Shock: EU commission president threatens Italy on eve of election, says Brussels has ‘tools’ if wrong parties win
Italian politicians are asking Ursula von der Leyen not to intervene in Italian elections after her stunning threat just days before citizens choose their new government
September 23, 2022
editor: REMIX NEWS
author: JOHN CODY
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is being accused of election interference after threatening to use “tools” if the wrong election result is achieved in Italy’s national elections, set to take place this Sunday, Sept. 25. She added that those same tools are already being used against Hungary and Poland.
“We will see the result of the vote in Italy,” said von der Leyen. “If things go in a difficult direction — and I’ve spoken about Hungary and Poland — we have the tools.” Von der Leyen made the comment while responding to a journalist after a talk she gave at Princeton University in the United States. The journalist remarked that there were candidates in the Italian elections “close to Putin” and then asked her how the EU would react if they were elected.
The comments from the EU commission president, arguably the most powerful figure from any EU institution, have been met with shock from the Italian political class.
Von Der Leyen was making a clear reference to the European Commission’s ability to cut funding to member states it views as violating “rule of law,” a powerful tool Brussels can use to punish any democratically-elected government in Europe. Just last week, the commission proposed cutting €7.5 billion in funding to Hungary, with the country’s conservative government having long been a thorn in the side of the EU over its opposition to mass migration and support for traditional values.
Meloni’s positions, in many ways, are no different than Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s.
“There is no possible mediation. Yes to the natural family. No to the LGBT lobbies. No to the violence of Islam, yes to safer borders, no to mass immigration, yes to work for our people, and no to major international finance,” said Meloni at a campaign event earlier this year.
Giorgia Meloni shares video of woman being raped by migrant, global left-wing press flies into rage
The left and global press are not particularly angry that a Ukrainian woman was raped by an African migrant in broad daylight, but they are furious that conservative leader Giorgia Meloni shared the video and raised awareness about the case
Meloni’s political beliefs mean the EU may respond with extreme sanctions against Italy if her party comes to power. However, unlike Hungary, where the population is overwhelmingly in favor of staying in the EU, Italy is already becoming increasingly skeptical of Brussels, according to polling data. If the EU were to cut funding to Italy, any such sanction measure could raise tensions in an already divided Europe and potentially spark a backlash among the Italian public.
Italian politicians are already responding to von der Leyen’s threat.
“What is this, a threat? This is shameful arrogance,” tweeted Matteo Salvini, the leader of Italy’s right-wing League party. He asked von der Leyen to “respect the free, democratic and sovereign vote of the Italian people.”
He also said on Italian TV that “if anyone in Brussels thinks of cutting the funds that belong to Italy, because the League wins the elections, then we have to rethink this Europe,” adding that “this is institutional bullying.”
With the EU’s left-liberal establishment going into panic mode at the prospect, von der Leyen’s remarks are the most visible and threatening remarks from a major EU politician since the campaign season began in Italy. The fact that she issued her remarks just days before the “quiet” period of Italian elections may also potentially affect the outcome.
IN MARCH, two veteran Facebook engineers found themselves grilled about the company’s sprawling data collection operations in a hearing for the ongoing lawsuit over the mishandling of private user information stemming from the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
The hearing, a transcript of which was recently unsealed, was aimed at resolving one crucial issue: What information, precisely, does Facebook store about us, and where is it? The engineers’ response will come as little relief to those concerned with the company’s stewardship of billions of digitized lives: They don’t know.
The admissions occurred during a hearing with special master Daniel Garrie, a court-appointed subject-matter expert tasked with resolving a disclosure impasse. Garrie was attempting to get the company to provide an exhaustive, definitive accounting of where personal data might be stored in some 55 Facebook subsystems. Both veteran Facebook engineers, with according to LinkedIn two decades of experience between them, struggled to even venture what may be stored in Facebook’s subsystems. “I’m just trying to understand at the most basic level from this list what we’re looking at,” Garrie asked.
“I don’t believe there’s a single person that exists who could answer that question,” replied Eugene Zarashaw, a Facebook engineering director. “It would take a significant team effort to even be able to answer that question.”
