Biden-Harris Administration: The Empire Strikes Back

[Anthony]

Any opposition to establishment directives or critiques of elite narratives, no matter how anodyne, will now be considered extremism. Since antimaskers, antivaxxers, and lockdown opponents are endangering granny, they are also by definition violent extremists. Maybe even terrorist insurgents.

I wish I was joking, but that is where this is headed.

The C's weren't joking about an immediate slide into totalitarianism.

Right, it's an effort to quash any opposition and dissent, no matter if it comes from the left or the right.

The Senate Intelligence Committee will examine both white supremacist groups on the right, and antifascist, or antifa, groups on the left, though Mr. Warner was quick to say that the danger the groups posed was not the same. “I don’t want to make a false equivalency argument here,” he said, “because the vast preponderance of them are on the right.”

I wonder if this is part of what the C's meant when they said that people will be united in their suffering? Those on the left who cheer the slide into totalitarianism are useful dupes for the time being, and thus the rethoric against them is a bit toned down, but eventually the PTB will probably decide that they are no longer so useful.

 

[XPan]

MSNBC host suggests killing American citizens with drone strikes

Is this the 'unity' that Biden promised? During a discussion regarding domestic terrorism, MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace floated the idea of the U.S. government killing American citizens with drone strikes. Wallace brought up the National...

www.sott.net

I think this one takes the cake for the zaniest thing I've heard or seen so far! Openly asking if drone strikes on American citizen terrorists is a good idea on national television. That's weird.

I have no words

I can't even phantom something like that, being actually said in the (US) media. De-humanization at the core - in order to give way for anything and everything - no matter what. It gives very, very, very strange vibes...

Boy, I really have no words.

With the Biden politics, the US indeed looks sliding directly into a totalitarian state. As a child in Berlin, I always wondered how a Second World War was able to unfold, I mean all the many signs before it turned around a whole nation, minds and then unfolded. I simply couldn't wrap my mind around how or what that could looked like, without people actually taking notice...

Now we see it live... on US National Television. My heart feels very heavy.

 

[BHelmet]

Is everyone basically just numb...mesmerized watching the show? Shock and awe? How about a prediction along the lines of: What is the next rake Biden is going to step on that hits him in the face and reveals the evil bozo behind the curtain?
Syria? Perhaps extraditing and persecuting Assange could potentially wake up more people sleeping on the left side of the bed.

 

[Deleted member 4320]

I wonder if this is part of what the C's meant when they said that people will be united in their suffering? Those on the left who cheer the slide into totalitarianism are useful dupes for the time being, and thus the rethoric against them is a bit toned down, but eventually the PTB will probably decide that they are no longer so useful.

Well, in my opinion, the words about uniting people, in their suffering, probably mean the moment after the real economic crisis, which, I say it partly figuratively, partly literally, will reset everyone's bank accounts. Then there will be no more race for money and presenting your new car to your neighbors. People will just have to get out of their homes, go up to their neighbors, and they will have to deal with what they have at hand. I think this could be the meaning of these words that people will eventually be united.

By the way, except for the above. I have pondered various predictions and theories. One thing occurred to me. Maybe I or someone mentioned it once before, I don't remember, I will write about it now. What if the "Last Pope" is Trump, and Biden is the Antichrist. See, if in the old days someone received a vision or something like that and saw a very important man to the world, what they might have thought? Pope! The head of the church - the head of the world. For our ancestors, religion and matters related to God were very important, it was their everyday life.

So seeing an important man, for them it was the Pope. And who is the truly important man in our society, no matter how it is in reality but how it is perceived, these are the presidents of the countries. Well, America is the world, so the president of America could be the president of the world. It is such a "Pope" of today of a world based on materialism and money. Well, religion and religions and related matters are just "additions" today, not like they were in the past of mankind. All this prompts me to hypothesize that the last Pope to be followed by the "end of the world" is Trump, and the Antichrist is Biden, who is to choke the world of man and remove the light from it. Look, they really extinguished Trump, and Biden is really acting very arrogant and progressive towards the darkness of totalitarianism.

Notice one more interesting thing. Antichrist is prophesied to come as a "false prophet", and is not Biden coming as a "false prophet"? After all, he was falsely chosen. Additionally, the Antichrist is to be seen by the Israelites as their "Christ". And in fact, from what I have heard from the media, Israel treats Biden as a "savior" that they see in him a force that is to protect them from threats in the Middle East (where things may get worse and they may not be able to control it), also possibly, Biden can allow for an eventual Israel expansion, if not territorial, then political.

