Design a site like this with
Get started

11 Aug 2020 – Election interfering by Twitter, Facebook, Paypal, and now Comcast – updated to include the Executive Order that will be used to seize all functions and assets of these ENTITIES

This is election interfering by INSTITUTIONS

These are utilities.  Define phone company.  Define water utility.  Define rail road.  They are the ROBBER BARONS of old.  They are using the IDENTITY of PRIVATE COMPANY as a shield.  Why should they be shielded?  Even the President was silenced on TWITTER.  What is the alternative to TWITTER?  NOTHING!!! One might say, well there are other platforms.  But there aren’t.  Parler?  Gab?  What government agencies are using these others?

There is no such thing as a “utility” anymore.  They are all PRIVATE.  But are they even “private?”

The problem is that they ARE utilities.  Taken as a whole they are not just American utilities.  They are in a separate category.  Why?  Because they have literally NO allegiance to any country.  They sit on boards of many other countries.  THEY are the lobbyists.  Can I start a company and compete?  No.  I am not able to compete against these people.  No ONE person can.  Is that how America was supposed to work?

Someone in each of these companies needs to go to jail.  They are criminals.

This is a CRIMINAL issue.  The reason is many-fold. They are INSTITUTIONALLY discriminatory and now they are interfering in free speech in addition to ELECTION INTERFERING.

OUTRAGEOUS! Xfinity-Comcast Bans GOP Candidate Laura Loomer from Sending Texts and Emails

Laura Loomer has never committed a crime.
In 2018 Laura Loomer was banned from Twitter.
She was then banned from Facebook and then she was banned from PayPal.

CAIR not only worked with Twitter to get Laura Loomer banned they then cheered the news ON TWITTER!

And now this–
Comcast and its subsidiary Xfinity banned GOP candidate Laura Loomer from sending text messages and emails to supporters.

This is Orwellian and should frighten ANY American!

TRENDING: The Choice in 2020: President Trump Who Created the GREATEST Economic Recovery EVER vs. Joe Biden Who Was Behind WORST Economic Recovery Since the Great Depression

Via Pete Hegseth:

It’s time to call them what they are Robber Barons 

Robber Barons vs Industrial Giants - History Guide - LibGuides at ...
Mark Zuckerberg is now worth $100 billion - CNN
Fasting, Models, And Bitcoin – The Life Of Twitter CEO, Jack ...
Bill Gates - Biography, Family, Net Worth,Foundation
George Soros and Tamiko Bolton's marriage will spare no expense ...
The EO from the Executive -maybe Z, Jack, Billy, and Soros forgot about this –

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, find that the ability of persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States to interfere in or undermine public confidence in United States elections, including through the unauthorized accessing of election and campaign infrastructure or the covert distribution of propaganda and disinformation, constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. Although there has been no evidence of a foreign power altering the outcome or vote tabulation in any United States election, foreign powers have historically sought to exploit America’s free and open political system. In recent years, the proliferation of digital devices and internet-based communications has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity of the threat of foreign interference, as illustrated in the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with this threat.

Accordingly, I hereby order:

Section 1. (a) Not later than 45 days after the conclusion of a United States election, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate executive departments and agencies (agencies), shall conduct an assessment of any information indicating that a foreign government, or any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, has acted with the intent or purpose of interfering in that election. The assessment shall identify, to the maximum extent ascertainable, the nature of any foreign interference and any methods employed to execute it, the persons involved, and the foreign government or governments that authorized, directed, sponsored, or supported it. The Director of National Intelligence shall deliver this assessment and appropriate supporting information to the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security.

(b) Within 45 days of receiving the assessment and information described in section 1(a) of this order, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate agencies and, as appropriate, State and local officials, shall deliver to the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of Defense a report evaluating, with respect to the United States election that is the subject of the assessment described in section 1(a):

(i) the extent to which any foreign interference that targeted election infrastructure materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, the tabulation of votes, or the timely transmission of election results; and

(ii) if any foreign interference involved activities targeting the infrastructure of, or pertaining to, a political organization, campaign, or candidate, the extent to which such activities materially affected the security or integrity of that infrastructure, including by unauthorized access to, disclosure or threatened disclosure of, or alteration or falsification of, information or data.

The report shall identify any material issues of fact with respect to these matters that the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security are unable to evaluate or reach agreement on at the time the report is submitted. The report shall also include updates and recommendations, when appropriate, regarding remedial actions to be taken by the United States Government, other than the sanctions described in sections 2 and 3 of this order.

(c) Heads of all relevant agencies shall transmit to the Director of National Intelligence any information relevant to the execution of the Director’s duties pursuant to this order, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law. If relevant information emerges after the submission of the report mandated by section 1(a) of this order, the Director, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate agencies, shall amend the report, as appropriate, and the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall amend the report required by section 1(b), as appropriate.

(d) Nothing in this order shall prevent the head of any agency or any other appropriate official from tendering to the President, at any time through an appropriate channel, any analysis, information, assessment, or evaluation of foreign interference in a United States election.

(e) If information indicating that foreign interference in a State, tribal, or local election within the United States has occurred is identified, it may be included, as appropriate, in the assessment mandated by section 1(a) of this order or in the report mandated by section 1(b) of this order, or submitted to the President in an independent report.

(f) Not later than 30 days following the date of this order, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence shall develop a framework for the process that will be used to carry out their respective responsibilities pursuant to this order. The framework, which may be classified in whole or in part, shall focus on ensuring that agencies fulfill their responsibilities pursuant to this order in a manner that maintains methodological consistency; protects law enforcement or other sensitive information and intelligence sources and methods; maintains an appropriate separation between intelligence functions and policy and legal judgments; ensures that efforts to protect electoral processes and institutions are insulated from political bias; and respects the principles of free speech and open debate.

Sec. 2. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any foreign person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security:

(i) to have directly or indirectly engaged in, sponsored, concealed, or otherwise been complicit in foreign interference in a United States election;

(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, any activity described in subsection (a)(i) of this section or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.

(b) Executive Order 13694 of April 1, 2015, as amended by Executive Order 13757 of December 28, 2016, remains in effect. This order is not intended to, and does not, serve to limit the Secretary of the Treasury’s discretion to exercise the authorities provided in Executive Order 13694. Where appropriate, the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, may exercise the authorities described in Executive Order 13694 or other authorities in conjunction with the Secretary of the Treasury’s exercise of authorities provided in this order.

(c) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order.

