Skip to content

Category: Elections

More News and Commentary

Charles Burris suggests to readers some books on the national security state.

Robert Wenzel interviewed Ross Ulbricht’s mother Lyn in this informative post, and Wenzel also gives some story behind the story on the government economics behind major fires, such as in Shovel Creek, Alaska.

Laurence Vance promotes libertarianism.

José Niño says that asset forfeiture will have to be abolished at the local level.

Robert Murphy on a new study that finds a modest carbon tax would hurt all humanity for two generations.

Thomas Knapp on the similarities between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

And Big League Politics on Kamala Harris’s Jussie and illegal wiretapping scandals not going away.

Police State, Lying U.S. Gov. Bureaucrats, And Dishonest Big Tech

Matt Agorist on Police State thugs: police detaining an entire bar, sealing off exits, forcing everyone to submit to records checks, with no reason to suspect anyone of anything or any suspicion that any crime has been committed. “Because we can.”

Mac Slavo on mass surveillance: the Pentacon can now ID you by your heartbeat with a laser.

Moon of Alabama on Western news agencies mistranslating Iranian president’s speech, not the first time such “error” happens.

Col. Ann Wright on scenario fulfillment: Why should we believe U.S. gov on location of drone shot down by Iran?

Sayer Ji on Google scrubbing natural health websites form search results.

James Bovard on Democrat debate #2.

Veronique de Rugy says that markets, not politicians, control the law of supply and demand.

And Courtland Culver says, heed James Madison, not Donald Trump and Candace Owens, on free speech. (Incidentally, why do people worship a flag? Just askin’.)

The Supreme Bureaucrats’ Term Is Finally Over (And Don’t Come Back!)

Five fascists on the U.S. Supreme Court, a.k.a. the Supreme Bureaucrats, have decided that the government police do not need a warrant to draw blood from an unconscious person suspected of drunk driving. The arguments against the policy are based on the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Drawing blood from someone without his consent violates one’s right to be secure in one’s person, houses, papers and effects.

The “High Court” cites the “Exigent Circumstances” doctrine. However, the Fourth Amendment does not refer to any “exigent circumstances.”

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I don’t see “exigent circumstances” written in there. In the case argued before the court, the flatfeet arrested a guy who wasn’t even driving but had already parked his van and was walking by a lake. So they were then taking him to a hospital to draw his blood there, apparently, but he passed out in the police car. They had already given him a breathalyzer, which is also unconstitutional because of its unreliability, but wasn’t that good enough for them?

Seizing someone’s blood is a much more invasive seizure. This case is just another “camel’s nose in the tent” thing. (There have been a lot of those in recent years.)

And according to James Bovard, the Supreme Bureaucrats also ruled in favor of government secrecy by allowing certain business records that pertain to government handouts to be kept secret.

In other news, the shrieking imbecilic parasites a.k.a. Democrats had their first debate last night, and their second debate is tonight. Were they asked about the Fourth Amendment? It is doubtful that these politicians know anything about or even care about the Fourth Amendment. We know they have contempt for the First Amendment, with all their fellow leftist comrades banning of speech and shouting down those with opposing points of view, their censorship and fake news. And their contempt for the Second Amendment, with their ignorant calls for even more gun control that we know merely disarms law-abiding citizens and doesn’t prevent criminals and psychopaths from getting their guns anyway, because criminals and psychopaths don’t obey the law, duh.

But this particular group is probably the worst group of very loud, screeching demagogues I’ve ever seen. Eventually, I really believe that people can be convinced to support the libertarian way of life that promotes non-aggression, voluntary contracts and decentralization. Especially with this crowd of communists and the moron Trump. People will REJECT government central planning as the way to have a society. Eventually.

David Bergland Has Died. Was Libertarian Party’s 1984 Presidential Candidate

David Bergland, the 1984 Libertarian Party nominee for U.S. President, has died, just a day before his 84th birthday. He was the author of Libertarianism in One Lesson: Why Libertarianism Is the Best Hope for America’s Future. He was also a business attorney and law professor, and a martial arts expert.