When asked about how Facebook might track down every bit of data associated with a given user account, Zarashaw was stumped again: “It would take multiple teams on the ad side to track down exactly the — where the data flows. I would be surprised if there’s even a single person that can answer that narrow question conclusively.”
In an emailed statement that did not directly address the remarks from the hearing, Meta spokesperson Dina El-Kassaby told The Intercept that a single engineer’s inability to know where all user data was stored came as no surprise. She said Meta worked to guard users’ data, adding, “We have made — and continue making — significant investments to meet our privacy commitments and obligations, including extensive data controls.”
THE DISPUTE OVER where Facebook stores data arose when, as part of the litigation, now in its fourth year, the court ordered Facebook to turn over information it had collected about the suit’s plaintiffs. The company complied but provided data consisting mostly of material that any user could obtain through the company’s publicly accessible “Download Your Information” tool.
Facebook contended that any data not included in this set was outside the scope of the lawsuit, ignoring the vast quantities of information the company generates through inferences, outside partnerships, and other nonpublic analysis of our habits — parts of the social media site’s inner workings that are obscure to consumers. Briefly, what we think of as “Facebook” is in fact a composite of specialized programs that work together when we upload videos, share photos, or get targeted with advertising. The social network wanted to keep data storage in those nonconsumer parts of Facebook out of court.
In 2020, the judge disagreed with the company’s contention, ruling that Facebook’s initial disclosure had indeed been too sparse and that the company must reveal data obtained through its oceanic ability to surveil people across the internet and make monetizable predictions about their next moves.
Facebook’s stonewalling has been revealing on its own, providing variations on the same theme: It has amassed so much data on so many billions of people and organized it so confusingly that full transparency is impossible on a technical level. In the March 2022 hearing, Zarashaw and Steven Elia, a software engineering manager, described Facebook as a data-processing apparatus so complex that it defies understanding from within. The hearing amounted to two high-ranking engineers at one of the most powerful and resource-flush engineering outfits in history describing their product as an unknowable machine.
The special master at times seemed in disbelief, as when he questioned the engineers over whether any documentation existed for a particular Facebook subsystem. “Someone must have a diagram that says this is where this data is stored,” he said, according to the transcript. Zarashaw responded: “We have a somewhat strange engineering culture compared to most where we don’t generate a lot of artifacts during the engineering process. Effectively the code is its own design document often.” He quickly added, “For what it’s worth, this is terrifying to me when I first joined as well.”
THE REMARKS IN the hearing echo those found in an internal document leaked to Motherboard earlier this year detailing how the internal engineering dysfunction at Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, makes compliance with data privacy laws an impossibility. “We do not have an adequate level of control and explainability over how our systems use data, and thus we can’t confidently make controlled policy changes or external commitments such as ‘we will not use X data for Y purpose,’” the 2021 document read.
The fundamental problem, according to the engineers in the hearing, is that Facebook’s sprawl has made it impossible to know what it consists of anymore; the company never bothered to cultivate institutional knowledge of how each of these component systems works, what they do, or who’s using them. There is no documentation of what happens to your data once it’s uploaded, because that’s just never been something the company does, the two explained. “It is rare for there to exist artifacts and diagrams on how those systems are then used and what data actually flows through them,” explained Zarashaw.
“It is rare for there to exist artifacts and diagrams on how those systems are then used and what data actually flows through them.”
Facebook’s inability to comprehend its own functioning took the hearing up to the edge of the metaphysical. At one point, the court-appointed special master noted that the “Download Your Information” file provided to the suit’s plaintiffs must not have included everything the company had stored on those individuals because it appears to have no idea what it truly stores on anyone. Can it be that Facebook’s designated tool for comprehensively downloading your information might not actually download all your information? This, again, is outside the boundaries of knowledge.
“The solution to this is unfortunately exactly the work that was done to create the DYI file itself,” noted Zarashaw. “And the thing I struggle with here is in order to find gaps in what may not be in DYI file, you would by definition need to do even more work than was done to generate the DYI files in the first place.”
The systemic fogginess of Facebook’s data storage made answering even the most basic question futile. At another point, the special master asked how one could find out which systems actually contain user data that was created through machine inference.
“I don’t know,” answered Zarashaw. “It’s a rather difficult conundrum.”
Update: September 7, 2022, 9:56 p.m. ET This story has been updated to include a statement from Meta sent after publication.
