Business Deals that Enriched the Biden Family At All America's Expense Nice and Pedophile Joe Biden's Said See A Chinese's Woman You Want ? Pay The Money And You Can Now Rape Her And Kill Her Having Sex And After You Are Done You Can Cook And Eat Her Or Him Or Trans Your Choose Baby's-Kids-Teens-Adult Life Is Fun. From Hunter Biden’s drug and gun crimes to whistleblower reports alleging that Joe Biden sold out U.S. policy to foreign agents, the level of corruption is staggering. A woman's body was found inside a freezer on Biden family property and now the whistleblower is dead now and body is moved and now its missing ? wow. Despite the overwhelming evidence no one will be charged in this crime at all?, Republican politicians do nothing but promise one dead-end investigation after the other. It’s time to take matters into our own hands. Biden family makes ‘admission of corruption’ in foreign business deals: China expert President Joe Biden denies $1 million in payments were made to family from Chinese business dealings and said its more like $33 million dollars and see if you can find the money ha ha ha. no money to me ? its only my family. News broke this week that Tara Reade, a former staffer to Joe Biden, is accusing him of sexual assault. Reade spoke to journalist Katie Halper on her podcast and detailed an incident in 1993 during which Joe Biden sexually assaulted her while she was at work. This accusation comes after a scandal last year when eight women came forward and said that Biden had inappropriately touched them. Reade was one of those women, though in that statement she did not mention the assault, saying only that Biden would often, as a senator, put “his hand on [her] shoulder and run his finger up my neck.” The other women had similar stories of Biden violating personal space and boundaries, though none rose to the level of sexual assault. Reade did not, at the time of that scandal, speak about the assault. She said that her choice not to come forward was because she received online harassment from social media users, journalists, and politicians after she accused Biden of inappropriate contact, including being doxxed and called a Russian agent. As first reported by The Intercept, Reade approached the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund — an organization founded by wealthy celebrities in response to the #MeToo movement — in January in the hopes that the organization could provide her with support for coming forward about her alleged assault. Initially, she was told to consult outside counsel and that Time’s Up could provide funding for PR and legal support. However, in February, Reade was told that because Joe Biden was running for federal office Time’s Up would not support Reade in her accusation because they were worried that doing so would jeopardize their non-profit status. Essentially, Time’s Up is claiming that, because their non-profit status prevents them from interfering in an election, they cannot help any victim who has an accusation against a candidate for public office. In a comment made to the Intercept, a spokesperson said “As a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization, the National Women’s Law Center [which is the parent organization of the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund] is restricted in how it can spend its funds, including restrictions that pertain to candidates running for election.” In other words, if a person comes to Time’s Up with an accusation against a person running for office, then Time’s Up’s position is that they will do nothing to help them. This means that any political candidate is exempt from facing the coordinated media and legal power of Time’s Up and the organized #MeToo movement. Experts have already begun to come forward to say that they disagree with the organization’s reasoning. In the Intercept’s original reporting, they spoke to Ellen Aprill, a professor of tax law, who argued that if Time’s Up was able to show that they had an “objective criteria” for who they took to court — a criteria that was apolitical and removed from the specifics of any individual case — then they could absolutely pursue allegations against a political candidate. The non-profit regulations about engaging in elections is to prevent groups from explicitly engaging in electoral politics but, in the words of Aprill: “Groups are allowed to continue to do what they have always done.” Interestingly, Anita Dunn, the managing director of the PR firm that works with Time’s Up, is effectively in charge of Biden’s campaign. While, at this point, it isn’t known what effect Dunn’s connection to Time’s Up played on the decision, the conflict of interest is clear. That the head of the PR firm that Reade would have used to support her allegations against Biden is also the head of Biden’s campaign means that there are clear pressures on Time’s Up to not get involved in a campaign against Biden. Biden’s establishment connections — like all other establishment figures — run deep and mean that he has allies everywhere. This situation reveals the ways in which powerful figures are able to get away with sexual assault and harassment unchecked. From Harvey Weinstein to Jeffrey Epstein to Donald Trump to Bill Clinton to, potentially, Joe Biden, men with money and power are able to get away with countless acts of violence against women without recourse. That an organization founded nominally to help people dealing with sexual harassment and assault in the workplace would exempt politicians from accountability is a dereliction of duty in the highest degree. But there is an explanation: the class content of Time’s Up. Time’s Up is an organization founded and funded by capitalist feminists, including Melinda Gates and Oprah. Time’s Up is part of a liberal and capitalist feminism and is materially tied to capital. This fundamentally limits its ability to deal with exploitation because capitalism, by its nature, is exploitative and, as such, reproduces violence within itself. This is the inherent contradiction of liberal feminism. Time’s Up, as an organization by and for capitalist feminists, represents not a continuation but a betrayal of the #MeToo movement. Compare the establishment response of Time’s Up to harassment to the response given by the working class: workers at Google and McDonald’s walked out of their workplaces to protest sexual harassment policy and in March of this year workers at publishing houses forced their employers to cancel the publication of accused pedophile Woody Allen’s memoir after they staged a walkout. By grounding the fight against sexual abuse and harassment in workplace organizing, workers are able to actually take a stand against systematic abuse and exploitation. Only workplace organizing will protect workers against their bosses — in whatever ways that they need to be protected. Only through attacking capital in the workplace can we win measures against inequality — protections against harassment, equal wages for equal work, etc. That the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund is a non-profit organization and needs to, on some level, collaborate with the government in order to maintain its status makes it a completely ineffectual watchdog for the powerful. Additionally, the fund is financed through donations and at least three of their top donors from 2018 have been accused of abuse in either the workplace or their personal relationships — Aziz Ansari, Gary Oldman, and Rosario Dawson. How will the organization react when/if other major donors are accused? These are the material pressures that the rich and powerful are able to exert in order to protect themselves from accountability. We may never learn the truth of the allegation against Biden, as any investigation that takes place will undoubtedly be an internal investigation conducted by Biden’s friends and allies. However, it is important to understand that both Biden and the U.S. state have a responsibility to respond to this allegation. Joe Biden is an establishment figure who was a sitting U.S. senator at the time of the alleged assault. A response must be made and a truly independent investigation must be launched. However, we all know that that is highly unlikely to happen. Indeed, this allegation is unlikely to derail Biden’s campaign — look at Donald Trump and his 25+ allegations of assault and harassment. However, it is important to, at this juncture, not fail Reade the way that our society has failed the accusers of Trump, Clinton, and others. Capitalism cannot deal with these situations because those with money and power will always use their power to oppress and suppress those without, because that is what the system is set up to do. The fact that Biden et al cannot be held accountable for their actions isn’t a bug of our system but, rather, a feature. Politicians of both parties are unified in not wanting accountability — just look at the bi-partisan insider trading that occurred around the coronavirus. Reade, in her account of the assault, says that, after she pushed Biden off of her, Biden said “Come on, man, I heard you liked me…You’re nothing to me.” That attitude is indicative of the ruling class’ view of the working class: we mean nothing to them. They are willing to let us die of the coronavirus if they can make some money in the stock market, they will fire and then evict us, they will assault and abuse us. And then, if anyone comes forward about what they’ve experienced, they encounter a rigged system that protects those with power from accountability. This is the system of capitalism laid bare. Joe Biden and Donald Trump are just two sides of the same coin, both champions of capital who will do whatever is needed to ensure that they and their rich friends do alright. We mean nothing to them and they’ve designed a system to make sure that we can never find justice. The average American would be shocked to learn that the United States government holds itself absolutely immune from civil liability for most sexual assaults by its employees. Even the average lawyer might be surprised to discover that the federal employee who commits a sexual assault may also be shielded from individual tort liability by a special federal statute. The Federal Tort Claims Act bars assault and battery claims against the sovereign United States, even if committed by an agent acting within the scope of most types of federal employment—that includes military recruiters, postal workers, and daycare employees. At the same time, the Westfall Act grants federal employees immunity from state tort claims for acts within the scope of employment. The scope of employment for both federal statutes is defined by state respondeat superior law, which over the decades has evolved to hold employers legally responsible under more circumstances for the intentional wrongdoing of employees. As a consequence of these statutes and evolving liability doctrines, both the federal government as an entity and the federal employee as an individual may well be immune from tort liability for assault and battery. Absent legislative reform, the victim of a sexual assault at the hands of a federal employee may be left without any remedy against either the government or the individual in any venue, state or federal. In this article, the preclusion of a remedy for sexual assault by a federal agent and the avoidance of federal responsibility is highlighted, together with a proposed legislative resolution. Joe Biden’s presidential campaign has not yet launched, but it’s already rocked by a long-simmering controversy over the propriety of his interactions with women. A former Nevada state legislator named Lucy Flores wrote a personal essay that New York magazine published on Friday, in which she describes an encounter with Biden at a 2014 campaign event. Flores says the then-vice president came up behind her, touched her shoulders, and kissed the back of her head. The behavior, she says, wasn’t criminal, but it made her feel uncomfortable. Amy Lappos, a former congressional aide who recalls Biden rubbing noses with her at a 2009 fundraiser, similarly says the incident “wasn’t sexual” but also that there’s “absolutely a line of decency” and “a line of respect” that Biden crossed. On Tuesday, two more women came forward to the New York Times with, similarly, stories they described as having “made them uncomfortable.” Flores’s account has raised some of the usual questions about what exactly happened and whose memory is correct. But the real issue with Biden isn’t the facts. The issue is what standard of conduct is acceptable for men in power. The Onion’s parody character “Diamond Joe” Biden, whose autobiography was titled The President of Vice, was, of course, a joke. But the joke was that Biden really was an old-school presence in the Obama White House. That presence extended to a habit of quite publicly making remarks about women’s appearances and frequent physical contacts that any modern HR department would probably warn against. For years, it was played off primarily as a joke — “Joe being Joe” — paired with some complaints from progressive writers and a larger volume of complaints from conservative writers that progressives were being hypocritical in not complaining about Biden. In the wake of the heightened mobilization of women in the Democratic Party and the #MeToo movement, it was inevitable that this would become an issue if Biden ran for president. And even though he’s not quite in the race yet, he and his camp keep very heavily hinting that he will be soon. The allegation isn’t that he has dark secrets, but that the stuff we’ve seen on camera and laughed off should be taken seriously as making public life hostile to women. Critics fear this will bring to life their long-held nightmare of #MeToo overreach, in which the idea of long-public behavior by a well-known and well-liked Democrat is suddenly unfairly castigated. Lucy Flores says Biden made her uncomfortable Lucy Flores got elected to the Nevada House of Representatives at 31 years old and was quickly marked as a rising star in the state party, getting the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor in 2014. She wound up losing fairly badly in an overall disastrous election year for Democrats, and then went on in the 2016 cycle to endorse Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign while waging a primary campaign of her own for a congressional seat. (She wound up losing to Ruben Kihuen, who in turn later ended up forced out of Congress by a sexual harassment scandal.) She was then a founding board member of Sanders’s national political organization, Our Revolution, but wound up resigning early. All of which is to say that while she’s now a somewhat marginalized figure in Democratic politics, in 2014 she was very much in the middle of things — backed by Harry Reid for a big role in the future of the Nevada Democratic Party and getting campaign visits from Biden, an extremely popular surrogate. But Flores recounts that Biden’s campaign rally on her behalf wound up taking an unsettling turn: I found my way to the holding room for the speakers, where everyone was chatting, taking photos, and getting ready to speak to the hundreds of voters in the audience. Just before the speeches, we were ushered to the side of the stage where we were lined up by order of introduction. As I was taking deep breaths and preparing myself to make my case to the crowd, I felt two hands on my shoulders. I froze. “Why is the vice-president of the United States touching me?” I felt him get closer to me from behind. He leaned further in and inhaled my hair. I was mortified. I thought to myself, “I didn’t wash my hair today and the vice-president of the United States is smelling it. And also, what in the actual fu*k? Why is the vice-president of the United States smelling my hair?” He proceeded to plant a big slow kiss on the back of my head. My brain couldn’t process what was happening. I was embarrassed. I was shocked. I was confused. There is a Spanish saying, “tragame tierra,” it means, “earth, swallow me whole.” I couldn’t move and I couldn’t say anything. I wanted nothing more than to get Biden away from me. My name was called and I was never happier to get on stage in front of an audience. Remember, date rape drugs are illegal and can have serious consequences for your health and well-being.

For Greater Good 30 Day Gun Ban Nobody Is Safe From New Mexico Governor Suspends The Bill Of Right To Carry Firearms In Public In Albuquerque People's Republic Of The Tyrannical Government. Governor announces statewide enforcement plan for gun violence, fentanyl reduction – Plan includes 30-day suspension of concealed, open carry in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County Today. Second Amendment Is Now Suspension New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) Signed An Emergency 30 Day Order To Hell With Your Rights Now. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. SANTA FE – Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced on Friday a new public health order that outlines immediate actions aimed at quickly reducing gun violence and illegal drug use in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. The recent shooting deaths of a thirteen-year-old girl on July 28, a five-year-old girl on August 14, and an eleven-year-old boy on September 6, as well as two mass shootings this year spurred the governor to declare gun violence a public health emergency on Thursday. Today’s public health order includes directives to curb the gun violence and drug abuse that the Governor has declared to be public health emergencies. “As I said yesterday, the time for standard measures has passed,” said Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham. “And when New Mexicans are afraid to be in crowds, to take their kids to school, to leave a baseball game – when their very right to exist is threatened by the prospect of violence at every turn – something is very wrong.” During a substantive and earnest conversation on Friday with public safety officials including District Attorney Sam Bregman, Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen, Albuquerque Police Chief Harold Medina, former State Police Chief Pete Kassetas, and state law enforcement leadership, the governor expanded on her plans to drastically reduce the number of violent incidents and fentanyl-related deaths in New Mexico. The governor also on Friday signed an executive order declaring illegal drugs a public health emergency. The action plan includes a suspension of open and concealed carry laws in Bernalillo County, temporarily prohibiting the carrying of guns on public property with certain exceptions. Exceptions include for licensed security guards and law enforcement officers. Citizens with permits to carry firearms are free to possess their weapons on private property (such as at a gun range or gun store), provided they transport the firearm in a locked box, use a trigger lock, or some other mechanism that renders the gun incapable of being fired. The public health order also directs: – The Regulation and Licensing Division to conduct monthly inspections of licensed firearm dealers to ensure compliance with all sales and storage laws. – The Department of Health, along with the Environment Department, to begin wastewater testing for illegal substances such as fentanyl at schools. – The Department of Health to compile and issue a comprehensive report on gunshot victims presenting at hospitals in New Mexico, which shall include (if available): demographic data of gunshot victims, including age, gender, race, and ethnicity; data on gunshot victim’s healthcare outcomes; the brand and caliber of the firearm used; the general circumstances leading to the injury; the impact of gunshot victims on New Mexico’s healthcare system; and any other pertinent information. – A prohibition on firearms on state property, including state buildings and schools. This also includes other places of education where children gather, such as parks. – The State Police to add officers in Albuquerque with funding for overtime provided. – The Children, Youth and Families Department to immediately suspend the Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative and evaluate juvenile probation protocols. The orders signed go into effect immediately. With few exceptions for human trafficking and pedophile and gangs and sex and drug cartels and any and all criminal organization. All State law requires people to meet certain criteria before they can carry, possess, or dispose of a firearm. These qualifying factors include the following: Be a citizen of the United States. Be at least 21 years old, except for honorably discharged individuals from either the New York National Guard or the United States Military. Be of good moral character. Never had a guardian appointed based on incapacity, mental illness, subnormal intelligence, or other condition or disease. Never had a handgun license revoked. Never civilly confined in a secure treatment facility. Never convinced in all state or anywhere else of a felony or “serious offense.” The definition of “serious offense” includes acts like aiding in an escape from prison, child endangerment, disorderly conduct, illegally using a dangerous weapon, making burglar instruments, rape, receiving stolen property, sodomy, and unlawfully entering a building. Never discharged from the military under dishonorable conditions. Never involuntarily committed to a facility under the Department of Mental Hygiene’s jurisdiction. Not be a fugitive from justice. Not be an addicted or unlawful user of any controlled substance. Not have a domestic violence restraining order filed against you. Not illegally in the United States or admitted into the United States under a non-immigrant visa. Not present any other “good cause” for denial of the license. These are some of the most common reasons why people in New York are denied gun permits. Also, you will likely be required to complete a gun safety class before obtaining a firearm permit. P.S. Remember... The Second Amendment Doesn’t Give Americans The “Right to bear Arms” It Prohibits the Government from ‘Disarming The People’. and It’s a protection from a possible Tyrannical Government Now! The Government does this Gun Control bit every year since 2008. And every year at least 10 million new guns are added to the 350 million we already have. For some reason, we don’t think “Gun Control” is the ‘real’ issue. It’s a great distraction and it causes division among the citizens. We think the Government is secure in their knowledge of their ‘new’ crowd control devices, that we know about, and their “Frequency and Earthquake Weapons” they think we don’t know about. We will be exploring their ‘new’ capabilities soon in greater detail. Yes We The People Of The New World Order Thank You! Every day, on average, 316 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides and suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, and police intervention. Every day, 106 people die from gun violence. 39 are murdered - 64 kill themselves - 1 is killed unintentionally - 1 dies but the intent is unknown - 115,551 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, or by police intervention. Every day, 210 people are shot and survive. - 95 are injured in an attack - 10 survive a suicide attempt - 90 are shot unintentionally - 4 are shot in a legal intervention 38,826 people die from gun violence. - 14,062 murdered - 23,437 die from suicide - 483 killed unintentionally - 521 killed by legal intervention - 324 die but intent was unknown 76,725 people survive gun injuries. - 34,566 injured in an attack - 3,554 survive a suicide attempt - 32,759 shot unintentionally - 1,376 people are shot by legal intervention Every year, 7,957 children and teens are shot in the United States. Among those: - 1,663 children and teens die from gun violence. - 864 are murdered - 6,294 children and teens survive gunshot injuries - 2,788 are intentionally shot by someone else and survive - 662 die from gun suicide - 166 survive an attempted gun suicide - 10 are killed by legal intervention - 101 are shot by legal intervention and survive - 89 are killed unintentionally Gun violence disproportionately impacts Black and Latin X Communities. - Every year, on average, 9,991 Black Americans die by gun violence. Of those: - 8,251 die from gun homicide - 1,447 die from gun suicide. - Black Americans compose 59% of victims of gun homicide but only 14% of the US population. Black Americans experience 8 times as many gun homicides as white Americans. And Black children and teens (ages 1-17) are three times more likely to be killed with a gun than their white peers. Every year, on average, 3,800 Latinos die due to gun violence - 2,508 are homicides - 1,102 are suicides - 114 are undetermined intent or legal intervention - 76 are unintentional shootings Every year, an average of 10,300 hate crimes involve firearms. - 28 hate crimes involve a firearm each day. Nearly a fifth of hate crimes are based on sexual identity and gender identity bias. LGBTQ+ are more likely to be targeted for a hate crime more than any other group. - 90% of suicides attempts with a gun are fatal. - LGBTQ+ youth are more likely to die by suicide than non-LGBTQ youth, implying that firearm suicides could have a disproportionate impact on transgender and adolescent members of the LGBTQ+ community. The first semi-automatic rifle was introduced in 1885, the first semi-automatic pistol in 1892, and the first semi-automatic shotgun in 1902. Semi-automatics account for about 20 percent of the 300 million privately-owned firearms in the United States and the percentage is quickly rising, because semi-automatics now account for about 50 percent of all new firearms bought annually. A semi-automatic rifle or semi-automatic pistol is an autoloading rifle or semi-automatic pistol that fires a single cartridge with each pull of the trigger, and uses part of the fired cartridge's energy to eject the case and load another cartridge into the chamber. For comparison, a single shot, derringer pistol and a bolt-action rifle requires the user to cycle the bolt manually before they can fire a second time, and a fully automatic rifle or pistol fires continuously until the trigger is released. This is called a Fully Automatic Sub Machine Guns. What’s the Difference ? Machine Gun vs. Submachine Gun... Submachine guns use handgun ammunition. Machine guns use rifle ammunition. If a gun-toting character pulls the trigger and holds it there while the business end goes bang-bang-bang, then there's an excellent chance that firearm is a submachine gun or a machine gun. So AR-15 and AK-47 Etc. Are Not Assault Weapon At ALL... Yes I Repeat Are Not Assault Weapon... So AR-15 and AK-47 & Other Guns Are and Fire Semi-Automatic Only The Same For 140 Years! Here’s a quick cheat sheet to avoid some easy pitfalls with this terminology. AR-15: Nope, the AR-15 isn’t a submachine gun or a machine gun. It’s not even an assault rifle. Read more about AR-15s here. Assault Rifle: Many, but not all, machine guns (not submachine guns) are assault rifles. If it meets the criteria in this post, then you’re good to go. Assault Weapon: Don’t use this term. At best, it’s vague. At worst, it introduces something politically loaded for no good reason. Read up on assault weapons in this post. Fully Automatic Pistol/Fully Automatic Handgun/Fully Automatic Rifle: Even though they’re technically correct, I’ve not heard of “fully automatic pistol” or “fully automatic handgun” being used all that often. “Submachine gun” or “machine pistol” are the better bets. “Fully automatic rifle,” on the other hand, is a solid substitute for “machine gun.” Machine Rifle: It’s tempting to use this term given machine guns use rifle ammunition, but writing in a “machine rifle” will probably win you a doofus award. Don’t be a doofus. Just write “machine gun.” Referring to a “Submachine Gun” as a “Machine Gun” Upon Second Reference: I think this works. If a character is using a submachine gun on the first reference, and you call it a “machine gun” on the second reference as an abbreviated form, that’s kosher. Just don’t call it a corn dog. It’s not a corn dog. Sub-Machine Gun vs. Submachine Gun: Pick one style and stick with it. I think “sub-machine gun” looks funky, and not in the good way like when I dance at wedding receptions. “Submachine gun” is the better of the two. Submachine Pistol: Even though they fire handgun ammunition, substituting in “submachine pistol” for “submachine gun” is just too weird for this planet (and your fiction). However, “machine pistol” is a thing, and is covered a little later in this post. Tactical Rifle: A good, but probably not great, catch-all for any military-esque, shouldered firearm. If you’re going for a generic depiction, pick submachine gun or machine gun and stick to it. Synonym for Gun A weapon is anything that is designed to, or is used to, cause damage to a person or animal. Gun is a category of weapons that have barrels and accelerate a projectile of some kind with an explosive. Also called firearms. Some weapons with similar forms are also called guns even though they do not use an explosive or a projectile. FISA-DOJ-CIA-FBI-NSA-DEA-MK-Ultra: Secret Motivation and Government Killing and Rape and Body Count for Top Government Misc. Jobs Initiations. Dirty Tricks Cops Use And Why They Use Them - This info. below describes some of the illegal tactics and questionable techniques police officers use to increase the chances of obtaining a conviction or to administer punishment to persons they perceive as having committed a crime. Police officers are outnumbered and restricted by legal mandates in their efforts to counter street-smart gangsters who can often afford highly skilled defense attorneys. Police officers often rationalize that they need an additional "edge" in their fight against crime. Thus, at times they break the rules and use illegal methods to obtain and increase evidence against a suspect they believe to be guilty of a crime. the use of "speed traps," the handling of suspects, search and seizure, the use of civil asset forfeiture and informers, the obtaining of confessions, the use of "alibi guns" when police kill a suspect, methods of obtaining evidence, the manipulation of evidence, entrapment, and proactive law enforcement. Some of the incidents described are the police planting of drugs on a private plane so it can be seized for police department use; the spraying of mace on a suspect's car seat, so that after a few minutes of driving he experiences excruciating pain on his crotch and buttocks; the use of a blank tape at an illegal interrogation, adding the reading of rights to the suspect later; the use of stun guns to torture suspects without leaving marks; vigilante cops conducting an "execution;" police instigation of gang wars to thin out gang members; and the adding of drugs to evidence so as to increase the charge from a misdemeanor to a felony. Other police practices discussed are the use of illegal wiretaps; the use of snitches; getting search warrants without probable cause; and keeping confiscated drugs, guns, and cash to pay for "Dirty FISA-DOJ-CIA-FBI-NSA-DEA Business. we tackle the pressing issue of judicial corruption in the U.S. justice system—a system that isn't as ideal as we may think. Discover the shocking "kids for cash" scandal, financial ties between judges and companies, and statistics revealing widespread perceptions of corruption. Join us as we delve into cases of biased rulings, challenges in prosecuting corrupt judges, and systemic loopholes that enable misconduct. We explore the complexities of judicial oversight and the need for accountability in the quest for justice. No matter how strict you make gun laws sick people and drug out persons or normal people and others etc. (all races and all colours of people) a criminal is a criminal and will always be a criminal and a criminal with a gun or without a gun, will always break the law. I don’t believe the lies they are trying to feed you they don’t work. On average in the United States, more than 110 people are killed from guns and more than 200 are shot and wounded each day. Additionally, 19 mass shootings take place in the U.S. each year from 2009 to 2020, with 947 wounded by gunfire and 1,363 fatally shot. In this video, we're going to take a look at the The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting…. It is about our rights, all of our rights to be able to protect ourselves from ‘All Enemies Foreign and Domestic’. This includes protections from a possible Tyrannical Government.” Why Is A Tyrannical U.S.A. Government Helping Mass Shootings Deadliest Gun Killings Now. The Real Number Now Are Over 1 Million Guns Sold Without Any Back Ground Check Now as Dec. 31 2022 by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives- Sold To The Drugs Cartels - any criminal organization with the intention of supplying sex worker and drug trafficking and guns etc. operations and also Remember The Taliban takes control of Afghanistan - there is a big concern emerging. $85 billion worth of military guns and equipment left by the Americans is now under Taliban's control. As of Dec 31 2022 Sold Over 5 Million Weapons To 1000s sex/drug cartels all over the world Now... bang bang you're dead ! In the United States, a red flag law is a gun violence prevention law that permits a state court to order the temporary removal of firearms from a person who they believe may present a danger to others or themselves. A judge makes the determination to issue the order based on statements and actions made by the gun owner in question. It’s impossible to separate the traffic in humans, the traffic in drugs and guns, and the ambitions. They are all part of the same picture. any criminal organization with the intention of supplying drug trafficking operations. Good Luck With This One ? Yes Tyrannical Government Gun Control Is The U.S.A. Now ? See and Read About Operation Fast and Furious, the largest gunwalking probe, the ATF monitored the sale of about 122,000+ firearms sold, of which only 710 were recovered as of February 2012. A number of straw purchasers have been arrested and indicted; however, as of October 2022 over 10,000 people dead and kids too. so far none of the targeted and killed. Yes Right Now Our Tyrannical Government U.S.A. Is Sell Guns To Gangs Right Now. Red Flags Laws and U.S. Gangs... Back Ground Check's - Ha ha ha Really... You Are Being Funny Now, See Video (Fast & Furious) How it went down. https://rumble.com/v28zp34-fast-and-furious-how-it-went-down-about-122000-firearms-sold-over-10000-peo.html With few exceptions for human trafficking and pedophile and gangs and sex and drug cartels and any and all criminal organization. All State law requires people to meet certain criteria before they can carry, possess, or dispose of a firearm. These qualifying factors include the following: Be a citizen of the United States. Be at least 21 years old, except for honorably discharged individuals from either the New York National Guard or the United States Military. Be of good moral character. Never had a guardian appointed based on incapacity, mental illness, subnormal intelligence, or other condition or disease. Never had a handgun license revoked. Never civilly confined in a secure treatment facility. Never convinced in all state or anywhere else of a felony or “serious offense.” The definition of “serious offense” includes acts like aiding in an escape from prison, child endangerment, disorderly conduct, illegally using a dangerous weapon, making burglar instruments, rape, receiving stolen property, sodomy, and unlawfully entering a building. Never discharged from the military under dishonorable conditions. Never involuntarily committed to a facility under the Department of Mental Hygiene’s jurisdiction. Not be a fugitive from justice. Not be an addicted or unlawful user of any controlled substance. Not have a domestic violence restraining order filed against you. Not illegally in the United States or admitted into the United States under a non-immigrant visa. Not present any other “good cause” for denial of the license. These are some of the most common reasons why people in New York are denied gun permits. Also, you will likely be required to complete a gun safety class before obtaining a firearm permit. P.S. Remember... The Second Amendment Doesn’t Give Americans The “Right to bear Arms” It Prohibits the Government from ‘Disarming The People’. and It’s a protection from a possible Tyrannical Government Now! Yes Tyrannical Government Gun Control Is The U.S.A. Now ? See and Read About Operation Fast and Furious, the largest gunwalking probe, the ATF monitored the sale of about 122,000+ firearms sold, of which only 710 were recovered as of February 2012. A number of straw purchasers have been arrested and indicted; however, as of October 2022 over 10,000 people dead so far none of the targeted and killed. Yes Right Now Our Tyrannical Government U.S.A. Is Sell Guns To Gangs Right Now. Red Flags Laws and U.S. Gangs... Back Ground Check's - Ha ha ha Really... You Are Being Funny Now, See Video (Fast & Furious) How it went down. https://rumble.com/v2etrk0-history-of-deadliest-prison-and-street-gangs-united-states-and-your-gun-rig.html https://rumble.com/v2eeblc-outrageous-police-killings-misconduct-police-brutality-and-public-trust-is-.html https://rumble.com/v2dnjoy-vietnam-requiem-and-horrors-of-war-and-killing-of-100s-millions-battle-grou.html https://rumble.com/v2cvtp6-questions-attorney-general-eric-holder-on-key-players-involved-fast-and-fur.html https://rumble.com/v2cuu12-76-million-gun-owners-gun-culture-and-2nd-amendment-laws-red-flags-u.s.