 

[Recto]

Well, in my opinion, the words about uniting people, in their suffering, probably mean the moment after the real economic crisis, which, I say it partly figuratively, partly literally, will reset everyone's bank accounts. Then there will be no more race for money and presenting your new car to your neighbors. People will just have to get out of their homes, go up to their neighbors, and they will have to deal with what they have at hand. I think this could be the meaning of these words that people will eventually be united.

Most of humanity (if not all) have become very pathologized and/or dependent on this pathological system. As the C's said the programming is complete. Before any unification around solidarity and human values in order to face this suffering, there may be a unification of humanity through a common experience of chaos and pain. Perhaps I'm too cynical about it, compassion and humaneness is becoming increasingly rare each day. Or so it feels...

By the way, except for the above. I have pondered various predictions and theories. One thing occurred to me. Maybe I or someone mentioned it once before, I don't remember, I will write about it now. What if the "Last Pope" is Trump, and Biden is the Antichrist. See, if in the old days someone received a vision or something like that and saw a very important man to the world, what they might have thought? Pope! The head of the church - the head of the world. For our ancestors, religion and matters related to God were very important, it was their everyday life.

Well, the current doctrine of sacrificing freedom for security (of every kind) in the name of the greater good sure sounds like a religious dogma. With the authority figures of this "church" being the pathocrats, usurping God's place to "save" the populations from all conceivable harm. Hail Biden, great Pope of the underworld, Antichrist of the living ones ! What a chilling perspective...

 

[dennis]

The Great Circle Route flies on! The retread Obama/Biden carousel ride with the stalwarts of mucketty muck spinning in tow. The public will be informed when they get a round tuit.
For some reason you tube loaded up the third video, Classical Gas by Mason Williams after the Cyrkle.

 

[aragorn]

I just realized something this morning that maybe isn't that spectacular or new to you guys but it made me see things more clearly. As I was thinking about what a huge operation the election fraud was, and how the deep state must've planned this for years (probably since Trump took office) I remembered the ridiculous impeachment hearings from last year and how they appeared so theatrical, almost comical. They knew that there would not be enough votes in senate to convict him. So, why bother? Why invest so much time and resources to arrange it?

Well, I think that despite of wishfully thinking that he might get convicted, if they're lucky, the main reason was to give the appearance that there is enough reason for the majority of people in the US to mistrust him. To give an imaginative 'casus belli' for people to vote against him. That's why they acted so over-the-top during the hearings: they wanted the still less programmed and smarter people to think "Oh, even if I don't believe what they're saying...since they don't seem to present any credible evidence, there are probably many US citizens who believe them because they are so emotionally appealing." And this appearance was greatly strengthened with the constant anti-Trump drum beat in the media.

What I'm getting at is – how would you make people believe that Biden, who did practically no campaigning, stayed in his basement, had no appealing political messsages, and acted like a fool and brain dead, received 16 million votes more than Obama in 2012? The solution was to create the narrative that people 'had had enough' and thus more people than ever in the history of US elections voted for Biden to oust Donald Trump.

When I, on a few occasions, have asked some acquaintances why they thought Biden suddenly became so popular, this is exactly the answer I've got..."Well, you know, Biden seems kind'a lame and gray, but people in the US wanted Trump out. They would've voted for anyone who wasn't Trump".

And that's why they also didn't 'JFK' Trump, because they needed him as a 'patsy' to make the voter fraud appear legitimate. I mean, imagine if Trump never would've taken office – would anyone believe, then, that a candidate like Biden could get 82 million votes?

 

[Recto]

When I, on a few occasions, have asked some acquaintances why they thought Biden suddenly became so popular, this is exactly the answer I've got..."Well, you know, Biden seems kind'a lame and gray, but people in the US wanted Trump out. They would've voted for anyone who wasn't Trump".

And that's why they also didn't 'JFK' Trump, because they needed him as a 'patsy' to make the voter fraud appear legitimate. I mean, imagine if Trump never would've taken office – would anyone believe, then, that a candidate like Biden could get 82 million votes?

Now that the narrative is crafted and start gaining steam the next step would be indeed to play the 'evil patsy' card for everything going wrong from now on. With a bit of luck on their side they may be able to convict him over nothing, only by laying out hundreds of accusations at his feet combined with constant corruption of the legal system (just what they've been doing until now). Since patience has long flown out the window on their side, some long-running narrative cloaking becomes mandatory to cover increasingly pathological and obvious undertakings.