The “Scariest Paper Of 2022” Reveals The Terrifying Fate Of Biden’s Economy: Millions Are About To Lose Their Job
For much of the past year (and certainly at the time, more than a year ago, when the so-called experts, central bankers and macrotourists were still yapping about “transitory inflation” and other things they were wrong about and do not understand), we were warning that at some point the Fed will realize that it is simply impossible to contain supply-driven inflation through stubborn rate hikes which instead would lead to a dire alternative – millions in mass layoffs and newly unemployed workers …
… and will revise its 2% inflation target higher, a move which will send every risk asset – from high-beta trash and meme stonks, to blue-chip icons, to bitcoin and cryptos limit up.
To remind readers of this coming phase shift, we most recently warned in June that “at some point Fed will concede it has no control over supply. That’s when we will start getting leaks of raising the inflation target“…
Well, it turns out that we were right, and not just about the coming mass layoffs, but also about the inflation target leaks. But first, lets back up a bit.
A little over one year after nobody expected the Fed would be hiking rates like a drunken sailor until some time in late 2023 or 2024, it has now become fashionable to not only predict that the Fed will keep hiking rates at every FOMC meeting and at the fastest pace since the near-hyperinflation of the 1980s, but that the central bank will somehow manage to avoid a hard landing (i.e., the hiking cycle won’t end in a recession or depression), even though every single Fed tightening cycle since 1913 has ended in disaster.
An example of this was the statement by former Fed vice chair (and PIMCO’s “twice-revolving door”) Rich Clarida, who told CNBC that “failure is not an option for Jay Powell,” adding that “I think they’re going to 4% hell or high water. Until inflation comes down a lot, the Fed is really a single mandate central bank.”
Of course, if one could hike rates in a vacuum that could work – after all, Clarida himself, who admits he got this year’s soaring inflation dead wrong when he was still a daytrading god and part oft he Fed in 2021, said that the Fed may as well have just one mandate, namely to tame inflation. But what so few seem to recall is that the Fed is “hiking to spark a recession“, or as CNBC’s Steve Liesman put it, there is no such thing as “immaculate rate hikes” meaning that rate hikes have dire tradeoffs in other sectors of the economy. In other words, if the Fed’s intention is to spark a recession, it will spark a recession… leading to millions of Americans losing their jobs, something which even Elizabeth Warren appears to have grasped.
Yet due to the recency bias of Biden’s trillions in stimmies, and a world where workers – whether working form home or the office – have virtually all the leverage, few today can conceive of a world where inflation is zero or negative and is instead replaced with millions in unemployed workers, an outcome which one could (or rather should) say is even worse for the ruling democrats than roaring inflation. At least, with runaway prices, most people have a job and their wages are rising (at least nominally, if not in real terms).
However, the higher rates rise, the closer we get to that inevitable moment when the BLS – unable to kick the can any longer – admits what has been obvious to so many for months: the US is facing a labor crisis of epic proportions with millions and millions of mass layoffs. And for those to whom it is not yet obvious, we urge to read a WSJ op-ed published by none other than Jason Furman, who is not some crackpot republican but Obama’s own top Economic Adviser from 2013-2017 and currently economic policy professor at Harvard.
In “Inflation and the Scariest Economics Paper of 2022“, Furman summarizes a paper written by Johns Hopkins macroeconomist Larry Ball with co-authors Daniel Leigh and Prachi Mishra of the International Monetary Fund released by the Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, whose conclusion is as follows: “To bring price increases down to 2%, we may need to tolerate unemployment of 6.5% for two years.”
In other words, just as we said, inflation – much of which is supply-driven, which the Fed can do nothing about – will force the Fed to crush the economy by keeping rates for much longer, the result of which will be many millions in unemployed workers, or as Furman puts it, the paper “shows why the Federal Reserve will likely need to maintain its war on inflation, even if unemployment continues to rise.”
What is more remarkable about Furman’s read of the economist paper is that in addition to its primary theme (the lack of labor slack, or labor tightness, is responsible for some 3.4% of underlying inflation in July 2022), the paper admits precisely what we have been saying all along – that the Fed can’t control supply-side variables:
The paper also argues, convincingly in my view, for a different measure of underlying inflation. Fluctuations in energy and food prices are generally due to factors outside the control of macroeconomic policy makers. Geopolitics and weather have elevated the inflation rate in recent years. Plunging gasoline prices are temporarily lowering the inflation rate now. That’s why economists since the 1970s have focused on “core” inflation, which excludes food and energy.
