TotallyRemixedNews

Joe biden could if prevented this from happening.

Summary The one-hour investigation “Biden’s Bribe Tapes”, produced by conservative US news channel OAN in the summer of 2020, includes the original leaked phone calls between Joe Biden and then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. Supported by key witness testimonies, they show how Joe Biden’s son Hunter was installed on the board of Ukrainian gas company Burisma, how Biden prevented a legal investigation against the company by the Ukrainian state prosecutor (and got him fired), and how Biden initiated a cover-up after the unexpected election of Donald Trump in November 2016. At one point, Biden threatened Poroshenko’s “economic and physical security” if he didn’t comply. When Ukrainian whistleblower Oleksandr Onyshchenko, a former advisor to Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko, wanted to testify and present the Biden tapes in the US in December 2019, he was first denied a visa and then, a few days before his departure, trapped and put into custody for half a year by German police. In May 2020, Ukrainian politician Andrii Derkach finally published the Biden tapes. Derkach was later declared a “Russian agent” by the US Treasury, barred from entering the country, and had his Facebook account – used for publishing the leaked documents – deleted. In October 2020, it became known that the Facebook manager for ‘election integrity’ was a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and had been a Ukraine policy advisor to Vice President Joe Biden. Moreover, both Oleksandr Onyshchenko (the Biden tapes whistleblower) and Viktor Shokin, the former Ukrainian state prosecutor who was investigating the Biden-linked Burisma gas company and who got fired after Biden put pressure on Poroshenko, claim to have been poisoned. Between the Ukrainian regime change in February 2014 and Trump’s election in November 2016, the Burisma gas company transferred millions of dollars to the Biden family. Yet according to leaked documents, Biden and Poroshenko were also involved in Ukrainian reverse flow gas dealings (routing Russian gas via the European Union and claiming it was European gas), which generated over one billion dollars in surcharges, whose recipients to this date remain largely unknown. In 2020, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani tried to publicize some of the above information in an attempt to sabotage Joe Biden’s US presidential candidacy. Giuliani served as attorney for then-President Donald Trump, who had himself worked with various shady Ukrainian businessmen.

Summary The one-hour investigation “Biden’s Bribe Tapes”, produced by conservative US news channel OAN in the summer of 2020, includes the original leaked phone calls between Joe Biden and then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. Supported by key witness testimonies, they show how Joe Biden’s son Hunter was installed on the board of Ukrainian gas company Burisma, how Biden prevented a legal investigation against the company by the Ukrainian state prosecutor (and got him fired), and how Biden initiated a cover-up after the unexpected election of Donald Trump in November 2016. At one point, Biden threatened Poroshenko’s “economic and physical security” if he didn’t comply. When Ukrainian whistleblower Oleksandr Onyshchenko, a former advisor to Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko, wanted to testify and present the Biden tapes in the US in December 2019, he was first denied a visa and then, a few days before his departure, trapped and put into custody for half a year by German police. In May 2020, Ukrainian politician Andrii Derkach finally published the Biden tapes. Derkach was later declared a “Russian agent” by the US Treasury, barred from entering the country, and had his Facebook account – used for publishing the leaked documents – deleted. In October 2020, it became known that the Facebook manager for ‘election integrity’ was a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and had been a Ukraine policy advisor to Vice President Joe Biden. Moreover, both Oleksandr Onyshchenko (the Biden tapes whistleblower) and Viktor Shokin, the former Ukrainian state prosecutor who was investigating the Biden-linked Burisma gas company and who got fired after Biden put pressure on Poroshenko, claim to have been poisoned. Between the Ukrainian regime change in February 2014 and Trump’s election in November 2016, the Burisma gas company transferred millions of dollars to the Biden family. Yet according to leaked documents, Biden and Poroshenko were also involved in Ukrainian reverse flow gas dealings (routing Russian gas via the European Union and claiming it was European gas), which generated over one billion dollars in surcharges, whose recipients to this date remain largely unknown. In 2020, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani tried to publicize some of the above information in an attempt to sabotage Joe Biden’s US presidential candidacy. Giuliani served as attorney for then-President Donald Trump, who had himself worked with various shady Ukrainian businessmen.