Sharon Harris at the Zero Aggression Project has this obit. And Brian Doherty at Reason.

More Articles

Carey Wedler says that the best way to honor fallen soldiers is to stop sending troops to war.

Whitney Webb on Micro$oft’s “ElectionGuard” being a trojan horse for a military-industrial takeover of U.S. elections.

Joe Lauria says that the tide of public opinion is turning in Julian Assange’s favor.

Matt Agorist with an article on police conspiracy to cover up Catholic church child sex ring.

Jacob Hornberger says that Iraq War veterans waged an illegal war.

An Initial Look at Some of the 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidates

In May of 2016 I wrote my article on some of the then Libertarian Party candidates of President, with some references to some past candidates and how the LP has changed (for the worse) over the years. That article was at the time of the LP convention for the 2016 election. But now I want to write about some of the official candidates and some unofficial candidates for 2020.

In 2012 and 2016 the LP chose statist Gary Johnson the pothead to be the “Libertarian” Party Presidential nominee. Ugh. And in 2016 Bill Weld was the LP’s VP nominee. Among other naive or incoherent things, Johnson said that Barack Obama was a “good guy,” and that Hillary Clinton is a “a wonderful public servant.”

And I responded to that by writing, “Obama’s war on journalists and government whistleblowers, his war on medical marijuana, his assassinations of non-convicted suspects without charges, his drone murders and other warmongering, his medical care intrusions and other acts of criminality, show that no, Barack Obama is not a ‘good guy.’ He is a ‘bad guy.'”

And I also wrote, “Besides being a corrupt sleazebag and a degenerate, Hillary is a real criminal. And not just from the Clinton Foundation racket and the email server criminality but a real war criminal as well, even going back to her days as first lady, aiding and abetting her criminal husband in his ethnic cleansing of Kosovo and his continuing bombing and sanctions against Iraq throughout the 1990s, as she urged and supported Bill Clinton to continue doing those horrible things.”

And on Weld, “And Bill Weld wants a ‘thousand-person FBI task force treating ISIS as a gigantic organized crime family’? No, the real libertarian answer to that is to abolish the FBI, because it is the government that should be treated as a ‘gigantic organized crime family’!”

So I wanted to see just who is now running to be the LP’s nominee for President this time, in 2020. As I wrote in my article in 2016 Darryl Perry was the only candidate at that time who had the right, actual libertarian views on the issues. Certainly not Johnson, John McAfee, or Austin Peterson.

For the 2020 declared and potential LP candidates there are so many names now on Politics1.com’s list, it’s really too much for me now. But this is only May of 2019 and it’s a whole year to go until the LP’s national Presidential convention.

Anyway, to begin, there’s Adam Kokesh, who has been in the military in Iraq and has a history of confrontations with police at protests or demonstrations. I wrote a little about his debate with Larken Rose, who said that an anarchist such as Kokesh running for President is legitimizing an illegitimate system of coercion and force.

There is one thing that bothers me. On Kokesh’s campaign website, in the photo of him he is giving a military salute. Are you kidding me? I know, there are a lot of military worshipers out there, who praise the military for their invading and bombing other countries and murdering millions of innocents. I’m not saying that Kokesh is endorsing that, but WHY is he giving a military salute?!!

On the home page, he writes, “My name is Adam Kokesh and I’m running for Not-President of the United States with the Libertarian Party on the platform of the peaceful, responsible dissolution of the entire federal government.” Okay, that’s good. (That’s similar to what Darryl Perry wrote in 2016, “that the United States government, as it exists today, should be abolished!”) Kokesh writes on the Platform page on how he would dismantle the U.S. government.

Now, I agree with that, because centralization of government is what takes the society to ruin. The more decentralized the society, the more freedom there will be, and the better able people are to vote with their feet.