But food and energy aren’t the only things people buy that are subject to supply-side volatility. Prices of new and used cars, for example, have gyrated over the past two years for reasons that are mostly unrelated to the strength of the overall economy. Both regular and core inflation are based on taking averages of price increases and can be distorted by large changes in outlier categories. The median inflation rate calculated by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland drops outliers to remove these distortions.
According to Furman, median inflation – which is a statistically better measure of the underlying inflation that policy makers can actually control – is well above the Fed’s preferred headline inflation print (which fell to zero in July on a sequential basis and has stabilize) and shows no sign of moderating and has run at a 6.6% annual rate in the last three months.
But the “scariest” part of the new paper, Furman reveals, is when the authors use their model to forecast the unemployment rate that would be needed to bring inflation down to the Fed’s 2% target. He explains why this is so scary:
The authors present a range of scenarios, so I ran their model using my own assumptions… Under these assumptions, which are more optimistic than the authors’ midpoint scenario, if the unemployment rate follows the Federal Open Market Committee’s median economic projection from June that the unemployment will rise to only 4.1%, then the inflation rate will still be about 4% at the end of 2025. To get the inflation rate to the Fed’s target of 2% by then would require an average unemployment rate of about 6.5% in 2023 and 2024.
Where is unemployment now: it’s 3.7% (6.014 million unemployed workers vs 164.746 million civilian labor force). This matters, because according to one of the most erudite economist Democrats, by the end of the Biden admin in 2024, the unemployment will have to soar to 6.5% for inflation to plunge to the Fed’s historical target of 2.0%
What does this mean in absolute numbers? Assuming a modest increase in the US labor force, a 6.5% unemployment rate in 2024 would translate into no less than 10.8 million unemployed workers, an 80% increase from the 6 million today!
Still think that politicians – and especially Democrats – will sit quietly and blindly ignore how high the Fed is hiking rates if it means that to normalize inflation back to 2% it means nearly doubling the number of unemployed Americans (and a crushing recession to boot). Spoiler alert: no, they won’t, and this may be one of the very rare occasions when Elizabeth Warren is actually right to worry about what the coming mass layoff wave means for Democrats… and the 2024 presidential election.
So what should the Fed do? Well, according to Furman, the Fed has four options:
First, place more emphasis on the ratio of job openings to unemployment and median inflation as it assesses the tightness of labor markets and the underlying rate of inflation.
Second, the new paper shows how much easier it will be to tackle inflation if expectations remain under control. The Fed should follow up on Chairman Jerome Powell’s tough talk at Jackson Hole with meaningful action such as a 75-basis-point increase at the next meeting.
Third, be prepared to accept the unemployment rate rising above 5% if inflation is still out of control.
While we doubt #3 is actionable, what is more remarkable is Furman’s final proposal: it’s the one that, like the Dude’s proverbial rug, ties the room together and sets the stage for what is coming:
Finally, stabilizing at a 3% inflation rate is probably healthier for the economy than stabilizing at 2%—so while fighting inflation should be the central bank’s only focus today, at some point the Fed should reassess the meaning of victory in that struggle.
And just in case his WSJ proves too complicated for some mainstream experts and economists, here it is in truncated, twitter format:
And there you have it: remember what we said on June 21: “At some point Fed will concede it has no control over supply. That’s when we will start getting leaks of raising the inflation target.” Well… there it is.
And while mainstream economists and the market may require quite a few months to grasp what is coming, it is the only way out of a crisis of commodities – as Zoltan has repeatedly and correctly put it – and which central banks have no control over, and thus will have to move not only the goalposts but the entire football field to avoid a social revolt or something even scarier.
While we wait, we can’t help but snicker at what the 79-year-old figurehead in the White House tweeted today…
… because what Biden calls “the strongest economic recovery in recent history” is – even according to Democrats – about to be the biggest economic disaster in modern history.
The hospital’s video series features doctors and other health care professionals promoting the butchering of children.