-gan.html https://rumble.com/v2ck7r4-10-times-america-helped-overthrow-a-foreign-government-and-our-sovereign-na.html https://rumble.com/v2cfl0c-what-is-martial-law-in-the-us-habeas-corpus-insurrection-act-of-1807-nwo-.html https://rumble.com/v297zz4-the-great-dictator-we-the-people-of-the-new-world-order-year-zero-thank-you.html https://rumble.com/v28znek-five-billion-slaughter-bots-weapon-ai-based-drone-weapon-are-ready-be-launc.html https://rumble.com/v28z52a-agent-killed-in-fast-and-furious-gun-operation-and-1000-more-now-dead-2022.html https://rumble.com/v28yen6-85-billion-worth-of-us-equipment-adds-to-world-terrorist-military-muscle-gr.html https://rumble.com/v27t6qc-new-world-order-national-anthem-the-ostrich-lyrics-by-steppenwolf-1968-a.c..html One of the most hotly debated parts of the Constitution, the Second Amendment is a single sentence that leaves a lot open to interpretation. Passed in 1789 along with nine other amendments known as the Bill of Rights, it prevents the government from infringing on “well regulated Militias.” What this means, is up for debate. The Supreme Court released very few groundbreaking opinions on the topic until 2008 when they found the Second Amendment does in fact protect an individual right to bear arms. Constitutional rights are essential - but they aren't always easy to protect. If you believe a government entity has infringed on your Second Amendment rights, contact an experienced civil rights attorney to learn about your options. To learn more about gun control laws in your state, visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law. What the Second Amendment Says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." Frequently Asked Questions What was the original intent of the Second Amendment? Many historians agree that the primary reason for passing the Second Amendment was to prevent the need for the United States to have a professional standing army. At the time it was passed, it seems it was not intended to grant a right for private individuals to keep weapons for self-defense. What does the right to bear arms really mean? The right to bear arms generally refers to a person’s right to possess weapons. Over the years, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution’s right to bear arms as an individual self-defense right, making it very difficult for Congress to regulate guns. What is a Second Amendment sanctuary? Second Amendment sanctuaries are cities, towns, and counties that resist state and federal gun laws. They adopt formal resolutions either declaring support for Second Amendment rights or withhold support for the enforcement of gun laws. In most cases, this means the local government will not enforce gun laws they don't agree with - such as bans on bump stocks, assault weapons, and high-capacity magazines. However, many legal experts say sanctuary resolutions have no legal authority, and challenges in the courts are likely to follow. United States Library of Congress, The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation For over 200 years, despite extensive debate and much legislative action with respect to regulation of the purchase, possession, and transportation of firearms, as well as proposals to substantially curtail ownership of firearms, there was no definitive resolution by the courts of just what right the Second Amendment protects. The Second Amendment is naturally divided into two parts: its prefatory clause (A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State) and its operative clause (the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed). To perhaps oversimplify the opposing arguments, the states’ rights thesis emphasized the importance of the prefatory clause, arguing that the purpose of the clause was to protect the states in their authority to maintain formal, organized militia units. The individual rights thesis emphasized the operative clause, so that individuals would be protected in the ownership, possession, and transportation of firearms. Whatever the Amendment meant, it was seen as a bar only to federal action, not state or private restraints. No matter how strict you make gun laws sick people and drug out persons or normal people and others etc. (all races and all colours of people) a criminal is a criminal and will always be a criminal and a criminal with a gun or without a gun, will always break the law. I don’t believe the lies they are trying to feed you they don’t work. On average in the United States, more than 110 people are killed from guns and more than 200 are shot and wounded each day. Additionally, 19 mass shootings take place in the U.S. each year from 2009 to 2020, with 947 wounded by gunfire and 1,363 fatally shot. In this video, we're going to take a look at the The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting…. It is about our rights, all of our rights to be able to protect ourselves from ‘All Enemies Foreign and Domestic’. This includes protections from a possible Tyrannical Government.” Why Is A Tyrannical U.S.A. Government Helping Mass Shootings Deadliest Gun Killings Now. The Real Number Now Are Over 1 Million Guns Sold Without Any Back Ground Check Now as Dec. 31 2022 by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives- Sold To The Drugs Cartels - any criminal organization with the intention of supplying sex worker and drug trafficking and guns etc. operations and also Remember The Taliban takes control of Afghanistan - there is a big concern emerging. $85 billion worth of military guns and equipment left by the Americans is now under Taliban's control. As of Dec 31 2022 Sold Over 5 Million Weapons To 1000s sex/drug cartels all over the world Now... bang bang you're dead ! In the United States, a red flag law is a gun violence prevention law that permits a state court to order the temporary removal of firearms from a person who they believe may present a danger to others or themselves. A judge makes the determination to issue the order based on statements and actions made by the gun owner in question. It’s impossible to separate the traffic in humans, the traffic in drugs and guns, and the ambitions. They are all part of the same picture. any criminal organization with the intention of supplying drug trafficking operations. Good Luck With This One ? Yes Tyrannical Government Gun Control Is The U.S.A. Now ? See and Read About Operation Fast and Furious, the largest gunwalking probe, the ATF monitored the sale of about 122,000+ firearms sold, of which only 710 were recovered as of February 2012. A number of straw purchasers have been arrested and indicted; however, as of October 2022 over 10,000 people dead and kids too. so far none of the targeted and killed. Yes Right Now Our Tyrannical Government U.S.A. Is Sell Guns To Gangs Right Now. Red Flags Laws and U.S. Gangs... Back Ground Check's - Ha ha ha Really... You Are Being Funny Now, See Video (Fast & Furious) How it went down. https://rumble.com/v28zp34-fast-and-furious-how-it-went-down-about-122000-firearms-sold-over-10000-peo.html With few exceptions for human trafficking and pedophile and gangs and sex and drug cartels and any and all criminal organization. All State law requires people to meet certain criteria before they can carry, possess, or dispose of a firearm. These qualifying factors include the following: Be a citizen of the United States. Be at least 21 years old, except for honorably discharged individuals from either the New York National Guard or the United States Military. Be of good moral character. Never had a guardian appointed based on incapacity, mental illness, subnormal intelligence, or other condition or disease. Never had a handgun license revoked. Never civilly confined in a secure treatment facility. Never convinced in all state or anywhere else of a felony or “serious offense.” The definition of “serious offense” includes acts like aiding in an escape from prison, child endangerment, disorderly conduct, illegally using a dangerous weapon, making burglar instruments, rape, receiving stolen property, sodomy, and unlawfully entering a building. Never discharged from the military under dishonorable conditions. Never involuntarily committed to a facility under the Department of Mental Hygiene’s jurisdiction. Not be a fugitive from justice. Not be an addicted or unlawful user of any controlled substance. Not have a domestic violence restraining order filed against you. Not illegally in the United States or admitted into the United States under a non-immigrant visa. Not present any other “good cause” for denial of the license. These are some of the most common reasons why people in New York are denied gun permits. Also, you will likely be required to complete a gun safety class before obtaining a firearm permit. P.S. Remember... The Second Amendment Doesn’t Give Americans The “Right to bear Arms” It Prohibits the Government from ‘Disarming The People’. and It’s a protection from a possible Tyrannical Government Now! The Government does this Gun Control bit every year since 2008. And every year at least 10 million new guns are added to the 350 million we already have. For some reason, we don’t think “Gun Control” is the ‘real’ issue. It’s a great distraction and it causes division among the citizens. We think the Government is secure in their knowledge of their ‘new’ crowd control devices, that we know about, and their “Frequency and Earthquake Weapons” they think we don’t know about. We will be exploring their ‘new’ capabilities soon in greater detail. Yes We The People Of The New World Order Thank You! Every day, on average, 316 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides and suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, and police intervention. Every day, 106 people die from gun violence. 39 are murdered - 64 kill themselves - 1 is killed unintentionally - 1 dies but the intent is unknown - 115,551 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, or by police intervention. Every day, 210 people are shot and survive. - 95 are injured in an attack - 10 survive a suicide attempt - 90 are shot unintentionally - 4 are shot in a legal intervention 38,826 people die from gun violence. - 14,062 murdered - 23,437 die from suicide - 483 killed unintentionally - 521 killed by legal intervention - 324 die but intent was unknown 76,725 people survive gun injuries. - 34,566 injured in an attack - 3,554 survive a suicide attempt - 32,759 shot unintentionally - 1,376 people are shot by legal intervention Every year, 7,957 children and teens are shot in the United States. Among those: - 1,663 children and teens die from gun violence. - 864 are murdered - 6,294 children and teens survive gunshot injuries - 2,788 are intentionally shot by someone else and survive - 662 die from gun suicide - 166 survive an attempted gun suicide - 10 are killed by legal intervention - 101 are shot by legal intervention and survive - 89 are killed unintentionally Gun violence disproportionately impacts Black and Latin X Communities. - Every year, on average, 9,991 Black Americans die by gun violence. Of those: - 8,251 die from gun homicide - 1,447 die from gun suicide. - Black Americans compose 59% of victims of gun homicide but only 14% of the US population. Black Americans experience 8 times as many gun homicides as white Americans. And Black children and teens (ages 1-17) are three times more likely to be killed with a gun than their white peers. Every year, on average, 3,800 Latinos die due to gun violence - 2,508 are homicides - 1,102 are suicides - 114 are undetermined intent or legal intervention - 76 are unintentional shootings Every year, an average of 10,300 hate crimes involve firearms. - 28 hate crimes involve a firearm each day. ASSAULT RIFLE BAN AND THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES https://rumble.com/v2kzj20-assault-rifle-ban-and-the-supreme-court-of-the-united-states-funny-.html The AR-15/M-16 Is a regular rifle. Is it because it’s black and scary looking? Is it because it’s a semi-automatic? Is it because the leftist media says so. What’s the difference between these two rifles. The top is the AR-15/M-16. The one under it is the Ruger Mini-14/ Etc.# Guns. One is black, the other has a normal looking wooden stock. Guess what? They both shoot the same 5.56x45/.223 cartridge. They are both semi-automatic. both will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. So, if you’re afraid of the AR-15 because it’s black and scary looking, it’s time you grew up and act like an adult. If it’s because the leftist media says so, then it’s time you start thinking for yourself. The AR-15/M-16 has the same sporting purpose as the Mini-14 / Other Guns. Hell, it has the same home defenses or sporting purpose as any rifle. The first semi-automatic rifle was introduced 138 years ago in 1885, the first semi-automatic pistol in 1892, and the first semi-automatic shotgun in 1902. Semi-automatics account for about 20 percent of the 300 million privately-owned firearms in the United States and the percentage is quickly rising, because semi-automatics now account for about 50 percent of all new firearms bought annually. As we have discussed on Penn-Lago Pennsylvanians are afforded heavy protections by our State constitution, which states in Article 1 Section 21 that “the right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.” While not an unlimited right (arguably none of our rights are unlimited) it still provides serious protection compared to some of our surrounding States and other States in the Northeast. Following the Sandy Hook shooting of 2012 the State legislature in New York took it upon themselves to enact the NY SAFE (Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement) Act, which bans possession of “high capacity” magazines, or magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds (originally 7). In addition, “assault rifles” are identified by the bill as weapons that accept detachable magazines and possess one or more of the following features: pistol grip, barrel shroud, telescoping or folding stock, thumbhole stock, bayonet mount, flash suppressor or muzzle break, a threaded barrel, a grenade launcher, shotguns that can accept detachable magazines, fixed magazines that hold in excess of 7 (now 10) rounds. Similarly, Connecticut passed a law restricting “assault rifles” which they define as selective fire weapons, or weapons placed on a limited (and somewhat arbitrary) list of semiautomatic AR, AK, and SKS variants. Magazines with capacities over 10 rounds are restricted, although ones owned prior to April 4, 2013 are grandfathered in as long as they are registered. Both Connecticut and New York’s laws were sued upon and eventually decided in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The Second Circuit court decided that although AR-15 style rifles are “commonly owned” because the answer to whether such weapons are “dangerous and unusual” was “elusive,” the right could be infringed upon. In short, the court said that while owning AR-15 style weapons is protected by the Second Amendment, the government could infringe upon that right if they have a “legitimate interest,” such as saving lives. In finding, the court said that AR-15 style weapons are “disproportionally used in crime, and particularly in mass shootings like the attack in Newtown.” The court used language borrowed from the court in Heller v. D.C. and the 1939 decision in U.S. v. Miller which suggested that the guidelines on what weapons could be lawfully owned under the Second Amendment should be based upon what weapons are in common use. Under this guidance weapons fitting under the title of “assault rifles” for purposes of the ban are protected as some of the most popular weapons sold in America. In fact, by some estimations sales of AR and AK style weapons each year outpace the sale of F150 pickup trucks in America. Even by the estimations the Second Circuit court used AR style weapons account for 2.5 % of all weapons owned in America, or roughly the same percentage of Toyota Prius’ on the road as compared to the total number of cars on the road, which the court decided was sufficient to establish common use. However, the recognized 2nd amendment right was not afforded strict scrutiny, which would have required that the New York and Connecticut laws which impact a constitutional right must serve a compelling state interest, and be narrowly tailored and necessary to serve that interest. Almost every other constitutionally enumerated right is tested using the strict scrutiny test in the courts. Instead, the Second Circuit decided that although the answer was elusive to the question whether AR style weapons are “dangerous and unusual,” they could still be banned as a way to prevent gun violence. The court used intermediate scrutiny in this determination (the proposed law is “substantially related” instead of “necessary” to the State interest at issue). It is unlikely this law would have passed a strict scrutiny test, as it seems to broad, and lacks the evidence needed to show that the law would be necessary to meet the State interest in minimizing firearm related deaths. After the Second Circuit decision, the firearm owners group who sued, the Connecticut Citizens Defense League (CCDL) appealed the decision. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court denied certiorari and said that they would not hear the case, thereby letting the Second Circuit decision upholding the law stand. While we do not know how this would have played out in the Supreme Court after the passing of Justice Scalia, we know that New York and Connecticut residents will remain burdened by the ban for the foreseeable future. Unfortunately, even at the federal level “assault weapon” bans are not unheard of, and the federal government in fact banned such weapons between 1994, and 2004, when the ban expired. Congress chose not to renew the ban after its expiration. The overall constitutionality of individual states instituting such bans is still undecided, as the Supreme Court has not yet heard a case on the issue. District Courts remain somewhat split on the matter, or at least split on what test to use to properly evaluate assault weapon ban laws. The court of appeals for the Fourth Circuit said that a lower court used the wrong standard of review when they chose not to use the strict scrutiny standard in reviewing a Maryland assault rifle ban. That case has been sent back to the lower court to be reheard using the strict scrutiny standard. While Pennsylvanians remain solidly protected from such State weapons bans by our State constitution, it is wise for responsible gun owners to pay attention to the political landscape, and the potential for the federal government to attempt a renewal of such a ban in the future. States in other districts instituting similar bans can act as test cases for how a national ban may play out. Even for gun owners that do not own weapons that fit in the “assault weapons” category, remaining vigilant of our rights is important to prevent sliding further on what can be a slippery slope. Pay attention to coming court decisions, and remember to vote! 10 Of The Most Lethal Gangs In America - So Its Very Easy To Do - Walk Up To Any Gang Member And Say (Ha Ha Ha) Pleases Give Me Your Banned Guns ? ? Human stupidity is infinite– we all do dumb things from time to time that are quite facepalm-worthy. But some folks take the dumbness to another level and cause problems to themselves or others. A stupid person doesn’t have much intelligence or imagination, and they go through life making decisions that seem to lack all common sense. If you’ve got a brain but you don’t use it, you might be a bit stupid. The word comes from a Latin adjective that means “amazed or stunned,” and stupid people are stunned by everything because their minds are numb. You can make a stupid mistake when you’re not thinking, and you can call someone stupid if you’re feeling cruel, like “Hey, Stupid.” Zombies are stupid because their brains are dead. If that makes sense to you, then you’re not stupid, and you’re also not a zombie. Well done! Gang violence in the United States is a huge problem. A handful of violent gangs with internecine and brutal networks are responsible for thousands of deaths of both innocents and other gang members. Gang violence in the United States is a huge problem. A handful of violent gangs with internecine and brutal networks are responsible for thousands of deaths of both innocents and other gang members every year. It’s no longer a problem that local law enforcement agencies can handle – it’s much bigger than that and the Feds have known this for years. Here are a 10 of the most lethal gangs that the FBI is constantly vigilant of. MS 13: The gang known as Mara Salvatrucha or MS 13 is known to have about 10,000 members and it’s one of the most dangerous and violent gangs in operation today. They are operational in over 40 cities around the United States. This gang was founded in the Salvadoran immigrant community of Los Angeles in the 1980s, but their illicit operations stretch deep into north, east and southern states of the country. They specialize in all types of illegal behavior: drug trafficking, murder, extortion, racketeering and even child prostitution. The gang has even become a major force back in their native country of El Salvador because of the large amounts of gang members that have been deported back to their country. Their reach even influences the ruling political parties of El Salvador. In 2012, the Obama administration officially declared MS-13 to be an “International Criminal Organization.” Barrio 18: The 18th Street Gang goes by other nicknames like the “Barrio 18” or the “M-18” and it is a huge youth gang in the United States, Central American and even Canada. The FBI has been waging a major war on this gang since the 1990s in an attempt to root out their influence in all kinds of illegal activity: drug sales, murder-for-hire, prostitution, extortion and kidnapping. Most of their members tend to be of Mexican descent, but in recent years, they have become open to other nationalities as well. The Barrio 18 gang considers the MS 13 to be its arch rival and disputes between these two collectives have resulted in several gang murders over the years. Currently, the membership of this gang across the United States numbers in the tens of thousands and the FBI knows it always needs to keep several eyes on this group. Aryan Brotherhood: Unlike other gangs mentioned in this piece, the Aryan Brotherhood organization is a gang that has a major stronghold in the federal penitentiary system of the United States. According to the FBI, the gang’s members make up less than 0.1% of the prison population, but they account for 20% of all the murders that happen in jails across the United States. The Brotherhood is also known as The Brand or AB or One-Two has been in operation since the 1960s, and while they origins may have had central themes in common with Nazism, it has evolved into a true criminal syndicate. The AB is particularly scary; one inflexible rule for joining the gang is killing a Black or Hispanic prisoner. Also, once you’re in, you can never leave. The membership of this collective is about 10,000 both in and out of prison, and once you’re part of them, there is no leaving – you are “brotherhood” for life. Actually, last year, the brazen murder of two Texas prosecutors was considered to be the work of the AB. This is certainly one scary bunch. Mongols MC: We might watch shows like the hugely popular Sons of Anarchy on cable and think that these actors are portraying something so farfetched, but the truth is, it’s closer to reality than you might think. An example of a real life motorcycle gang that parallels the SAMCRO version on television is The Mongols Motorcycle Club which was formed in the 1970s in California. They are named of course after Genghis Khan’s ruthless Mongol empire and they are believed to have over 70 chapters spread throughout the nation. They specialize in the distribution and transportation of drugs, money laundering, extortion and armed assaults. They are not on the best of terms with the Hell’s Angels but they do have a good criminal cohort relationship with other motorcycle clubs like the Outlaws, Bandidos and Sons of Silence. Chicago’s Splinter Gangs: If you’ve been keeping up with the news lately, you know that the rate of gang violence in Chicago is hopelessly spiraling out of control. Even the hard-nosed mayor Rahm Emmanuel can’t seem to get a handle on the crisis. In 2012, there were 503 murders and in 2013, there were 415 murders. A huge part of this problem has to deal with the gang problem in the city – most specifically on the gritty south side of the city. In the 70s and 80s, bigger and more structured gangs like the Gangster Disciples, The Hit Squad and The Killa Ward were in control. But the Chicago PD did a major sweep and imprisoned a lot of these gang leaders. This has resulted in a more dangerous system of unsupervised splinter cliques with limited turf and no rules of operation. The scariest thing is what with these smaller gangs, there are still as many weapons on the street and the shooters are mostly young 14-year-olds. It’s truly a deplorable state of affairs. The Bloods: The notorious Bloods gang started off in the 1960s in Angeles, and eventually spread to several prisons in Texas in the 1980s. Ever since its inception, the Bloods gang (whose color is red) has had an arch rival in the form of the Crips (whose turf color is blue). The East Coast Bloods started in NYC a couple of decades later and has become an influential criminal enterprise in its own right. Actually just last year, a judge in Manhattan sentenced Omar Portee, one of the founders of the East Coast Bloods to 50 years in jail. In that trial, prosecutors proved that the East Coast Bloods gang was the largest, violent street gang in New York City and that it shared similar criminal and violence ideologies with the West Coast gang of the same name. The Mexican Mafia: The Mexican Mafia is a gang that has deep roots in the penitentiary system of America. It traces its origins back to the 1950’s and back then it was largely centered in the California Department of Corrections. It also goes by other names like EME or Emeros. Before members can join the MM they have to pass loyalty tests and these include cruel and criminal acts like beatings, thefts or even murder. The MM is also known to maintain a strong code of intra-gang ethics. For example in 1997, after a botched robbery by two gang members in Texas, the two culprits were quickly executed. One of them was found choked, stabbed and run over by a car and the other was found stabbed to death. The Mexican mafia is active in all kinds of illegal activities: drugs, racketeering, paid hits, fraud and have operations in several states including Florida, California, Arizona and Texas. Rollin’ 60 Crips: The Rollin’ 60 Neighborhood Crips is one of the major gangs operating out of Los Angeles. This gang is a splinter group of the notorious Westside Crips, and their formation goes back to the late 1970s. As far as their membership, it is believed that they have more than 2,000 members mostly recruited from the Westchester and Crenshaw neighborhoods of Los Angeles. With regards to criminal activities they partake in, the 60s are known for their involvement in bank-robberies, car-jackings, deadly weapon assaults, home invasions and even rapes. They have also been known to get into blood feuds with rival gangs like Inglewood Family Gangster Bloods and the Neighborhood Pirus. Barrio Azteca: This is another gang that is certainly of major concern to local and even international law enforcement organizations. Barrio Azteca or Los Azteca is a violent street gang with several thousand members operating out of southern states like New Mexico and Texas and even East Coast states like Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. The members of this gang even wield influence in Juarez, Mexico – where they have another 5,000 or more members. The reason this gang is so dangerous is that they are affiliated with the ruthless Juarez Drug Cartel in Mexico. This cartel has a militant arm called La Linea, and this sub-collective often hires gangsters and thugs from Barrio Azteca to do their dirty work. The gang is has been implicated in cocaine trafficking, high profile murders and even prison massacres. They are definitely not the crowd you want to be mingling with. Trinitarios: Most of the jail gangs already discussed started in Western and southern states. However Trinitarios is a gang that was formed in New York City. The group is comprised mostly of Dominican immigrants and it officially became active in 1989. This gang is considered as one of the fastest growing in the country – there are members in all the five boroughs of the city and a slew of other states including New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Ohio. This gang is considered to be particularly violent; in 2012, dozens of members of the Bronx chapter were rounded up for their involvement in nine murders and 24 attempted murders. They are also very active in drug trafficking, specializing in marijuana, crack cocaine, powder cocaine and oxycodone. The Bill of Rights is the first 10 amendments to the US Constitution, adopted in 1791. It outlines Americans' rights in relation to their government and guarantees civil rights and liberties to the individual, such as freedom of speech, press, and religion. It sets rules for due process of law and reserves all powers not delegated to the Federal Government to the people or the states. It prohibits serious criminal charges starting by a grand jury, double jeopardy, and property taking without just compensation. People have the right against self-incrimination and cannot be imprisoned without due process of law. The Bill of Rights: A Brief History “[A] bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse.” – Thomas Jefferson, December 20, 1787 In the summer of 1787, delegates from the 13 states convened in Philadelphia and drafted a remarkable blueprint for self-government — the Constitution of the United States. The first draft set up a system of checks and balances that included a strong executive branch, a representative legislature and a federal judiciary. The Constitution was remarkable, but deeply flawed. For one thing, it did not include a specific declaration – or bill – of individual rights. It specified what the government could do but did not say what it could not do. For another, it did not apply to everyone. The “consent of the governed” meant propertied white men only. The absence of a “bill of rights” turned out to be an obstacle to the Constitution’s ratification by the states. It would take four more years of intense debate before the new government’s form would be resolved. The Federalists opposed including a bill of rights on the ground that it was unnecessary. The Anti-Federalists, who were afraid of a strong centralized government, refused to support the Constitution without one. In the end, popular sentiment was decisive. Recently freed from the despotic English monarchy, the American people wanted strong guarantees that the new government would not trample upon their newly won freedoms of speech, press and religion, nor upon their right to be free from warrantless searches and seizures. So, the Constitution’s framers heeded Thomas Jefferson who argued: “A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.” The American Bill of Rights, inspired by Jefferson and drafted by James Madison, was adopted, and in 1791 the Constitution’s first ten amendments became the law of the land. Limitied Government Early American mistrust of government power came from the colonial experience itself. Most historians believe that the pivotal event was the Stamp Act, passed by the English Parliament in 1765. Taxes were imposed on every legal and business document. Newspapers, books and pamphlets were also taxed. Even more than the taxes themselves, the Americans resented the fact that they were imposed by a distant government in which they were not represented. And they were further enraged by the ways in which the Stamp Act was enforced. Armed with “writs of assistance” issued by Parliament, British customs inspectors entered people’s homes even if they had no evidence of a Stamp Act violation, and ransacked the people’s belongings in search of contraband. The colonialists came to hate these “warrantless” searches and they became a rallying point for opposition to British rule. From these experiences came a uniquely American view of power and liberty as natural enemies. The nation’s founders believed that containing the government’s power and protecting liberty was their most important task, and declared a new purpose for government: the protection of individual rights. The protection of rights was not the government’s only purpose. It was still expected to protect the community against foreign and domestic threats, to ensure economic growth, and to conduct foreign affairs. It was not, however, the government’s job to tell people how to live their lives, what religion to believe in, or what to write about in a pamphlet or newspaper. In this sense, the idea of individual rights is the oldest and most traditional of American values. “Certain Unalienable Rights” Democracy and liberty are often thought to be the same thing, but they are not. Democracy means that people ought to be able to vote for public officials in fair elections, and make most political decisions by majority rule. Liberty, on the other hand, means that even in a democracy, individuals have rights that no majority should be able to take away. The rights that the Constitution’s framers wanted to protect from government abuse were referred to in the Declaration of Independence as “unalienable rights.” They were also called “natural” rights, and to James Madison, they were “the great rights of mankind.” Although it is commonly thought that we are entitled to free speech because the First Amendment gives it to us, this country’s original citizens believed that as human beings, they were entitled to free speech, and they invented the First Amendment in order to protect it. The entire Bill of Rights was created to protect rights the original citizens believed were naturally theirs, including: Freedom of Religion The right to exercise one’s own religion, or no religion, free from any government influence or compulsion. Freedom of Speech, Press, Petition, and Assembly Even unpopular expression is protected from government suppression or censorship. Privacy ​The right to be free of unwarranted and unwanted government intrusion into one’s personal and private affairs, papers, and possessions. Due Process of Law ​The right to be treated fairly by the government whenever the loss of liberty or property is at stake. Equality Before the Law ​The right to be treated equally before the law, regardless of social status. ​ ​”An Impenetrable Bulwark” of Liberty The Bill of Rights established soaring principles that guaranteed the most fundamental rights in very general terms. But from the beginning, real live cases arose that raised difficult questions about how, and even if, the Bill of Rights would be applied. Before the paper rights could become actual rights, someone had to interpret what the language of the Bill of Rights meant in specific situations. Who would be the final arbiter of how the Constitution should be applied? At first, the answer was unclear. Thomas Jefferson thought that the federal judiciary should have that power; James Madison agreed that a system of independent courts would be “an impenetrable bulwark” of liberty. But the Constitution did not make this explicit, and the issue would not be resolved until 1803. That year, for the first time, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down an act of Congress as unconstitutional in a case called Marbury v. Madison. Although the facts of this case were fairly mundane (a dispute over the Secretary of State’s refusal to commission four judges appointed by the Senate), the principle it established – that the Supreme Court had the power to nullify acts of Congress that violated the Constitution – turned out to be the key to the development and protection of most of the rights Americans enjoy today. According to one eminent legal scholar, the independent judiciary was “America’s most distinctive contribution to constitutionalism.” Cases or Controversies The judicial branch of the new government was different from the legislative and executive branches in one very important respect: the courts did not have the power to initiate action by themselves. Congress could pass laws and the President could issue executive orders, but courts could not review these actions on their own initiative. Courts had to wait until a dispute – a “case or controversy” – broke out between real people who had something to gain or lose by the outcome. And as it turned out, the people whose rights were most vulnerable to governmental abuse had least capacity to sue. Thus, although the power of judicial review was established in 1803, more than a century would pass before the Supreme Court even had many opportunities to protect individual rights. For 130 years after ratification, the most notable thing about the Bill of Rights was its almost total lack of implementation by the courts. By the beginning of the 20th century, racial segregation was legal and pervaded all aspects of American society. Sex discrimination was firmly institutionalized and workers were arrested for labor union activities. Legal immigrants were deported for their political views, the police used physical coercion to extract confessions from criminal suspects, and members of minority religions were victims of persecution. As late as 1920, the U.S. Supreme Court had never once struck down any law or governmental action on First Amendment grounds. The most common constitutional violations went unchallenged because the people whose rights were most often denied were precisely those members of society who were least aware of their rights and least able to afford a lawyer. They had no access to those impenetrable bulwarks of liberty – the courts. The Bill of Rights was like an engine no one knew how to start. In the Public Interest In 1920, a small group of visionaries came together to discuss how to start the engine. Led by Roger Baldwin, a social worker and labor activist, the group included Crystal Eastman, Albert DeSilver, Jane Addams, Felix Frankfurter, Helen Keller and Arthur Garfield Hayes. They formed the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and dedicated themselves to holding the government to the Bill of Rights’ promises. The ACLU, the NAACP, founded in 1909, and labor unions, whose very right to exist had not yet been recognized by the courts, began to challenge constitutional violations in court on behalf of those who had been previously shut out. This was the beginning of what has come to be known as public interest law. They provided the missing ingredient that made our constitutional system and Bill of Rights finally work. Although they had few early victories, these organizations began to create a body of law that made First Amendment freedoms, privacy rights, and the principles of equality and fundamental fairness come alive. Gradually, the Bill of Rights was transformed from a “parchment barrier” to a protective wall that increasingly shielded each individual’s unalienable rights from the reach of government. Enormous progress was made between 1954 and 1973, when many rights long dormant became enforceable. Today, those achievements are being heavily challenged by a movement dedicated to rolling back the reach and effectiveness of the Bill of Rights and to undermining the independence of our courts. The development of the Bill of Rights was a pivotal event in the long story of liberty, but it is a story that is still unfolding. Rights, But Not for Everyone The Bill of Rights seemed to be written in broad language that excluded no one, but in fact, it was not intended to protect all the people – whole groups were left out. Women were second-class citizens, essentially the property of their husbands, unable even to vote until 1920, when the 19th Amendment was passed and ratified. Native Americans were entirely outside the constitutional system, defined as an alien people in their own land. They were governed not by ordinary American laws, but by federal treaties and statutes that stripped tribes of most of their land and much of their autonomy. The Bill of Rights was in force for nearly 135 years before Congress granted Native Americans U.S. citizenship. And it was well understood that there was a “race exception” to the Constitution. Slavery was this country’s original sin. For the first 78 years after it was ratified, the Constitution protected slavery and legalized racial subordination. Instead of constitutional rights, slaves were governed by “slave codes” that controlled every aspect of their lives. They had no access to the rule of law: they could not go to court, make contracts, or own any property. They could be whipped, branded, imprisoned without trial, and hanged. In short, as one infamous Supreme Court opinion declared: “Blacks had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” It would take years of struggle and a bloody civil war before additional amendments to the Constitution were passed, giving slaves and their descendants the full rights of citizenship – at least on paper: The 13th Amendment abolished slavery; The 14th Amendment guatanteed to African Americans the right of due process and equal protection of the law; The 15th Amendment gave them the right to vote; But it would take a century more of struggle before these rights were effectively enforced. The Great Awakening Another Powerful Documentary From What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie? Yes Its For The Greater Good. Yes Thank You For Killing Yourself Too... We The Sheeple People's Republic Of United State Of America... Yes Its For The Greater Good. With Love From Your Uncle Sam... Yes Its For The Greater Good, Greater Good, Greater Good, And God Bless You ALL... Yes Its For The Greater Good. Second Amendment Is Now Suspension New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) Signed An Emergency 30 Day Order To Hell With Your Rights Now.