Another candidate is Dan “Taxation Is Theft” Behrman, who writes on his campaign website, “Taxation Is Theft,” “Fire the IRS,” “End the Fed,” “Erase the Debt,” “It’s time to free healthcare…by simply giving back our freedom to choose” (Video with Dan “Taxation Is Theft” Behrman explaining that.)…”Pardon the Innocent,” and other libertarian statements. (And he wears a funny hat.)

On William Hurst‘s campaign website, his slogan is “E Pluribus Unum Possumus – Of Many We Can Be One!” Huh? What do you mean we can be one? But I don’t want to be a part of a whole collective of people I don’t know, and be “one.” I just want freedom.

Under “My Goals,” Hurst writes, “If our children are to have a future, we need to address climate change now.” Huh? How do we address climate change which has been a natural occurrence on Earth for hundreds of millions of years that human activity has had nothing to do with, despite what the junk science fraudsters have brainwashed millions of people to believe?

And, “All citizens should be afforded quality education and a basic degree.” Huh? So what are you saying, that the gubmint should be providing education? Who defines “quality education,” the NEA? Betsy DeVos? And what about those who don’t want a “basic degree”?

In this interview, Hurst was asked if he supports Medicare for All, and his response: “Yes, if it doesn’t lend a hand to furthered abuses of the current healthcare system, I am all for it. This is one of the generally non-libertarian stances that you referred to earlier. I argue that it should be. You can’t enjoy freedom of you’re dead and the for-profit style of medicine has become a means of oppression.” Apparently, Hurst hasn’t read these articles. The “for-profit style of medicine” was working in America, and it was providing the best quality health care for most people and it wasn’t too expensive. Until Medicare was shoved down our throats, and then the quality of medical care declined and the costs went up!

Back to Hurst’s website, he writes about immigration (with my comments in brackets): “If it remains necessary to halt the illegal traffic across our border, to aid the efforts of our border patrol [“Our border patrol”? You mean our government border patrol, the police state?], we have the technology available that will allow for a nearly invisible barrier. This barrier will allow our guards [What, government guards? the border gestapo, “Your papers, please?” No thanks!] to effectively see and handle any potential threat while maintaining the ability of wildlife to traverse our expansive borders.”

On Ben Leder‘s campaign website, he proposes a Civilian Defense Act: “The Civilian Defense Act shall Repeal and Replace all Federal Gun Control Laws to include but not limited to the National Firearms Act of 1934, the National Firearms Act of 1938, the Control Act of 1968, the Hughes Amendment of the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, and reaffirm the Second Amendment of the US Constitution by creating an Online Government Auction for US Military Surplus.  All US Military Surplus shall be sold at auction to the highest bidder amongst the United States Civilian Market.  The US Civilian Market shall have the first right of refusal on all US Military Surplus, and all US Military Surplus Exports shall be sold at action to the highest bidder only after failing to be liquidated to the Civilian Marketplace.    Financing Options shall be made available to the US Civilian Market on US Military Surplus Equipment to include but not limited to Aircraft, Ships, Boats, in addition to Amphibious, Armored,  Wheeled, and Tracked Vehicles.” Hmmm.

And a Felony Forgiveness Act. “The Felony Forgiveness Act shall retroactively expunge all convictions for offenses no longer deemed illegal, to include but not limited to Drug Offenses, Firearms Offenses, and Tax Offenses….” Good.

Kimberly Ruff has a campaign website with an already chosen running mate, John Phillips.

On immigration reform, Ruff concludes, “We therefore call for the abolition of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and would declare, when elected, a full pardon for all otherwise innocent people who are in the country without government permission. We oppose the false conflation of government welfare with ‘illegal’ immigration, as those claims are unsupported by empirical study, and irrelevant to matters of natural rights. We oppose border walls as antithetical to the principles of freedom and liberty.” Good.

However, on his Positions on National Issues page, Kimberly Ruff’s VP running mate John Phillips states: “Immigration reform.  I am not a fully open borders with no restrictions person, though close.  I am however for MUCH easier immigration, work permits, and border crossing.  Once we correct our current welfare system I would be willing to look at making it even easier than I think we should now.” Work permits? You mean that people need to get a gubmint bureaucrat’s permission to work? “Correct our current welfare system”? I hope you mean “abolish” our current welfare system!