Sec. 3. Following the transmission of the assessment mandated by section 1(a) and the report mandated by section 1(b):

(a) the Secretary of the Treasury shall review the assessment mandated by section 1(a) and the report mandated by section 1(b), and, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, impose all appropriate sanctions pursuant to section 2(a) of this order and any appropriate sanctions described in section 2(b) of this order; and

(b) the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the heads of other appropriate agencies, shall jointly prepare a recommendation for the President as to whether additional sanctions against foreign persons may be appropriate in response to the identified foreign interference and in light of the evaluation in the report mandated by section 1(b) of this order, including, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, proposed sanctions with respect to the largest business entities licensed or domiciled in a country whose government authorized, directed, sponsored, or supported election interference, including at least one entity from each of the following sectors: financial services, defense, energy, technology, and transportation (or, if inapplicable to that country’s largest business entities, sectors of comparable strategic significance to that foreign government). The recommendation shall include an assessment of the effect of the recommended sanctions on the economic and national security interests of the United States and its allies. Any recommended sanctions shall be appropriately calibrated to the scope of the foreign interference identified, and may include one or more of the following with respect to each targeted foreign person:

(i) blocking and prohibiting all transactions in a person’s property and interests in property subject to United States jurisdiction;

(ii) export license restrictions under any statute or regulation that requires the prior review and approval of the United States Government as a condition for the export or re-export of goods or services;

(iii) prohibitions on United States financial institutions making loans or providing credit to a person;

(iv) restrictions on transactions in foreign exchange in which a person has any interest;

(v) prohibitions on transfers of credit or payments between financial institutions, or by, through, or to any financial institution, for the benefit of a person;

(vi) prohibitions on United States persons investing in or purchasing equity or debt of a person;

(vii) exclusion of a person’s alien corporate officers from the United States;

(viii) imposition on a person’s alien principal executive officers of any of the sanctions described in this section; or

(ix) any other measures authorized by law.

Sec. 4. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 2 of this order.

Sec. 5. The prohibitions in section 2 of this order include the following:

(a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and

(b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Sec. 6. I hereby find that the unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of such persons. Such persons shall be treated as persons covered by section 1 of Proclamation 8693 of July 24, 2011 (Suspension of Entry of Aliens Subject to United Nations Security Council Travel Bans and International Emergency Economic Powers Act Sanctions).

Sec. 7. (a) Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 8. For the purposes of this order:

(a) the term “person” means an individual or entity;

(b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;

(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person (including a foreign person) in the United States;

(d) the term “election infrastructure” means information and communications technology and systems used by or on behalf of the Federal Government or a State or local government in managing the election process, including voter registration databases, voting machines, voting tabulation equipment, and equipment for the secure transmission of election results;

(e) the term “United States election” means any election for Federal office held on, or after, the date of this order;

(f) the term “foreign interference,” with respect to an election, includes any covert, fraudulent, deceptive, or unlawful actions or attempted actions of a foreign government, or of any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, undertaken with the purpose or effect of influencing, undermining confidence in, or altering the result or reported result of, the election, or undermining public confidence in election processes or institutions;

(g) the term “foreign government” means any national, state, provincial, or other governing authority, any political party, or any official of any governing authority or political party, in each case of a country other than the United States;

(h) the term “covert,” with respect to an action or attempted action, means characterized by an intent or apparent intent that the role of a foreign government will not be apparent or acknowledged publicly; and

(i) the term “State” means the several States or any of the territories, dependencies, or possessions of the United States.

Sec. 9. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 2 of this order.

Sec. 10. Nothing in this order shall prohibit transactions for the conduct of the official business of the United States Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof.

Sec. 11. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may re-delegate any of these functions to other officers within the Department of the Treasury consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order.

Sec. 12. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit the recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).

Sec. 13. This order shall be implemented consistent with 50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1) and (3).

Sec. 14. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.



September 12, 2018.

10 Aug 2020 -A shooter down outside the WHITE HOUSE – trial run? Adbusters had posted a September 17 2020 “The White House Siege”

These people are terrorists and have declared war.  They are INTERNATIONALLY coordinated




Trump Pulled From Briefing After Secret Service Involved Shooting Outside White House


President Donald Trump was whisked out of his news conference by a Secret Service Agent Monday afternoon.

The Agent whispered something in the President’s ear, and immediately removed the president as he was addressing the media.

Trump later returned to the room and told reporters that the Secret Service shot someone outside of the White House.

“Someone was shot by law enforcement.” “I would like to thank the Secret Service.”

Circumstances surrounding the shooting were not immediately known. The condition of the suspect wasn’t clear.


Facebook Comments

from –


They are internationally coordinated and funded by the same groups / people

They are ALL OVER THE WORLD – but the ideology is Communist – NWO – New World Order programs collaborated and negotiated by INTERNATIONALS – corporations, individuals, Foundations and UN groups



10 Aug 2020- Thank COVID for bringing up that we really need to END FEDERAL EDUCATION. Teachers fear that PARENTS (OUTSIDERS) might be able to hear them brainwashing your kids

This is the result of Government getting it’s hands on anything.


WALSH: Teachers Openly Fret That Parents Might Hear Them Brainwashing Children, Call Parents ‘Dangerous’

This is why I homeschool.
A public school stands on the Upper East Side on August 07, 2020 in the Manhattan borough of New York City. Due to the low COVID-19 infection rates reported in the city, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced Friday that all New York school districts may reopen this fall. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

In one of the creepiest yet most revealing Twitter threads ever to be posted on the platform, a teacher recently fretted out loud that virtual classes might allow parents to hear him brainwashing their kids. Matthew R. Kay, an educator and author of a book on “how to lead meaningful race conversations in the classroom,” worried that “conservative parents” would be able to interfere with the “messy work” of indoctrinating children into critical race theory, gender theory, and other left-wing dogmas.

Here’s the entire thread, which has since been set to private:

So, this fall, virtual class discussion will have many potential spectators — parents, siblings, etc. — in the same room. We’ll never be quite sure who is overhearing the discourse. What does this do for our equity/inclusion work?

How much have students depended on the (somewhat) secure barriers of our physical classrooms to encourage vulnerability? How many of us have installed some version of “what happens here stays here” to help this?

While conversation about race are in my wheelhouse, and remain a concern in this no-walls environment — I am most intrigued by the damage that “helicopter/snowplow” parents can do in the host conversations about gender/sexuality. And while “conservative” parents are my chief concern — I know that the damage can come from the left too. If we are engaged in the messy work of destabilizing a kid’s racism or homophobia or transphobia — how much do we want their classmates’ parents piling on?