JORDAN BOYD
Boston Children’s Hospital is promoting the mutilation of healthy kids who claim to be “transgender” via “gender-affirming” hysterectomies, sterilization, and chemical castration despite the irreversible mental and physical damage those procedures cause.
For years now, BCH has mutilated children’s sexual organs under the guise of “inclusive reproductive health care for people of all gender identities and anatomies.” That includes prescribing hormones that suppress menstruation in underage girls and block the increase of testosterone in minor boys, phalloplasties and metoidioplasties for 18-year-old girls who want penises, vaginoplasties for 17-year-old boys who want vaginas, chest reconstruction and breast augmentation for children as young as 15, and even medically unnecessary hysterectomies for girls whom the hospital deems eligible for surgery.
Just this week, BCH scrubbed a video titled “What happens during a gender-affirming hysterectomy?” after facing backlash for promoting the surgery for minors who can’t consent and do not have the mental capacity to make such a life-altering decision.
An archived version of the footage shows Dr. Frances Grimstad, an obstetrician-gynecologist, describing the process of rendering teen women infertile by removing key female reproductive organs in the name of affirmation.
“A gender-affirming hysterectomy is very similar to most hysterectomies that occur,” Grimstad happily explains. “A hysterectomy itself is the removal of the uterus, the cervix, which is the opening of the uterus, and the fallopian tubes, which are attached to the sides of the uterus.”
Grimstad notes that ovaries, which produce eggs, may also be removed in an attempt to convince young girls that they are boys.
BCH also appears to have taken down Grimstad’s profile on its website, but a bio on the Harvard Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression Health Equity Research Collaborative page describes how the OB-GYN has participated in “clinical and research work surrounding transgender and intersex reproductive health” for years.
“She has been involved in trans health advocacy since her own adolescence, when she decided to pursue medicine to address disparities in care faced by these communities,” the page, which also states Grimstad’s pronouns, says. “Her interests center around optimizing reproductive health outcomes for both populations including hormonal and menstrual management, surgical care and family planning.”
The playlist, designed to help families “understand” gender and LGBT issues, includes 90 videos (some of which are currently hidden) of doctors and other health care professionals promoting the butchering of children. Some topics highlighted in the clips include: “Recovery after chest reconstruction,” “Let’s talk about sex (for trans folks),” “Why is hair removal necessary before phalloplasty?,” “What is tucking?,” and “Fertility preservation: What transgender patients should know.”
BCH not only brags about starting “the first pediatric and adolescent transgender health program in the United States,” but also claims that laws from Republican states that have legislated against the maiming of minors in the name of transgenderism “are in direct opposition to our commitment to equity, diversity and inclusivity, as well as the standard of care that we live by.”
A BCH blog post from April also condemns conservatives’ attempts to classify these procedures as “child abuse” and claims that “caring” for trans-identifying children means “supporting kids who are exploring their gender identity, transitioning socially (for example, changing their pronouns, using an affirmed name, or modifying their clothing), or pursuing medical care.” In the article, the author repeats lies, some of the same ones touted by the Biden administration, that declining to mutilate children will result in more suicides.
BCH’s webpage describing its genital mutilation operation and chemical castration regimens for minors even includes a section that details how doctors at the hospital should “ask you what language you use to describe your body and its functions,” even if those answers deny biological reality.
BCH did not immediately respond to The Federalist’s questions or request for comment
Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.
Amazon.com Inc.’s $1.7 billion acquisition of robot vacuum cleaner company iRobot Corp. is a move by the megacorporation to use Roombas to map the interior of homes. This data type is a digital gold mine for Amazon because if marketers know more about what’s inside, they can easily create tailormade ads.
From a market perspective, Amazon’s acquisition of iRobot is to gain deeper insight into customers’ homes via the autonomous robotic vacuum cleaner called “Roomba.”
The latest model of the Roomba, called J7, has a front-facing, AI-powered camera that maps out each room and will identify nearly everything in its path, such as floor plans, where the kitchen is, which space is the master bedroom, and where the kids sleep, as well as items on the floor.