Many clips about Begum. How can begum believe that she shouldn't face charges for joining a TERRORIST DEATH CULT. Begum is asked if she received training, she slipped up. Apparently, all new jihadi / jihadi brides receive weapons training and attended sharia classes.

They scream that begum was groomed and that she is a victim. But when it come to actual grooming, the same people only whisper. Begum travelled to Turkey with zero assist. Begum only needed the assist to get to Syria once she reached Turkey. She travelled of her own volition, with the intent of joining ISIS. Why do these people think that just because a crime was committed by a child that they shouldn't face courts or being detained. They claim that begum is being treated different because of her skin color. Was Rhianan Rudd treated any different? She was treated appropriately for her crime in the UK. The same should happen to Begum, she should face justice. But the only evidence the uk has against begum is that she joined ISIS, a terror death cult. Any of the alleged crimes were committed while she was in syria, so those alleged crimes should be dealt with under syrian law, begum wanted this type of utopia and wanted to live under those laws. Now she wants to be treated different. To bring begum back to the UK and be sentenced to a maximum of 10 years is inappropriate. All of the yazidi sex slaves would want justice and not a gesture. Most of the yazidi sex slaves are children, almost all of the yazidi genocide were adult males and adult women. Do the yazidis not deserve justice?

Minimum of 5 million dollars, alleged. How long has he been doing this? Even the #FBI attempted to cover it up, which you'll see on the video. If this is what Biden has been doing for years, what has he pushed through with the powers of being the president. Biden has commented that he wanted the police to be held accountable, the Americans now want the same. So President Joe Biden should be held accountable for this 5 million dollars, if he is found guilty.