It’s important to note that while some teachers responded to Kay’s comments with the appropriate level of horror and disgust, many others chimed in to share their own strategies for brainwashing during a pandemic. One teacher said she’d also been “thinking about” the problem Kay described, and had decided that she’d ask students about their preferred pronouns via survey — though she still worries that “caregivers” might see it and learn something about their children that they weren’t supposed to know.

Another teacher said that students last semester would sometimes “type secrets into the chat” whenever the discussion turned to “anti-racism and gender inclusive content.” Another complained that a white parent— she made sure to specify “white” — in her district recorded a Zoom class and “filed a complaint against the teacher for an anti-racist read aloud (saying the teacher’s commentary was inappropriate and biased).” This, the teacher says, “is going to be an issue.”

A ninth grade teacher shared in the commiseration, saying that her class required students to “read and respond to a news article,” but that participation in this exercise is stunted now because “outsiders” are “listening.” The “outsiders,” to be clear, are the children’s parents. A teacher with pronouns listed in her Twitter handle said that she plans to use the chat function more than voice lectures because she wants children to share “information” with her in a “parentless way.” A science teacher agreed with all of the sentiments expressed here and summarized it bluntly: “Parents are dangerous.”

And these are just the comments that were captured in screenshots before the tweets were all made private. Presumably, there is more where this came from. A lot more.

Several points must be made in response.

First, classrooms are certainly not “safe places” for children to be “vulnerable.” Students may say and do things when they are with their peers in school that they would not say and do at home, but only a fool who doesn’t understand the first thing about child psychology and the effects of peer pressure would assume that the child’s at-school version of himself is the most authentic, much less the most healthy. The pressure to conform to the values and opinions of your peers in the classroom is immense, and often suffocating. There is a reason why rejection and alienation by peers has contributed to a true epidemic of suicide among young people.

The very same people who extol the classroom as a “safe place” for vulnerability will also tell us, on different days and in different contexts, that bullying is a major problem for today’s youth and many of them are driven to self-destruction because of it. So, which is it? Is the classroom a place for open and genuine dialogue, where children can safely express their truest feelings and beliefs, or is it a place rife with bullying and mockery, where rigid conformity is demanded and those who fail to meet the demands are severely punished? It certainly can’t be both.

Second, an adult keeping a secret with a child, and helping the child conceal that secret from his parent — especially when the secret has anything to do with sexuality — is acting in a way that is nothing short of predatory. If you heard a strange man on the playground whisper to your child, “this will just be our little secret,” you would assume that the man is some kind of sex offender. Does this behavior suddenly transform from disturbing to admirable if the strange man is a teacher? No, it doesn’t. But this is the sort of license society has given to teachers, on the the theory that they cannot do the work of educating unless they have more power over, and intimate knowledge of, their students than the students’ own parents.

That brings us, finally, to point three, which is that a public school teacher is not supposed to be, and should not try to be, educator, parent, shaman, spiritual guide, therapist, friend, confidant, and sex counselor, all rolled into one. He or she is meant to fill only the first role on that list, and only in the subject the teacher has been assigned to teach. A child’s actual parents only come to be viewed as “dangerous” interlopers and intrusive “outsiders” when teachers begin to view themselves and the school system as the true guardians and conservators of the children that are temporarily in their care. And that, ultimately, is the problem with the modern education system.

Children are not old enough to be emancipated. They cannot yet go out and live their own lives. They cannot make every decision for themselves. They must belong to someone — not owned like objects but cared for and protected like the vulnerable human beings they are. The fundamental question is who do they belong to. Different cultures in different times and places have had different answers to this question.

Here, in contemporary American society, there are generally two ways of looking at it: children belong to their parents, or they belong to the school system (which is to say, the government). In one vision, a child is a son or daughter, in the other, the child is a ward of the state.

Only one of these visions is healthy, natural, and humanizing. Only one can properly facilitate a child’s emotional, mental, intellectual, and spiritual growth. The school system doesn’t just have a wrong and harmful idea of what education is — it has a wrong and harmful idea of what a child is, and what its fundamental role in a child’s life is supposed to be. And that is why I will not send my kids into its clutches. Neither should you.

More from Matt Walsh: George Floyd Body Cam Footage Is Out. The Story Is Far More Complicated Than Media Led Us To Believe.

The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.

From –


I pulled some from the twitter thread



9 Aug 2020 – When they say that guns should be off the streets – who’s guns will they grab? They are the UN who are currently operating illegally on US soil as “Sustainable Development Goals” for the UN

Anyone who hasn’t made the connection yet, here is how the gun grab is related to the UN. Our gun lobby groups don’t tell you that, because they are connected at the hip with the CCP, who has been a willing partner in the development of this agenda and the Democrat party.



Advancing Disarmament within the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

Izumi Nakamitsu, United Nations High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, briefs the Security Council as it considers the situation in the Middle East. 5 February 2018. © UN Photo/Manuel Elias

The Nexus between Disarmament, Arms Control and Development

The idea that disarmament and arms control are connected to development is not new. Article 26 of the Charter of the United Nations recognizes disarmament as a precondition for durable peace, security and development by calling for the maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion of the world’s economic and human resources for arms.

For a long time, however, disarmament has largely slipped off the development agenda. This is despite overwhelming evidence that excessive arms accumulation diverts needed resources from development and fuels armed conflict and violence, leading to unnecessary death and suffering, social inequality and environmental degradation. Hence, the failure to establish effective disarmament and arms control systems is devastating to socioeconomic development, peace and security, and human well-being.

The Secretary-General recognized this in his new Agenda for Disarmament, where he described “a vast potential” for disarmament activities to further advance our pursuit of development objectives.

The Agenda, launched on 24 May 2018, offers new perspectives on better integrating disarmament and arms control into our work on other key international priorities, moving beyond our tendency to view this pressing matter through a narrow, isolated security lens. Instead, it encourages us to place disarmament and arms control within the scope of our work on sustainable development, conflict prevention and peacebuilding.

Disarmament and Arms Control: A Contribution to Peace and Security

The 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a unique opportunity to revisit the historical relationship between disarmament and development. While SDG 16 on peaceful and inclusive societies, justice and strong institutions recognizes that durable peace and lasting conditions for security are necessary for long-term development, we need to better understand the diverse areas in which achieving disarmament objectives can contribute to the implementation of the SDGs. All Member States have committed themselves to taking such an integrated approach.