“Slightly more terrifying, the maps also represent a wealth of data for marketers. The size of your house is a pretty good proxy for your wealth. A floor covered in toys means you likely have kids. A household without much furniture is a household to which you can try to sell more furniture. This is all useful intel for a company such as Amazon which, you may have noticed, is in the business of selling stuff,” Bloomberg said.
Roomba’s surveillance from within the home is pure digital gold, as Amazon’s ambition to learn more about the customer will allow marketers to sell more junk.
Vice News said, “leaked documents acquired by Motherboard revealed that one of the goals of Astro [Amazon’s robot] was to create a robot that intelligently plotted out the interior of a user’s homes, even creating heat maps of highly trafficked areas.”
Amazon customers haven’t received Astro well for privacy reasons, and the same could happen with robot vacuums following the acquisition. Some on Twitter are already calling the Amazon/iRobot deal “pure dystopia.”
People are starting to catch onto Amazon’s mass surveillance program of the household:
So, what iRobot brings to Amazon is the ability to embed its vast surveillance infrastructure into what appears to be a harmless vacuum, but just as Echo smart speakers are always ‘listening,’ perhaps the vacuum will always be watching.
As a reminder, Amazon has a frightening partnership with the Central Intelligence Agency — maybe it’s time to ditch the Roomba.
Out of 23 monkeys that had Elon Musk’s Neuralink microchips implanted in their brains at the University of California Davis between 2017 and 2020, 15 of them died, and all suffered debilitating health effects, according to the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Neuralink was founded in 2016 with a goal of helping people recover from traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries, curing depression, and connecting humans to the internet.
Out of a total of 23 monkeys implanted with Elon Musk’s Neuralink brain chips at the University of California Davis between 2017 and 2020, at least 15 reportedly died.
Via Business Insiderand the New York Post, the news comes from the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, an animal-rights group that viewed over 700 pages of documents, veterinary records, and necropsy reports through a public records request at the university.
Neuralink was founded in 2016 with a goal of helping people recover from traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries, curing depression and other mental health disorders, and connecting humans to the internet for everything from music streaming to near-telepathic communication. The company has often touted its successes, such as a demonstration on a pig in 2020, and a 2021 video of a macaque playing Pong with its mind.
The project has attracted a great deal of interest from celebrities like Grimes and Lil Uzi Vert, and people suffering from paralysis often petition Musk on social media to be a part of human trials. Musk previously said that he hoped to begin human trials in 2021, but that goal has been pushed back to 2022. Based on the PCRM’s findings, the brain chips may be nowhere near ready.
“Pretty much every single monkey that had had implants put in their head suffered from pretty debilitating health effects,” said the PCRM’s research advocacy director Jeremy Beckham. “They were, frankly, maiming and killing the animals.”
Neuralink chips were implanted by drilling holes into the monkeys’ skulls. One primate developed a bloody skin infection and had to be euthanized. Another was discovered missing fingers and toes, “possibly from self-mutilation or some other unspecified trauma,” and had to be put down. A third began uncontrollably vomiting shortly after surgery, and days later “appeared to collapse from exhaustion/fatigue.” An autopsy revealed the animal suffered from a brain hemorrhage.
The PCRM filed a complaint with the the US Department of Agriculture on Thursday, accusing UC Davis and Neuralink of nine violations of the Animal Welfare Act. “Many, if not all, of the monkeys experienced extreme suffering as a result of inadequate animal care and the highly invasive experimental head implants during the experiments, which were performed in pursuit of developing what Neuralink and Elon Musk have publicly described as a ‘brain-machine interface,’” the group wrote in the complaint.
While President Joe Biden has portrayed anyone supporting the filibuster as a virtual confederate sympathizer and Bull Conner wannabe, the attacks did not sway senators like Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz. who defiantly went to the floor to deliver a speech calling for the end of the politics of division. She, and her colleague Sen. Joe Machin, D-W.V., stood firm in support of the filibuster. The response from the commentators on the left was pure unadulterated rage. Many like MSNBC Lawrence O’Donnell cruelly mocked her from appearing emotional. However, one of most chilling attack came from a reported staff member at the ACLU, Sarah Michelsen, who encouraged people to keep up the pressure to “break” Sinema. The senator has been continually harassed by activists, who even followed her into a bathroom to berate her.