Terrorism can be seen as such narrative and now is used against any opponents (including Trump followers/affiliates) of the established agenda. Those opponents can now become themselves 'patsies' to cloack even more egregious actions. No need to say that this giant blame game will go south quite quickly once a critical mass of 'patsies' has been reach (weirdly, half of Americans voting for Trump doesn't seem to be a number high enough. Am I missing something here ?).

Now the question to ask is, did a significant enough portion of the people buy this narrative for it to live on ? The voter fraud getting through (as enormous as it is) can point us to a sad "yes".

 

[seek10]

What I'm getting at is – how would you make people believe that Biden, who did practically no campaigning, stayed in his basement, had no appealing political messsages, and acted like a fool and brain dead, received 16 million votes more than Obama in 2012? The solution was to create the narrative that people 'had had enough' and thus more people than ever in the history of US elections voted for Biden to oust Donald Trump.

When I, on a few occasions, have asked some acquaintances why they thought Biden suddenly became so popular, this is exactly the answer I've got..."Well, you know, Biden seems kind'a lame and gray, but people in the US wanted Trump out. They would've voted for anyone who wasn't Trump".

And that's why they also didn't 'JFK' Trump, because they needed him as a 'patsy' to make the voter fraud appear legitimate. I mean, imagine if Trump never would've taken office – would anyone believe, then, that a candidate like Biden could get 82 million votes?

If one counts votes correctly, Biden didn't get more than Trump and it is all rigging that happened at thousands of places in many flavors. I doubt many Americans consider Biden as legitimate president. What happened in the January is finale of 4 years of battle since Trump's 2016 surprise election. The Nation is slowly and steadily polarized during that time across Trump vs Establishment lines. So opinions are strong. By peacefully going out of power, Trump only increased his Anti-Establishment credentials.

They beat the dead horse or p*ss over him, but that only exposes their nakedness and gives more credibility to Trump. Establishment gang don't know what to do with people's opinion of Trump. They can rant and rave of "Domestic Terrorism" and impeach to Stalinize him. If they try to do some thing to 76 million so-called terrorists, the same military guys who were suppose to eliminate, will revolt. Same with Covid vaccine. As long as Trump in office, they want reckless vaccination and lockdowns and so on, but the moment they are in power, they rant, but won't do it recklessly any more. So the Circus goes on.

 

[genero81]

And that's why they also didn't 'JFK' Trump, because they needed him as a 'patsy' to make the voter fraud appear legitimate. I mean, imagine if Trump never would've taken office – would anyone believe, then, that a candidate like Biden could get 82 million votes?

Once Trump was in office and it was obvious he wasn't willing to play ball, then yes, they went into overdrive to take him out, one way or another. I think the unseen players at the top of the consortium can't really control everything that happens at the lower levels. But they have the power and resources to turn whatever does happen to their advantage.

Did they want Biden? I doubt it, but they wanted someone they could control and depend on. So, someone like Tulsi Gabbard was definitely a no for example, and Biden was the best the Democrats had that fit the bill besides Harris, who Gabbard took apart in the debates. I mean there were other candidates but they went with Biden.

I wouldn't put it past them to have in mind sending a message to those who see that; "we have the power to put into office even the most obviously unlikely candidate."

 

[dennis]

Energy industry executives are sounding the alarm on President Joe Biden’s disastrous policies and warning that they will force Americans to pay higher prices for gas and other utilities.

Steven Kopits is a longtime oil industry executive who’s currently the managing director of Princeton Energy Advisors. He’s horrified that since Election Day, gas prices have soared 18 percent, while the price of oil has rocketed almost 50 percent, the reported Thursday.

Expert: Gas Prices Have Surged 18% Since Biden Won Election, Could Skyrocket to $4 Under Biden

Well isn't that great.

thefederalistpapers.org

Qui Bono?

 

[Bluegazer]

Have you already commented on it here? Well, I'll share it anyway.

Trump impeachment trial: What verdict means for Trump, Biden and America

Reputations were burnished and tarnished - and a tumultuous stage was set for political battles to come.

www.bbc.com

Only five days after it began, Donald Trump's Senate impeachment trial has concluded. As was widely predicted, the final verdict was that the former president was not guilty of inciting an insurrection at the US Capitol last month.