A central concern for disarmament and arms control is the protection of civilians from the impact of weapons. Measures to ban or restrict certain weapons on humanitarian grounds have a clear role to play in reducing armed violence and related death rates, an objective under SDG target 16.1. The increasing urbanization of armed conflict and the use of explosive weapons in towns and cities have particularly devastating impacts on civilians, causing death and injury, forced displacement, and destruction of livelihoods and infrastructure. In response to the escalation of armed violence, the United Nations supports efforts by Member States to develop appropriate limitations, common standards and policies in conformity with international humanitarian law on the use of explosive weapons in populated areas.

Through SDG target 16.4 on significantly reducing illicit arms flows, the 2030 Agenda explicitly reflects upon the importance of arms control in promoting peace, security and sustainable development, while placing disarmament and arms control within the scope of development policies. To provide sustainable and coherent solutions with a strong development focus to the problem of small arms control, the United Nations will establish a multi-partner trust facility through the Peacebuilding Fund, contributing to SDG targets 16.4 and 16.a on strengthening the institutional capacities of States to prevent violence, terrorism and crime.

Disarmament and Arms Control: A Contribution to the Broader 2030 Agenda

The advancement of disarmament and arms control objectives also supports the achievement of other SDGs, from good health and quality education to gender equality, economic growth, reduced inequalities and safe cities.

Disarmament and arms control can advance progress in achieving SDG 3 on good health and well-being, since armed violence is the leading cause of premature death and a key source of injuries, disability, psychological distress and disease. There is also increasing concern regarding the risk of acquisition and use of biological weapons. To address it, the United Nations strengthens the capacity of Member States to implement the Biological Weapons Convention, and will establish a standing capacity to conduct investigations of alleged use of biological weapons.

SDG 4 on quality education benefits from disarmament education, which promotes a culture of peace and non-violence. Raising awareness about disarmament issues emphasizes approaches to reducing and eliminating violent conflicts. It also encourages efforts to enhance national and international security at lower levels of armaments. Such education imparts knowledge and skills that empower individuals to participate in the achievement of concrete disarmament objectives.

With respect to SDG 5 on gender equality, gender-responsive disarmament and arms control have a recognized role in eliminating violence against women and girls in both public and private spheres. Weapons have differentiated impacts on women, men, girls and boys. While men and boys account for most violent deaths and constitute the majority of weapon owners and users, women and girls are more frequently the victims of gender-based violence facilitated by small arms, including domestic and sexual violence. To address violence against women, it is essential that gender considerations inform the development of legislation and policies on disarmament and arms control. We also need to challenge predominant gender stereotypes of masculinity associated with the ownership and use of small arms, which increase the risk of gender-based violence.

There is also a close connection between disarmament and the achievement of SDG 8 on decent work and economic growth. United Nations studies have shown that excessive military spending negatively impacts economic growth, capital investment and employment. Reducing military budgets can lessen these negative effects and allow public spending to be redirected towards people-centred programmes for social and economic development. These measures will also contribute to the achievement of SDG 10 on reduced inequalities. To promote mutual restraint in military expenditure, the United Nations seeks opportunities for regional dialogue and further development of confidence-building initiatives.

Transparency and confidence-building instruments such as the United Nations Report on Military Expenditures can increase trust between countries, leading to greater stability. This and other transparency instruments, such as the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, whereby States report on arms imports and exports, promote effective, accountable and transparent institutions, a key commitment under SDG target 16.6.

Disarmament and arms control further contribute to SDG 11 on the safety, resilience and sustainability of cities and human settlements. In many countries, arms and ammunition depots are located in populated areas where unplanned explosions can cause high levels of casualties, injuries and displacement, as well as economic loss and destruction of livelihoods and infrastructure. Over the last decades, more than half of States have experienced accidental explosions at munition sites. The safe and secure management of stockpiles, including the identification of surpluses and their destruction, helps prevent such incidents from occurring. Through the development and dissemination of standards, guidelines and good practices, the United Nations supports States in improving the physical security and stockpile management of their weapons and ammunition. The International Small Arms Control Standards and the International Ammunition Technical Guidelines are prime examples of these efforts.

Finally, the disarmament community can contribute to more inclusive global governance, an objective expressed in SDG targets 5.5 and 16.8. To achieve greater inclusivity, we need to further promote the equal and full participation of women in all disarmament decision-making processes and support the active participation of all States, especially developing countries, in disarmament forums. A more inclusive disarmament machinery will lead to more effective and sustainable policy outcomes in all areas of peace and security, and it should be a major focus of our efforts.

Looking Ahead: Strengthening Partnerships for Disarmament

I believe that investment in disarmament and arms control is a direct investment in long-term peace and security, and, therefore, in sustainable development. The SDGs provide a comprehensive, universal framework for action, and I am committed to establishing and strengthening partnerships and collaborations in order to attain the Goals. Advancing disarmament and arms control makes a real difference for development. Acknowledging this fact on a broader scale will make the world safer, more prosperous and better prepared to tackle twenty-first century challenges.

from –


8 Aug 2020 – MY TAX’s were STOLEN and GIVEN to CHINA – and so were yours

China engaged in Bio Warfare against the USA.  The people who authorized PPP money to companies that dealt with China or really any other country were therefore engaging in seditious and may include TREASONOUS activity.  Providing material support to an enemy during a time of war is treason.  Providing material support with public money to other countries can be considered money laundering.  That may be considered sedition outside an authorized declaration of war.

So, the Department of the TREASURY is a seditious and is potentially engaging in TREASON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Millions Worth of PPP Loans Went to Chinese-Owned Companies, Report Finds

August 3, 2020 Updated: August 4, 2020

A man looks at a J-31 gyrfalcon stealth fighter plane model designed by Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) at the Beijing International Aviation Expo in Beijing on Sept. 17, 2015. (WANG ZHAO/AFP via Getty Images)

August 3, 2020 Updated: August 4, 2020

Hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars went to Chinese companies from the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which was designed to help small businesses survive during the pandemic, according to a new report.

review of public PPP loan data by consultancy firm Horizon Advisory found that $192 million to $419 million in loans were given to more than 125 Chinese-owned or -invested companies operating in the United States. Many of the loans were substantial, with at least 32 Chinese-owned firms receiving more than $1 million under the program, totaling between $85 million and $180 million, it found.