Joe Biden Share Background How He Orchestrated First Wife A Lonesome Death Of Neilia Biden A Love Story. Joe Dirt's illegal schemes are coming to light. He called reporter Peter Doocy a louse for asking him about his and Hunter's scams, like it was beneath his dignity to answer. What dignity? He has none. He is the first Pervert Child Rapist President. But he looks like a White Legacy American so it is hard for people to believe he is what he is. If he would rape his daughter, as her diary reads, he is capable of sending his first wife Neilia to buy a Christmas tree, knowing she was a lush; driven to alcoholism after finding out the man she put through college and Law School was having an affair with the now Jill Biden. His motive was classic - he orchestrated his first wife's death so he could marry his mistress and a fine piece of ass she was, this Jill Richardson, Jill Tracy Jacobs, Jill Giancoppa, or Giancoppo. I assume Joe wasn't out to kill his three kids during the "accident." Smart-ass Joe was counting on Neilia leaving the children with their baby sitter (Jill Richardson) instead of schlepping a one-year-old along but she didn't. Neilia hated Jill. She didn't want to see her cheatin' face. Joe the Weasel tried to pin the rap on a truck driver to take the heat off himself and had his buddy in the Delaware AG's office, a neighbor of his, destroy the documents on the "accident." https://www.neiliabiden.com/ According to Jill’s first husband Bill Stevenson, yes. They were seen all the time together, Jill and her first husband both worked on Joe’s campaign committee, and got caught when Joe and Jill got in a car accident while Joe was driving Jill’s corvette. Joe tells everyone he met Jill on a blind date “AFTER” his wife died, and that is a lie. The whole story about a drunk semi driver hitting and killing his first wife was a lie. So much so, that the family of the truck driver, threatened to sue Joe if he kept telling that B.S. story on the campaign trail, because their father was found guiltless of the accident, and drove tractor trailers for 30 years after that. This researcher discovered that the high end Washington Strip Joint where Hunter met Lundun is connected to China. Strip Club Or ChiCom Op? It has branches all over the Western World. The connection is a front group call anti-Dumping LLc, which is supposed to prevent other countries from undercutting China by subsidizing exports. Biden told the Black Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law Reception: "But pause for just a moment. I thought things had changed. I was /able - literally, not figuratively, talk Strom Thurmond into voting for the the [STUTTER ALERT] Civil Rights Act before he died. And I thought, “Well, maybe there’s real progress.” The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964 - the habitual liar was not in Congress and Strom voted against it. Biden's Speech Biden was tight with fellow Dixiecrat Thurmond. He lies about imumerable things, why not lie about what really happened to his wife? New York Times failed to cover this story. The New York Times the "Semi-Official" newspaper of the Democrats cancelled it 'cause they want to hide the fact we have a schmuck and a half for a President. The Times practices what it believes to be "Inclusion" but it is actually Exclusion. The "thinking" here is that the Blacks have been excluded in favor of the Whites now it's the White's time to be excluded in favor of the Blacks, even if the Whites had nothing to do with their exclusion. It's collective punishment. Joe Biden & Jill Biden Share Their Rape & Incest Inspiring A Pedophile's Love Story - https://rumble.com/v51yhw7-joe-biden-and-jill-biden-share-their-rape-and-incest-inspiring-a-pedophiles.html Joe and Jill Biden's Share Their Inspiring A Pedophile's True Enduring Love Story And Ashley Biden Admits Details In Her Diary Are True About Her Father Showers With My Dad. Joe Biden Eleven-Year-Old Daughter From (Ashley Biden Diary) Who Said I Had To Wash And Soap Up My Dad Hard Naked Body By Hand ? Joe Biden Said Cum On Man... Its Not True... See How Congress Really Works And Its A Joke. Kathleen Buhle Biden “Guns, Drugs, Alcohol, Alive And Dead Prostitutes, Strip Clubs, Sexual Relations With Kids” A Pedophile's Family Look At Creepy Joe Biden Nose In Own Kid's Hair! So Did Hunter Biden Really Kill Two Prostitutes ? FD-1023 FBI: "What are FD-1023s? the FD-1023 is the form our special agents use to record raw, unverified reporting from confidential human sources (CHSs). FD-1023s merely document that information; they do not reflect the conclusions of investigators based on a fuller context or understanding. Recording this information does not validate it, establish its credibility, or weigh it against other information known or developed by the FBI in our investigations." It does. CHS's are not people who anonomously telephone the FBI with info, tips, they either work for the Fed or are working off a beef. When I was doing research at the J. Edgar Hoover Building while I was waiting in the lobby an old dude with a dog-eared notebook entered. An agent questioned him. He said he had info on Bugsy Siegel. Did the agent fill out a FD-1023? Anything other than a crank report is significant if it appears on a FBI document. Do the self-incriminating tape recordings of Joe Dirt exist? I doubt it. Joe is slicker than that. The informant is exaggerating as most are unstable people and prone to embellishment. This informant is from the criminal world who has provided previous reliable tips. This informant has established a relationship with the authorities, both as a criminal and as a past informant with accurate information and a willingness to cooperate. Because of this, law enforcement tends to value these types of tips as reliable. The impeachment should revolve aound this document. Bill "Pudjo" Barr, who I expose as a mole on this website, had FBI quash the investigation of this document. BIDEN IN HAWAII "I remember when I got the call — my first wife and daughter — I was a young senator, and I got a call in Washington. I hadn’t been sworn in yet. I wasn’t old enough. And I was hiring staff in the Capitol in Teddy Kennedy’s office. And I got a phone call saying — from my fire department, and a young first responder kind of panicked and said, “You’ve got to come home. There’s been an accident.” I said, “What happened?” He said, “Your wife, she — she’s dead. Come home. Come home.” If you read this website you will find he never got a call, his sister informed him and he wasn't in Ted Kennedy's office - he was in Senator Robert Byrd's office - once a Grand Kleagle of the KKK and he never went home, he went to the hospital. The New York Times never fact checked this. BIDEN CLAIMS HE DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION ABOUT HAWAII JOE DIRT GET'S SEXUALLY EXCITED BY A SMELL SHORTLY AFTER HIS WIFE'S "ACCIDENT" THE FIRST CHILD RAPIST PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Neilia was the all-American girlNeilia Hunter born on July 28, 1942, Skaneateles, NY, was Joe Dirt's college sweet heart who he entrapped during Spring break in Bahamas in 1964. Neilia came from a wealthy family, and was a class act. Neilia's father was Robert Neil Hunter, (Born: January 26, 1914, Auburn, NY Died: August 19, 1991 Robert Neil Hunter Obit). What a shame this decent man's daughter married into this sleazy family. Pops was a draft-dodging used car salemen whose cousin was a corrupt coal mine inspector who caused a mine collapse, similar to the collapse of the economy Biden is causing us all today. Additionally, he has US involved in a surrogate war with Russia has also created a dangerous Russia / Iran alliance that could also lead to a nuclear war in the Middle East. In 1960 Neilia graduated Penn Hall preparatory school in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, earned her Master’s degree in English from Syracuse University, and taught special needs students. In 1964, Biden, a student at the University of Delaware, took a break from convincing Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond to vote for the Civil Rights Act and joined friends on spring break in the Bahamas. Joe introduced himself to Neilia Hunter in a hotel lobby, where he was not a guest but had snuck in through the swimming pool. Neilia, raised in Auburn, New York, had been a homecoming queen at Syracuse University, and was good looking in a subdued fashion, unlike Jill and ex-model. Biden: "I never met anyone who didn't like Neilia, she is an incredible person, a striking woman whose kindness matched her physical beauty." Joe filled his Senate office with pictures of Neilia to show how much he loved her, when in reality he cheated on her and killed her. Joe and Neilia, were married on August 27, 1966. Joe often called her his "millionaire wife." Neilia's father, Robert Neil Hunter, owned the Genesee Street restaurant in Auburn, New York, Hunter's Diner. He also owned a car dealership and was probably an upstate New York Conservative Republican. Unlike Joe's father who was a war profiteer, Neilia's father was a WWII veteran. Joe married Neilia partially because he needed a family to have a winning senatorial run and to get financial backing from her father. Joe Dirt is a dangerous predator. CLIPPED FROM The News Journal Wilmington, Delaware 29 Mar 1966, Tue • Page 20 NEILIA BIDEN - NEILIA WAS A ENGLISH SPECIAL NEEDS TEACHER - JOE HAD SPECIAL NEEDS, A SHOWER WITH ASHLEY NEILIA WAS AN ENGLISH TEACHER AT THE BELLEVUE ACADEMY IN SYRACUSE, NEW YORK 1964 - 1968 Neilia put two-timing Joe through Syracuse U where he was caught cheating on his law exams. This caught up with Joe later on in his life, as did plagerism charges, and he had to withdraw from his first Presidential bid. He graduated 76th in a class of 85. The happy couple lived in a house at 608 Stinard Ave. Neilia taught at Bellevue from 1964 to 1968. Neilia paid the rent on this house by working as a teacher Before Jill came along Joe was madly in love with Neilia NEILIA HUNTER JOE SINGS THE PRAISES OF NEILIA YET HE CHEATED ON HER “Neilia had the best body of any woman I ever saw. She looks better than a Playboy bunny!" Biden: “Neilia was my very best friend, my greatest ally, my sensuous lover. The longer we lived together the more we enjoyed everything from sex to sports. Most guys don’t really know what I lost because they never knew what I had. Our marriage was sensational. It was exceptional, and now that I look around at my friends and my colleagues, I know more than ever how phenomenal it really was. When you lose something like that, you lose a part of yourself that you never get back again. My wife was the brains behind my campaign. I would never have made it here without her. It’s hard to imagine ever going through another campaign without her. She was the most intelligent human being I have ever known. She was absolutely brilliant. I’m smart but Neilia was ten times smarter. And she had the best political sense of anybody in the world. She always knew the right thing to do. My beautiful millionaire wife was a conservative Republican before she met me. But she changed her registration. At first she didn’t want me to run for the Senate—we had such a beautiful thing going, and we knew all those stories about what politics can do to a marriage. She didn’t want that to happen. At first she stayed at home with the kids while I campaigned but that didn’t work out because I’d come back too tired to talk to her. I might satisfy her in bed but I didn’t have much time for anything else. That’s when she started campaigning with me and that’s when I started winning. You know, the people of Delaware really elected her,” he said, “but they got me.” NEILIA CAMPAIGNED FOR HIM, TOOK CARE OF HIS KIDS, PUT HIM THOUGH LAW SCHOOL AND HE ORCHESTRATED HER DEATH NEILIA BIDEN CAMPAIGNS FOR HER HUSBAND There is no evidence that Neilia was a conservative Republican other than Joe, who was, and is, a habitual liar. Although her father might have been a GOP voter, her uncle, Robert "Joker" Hunter served as an Auburn City Counselor, Cayuga County Legislator and Chairman of the Cayuga County Democratic Party. But if we take Joe at his word Neilia found herself campaigning for a liberal Democrat for Senate, a Catholic while she was a Protestant, along with caring for 3 children. Evidence has surfaced that Neilia was also an alcoholic and and this played into her son Hunter Biden addictions. There is evidence for a connection between genetic endowment and addiction to alcohol and drugs. By analyzing patterns of inheritance, researchers have learned that heredity accounts for about half of the risk that a person will develop an addiction. NEILIA WITH TED KENNEDY U.S. SEN. TED KENNEDY APPEARS AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1972 EVENT IN TURNERS HALL IN WILMINGTON TO SUPPORT LOCAL DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES, INCLUDING SEN. CANDIDATE JOE BIDEN (LEFT) WITH HIS WIFE NEILIA BIDEN. JILL'S EX-HUSBAND SAYS JOE AND JILL WERE HAVING AN AFFAIR - IS IT A COINCIDENCE THAT JILL & JOE WOULD EVENTUALLY WED? Biden committed adultry with the then married, now First Lady, "Doctor" Jill Biden, then known as Jill Stevenson (birth name Jill Giacoppo, not the Americanized "Jill Tracy Jacobs") causing Neilia to descend deeper in alcoholism. The cheating part of this scenario comes from Jill's then husband, William W. Stevenson, who said he first suspected Joe Biden and Jill were having an affair in August 1974; THE DAILY MAIL : BILL STEVENSON, Jill's ex-husband, claims he and his then wife Jill met Biden in 1972, when they worked on then-New Castle County Councilman Biden's first campaign for the Senate. At the time Biden was married to his first wife Neilia. William W. Stevenson said he first suspected Biden and Jill were having an affair in August 1974; He was then 26, Jill was 23 and Joe was 31 'One of her best friends told me she thought Joe and Jill were getting a little too close,' he said. That October 1974 he got confirmation when a man informed him Biden was driving his wife's car and the two of them got into a fender bender. William W. Stevenson said: 'I asked Jill to leave the house, which she did... I considered Joe a friend. I'm not surprised he fell in love with Jill." One of Jill's tweets, however, indicated the affair began much earlier, circa summer of 1972. The husband is always the last to know however everyone and their dog in Newark, Delaware, were aware of the affair. Here are 2 sources I contacted by on Facebook. Click on their post to see bona fides. High level Democrats were aware of the affair as it might have endangered his Senatorial race. JOE BIDEN TEXTED HUNTER BIDEN AND STATED HUNTER GOT "THE DISEASE" OF ADDICTION FROM HIMSELF AND NEILIA BIDEN As for the alcoholism, a new piece of evidence recently surfaced. That's was why Biden accused the driver who T-boned Neilia of being drunk - to deflect suspicion from his wife. Biden claimed trucker, Curtis Dunn, had had a 'LIQUID LUNCH' and was a lowlife who killed his wife and baby. Hunter reportedly sent Joe Biden a message saying he was in California and would not be around for Father’s Day. "All I want is to make you proud. And I know I haven’t. But I promise I’m trying Dad,” Screenshots show the president wrote in June 2018: "You've always made me proud you got the disease from mommy and me but you are strong and courageous with so much more to give." This verifies that Neilia, Hunter's birth mother, was abusing alcohol thanks to her sidewinder husband's dalliance. Source A CHRISTMAS STORY: NEILIA AND THE TREE The "Christmas Tree Trip" part of this story ('Neilia was Christmas shopping when she had her accident') relies on conflicting media accounts. Most reports state that Neilia was on her way to buy a Christmas tree. Other versions say she was on her way to "pick out a tree," which would be mean Joe Dirt would pick it up, implying he sent her on the errand. People Magazine quoted an unamed local news source: "A Christmas tree, briefcase, telephone index cards and literature from Biden's Senate campaign were thrown from the car." Delaware Online reported: "A Christmas tree was still wedged in the station wagon." Wouldn't it have been tied to the roof? Wouldn't the media have interviewed the salesperson who sold her the tree? Since all the State Police photos, reports etc. of the accident scene are missing and have probably been destroyed, there is no way to tell if she had the tree or not. THE MOTIVE: Joe set up Neilia so he could marry Jill after Jill divorced her husband. Jill Tracy Jacobs benefited from Neilia's death. Jill got her wish and married Joe becoming "Mrs. Joe Dirt" five years after Neilia's death. The Dirts married June 17, 1977. Jill claimed it was after Joe proposed five times, in order to tacitly hide their previous relationship. The two lovers still saw each other during these five years, but had to wait a respectable amount of time before tying the knot. Jill was 18 when she married Bill in 1970 and got divorced from her Woodstock Nation rock promoter hippy husband, Bill Stevenson in 1975. UNRAVELING THE MYSTERY OF NEILIA'S AND NAOMI'S TRAGIC DEMISE THE HOUSE NEILIA DEPARTED FROM ON THAT FATAL DAY THE NORTHSTAR ROAD HOUSE NEILIA DEPARTED FROM ON THAT FATAL DAY The State Police reported the accident happened Monday, December 18, 1972 at approximately 2:27 PM Since it only took 3 minutes to get from her home to intersection where the accident happened Neilia must have left at about 2:20 PM. Joe never said if it was his idea or her's idea to buy the tree? Joe probably believed Neilia would leave kids with their baby sitter, Jill Stevenson. But Neilia took Beau, Hunter and one year old Naomi with her because she hated Jill for seducing her husband and destroying their fairytale marriage. She didn't want to interact with this homewrecker. August 13, 1974: Bill Stevenson first suspects Jill is having an affair with Biden when she turns down meeting Springsteen saying she has to baby-sit the Biden boys. Maybe it was December 18, 1972 when Neilia first found out about the affair? Neilia was a skilled driver and had been driving all her life as her father, Robert Neil Hunter, was an upstate N.Y. car dealership owner. Was she thinking about how she helped put the weasel through college and how she had been betrayed and played? In any event, Neilia drove off into eternity. What does this time line tell us? It's wasn't fatigue and she was familiar with the area. Did Neilia have a drink to ease the pain and anger she had kept to herself in order to not destroy two-timing Joe's career before she left? Hunter Biden describes how Naomi was “sound asleep in the front passenger seat tucked into a bassinet. Suddenly, I see my mother’s head turn to the right,” he writes. “I don’t remember anything else about her profile: the look in her eye, the expression of her mouth. Her head simply swings.” — Other reports say Naomi was on Neilia's lap. "Neilia was carrying the one-year-old baby Naomi on her lap and neither of them survived that accident: Beau made it, and so did Hunter, the former with a crushed pelvis and the latter with a crushed skull. Meet the Candidates 2020: Joe Biden: A Voter's Guide Scott Dworkin." The obscuration was these events raises a red flag about what really happened. IT WAS AMAZING BEAU AND HUNTER SURVIVED THE TURNED HEAD THEORY Police determined that Neilia Biden “drove into the path of Curtis C. Dunn’s tractor-trailer, possibly because her head was turned and she didn’t see the oncoming truck,” according to the Newark Post Online. Assistant State's Attorney Jerome O. Herlihy said investigators discussed several possible causes for the crash, including that Neilia turned her head and didn't see the oncoming truck as she exited the intersection of Limestone and Valley roads. Curtis C. Dunn said she was not looking at him, her face turned away, and the state police thought she was distracted by one of the children in the back seat, Hunter Biden: "Suddenly, I see my mother’s head turn to the right,” he writes. “I don’t remember anything else about her profile: the look in her eye, the expression of her mouth. Her head simply swings.” But why the hell did she take her foot off the break when she had stopped at the intersection knowing that transversing it without looking could be fatal? Neilia mistakenly stepped on the accelerator of her car when her intention was to keep her foot on the brake pedal or her foot might have slipped from the brake pedal to the accelerator or she might have errantly applied pressure to both the brake and accelerator pedals at the same time. The result can be a rapid acceleration of her car, often at full throttle, when the driver was expecting the vehicle to stop. Maybe, along with the few drinks she had before she left, the boys were misbehaving? Or were constantly asking "Are we there yet mommy?" Or the baby was crying? Or her husband's infidelity was haunting her and causing her to become disraught? Or a confluence of events? In retrospect it wouldn't surprise me if middle child, 3 year old Miscreate Hunter, started a fight with Beau and this was what distracted her. Whatever the reason or combinationns of reasons, she went through the intersection. Jerome O. Herlihy in Politico: “She had a stop sign. The truck driver did not,” JEROME O. HERLIHY told me. He’s a retired judge who then was a deputy attorney general and once was a neighbor to Biden and remains friendly. A pal of Biden at the time asked Jerome O. Herlihy “to go out to the state police troop where the driver of the other vehicle was to make sure everything was going all right,” and so he did. What else did he ask him to do? “In the end,” Jerome O. Herlihy said, “I concurred in their decision that there was no fault on Dunn's part.” The Wilmington, Delaware News reported:"The crash involving the Biden family station wagon and a tractor-trailer driven by CURTIS C. DUNN 43, of Kaolin, Pa., occurred on Monday afternoon, December 18, 1972, when Dunn T-boned it, sending it spinning for 150 feet, breaking the windshield and crushing in a rear door, while the truck itself skidded for 20 feet and landed on its side. Neilia had pulled away from a stop sign at about 2:30 p.m. when the tractor-trailer carrying corn cobs, which was coming down a hill, hit the side of her station wagon. Dunn overturned his rig while swerving to avoid collision, ran to wrecked car, was 1st to render assistance. Neilia Biden and 13-month-old daughter Naomi were declared dead at a hospital. Beau, once Delaware's attorney general now deceased, broke his leg, and Hunter suffered head injuries [which he apparently still suffers from]. Police said the Biden’s station wagon “pulled from a stop sign” and was struck on the left side by the truck, “continuing approximately 150 feet spinning around, going backwards down an embankment and striking three trees." Neilia stopped the car at that fatal intersection of rural Valley Road in Hockessin, Delaware and Delaware Route 7 (Limestone Road), where she pulled out in front of a tractor-trailer truck traveling north along Route 7. She didn't run the intersection speeding when a big rig, a tractor trailer farmer truck, that had the right of way, T-boned her. (LISTEN) ASSISTANT DELAWARE ATTORNEY GENERAL JEROME O. HERLIHY, Joe's friend and neighbor, covered up the DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) and destroyed the documents about the accident. Without this Irishman Joe would not be President. The bottom line here is "Joe Dirt," having an extra marital sexual relationship and throwing it up in his wife's face, contributed to or caused his wife and daughters untimely deaths and Beau and Hunter's injuries. Biden pinned the rap for a baby's death on the trucker by saying CURTIS DUNN had a "liquid lunch" and was drunk. As far as the probability of Joe's having an affair, factor in his youth and sudden success and remember Joe was a virile male who sniffed the hair on numerous woman's heads, and in private, elsewhere. Joe also touched women and children in public as much as he thought he could get away with. The incontravertable evidence that Jill was sexually involved with Joe while still married to Neilia is in a Tweet wherein Jill states during her first phone call with Joe in 1975 (March 1975) Joe told her that he'd be speaking at the Democratic Convention and she should "tune in." The Democratic Convention is traditionally held in July. She slipped and was referring to the 1972 Dem. Con. in Miami Beach in July 1972. I was there. Check it out: "In 1972, Biden, then a New Castle County Council member, skipped votes to attend the convention in Miami Beach in the middle of his long-shot Senate campaign, according to The Morning News, a Delaware paper. He won his Senate race." The Dem. Con. was in July 1972, the same year Jill's first husband, William W. Stevenson, said she first met Joe. “Jill and I got married in 1970, I introduced Joe to Jill in 1972.” Jill couldn't have been referring to the 1976 convention, since according to Jill, Joe asked her for a second date, was half way into her bogus courtship, which she said started in March 1975 and lasted until they were married in June 1977 that is 27 months, over two years. Jill claimed Joe proposed three times before she finally accepted. (She meant propositioned her 3X) Jill admits to meeting Neilia in November 1972 at Joe's Victory Party, but claims she didn't meet Joe. However in an interview with Piers Morgan she said she met him at a fund raiser. In August 1974, according to Stevenson, Jill was baby-sitting for Joe so we know the March 1975 blind date phone call was a lie. All Delaware State records regarding one of the most significant and discussed auto accidents in U.S. history were destroyed by Assistant Delaware State's Attorney Jerome O. Herlihy, a close friend and crony of Joe who conducted the investigation for the Del. AG Office and saved Joe's career. You would think O. Herlihy would keep a copy for his files? The accident might have had a lasting effect on the boys since Hunter is a dope fiend and sexual deviate. In Beau's case there is conflicting evidence that a concussion can increase the liklihood of a brain tumor (glioblastoma) which took his life. JOE AND BABY HE CLAIMED CURTIS DUNN KILLED! JOSEPH ROBINETTE BIDEN AND BABY NAOMI BIDEN WHO HE CLAIMED CURTIS DUNN KILLED NAOMI WASN'T THE ONLY ONE IN THE FAMILY HITTING THE BOTTLE NEILIA HUNTER BIDEN AND BABY NAOMI JOE DIRT'S VERSION OF THE TREE STORY AND HOW HE FOUND OUT ABOUT THE ACCIDENT "That morning I headed off to Washington to interview staff, but Neilia decided to stay home in Wilmington. Christmas was a week away, and we hadn't had time to do anything, Neilia was going to have breakfast with Jimmy, then do some big shopping then get a tree. She wasn't going to come home without a Christmas tree. Val and I were sitting in the office Senator Byrd had lent me when Jimmy called from Wilmington. He wanted to talk to Val. When she hung up the phone, she looked white. "There's been a slight accident. Nothing to be worried about. But we ought to go home." Was it something in the way Val's voice caught? Something in her mouth? What I felt was something jarring, something to a premonition. It was a physical sensation, like a little the center of my chest. I could already feel Neilia's absence. She's dead I said, "isn't she?" Although Joe is a habitual liar, it is noteworthy that he claims he immediately knew Neilia was dead. How? Why? Because he set her up. Joe only had one picture of Neilia in Promises to Keep the book this quotation was extracted from, and this is about all he has to say about her. JOE DIRT'S SISTER VALERIE'S VERSION OF THE TREE STORY AND HOW JOE FOUND OUT ABOUT THE ACCIDENT Val: "Neilia was getting the tree a full week early, even if the important stuff—the decoration, the foamy snow peaks, the presents—would still be handled by Santa and his elves. They stopped at a Christmas tree farm, picked out a big one, strapped it to the car, and headed home. They were about four miles away from home when it happened. My brother James Biden was the first one who was contacted. He got a call from a man named Mort Kimmel, who worked with the state police. "Neilia's been in an accident," Kimmel said, explaining, "they're taking her to Saint Francis Hospital, and someone needs to get down there right away." Jimmy hung up and raced the ten minutes to downtown Wilmington. When he arrived at the ER, a sober-faced doctor sequestered him in another room to give him the details: Neilia had been broadsided by an eighteen-wheeler as she was crossing the two-lane highway...First James Biden went to see Neilia and Naomi. He identified the bodies...James Biden also sent the State Police to collect Frank Biden quietly from the Friends School, where he was a senior. He didn't want Frankie driving while upset." THE ONLY REMAINING OFFICIAL PAPERWORK ON NEILIA'S DEATH Note the name JAMES BIDEN as informant: the person making arrangements will be listed as the "informant" on the Death Certificate. The "informant” is the person providing the decedent's personal information. This person is the "next of kin" such as: son, daughter, spouse, or other relative. James Biden called his sister Valerie and told her about the accident. Mort Kimmel was a attorney for thousands of clients, including the Delaware State Police, New Castle County Police, and the Wilmington Police Department. Kimmel JOE NEVER GOT A PHONE CALL ABOUT THE ACCIDENT AS HE CLAIMED - HIS SISTER DID AND SHE TOLD HIM WHAT HAPPENED Joe recalled how he was informed of the accident: "To the loved ones of the victims, there is nothing really we can say to erase this tragedy. And, those of you who think it's presumptuous of me to say that… in a different circumstance, I got one of those phone calls. I got one of those phone calls like Davis Sezna got. I got a phone call saying, "Your wife's dead; your daughter's dead." And I've only said that three times in public before. But, I say it here because it's so important for you to understand. I got one of those phone calls. It was an errant driver WHO STOPPED TO DRINK INSTEAD OF DRIVE and hit a tractor-trailer, hit my children and my wife and killed them. It wasn't an airplane [like Sezna], but it was a phone call: "They're dead." And, I can tell you from experience, and some of you can, too, that feeling that inside your chest is a black hole and you're being sucked inside it. I know from experience there's nothing in the near term we can do to bring solace, relief or peace to those people." But according to numerous accounts, Joe never got any such phone call. The police called his brother James, as you can see from the death certificate above, who called his sister Valerie who was with her dirtbag brother in D.C. interviewing prospective staff members and she told him about the accident. Valerie Biden Memoir JOE IS FOND OF THE BLACK HOLE METAPHOR And, folks, for those who have lost a loved one in the service of our country, if your loved one is missing or unaccounted for, I know the ceremonies reopen that black hole