 

[bjorb]

Too easy

https://twitter.com/x/status/1361078521758679040

 

[JEEP]

Too easy

https://twitter.com/x/status/1361078521758679040

Here's a timely blast from the past that came back to my attention by still another blast from the past that I had never known about, The Lady and the Dale that's been showing on HBO - from wiki:

Renée Richards (born August 19, 1934) is an American ophthalmologist and former tennis player who had some success on the professional circuit in the 1970s, and became widely known following male-to-female sex reassignment surgery, when she fought to compete as a woman in the 1976 US Open.

The United States Tennis Association began that year requiring genetic screening for female players. She challenged that policy, and the New York Supreme Court ruled in her favor, a landmark case in transgender rights.[2] As one of the first professional athletes to identify as transgender, she became a spokesperson for transgender people in sports.[3][4][5] After retiring as a player, she coached Martina Navratilova to two Wimbledon titles.
[...]

Transition​

During college Richards began dressing as a woman, which at the time was considered to be a perversion, with transsexualism classified as a form of insanity.[3] Richards named her female persona "Renée", which is French for "reborn".[3] Her struggle with gender identity created sexual confusion, depression, and suicidal tendencies.[6] She began seeing Dr. Charles Ihlenfeld, a disciple of Harry Benjamin who specialized in endocrinology, transsexualism, and sexual reassignment.[3] Upon seeing Ihlenfeld she began getting hormone injections with the long-term hope for a life change.[3] In the mid-1960s she traveled in Europe dressed as a woman, intending to go to North Africa to see Georges Burou, a famous gynecological surgeon at Clinique Parc in Casablanca, Morocco, regarding sex reassignment surgery; however, she ultimately decided against it and returned to New York.[3] Richards married model Barbara Mole in June 1970, and together they had a son Nicholas in 1972. They were divorced in 1975.[3][11][12]

In the early 1970s, Richards resolved to undergo sex reassignment and was referred to surgeon Roberto C. Granato Sr. by Harry Benjamin, successfully transitioning in 1975.[3][13][14] After surgery, Richards went to Newport Beach, California and started working as an ophthalmologist in practice with another doctor.[3][6]

Court case​

In 1976, Richards' gender reassignment was outed by local TV anchor Richard Carlson, the father of Tucker Carlson.[15] Subsequently the United States Tennis Association (USTA), the Women's Tennis Association (WTA), and the United States Open Committee (USOC) required all female competitors to verify their sex with a Barr body test of their chromosomes.[3][6][16] Richards applied to play in the US Open in 1976 as a woman, but refused to take the test, and thus was not allowed to compete in the Open, Wimbledon, or the Italian Open in the summer of 1976.[3]

Richards then sued the United States Tennis Association (USTA), which runs the US Open, in New York state court, alleging discrimination by gender in violation of the New York Human Rights Law.[3][6][16] She asserted that participating in the tournament would constitute "an acceptance of her right to be a woman."[6] Some USTA members felt that others would undergo sex change to enter women's tennis.[3][6] Sports Illustrated called Richards an "extraordinary spectacle", and characterized reactions to her as "varying from astonishment to suspicion, sympathy, resentment, and more often than not, utter confusion."[6] The USOC stated "there is competitive advantage for a male who has undergone a sex change surgery as a result of physical training and development as a male."[6][17] Richards finally agreed to take the Barr body test. The test results were ambiguous. She refused to take it again and was barred from play.[6]

On August 16, 1977, Judge Alfred M. Ascione found in Richards' favor. He ruled: "This person is now a female" and that requiring Richards to pass the Barr body test was "grossly unfair, discriminatory and inequitable, and a violation of her rights."[4][18] He further ruled that the USTA intentionally discriminated against Richards, and granted Richards an injunction against the USTA and the USOC, allowing her to play in the US Open.[4][6] Richards lost to Virginia Wade in the first round of the singles competition, but made it to the finals in doubles.[3][6][16]

Tennis career after transitioning​

After moving to California, Richards played in regional competitions for her local club, the John Wayne Tennis Club, under the name Renée Clark.[3][6] In the summer of 1976 she entered the La Jolla Tennis Tournament Championships, where she crushed the competition, and her unique left hand serve was recognized by Bob Perry, a tour player from UCLA.[3] Her long-time friend Gene Scott then invited her to play in his professional tennis tournament, the Tennis Week Open in South Orange, New Jersey. The USTA and the WTA then withdrew their sanction for the Tennis Week Open, and organized another tournament; 25 of the 32 participants withdrew from the Tennis Week Open.[3][4][6] This was just the beginning of the issues Richards would encounter in trying to play professional women's tennis, which eventually led to her suing the USTA and winning.