The recipients included Chinese state-owned enterprises, companies that supported Beijing’s military development program, firms identified by the United States as national security threats, and media outlets controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), the report said. Many were based in critical industries such as aerospace, pharmaceuticals, and semiconductor manufacturing. These are sectors that the CCP has slated for aggressive development to achieve global dominance, with the goal of supplanting competitors in the United States and other countries.


The report said that loans went to affiliates of three Chinese companies that featured on a Pentagon list of 20 firms that are owned or controlled by the Chinese military. It found that six recipients were affiliated with state-owned companies that supply arms to China’s People’s Liberation Army, including Aviation Industry Corp. of China, China Aerospace Science and Industry, and China North Industries Group Corporation (Norinco Group).

Chinese-linked biotech companies were also identified, including California-based Dendreon Pharmaceuticals, which received between $5 million to $10 million in PPP loans. Dendreon is owned by Nanjing Xinbai, a Chinese state-invested company that is controlled by a tech conglomerate with close ties to the CCP.


cont’ – from –

BIOTECH ?  We have been attacked with a BIO weapon!!!!!!!

Which our DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY gave our TAX money to via PPP and in prior to that in 2008 they used Obama’s stock market crash to their advantage also.

PPP TAX Payer money’s go to who knows who?  I tried to research who got loans and it is NOT public information – why?

When I went to search who got loans, I drilled all the way down to the comma separated value file on the website for the US Treasury.

I chose Texas because it’s where I live.

Here’s an example of the file and the granularity to which it goes.  But it NEVER says the NAME of the business.  Why? Why are we not allowed to know?

PPP - recievers in TX example


Here’s a list of companies from the US Dept. of Commerce:

Commerce Department to Add Two Dozen Chinese Companies with Ties to WMD and Military Activities to the Entity List

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 482-4883

The Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) announced it will add 24 governmental and commercial organizations to the Entity List for engaging in activities contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. The entities, based in China, Hong Kong, and the Cayman Islands, represent a significant risk of supporting procurement of items for military end-use in China.

“The new additions to the Entity List demonstrate our commitment to preventing the use of U.S. commodities and technologies in activities that undermine our interests,” said Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross.

This action will prohibit the export, re-export, or in-country transfer of items subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to these entities without Department of Commerce authorization.

Pursuant to Section 744.11(b) of the EAR, the Entity List identifies persons or organizations reasonably believed to be involved, or to pose a significant risk of being or becoming involved, in activities contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. The EAR imposes additional license requirements on, and limits the availability of most license exceptions for, exports, re-exports, and transfers (in-country) to listed entities.

The 24 entities to be added to the Entity List are:

  • Beijing Cloudmind Technology Co., Ltd.
  • Beijing Computational Science Research Center
  • Beijing Jincheng Huanyu Electronics Co., Ltd.
  • Center for High Pressure Science and Technology Advanced Research
  • Chengdu Fine Optical Engineering Research Center
  • China Jiuyuan Trading Corporation
  • Cloudminds (Hong Kong) Limited
  • Cloudminds Inc.
  • Harbin Chuangyue Technology Co., Ltd.
  • Harbin Engineering University
  • Harbin Institute of Technology
  • Harbin Yun Li Da Technology and Development Co., Ltd.
  • JCN (HK) Technology Co. Ltd.
  • K Logistics (China) Limited
  • Kunhai (Yanjiao) Innovation Research Institute
  • Peac Institute of Multiscale Science
  • Qihoo 360 Technology Co. Ltd.
  • Qihoo 360 Technology Company
  • Shanghai Nova Instruments Co., Ltd.
  • Sichuan Dingcheng Material Trade Co., Ltd.
  • Sichuan Haitian New Technology Group Co. Ltd.
  • Sichuan Zhonghe Import and Export Trade Co., Ltd.
  • Skyeye Laser Technology Limited
  • Zhu Jiejin.

from –


From the Horizon researchers –from

they found out about some of the specific companies and they are very concerning:

American TAX's were STOLEN and GIVEN to CHINA


American TAX's were STOLEN and GIVEN to CHINA 2American TAX's were STOLEN and GIVEN to CHINA 3American TAX's were STOLEN and GIVEN to CHINA 4American TAX's were STOLEN and GIVEN to CHINA 5

If the US can lock me up for not paying my taxes or incorrectly reporting them, HOW can they be so accurate about ME, but NOT know that CHINA was getting MY money?







6 Aug 2020 – Project Veritas’- James O’Keefe – Gun Rights (2A) removed due to being a “Felon?” – His second amendment right have been removed in a gun grab and an abuse of POWER by the FBI

James O’Keefe was charged with a felony.  He was only convicted of a misdemeanor.  JameOKeefFelony


FBI Puts James O’Keefe On NICS Background Check List As A ‘Felon,’ Denies Him His Gun Rights

Chris Menahan
Aug. 06, 2020

James O’Keefe of Project Veritas revealed Thursday that he was erroneously placed on the National Instant Criminal Background Check System as a “felon” by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, effectively denying him his Second Amendment rights.
“I have just filed a lawsuit against the FBI for infringing upon my 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms,” O’Keefe tweeted. “They have erroneously put me on the Federal NICS Background Check System as a convicted felon.””The problem? I am NOT a convicted felon.”





FBI Director Chris Wray seems to have spent the majority of his tenure politically persecuting all of President Trump’s supporters.

Last year, a 32-year-old former Marine had his guns seized at the direction of the FBI after he allegedly said he would kill antifa members in self-defense if “they start killing us.”


The FBI also arrested members of the United Constitution Patriots after they caught hundreds of illegal aliens invading our southern border in New Mexico.

Meanwhile, the FBI has allowed antifa terrorists to riot all over the country and operate completely unimpeded (they *still* haven’t raided Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, by the way).


Is it just a coincidence James O’Keefe appears to have been put on this list around two months after infiltrating and exposing Rose City Antifa?

Perhaps, as with the “white supremacist” group “The Base” that was exposed earlier this year for allegedly being run by a federal agent, they don’t like their agents getting burned.

Follow InformationLiberation on TwitterFacebookGab and Minds.




Here’s the California Gun Laws



Here’s what the paper say



5 Aug 2020 – Artificial ORGANS – testing vaccines – 3D printed organs are a big business

3-D printed organs aid vaccine testing

While use of the technique in humans is years away, researchers are honing the methods to test drugs and more.