With hidden footage of testimony and a mole within Hope not Hate organization, Robinson now reveals how this charity manipulates sources and uses threats and defamation against political opponents and their families. In several cases, in an indirect collaboration with terrorist groups, Hope has not Hate directed violent elements against the families of political opponents and their private addresses. Thus, Hope is not Hate a threat to freedom of expression and to democracy. No mainstream media has featured Tommy Robinson's revealing documentary about Hope not Hate. Do we have similar conditions in Denmark? Hope not Hate is an English interest organization which, according to them, creates campaigns and undercover journalism against ” racism and right-wing radicalism ”. Several Danish media, such as. Christian Dagblad, Politiken, Berlingske and Ekstra Bladet, has used Hope not Hate as the source of ” right-wing movements ” in England and the United States. Some of Hope not Hate's work has also uncovered real right-wing radicals, such as. when Swedish journalist Patrik Hermansson from the left-wing media Expo in 2017 partnered with Hope not Hate to act as a mole to reveal hidden footage from real right-wing radicals in America. In England, the Hope not Hate organization is supported by all political parties and is used uncritically as a source of all mainstream media. International media such as CNN, the Guardian,The BBC and Sunday Times have all used Hope not Hate as a source and still make it away. The problem with Hope not Hate is that they use dishonest and untrustworthy methods, such as manipulation of sources by money and drugs, threats and various extortion methods to get sources to speak as Hope not Hate wants it. Another problem is that Hope does not Hate use backward campaigns and makes untrue accusations of ” racism ” and ” right-wing radicalism ” against anyone, which in England expresses itself critically about Islam and social problems associated with mass immigration. Thus, Hope does not Hate work effectively to restrict freedom of expression, especially on serious social problems associated with Muslim mass immigration. The problem with Hope not Hate is that they use dishonest and untrustworthy methods, such as manipulation of sources by money and drugs, threats and various extortion methods to get sources to speak as Hope not Hate wants it. Another problem is that Hope does not Hate use backward campaigns and makes untrue accusations of ” racism ” and ” right-wing radicalism ” against anyone, which in England expresses itself critically about Islam and social problems associated with mass immigration. Thus, Hope does not Hate work effectively to restrict freedom of expression, especially on serious social problems associated with Muslim mass immigration. The problem with Hope not Hate is that they use dishonest and untrustworthy methods, such as manipulation of sources by money and drugs, threats and various extortion methods to get sources to speak as Hope not Hate wants it. Another problem is that Hope does not Hate use backward campaigns and makes untrue accusations of ” racism ” and ” right-wing radicalism ” against anyone, which in England expresses itself critically about Islam and social problems associated with mass immigration. Thus, Hope does not Hate work effectively to restrict freedom of expression, especially on serious social problems associated with Muslim mass immigration.Another problem is that Hope does not Hate use backward campaigns and makes untrue accusations of ” racism ” and ” right-wing radicalism ” against anyone, which in England expresses itself critically about Islam and social problems associated with mass immigration. Thus, Hope does not Hate work effectively to restrict freedom of expression, especially on serious social problems associated with Muslim mass immigration.Another problem is that Hope does not Hate use backward campaigns and makes untrue accusations of ” racism ” and ” right-wing radicalism ” against anyone, which in England expresses itself critically about Islam and social problems associated with mass immigration. Thus, Hope does not Hate work effectively to restrict freedom of expression, especially on serious social problems associated with Muslim mass immigration. For example, a report from the Swedish Defense Institute in 2018 showed that Hope not Hate cooperates with violent left-wing extreme movements such as. Antifa on the provision of information and addresses of nationalist debaters whose families and workplaces are then subjected to violence and threats by Antifa's left fascists - https://www.foi.se/rapportsammanfattning?reportNo=FOI-R--4592--SE Hope not Hate also collaborates with tech giants such as. Facebook and Twitter on disabling, censoring and shutting down national conservative and Islamist-critical debaters on social media. In 2016, the magazine The Economist Hope did not investigate Hate's material on alleged online hate speech following the assassination of English politician Jo Cox and revealed, that Hope not Hate had actually exaggerated the amount of alleged right-wing hate speech online - by 3000% https://archive.is/YZdj2 Hope not Hate's undemocratic methods are quite clear from a revealing documentary about Hope not Hate, which Tommy Robinson has just published on various alternative social media https://www.bitchute.com/video/cjbwCLo61oqa/ Here's a summary of Tommy Robinson's reveal of Hope not Hate's dirty methods of shutting down political opponents' freedom of speech: After a young man named Tom Dupree on social media had spoken fully legal and democratic, but critical views on Islam and mass immigration into England, Hope not Hate approached his employer with pressure to get him fired. The young man was then dismissed from his work in an English bank without notice. The method used by Hope not Hate was to accuse the young man of being ” Nazi ” to damage the bank's reputation. In the documentary, the young man states as a first-hand source of what Hope has not exposed him to. Tommy Robinson's former employee Caolan Robertson makes allegations in the video, about Hope not Hate's alleged use of dirty extortion methods and sexual assaults to make him testify and blatant testimony against Tommy Robinson. Former member of the Ulster Defense Association paramilitary, Johnny Adair, claims that Hope not Hate should have paid about £ 20,000 to Jayda Fransen from the Islamic-critical party Britain First, to get her to speak out for a BBC Panorama documentary with burdensome allegations about party chairman Paul Golding. Andrew Edge, former security guard for Britain First's Paul Golding, also states on a hidden phone call that Hope not Hate has paid him money to make a critical statement about Golding. A homeless veteran and drug addict; Tom Foley, had been picked up by the same Paul Golding in Ulster, who gave him shelter and help, and on the video, Foley claims, that Hope did not Hate give him money and narcotics as payment to make him make a statement with burdensome statements about Golding, who later reported Hope not Hates Nick Lowles and Matthew Collins to police with charges of affecting witnesses with money and drugs. Interestingly, Paul Golding and his partner Ashlea Simon received a few days after a visit from