in the center of your chest that just pulls you in, suffocates you. Memoir Day Speech 2022 BIDEN CLAIMED HE WAS SO DEVASTATED BY NEILIA AND NAOMI'S DEATHS HE FELL INTO A BLACK HOLE AND CONTEMPLATED SUICIDE ABC NEWS MAY 2012 "For the first time in my life, I understood how someone could consciously decide to commit suicide. Not because they were deranged, not because they were nuts, because they'd been to the top of the mountain and they just knew in their heart they'd never get there again, that it was never going to be that way ever again. That's how an awful lot of you feel. And just like you guys know by the tone of a phone call - you just knew, didn't you? You knew when they walked up the path. You knew when the call came. You knew. You just felt it in your bones something bad happened. And I knew. I don't know how I knew. But the call said [no such call ever came - Valerie informed him of his accident] my wife was dead, my daughter was dead, and I wasn't sure how my sons were going to make it. The black hole [here we go again with the Black Hole] you feel in your chest, like you're being sucked back into it. While the ache never goes away, it gets controllable. Keep thinking what your husband or wife would want you to do. Keep thinking what it is, and keep remembering those kids of yours, or him or her the rest of their life, blood of my blood, bone of my bone, because, folks, it can and will get better. There will come a day, I promise you, and your parents, as well, when the thought of your son or daughter or your husband or wife brings a smile to your lips before it brings a tear to your eye. It will happen. My prayer for you is that day will come sooner or later. [WHAT? he wants people to get a call saying their wife and baby were dead?] But the only thing I have more experience than you in is this: I'm telling you it will come." POLITICO reported in August 2020 that Biden stated: "I thought about it, not doing it. I thought about what it would be like just to go to the Delaware Memorial Bridge and just jump off and end it all, but I didn't ever get in the car and do it or wasn't ever even close. I don't drink at all. I've never had a drink in my life, but I remember taking out a fifth of, I think it was gin, and put it on the kitchen table. But I couldn't even make myself take a drink. What saved me was really my boys." But what's in the bottle in the college photo below? The DWI occurred December 18, 1972, 50 years ago. Why bring his contemplating suicide up again at the same time the truth about his marriage surfaced? To show that Joe loved her so much he couldn't have been cheating on her with Jill. What was the booze doing in his home if he didn't drink? Maybe it belonged to two-year-old Hunter? Why go to all the trouble to jump off a bridge? Joe was about to become a United States Senator and probably had a handgun or long gun in his home for protection. Joe wrote the script for this dog and pony show. ALL THE NEWS THAT'S FIT TO MANAGE NEW YORK TIMES CROPS JOE DIRT PHOTO IN ORDER TO NOT CONTRADICT HIS CLAIM "I NEVER DRANK A DROP OF ALCOHOL IN MY ENTIRE LIFE!" JOE BIDEN SAID THAT DRIVER CURTIS DUNN WHO SAVED HIS TWO SONS LIVES HAD A LIQUID LUNCH CURTIS C. DUNN Biden told everyone and his dog Dunn was drunk. Why? Dunn had run to the wreck and pulled his wife and family out. He may have saved 2 of their lives. Biden October 13, 2022 speaking at event honoring firefighters: “My two boys, who were then almost three and almost four, were on top of their dead sister and mother, and it took the jaws of life from my local fire department volunteers to get them out and get them to the hospital, and it saved their lives.” INDEPENDENT Why did Joe do this and continue to do this to Dunn? So people would feel sorry for him? Wasn't it enough he lost 2 family members in a car crash? Or was it to deflect suspicion from his wife being drunk and a subsequent journalistic investigation? It would have looked bad for Joe if his wife's alcoholism resulted in one his chidren's death. The Delaware News Journal reported: "Since his vice presidential nomination, Joe Biden's 2007 statement that Curtis Dunn, a "guy who allegedly DRANK HIS LUNCH" and drove the truck that struck and killed his first wife and daughter has gained national media traction. It's unclear who first suggested alcohol was a factor in the crash, but since Obama made him his running mate The New York Times, National Public Radio and The Economist have run articles that characterized Dunn as a drunken driver. Along with many other news outlets, the Huffington Post, in 2008, described the accident this way: “Delaware’s Senator-elect would face a more difficult challenge soon after his election, when a drunk driver struck the car carrying his family, killing his wife Neilia and daughter Naomi and severely wounding sons Hunter and Beau.” "The New York Times reported the 2007 crowd at the University of Iowa grew silent as Biden gave his version of what happened that day. "Let me tell you a little story, I got elected when was 29, and I got elected November the 7th 1972. And on Dec. 18 of that year, my wife and three kids were Christmas shopping for a Christmas tree. A tractor-trailer, a guy who allegedly -- and I never pursued it -- DRANK HIS LUNCH, instead of eating his lunch, broadsided my family and killed my wife instantly, and killed my daughter instantly, and hospitalized my two sons, with what were thought to be at the time permanent, fundamental injuries." Biden told the Delaware Grapevine in a brief telephone interview from Iowa he told the story as he knew it. “All I said was what I heard at the time. What I heard from folks at the time is he’d been drinking,” Biden said, sounding agitated. “I don’t want to talk about it. . . . She must have pulled out. . . . It’s still painful to talk about 35 years later.” “All I said was what I heard at the time. What I heard from folks at the time is he’d been drinking,” Biden said, sounding agitated. “I don’t want to talk about it. . . . She must have pulled out. . . . It’s still painful to talk about 35 years later.” NOT THE FIRST TIME JOE DIRT LET A FALL GUY TAKE THE BLAME BABY KILLER CURTIS "BABY KILLER" DUNN WITH HIS NEXT VICTIM "He once paid a covert visit to a romantic interest and left a friend, his lookout, to take the fall with the campus police, according to a transcript of Biden’s eulogy for the man in 2004.... He recalled the story of a college friend, Donald Brunner, Biden’s roommate at the University of Delaware, taking a fall with the campus police for a young Biden, who was trying to visit a romantic interest. Brunner, is now a senior vice president with J. P. Morgan." Reference: New York Times A FEW DAYS AFTER 9/11 BIDEN TOLD A SIMILAR STORY WHEN ADDRESSING AN AUDIENCE AT THE BOB CARPENTER CENTER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE . "To the loved ones of the victims, there is nothing really we can say to erase this tragedy. And, those of you who think it's presumptuous of me to say that… in a different circumstance, I got one of those phone calls. I got one of those phone calls like Davis Sezna got. I got a phone call saying, "Your wife's dead; your daughter's dead." And I've only said that three times in public before. But, I say it here because it's so important for you to understand. I got one of those phone calls. It was an errant driver WHO STOPPED TO DRINK INSTEAD OF DRIVE and hit a tractor-trailer, hit my children and my wife and killed them. It wasn't an airplane, but it was a phone call: "They're dead." And, I can tell you from experience, and some of you can, too, that feeling that inside your chest is a black hole and you're being sucked inside it. I know from experience there's nothing in the near term we can do to bring solace, relief or peace to those people." CURTIS DUNN THE COVER-UP THE MISSING DELAWARE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL'S FILE This researcher filed a Freedom of Information request with the Delaware Attorney General's Office for documents on the Neilia Biden investigation and discovered that the documents were missing. "This will acknowledge receipt of your request for “copies of public records that Chief Deputy Attorney General Jerome Herlihy generated on a fatal automobile accident Neilia Biden Decemeber 18, 1972 and any other relevant documents.” Upon information and belief we have no responsive documents." THE MISSING DELAWARE STATE POLICE FILE Politico: "The driver of the truck, Curtis C. Dunn was not charged with drunk driving. He wasn’t charged with anything. The accident was an accident, and though the police file no longer exists, coverage in the newspapers at the time made it clear that fault was not in question." Did Politico confuse this with the Deputy AG's file or was this a different file compiled by Delaware State Troopers? Sounds like Politico contacted them and were told it was missing? THE MAN WHO SAVED JOE DIRT'S CAREER JEROME O. HERLIHY According to Republican Jerome O. Herlihy, who shared many of Joe's conservative values, and who oversaw the police investigation as chief prosecutor, there was no evidence supporting Biden’s claim that Dunn was intoxicated. A story headlined, “NO CHARGES DUE FOR TRUCKER IN BIDEN DEATHS,” in the Evening Journal read: “Chief Deputy attorney general, JEROME O. HERLIHY said there was no evidence that [Curtis Dunn] was speeding, drinking or driving a truck with faulty brakes. In addition, witnesses to the crash near Hockessin provided no basis for a prosecution. Herlihy said Neilia Biden either accelerated or drifted through the intersection, and Dunn could not stop. Dunn died in 1999, but Philip A. Lafferty, the truck owner he drove for, still lives in Avondale, Pa. Lafferty recalled the state police impounding the tractor-trailer and the station wagon for the investigation for a couple of days and concluding that Dunn was not at fault." O'HERLIHY BURNED THE NEILIA FILES: THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR THE THEORY THAT NEILIA'S ACCIDENT WAS A DWI WAS DESTROYED IN THE COVER-UP O'HERLIHY THE POST MORTEM TOXICOLOGY TEST AUDIO "I have no idea whether there was or was not [a toxicology test on Neilia Biden] or at least I have no recollection whether there was or was not." - Chief Deputy Attorney General, JEROME O. HERLIHY, close friend and neighbor of the Bidens who conducted investigation. Assistant Delaware State's Attorney Jerome O. Herlihy never ordered a Toxicology test be performed or destroyed the one that was performed. O. HERLIHY, now a retired Superior Court Judge in Delaware who conducted the Neilia Investigation will neither confirm nor deny a Toxicology test was performed on Neilia even though he was in a key position to know and has stated Neilia Biden was not intoxicated. I spoke with him: Mr. HERLIHY? This is A. J. Weberman a journalist from New York. I won't take up much of your time. Can you tell me if there was a Toxicology test done on Neilia Biden? "I have no idea whether there was or was not or at least I have no recollection whether there was or was not." AUDIO Using content analysis "no idea" means he remembered everything that happened, but wasn't sure this was part of it, then he switched to I don't remember squat. Deception. This involved a United States Senator elect's wife and children. It was the most important case in the Judge's career as assistant State's Attorney, because it involved a Biden. O. HERLIHY later went on to preside in a drug court. It stands to reason the Judge would have kept a copy of this public file or would have a vivid recollection of his investigation. The Delaware News Journal reported: "The rumor about alcohol being involved by either party, especially the truck driver, is incorrect," said JEROME O. HERLIHY, a Delaware Superior Court judge who was chief deputy attorney general and worked with crash investigators in 1972."If it were some part of a cause of the accident, there would have been a charge, simply because if you're driving under the influence and kill someone in the process -- whether it's the wife of a U.S. senator or anybody else -- there's going to be a charge," he said. How could he say Neilia was not intoxicated unless her blood alcohol level was tested which he refuses to confirm nor deny? JEROME O. HERLIHY who lived near the Biden's in the late 1960's and was a family friend could have heard rumors about Neilia's drinking: No one except Jerome O. Herlihy brought up the rumors that Neilia was intoxicated. And he would be in a position to know. Only two days after the crash, Jerome O. Herlihy, a neighbor of the Bidens in the late 1960s, who still considers the senator "a friend," told The Delaware News Journal that there was no evidence that Dunn "was speeding, drinking or driving a truck with faulty brakes." No criminal charges related to the crash were ever filed against Curtis Dunn. Biden knew there were no charges against the driver since the fact there were no charges made headlines and there is no doubt that Herlihy, who was socially connected to Joe, informed him personally or through a mutual friend that no charges had been filed. Yet Biden twice stated that Dunn was drunk. What did he have against this man to make him into a murderer, a baby killer no less? He had an ulterior motive. CHRONOLOGY OF JOE'S SEX LIFE August 27, 1966 Joe weds Neilia Hunter July 1972 actual date of first phone call with Jill Giacoppa (AKA Jacobs) due to "tune in" to watch me speak at Dem. Convention recollection. December 1973 an unsubstantiated rumor circulates that Frances Roderick Barnard begins dating Joe Biden: Kitty Kelley, (June 1, 1974). "Death and the All-American Boy" The Washingtonian. May 1974 Frances Roderick Barnard still dating Biden according to Biden in Kitty Kelley interview. AP report this is based on cannot be found nor are there any photos of their dating. August 13, 1974 Bill Stevenson first suspects Jill is having an affair with Biden when she turns down meeting Springsteen saying she has to baby-sit the Biden boys. October 1974 Fender bender with Biden in Jill's car confirms Stevenson's suspicions of an affair. November 29, 1974 Frances Roderick Barnard marries Bob Woodward - divorced in 1979. March 1975 Jill claims she had first conversation with Joe. Says Joe told her he would be speaking at the Dem Com tomorrow and she should tune in. Next convention was in NYC in 1976. May 1975 Jill and Stevenson's divorce decree issued. https://www.neiliabiden.com/ https://people.com/politics/joe-and-jill-biden-love-story/ Ashley Biden Admits Details In Her Diary Are True About Her Father "Showers With My Dad" - https://rumble.com/v4za4mo-ashley-biden-admits-details-in-her-diary-are-true-about-her-father-showers-.html Here Are All The Times Pedophile Joseph R. Biden Jr. A Rapist-Sex With Kids Has Been Accused Of Acting Inappropriately Toward Women And Girls And Taking Naked Showers With Age 11 To 16 Year Old Daughter Ashley Biden Writing In Her Diary And Later Getting A Abortion (So Who Baby Is It ?) And Swimming Naked 100 Of Times Yes Creepy Joe Biden Likes To Swim Naked In Front Of The Secret Service Women And Yes This Man And His Family Are One Sick Group Of People With Our Nation Young Children. A Closer Look At Who's Who In Pedophile And Rapist President Joe Biden's Family. The president is a proud husband, father, and grandfather. Here are all the details on Joe and Dr. Jill Biden's extended family link to video's below. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2712943/Female-secret-service-agents-hate-assigned-Joe-Biden-love-SKINNY-DIPPING-consider-second-worse-assignment-Hillary.html Kathleen Buhle Biden Said Why Joe Biden Keep Having Sexual Relations With Family Ashley Biden Diary Said As A Child Contains a Line About ‘Showers With My Dad Joe Biden & 100's Kids And Young Women And Not Go To Jail ? https://www.docdroid.net/AHRA5wJ/alleged-ashley-biden-diary-full-release-nf-wm-rev2-pdf Why Did Joe Biden Take Lots Of Showers And Use Date Rape Drug With His Eleven-Year-Old Daughter From (Ashley Biden Diary) Who Said I Had To Wash And Soap Up My Dad Hard Naked Body By Hand ? Joe Biden Said Cum On Man... Its Not True... #metoo Movement Believe All Women ? So Did Hunter Biden Really Kill Two Prostitutes ? Kathleen Buhle Biden “Drugs, Alcohol, Prostitutes, Strip Clubs, Sexual Relations” - https://rumble.com/v4s4h4l-kathleen-buhle-biden-drugs-alcohol-prostitutes-strip-clubs-sexual-relations.html Creepy Pedophile's Uncle Joe PAID Out Over 33 Million Dollars Sexual Assault Claims - https://rumble.com/v2rp4bc-creepy-pedophiles-uncle-joe-played-out-over-33-million-dollars-sexual-assau.html Creepy Pedophile's Uncle Joe Biden Has Been Accused 696 Times of Sexual Assault And Some Whistle blowers Are Dead Now. Where Is the #TimesUp Movement? The controversy over Joe Biden’s treatment of women, explained An old-school politician in a #MeToo world. A former staffer of Joe Biden has come forward, alleging that he sexually assaulted her while he was a Senator. She had initially approached the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund but they turned her away, citing fears over accusing politicians. This reveals the inherent contradictions of Time’s Up. Holding the Federal Government Accountable for Sexual Assault Clams As Of Oct. 01 2022 U.S. Government Has PAID Out Over 6+ Billion Dollars For Rape, Sexual Assault, Kids Out Of Wedlock and Sex With Kids And The List Goes On And On On. UN Report Calls For Decriminalization Of Sex Between Adults/Children Age 8+Up https://rumble.com/v2qo62c-un-report-calls-for-decriminalization-of-sex-between-adultschildren-age-8-u.html UN New Legal Principles Launched On International Women’s and Trans Women Day to advance decriminalization efforts In March 2023, UNAIDS and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), along with the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) published a group of "new legal principles" that would advance "decriminalization efforts" globally. Principle 16, titled "consensual sexual conduct," stated that sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual. https://icj2.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/8-MARCH-Principles-FINAL-printer-version-1-MARCH-2023.pdf U.S. Government Is Selling Child Pornography and False Charges Against U.S. Citizens https://rumble.com/v2gonq2-u.s.-government-is-selling-child-pornography-and-false-charges-against-u.s..html I Was Raped By Politicians, Your Fathers Your Mother Other Family Members and U.S. Government Is Selling My Photos XXX Child Pornography (also called CP, child sexual abuse material, CSAM, child porn, or kiddie porn) is pornography that is unlawfully to some and not-unlawfully to other global elite who exploits children for sexual stimulation. It may be produced with the direct involvement or sexual assault of a child (also known as child sexual abuse images) or it may be simulated child pornography. Abuse of the child occurs during the sexual acts. Secrets Meeting Biden Said New U.S.A. Laws Coming Age of Consent Is To Be 8 Yrs. Old https://rumble.com/v2j9os4-secrets-meeting-biden-said-new-u.s.a.-laws-coming-age-of-consent-is-to-be-8.html In A Secrets Meeting Per U.S.A. New Sharia Law Rules 2022 and Kids Gender Affirming Hormone Therapy Rules 2023 Kids Can Now Start At Age 8 Yrs. Old Puberty Blockers Drugs Per President Joe Biden's Administration has confirmed that the legal age of consent for sex and marriage will be lowered to 8 yrs old starting February 16th. 2023 During a speech Tuesday afternoon, Biden stated ‘We have to do it... The age, the kids, they should be about this old.’ He then held up a gesture suggesting the historic decrease. Puberty typically starts between the ages of 8 and 13 for girls and AFABs and New Age of Consent, specifically one young person's question about whether or not to wait until she reaches to have sex, is complicated. There are many nuances to the law depending on where you live and the law itself can be harmful when it's intent is to help. Social media users are sharing screenshots of articles claiming Joe Biden has lowered the age of sexual consent to 8 years by laws. Over the last week, social media users have been pushing claims that President Joe Biden had lowered the age of sexual consent to 8 years. Kathleen Buhle Biden Said Before You Vote For Creepy Joe Biden In Nov. 2024. See A True Pedophile's Family At Work... You Must See All Video's Listed & Linked Below Thanks ! Kathleen Buhle Biden Said Why Do You Ditched Hunter Biden Gun In A Trash Can ? Or Why Do You Hide A Gun In A Lake After You Kill Someone ?... So Did Hunter Biden Really Kill Two Prostitutes ? Yes Maybe No ? Secret Service ‘protected’ Biden family in Hunter gun probe A trove of new emails raises new questions about whether the Secret Service “protected” the Biden family and obscured the agency’s alleged involvement in a police probe after Hunter Biden’s girlfriend ditched his gun in a trash can. Conservative nonprofit Judicial Watch obtained via Freedom of Information Act request 487 pages of Secret Service records about the October 2018 incident — when Hunter’s brother’s widow and then-girlfriend, Hallie Biden, left his .38 handgun on in a supermarket garbage can in Wilmington, Delaware. Biden's Crime Family And Kids​ With Sex Crime Against Young Girls And 13 Dead Body's - https://rumble.com/v2te3tg-bidens-crime-family-and-kids-with-sex-crime-against-young-girls-and-13-dead.html The Corruption of the Biden Crime Family is staring us right in the face. From Hunter Biden’s drug and gun crimes to whistleblower reports alleging that Joe Biden sold out U.S. policy to foreign agents, the level of corruption is staggering. A woman's body was found inside a freezer on biden family property and now the whistleblower is dead now and body is moved and now its missing ? wow. Despite the overwhelming evidence no one will be charged in this crime at all?, Republican politicians do nothing but promise one dead-end investigation after the other. It’s time to take matters into our own hands. Kathleen Buhle Biden Said Why Joe Biden Keep Having Sexual Relations With Family Ashley Biden Diary Said As A Child Contains a Line About ‘Showers With My Dad Joe Biden & 100's Kids And Young Women And Not Go To Jail ? https://www.docdroid.net/AHRA5wJ/alleged-ashley-biden-diary-full-release-nf-wm-rev2-pdf Why Did Joe Biden Take Lots Of Showers With His Eleven-Year-Old Daughter Who Said I Had To Wash And Soap Up My Dad Hard Naked Body By Hand ? Joe Biden Said Cum On Man... Its Not True... #metoo Movement Believe All Women ? My Follow American I'm Name Is Joseph R. Biden Jr. And This Is My Record Wow - https://rumble.com/v4mzd0n-my-follow-american-im-name-is-joseph-r.-biden-jr.-and-this-is-my-record-wow.html Joseph R. Biden Jr. And This Is My True Video's Record As Your President So Far Over Last 40 Years And All American Need To Remember Is "No One Is Above The Law" In 2024 Wow ! In 1998, Biden’s daughter Ashley was arrested for cannabis possession in Louisiana. While others arrested for the same offense faced sentences sometimes spanning decades, Ashley Biden was never convicted of any drug-related crime. In 2014, Hunter Biden was discharged from the Navy after testing positive for cocaine. Like his daughter, no charges were ever filed against Biden’s son. Pedophile Joe Biden Said About His Son Hunter Biden Is A Parasitic Monsters - https://rumble.com/v4hhtyk-pedophile-joe-biden-said-about-his-son-hunter-biden-is-a-parasitic-monsters.html A Gun Belonging To President’s Son Was Dumped In A Trash Can Behind A Grocery Store Why ? https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/?p=2640344 Hunter Biden, a dead beat dad has agreed to plead guilty to federal two criminal tax charges & felony gun charges and no dead women body found. The "Fix was In" all of the time and we all knew it and here is the proof that we have a two tier justice system: So after Hunter Biden Paid 2 Prostitutes for sex and drugs etc. The 2 women are missing and or dead now... So if you kill 2 hookers in a bad drug deal this is why or maybe why hunter biden drop the gun into a trash can to hide to gun ? who know this ? and without the two hookers body for a investigation by the police... Who gun maybe used to kill them... who know this info. and who care's in the first place hunter biden ? All Hunter Biden Sex Crime Report On My Laptop Missing 100s Prostitutes Body's - https://rumble.com/v4hir8u-all-hunter-biden-sex-crime-report-on-my-laptop-missing-100s-prostitutes-bod.html Hunter Biden also has agreed to enter a pretrial diversion agreement in connection with a felony charge of possession of a firearm by a person who is a user/or addict of illegal drugs which is a $250,000 fine and 5 years "mandatory" sentence in prison. https://bidenlaptopreport.marcopolousa.org/report_viewer/index.html#p=1 The Mann Act is a federal law in the United States that criminalizes the transportation of women or girls for the purpose of prostitution or any other immoral purpose. The law was passed in 1910 and is also known as the White-Slave Traffic Act. https://bidenlaptopmedia.com/ - 6,900 Hunter Photo's, Drugs, XXX, Sex Works Etc. The Mann Act makes it a felony to engage in interstate or foreign commerce transport of “any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose.” The law was originally intended to target the sex trade and prevent the exploitation of women and girls. The Mann Act has been used to prosecute a wide range of cases, including cases involving prostitution, human trafficking, and child exploitation. The law has also been used to prosecute cases involving the transportation of individuals for the purpose of sexual exploitation, even if the individuals are not necessarily being forced into prostitution. "I do remember her telling me that Joe Biden had put her up against a wall and had put his hands up her skirt and had put his fingers inside her," LaCasse said. Reade, as detailed in a previous NPR report, has accused Biden of pinning her against a wall in the hallway of a Capitol Hill building and penetrating her vagina with his fingers in the spring of 1993. https://www.kcrw.com/news/shows/morning-edition/npr-story/848872182 The Biden campaign denies the alleged incident, as do longtime Biden staffers whom Reade worked for at the time. Joe Biden Is Trying To Kill Me Tara Reade, who claims she was sexually assaulted by President Joe Biden and has lived in Russia for nearly a year, continues to seek aid from House Republicans who can provide her an outlet to publicly testify her complaints under oath. Reade, who served as a Biden aide when he represented Delaware as a U.S. senator, made headlines during his 2020 presidential campaign when she filed a criminal complaint with the Washington Metropolitan Police Department alleging that he pushed her against the wall in a Senate corridor in 1993 and penetrated her with his fingers. The president strongly denied the accusations and continues to do so. The reaction to her complaint ultimately led her to seek refuge in Moscow in May 2023. As of December, she was granted asylum in an expedited process, but remains intent on wanting to share the totality of her story and allegations with Republicans—though interest in making the testimony a public spectacle has seemingly waned. "I'm angry that nobody is helping me," Reade, who describes herself as a political independent, told Newsweek via phone last week from her Moscow residence. A letter was sent by Reade's attorney, Jonathan Levy, on March 21 to Ohio Republican Representative Jim Jordan, who chairs the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. The letter, which was shared by Reade and Levy with Newsweek, explains Reade's intent to testify remotely from any mutually agreeable location regarding her experiences "as the target of an unconstitutional FBI special operation to silence her. https://www.newsweek.com/biden-accuser-tara-reade-angry-shes-being-ignored-republicans-1883078 "Unlike Stormy Daniels and E. Jean Carroll, Tara reported the sexual assault by President Biden when it occurred and it was contemporaneously documented in 1993 by congressional investigators," the letter reads. "The records, however, remain sealed and locked at the behest of President Biden." Levy said it's "obvious" why Daniels and Carroll have gained notoriety, describing affinity towards their accounts as "unofficial sponsorship" by Biden supporters. Reade's claims were not taken as seriously and led to her being victimized and not telling the entirety of her own story, he added. "Frustrated is how I feel about the whole investigation, especially when I watch things like Stormy Daniels getting a documentary and prancing on The View," Reade said. "You know, she's a porn star and acting like she's a victim. It's disgusting. Secret Pedophile's Watch Child Beauty Pageant Glitter Girls Age 4 Thru 8 Yrs. Old - https://rumble.com/v36e1uw-secret-pedophiles-watch-child-beauty-pageant-glitter-girls-age-4-thru-8-yrs.html A child beauty pageant is a beauty contest featuring contestants starting at age 4 to under 16 years of age. Competition categories may include talent, interview, sportswear, casual wear, swimwear, western wear, theme wear, outfit of choice, decade wear, and evening wear. https://bidenlaptopreport.marcopolousa.org/report_viewer/index.html#p=1 The Biden, Clinton, Obama, FBI , and CIA Crime Syndicate will have no other choice than to have Trump killed before he is elected president. Otherwise once Trump does get elected he will be holding all accountable and aggressively drain the Washington swamp. Biden's Chinese Sex & Business Secrets Enriched Biden Family At America's Expense - https://rumble.com/v2tehzo-bidens-chinese-sex-and-business-secrets-enriched-biden-family-at-americas-e.html Uncover Joe Biden and His Family's Secret Relationship with China People and the Sinister Business Deals that Enriched the Biden Family At All America's Expense Nice and Pedophile Joe Biden's Said See A Chinese's Woman You Want ? Pay The Money And You Can Now Rape Her And Kill Her Having Sex And After You Are Done You Can Cook And Eat Her Or Him Or Trans Your Choose Baby's-Kids-Teens-Adult Life Is Fun. From Hunter Biden’s drug and gun crimes to whistleblower reports alleging that Joe Biden sold out U.S. policy to foreign agents, the level of corruption is staggering. A woman's body was found inside a freezer on Biden family property and now the whistleblower is dead now and body is moved and now its missing ? wow. Despite the overwhelming evidence no one will be charged in this crime at all?, Republican politicians do nothing but promise one dead-end investigation after the other. It’s time to take matters into our own hands. Biden family makes ‘admission of corruption’ in foreign business deals: China expert President Joe Biden denies $1 million in payments were made to family from Chinese business dealings and said its more like $33 million dollars and see if you can find the money ha ha ha. no money to me ? its only my family. https://www.neiliabiden.com/ Remember, date rape drugs are illegal and can have serious consequences for your health and well-being.