As shortages of personal protective equipment persist during the coronavirus pandemic, 3-D printing has helped to alleviate some of the gaps. But Anthony Atala, director of the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine, and his team are using the process in a more innovative way: creating tiny replicas of human organs — some as small as a pinhead — to test drugs to fight COVID-19.

The team is constructing miniature lungs and colons — two organs particularly affected by the coronavirus — then sending them overnight for testing at a biosafety lab at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. While they initially created some of the organoids by hand using a pipette, they are beginning to print these at scale for research.

In the past few years, Atala’s institute had printed these tiny clusters of cells to test drug efficacy against bacteria and infectious diseases like the Zika virus, “but we never thought we’d be considering this for a pandemic,” he said. His team has the ability to print “thousands an hour,” he said from his lab in Winston-Salem, N.C.

The process of constructing human tissue this way is a form of bioprinting. While its use in humans is years away, researchers are honing the methods to test drugs and, eventually, to create skin and full-size organs for transplanting. Researchers are making strides in printing skin, critical for burn victims; managing diseases like diabetes in which wound healing is difficult; and for the testing of cosmetics without harming animals.

“Even to us it sometimes seems like science fiction,” said Akhilesh Gaharwar, who directs a cross-disciplinary lab in the biomedical engineering department at Texas A&M University that focuses on bioprinting and other approaches to regenerative medicine.

Bioprinting’s importance for pharmaceutical analysis is paramount now, not only for COVID-19 treatments but also for testing treatments for cancer and other diseases.

He cited Rezulin, a diabetes drug recalled in 2000 after there was evidence of liver failure. His lab tested an archived version of the drug, and Atala said that within two weeks, the liver toxicity became apparent. What accounts for the difference? An organoid replicates an organ in its purest form and offers data points that might not occur in clinical trials, he said, adding that the testing is additive to, rather than in lieu of, clinical trials.

“The 3-D models can circumvent animal testing and make the pathway stronger from the lab to the clinic,” Gaharwar said.

The foundation for a printed organ is known as a scaffold, made of biodegradable materials. To provide nutrition for the organoid, microscopic channels only 50 microns in diameter — roughly half the size of a human hair — are included in the scaffold. Once completed, the “bioink,” a liquid combination of cells and hydrogel that turns into gelatin, is then printed onto the scaffold “like a layer cake,” Atala said.

Another important part of the process is constructing blood vessels as part of the printing. Using a cell known as a fibroblast, which helps with growth, along with collagen, as a scaffold, researchers printed the epidermis and dermis, the first two layers of skin. (The hypodermis is the third layer.) “It turns out the skin cells don’t mind being sheared” and they could survive, said Pankaj Karande, an assistant professor of chemical and biological engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

But without incorporating blood vessels, the skin eventually sloughs off. Collaborating with Jordan Pober and W. Mark Saltzman of Yale University, they eventually succeeded in constructing all three layers of human skin as well as vasculature, or blood vessels.

The three began experimenting with integrating human endothelial cells, which line blood vessels, and pericyte cells, which surround the endothelial cells, into the skin as it was printed. Eventually, they were able to integrate the blood vessels with the skin and found that connections were formed between new and existing blood vessels.

While the work is preliminary, Karande said he was hopeful that the success in printing integrated skin and vasculature would set the stage for successful grafting in humans. “We have Plan A, which we often know won’t work, and then we go down the list,” he said about their research. “We can often write about what works in five pages but have 5,000 pages of what didn’t work.”


From -


3D-Printed Organs Market is Ready to Set Outstanding Growth in 2020 || Leading Players – Medprin Regenerative Medical Technologies Co., Ltd, EnvisionTEC, nScrypt, Advanced Solutions, Inc., Digilab Inc

3D-Printed Organs Market

For in-depth understanding of market and competitive landscape, this 3D-Printed Organs Market research report provides a lot of parameters and detailed data about Healthcare industry. The report offers persistent knowledge and information of revolutionizing market landscape, what already exists in the market, future trends or what the market expects, the competitive environment, and strategies to plan to outshine the competitors. Various market related parameters considered in this 3D-Printed Organs Market research report helps businesses for better decision making.

Get Sample PDF (including COVID19 Impact Analysis) of Market Report @

Market Analysis: Global 3D-Printed Organs Market

Global 3D-printed organs market is set to witness a substantial CAGR in the forecast period of 2019- 2026. The report contains data of the base year 2018 and historic year 2017.The rise in the market can be attributed to the increasing demand of organs transplant.

Key Market Competitors:

Few of the major competitors currently working in global 3D-printed organs market are Organovo Holdings Inc., Modern Meadow, Poietis, REGEMAT 3D S.L., Cellbricks, Nano3D Biosciences, Inc., Medprin Regenerative Medical Technologies Co., Ltd, EnvisionTEC, nScrypt, Advanced Solutions, Inc., Digilab Inc., TeVido BioDevices, Aspect Biosystems Ltd., Cyfuse Biomedical K.K. and CELLINK GLOBAL among others.

Get Full TOC, Tables and Figures of Market Report @

Market Definition: Global 3D-Printed Organs Market

3D organs printer prints organs layer-by-layer by using 3D printing method and regenerative medicine by placing biomaterials or bio-inks on structures tissues and organs. Although, these modified medical products can only imitate the natural tissues/organs, they cannot be utilized as replacement for the original organs. The market is expected to rise rapidly in the future due to increasing usage of 3D-printed organs.

3D-Printed Organs Market Drivers

  • Growing Research & Development on 3D printing technology is expected to drive the growth of the market in the forecasted period
  • Rise in usage and application of 3D organs and increasing population suffering from chronic diseases will propel the market growth
  • Increasing geriatric population as this population is more prone towards surgical treatments and procedures which may boost the market in the forecast period
  • Government investments in 3D printing projects is also contributing to the growth of this market

3D-Printed Organs Market Restraints

  • High risk associated with 3D-printed organs is expected to hinder the market in the forecast period
  • The 3D organs printer emits unhealthy particles into the air which is the major environmental issue, resulting in restraining the market growth
  • High cost of 3D organs can decrease the usage may hamper the growth of the market

Segmentation: Global 3D-Printed Organs Market

3D-Printed Organs Market : By Organ Type

  • Kidney
  • Liver
  • Heart
  • Cornea
  • Bones

3D-Printed Organs Market : By Technology

  • Magnetic Levitation
  • Inkjet Based
  • Syringe Based
  • Laser Based
  • Others