Now, I see on the Wikipedia page for the LP 2020 Presidential primaries that the Kimberly Ruff/John Phillips ticket has been endorsed by Darryl Perry, with a footnote link to this tweet. To me, that sure has a lot of weight, given how consistently libertarian and voluntaryist Darryl Perry is in his views.

And finally, someone who has a campaign website but hasn’t formally declared a candidacy for President is Jacob Hornberger, the founder and president of the Future of Freedom Foundation. He has quite an impressive background and résumé, and has been involved for many years in advancing liberty.

On Taxation, Hornberger states: “Abolish the federal income tax and the IRS. People have the fundamental, God-given right to keep everything they earn and decide for themselves what to do with it — spend, save, donate, or invest. The right to keep and dispose of the fruits of one’s earnings is a necessary prerequisite to a free society.”

On Healthcare, Hornberger states: “There is but one solution to what Democrats and Republicans have done to destroy what was once the greatest health-care system in the world: a total separation of health care and the state, just as our ancestors separated church and state. That necessarily means the repeal, not the reform, of Medicare, Medicaid, occupational licensure, and healthcare and tax regulations, all of which are nothing more than a cancer on the body politic.”

In fact, just this week he has some proposals for Constitutional amendments on his regular blog at FFF, such as: “No law shall be enacted by either the federal or the state governments respecting the regulation of commerce or abridging the free exercise thereof.” And, “No law shall be enacted by either the federal or state governments regarding the establishment of education or abridging the free exercise thereof.” (Well, I am not sure whether the inclusion of “state governments” might violate the Tenth Amendment, but whatever.)

On his campaign website, Hornberger has this video, A Political Message to Americans:

And he has it in Spanish as well.

Hornberger doesn’t agree with Adam Kokesh and Darryl Perry (and me) that we need to abolish the federal government, at the very least. But Hornberger does believe that the U.S. government needs to have most of what it is today dismantled, its police state given a dishonorable discharge and so on. As Hornberger wrote n 2013, permanently lay off the parasitic sector. Yup.

But in my view, the U.S. needs to decentralize, just as the old Soviet Union did. This entire territory is just too damn big to be all one single country and a single “culture.” Murray Rothbard wrote about how best to decentralize, and Lew Rockwell also envisioned how he’d like to see that done.

But, as long as this is one single country and ruled over by a single regime in Washington, we should have someone there who will veto just about everything, pardon peaceful non-criminals who are being harassed by government tyrants, and make use of the power of the executive branch to dismantle as much as possible that criminal racket in Washington, and liberate the people!

While I’m not endorsing anyone here, if the LP were to have its nominating convention today, I would be shocked if they didn’t nominate Jacob Hornberger, given his years of experience in advancing the cause of liberty, and his qualifications.

News and Commentary

John Solomon of The Hill has this article about former Fusion GPS contractor Nellie Ohr’s emails to her DOJ flunky husband Bruce Ohr, emails just recently released due to a FOIA request, followed by members of Congress who have now filed a criminal referral with the DOJ. Nellie had tried to tie Donald Trump and Paul Manafort to Russian gangsters in 2016.

And Solomon also has this article on the Ukrainian embassy which confirmed that a DNC insider tried to solicit from the Ukrainian government any possible dirt on Trump and his campaign chairman in 2016.

Russia expert Prof. Stephen F. Cohen details some little-noted aspects of the first volume of the Mueller report.

Bradley Thomas on freedom or government control — there is no true “third way.”

Art Carden says that people are desperately fleeing socialism, if they are allowed.

Joe Lauria with an article on Assange to the extradition court: “I won’t surrender to the U.S. for doing journalism.

Jacob Hornberger discusses U.S. government hypocrisy on Venezuela.

Andrew Bacevich on when Nixon told us invading Cambodia would save civilization.

Laurence Vance discusses Cory Booker’s “tax cuts” proposal, i.e. expanded welfare.