the police, who informed them that they had received credible information about death threats against them from extreme groups, there would bezin bomb Paul Golding's house and family.At the same time, Hope did not send Hate employees out in Golding's neighborhood for household redistributions with claims that Golding should have received large sums of money in tax havens in Russia. According to Tommy Robinson, this does not show Hate's intimidation methods against political opponents. Hidden footage with statements by Andrew Edge also points out that Hope has not Hate tried to intimidate Golding's family by threatening his partner Ashlea Simon with the social service that the social service would forcibly removing the family boy because the child was allegedly becoming ” radicalized ”.Hidden footage with statements by Andrew Edge also points out that Hope has not Hate tried to intimidate Golding's family by threatening his partner Ashlea Simon with the social service that the social service would forcibly removing the family boy because the child was allegedly becoming ” radicalized ”.Hidden footage with statements by Andrew Edge also points out that Hope has not Hate tried to intimidate Golding's family by threatening his partner Ashlea Simon with the social service that the social service would forcibly removing the family boy because the child was allegedly becoming ” radicalized ”. It is reminiscent of the same dirty methods used by the Danish social service against the Islamist Christian debater in Denmark; Jaleh Tavakoli. When a Jewish woman and pro-Israel activist in 2018 participated in demonstrations against a grand mosque in London, Hope did not accuse the Hate woman named Sharon Klaff of participating in a violent assault against a socialist bookstore in London. The problem was that Hope not Hate's claim was a lie and in August 2018, after a lawsuit, the organization had to pay damages to Sharon Klaff after the Jewish woman was assaulted because of it. Hope not Hate's claims. However, no mainstream media has written about this case, except the Jewish Chronicle newspaper - https://www.thejc.com/news/news/hope-not-hate-apologises-for-wrongly-accusing-pro-israel-activist-over-bookshop-attack-1.486571 If you search for Sharon Klaff case on google you will thus get no results. Hope not Hate has also deliberately tried to conduct violent assaults on Tommy Robinson's family by on the internet to publish the address of his 76-year-old parents, whose home was assaulted with stones through the windows. Hope not Hate also published a photo on their website of a house which they mistakenly claimed belonged to Tommy Robinson with the result, that Muslim gangs appeared and threatened a socially vulnerable single mother and her 12-year-old daughter who happened to be in this house. In interview with Robinson, the frightened woman confirms the course of events and on hidden recordings you see her subsequently visit the wife of Hope not Hates director Nick Lowles to urge her husband to no longer to expose her 12-year-old daughter and herself to our further danger. Hope not Hate has also, in order to hit Tommy Robinson's family and put him under pressure, sent people out to his ex-wife and his children's private address. On video, Robinson is interrogating a man who mysteriously appeared at. 23 in the evening, and lit with flashlight through his ex-wife's home allegedly to hand over a subpoena to court. The documentary eventually sees Tommy Robinson confront the director of Hope not Hate; Nick Lowles, where Robinson asks him why he uses these dirty methods against political opponents? Next, he asks him if he thinks it was fair that Lowles put a photo online of the house where Robinson's children live? In the heat of the quarrel, Nick Lowles is obviously going to go ahead and makes an indirect confession that he has paid witnesses and manipulated sources. When Robinson accuses him: ” You are manipulating sources! You paid Andrew Edge and Tom Foley! ”, Nick Lowles answers in the affirmative; ” Better than selling drugs, right? ” . To emphasize the point, Robinson plays Nick Lowle's involuntary confession of Hope not Hates using dirty methods again: ” Better than selling drugs, right? ” At the end of the documentary, Tommy Robinson interviews a mole who has worked for Hope not Hate for 10 years. The source admits Hope not Hate's dirty methods. According to Robinson's mole, Nick Lowles, in an upcoming book, makes untrue accusations against Robinson from various sources, all of whom have in common that they hate Tommy Robinson. Eg. Lowles has sought out a Muslim drug gang in Luton named Gambino gang, which he uses to make allegations that Robinson should have sold drugs. So Lowles uses Luton's most brutal drug gang as a source of accusations against Robinson for selling drugs. Finally, the source within Hope does not admit Hate,that Nick Lowles is working to drag Tommy Robinson's wife to court for the purpose of publishing her identity and thus indirectly directing more pressure from violent and criminal elements towards Tommy Robinson's family. In summary, Tommy Robinson concludes that organizations like Hope not Hate use criminal, dishonest and dirty methods to destroy political opponents and hit their families and their work. At the same time, Hope does not Hate exercise great power in the UK because it cooperates closely with violent and terrorist elements and enjoys the support of English mainstream media, from powerful politicians and from the English legal system, all of whom uncritically attach great credibility to this organization. Robinson concludes that organizations such as Hope not Hate thus pose a serious threat to freedom of expression, freedom of opinion and democracy. Finally, Robinson predicts that Hope will not Hate again cooperate with the media and the English legal system to destroy him and stop his independent journalism and political activism. Nick Lowles has apparently even been out in public with allegations to disqualify and harm the vulnerable women and victims of Muslim rape gangs in Telford, who has spoken out as sources and starred in Tommy Robinson's various documentaries about the rape gangs in Telford. After watching Tommy Robinson's documentary about Hope not Hate and their criminal methods, we are tempted to raise the question of whether we also have similar organizations in Denmark, using the same dirty methods as Hope not Hate and enjoying broad and uncritical support in state-paid media and in parts of the political system? The Henrik Gade Jensen case seemed to point to that. In 2003, the newspaper provided Information and its then editor, current star journalist and Helle Thorning Schmidt's favorite candidate for the Social Democracy at the 2019 election, David Trads, an untrue accusation against then spindoctor of church minister Tove Fergo ( V ) for having ” connection to Nazi circles ”. The claim was an infamous lie for which Information lost a lawsuit and had to pay damages, but the source of David Trad's history at that time was the left-wing extremist organization Modkraft. P.S. No state-paid media in Denmark ever mentions Tommy Robinson's revealing documentary. Neither his documentary about the victims of Telford's Muslim rape gang nor his new reveal of Hope not Hate.