3D-Printed Organs Market : By End User

  • Hospitals
  • Research Centers/Laboratory
  • Medical Collages
  • Others

3D-Printed Organs Market : By Geography

  • North America
  • South America
  • Europe
  • Asia-Pacific
  • Middle East & Africa

Key Developments in the Market:

  • In April, 2019 Tel Aviv University Israel has developed 3D printed heart with blood vessels for the creation of heart complete with blood vessels and human tissue. The development will help market to grow in the future as the development will increase possibilities for 3D printed heart transplants
  • In November 2018, CELLINK AB acquired Dispendix GmbH. This acquisition helped the company by enabling Dispendix’s technology implementation in CELLINK’s bio printing applications and it will also help to increase the dispensing rate of bioink in 3D printers and provide efficient printing capabilities

Competitive Analysis:

Global 3D-printed organs market is highly fragmented and the major players have used various strategies such as new product launches, expansions, agreements, joint ventures, partnerships, acquisitions, and others to increase their footprints in this market. The report includes market shares of 3D-printed organs market for Global, Europe, North America, Asia-Pacific, South America and Middle East & Africa.

Research Methodology: Global 3D-Printed Organs Market

Data collection and base year analysis is done using data collection modules with large sample sizes. The market data is analysed and forecasted using market statistical and coherent models. Also market share analysis and key trend analysis are the major success factors in the market report. To know more please request an analyst call or can drop down your enquiry.

The key research methodology used by DBMR research team is data triangulation which involves data mining, analysis of the impact of data variables on the market, and primary (industry expert) validation. Apart from this, other data models include Vendor Positioning Grid, Market Time Line Analysis, Market Overview and Guide, Company Positioning Grid, Company Market Share Analysis, Standards of Measurement, Top to Bottom Analysis and Vendor Share Analysis. To know more about the research methodology, drop in an inquiry to speak to our industry experts.

Primary Respondents

Demand Side: Doctors, Surgeons, Medical Consultants, Nurses, Hospital Buyers, Group Purchasing Organizations, Associations, Insurers, Medical Payers, Healthcare Authorities, Universities, Technological Writers, Scientists, Promoters, and Investors among others.

Supply Side: Product Managers, Marketing Managers, C-Level Executives, Distributors, Market Intelligence, and Regulatory Affairs Managers among others.

Reasons to Purchase this Report

  • Current and future of global 3D-printed organs market outlook in the developed and emerging markets.
  • The segment that is expected to dominate the market as well as the segment which holds highest CAGR in the forecast period
  • Regions/Countries that are expected to witness the fastest growth rates during the forecast period
  • The latest developments, market shares, and strategies that are employed by the major market players

Customization of the Report:

  • All segmentation provided above in this report is represented at country level
  • All products covered in the market, product volume and average selling prices will be included as customizable options which may incur no or minimal additional cost (depends on customization)

Do You Have Any Query Or Specific Requirement? Ask to Our Industry Expert @

About Data Bridge Market Research :

Data Bridge Market Research is a versatile market research and consulting firm with over 500 analysts working in different industries. We have catered more than 40% of the fortune 500 companies globally and have a network of more than 5000+ clientele around the globe. Our coverage of industries include Medical Devices, Pharmaceuticals, Biotechnology, Semiconductors, Machinery, Information and Communication Technology, Automobiles and Automotive, Chemical and Material, Packaging, Food and Beverages, Cosmetics, Specialty Chemicals, Fast Moving Consumer Goods, Robotics, among many others.

Data Bridge adepts in creating satisfied clients who reckon upon our services and rely on our hard work with certitude.We are content with our glorious 99.9 % client satisfying rate.

Contact Us :

Data Bridge Market Research

US: +1 888 387 2818

UK: +44 208 089 1725

Hong Kong: +852 8192 7475


5 Aug 2020 – St. Louis Democrats vote to end Self Defense !!! Prosecutor who charged couple for brandishing weapons in defense of their lives WINS Democrat Primary

BLM is an internationally funded organization, as well as ANTIFA.  In fact they have the same benefactors.

Democrats in St. Louis are a dangerous lot.  I know that I won’t be visiting any time soon.

Is this voter fraud?  I can’t see why people would VOTE for this.  They don’t want you to have guns.  But they want to END POLICE?  Anarchy.  OR WAR?  Because this movement IS internationally funded.  So, these are not DOMESTIC terrorists.  They are just plain TERRORISTS!

St. Louis prosecutor who charged couple for displaying weapons wins Democratic primary

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner defeated Mary Pat Carl in the Democratic primary by a 61-39 margin

The polarizing St. Louis prosecutor who charged a couple for flashing guns at a crowd marching to the mayor’s home last month has been nearly assured another term after winning Tuesday’s primary election.


St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner defeated Mary Pat Carl in the Democratic primary by a 61-39 margin, according to Fox 2 Now. Due to St. Louis voters being mostly Democratic, she’s projected to be favorited come November against Republican Daniel Zdrodowski.

Gardner, 44, said her victory on Tuesday was “about people who sent a message that they want reform in the city of St. Louis.”


St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner speaks in St. Louis on Jan. 13, 2020. Gardner is being challenged in the Aug. 4, 2020, Democratic primary by Mary Pat Carl. (AP Photo/Jim Salter, File)

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner speaks in St. Louis on Jan. 13, 2020. Gardner is being challenged in the Aug. 4, 2020, Democratic primary by Mary Pat Carl. (AP Photo/Jim Salter, File)

Last month, she charged Mark and Patricia McCloskey — both personal injury attorneys in their 60s — with felony unlawful use of a weapon for displaying guns when protesters marched near their home.

“It is illegal to wave weapons in a threatening manner — that is unlawful in the city of St. Louis,” Gardner said in a statement.

Armed homeowners standing in front of their house along Portland Place confront protesters as they march to Mayor Lyda Krewson's house on Sunday, June 28, 2020, in the Central West End in St. Louis. (Laurie Skrivan/St. Louis Post-Dispatch/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)

Armed homeowners standing in front of their house along Portland Place confront protesters as they march to Mayor Lyda Krewson’s house on Sunday, June 28, 2020, in the Central West End in St. Louis. (Laurie Skrivan/St. Louis Post-Dispatch/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)

The McCloskeys have said they were defending themselves during the June 28 incident, with tensions high in St. Louis amid nationwide police protests sparked by the police-involved death of George Floyd. They said that the crowd of demonstrators broke an iron gate marked with “No Trespassing” and “Private Street” signs and that some violently threatened them.