Per U.S.A. Government DOA-DOJ-FBI-CIA-Etc. Everyone In U.S.A. All Person And Or America Citizens Right Now Today Is A Criminal As of Oct 2023 Need To Be In Jail Or Pay $$$ Fines Now. Per all federal and local police and all government agencies. All The America People Break The Law's Average 3 Times Everyday with A Average Fine of $512 dollars a day. it add up to $512 x 365 days in a year add up to $186,880 Dollars per year in fines per every person alive today right now. also federal and local agencies issue an average of 27 rules for every law over the past decade. However, the rules issued in a given year are typically not substantively related to the current year’s laws, as agency output represents ongoing implementation of earlier legislation. According to a 2020 article, the more than 300,000+ laws and regulatory crimes on the federal law books serve little purpose other than inviting arbitrary enforcement by providing prosecutors the tools to charge nearly anyone every day for your life with violating some long-forgotten regulation or law and to pay the fines now or go to jail for everyone in the U.S.A.. Government Every Man, Women, & Child Is A Criminal & Need 2 Go To Jail for life. A cell phone app is a smartphone add-on that performs functions other than making a phone call, ranging from GPS map to games to medical monitoring and speeding in your car. So per GPS mapping every street and speed limits of all roads in all town and roads every place of earth we can see you every move and every person driving or moving around town by car or truck... so if you drive 30 mile per hour in a 25 miles per hour zone you get a ticket for speeding etc. your cell phone will tell your speed everyday and night too. most people will get 3-5 tickets a day. you are your brothers keeper and every cell phone in car will get a ticket for speeding and you pay your fine or go to jail. So Per U.S.A. Government Every Man, Women, & Child Confiscation of all property and all assets you have to pay all tickets and all fines every day of your life. P.S. Remember All The America People Break The Law's Average 3 Times Everyday with A Average Fine of $512 dollars a day. So per U.S.A. new land reform and confiscation all personal property to pay all new court fines was not only an economic or administrative process of taking and redistributing deeds or legal ownership of land. It was a two party system's republican and democratic parties -led to new mass movement which turned peasants (its you baby) into active participants and which pushed for political and ideological change beyond the immediate economic question of all land confiscation and ownership rights are gone. If you have a home the state will take it for the fines you own to the state now. you can stay in your old home as a renter with 3 other family to move in with you to help the homeless problem. In order for housing to be considered affordable, a family should not spend more than 30% of its income on rent. Thus, a working family needs to earn nearly $42 per hour – or roughly $87,000 per year – to afford the average rent in Los Angeles. In Los Angeles, the median rent is 46.7% or nearly half of median income. 509,404 low-income renter households in the county do not have access to an affordable home. As of July 10, 2023 - While some states are on a schedule for annual increases to eventually reach $15 an hour, 12 states still adhere to the federal minimum. Although the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 has not budged since 2009, more than 20 states have provided additional increases in 2023. Why Minimum Wage Isn’t Enough Picture this: Jane Doe is a single adult working a full-time (40 hours per week) minimum wage job. Jane wants to rent a modest one-bedroom apartment. No matter where Jane lives in America, and regardless of whether Jane lives in a state with a minimum wage higher than the federal minimum wage, Jane will be unable to do so. Why? Because there’s no state in America in which a person working a full-time job that pays minimum wage can afford to rent a one-bedroom apartment. This shocking fact comes from the National Low Income Housing Coalition’s recently-released report, “Out of Reach 2015.” The report analyzes the Department of Housing and urban Development’s estimated Fair Market Rent (FMR)—which is defined as the 40th percentile of rents for typical, non-substandard rental units, including the cost of utilities—in relation to wages earned in each state. The report estimates the earning necessary to rent one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments without spending more than 30 percent of a household’s total income on rent. Let’s look at how the information presented in this report might impact Jane Doe’s apartment search: To rent a one-bedroom FMR apartment, Jane would need to earn $15.50 per hour. This is more than twice the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Even the proposed federal minimum wage of $10.10 per hour would be insufficient for Jane to rent an apartment. To a rent a two-bedroom FMR apartment, Jane would need to earn $19.35 per hour. If Jane lives in Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, Virginia, or Washington, she’ll need to make over $20 per hour to afford a two-bedroom apartment. The average national FMR price for a one-bedroom apartment is $806 per month. That means Jane would need to work 86 hours per week in her minimum wage job to afford the cost of rent. Unfortunately for Jane, findings in the “Out of Reach” report show that her situation is unlikely to improve any time soon. Nationally, rents are rising, wages are lagging behind, and there is a limited supply of affordable housing. With all these barriers to renting an apartment, it’s easy to see how Jane might end up doubled-up with family or friends, severely burdened by the cost of her housing, or homeless. Unless we take action to increase the supply of affordable housing units (Out of Reach suggests America needs 26.1 million more units to meet demand), increase the minimum wage, and decrease the cost of rent, Jane won’t ever be able to afford her apartment. U.S.A. Government Every Man, Women, Child Is A Criminal Need Two Go To Jail Confiscation All Personal Property And Land Etc. The Confiscation Acts of 1861 and 1862 and Today Soon 2024 As the Senate met in extraordinary session from July 4 to August 6, 1861, one of the wartime measures it considered was the Confiscation Act, designed to allow the federal government to seize property, including slave property, being used to support the Confederate rebellion. The Senate passed the final bill on August 5, 1861, by a vote 24 to 11, and it was signed into law by President Lincoln the next day. Although this bill had symbolic importance, it had little effect on the rebellion or wartime negotiations. When Congress again convened in December, Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, proposed a more comprehensive confiscation bill. On December 2, 1861, Trumbull introduced the Confiscation Act of 1862 to allow for seizure of all Confederate property, whether or not it had been used to support the rebellion. Before long, however, Trumbull's bill stalled due to ideological differences over the issue of confiscation. Radical Republicans called for a vigorous confiscation bill to seize property and free slaves, but more conservative members worried about expanding the reach of the federal government while denying property owners their constitutional rights. Early in 1862, a group of moderate senators, led by Ohio’s John Sherman, produced a compromise bill that authorized the federal government to free slaves in conquered rebel territory and prohibited the return of fugitive slaves, while allowing for confiscation of Confederate property through court action. It also allowed the Union army to recruit African American soldiers. Although more aggressive than the first act, the Confiscation Act of 1862 also lacked enforcement capabilities. Loosely enforced by the Lincoln administration, the law was actively undermined by Lincoln’s successor, President Andrew Johnson. Tracking Everything Everywhere All at Once Cell phone tracking enables you to follow the movements of a person of interest. You can track someone’s location without them knowing by installing a spy app secretly on their target phone. These phone spying apps track almost all targeted phone activities like Calls, SMS messages, Google map’s location, Web history, Social Media sites like Facebook, WhatsApp, Snapchat, Telegram, etc. ... mSpy is a GPS tracker that allows you to remotely track any user’s phone activity. Most Common Reasons Why People Go to Jail Have you ever wondered what are the common reasons people go to jail? What sort of crime do people have to commit to have to spend time behind bars? The truth is that many people end up in jail because they don’t have enough money to pay their bail bond, which implies they will be released, as long as they promise to appear in court when they are required to. If they can’t pay, they have no choice but to go to jail, until they find a reputable criminal lawyer and appear before court. Other people have to go to jail because they don’t know their legal rights, and could not benefit from a fair trial. But what do people do to end up in such a situation? Here is a list of the most common reasons to go to jail: Reason #1: Drug offences One of the most common reasons to go to jail is because of drug-related offences. Criminal organizations make a lot of money by producing and selling illegal drugs. The people who work for these organizations can also make some money by selling drugs, but if they get caught, they can end up in jail. Possessing and using illegal drugs is also punishable by law. Even though using medical marijuana is now legal in Canada, growing large amounts of this drug at home is also considered a drug-related offence. Reason #2: Offences against the justice system There are people who go to jail because they have committed offences against the justice system. This can take many forms: perjury, breach of bail, breach of probation, and failure to attend court mandated programs. Obstructing a police officer, or impersonating a police officer are also considered offences against the justice system. People who commit an offence against the justice system usually have been charged for another crime, and got into some more trouble by refusing to obey the law. Reason #3: Traffic offences Traffic offenses are common reasons for incarceration. People usually don’t go to jail because they ran a red light. If they repeatedly get caught violating traffic laws, they could face some serious consequences. Driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, committing a hit-and-run, and driving dangerously or carelessly are all considered traffic offences. People who commit these offences could get their driving license suspended, have to pay heavy fines, get a criminal record, and even serve some time in jail. Reason #4: Assault Assault is another reason why people can go to jail. It includes any situation where force is applied intentionally to cause harm to someone. But you don’t have to physically hurt someone to be charged with assault: simply verbally threatening someone can be considered a violent crime. Holding a weapon to threaten someone, even if it isn’t a real weapon, can also be considered assault. Someone found guilty of assault, even if it seemed like a minor offence, could end up with a criminal record and serve some time in jail. Reason #5: Sexual assault A sexual assault is a type of assault that was committed for sexual purposes. Any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without consent can be considered sexual assault. This includes rape, attempted rape, or any form of unwanted physical contact. Someone who is found guilty of sexual assault can end up with a criminal record that will follow them throughout their life, and they can also serve time in jail. Reason #6: Theft Theft is another common reason why people go to jail. It can include shoplifting, retail theft, workplace-related theft, breaking and entering, or any situation where someone is taking and moving someone else’s property without their permission. Robbery, which is the act of taking someone else’s possession through violence or intimidation, is a serious criminal offence. Serious charges of theft or robbery can send someone in jail. The value of what was stolen determines how much time the person who committed the crime will serve behind bars. Reason #7: Fraud Fraud is a form of theft. It includes credit card fraud, social assistance fraud, business fraud, investment scams, and, of course, internet fraud. Cybercriminals are using different types of online fraud setups to steal money from people. Identity theft is a type of fraud that happens frequently through the internet. Once again, depending on the amount of money that was stolen, someone recognized guilty of a fraud can serve a few years in jail. Reason #8: Homicide Finally, anyone who is found guilty of committing a murder will be taken to jail, and will probably stay in jail for a long time. Homicide is one of the worst crimes that can be committed, but there are a number of other offences that could send someone in jail. There are even people who go to jail because they have been charged with a crime they did not commit. Wrongful conviction happens when an innocent person goes to jail while a criminal goes free. Reason #9: Just Being Alive Is A Crime 300,000+ laws and regulatory crimes on the federal law books serve little purpose other than inviting arbitrary enforcement by providing prosecutors the tools to charge nearly anyone every day for your life with violating some long-forgotten regulation or law. Many people are arrested for breaking the law or performing illegal activities every single day. Those who are stopped by policeman, turned in by their neighbors, or simply stumble into trouble find themselves facing arrest, fines, and even prison time after they commit crimes. Crimes that are minor will subject individuals to pay hefty fines, but as the crimes rise in severity, so does the punishment. When people are first arrested, they may need to spend time behind bars until they are bailed out. Bail bonds in Orlando help many people meet bail when they are first arrested. There are a few common reasons why people get arrested in the United States. Larceny Larceny, one of the most common crimes, is when someone takes or removes another person's personal property without their permission. This is also known as theft. Typically, this is a nonviolent crime unless it is accompanied by another charge indicting assault. It is also often associated with the crime of trespassing or even breaking and entering. This crime can include taking money, labor, or possessions. This is typically classified as a misdemeanor offense, which means that the guilty will not have to spend time behind bars. Instead, they will have to pay a criminal fine. If they have stolen items of high value, they may end up spending less than a year in jail, as determined by the judge during sentencing. Some cases involving theft may even be less severe, only resulting in citations or a small fine. Drug Abuse Violations This crime is described as the violation of laws involving the production, distribution, and use of illegal substances. This can also include the possession of drug equipment or devices used to prepare these substances or to practice them. Many people are arrested for being under the influence of drugs, possessing drugs at the time of the arrest, selling drugs to others, or even manufacturing the drugs themselves. Commonly used drugs are cocaine, heroin, morphine, and amphetamines. In certain states, recreational marijuana is also a banned drug that you can be arrested for using or possessing. The penalties for being found guilty of drug abuse violations involve a variety of consequences. They can spend time in jail or even federal prison. When the crime is minor, they may also have to face fines, community service, or probation. House arrest is also common to ensure that they are not a threat to the community if they have been found as a danger possessing or selling drugs. The penalties are determined by the substance, the amount of the substance, the drug-related activity, and also if the person has a prior criminal record or not. Driving Under the Influence This common offense is when someone is caught driving their vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs. When the driver is rendered incapable of operating their vehicle, they can be charged with this offense. This includes the use of alcohol and drugs, whether the drugs are recreational or prescribed. When that driver is suspected of driving under the influence, a police officer or medical professional will perform a breathalyzer test to determine the level of intoxication to determine the severity of the crime. Driving under the influence poses a danger to both you and the other drivers on the road. The penalties for driving under the influence also depend on the severity of the crime and the state in which you are driving. Often times, for a first offense, a driver may be fined and have to spend time doing community service. They will also need to take classes that help them stay sober. Second offenses carry a more hefty fine and potential jail time. Drivers may also be subject to have their license revoked for a period of time until they deemed fit to drive safely again. Disorderly Conduct This offense comes in a variety of forms. It is typically referring to a crime involving being publicly under the influence, disturbing the peace, or even loitering in restricted areas. When people are being disruptive enough to cause problems is typically when police officers will consider the crime to be categorized under disorderly conduct. Those who are charged with disorderly conduct pose no danger to them or others. They are just simply disruptive those nearby by engaging in inappropriate or bothersome actions in areas where they shouldn't be. This offense is typically categorized as a misdemeanor or even an infraction, which means the penalties are minor. It may require you to pay a small fine or perform some community service. Disorderly conduct crimes that are more severe may result in a short amount of jail time, but this is typically not the case. Other penalties may involve restraining orders and probation, which require the arrested individual to obey certain behaviors issued by the courts. These are the most common reasons why people get arrested in our country. In order to avoid being arrested, it's simple: avoid breaking the law. By making smart choices, you won't have to request bail bonds in Orlando and spend any time behind bars. Facing hefty fines and paying back your friends and bondsman are just two of the steps in the journey after you have a criminal record. You will also likely need to apologize to many of your loved ones and you may even live your life full of regret if you harmed anyone while you were breaking the law. Once you find yourself in trouble with the law, you can find a way out by trusting the right bondsman. If you or someone you know is in need of trusted bonds services, contact us today for help. Can it really be true that most people in jail are being held before trial? And how much of mass incarceration is a result of the war on drugs? These questions are harder to answer than you might think, because our country’s systems of confinement are so fragmented. The various government agencies involved in the justice system collect a lot of critical data, but it is not designed to help policymakers or the public understand what’s going on. As public support for criminal justice reform continues to build, however, it’s more important than ever that we get the facts straight and understand the big picture. This report offers some much needed clarity by piecing together this country’s disparate systems of confinement. The American criminal justice system holds almost 2.3 million people in 1,833 state prisons, 110 federal prisons, 1,772 juvenile correctional facilities, 3,134 local jails, 218 immigration detention facilities, and 80 Indian Country jails as well as in military prisons, civil commitment centers, state psychiatric hospitals, and prisons in the U.S. territories. This report provides a detailed look at where and why people are locked up in the U.S., and dispels some modern myths to focus attention on the real drivers of mass incarceration, including exceedingly punitive responses to even the most minor offenses. What is the ‘New World Order’ and why has Joe Biden caused uproar by using the phrase? US president excites conspiracy theorists with unfortunate choice of words at White House event Joe Biden caused a stir on Monday during a gathering of business leaders at the White House when he alluded to a coming “new world order” in the wake of the Ukraine crisis, apparently not stopping to consider the awkward legacy of the phrase. Addressing the Business Roundtable’s CEO Quarterly Meeting, which included the bosses of General Motors, Apple and Amazon, Mr Biden concluded his remarks by saying: “Now is a time when things are shifting. We’re going to – there’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it. And we’ve got to unite the rest of the free world in doing it.” The phrase quickly began trending on Twitter, with commentators wasting no time in gloating over what they saw as the president’s presumably accidental invocation of a well-worn conspiracy theory claiming that an elite globalist cabal operating from the shadows is plotting to carve up the world and impose totalitarian rule. “I don’t want Joe Biden leading a line for Jello at a nursing home let alone the world,” one wrote on Twitter. “The nuts who brought us lockdowns creating ‘a New World Order’ is terrifying.” “Did y’all forget everything we learned in those 2012 conspiracy videos?” said another. “Did y’all forget mass vaccination, mass surveillance (vaccine passports) & a total police state is apart [sic] of the New World Order.” And so it went on. Another professed, apparently sincerely: “I believe with all my heart that Joe Biden was installed by Globalists, Babylon included, to usher in the New World Order.” Anyone who took the trouble to listen to Mr Biden’s speech in full would have been left in no doubt that he was referring to the shifting sands of geopolitical relations in response to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine last month. The conflict has seen cities pulverised by savage siege warfare tactics, Ukrainians stage a courageous fightback and war crimes alleged as bombs rain down on maternity hospitals, children’s nurseries, shopping centres, a community theatre and even a Holocaust memorial. The international community has meanwhile moved to impose punitive economic sanctions against Russian businesses, banks, politicians and oligarchs the likes of which have never been seen before, shunning the country’s exports and energy as corporations cease operations, cutting it off commercially as well as diplomatically in the hope of forcing an end to the hostilities. Mr Biden warned the CEOs assembled in Washington that Russia could retaliate with further cyberattacks against the west and use chemical weapons against Ukrainian civilians as the conflict morphs into a drawn-out war of attrition, rather than the swift conquest Mr Putin appears to have envisioned. All of which means the balance of power between nations will inevitably be upended as the world seeks to reorder diplomatic relations to exclude the Kremlin – so long as Mr Putin remains in charge and his war against a free democratic nation continues unchecked, that is – which is clearly what the US president was referring to. Historically, the phrase “New World Order” has been common currency and used in much the same way as Mr Biden by the likes of Woodrow Wilson and Sir Winston Churchill in the aftermath of the First and Second World Wars respectively and, more recently, by George HW Bush in response to the collapse of the Soviet Union. In an address to a joint session of Congress on 11 September 1990, the first President Bush delivered a speech actually entitled “Toward a New World Order” in which he directly quoted Mr Churchill. “Until now, the world we’ve known has been a world divided – a world of barbed wire and concrete block, conflict and the Cold War,” he began. “Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the genuine prospect of new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a ‘world order’ in which ‘the principles of justice and fair play... protect the weak against the strong’. A world where the United Nations, freed from Cold War stalemate, is poised to fulfil the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.” However, the phrase has also been used in a much less optimistic sense, notably in promoting Red Scare fears over the spread of the “international communist conspiracy” in the 1950s, which culminated in Republican senator Joseph McCarthy’s shameful persecutions of the period. That mood of post-war paranoia tapped into much more ancient social anxieties about the possibility of shadowy secret covens engaging in evil, which saw “witches” hunted, convicted and executed by Puritans in 17th century England, Scotland and America and fraternal organisations like the Freemasons accused of practising Satanism. The Illuminati, the model for all subsequent sinister behind-closed-doors cabals feared by conspiracy theorists – not least the adrenochrome-harvesting legion of demon Democrats allegedly operating out of Hillary Clinton’s favourite pizza parlour – traces its origins to the German Enlightenment of the 18th century. Belief in such a group plotting insurrection to realise its “new world order” first gained real prominence in the US among anti-government extremists in the 1990s, according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). “Conspiracists believe that a tyrannical, socialist ‘one-world’ conspiracy has already taken over most of the planet and schemes to eliminate the last bastion of freedom, the United States, with the help of collaborators within the government,” the ADL states. “Through repressive measures, as well as manufactured crises such as terrorist attacks and pandemics, the globalist conspirators seek to eliminate dissent and to disarm Americans so that the ‘New World Order’ can move in and enslave them.” The ADL says its adherents believe the conspirators one day plan to declare martial law in the US, confiscate firearms and round up dissenters into secret concentration camps. The movement brings together American right-wing militant instincts with Christian fundementalist doom prophecies – right-wing televangelist Pat Robertson wrote a best-selling book called The New World Order in 1991 warning against imaginary enemies – and has exploded over the last three decades in tandem with the growth of the internet, a feverish rumour mill of half-truths, political confusion and wilful bad faith interpretations at the best of times. Conspiracy theories have now become a form of mass entertainment on social media, fuelled by everything from The X Files to Alex Jones and culminating in the choose-your-own-reality fringe fantasies of QAnon, whose zealots, bored in lockdown during the pandemic, blended ancient anti-Semitic smears with quest narrative mythologies and pop cultural borrowings to worrying ends. Apparent gaffes like Mr Biden’s only provide further grist to the mill of those who choose to believe that lizard men in silk hoods congregate behind boardroom doors to consult with their puppet-master overlord, hell-bent on global domination and busy manipulating international events to achieve his villainous ends. Can it really be true that most people in jail are legally innocent? How much of mass incarceration is a result of the war on drugs, or the profit motives of private prisons? How has the COVID-19 pandemic changed decisions about how people are punished when they break the law? These essential questions are harder to answer than you might expect. The various government agencies involved in the criminal legal system collect a lot of data, but very little is designed to help policymakers or the public understand what’s going on. As public support for criminal justice reform continues to build — and as the pandemic raises the stakes higher — it’s more important than ever that we get the facts straight and understand the big picture. Further complicating matters is the fact that the U.S. doesn’t have one “criminal justice system;” instead, we have thousands of federal, state, local, and tribal systems. Together, these systems hold almost 2 million people in 1,566 state prisons, 98 federal prisons, 3,116 local jails, 1,323 juvenile correctional facilities, 181 immigration detention facilities, and 80 Indian country jails, as well as in military prisons, civil commitment centers, state psychiatric hospitals, and prisons in the U.S. territories. This report offers some much-needed clarity by piecing together the data about this country’s disparate systems of confinement. It provides a detailed look at where and why people are locked up in the U.S., and dispels some modern myths to focus attention on the real drivers of mass incarceration and overlooked issues that call for reform. This big-picture view is a lens through which the main drivers of mass incarceration come into focus; it allows us to identify important, but often ignored, systems of confinement. The detailed views bring these overlooked systems to light, from immigration detention to civil commitment and youth confinement. In particular, local jails often receive short shrift in larger discussions about criminal justice, but they play a critical role as “incarceration’s front door” and have a far greater impact than the daily population suggests. While this pie chart provides a comprehensive snapshot of our correctional system, the graphic does not capture the enormous churn in and out of our correctional facilities, nor the far larger universe of people whose lives are affected by the criminal justice system. In 2021, about 421,000 people entered prison gates, but people went to jail almost 7 million times. Some have just been arrested and will make bail within hours or days, while many others are too poor to make bail and remain behind bars until their trial. Only a small number (about 87,500 on any given day) have been convicted, and are generally serving misdemeanors sentences of under a year. At least 1 in 4 people who go to jail will be arrested again within the same year — often those dealing with poverty, mental illness, and substance use disorders, whose problems only worsen with incarceration. With a sense of the big picture, the next question is: why are so many people locked up? How many are incarcerated for drug offenses? Are the profit motives of private companies driving incarceration? Or is it really about public safety and keeping dangerous people off the streets? There are a plethora of modern myths about incarceration. Most have a kernel of truth, but these myths distract us from focusing on the most important drivers of incarceration. The overcriminalization of drug use, the use of private prisons, and low-paid or unpaid prison labor are among the most contentious issues in criminal justice today because they inspire moral outrage. But they do not answer the question of why most people are incarcerated or how we can dramatically — and safely — reduce our use of confinement. Likewise, emotional responses to sexual and violent offenses often derail important conversations about the social, economic, and moral costs of incarceration and lifelong punishment. False notions of what a “violent crime” conviction means about an individual’s dangerousness continue to be used in an attempt to justify long sentences — even though that’s not what victims want. At the same time, misguided beliefs about the “services” provided by jails are used to rationalize the construction of massive new “mental health jails.” Finally, simplistic solutions to reducing incarceration, such as moving people from jails and prisons to community supervision, ignore the fact that “alternatives” to incarceration often lead to incarceration anyway. Focusing on the policy changes that can end mass incarceration, and not just put a dent in it, requires the public to put these issues into perspective. Some criminals might be content to serve time in prison, if they know their assets will be available upon release, or that their non-incarcerated families may continue to enjoy the proceeds of crime. This is why confiscation of assets is such an important measure to prevent and combat organized crime. It is also an equally important tool to prevent organized crime infiltration of the legal economy. Confiscation is also known as forfeiture in some jurisdictions. The two terms will be used interchangeably in this Module. Confiscation of assets or property is the permanent deprivation of property by order of a court or administrative procedures, which transfers the ownership of assets derived from criminal activity to the State. The persons or entities that owned those funds or assets at the time of the confiscation or forfeiture lose all rights to the confiscated assets (FATF, 2017; McCaw, 2011; Ramaswamy, 2013). The large revenues generated from organized crime activity can affect the legitimate economy and in particular the banking system adversely through untaxed profits and illicitly funded investments. Furthermore, even after having invested in the legal economy, organized criminal groups often continue to use illicit tools and methods to advance their business, potentially pushing other businesses out of the market. Confiscation of assets is a way to undermine the fiscal structure and even the survival of an organized criminal group by seizing illicitly obtained cash and any property derived from criminal activity (Aylesworth, 1991; Baumer, 2008; U.S. Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture, 1990). Confiscation occurs under one of two types of proceedings: conviction-based confiscation or forfeiture and non-conviction-based confiscation or forfeiture. They differ in the level of proof required for it to take place. Conventionally, non-conviction-based confiscation requires a standard of proof that is lower than the standard required to obtain a conviction in a criminal court. Conviction-based confiscation or forfeiture: confiscation by the State of proceeds of a crime for which a conviction of an offender has been recorded. This is also called criminal confiscation or forfeiture in some jurisdictions. Non-conviction-based confiscation or forfeiture: asset confiscation or forfeiture in the absence of the conviction of the wrongdoer. The term is often used interchangeably with civil confiscation or forfeiture. Furthermore, States might decide to adopt a value based approach to confiscation, which enables a court to impose a pecuniary liability (such as a fine), once it determines the benefit derived directly or indirectly from the criminal conduct. Value-based confiscation is also included in article 12 (1)(a) of the Organized Crime Convention. It is also worth mentioning that, in some countries, assets may be confiscated even if they are not directly linked to the specific crime for which the offender has been convicted, but clearly result from similar criminal activities (i.e. extended confiscation). Growing use of confiscation offers the opportunity to disrupt continuing illicit enterprises and to curtail the effect of large amounts of illicitly obtained cash on the economy. There has been a growing body of case law and policy regarding the seizure and disposition of property in asset forfeiture cases. Concerns regarding the seizure and disposition of property include: Lawfulness of confiscation. Protecting the rights of third parties. Management and disposition of seized or confiscated assets. Lawfulness of confiscation Every jurisdiction has specific powers and limits to guide the confiscation of assets. The procedures permitted correspond with the legal traditions in the country. In some civil law jurisdictions, the power to order the restraint or seizure of assets subject to confiscation is granted to prosecutors, investigating magistrates or law enforcement agencies. In other civil law jurisdictions, judicial authorization is required. In common law jurisdictions, an order to restrain or seize assets generally requires judicial authorization (with some exceptions in seizure cases). Legal systems may have strict obligations to give notice to investigative targets, such as when a search or production order is served on a third party such as a financial institution. That third party may be obliged to advise their client of the existence of such orders, which means that the client would be forewarned about an investigative interest. That must be taken into consideration when taking steps to secure assets or use coercive investigative measures (UNODC, 2012). The legal principle behind confiscation or forfeiture is that the government may take property without compensation to the owner if the property is acquired or used illegally. There are several broad mechanisms for accomplishing this, however the three predominant types of processes used to confiscate property are: administrative (no conviction), property or criminal (conviction-based), and value-based (UNODC, 2012). Conviction-based (or criminal) confiscation In a conviction-based confiscation, property can only be seized once the owner has been convicted of certain crimes. Criminal confiscation is a common approach to asset confiscation in which investigators gather evidence, trace and secure assets, conduct a prosecution, and obtain a conviction. Upon the conviction, confiscation can be ordered by the court. The standard of proof required (normally proof beyond a reasonable doubt) for the confiscation order is often the same as that required to achieve a criminal conviction. Non-conviction-based (or administrative) confiscation A non-conviction-based confiscation occurs independently of any criminal proceeding and is directed at the property itself, having been used or acquired illegally. Conviction of the property owner is not relevant in this kind of confiscation. Administrative confiscation generally involves a procedure for confiscating assets used or involved in the commission of the offence that have been seized in the course of the investigation. It is most often seen in the field of customs enforcement at borders (e.g., bulk cash, drug, or weapons seizures), and applies when the nature of the item seized justifies an administrative confiscation approach (without a prior court review). This process is less viable when the property is a bank account or other immovable property. The confiscation is carried out by an investigator or authorized agency (such as a police unit or a designated law enforcement agency), and usually follows a process where the person affected by the seizure can apply for relief from the automatic confiscation of the seized property, such as a court hearing. All proceeds of crime are subject to confiscation, which has been interpreted to include interest, dividends, income, and real property, although there are variations by jurisdiction (for more information, please see StAR's " A Good Practice Guide for Non-conviction-based Asset Forfeiture"). Whereas the Organized Crime Convention does not make reference to this type of confiscation, the Convention against Corruption includes it in article 54 (1)(c), which encourages States to "consider taking such measures as may be necessary to allow confiscation of [property acquired through or involved in the commission of an offence established in accordance with this Convention] without a criminal conviction in cases in which the offender cannot be prosecuted by reason of death, flight or absence or in other appropriate cases". Value-based confiscation Some jurisdictions elect to use a value-based approach, which is a system where a convicted person is ordered to pay an amount of money equivalent to the value of their criminal benefit. This is sometimes used in cases where specific assets cannot be located. The court calculates the benefit to the convicted offender for a particular offence. Value-based confiscation allows for the value of proceeds and instrumentalities of a crime to be determined and assets of an equivalent value to be confiscated. Protecting the rights of third parties Concern arises regarding the rights of individuals not involved in criminal activity, but whose property is used in, or derived from, the criminal activity of others (Friedler, 2013; Geis, 2008; Gibson, 2012; Goldsmith and Lenck, 1990). This might include uninformed lien holders and purchasers, joint tenants, or business partners. A person who suspects his or her property is the target of a criminal or administrative confiscation investigation may sell the property, give ownership to family members, or otherwise dispose of it. Third-party claims on seized property are sometimes delayed in criminal confiscations because the claim often cannot be litigated until the end of the criminal trial. In an administrative confiscation, the procedure moves more quickly because the confiscation hearing usually occurs soon after the confiscation. In some jurisdictions, third parties are protected under the 'innocent owner' exception for non-conviction-based confiscations, if the government fails to establish that they had knowledge, consent, or wilful blindness to illegal usage of the property. Disposition of confiscated assets Some of most commonly confiscated assets are cash, cars and weapons, as well as luxury property such as boats, planes and jewellery. Residential and commercial property are also subject to confiscation. Once an asset is confiscated, it must be appraised to determine the property's value, less any claims against it. The item must be stored and maintained while ownership and any third-party claims are heard in court. If the challenge to the confiscation is not effective, the property is taken for government use or auctioned. There has been controversy over the use of confiscated assets by some law enforcement agencies. Laws in some jurisdictions earmark specific uses for confiscated assets, such as for education costs. Some have claimed that confiscation of assets that are kept by police provide an incentive for spurious or aggressive confiscations (Bartels, 2010; Skolnick, 2008; Worrall and Kovandzic, 2008). Agenda 21 – Eminent Domain – Confiscation of Private Property – Sustainable Development – Re-wilding The United Nations Agenda 21 was signed by the United States in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Very few people have even heard of it yet it is being implemented in every city, community, and region in America. Agenda 21 is a 40 chapter document listing goals to be achieved globally. It is the global plan to change the way we “live, eat, learn, and communicate” because we must “save the earth.” “Its regulation would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation – even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas, it would monitor all lands and all people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system,” according to Berit Kjos, author of Brave New Schools. Maurice Strong, Secretary-general of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro said, “. . . Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat consumption and large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations. In other words, the Global plan is for us to live on the level of third world nations. That means limited use of fuel of any kind (we will ride bicycles instead of riding in automobiles), no air-conditioning, and we will all be forced to live in tiny apartments in tenement buildings in the middle of a city. That same year, 1992, Al Gore wrote his book, “Earth in the Balance,” and began promoting the Hoax of Global Warming. But it took Bill Clinton to actually introduce something so invasive to our nation and get by with it without the public becoming aware. He appointed his “President’s Council on Sustainable Development” through which he literally gave away the rights and freedoms the framers of the Constitution had provided. Many Americans naively cringe at the mention of “global government” or “conspiracy.” But it is a basic element of human nature to seek wealth and power, and people throughout human history have conspired together to do so. What is Sustainable Development? According to its authors, this is the cover story. The objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social, environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components: global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction. Social Equity (Social Justice) Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people (except the elitists, of course) “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” That means the Redistribution of wealth. Private property is considered a social injustice (except for the elitists, of course) since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care (controlled by the elitists, of course) is a social justice. These are ALL part of Agenda 21 policy. Economic Prosperity?? Public Private Partnerships (PPP) – which means that all public roads, utilities, public buildings, etc. that have been built and paid for with taxpayers’ dollars, will be given to Private Corporations to do with as they choose. Special dealings between government (which is already controlled by the mega corporations) and certain, “chosen” corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government’s power of Eminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Eminent Domain has been extended to allow the government in any area, including City, and State, to take your property at will. Government-sanctioned monopolies are also part of Agenda 21. What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority? More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during the signing ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H. W. Bush signed the document for the U.S. As a result, with the assistance of many groups like the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county, and state in the nation. Revealing Quotes from Planners “Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by EVERY person on earth. . . it calls for specific changes in the activities of ALL people. . . Effective execution of Agenda 21 will REQUIRE a profound reorientation of ALL humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced. . .” Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993) “The realities of life on our planet dictate that continued economic development as we know it cannot be sustained. . . Sustainable development, therefore, is a program of action for local and global economic reform – a program that has yet to be fully defined.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996. “Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI. The Wildlands Project What is not sustainable? Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paved and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment.” UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report. Hide Agenda 21’s UN roots from the people “Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society. . . This segment of our society who fear One-World Government and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined the “conspiracy” by undertaking Agenda 21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.” J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development. Here is a succinct list of Agenda 21 and related programs that will eliminate many things Americans hold dear. These have been declared “unsustainable” and will be abolished. Here are some of them: 1. ALL private property rights (ownership of private property) 2. ALL forms of irrigation, pesticides & commercial fertilizer 3. Livestock production and most meat consumption 4. Privately owned vehicles and personal travel 5. Use of fossil fuels for power generation or mechanized travel 6. Single family homes 7. Most forms of mineral extraction and timber harvesting 8. Human population must be reduced to fewer than 1 billion people (from the present population of over 6 billion people). This is not coming directly from Washington D.C. or state legislatures for the most part. It is seeping in through local city and county governments. Agenda 21 brings with it stealthy code words, comforting words such as “smart growth,” “social justice,” “bio-diversity,” and “sustained development.” You will hear them often. Translated these terms effectively mean total environmental dictatorship and the elevation of the pagan practice of the worship of Mother Earth – Gaia! Agenda 21 is designed to control every aspect of human life on every square inch of planet earth – and man falls to the bottom of the food chain. If Agenda 21 succeeds animals will become more important than man as will plants and trees. We can already see ample evidence of this process in motion today. Agenda 21’s real message is: “Man is the problem. Nature must be preserved and take precedence. Mother Earth must not be scratched.” The 4 “E’s” of Agenda 21 are not what they appear: Education = Indoctrination into believing that nature is more important than man and the group is more important than the individual. The new purpose of education is to learn values not facts. Students must become global, not American citizens. Equity = Theft of private property, open borders, remove God, morality and responsibility. Economy = Redistribution of America’s wealth to foreign countries by outsourcing jobs, factories and technology creating massive unemployment Environment = Nature is more important than man. The new god is Mother Earth. Phony science creates phony regulations destroying energy independence and industry. Each policy and regulation is in place to control more and more of your life. So WHAT is the REAL GOAL of Agenda 21? In simple, direct terms, the Real Goal of Agenda 21 is for the Elitist Jews to take control of the whole world, including ALL the wealth of everyone in the world, including control of ALL the resources in every country in the world, and kill off 5 1/2 billion people – ALL “Gentiles” of course – and just keep enough people around to be their slaves. The population of America, until they can be destroyed, will have their private property confiscated, will be forced to live in tiny high rise tenement buildings in large cities where they will not be allowed to have a car. They will walk to a job for which they will receive slave labor wages. On every floor of the tenement building will be an agent of the Secret Police who will keep track of the comings and goings of everyone in the building. Lest you think that I am exaggerating, I visited the Soviet Union in 1988, a year before the Berlin Wall came down (which was nothing more than a propaganda stunt by the Communists to make the world think Communism was “dead”). I was traveling with a group of ten other Orthopedic Surgeons in a program to meet with Russian orthopedic surgeons to share information. Our plane landed in Moscow where we stayed overnight in a hotel before flying on to Kurgan, in Siberia. Our passports were confiscated and we were assigned to a room in the hotel. As we got off the elevator to go to our respective rooms, we had to sign in with the Secret Police agent on that floor, as we did every time we left – or returned to – our hotel room. The next day we flew on to Kurgan, a city of 350,000 people, a city that virtually no American has ever heard of. Even though this was mid-summer and the temperatures were in the 70’s, there was no grass and no flowers anywhere – just dirt. As “special physician guests from America” we were housed in the “best” hotel in Kurgan. Each hotel room was approximately 8’ X 10’ – the size of a prison cell – with one small window. The “bed” was a thin mattress laid on a wooden surface. Before we started on our trip, each of us had been told to bring a golf ball, but we didn’t know the reason until we got to our hotel. The bathroom was about 3 1/2’ square with no bathtub or shower that we could see. The small sink had no stopper – which was why we were told to bring the golf ball to use as the stopper. The toilet seat was made from plywood that was cut down the center of the board – long ways – exposing the rough inner part of the plywood, making it prone to delivering splinters. We were told that the “shower” was in the ceiling in the center of the bathroom. So one would just stand there, turn the shower on, and water would soak everything including the sink and the toilet. There was a drain in the center of the floor. But the biggest problem was that there was NO hot water. The City administrators turned off the hot water in the Spring – for the entire city – and turned it back on in the fall, when they felt it was appropriate. So one could only shower with freezing cold water – straight from the melted ice rivers of Siberia. Each morning, I could hear the screams of everyone up and down the hotel hallway as they showered. Finally, because we were “special” Americans, the hotel provided a bucket of boiling water outside our door each morning. That was a gracious gesture but it was useless for the purpose of showering. It could be used in the sink – mixed with cold water – for the men to shave or for any of us to take a sponge bath. I saw no private homes in this city of 350,000. Everyone lived in a high rise tenement. We American physicians were not allowed to talk to the Russian physicians we were visiting at any time other than over the operating table as we performed surgery. We were not allowed to eat with them, nor to visit them in their apartments. However, under dark of night, at danger to ourselves and to them, we did – at their request – sneak into their apartments to talk. Physician families of six, parents and four children, were housed in an apartment of approximately 500 square feet. Physicians were paid less than bus drivers because the policy of the Communist state was that a physician – if he made a mistake – could only kill one person at a time whereas a bus driver – if he made an error – could kill a whole busload of people. When we were visiting them in their tiny apartments, we had to speak in whispers so no other tenants could hear us because everyone was taught to be a snitch. We had to come to their apartments and leave from their apartments by the back stairs after given a special signal of “all clear.” We American physicians were given the opportunity to visit an Art store in Kurgan, a shop that was kept locked continuously otherwise, so no resident of Kurgan had access to it. It contained reproductions of famous artists, and books of famous classical artists, and books of classical literature. All of us bought some of these books and painting reproductions to surreptitiously give to the Russian physicians who were not allowed to have anything of beauty. We American surgeons were appalled at the instruments the Russian orthopedic surgeons were forced to use. The equipment was at least 50 years old and completely – and dangerously – rusty. There were no disposable needles, no antibiotics and no disposable surgical gowns. All needles were also rusty and had to be sterilized and re-used. And their sterilization techniques were from the previous century. The hospital was at least 100 years old. There were virtually no cars on the street – except for an occasional “official.”. I wanted to buy a souvenir from my visit to Kurgan so I proceeded to the only department store in the city – GUM – pronounced goom, the abbreviation for the Russian words for “main universal store.” Unfortunately, there was nothing to be purchased. There were dozens of long, old wooden cases with glass tops, remnants also of the previous century, but all they contained were black combs endlessly lined up 2 inches apart. The rest of the merchandise was made of the cheapest plastic that wouldn’t even be sold in a 99 cent store in the U.S. There were no grocery stores that I could find. However, little old ladies in their babushkas were lined up selling what they had produced in their “garden.” The average “seller” had no more than 6 items, for example: 2 small tomatoes, 1 straggly cucumber, and 3 green onions. I never found out where any other food was sold. However, our hotel fed us (Americans) excellent food which was imported from Moscow, just for us. None of that food was available to the Russian people. The Russian people look just like Americans. There were many young, beautiful girls, but they aged rapidly from their very difficult life. Our guide was a lovely, outgoing, young Russian woman who spoke excellent English. At one point she was telling us how excited she was for her upcoming vacation. But she couldn’t make final plans until she got her Visa – to travel to Moscow! – a city within her own country. The Russians were not allowed to travel even to another city without a visa from Moscow, the capital, requiring all travel plans to be registered with the state. I had to leave a day earlier than the rest of the surgeons in my group, therefore I had to board a small plane, a commercial plane that carried about 30 passengers to take me from Kurgan to Moscow. The plane had to be at least 30 years old. The seats had less than one inch of padding that covered several metal bars that drilled into one’s backside during the trip. No food or beverage was served on the trip that lasted over an hour. There was one Flight attendant, a large, fierce looking woman in her mid-fifties, who looked like Nurse Ratched from the movie, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.” If you never saw that movie, then the next best illustration would be a woman bouncer in a low class bar. No one was allowed to get up from their seat at any time during the flight, even to go to the bathroom. (I’m not even sure there was a bathroom on the plane.) When we reached our destination at the Moscow airport, no one got up, so I stayed in my seat, too. Finally, when the prop engines were turned off, the pilots got off the plane and they were the ones who unloaded all the luggage. At that point, “Nurse Ratched” came to me, pointed at me, and motioned me to go with her. She spoke no words. I followed her off the plane and a black car with dark tinted windows was waiting for me at the bottom of the stairs. The driver got out of the car and motioned me to get in. I’ll have to admit, I was not totally comfortable getting into that car, not knowing where I was being taken. Only then were the other passengers allowed to de-plane. Fortunately, I was taken directly to the plane I was to board for my flight home from Moscow, where, for the first time since coming to the U.S.S.R, I was able to feel some sense of freedom. The Soviet Union was – and is today – ruled by the Jews, the same Jews that rule America, China, and virtually every country in the world, except for Iran, North Korea, and a few others who are now on their “mopping up” agenda. What I experienced in Kurgan was just a taste of what we can expect in America. Our Slave-masters are the same as those in Kurgan, Moscow, and the entire Soviet Union, and every other Communist country. Our lives will be worth nothing. Back to Agenda 21 The Deliberate LIE of the story of “saving the environment” – which is actually being destroyed by these same Elitist Jews, not the population of the world – is nothing but a “cover” story to keep the people in the dark while the “Plan” proceeds at break-neck speed. After all, if people caught on to the truth of what is going on, they might make some attempt to survive! This is nothing less than blatant, RAW, Communism! And we, the people, are paying for it. Cities, towns, and states are being seduced into destroying their own rights, and the rights of their fellow Americans, by federal grants and “easy” money to implement these diabolical plans. Undoubtedly, residents of any town, county, or city in the United States that treasure their freedom, liberty, and property rights couldn’t care less whether it’s called Agenda 21 or smart growth. A recent example of this can be found in Carroll County, Maryland, where a smart growth plan called Pathways was drafted by the County Planning Department in 2009. It proposed a breathtaking reshuffling of land rights: Rezoning of thousands of acres of beautiful, low-density agricultural farmland and protected residential conservation land into office parks Down-zoning of agriculture land to prevent future subdivision by farmers Up-zoning of low-density residential land around small towns into higher density zoning to permit construction of hundreds or possibly thousands of inclusive housing units, including apartments and condominiums Inclusive housing with placement of multi-family construction on in-fill lots within existing residential single family communities Endorsement of government-sponsored housing initiatives (subsidies) to ensure healthier, balanced neighborhoods “Balanced” means putting prostitutes, drug addicts, street people, gang members, etc. as tenants in the same buildings with middle class families. This has been going on in San Francisco for years. Upper middle class Americans bought up-scale condominiums in up-scale high rise buildings in San Francisco only to see the City give HUGE subsidies (sometimes paying as much as $4,000 per month) to put these indigent people in the same building. Their goal? To destroy the value of the condominiums owned by the upper middle class thereby destroying the largest investment they owned. The indigent people who were put in these buildings at great expense to the city would defecate in the elevators and in the hallways, leave trash everywhere, put graffiti all over everything inside and outside the building, buy and sell dope on the property, bring their thug friends into the building, and do everything possible to make the decent tenants miserable and frightened. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/publication/download_pdf/Growing-Smart-Legislative-Guidebook.pdf https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/rwss/2016/full-report.pdf https://rumble.com/v2yky8g-this-is-un-4g3nda-21-aw4reness-is-the-first-step-in-the-r3slst4nc3-by-the-p.html Agenda 21 and 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is a non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development. It was adopted by more than 178 countries at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992.