"SILENCED" delivers a powerful and timely message, serving as a poignant warning to all Americans. This film boldly exposes a disconcerting trend of weaponizing the government against truth-tellers. Journalist Tommy Robinson finds himself facing a two-year imprisonment for his internationally banned documentary, "Silenced." With unflinching courage, the film unearths the unholy alliance that exists between the government, media, and judiciary, unveiling their relentless efforts to control free speech and silence dissenting voices. Brace yourself for an eye-opening exploration of the lengths taken to suppress truth, as "SILENCED" challenges viewers to confront the erosion of fundamental rights and the urgent need to safeguard freedom of expression.

Year-by-Year Breakdown of Joe Biden's Abortion Joe Biden entered the senate in 1973, the same year the Supreme Court legalized abortion in its Roe v. Wade decision. He has evolved from being strongly pro-life to rabidly pro-abortion. Here is a list of his changing positions. 1973: Biden said Roe v. Wade had gone "too far." 1974: He said that a woman seeking an abortion should not have the "sole right to say what should happen to her body." 1976: He votes for the "Hyde Amendment," which bans federal funding of abortions. 1981: He introduces the "Biden Amendment," which prohibits foreign-aid funding of biomedical research involving abortion. 1982: He votes for a constitutional amendment allowing states to overturn Roe v. Wade. 1983: He votes against a constitutional amendment allowing states to overturn Roe v. Wade. 1984: He votes for the Mexico City Policy which bans federal funding for abortion referrals or counselling. 1987: He becomes chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and leads the fight against Supreme Court nominee Judge Robert Bork, whom he said was opposed to Roe v. Wade. 1994: He says, "those of us who are opposed to abortion should not be compelled to pay for them." 1995-2003: He votes six times to ban partial-birth abortion. 2007: He criticizes the Supreme Court decision upholding the ban on partial-birth abortion, calling it "paternalistic." He also says he "strongly" supports Roe v. Wade. 2012: He says the government does not have "a right to tell other people that women, they can't control their body." 2019: He says he is opposed to the "Hyde Amendment," which bans the federal funding of abortion. 2020: He says he supports abortion "under any circumstance." There is no one in public life who has undergone such a dramatic transformation. He did not change because of the Catholic Church: it did not change its position on abortion. He did not change because of science: it did not change its position on when life begins. It was Biden who changed, and he did so for totally political reasons. Biden's prospective nomination comes just as the President is pledging to use everything within his power to fight for abortion rights in the wake of last week's US Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade. With the federal constitutional right to an abortion eliminated, states will have to determine abortion rights unless Congress acts. Conservatives on Twitter were appalled Wednesday after President Joe Biden defended abortion by appealing to his natural rights as a "child of God." ‘Devout Catholic’ Biden’s latest rhetorical blunder happened while talking to the press Wednesday when he elaborated more on his stance on the leaked Supreme Court opinion draft that seems poised to overturn Roe v. Wade. American Majority CEO Ned Ryun blasted Biden, tweeting, "Pretty sure God doesn’t want His children murdering viable unborn human beings a[d] nauseam. I know, crazy thought and outside the box thinking on my part but maybe just think about it. . ." "Having this doddering fool as President is the greatest threat our country has faced in nearly 70 years," tweeted Texas Republican Party chairman Matt Rinaldi. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki described President Biden as a "devout Catholic" after being asked about his stances on taxpayer funding for abortion. Psaki's comments came during her first press conference Wednesday, where an EWTN Global Catholic Network reporter asked her about "two big concerns for pro-life Americans" -- the Hyde Amendment and Mexico City Policy. The former bars the use of federal funds to pay for abortion under most circumstances, while the latter restricts taxpayer funding of abortion abroad. "What is President Biden doing on those two items right now?" reporter Owen Jensen asked. Psaki responded that the administration would have more to say on the Mexico City Policy, adding: "I will just take the opportunity to remind all of you that he is a devout Catholic and somebody who attends church regularly. He started his day attending church with his family this morning but I don't have anything more for you on that." The Mexico City Policy, which blocks funding for overseas organizations that perform abortions or promote the procedure, has repeatedly been reversed and reinstated by previous administrations. Biden, however, sent shockwaves through the media when he announced that he would reverse his position on the decades-old Hyde Amendment. Both the Catholic Catechism and some clergy have indicated that politicians have an obligation to support anti-abortion legislation. The section of the Catechism discussing abortion says that the procedure and infanticide "are abominable crimes."