And Danny Sjursen says the Left needs to stop crushing on the generals.

Beto O’Rourke: Just Another Perv Pol

Robert Francis O’Rourke, a.k.a. Beto O’Rourke, a Democrat running for President, has recently apologized for his “white privilege.” Well excuse me, Beto, but I’m white, and where’s my privilege? And what about all the black and Hispanic people who benefit from affirmative action at the expense of white people? Who’s privileged there?

There. Now that I’ve gotten all that out of the way, I can say that Beto O’Rourke does NOT have “white privilege.” He has wealth privilege. Net worth of $9 million as of 2015, and he married the daughter of a real estate tycoon who is estimated to be worth about $500 million. So he’s extremely rich as is his wife, so why such an insatiable desire to grab political power over the masses? If he really wants to help people, he can set up charities and other things. But no, I do not believe he’s any different from the average corrupt sleazebag misfit politician psychopath.

What else do we know about Beto O’Rourke? Well, supposedly he is an “impulsive prankster,” according to the Daily Caller. For instance, he pranked his wife by “putting baby poop in a bowl and telling her that it was avocado.” She may have actually eaten the baby poop. (Hope I haven’t ruined anyone’s lunch here.) He also supposedly pranks his wife with “‘Psycho’-style scares in the shower.” Hmm, we sure do want this guy as President, don’t we? What a guy.

Beto O’Rourke also belonged to a popular computer hacking group known as “Cult of the Dead Cow,” according to Reuters, whose reporter acknowledged sitting on the story until after O’Rourke’s failed challenge against Sen. Ted Scruz in 2018. (Hmm, since when do reporters ever sit on a story to protect a politician? That never happens!)

O’Rourke is truly one sick puppy who has also fantasized about murdering children, and he wrote a poem that included the words, “wax my ass, scrub my balls.” Maybe if he becomes President Beto can join the club of all the other sickos, perverts, sadists and terrorists we Amerikans have employed in the Oval Office.

He probably couldn’t be any worse than Kamala Harris who wants to jail the parents of kids who don’t go to government indoctrination prisons, or Elizabeth Warren in which Liawatha fraudulently claims to be a Native American as a means of career-climbing or her neurotic dictatorial lust to control every infinitesimal aspect of private companies’ boards of directors and hiring practices.

These people are really sick, evil degenerates. But, this is what we get when we have elections. Why do you still vote?

Should 16-Year-Olds Be Able to Vote?

It appears that Congresswoman Elvis Ayanna Pressley is proposing that we lower the voting age to 16. The measure has failed, of course.

Well, I don’t see why not. There are plenty of people above the age of 18 or 80 who have voted for kooks, gangsters and nincompoops like the Bushes, the Clintons, Bob Dole and Bernie Sanders. We might as well lower the voting age.

But I’m sure there are plenty of 16-year-olds who, if they were informed of the actual truth, would not vote for those aforementioned statists.

How about a choice on the ballot of “None of the Above,” Elvis?  (It would win in most elections!)

Actually, I think that no one should vote. Voting has given 51% of the people the power to use the armed apparatus of government to steal away the earnings of the other 49%, and violate their civil liberties, invade their homes, their businesses, their churches, and their freedom. The system of voting and elections enables the enslavement of some by others. It’s immoral.

So, however old a voter might be will make no difference. And it’s the same thing with a legal drinking age, cigarette smoking age, or whatever. For those other things, it’s the parents who should determine whether their kids may smoke, drink or take drugs, not the State.

Articles on voting and non-voting

Non-Voting, and Is Voting an Act of Violence? by Carl Watner

Non-Voting as an Act of Secession by Hans Sherrer

The Illegality, Immorality and Violence of All Political Action by Robert LeFevre

And The Non-Voter’s Right to Ignore the State by Herbert Spencer

A Snow Storm in the Northeast and Loony-Tunes in Washington

Very sorry for not writing as much in recent days or weeks here. I know there are readers out there. The past couple of weeks have been a bit much. I have been doing this writing for almost 10 years now, many, many blog posts and articles. Is it time for me to “retire” from this writing? I’d rather not, as long as we have con-men and phonies like The Donald and The Ocasio then I have to keep doing this.