A Brief History Of America In Pictures - Can We Save Our Republic ? No I Do Not Thank So - Yes Happy Veterans Day - We The Sheeple People of The United States of America and A Real Bill of State Rights - A Republic If We Can Keep It ? The Left/Right paradigm isn't only exposed by race and immigration issues. The Left and Right are in lockstep on every issue that really matters: The IRS. Income tax. Federal Reserve system. Endless wars. Endless expansion of tyranny and ever contracting liberty. Chronically wide-open borders. Suicidal immigration policies. Don't you see? The democrats and republicans exist only to provide the illusion of choice. A strong "us versus them" simulation in every election. It's ritualized tribalism. But the joke is, it doesn't matter which team wins, because both sides have the same agenda. God, guns and gays are phony "issues" to bolster the illusion of "difference" between the parties. The only thing that makes all this possible is that people aren't aware of the scam. Just knowing they are either "Team Red" or "Team Blue" liberates them from the responsibility of having to actually know or think anything. Then they feel righteous when their team wins, or despondent when they loose. It's no coincidence that the system works exactly like sports. There comes a point when ignorance and apathy become treason. We are past that point, people. How far our Government has come from being limited and protecting freedoms to Tyranny and Blaming Problems on Freedom and Bioweapon Covid-19 U.S.A.. 1. Freedom America is what we stood for (Background) - 2. 13 Original Colonies Joined to beat the British - 3. Pilgrims Landing - 4. Tyranny Grows British Kill people with NO accountability (much like our Gov Today) - 5. Protest started over high and excess taxes by Red Coats - Much like today - 6. Boston Massacre- Standing Army/Police Shoots Kids for throwing rocks - 7. Boston Tea Party To Peaceful Protest the more high taxes - 8. Protest grows over Tea tax, sugar tax, stamp act - 9. 1765, Quartering Act Troops can take over homes at their will - 10. leaders getting fed up, Give me Liberty or Give me Death, Patrick Henry 11. Paul Revere Pony Run, One If By Sea - 12. 1775, Revolutionary War - 13. 1775, George Washing is appointed as the Commander In Chief of Army - 14. Jun 1775, Battle of Bunker Hill - 15. Navy Was Established To fight off British Navy - 16. Thomas Paine starts paper called Common Sense To Inform on Tyranny - 17. Mar 1776, British Leave and evacuate Boston, Red Coats Run - 18. Jul 4th, 1776. Declaration of Independence - 19. Join or Die, Ben Franklin, first political cartoon that advocated unification of the colonies - 20. Dec, 1791, Bill Of Rights 21. Don't Tread On Me, Gadsden Flag first flown on a warship,1775 as a battle cry for American independence from British rule - 22. On May 4, 1970, members of the Ohio National Guard fired into a crowd of Kent State University demonstrators, killing four & wounding nine Kent State students - 23. Randy Weaver, 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff at his cabin near Naples, Idaho, that resulted in the deaths of his wife & son after he was set up by Gov - 24. The Waco siege, the Waco massacre, 900 Fed Agents siege the compound of religious sect Branch Davidians, Killing 75 people, 25 were children - 25. Oklahoma Federal Building Bombing in retaliation for Gov Killing at Waco & Ruby Ridge - 26. Tim McVeigh, claiming he was doing his Patriotic duty Holding Gov Accountable being led out of court - 27. McVeigh sold bumper stickers at Waco promoting Freedom & Gun Rights Knowing gov is trying to disarm the People so they can't fight Gov or hold Gov accountable - 28. FBI Agent Shot UNARMED Man over Bundy Standoff, Gov was stealing and killing Cattle over taxes, Agent cleared of shooting, Gov protecting Gov, NO accountability - 29. Lavoy Finicum, Good American Killed for standing up to Gov Tyranny - 30. FBI operation Coin-Tel-Pro to Spy On Americans - More Gov Tyranny 31. US Patriot ACT, largest seizer of Freedoms By Gov - Ignoring our Constitution - 32. FBI caught paying Best Buy To spy and Unlawfully Search all computers they worked on. Paying employees Gov money to find or PLANT evidence on comp for money. - 33. Gov Seized Guns UNLAWFULLY during Katrina crisis, Gov Broke into home & forcefully seized gun from citizens leaving them helpless to looters and criminals - 34. RED FLAGS being pushed by Gov to seize more guns from citizens - 35. Beto O' Rourke running for Texas Governor gives speech, "Hell yea, we are going to take your AR-15" finally admitting Gov Wants your guns. - 36. FBI has secret NO FLY lists & expands it to Trump Supporters Going To Protest - 37. FBI has become the most Tyrannical Gov Agency, ignoring the Constitution, secret warrants, secret list, NO Accountability - 38. FBI disinformation, working with Google, Twitter, other social platforms, using Gov power to force Pvt Companies to SPY on Americans - 39. Massive Voter Fraud, covered up & censored by Gov and Media - 40. Gov throws out Due Process & Jails political opponents IGNORING the Constitution 41. Gov Shoots and KILLS Unarmed Woman for Climbing in a window, Gov Cleared & Justified shooting - 42. Biden's Open Border flooding country with over 3 Million Illegals, American Hating Terrorist to flood more Voter Fraud - 43. Gov Forced Lock Downs, Masks, Vaccines on American, Yet Open border people get free food, phones & not required to be Vaxed. - 44. Gov CDC MADATING Kids Get vaxed or can't go to school - 45. Biden & Congress Approve 87,000 NEW IRS agents to further impose MORE TAXES - 46. Armed Americans Stand up to Federal Agents at Bundy Standoff - Gov Backs Down - 47. FBI puts out a Warning Flyer labeling Patriots & Gun owners has Dangerous and Extremist - 48. Congress passing 5000 page bills without reading them giving BILLIONS to other countries - 49. National Debt Clock - 31 TRILLION IN DEBT AND GROWING - Gov Needs more Taxes & Money - 50. Judicial Watch releases report showing FBI & Biden are Hiding Biden's Crimes 51. When Gov becomes Tyrannical It is not only our right, it is our Duty to stop it. - 52. We The People - must defend & protect our constitution and bill of rights (2nd Amendment) - 54. Ben Franklin - We must hand together or we will Hang separately - 55 A Republic if you can keep it - 56 Right to Bear Arms - 57 Molon Labe - Come & take it - Don't Tread On Me - 58 Three Percent - 59 Betsy Ross Flag Does the U.S. government have the right to kill its own citizens? A Hellfire missile obliterated a 16-year-old American citizen in Yemen last fall. U.S. President Barrack Obama personally signs off on all such "targeted killings," and while most are directed against foreigners – usually Muslims suspected of being radical jihadists – at least three Americans are among the hundreds killed in the last three years in drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. Hellfire missiles fired from unmanned Predators have become the president's preferred means of dealing "justice" overseas. The 16-year-old, reportedly sitting among a group of men at a roadside café in Yemen, was Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, son of Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S.-born radical Muslim cleric widely suspected of recruiting jihadists for attacks on the United States. Mr. al-Awlaki had been killed two weeks earlier in another Hellfire missile strike along with another U.S. citizen, Samir Khan, a propagandist for al-Qaeda in Yemen. It remains unknown whether the 16-year-old was killed because he was the son of a suspected al-Qaeda figure or whether he was so-called collateral damage and someone else in the group was the target okayed by Mr. Obama. At issue is whether the president, any president, can simply sign a death warrant for a U.S. citizen overseas or whether Constitutional guarantees of "due process" require more than an Oval Office checklist. While many Americans savaged former U.S. President George W. Bush for approving harsh measures, including so-called enhanced interrogation techniques that many, including the current president, deplored as inhumane and tantamount to torture, the targeted killing on Mr. Obama's watch of a handful U.S. citizen has attracted little outrage. Now two rights groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights are suing Defence Secretary Leon Panetta and Central Intelligence Director David Petraeus, among others, in an attempt to pull back the curtain on Mr. Obama's murky program of selective assassination. They can't sue the president directly; he has immunity. The suit was filed earlier this month on behalf of Nasser al-Awlaki, the father and grandfather of Anwar and Abdulrahman and Sarah Khan, the mother of Samir Khan. The Obama administration claims "targeted killings" are completely legal. The simple explanation, as given by Attorney General Eric Holder, in a long speech last March states that: "'Due process' and 'judicial process' are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security." In the view of the Obama administration, "the Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process," Mr. Holder said. That bizarre interpretation of the Constitution is what the current lawsuit aims to challenge. "For obvious reasons the government's authority to kill people summarily without judicial process is very limited," said Jameel Jaffer, legal director of the ACLU. He admits there are some exceptions: a police officer faced with an imminent threat from an armed assailant or a soldier at war on a foreign battlefield. Both domestic and international law sanction such killing as lawful within limits. But the use of lethal force – away from an active war zone – has traditionally been limited to thwarting a grave and imminent threat, not substituting for the long, convoluted, process of charge, arrest, trial, conviction and punishment. "The questions here is whether the government is justified in killing them without charging them with anything or trying them for anything," Mr. Jaffer said, adding that the ACLU fully acknowledges the very serious allegations of terrorism against Anwar al-Awlaki. Taking a page out of the Bush playbook, Mr. Holder said legal opinions – prepared secretly because of national security implications and therefore not available – have concluded that "targeted killings" are legal. Mr. Jaffer disputes that. "While the case is complicated in some ways, ultimately it is very simple. Our argument is that when the government is killing its own citizens it has an obligation to explain why," he said. I'm from the Government and I'm Here to Kill You The True Human Cost of Official Negligence Gallup recently found that 49 percent of Americans believe that the government poses “an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.” I’m from the Government and I’m Here to Kill You, written by a former federal attorney, shows that even the 49 percent have no idea how bad things really are. Rights and freedoms are not the only things at stake; all too often government imperils the very lives of those it supposedly serves. Federal employees have, with legal impunity, blown up a town and killed six hundred people, released staggering amounts of radioactive contamination and lied about the resulting cancer, allowed people to die of an easily treated disease in order to study their deaths, and run guns to Mexican drug cartels in hopes of expanding agency powers. Law enforcement leaders have ordered their subordinates to commit murder. Medical administrators have “cooked the books” and allowed patients to die, while raking in plump bonuses. Federal prosecutors have sent Americans to prison while concealing evidence that proved their innocence. I’m from the Government documents how we came to this pass: American courts misconstrued and expanded the old legal concept of sovereign immunity, “the king can do no wrong.” When Congress attempted to allow suits against the government, the legislators used vague language that the courts construed to block most lawsuits. The result is a legal system that allows official negligence to escape legal consequences and paradoxically punishes an agency if it tries to secure public safety. I’m from the Government ends with proposals for legal reforms that will hold the government and its servants accountable when they inflict harm on Americans. IS THERE A RIGHT TO TRAVEL WITHOUT A DRIVER'S LICENSE IN THE UNITED STATES? Right to Travel vs. Freedom of Movement The phrase "right to travel" should be clarified because it's commonly confused. Many cases, documents, etc. using the phrase "right to travel" are in fact about Freedom of Movement, which is the Constitutional right to travel between States at will. If anyone speaks of a "Constitutional right to travel" Freedom of Movement is the only valid thing they could be referring to, as we'll show. In pseudo-legal circles, "right to travel" means the supposed right to "travel freely in your private property / automobile / conveyance on the public roads / highways without a driver's license, insurance or registration and exempt from regulation or interruption provided one does not engage in commerce / earn profit or cause harm to people or property." Absolute freedom! Could it be true? How does the law work? Tenth Amendment, State Codes Traffic regulation isn't mentioned in the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, therefore the power generally falls to the States pursuant to the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. States are free to enact whatever traffic regulations they want provided they do not violate federal law, as determined by the federal courts, pursuant to their police power. All 50+ States, through their legislatures consisting of the people's elected representatives, have seen fit to devise and enact their own traffic codes and police them. Was it always this way? There wasn't always legislation displacing the common law. Automobile regulation began in the early 1900's. Here is an excellent paper that thoroughly explores the transitional period when decisions could go either way: The Orphaned Right: The Right to Travel by Automobile, 1890-1950. Bicycles were regulated decades before automobiles were invented and activists of the day faced many of the same questions and challenges modern right to travel proponents do. An analysis of that period can be found in this publication: The Impact of the Sport of Bicycle Riding on Safety Law. Constitutionality The States have all enacted traffic regulations, but do they violate federal law or the Constitution? Judging constitutionality is ultimately up to the Supreme Court pursuant to Article 3: The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. Appeals are more-often-than-not declined by the Supreme Court so adjudication may stop at the federal United States Courts of Appeals (circuit courts) or District Courts and those are a good place to look for precedent, too. We prefer citations from these federal courts to avoid presumptions of bias that might arise by the State judging its own regulations and because federal decisions are superior to State decisions pursuant to the Supremacy Clause. Federal Court Decisions Let's have a look at some federal cases on the right of States to regulate traffic. Hendrick v. Maryland 235 US 610 (1915) The movement of motor vehicles over the highways is attended by constant and serious dangers to the public, and is also abnormally destructive to the ways themselves . . . In the absence of national legislation covering the subject a State may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and order in respect to the operation upon its highways of all motor vehicles — those moving in interstate commerce as well as others. And to this end it may require the registration of such vehicles and the licensing of their drivers . . . This is but an exercise of the police power uniformly recognized as belonging to the States and essential to the preservation of the health, safety and comfort of their citizens. Hess v. Pawloski 274 US 352 (1927) Motor vehicles are dangerous machines; and, even when skillfully and carefully operated, their use is attended by serious dangers to persons and property. In the public interest the State may make and enforce regulations reasonably calculated to promote care on the part of all, residents and non-residents alike, who use its highways. Reitz v. Mealey 314 US 33 (1941) The use of the public highways by motor vehicles, with its consequent dangers, renders the reasonableness and necessity of regulation apparent. The universal practice is to register ownership of automobiles and to license their drivers. Any appropriate means adopted by the states to insure competence and care on the part of its licensees and to protect others using the highway is consonant with due process. There we have three solid federal Supreme Court decisions that set nationwide precedent that cannot be ignored. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of law in the United States. Unless "right to travel" proponents can come up with a later Supreme Court ruling that states otherwise, their claims are busted. And we have one less-impressive but telling quote from a lower federal district court: Wells v. Malloy 402 F. Supp. 856 (1975) Although a driver's license is an important property right in this age of the automobile, it does not follow that the right to drive is fundamental in the constitutional sense. A few of the above cases were found in a somewhat inflammatory and dated but comprehensive publication, Idiot Legal Arguments. We picked out the relevant federal cases, but many more high-level State cases can be found there, too, if you're interested. There actually isn't a whole lot at the federal level because appeals beyond State courts are often denied as it has long been accepted by the federal government that traffic regulation is a proper exercise of State police power. Federal courts uphold the ability of States to regulate road traffic provided it is done so with equality, reasonableness and for public safety and doesn't violate any federal laws or rights. But I don't "drive" or use a "motor vehicle"! Those are legal terms used to enslave me and I'm smarter than that! I'm afraid the State and its courts dictate how things are viewed under its law. You don't get to decide what's considered driving or a motor vehicle, they do. You can't simply switch out a few words to avoid responsibility. If you're in territory controlled by the US and/or a State then its laws may be applied to you and you have no lawful recourse (see Law Basics). I've heard of people being ignored or let go by police, even without a license or insurance! Police have discretion. The world is a very dynamic place. There are any number of reasons why you might be passed by or allowed to proceed at any given time. The cop might be a scared rookie, not care, not want to fight, have a date, have to pee, be on lunch break, be at the end of their shift and going home – think about it – they're human, not machines. The priorities of police and prosecuting attorneys vary. The law is what it is, though, and when you understand it you know in the long run you're looking for trouble if you don't obey it. I don't like traffic regulations. What can I do? Your lawful remedy is to convince the majority of people in your State to put pressure on your elected representatives in the State legislature to change the law. That or you could move to another State or country where there are less regulations (and perhaps more fatalities). Study hard, verify claims, think for yourself, question this, comment. DID THE 14TH AMENDMENT LIMIT STATE CITIZENS' RIGHTS? The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Section 1, the Citizenship Clause, states: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. Some claim that before the amendment was ratified State citizens were not subject to the federal United States government. The argument fails straight-away because the clause plainly states that it only applies to subjects of the United States. Anyone affected by the 14th amendment was already subject to the federal government. The federal government was merely dictating something to its subjects as anyone with subjects lawfully could. The main intent of the amendment was to have the States recognize federal subjects, particularly slaves that were considered property and not citizens in the southern slave States, and to establish equality and full civil rights across the nation. We should know that the States themselves, and thereby their constituents and properties, e.g. citizens and slaves, have been subject to the federal government since the Constitution was signed in 1788. Article 6, Clause 2 of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause, reads: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. Therefore, State citizens may or may not have been federal citizens but were definitely subject to the United States government, at least as far as the United States government could limit the States and their members. The amendment imposed federal citizenship on State citizens that didn't have it, but did it represent a substantial loss of liberty? It is said in related Congressional documents here or here that subjects should be treated about equal with citizens as far as liberty is concerned. Therefore if a State citizen were indeed not to have US citizenship and (as subjects but not citizens) gained it by the 14th amendment, they would conceivably not suffer much, if any, loss of liberty. They would, however, gain valuable constitutional and federal protection. I want to say that the 14th amendment Citizenship Clause does not remove any rights or privileges or impose any additional duties upon State citizens that were not previously federal citizens. For the most part this appears true. As federal subjects but not citizens State citizens would seemingly be limited similarly to federal citizens. By swearing allegiance to a State that swore allegiance to the Constitution even without federal citizenship there is a substantial loss of liberty for State citizens to the federal government. Therefore I think it's safe to say that any additional duties imposed by federal citizenship would be minor. Further, the act of forcing subjects to become citizens could not conceivably be viewed as unlawful, as doing what your master says is what being a subject is all about. I wonder whether or not all State citizens automatically became federal citizens or if there was ever a sweeping grant or imposition of citizenship at some point before the 14th amendment. There were naturalization acts, people could become US citizens by residing in the US for a period of time and swearing allegiance in court, but how did the first citizens, the signers, etc., get their citizenship? Still working on it. Stay vigilant. Keep asking questions. Post a comment. IS THE UNITED STATES A FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION? A popular theory is that the United States is a for-profit corporation similar to McDonald's. A variety of arguments are used to try to support this claim. We intend to investigate those arguments, but first we need to get some fundamentals out of the way. What is a country? What is a corporation? A country, or nation-state, is a "public body corporate", a lawful entity consisting of various members. Countries are not incorporated with any superior entity – they are sovereign, answerable only to the political, economic and military force of other nations who dare oppose. In general, nations voluntarily follow principles of public international law in the interest of peace, order and mutual benefit. A standard corporation, on the other hand, similarly consists of various members but is incorporated into, under and subject to a nation-state or state and its laws. The nature and necessity of such corporations is explored at length in Blackstone's Commentaries: Of Corporations. People, men and women, human beings, whether citizens or not are not considered corporations under law, but natural persons. It is not possible to appear in law individually except as a natural person. What is the United States? The United States is a sovereign state with the Constitution as the foundational document and supreme law of the land. The United States entity, the same you see as a party in court cases, etc., was created implicitly by the Constitution. The United States is the highest entity that exists or can exist in the United States. The United States itself is not a standard corporation incorporated under any nation's laws (or its own), however the US may form and make use of various standard corporations internally. Now that we're done with the formalities, let's debunk some pseudo-legal claims! 28 USC § 3002 Definition The following definition is often claimed to be proof-positive that the United States is a corporation: (15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States. First we need to understand the basics of statutory word definition. If you read the top of the section carefully you will see the words "As used in this chapter". That means those definitions only apply within that chapter of the USC, which we see here. At a glance it covers about 124 sections out of many thousand in the USC. Moreover, the definitions only apply in federal proceedings that fall under that chapter. The same definition does not apply and is not used anywhere else. So yes, for the purposes of that chapter, United States is defined as a Federal corporation. This argument is busted based on the scope of the definition alone – clearly something that applies in just one chapter of federal code can't override the entire nation. We can look further, though, to find the exact intent and reasoning behind the particular definition. From the description of the chapter we see it's related to federal debt collection procedure, which is a start. How can we quickly find out more? We can search Google Scholar to see what the courts say. Clicking the first case and checking footnotes 8 and 9 sheds much light on the topic. Apparently the definition is related to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the intent is to limit the application to dealings with federal entities. In passing the FDCPA, Congress evinced a clear intent to exclude private transactions — debts created under (and thus governed by) state law, and to which the United States was not an original party. That explains that! The District of Columbia Some believe that the creation of a municipal or state-style government subject to Congress in the District of Columbia somehow changed the government and made everything, including the Constitution (the supreme law of the land, remember) subject to that corporation. This would be quite impossible and makes no sense. The created cannot supersede its creator. No legislation from Congress, no ruling from the Supreme Court, no Executive Order can destroy or replace the Constitution or the United States. Where do the profits go? Revenue collected by the United States is managed by the United States Department of the Treasury which has a number of responsibilities. Collected monies remain in the Treasury for use within the nation. Money cannot be removed except in accordance with US law under the Constitutional framework. What say you? Do you think the United States is a "for-profit corporation"? Nation-States, Jurisdictions The highest sovereign power is the nation-state, a "public body corporate", a country in accordance with public international law. At this level there is really no binding authority or effective force to hold nations accountable. Nations may have treaties with other nations, but they are honoured voluntarily, with no repercussions other than public stigma or the potential action of an injured party in the event of a breach. While every nation is free to do things their own way, in general, next are internal states (or provinces), in accordance with national law, and [counties and] municipalities, in accordance with state law. National law trumps state law, and state law trumps regional and municipal law. Where treaties exist, international law trumps national law. Each jurisdiction, be it federal, state, county, municipal, etc., is sovereign unto itself, subject to its parent, with federal being the highest authority in the nation. In general, a federal court cannot hear a state matter, except on appeal and in accordance with state law. A federal court cannot interfere in state matters, except where they violate federal law. A state court cannot hear a federal matter at all. A county or municipal court cannot hear a state or federal matter. Applicability of Law Unless you make your own law (that nobody cares about) it is impossible to appear in law except under a nation-state. You can't contract out of national law because the contract law you're using is subject to that same nation. Likewise, you can't call citizenship a trust because there is no position or law above the nation to call it a trust from. The nation dictates how things operate and there is nothing lawful you can do about it short of leaving the area, starting your own nation and declaring war. The laws of a nation-state apply equally to everyone. Anyone in or on territory claimed by a nation is expected to conform to all the laws of the nation, state and municipality (as applicable). Where one does not wish to conform and is forced to, there is no lawful remedy one can employ to collect compensation. One can only potentially be awarded damages when federal, state or municipal laws are violated. There is no higher law as some believe. This could be viewed as an unfortunate case of might making right. Theories about what makes such a social contract legitimate vary from divine blessing to tacit acceptance by staying in a claimed area or using the products of society. Challenging Constitutionality Until such time as a superior court deems a piece of legislation unconstitutional or invalid it is in full force and effect. The way it works is this: bad laws are enacted, someone is eventually harmed, that someone now has standing to sue and challenge the law to potentially have it struck down. It is not up to individuals to determine the constitutionality of laws or declare them invalid. Only the highest courts can do this. Common Law vs. Statute Law Many seem to think common law trumps statute law. This is false. The local federal, state and municipal constitutions and legislatures are supreme. Statutes have always displaced common law, since the first English statutes. The constitution, king and parliament (or congress, state legislature or regional council) have always been stronger than the judges and courts they employ in their realm. Again, the nation-state is the highest entity in law. Sovereign states can choose to receive third party law, such as English law. English colonies automatically receive English law whereas the US received it voluntarily via reception statutes, clearly subject to local law. Local governments, being sovereign inasmuch as they do not violate higher national, state or regional law, are always able to overturn foreign law they inherited or received. Contract Law – Is silence consent? There is a common misconception based on the spongy maxim "silence is consent" that one can simply send a Notice, Affidavit, Fee Schedule or other document with a time limit for response and failing that response a binding contract is made. This is not valid contract law. According to the reigning case law (contracts remain primarily at common law), contracts cannot be established unilaterally through silence, there must be a clear offer and acceptance and meeting of the minds. The recipient failing to respond in a certain time is not binding unless there is some specific valid governing legislation or common law that dictates the same. For example, many Acts, contracts, court rules, etc. dictate that certain notices and time limits apply. UCC-1, PPSA and other Financing Statements When a document is ignored a wayward pseudolaw proponent may turn to abusing other legal processes to try to enforce their view of the law. A common method is through UCC or PPSA filings (for the US or Canada, respectively), as these are not checked for validity at the time of filing. Such filings are a direct attack on the well-being of a person and can severely affect their economic status, credit rating, etc. In some jurisdictions frivolous or vexatious filings can garner cash awards, years in jail or both. Financing statements are a form of expressing interest in collateral. In order for collateral to be properly owed to a secured party and qualify for a filing a clear contract or security agreement describing the intent and collateral must exist between the would-be secured party creditor and debtor. In the US and Canada, pursuant to UCC, PPSA or other legislation such as a Statute of Frauds, the debtor must authenticate the security agreement by signature. Where no collateral is involved, financing statements are useless and improper. For a standard contract, one would simply sue in court to obtain a judgment which would allow garnishment of income and seizure of assets. Definition of Legal Terms A common mistake is applying definitions of legal terms universally, often from an incorrect source. One might think a law dictionary is the best place to define words for use in law. This is unfortunately incorrect. The first place a court looks for a definition is in the Act related to the specific charge. If the charge is a state traffic violation, for example, the state traffic code and definitions found therein would apply. Where a word isn't defined in legislation a court might look to its own past rulings, a superior court or any number of dictionaries or other sources for suggestions before deciding for itself what a word means. Meads v. Meads A Canadian case, (Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571)-(This A PDF File 188 Pages) explores numerous pseudo-legal theories at length. It is highly recommended to read the case in full. https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.pdf IS THE UNITED STATES STILL UNDER LINCOLN'S MARTIAL LAW? Some believe Abraham Lincoln's martial law from the American Civil War is still in effect. Hostilities technically ended about a month after Lincoln's assassination, with a proclamation made by new President Johnson on May 10, 1865. armed resistance to the authority of this Government in the said insurrectionary States may be regarded as virtually at an end On April 2, 1866, another proclamation declared the insurrection at an end in all States but Texas. there now exists no organized armed resistance of misguided citizens or others to the authority of the United States in the States of Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Florida, and the laws can be sustained and enforced therein by the proper civil authority On Aug 20, 1866, a third proclamation confirmed that civil government was officially resumed in all states that had seceded from the Union. I do further proclaim that the said insurrection is at an end and that peace, order, tranquillity, and civil authority now exist in and throughout the whole of the United States of America. Ergo, Lincoln's martial law can confidently be said to be no longer in effect. The image reads ‘We kill people, who kill people, because killing people is wrong’ placed on an American flag with a woman holding a gun with her eyes and mouth taped shut. To understand the image further it is easier to break it down into the separate symbols within the image; The American Flag is traditionally a symbol of freedom, although the smeared paint of the flag may pertain to some form of blurred image, showing that the image and what it stands for is not always what it appears to be Historically women represent a caring and motherly figure, although the body language displayed (such as the gun being held firmly to her chest) depicts a cold and un-nurturing connotations Black clothing symbolises death in a lot of countries, as it is worn to funerals. Guns are often a representation of death or pain The blindfold is a symbol of silence or silencing, also a parallel may be drawn to hear no evil, speak no evil. To put simply, the best way to describe the image is simplifying a complex issue. I think that the image alludes to the use of the death penalty in America and the author’s feelings are conveyed through the tweaks made to simple symbols, such as the American flag, and that they do not agree with the death penalty, best distinguished through the words displayed on the image. A separate reading may look further into a gender based reading of the image, rather then a political stance. The use of a female, rather then a male, in comparison, gives the image a different vibe altogether. As stated above, women are symbols of love and maternity, whereas males often are associated cold and callous feelings. Her body shape could also be looked into. USA Loves To Meddle Other Countries And Coup U.S. Wars and Hostile Actions List! https://rumble.com/v2ii9fo-usa-loves-to-meddle-other-countries-and-coup-u.s.-wars-and-hostile-actions-.html A list of U.S.-backed right-wing military coups in Latin America. The U.S. has never been a country that has stood for freedom or democracy. • ⁠South Korea 1945-48 * • ⁠China 1949 to early 1960s • ⁠Greece 1947-49 * • ⁠Italy 1947-1970s • ⁠Costa Rica 1948 • ⁠Albania 1949-53 • ⁠Syria 1949 * • ⁠Korea 1950-53 • ⁠Egypt 1952 • ⁠Iran 1952-53 * • ⁠Cuba 1953 to present • ⁠Philippines 1953 • ⁠British Guiana 1953-64 * • ⁠Guatemala 1954 * • ⁠Syria 1956-57 • ⁠Indonesia 1957-59 • ⁠Vietnam 1959-75 • ⁠Lebanon • ⁠Iraq 1959 • ⁠Congo 1960-65 * • ⁠Laos 1960-75 * • ⁠Ecuador 1960-63 * • ⁠Dominican Republic 1961 * • ⁠Brazil 1961-64 * • ⁠Iraq 1963* • ⁠Chile 1964-73 * • ⁠Dominican Republic 1965-66 * • ⁠Indonesia 1965 * • ⁠Cambodia 1967-75 * • ⁠Bolivia 1971 * • ⁠Ghana 1966 * • ⁠Greece 1967 * • ⁠Costa Rica 1970-71 • ⁠Iraq 1972-75 • ⁠Australia 1973-75 * • ⁠Ethiopia 1974-91 * • ⁠Portugal 1974-76 * • ⁠Angola 1975-91 • ⁠Jamaica 1976-80 * • ⁠Zaire 1977-78 • ⁠Seychelles 1979-81 • ⁠Afghanistan 1979-89 * • ⁠Poland 1980-1989* • ⁠El Salvador 1980-1992 • ⁠Chad 1981-82 * • ⁠Grenada 1983 * • ⁠South Yemen 1982-84 • ⁠Suriname 1982-84 • ⁠Libya 1980s • ⁠Nicaragua 1981-90 * • ⁠Fiji 1987 * • ⁠Panama 1989-94 * • ⁠Bulgaria 1990 * • ⁠Albania 1991 * • ⁠Iraq 1991 • ⁠Haiti 1991 * • ⁠Somalia 1993 • ⁠Yugoslavia 1999-2000 * • ⁠Ecuador 2000 * • ⁠Afghanistan 2001 * • ⁠Venezuela 2002 * • ⁠Iraq 2003 * • ⁠Haiti 2004 * • ⁠Somalia 2007 to present • ⁠Honduras 2009 * • ⁠Libya 2011 * • ⁠Syria 2012-present • ⁠Ukraine 2014 * • ⁠Yemen 2015-present • ⁠Bolivia 2019 * • ⁠Venezuela 2019-present • ⁠United State Of America 1984-present • ⁠New World Order Year Zero ! U.S. Wars and Hostile Actions: A List There is a reason that most countries polled in December 2022 by Gallup called the United States the greatest threat to peace in the world, and why Pew found that viewpoint increased in new year 2023. Since World War II, during a supposed golden age of peace, the United States military has killed or helped kill some 20 million people, overthrown at least 36 governments, interfered in at least 86 foreign elections, attempted to assassinate over 50 foreign leaders, and dropped bombs on people in over 30 countries. The United States is responsible for the deaths of 5 million people in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, and over 1 million just since 2003 in Iraq. U.S. Government Is Selling Fentanyl Laced w-Xylazine To Kill Us - Its Not From Mexico https://rumble.com/v2giyy1-u.s.-government-is-selling-fentanyl-laced-w-xylazine-to-kill-us-its-not-fro.html America Is Largest Drug Cartels In The World and Fentanyl Alone or Fentanyl Laced w-Xylazine To Kill Us is a potent synthetic opioid drug approved by and sold by the Food and Drug Administration for use as an analgesic (pain relief) and anesthetic. It is approximately 100 times more potent than morphine and 50 times more potent than heroin as an analgesic. Illicitly manufactured, fentanyl is added to heroin, disguising it as highly potent heroin, so users don’t realize that the heroin they’re purchasing may contain fentanyl. Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid that was originally developed as an analgesic – or painkiller – for surgery. It has a specific chemical structure with multiple areas that can be modified, often illicitly, to form related compounds with marked differences in potency. CIA Killing 100,000> Year Selling Heroin In U.S.A. Our Troops Protecting Opium-Heroin https://rumble.com/v2fg19o-cia-killing-100000-year-selling-heroin-in-u.s.a.-our-troops-protecting-opiu.html In 1990, a failed CIA anti-drug operation in Venezuela resulted in at least 18 ton of cocaine being smuggled into the United States and sold on the streets. The incident, which was first made public in 1993, was part of a plan to assist an undercover agent to gain the confidence of a Colombian drug cartel. How the CIA Turned Us onto LSD and Heroin Secrets of America's False War on Drugs. Through in-depth interviews with academic researchers, historians, journalists, former federal agents, and drug dealers, America's Fake War on Drugs tells true tales of how, for instance, the CIA and Department of Defense helped to introduce LSD to Americans in the 1950s. "The CIA literally sent over two guys to Sandoz Laboratories where LSD had first been synthesized and bought up the world's supply of LSD and brought it back," Lappé tells Nick Gillespie in a wide-ranging conversation about the longest war the U.S. government has fought. "With that supply they began a [secret mind-control] program called MK Ultra which had all sorts of other drugs involved." Drug Enforcement Administration - Will Kill You - This Man Is Lucky - Most Time Dead https://rumble.com/v2ffnam-drug-enforcement-administration-will-kill-you-this-man-is-lucky-most-time-d.html Stephen Lara did everything right. But, as you know well, most of the time DEA or FBI or CIA or DOJ or A COP Will Kill You With Bullet To Your Head and Drive Off With Your Money. Yes even innocent people aren’t safe from U.S. Civil Forfeiture. Asset forfeiture laws is a tool in our country’s a tyrannical u.s.a. government battle against its own people and u.s.a. citizens to steal all your money and kill you, drug abuse and drug crimes, helping to shut down “pill mills” and stop rogue doctors, pharmacists, and dealers. Thousand's Dead In U.S.A. Now & Shot In Head By Police & Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuse https://rumble.com/v2fjx2g-thousands-dead-in-u.s.a.-now-and-shot-in-head-by-police-and-civil-asset-for.html New Proof That Police Use Civil Forfeiture To Take From Those Who Can’t Fight Back Nassir Geiger spoke with the wrong person at the wrong time and it cost him hundreds of dollars and his car. Nassir was a victim of Philadelphia’s predatory civil forfeiture scheme that operated from a shady “courtroom” at City Hall. For years, police and prosecutors seized cash, cars and even homes and then took the property for themselves. Worse still, new data show that the police preyed on people in minority and low-income areas—in other words, people who could least afford to fight back. Black's Is White's Law Dictionary and Read Secret Canons of Judicial Miss-Conduct Info. https://rumble.com/v2edz96-blacks-is-whites-law-dictionary-and-read-secret-canons-of-judicial-miss-con.html Rules Professional Responsibility course about various provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct. This is a quick overview that hits the highlights. Video Is Good... You Can Read Court Laws and Secret Canons of Judicial Conduct Law Info. True Story How US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical ! https://rumble.com/v2ath8q-true-story-how-us-government-tried-to-kill-weed-smokers-with-a-toxic-chemic.html Paraquat Pot The True Story Of How The US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical When people talk about “killer weed,” that’s typically understood to mean really good weed. But due to US government policies that started in the 1970s and extended through most of the 1980s, marijuana fields were being sprayed with a chemical that can actually kill you. The chemical, known as “paraquat,” is an herbicide sprayed over marijuana fields in Mexico in the 1970s—with the aid of US money and US-provided helicopters—and over marijuana fields in Georgia in the 1980s under the direction of the Reagan Administration. But normally, anything poisonous enough to kill plants is also toxic enough to kill humans, and that is the case with paraquat. How U.S. Government (Killed Us Again) U.S.A. Poisoned Alcohol During Prohibition https://rumble.com/v2atam4-how-u.s.-government-killed-us-again-u.s.a.-poisoned-alcohol-during-prohibit.html Almost everyone knows that the United States government sometimes operates in the shadows, but have you ever heard of how the U.S. government poisoned alcohol during prohibition? This event costed 10,000+ dead people their lives perished from such poisoning and hundreds of thousands more suffered irreversible injuries including blindness and paralysis . When the manufacture and sale of alcohol was illegal between 1920 and 1933, regulatory agencies encouraged measures making 60 Million Gallons industrial alcohol undrinkable, including the addition of lethal chemicals. Why COVID-19 Shot Is Not Safe ? Nuremberg Code ? Agent Orange ? Anthrax Vaccine ? https://rumble.com/v2affqe-why-covid-19-shot-is-not-safe-nuremberg-code-agent-orange-anthrax-vaccine-.html U.S. Government said and or told Us - We The People - COVID-19 Shot Are Safe ? LIE's ? So Per the Nuremberg Code ? Agent Orange ? Anthrax Vaccine ? Paraquat Pot ? 1920 Poisoned Alcohol ? Now Mandatory COVID-19 Shots caused adverse reactions in most recipients all part of a series of massive government cover-ups. The Pentagon's mandatory anthrax shots caused adverse reactions in most recipients and helped prompt many Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard members to transfer to other units or leave the military between 1998 and 2000, according to a survey by Congress's General Accounting Office (GAO). The survey indicated that 85% of troops who received an anthrax shot had an adverse reaction, a rate far higher than the 30% claimed by the manufacturer in 2000, when the survey was conducted. Sixteen percent of the survey respondents had either left the military or changed their status, at least in part because of the vaccination program. Why is the Nuremberg Code being used to oppose Covid-19 vaccines? Other Info. https://rumble.com/v2aav9u-why-is-the-nuremberg-code-being-used-to-oppose-covid-19-vaccines-other-info.html I AM running through what the Nuremberg code is how the military has crossed the line with the Chemtrails and Flouride in the water parasites being sprayed poisoning the animal live stock poisoning the food with chemical additives and paraquat pot poisoning .. Clear violation of international Law, their time is extremely limited and are being dealt with as we speak. Flying right out of military bases human trafficking out of military bases, Drug and Arms trafficking out of military bases, and underground bunkers cloning underground, cloned military personell, cloned police force, forcing corporate policy on citizens during a war when there is NO LAW during war.. so maybe everyone should start doing there job because if the people have to handle this to save time we will include you all in the same bunch consider you all accomplices and let GOD sort you all out.. Also another reason why it might be in their best interest to get right with GOD. Why is the Nuremberg Code being used to oppose Covid-19 vaccines? As the UK Covid-19 vaccine roll out has gathered pace, and the use of “vaccine passports” continue to be debated, an increasing number of social media users are voicing their opposition to these moves and claiming they are an infringement of their rights under the Nuremberg Code. The Nuremberg Code is a set of ethical research principles, developed in the wake of Nazi atrocities—specifically the inhumane and often fatal experimentation on human subjects without consent—during World War Two. We spoke to experts in medical ethics, healthcare law and social epidemiology about the Nuremberg Code and whether its principles are applicable to the current vaccine roll out or vaccine passports. We also discussed whether the code is legally binding and the darker links the claims seem to draw between the current pandemic and the Nazi era. Ten of Thousand's Killed by U.S.A. Government + I Want Your Gun's - Killed Million+ https://rumble.com/v2a7c7q-ten-of-thousands-killed-by-u.s.a.-government-i-want-your-guns-killed-millio.html crazy conspiracy theories that actually turned out to be true and ten of thousand's killed by u.s.a. government These theories became proven fact, from a government brainwashing program, an anti-John Lennon plot to a plan to remove homosexuals from service. 15 Conspiracies That Turned Out to Be True! Are You Lost in the World Like Me ? and The Moby & The Void Pacific Choir - W0W https://rumble.com/v298af8-are-you-lost-in-the-world-like-me-and-the-moby-and-the-void-pacific-choir-w.html One of the great paradoxes of our time is this: Never have we been more connected, yet never have we been more disconnected. Professor Sherry Turkle captured this jarring juxtaposition of realities in her book title Alone Together. Now electronic music maestro Moby has a song that gets at this conundrum as well: “Are You Lost in the World Like Me?” The song asks probing questions about navigating life in our tech-obsessed, postmodern world. And the remarkable video that accompanies it adds a poignant exclamation point of its own. Our interconnected world makes many promises about making life better. But Moby’s not buying it. If anything, he suspects that things are getting worse.