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, a Republican, said on July 20 he would consider pardoning the couple should they be criminally charged.



“Kim Gardner’s action toward the McCloskeys is outrageous,” Parson wrote on Twitter. “Even worse, the Circuit Attorney’s office has admitted there is a backlog of cases and dozens of homicides that haven’t been prosecuted, yet she has accelerated this case forward.”

With St. Louis having one of the nation’s highest murder rates, Parson — among other critics — have accused Gardner of wasting effort on high-profile cases instead of doing more to put killers behind bars.

Republican Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt asked a judge to throw out the charges, calling it “a political prosecution.” President Donald Trump was also critical of Gardner on Twitter and in interviews.

“At a time when there’s calls to defund the police, at a time with skyrocketing violent crime rates – including here in Missouri and in St. Louis – we’ve got a prosecutor now targeting individuals for exercising their fundamental rights under the Second Amendment,” Schmitt said.

Joel Schwartz, the couple’s attorney filed a motion last Wednesday which argued Gardner used the McCloskey case in solicitations for campaign donations, according to St. Louis’s KSDK. He cited a July 17 campaign email allegedly sent three days before his clients were charged.



“The July 17th email drew a direct line from the incident, which had not yet resulted in criminal charges, to Ms. Gardner’s political antagonists and from there to a call for donations to further her re-election efforts,” Schwartz wrote. “It implied that the defendant was among those ‘perpetuating a system of systemic racism and police brutality.’”

In 2018, Gardner charged then-Gov. Eric Greitens, a Republican, with felony invasion of privacy. The charge accused Greitens of taking a compromising photo of a woman during an extramarital affair and threatening to post it if she spoke of their relationship. Greitens admitted to the affair but denied that he committed a crime. The charge was later dropped, but Greitens resigned that June.

Mary Pat Carl poses for a photo Tuesday, July 28, 2020, in St. Louis. Carl is challenging incumbent Kim Gardner in the Tuesday, Aug 4, 2020 Democratic primary for St. Louis circuit attorney. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson)

Mary Pat Carl poses for a photo Tuesday, July 28, 2020, in St. Louis. Carl is challenging incumbent Kim Gardner in the Tuesday, Aug 4, 2020 Democratic primary for St. Louis circuit attorney. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson)


Despite the criticism, Gardner has had plenty of support from the city’s Black community which has praised her reforms and her willingness to take on police, who they believe have unfairly targeted Black residents for years.

The Associated Press contributed to this report

They THEMSELVES acknowledge and even BRAG that they are an international coordinated WAR on the west.  
This was PLANNED 


NWOAlinskyFundamentalTransformRadicalization - DHS - SAEDAPROPAGANDAOFPEACE

Chinese Spy - TangJuanActorAgentAOCthreatObamaArtistthisISaSETUPEllisonAntifa





4 Aug 2020 – The China virus (covid_19, covid-19, coronavirus, sars-cov2,or just covid) was a dry run for universal basic income

Think about it.  They shut the entire economy down and sent checks for “basic income.”

The business’ that may remain are the big box and international chains

But the local?  The small shop? Who was able to maintain?  They want to USE this in the future for PROOF that we CAN provide the universal income.  They WANT to eliminate YOU.  They want to prove that YOU are non-essential.  They are wrong.  But they are too righteous to see that.  The business is under attack, but what of the law enforcement?  They don’t want cops that are dutiful to the Constitution.  NO. They want to get rid of THAT law enforcement, but they will tell you that they got rid of the BAD “justice system” in favor of the EQUAL justice system.  The EQUAL justice system is a LIE.  Why should you be equal to someone who’s NOT pulling their weight? What is ones weight? Who decides?  Do you really want the government to decide?


4 Aug 2020 – Middle East – Lebanon – explosion -Hezbollah warehouse in Beirut for missiles from Iran


I’m sorry for the people that were affected.  Their government needs to do better for them.

So, why is Trump saying “The #UnitedStates stands ready to assist Lebanon,”

said at a White House briefing. “We will be there to help. It looks like a terrible attack.”

Per the JP Post?

UPDATE: Al-Arabiya Reports Massive Blast in Beirut Was at Ammunition Warehouse Belonging to Hezbollah Terrorists


A MASSIVE explosion rocked Beirut, Lebanon on Tuesday.

As reported earlier by Cristina Laila The National News Agency reported that the explosion was at a warehouse for firecrackers near the port.

TRENDING: Teen Activist Who Rallied to Defund Police and Remove Police from Schools Is Shot Dead in Chicago

But now there are conflicting reports including a report at Al-Hadeth that claims the massive explosion was a Hezbollah warehouse in Beirut for missiles from Iran.

Al-Hadeth from Jordan reported (translated):

Security sources said two explosions occurred in Beirut, leaving one wounded. The Lebanese Minister of Health also confirmed that a large number of people were injured.

The site of the accident was reportedly inside the Port of Beirut, specifically Ward 12, a warehouse for explosives.

The massive explosion damaged the glass of buildings in most parts of Beirut, and injured hundreds of people.

It looked like the mother of all bombs.

Al-Arabiya reported that the blast was an ammunition warehouse belonging to Hezbollah.

Submit a Correction





Why should America assist in a Hezbollah weapons factory?




Secrets of the Universe

University Of Harns

The Goomba Gazette

Commonsense - fairness - honesty - shooting straight from the hip

The Lone Cactus

Only The Truth Shall Survive!

The Mad Jewess

Born Again Sephardic W/ A Jewish Husband. We're All Mad At Evil, Burdened For God. With Commentary By David Ben Moshe, Rogue Christian & More

The Conservative-Patriot Christian Right

Conservative-Patriot Politics and Christian Right



cathy fox blog on child abuse

Child Sexual Abuse and Illuminati

Allah's Willing Executioners

Antisemitism, Antizionism, Jihadism and the Reunited Germany. News by Fred Alan Medforth

Coercion Code - "Dark Times are upon us"

"Brethren, do not be children in understanding; however, in malice be babes, but in understanding be men". - 1 Corinthians 14:20

Mark Arnold Blog

Online Marketing Strategies

Rain Coast Review

Thoughts on life... by Donald B. Wilson


Truth In Love: News, Sports, and Culture Analysis and Commentary


"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from his government." - Thomas Paine

Politics Religion and Family

if you like the content, then support it -

Discover WordPress

A daily selection of the best content published on WordPress, collected for you by humans who love to read.

The Atavist Magazine

if you like the content, then support it -


Longreads : The best longform stories on the web