And now there is this big snow storm. Nothing in December or January, not until the end of February and now March do we have snow storms. There’s at least 10 inches out there now, and continuing. The parking lot across the street has a “Bobcat” plow trying to keep up with the snowfall. But after he plows the main part of the lot the snow covers it all up again, and he has to start all over again. I assume the operator is a “he,” because rarely do we find women snow plow operators. Feminazis please spare me your complaints.

Speaking of feminazis, Hillary Clinton was given the “International Unity Award” at the Martin Luther King and Coretta Scott King Unity Breakfast in Selma, Alabama. I have to put that award in quotes, because I almost puked when I heard that. In the Fox News article, the caption below the still-picture of Hillary (prior to the video starting), read, “Hillary Clinton: 2020 women have to avoid looking angry,” and that still-picture is of Hillary Clinton … “looking angry“!! It cracked me up.

Hillary getting a “Unity Award” is like Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize, before he even became President, after which he bombed the crap out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and all the rest, as well as becoming the “Deporter-In-Chief.” And he still hasn’t given back the award he knows he does not deserve. Fraud. (Just like the Fake Indian fraud.)

The Rev. Jesse Jackson was at the “Unity Breakfast.” He was the eldest of the Jackson Five, in case you didn’t know. (I don’t think the Rev. Al Shrapnel was at the “Unity Breakfast” this time.)

Yesterday on Bloomberg Radio I heard a rebroadcast of Meet the Press with Chuck Toady. Yech. He was grilling Rep. Jim Jordan, who, unfortunately has to repeatedly get into the scripted talking points. Jordan should have spent more time talking about the criminality of the FBI and DOJ presenting judges with FISA spying applications with false information. Chuck Toady couldn’t shut up about Paul Manafort, whose convictions were irrelevant to “Trump-Russia collusions” allegations, and had to do with taxes from over 10 years ago! I just saw a brief excerpt video of their discussion online. What is that on Chuck Toady’s chin, I think that’s called a goatee, he looks like he just ate some spinach. And nice hair, Chuck. I know, we shouldn’t make fun of someone’s appearance. Best to stick with someone’s character. So I will.

So I would like to point out about Chuck Toady that he knew as early as March of 2017 that no evidence has existed of “Trump-Russia collusions,” yet he has continued in his discussions with the “Trump-Russia collusions” assumption anyway. Very dishonest Toady. He interviewed Director of National Intelligence (sic) James Clapper on March 5, 2017, who told Toady, “we had no evidence of such collusion.” Now, all the national security-related department heads report to the Director of National Intelligence, including the heads of FBI, NSA and CIA. Not one of them had reported to Clapper any evidence of said “collusion” (or conspiracy, coordination etc.) to change election results. What that means is that there really is no evidence.

But Rep. Jordan is just as bad, in my view. He says that while the intelligence community has had no evidence of “Trump-Russia collusions,” there nevertheless is legitimacy in the “collusion” assertion because Clapper et al. says that believe it anyway, without evidence. Even though I’m sure that Jordan and the rest of the House Conservative Carcass know that there was never any “collusion” and that the Russians didn’t “meddle” in the election, they still kowtow to the national security state despite its Soviet-like danger to civilization.

So not only has Chuck Toady been acting as a propagandist apparatchik on behalf of the corrupt national security state in Washington, D.C., in my view, but he has been helping to cover up the Comey-Strzok-FBI false exoneration of Hillary Clinton, by intentionally not reporting on it or discussing it. Please don’t tell me these news “journalists” don’t know about all that, as well as the illegal FISA applications and warrants to spy on Trump people. And if the Dear Reader doesn’t know about those things, I have covered that in my exhaustive article on the whole Orwellian Mueller fiasco. (I’m exhausted just thinking about it.)