In 1990, a failed CIA anti-drug operation in Venezuela resulted in at least 18 ton of cocaine being smuggled into the United States and sold on the streets. The incident, which was first made public in 1993, was part of a plan to assist an undercover agent to gain the confidence of a Colombian drug cartel. How the CIA Turned Us onto LSD and Heroin Secrets of America's False War on Drugs. Through in-depth interviews with academic researchers, historians, journalists, former federal agents, and drug dealers, America's Fake War on Drugs tells true tales of how, for instance, the CIA and Department of Defense helped to introduce LSD to Americans in the 1950s. "The CIA literally sent over two guys to Sandoz Laboratories where LSD had first been synthesized and bought up the world's supply of LSD and brought it back," Lappé tells Nick Gillespie in a wide-ranging conversation about the longest war the U.S. government has fought. "With that supply they began a [secret mind-control] program called MK Ultra which had all sorts of other drugs involved." The cover the history of drug prohibition, the rise of the '60s drug counterculture; heroin epidemics past and present; how drug policy has warped U.S. foreign policy in Southeast Asia, Central America, Afghanistan, and beyond; the bipartisan politics of prohibition; and much more. America's Fake War on Drugs features exclusive and rarely seen footage and documents how, time and time again, the government was often facilitating trade and use in the very drugs it was trying to false stamp out. The new world order adds short videos, and more information in an attempt to produce an "immersive experience" that will change how viewers think and feel about prohibition. Though is that knowledge and reason will eventually win out over keeping things in the dark, making things taboo." Even when it veers off into questionable territory (such as the role of the government in creating the crack epidemic of the 1980s), America's False War on Drugs performs the invaluable function of furthering a conversation about drug policies and attitudes that have caused far more harm than they have alleviated. We take a very critical look at the entire history of the war on drugs. In particular, looking at American foreign policy and how the Central Intelligence Agency is not just been involved in a couple of bad apples here and there. In couple rogue operations as a lot of these drug trafficking allegations have been called before. But actually very directly involved in drug trafficking not only drug trafficking but in the largest drug trafficking stories of our time. Whether that's in the secret tests that introduced LSD to the United States or heroin during the late 60's and early 70's from southeast Asia, to cocaine during the late 70's and early 80's onto opium and heroin coming out of Afghanistan. There's a huge story to be told there about the actual extent of the US government's involvement in drug trafficking. Gillespie: Let's talk first about the old days of MK Ultra and mind control and the way that the CIA actually helped introduce LSD evolved drugs into America, to American minds. What was going on in the 50's with the CIA and how did they become involved in introducing LSD to Americans? Lappe: This is a story that a lot of your listeners may have heard about, people have heard about MK Ultra and I had as well, but I never really understood the full origins of the story. They go all the way back to the 1950's. During the 1950's of course, US and the Soviet Union are locked in a battle for hearts and minds around the world and psychoactive drugs were a big part of the Cold War psychological warfare programs on both sides. The CIA had heard rumors that the Soviet Union was starting to use LSD at this point as a truth serum to see if they could break spies and get them to expose details, admit they were spies et cetera. The CIA literally sent over two guys to Sandoz Laboratories where LSD had first been synthesized and bought up the world's supply of LSD and brought it back. With that supply they began a program called MK Ultra which had all sorts of other drugs involved. In particular they started doing secret tests around the country. Some of them using in veteran's hospitals and through the military. Others were in mental hospitals, a lot of basic, pretty much a lot of them were unwitting people, mental patients. But one of the incredible stories we found, I never knew this before, is that Ken Kesey, famously the author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and really the guy who started the famous acid tests in the San Francisco Bay area, it was really the godfather of acid movement. As a Stanford grad student, or sorry an undergrad, was part of a test at the Menlo Park Veteran's hospital. Loved it so much that he got a job in the lab, stole all the acid, went up to San Francisco and started his acid test. That was the origins of how LSD was introduced into United States. This was also happening in other places around the country. It was just that Ken Kesey was the progenitor of the entire movement. It literally was the CIA. Gillespie: That is a real challenge to all good thinking Libertarians like myself. Small L Libertarians who say that the government can never do anything right. The manage to strangely change the course, not of, I guess maybe of Cold War history, but certainly of American cultural history through their actions. The first episode of the series, and again check these out on history.com, the History Channel if you have, you can download their app and take a look at it. Plus there's other material there that's well worth delving into. You look at the prehistory of Richard Nixon's declaration of a war on drugs in the early 70's, what were some of the motivating factors you found behind Nixon declaring war on drugs? Very early in the 70's he talked about, famously used the phrase, declaring a war on drugs, that illegals drugs were the number one enemy facing America. What was going on, things like pot and acid and heroin rose to that level of attention from the federal government? Lappe: You really had two strains happening. You had the psychedelic movement which was heavily influenced by acid which the CIA itself had introduced, which is just my blowing right. Then you had pot as well which basically increasing numbers of young people were smoking. Nixon declares famously this war on drugs in June 1971. At the same time there was a massive heroin epidemic that really was ravaging mostly the eastern seaboard. What a lot people don't realize is that too in part, you could argue another case of blow back from our own operations. During the mid 60's to late 60's there was a famous, everyone knows, a war against communist forces in Vietnam but also next door there was a gigantic secret war happening in Laos that officially we were not supposed to be fighting. Both politically it was radioactive for Johnson to declare another front but there were also treaties that said that we couldn't have troops on the ground both with Laos and we had an agreement, a sort of tacit agreement with the Soviet Union they wouldn't put troops on the ground. There was a massive clandestine CIA operation in Laos running this secret war. People have probably heard of this CIA airline called Air America. Basically we go into business helping a local warlord named Vang Pao. When we started the war in the mid 60's, around 65, Vang Pao was a sort of somewhat populous, anti-communist leader of the Hmong hill people in Laos and was peripherally involved in growing opium because that's really what the cash crop was in that area. By 1968, 1969 into 1970 Vang Pao was the biggest heroin trafficker on the planet. Some of his partners were the Sicilian mobsters that we had gone into business to put in Havana Cuba and south Florida to try to kill Fidel Castro. Basically we had created this huge network or aided this huge network of international drug trafficking that created a massive heroin epidemic which has only been surpassed by the current opioid crisis and we go into that later. What happens is, there's all this heroin in the theater of war in southeast Asia, a lot of troops are getting hooked, famously they all start bringing this heroin back and heroin really starts devastating the inner city and there was a legitimate belief by a lot of people that really it was out of control and crime rates were really skyrocketing especially in cities like New York. So Nixon was under a lot of pressure. He had run in 1960 under the banner of law and order and the country was literally falling apart by 1971 in his eyes. Gillespie: As you were saying, the crime really ratcheted up. It started in the 50's but it really ratcheted up in the 60's, there was the perception that people were leaving cities in droves to avoid crime. You talk, I think, in the first episode, it's something that in 1960 the government figures had something like 50,000 heroin addicts around the country or heroin users and it had crept up to something like 200,000 or 500,000 by about 1970. Lappe: Yeah. Gillespie: Part of it Nixon was a law and order guy and there's, you go into this a bit at your site as well as in the show that John Ehrlichman one of Richard Nixon's chief lieutenants in a 1990, 94 interview with Dan Baum who ultimately published a story in Harper's about this, that he said that the war on pot and the war on drugs was really a way to control black people. There was also this sense that the urban American was going to hell in a hand basket as well. Follow up question for that is, the war on drugs gets birthed out of mixed feeling and Nixon and there's some footage in one of the episodes of Ronald Reagan denouncing the use of acid in the 60's and obviously became drug warrior himself as president. There was a strong bipartisan element to the war on drugs because even people, Jimmy Carter seemed to be okay with the idea of pot legalization or decriminalization until events overtook him and he became a staunch drug warrior. People like Bill Clinton, people like Barack Obama also added to the drug war. What is the, I guess that's a long wind up for a pretty simple question, what is it about the war on drugs that pulls such support from Democrats and Republicans across the board? Lappe: I think this is pretty deep question because I think it goes to what I found in working on this project which is really one of the most epic projects I've ever worked on in my life in terms of the amount of research we did. I think drugs have always played a scapegoat role in our society where we see other social forces, in particular economic forces and other things that have been pressures on communities and it's very easy to point the finger at drugs. In some ways it's a natural reaction to try to crack down on them in the harshest way. Of course by cracking down on drugs are an inanimate object, there is no such thing as a crack down on drugs. You're cracking down on people. And when you crack down on people, that has a reverberating effect. It also can be used as a tool. Nixon is probably one of the most cynical politicians in our history but maybe not the worst in my opinion. He saw it purely, in my opinion, as a political move. As a way to take out this, he believed he had all these enemies that were growing around him, all these social movements, you had black nationalism, you had increasingly radicalized hippie movement that had turned from a peacenik movement into a more dangerous, whether underground type of operations. There was a feeling that society was unraveling to some degree. That was in large part because it was because we lived in a oppressive racist society and there was a war that in 1968, everyone knew was at a stalemate or that we had lost but continued going on. People don't realize half the people died, of our soldiers after 1968 when Nixon ran under this completely cynical lie that he had a secret plan to end the war [Editor's note: Journalism historian Joseph W. Campbell has documented that Candidate Nixon never publicly made such a pledge, which continues to be cited frequently.]. There was all these other forces going on in drugs were very easy way to demonize people. Gillespie: At the website, at history.com, among the various things you have in timelines or whatnot that are worth going back to. The early attempts to link cocaine with black people and if you want to crack down on cocaine because white women may be taking it or something, you crack down on black people. When pot became illegal, under federal law, became effectively illegal in the 1930's, it was identified with Mexicans. Chinese and opium was a problem. It is fascinating in the 60's you have with something like LSD the youth movement and hippies and then again when ecstasy which was made illegal in the 80's thanks in large part to Joe Biden. The identification of a subculture or subgroup or a particular ethnic group that you can crack down on is one of the really haunting elements, I think, of the drug war and that comes through in this, in this series. Talk a bit about how particularly after 9/11 part of the series, and I think you're absolutely right in looking at it, that what this does in a way that is really fresh and interesting is look at how foreign policy, US foreign policy has been both guided and infected by the drug war. Talk a bit about the post 9/11 era and how have fears of narco-terrorism really changed the way we go about our foreign policy? Lappe: Narco-terrorism is a term that started, that was introduced after 9/11, shortly after really. We show how in the first Superbowl after 9/11, the Partnership for Drug Free America began running this very eerie infamous ad now where you had a bunch of kids saying, "I supported terrorists, I supported a suicide bomber, I did this." Basically saying because I did drugs I was helping all of these different terrorists groups et cetera. When the incredible irony is that our own government has been knee deep in drug trafficking for decades. There was a big push though it was completely ironic and what we show in our last episode which is the post 9/11 era, is we actually have an undercover DEA agent. This was a huge theme that we saw throughout our series was the tension between the DEA and the CIA. I'll paint the picture of what was happening in Afghanistan. In the late 1990's, opium has always been one of or the biggest cash crop in Afghanistan. During the 1990's there was a massive civil war. All sides were using opium to finance themselves. The Taliban comes in to power and starts taxing at first, opium growers but by the late 90's the Taliban is having a huge PR problem. They're chopping off women's heads in stadiums and they're blowing up the Buddhas. They were becoming an international pariah. They pulled this incredible PR coup where they said they were cracking down on opium. When really all they were doing were stockpiling it. Basically they launched this whole fake crackdown that got the UN off their back. The US, we even in 2000, sent them $40 million of aid money to help, quote unquote, crackdown on opium. But really what was happening was they were stockpiling opium and then after 9/11 used those stockpiles to ramp up their war effort. At the time of 9/11, Afghanistan was about 30% of the world's heroin. Today it's about 90%. What Afghanistan has become is a drug war. People never talk about it in that context but Afghanistan is a giant drug war. The Taliban have, to quote REM, lost their religion. They're really are not much of a religious force any more as they are just any other militant insurgency group that is trying to take down a government. There isn't much, they're not putting a lot of effort into their Sharia program. They basically have become gigantic drug traffickers. But also our allies in Afghanistan. Including in the early days, Hamid Karzai's brother, Wali Karzai was the biggest heroin trafficker and drug lord who controlled all the traffic in Kandahar. Who was completely protected by the CIA. I talked to soldiers who literally their job was to guard the opium fields of our local warlord allies. This heroin has had a major impact on the world's drug stage. It should be noted a lot of the heroin that comes into the United States is coming from Mexico now but a lot of it is coming from Afghanistan, especially on the east coast and in Canada. It's a really incredible story that no one really talks about. There's a great reporter that is one of our contributors to the show named, Gretchen Peters, wrote a book called, Seeds of Terror. That essentially is her thesis. We also have great stories about the undercover DEA agents who were fighting to try to take down drug traffickers at the same time the CIA was undermining their efforts. Gillespie: It's a phenomenal drama that unfolds and it has these dark, rich, historical ironies that abound throughout the series. The odds are good now at least and actually in a story that's up at the website, you guys talk about Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General under Donald Trump. Who has really, he's pledged to really redouble efforts at least domestically, on the war on drugs which you guys point out at least in it's Nixonian phase has been going on for 50 years. It's really more like a 100 years when you go all the way back to things like the Harrison Narcotics Act. It's failing, it doesn't seem to have much effect on drug usage rates, they seem to be independent of enforcement, there's obviously problems with surgeon opiod use that is it's own tangled web of unintended consequences and weird interventions into markets. At the same time the odds are phenomenal that pot is going to be fully legal in the US within the next decade if not before. During the campaign, weirdly Donald Trump seemed to be at times okay with the idea of different states deciding what kind of marijuana policies, obviously the Sessions factors a big difference from that. Are you optimistic that we're at least entering the beginning of the end of the drug war, to borrow a terrible Vietnam phrase that there's light at the end of the tunnel in terms of American attitudes towards currently illegal drugs, and rethinking the drug war? Lappe: There's no doubt that things are moving in that direction in the same way there's no doubt that things like gay rights and LGBT rights are moving in a certain direction. Jeff Sessions essentially is a weird outlier, historical blip, as you said, to try to pin Trump down on any one ideology or stance is literally impossible. He said we were going to stop all our foreign wars, yet he's sending 8,000 more troops in Afghanistan. Whatever Trump has said on the war on drugs is sort of irrelevant. But Sessions is just a weird dinosaur throwback to another era that I think is just going to be, if he survives the next three years. Will just be a blip in the road towards eventually people moving, starting with marijuana towards legalization both for, at least, nationwide to medicinal use if not most states towards recreational use. Because people are seeing that it doesn't really have any negative effects, there isn't really a gigantic increase in use and there's great benefits to society in terms of being able to tax it and make it a normalized thing. I think a big part of the problem with drugs and Dr. Carl Hart at Columbia is one of the most iconoclastic guys on this and he's in our series, he's out on the far fringes of this. But what he really says is, the problem with drugs is not drugs. The problem is drug use and misuse and people being idiots with drugs and not knowing how to use them. Gillespie: But it's hard to know how to use them if you're not allowed to freely and openly discuss the facts, your experiences, your parents, we have enough problems with alcohol abuse and that's fully legal. When you start talking about these other drugs it's hard to get good information. Lappe: Right. It's the same thing with these abstinence programs. You see wherever there's abstinence programs there's more STD's, there's more pregnancies because people are ignorant. I think that's a great trait of libertarianism even though I don't believe in everything you guys believe in. Is that knowledge and reason will eventually win out over keeping things in the dark, making things taboo. I think that people are rational and when it comes … There's always going to be people who are going to abuse something, just the same way people abuse alcohol or any substance. I think there is a general consensus that we're moving in a particular direction and I think that ultimately it's going to be better for society. Provisional data from CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics indicate that there were an estimated 100,306 drug overdose deaths in the United States during 12-month period ending in April 2021, an increase of 28.5% from the 78,056 deaths during the same period the year before. The new data documents that estimated overdose deaths from opioids increased to 75,673 in the 12-month period ending in April 2021, up from 56,064 the year before. Overdose deaths from synthetic opioids (primarily fentanyl) and psychostimulants such as methamphetamine also increased in the 12-month period ending in April 2021. Cocaine deaths also increased, as did deaths from natural and semi-synthetic opioids (such as prescription pain medication). The provisional data presented in this visualization include: the reported and predicted (estimated) provisional counts of deaths due to drug overdose occurring nationally and in each jurisdiction; a U.S. map of the percentage changes in provisional drug overdose deaths for the current 12-month ending period compared with the 12-month period ending in the same month of the previous year, by jurisdiction; and the reported and predicted provisional counts of drug overdose deaths involving specific drugs or drug classes occurring nationally and in selected jurisdictions. The reported and predicted provisional counts represent the numbers of deaths due to drug overdose occurring in the 12-month periods ending in the month indicated. These counts include all seasons of the year and are insensitive to variations by seasonality. Deaths are reported by the jurisdiction in which the death occurred. Drug overdoses now kill more than 100,000 Americans a year — more than vehicle crash and gun deaths combined. Our Own Government Sale Drugs To Kill US Overdose/Deaths. Researchers think LSD flashbacks may happen during times of increased stress. Project MK-Ultra, the code name given to a Central Intelligence Agency program that began in the 1950s and lasted through the 1960s, is sometimes known as part of the CIA’s “mind control program and the Central Intelligence Agency Sold over 6 Millon+ Hit of Acid to the u.s.a. People in the 1950 thur 1973 These government acid experiments—which also sold millon's of hits or tabs of acid involved dozens of universities, pharmaceutical companies and medical facilities—took place throughout the 1950s and 1960s, before LSD was deemed too unpredictable to use in the field. When Project MK-Ultra became public knowledge in the 1970s, the scandal resulted in numerous lawsuits and a congressional investigation headed by Senator Frank Church. After volunteering to take part in Project MKUltra as a student at Stanford University, Ken Kesey, author of the 1962 novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, went on to promote the use of LSD. In the early 1960s, Kesey and the Merry Pranksters (as his group of followers were called) hosted a series of LSD-fueled parties in the San Francisco Bay area. Kesey called these parties “Acid Tests.” Acid Tests combined drug use with musical performances by bands including the Grateful Dead and psychedelic effects such as fluorescent paint and black lights. Both psychology professors at Harvard University, Timothy Leary and Richard Alpert administered LSD and psychedelic mushrooms to Harvard students during a series of experiments in the early 1960s. At the time, neither of these substances (Gov. Sales of over 6 Millon hits of acid) were illegal in the United States. (The U.S. federal government didn’t outlaw LSD until 1968.) Leary and Alpert documented the effects of the hallucinogenic drugs on the students’ consciousness. The scientific community, however, criticized the legitimacy of the studies which Leary and Alpert conducted while also tripping. Both men were eventually dismissed from Harvard but went on to become symbols of the psychedelic drug and hippie counterculture. Paraquat Pot: The True Story Of How The US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical In The 1980s When people talk about “killer weed,” that’s typically understood to mean really good weed. But due to US government policies that started in the 1970s and extended through most of the 1980s, marijuana fields were being sprayed with a chemical that can actually kill you. The chemical, known as “paraquat,” is an herbicide sprayed over marijuana fields in Mexico in the 1970s—with the aid of US money and US-provided helicopters—and over marijuana fields in Georgia in the 1980s under the direction of the Reagan Administration. But normally, anything poisonous enough to kill plants is also toxic enough to kill humans, and that is the case with paraquat. Our Own Government with Oliver North Worked With Cocaine Traffickers to Arm Terrorists Along with a Other U.S.A. leading role in the Iran/Contra scandal - in which North helped sell arms to Iran to fund the Contra War - North is also said to have employed air and sea transport companies moonlighting as drugs carriers. A series of expose articles in the San Jose told tales of a drug triangle during the 1980s that linked CIA officials in Central America, the U.S.A. Gov. Own Air Forces fly tons of drugs in and fly guns and arms out to Central America and Sold Tons of Drugs to a San Francisco drug ring and a Los Angeles drug dealer. According to the stories, the CIA and its operatives used crack cocaine--sold via the Los Angeles African-American community--to raise 100s millions dollars to support the agency's clandestine operations in Central America. Now its very funny again the CIA/FBI Our Government is Sell Drugs Again. The U.S. drug epidemic reached another terrible milestone Wednesday when the government announced that more than 100,000 people had died of overdoses between April 2020 and April 2021. It is the first time that drug-related deaths have reached six figures in any 12-month period. Overdose deaths from synthetic opioids (primarily fentanyl) and psychostimulants such as methamphetamine also increased with are own government help with Mexico and China were the primary source for fentanyl trafficked by our own government and u.s. navy and u.s. air forces flights out of hong kong area into the u.s.a. by land and sea and balloons for years now per the National Center for Health Statistics 2022. President Biden on Wednesday released a statement mourning the more than 100,000 Americans who died last year from drug overdoses — without mentioning U.S.A. and China is helping us with leading role exporting fentanyl, which drove the 29 percent annual increase in deaths but lower then planned. Nearly two-thirds of deaths were caused by fentanyl and related synthetic opioids that can kill a person at extremely low doses. Fentanyl is increasingly added to non-opioid drugs such as cocaine and counterfeit prescriptions. In some areas of New York City, including the Bronx and the North Shore of Staten Island, more than 75 percent of overdose deaths involved fentanyl. “Today, new data reveal that our nation has reached a tragic milestone: more than 100,000 lives were lost to the overdose epidemic from April of last year to April of this year,” Biden said. “As we continue to make strides to defeat the COVID-19 pandemic, we cannot overlook this epidemic of loss, which has touched families and communities across the country”. Click on the links below for the full story and or Type it into a Web Base Search ! https://rumble.com/v2dye2c-covid-19-blood-and-non-vaccines-blood-and-secret-pedophiles-blood-bank-u.s..html https://rumble.com/v2cjoog-a-dangerous-new-zombie-drug-is-taking-over-american-streets-and-million-wil.html https://rumble.com/v2auj9m-a-organ-donor-card-will-get-you-killed-very-fast-as-a-doctors-will-sell-you.html https://rumble.com/v2ath8q-true-story-how-us-government-tried-to-kill-weed-smokers-with-a-toxic-chemic.html https://rumble.com/v2atam4-how-u.s.-government-killed-us-again-u.s.a.-poisoned-alcohol-during-prohibit.html https://rumble.com/v2anz0m-conspiracy-revealed-our-own-government-sale-drugs-to-kill-us-overdosedeaths.html https://rumble.com/v2affqe-why-covid-19-shot-is-not-safe-nuremberg-code-agent-orange-anthrax-vaccine-.html https://rumble.com/v2a7zkq-these-most-dangerous-conspiracy-theory-in-the-world-that-turned-out-to-be-t.html https://rumble.com/v2a7ugy-top-secret-government-conspiracy-revealed-government-secrets-and-cover-ups-.html https://rumble.com/v2a7kly-i-kill-you-is-it-china-russia-who-its-your-own-u.s.a.-government-who-kill-y.html https://rumble.com/v2a7c7q-ten-of-thousands-killed-by-u.s.a.-government-i-want-your-guns-killed-millio.html https://rumble.com/v2a5yvw-conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true-u.s.a.-government-lies-again.html https://rumble.com/v29orjq-welcome-to-the-satellite-hoax-man-excellent-music-an-video-from-flat-earth-.html https://rumble.com/v28zp34-fast-and-furious-how-it-went-down-about-122000-firearms-sold-over-10000-peo.html https://rumble.com/v28z52a-agent-killed-in-fast-and-furious-gun-operation-and-1000-more-now-dead-2022.html https://rumble.com/v28z81i-cia-mind-control-and-cia-secret-experiments-use-of-biological-and-chemical-.html