Michelsen, a former state director for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign, is a “senior strategist” at the ACLU. Like many, Michelsen seemed thrilled that Sinema seemed emotional in her speech and encouraged activists to “keep going” with the attacks because they are “breaking her.”
Michelsen seemed to be following the lead of President Biden, who was widely criticized for his Atlanta speech declaring that anyone supporting the filibuster was attacking democracy and supporting autocracy. He continued the attacks yesterday on the Hill despite the fact that he was clearly not intimidating either senator into changing their positions.
It did not matter that Biden showed equal passion as a senator to denounce those who would find excuses for abandoning the filibuster rule. He called such efforts “disastrous” and proclaimed: “God save us from that fate … [it] would change this fundamental understanding and unbroken practice of what the Senate is all about.”
Despite the support of the rule by figures from Barack Obama to Chuck Schumer, it is now officially a “relic of Jim Crow” and open season on anyone standing with the senate tradition.
It is not clear what Michelsen did or does at the ACLU. Her Twitter account was taken private after her attack on Sinema. The account calls for defunding police and chaos.
What is most notable about Michelsen’s attack (like the diatribes of President Biden) is that they are clearly not working to intimidate these senators. Yet, activists still want to continue them because they can. The age of rage gives them license to hate and harass. That is enough to “keep it up” in harassing those who hold opposing views.
Dr Vladimir Zelenko risks his life by saying this – [Must See!]
The world renowned Physician of Presidents, and nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. Vladimir Zelenko takes a BIG RISK by speaking out fearlessly about the devastating destruction the current vaccinations are causing worldwide. Before a Rabbinical court in Jerusalem he testifies how millions may have died and possibly billions may lose their lives in the coming years. Dr. Zelenko helped make the Vaccine Death Report that shows all the scientific evidence for the shocking claims he is making in this video. Make sure to download this revealing report, after watching this video.
Few medical experts have the courage to speak out as freely as this hero of humanity.
President Biden issued two executive orders requiring vaccination against COVID for federal workers and contractors who work for the federal government. He also asked the Department of Labor to issue an emergency order requiring businesses with more than 100 employees to ensure their workers are vaccinated or tested on a weekly basis. But the mandates for federal employees do not apply to members of Congress or those who work for Congress, also not for the executive branch or the federal court system. Illegal migrants rushing across the border are not included in the order mandating Covid vaccines so, indirectly, they are exempt also. [It is fascinating how no one in the press corps asked the obvious question: “If the vaccines are truly safe and effective, why is anyone exempt?” Think about this matter for a moment, and it will become clear that Covid vaccines have nothing to do with stopping pandemics or protecting lives. You also will know who is to be spared and who is to be sacrificed.] -GEG
President Joe Biden‘s new vaccine mandates for federal employees do not apply to members of Congress or those who work for Congress or the federal court system.
Biden issued two executive orders on Thursday requiring vaccination against COVID for federal workers and contractors who work for the federal government. He also asked the Department of Labor to issue an emergency order requiring businesses with more than 100 employees to ensure their workers are vaccinated or tested on a weekly basis.
However, Biden’s order on federal workers applies to employees of the executive branch. The House of Representatives and the Senate belong to the separate legislative branch, and the courts to the judicial branch of the federal government.
Gideon Rozner, the Director of Policy at the Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne, said that the police in his home state of Victoria asked the Federal Civil Aviation Authority to declare a no-fly zone over Melbourne so commercial media outlets couldn’t film the protests which would have allowed the public to know how large they were. He said it was extraordinary for the government to request the police to censor the broadcast media. -GEG
Gideon Rozner, the Director of Policy at the Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne, joined Tucker Carlson on Thursday night to discuss the
Rozner says the police urged the government of Victoria to issue a no-fly zone over Melbourne so people could not see how large the anti-government protests are.
Gideon Rozner: The fact is the coronavirus has completely changed the relationship between government and citizenship in this country. It has overwhelmed every check and balance in our system… This is a radically new era we’ve seen in Australia… The police in my home state of Victoria asked the Federal Civil Aviation Authority to declare a no-fly zone over Melbourne so commercial media outlets couldn’t film the protests in case people saw how big they were and went down and joined in. That is an extraordinary step for the government to take. The police censoring the broadcast media? And it has been in the main accepted.