And see my article on the government media, including Chuck Toady, they’re all the same, especially on those Sunday talk shows, George Snuffleupagus, and Margaret Brennan. Hey Margaret, look at all the conservatives you have on your discussion panel. Don’t overdo it, now.

Speaking of the conservatards, they had their annual pajama party at the “Conservative Political Action Conference,” a.k. CPAC. Notice how that’s conservative political action, not economic action or social, etc.

As noted by Franz Oppenheimer, the economic means is the means of peaceful productivity, and one gets what one wants through voluntary action and voluntary contract.

But the political means, which is the CPAC crowd’s way of life, is the means of predation, coercion and parasitism by way of aggression and theft through the State’s violence.

So these statists are not really that different from the authoritarian statists on the Left. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, they all love the State’s process of stealing from their neighbors and using the police state apparatus to order their victims around. The authoritarian conservatards are no different, with their trade and immigration restrictions, and their terrible warvangelical foreign policy. And I will stay on their case as long as I keep hearing these talk radio ditto-heads and their collectivist fanatical belief in some kind of imagined common ownership of the territory as a whole, ownership by the “citizens” (versus the “invasion” of non-citizens). These people are just as dumb, indoctrinated and communist as those on the Left, in my view.

The National Security State’s Useful Idiots in the Media

It really is sad to see professional journalists acting as government propagandists, i.e. de facto bureaucrats themselves, on behalf of an agenda at the expense of the truth. And we see that a lot now in Amerika especially to do with pathological Trump hatred. And I am not a Trump supporter, as many people here know.

Quite a few writers have now channeled Paul Craig Roberts with the moniker he has assigned to the mainstream Press as “presstitutes,” referring to mainstream news media chumps letting themselves be used by “anonymous intelligence sources” or “unnamed government officials” (or by people who are named) to advance an agenda at the expense of actual investigative reporting or being the “adversarial” Fourth Estate they are expected to be. That is, challenging assertions of bureaucrats and corporate flunkies, demanding answers, investigating the issues.

Instead, the news media have been plagued with activist do-gooders who have been brainwashed into believing that suppressing the truth about stories and merely repeating what bureaucrats tell them without question is “good journalism.”

But sadly, while some of the news media really are dishonest and intentionally promoting “fake news,” as I wrote about in my article on that a few months ago, I think that many of them are also just plain dumb, ignorant and/or gullible sheeple. It just never occurs to them to check what an “important source” in the bureaucracy tells them and that he might be lying to them. And as far as ignorance is concerned, like the population in general, many of them are just ignorant of history, science, economics, and did not have effective training in or encouragement of having critical thinking skills. And now with the “snowflake” generation, emotion is everything and thinking is suppressed.

Regarding the world-wide hatred for Donald Trump and the drooling drive to get rid of him, former CIA analyst and political activist Ray McGovern notes how investigative journalist Robert Parry may have had strokes and died because the “prostitution of the profession he loved so much” (journalism) may have been “too much; it’s just too much, too much.”

McGovern quotes Parry from a late article prior to Parry’s death:

More and more I would encounter policymakers, activists and, yes, journalists who cared less about a careful evaluation of the facts and logic and more about achieving a pre-ordained geopolitical result –and this loss of objective standards reached deeply into the most prestigious halls of American media. This perversion of principles –twisting information to fit a desired conclusion – became the modus vivendi of American politics and journalism. And those of us who insisted on defending the journalistic principles of skepticism and evenhandedness were increasingly shunned by our colleagues … Everything became ‘information warfare.’ …

Ironically, many ‘liberals’ who cut their teeth on skepticism about the Cold War and the bogus justifications for the Vietnam War now insist that we must all accept whatever the U.S. intelligence community feeds us, even if we’re told to accept the assertions on faith.

Sad. And Parry said that Trump hatred “had become like some invasion of the body snatchers,” a great analogy, in my view. However, in some cases there has been intentional dishonesty. But in other cases, there are members of the Press who are extremely infatuated with governmental powers, probably because they were raised to worship the government like a god, or like their mommy and daddy.