The beginning of the video starts with Mohammed Akunjee defending Shamima begum. Original link to article www.jihadwatch.org/2020/01/uk-muslim-lawyer-for-isis-bride-asks-his-followers-to-flood-radio-shows-phone-lines-to-avoid-hard-questions Shamima begum loses her appeal again. This video is compiled from various online sources. The UK would not prevent begum returning if there was no condemning evidence. It sounds like most of the evidence produced was in a closed court, they would only do this to protect the source provider. It's really hard to believe that someone went to the lengths of getting themselves to Turkey so they could meet their contact and not changing their mind. It's beginning to sound like Sharmeena Begum arranged it and past the information to Shamima begum. if this is true, the alledge grooming was by her best friend who is a fellow Muslim. Begum and co travelled from the UK to Turkey to meet their contact, freely and willingly. Begum travelled on her older sisters passport, which was most likely stolen. This alone could lead to a 10-year prison sentence. This needs to be handled correctly, yes the UK have every right to prosecute Shamima for the alledged crimes of theft, travelling on a stolen passport and finally travelling to Syria with the aim of joining ISIS, which begum has even stated that "yes, I joined ISIS". But what about what begum done while in Syria? We are expected to believe that begum never went anywhere and stayed at home. What about those conditions that begum was asking of her husband, some of the conditions agreed were that she get an English Quran, be aloud out to her friends... Any and all crimes that begum is accused of would and should be dealt with in Syria, as that is where these alledged crimes were committed. So if Begum is cleared of all alleged crimes, then she could possibly return to the UK with less risk to the UK and she may get more support from more people in the UK.

While Begum will be disappointed by the decision. The rumours of the alleged crimes whilst in Syria. These accusations can ONLY be dealt with by the country where the alleged crimes were committed. While some don't believe that she was trafficked, Begums Trafficking began in Turkey. that is where she met with her contact. So her only crime that the UK courts should be prosecuting begum for, is that she joined a terror group and that she travelled on a stolen passport. Any crimes alleged or otherwise need to be dealt with in the country where the offences were committed. The uk needs to STOP trying to get her back into the UK, at least until she is found not guilty in a Syrian court. Now if someone committed a crime and their country wanted her back in that country, which would result in that person not being punished for the alledged crimes. So would you allow the deport, or would you want the person to face justice where the crimes were committed.