Richards played professionally from 1977 to 1981 when she retired at age 47.[3][4][16] She was ranked as high as 20th overall (in February 1979), and her highest ranking at the end of a year was 22nd (in 1977). Her first professional event as a female was the 1977 U.S. Open. Her greatest successes on court were reaching the doubles final at her first U.S. Open in 1977, with Betty Ann Grubb Stuart – the pair lost a close match to Martina Navratilova and Betty Stöve – and winning the 35-and-over women's singles. Richards was twice a semifinalist in mixed doubles, with Ilie Năstase, at the U.S. Open. In 1979, she defeated Nancy Richey for the 35-and-over singles title at the Open. Richards posted wins over Hana Mandlíková, Sylvia Hanika, Virginia Ruzici, and Pam Shriver. She later coached Navratilova to two Wimbledon wins.

Richards was inducted into the USTA Eastern Tennis Hall of Fame in 2000.[19] On August 2, 2013, Richards was among the first class of inductees into the National Gay and Lesbian Sports Hall of Fame.[20]

Richards has since expressed ambivalence about her legacy, and came to believe her past as a man provided her with advantages over her competitors, saying "Having lived for the past 30 years, I know if I'd had surgery at the age of 22, and then at 24 went on the tour, no genetic woman in the world would have been able to come close to me. And so I've reconsidered my opinion."[21][22]

On that last point, Richards had this to say (from an RT article):

With the transgender issue in sports flaring up again today, many advocates use Renee’s story as an example of a fair approach to athletes, including those who preferred to choose their sex.

Those speaking in defence of transgender athletes insist that she didn’t have any significant advantage over her competitors, having lost so many matches to female players, including Navratilova.

However, the athlete herself admits that changing sex at the age of 20 is much different from doing so at the age of 40, adding that she could have dominated women’s tennis if she had the surgery earlier.

“If I had played [women’s tennis] in my 20s, I would have won Wimbledon,” she said.

She also added that her potential dominance would not have helped to promote women’s tennis. “I would have quit. That wouldn’t have been good for anyone. Not me and not women’s tennis.”

A short 2018 video on the subject concerning Richards - try not to spew as the pertinent fact is ignored:

A telling comment from the above:

"She made it to the 3rd round of a women's open" Read that back to yourself. A player in their 40s walked into an open tournament and got to the 3rd round. You're kidding yourself if you don't think it's advantage to have been male. Serena Williams is 38 and struggling. If it wasn't for racquet technology she would have been gone years ago to fitter faster younger players.

So, since the Barr body test has already been ruled to be "grossly unfair, discriminatory and inequitable, and a violation of her rights", her being any transgender woman now, then perhaps the rule should be these athletes must be at least 40 years old before they can compete against biological women. Or they can compete against men before age 40 or against other transgender women. Otherwise, biological women's sports will be eviscerated despite what the ACLU has to say on the subject.

Now, the other sticky wicket regarding transgenders concerns their incarceration whether they identify as males or females. Be it biological males/trans women jailed with real women or biological males/trans women (and the opposite) jailed with real men, extreme danger to the female prison population in the first instance and extreme danger to the prisoner from the male prison population in the second. This last one occurred in real life as shown in The Lady and the Dale - it wasn't pretty. The trailer:

And so, in contemplating the life stories of these transgender women of the past, I have to entertain the possibility that they are a unique type, their feelings of being in the wrong body are more than real and valid rather than supposed mental illness or a denial of homosexuality. It should be noted that the two examples here occurred in an era that did not promote transgender lifestyles, most especially not in regards to children as is happening today. I wonder too, if this applies:

A: Laura, my dear, if you really want to reveal "many beautiful and amazing things," all you need to do is remember the triad, the trilogy, the trinity, and look always for the triplicative connecting clue profile. Connect the threes... do not rest until you have found three beautifully balancing meanings!!

Q: So, in everything there are three aspects?

A: And why? Because it is the realm of the three that you occupy. In order to possess the keys to the next level, just master the Third Man Theme, then move on with grace and anticipation.

Are there then really three sexes - male, female, trans?

 

[bjorb]

Trump remains the rightful US president for many.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1361464621555662854