Besides my article in August on “fake news,” I also pointed out how what we have in the media is not the “liberal media” (although yes in the social agenda of many of them), but the government media. Not just journalism media but others in the academia and “intelligentsia” who promote and glorify the State and its god-like powers.

For example, Glenn Greenwald pointed to court historian Douglas Brinkley’s fawning interview of Barack Obama, and that “journalists joyously dance with top officials, swing on their tires, are creepily grateful when they’re sprayed in the face by their squirt guns, and play fun beach games with the very campaign officials they’re ostensibly covering.”

Yech. And as I further wrote in that earlier post, some examples provided by Greenwald have included Bob Schieffer kissing up to former NSA directer Michael Hayden, and Bob Shieffer hatchet-jobbing Ron Paul on foreign policy. And Scott Pelley’s “13 uninterrupted minutes of drooling propaganda” interview of Obama defense secretary Leon Panetta, how Wired manipulated chat logs to aid and abet the government’s persecution of Army whistleblower Bradley Manning, and Diane Sawyer and Brian Ross’s anti-Iran fear-mongering (things haven’t changed much).

Back to Trump. So besides Trump’s being rude and oftentimes insulting people like Rosie O’Donnell and Megyn Kelly, he has also criticized the national security state and elitists in Washington, especially during the 2016 campaign. And those apparatchiks there didn’t like that.

The real news has been that elements within the FBI and DOJ and their media sycophants including the Washington Post made up this “Trump-Russia collusions” and Trump-Russia “hacking and manipulating the 2016 election” in order to frame Donald Trump and to get rid of him. The same elements in the FBI and DOJ also falsely exonerated Hillary Clinton in her corruption with her email scandal and Clinton Foundation. And there is plenty of evidence to back that up, while there is no evidence to this day that proves “Trump-Russia collusions” in changing election results.

But the news media have been reporting otherwise, haven’t they? That is because they shill for the national security state, the same national security state that reads their emails, listens to their phone calls, S.W.A.T.-raids their homes or hacks their computers if their reporting goes against the grain of the apparatchiks of the national security state. Why do the media shill and propagandize? Because they are True Believers? Or because they are extremely gullible and naive and believe what FBI or CIA agents tell them?

But also because they are agenda driven. For example, the gun control agenda, in which they will only play sound bites of quotes by Elizabeth Warren or Nancy Pelosi (“How many more people have to die until we finally wake up?” “We need stricter gun legislation,” etc., etc.), but never or rarely quotes by people pointing out “Well, if someone there had been armed he or she could have taken out the shooter before those remaining 54 people could be killed,” “Gun-free zones attract the shooters because they know no one is armed who could shoot back,” “Criminals don’t obey laws against assault, murder or rape, why would they obey gun laws?” etc. You know, those rational points that the mainstream media don’t want people to hear because such points refute the irrationality of emotion-based anti-self-defense arguments.

And this anti-Trump obsession is not new. So far, the media in collusion with the national security state have still not taken down Donald Trump. There just is no evidence against Trump to prove what he has been accused of. And now people are pointing to Michael Cohen, a proven liar and sleazebag, as though his testimony is actually reliable or respectable.

But the national security state with the aid of news media colluders did take down a sitting President, and an awful statist at that, just as Trump is. It is very possible that what the mainstream media had been reporting on Watergate and the burglary is not the true story behind the story, and in fact it might very well be that Richard Nixon was set up by the national security state with that Watergate burglary and cover-up. CIA goons such as E. Howard Hunt participated in the burglary. Nixon had been trying to thaw relations with Russia and China, and the national security state didn’t like that one bit. And they had media helping to take down Nixon, including Bob Woodward.

And we see it now how Trump is trying to thaw relations with Russia, and the sycophants of the mainstream media huff and puff in their devotion to the national security state and its dependence on conflict, belligerence, and living high off the hog on taxpayer dollars.

Although, this mainstream media pathological hatred of Trump is like never before, apparently. It seems like mostly a personal thing. They just don’t like him. Well I don’t like him either, but I still think the truth is important.