US Democrats Latest Undemocratic Plot To Topple Trump: Politics According To (Groucho) Marx

Authored by Martin Sieff via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

The US political, intelligence and media establishments have made even greater asses of themselves before the entire world by cooking up their latest wild concoction of a plot to topple President Donald Trump and – while they’re at it – knock his most plausible challenger former Vice President Joe Biden out of the race as well.

Washington has become a buffoonish theater of the absurd. It is politics according to Marx: But not Karl Marx. The latest scandal is pure Groucho Marx.

It is straight out of the Marx Brothers 1933 comic movie masterpiece “Duck Soup.”

Freedonia is a chaotic joke of a nation that has just gone bankrupt. This of course fits modern America perfectly. The country’s financial benefactor Mrs. Teasdale (obviously a stand in for the International Monetary Fund which had not been created yet) then insists that her favorite, the wild and ludicrous Rufus T. Firefly, a con man with no dignity whatsoever but a surprising amount of wit and street smarts becomes its president.

However, Firefly – a natural stand in for President Donald Trump – must then survive one sinister scheme to topple him from power after another. All of them ineptly executed.

Russiagate was such a scheme. A big lie of such staggering inherit absurdity lacking any hard evidence whatsoever that a six year old child with Downs’ Syndrome would not have been believed it. But around half the adult population of the United States apparently did.

Now, within weeks, hardly even days after absurd and now half-senile Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller (a perfect foil for the Marx Brothers to be played by any comic actor specializing in befuddlement) bit the dust in his own ludicrous congressional testimony, a new Outrageous Accusation has been thrown at Trump, even more non-existent than the previous one.

Right after being falsely accused of conspiring with Russia for the past two and a half years, Trump is suddenly accused of the opposite – of conspiring with Ukraine instead …

READ FULL ARTICLE:

The Daily Stirrer

There is No Climate Emergency Say 500 Climate Scientists

We’ve been saying it since this blog began in 2005 and before, the Climate Change scare is part of a power grab by the global elites who, unterstanding that Marxism is the most elitist political philosophy since the Patricians ruled The Roman Empire, have embraced Cultural Marxism and want to enslave us all in a global, bureaucratic dictatorship.

Well OK, that’s maybe a bit extreme, but we all like to attract traffic to our blogs and sensationalism is as god a way as any. The basic premise holds true though: the unanimity of opinion on climate change, its effects and causes is not just exaggerated, not even a myth, it’s a fairy story as this report demonstrates …

500 Scientists Write U.N.: ‘There Is No Climate Emergency’


Picture: Getty images via Breitbart.com

authored by Thomas D Williams PhD for Breitbart.com

More than 500 scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have sent a “European Climate Declaration” to the Secretary-General of the United Nations asking for a long-overdue, high-level, open debate on climate change.

Just as 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg addressed the U.N. Climate Action Summit in New York accusing world leaders of robbing her of her future, scientists were begging the United Nations to keep hysteria from obscuring facts.

“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,” the declaration states. “Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.”

The scientists underscored the importance of not rushing into enormously expensive climate action before fully ascertaining the facts.

“There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent,” they declared. “However, CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and bats, and palm-oil plantations destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.”

The signatories of the declaration also insist that public policy must respect scientific and economic realities and not just reflect the most fashionable frenzy of the day.

READ FULL ARTICLE

RELATED POSTS:

Zuckerberg Admits Facebook Interfered In Irish Abortion Vote
After three years of Facebook campaigning for the impeachment and firing of Trump because of alleged cooperation with the government of Russia in the 2016 US election, the Social Media giant’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg has at last admitted what many of us suspected all along, that it is Facebook, rather that hostile governments which interferes in the political processes of democratic nations.

Macron Threatens G20 On Climate Then Backs Off
France’s boy president and current climate scaremonger in chief and leading European federalist Emmanuel Macron arrived in Japan for the G-20 summit full of sound and fury, which like the stuff of Macbeth’s soliloquy in Shakespeare’s play turned out to signify nothing.France’s boy president and current climate scaremonger in chief and leading European federalist Emmanuel Macron arrived in Japan for the G-20 summit full of sound and fury, which like the stuff of Macbeth’s soliloquy in Shakespeare’s play turned out to signify nothing.

War and Politics Behind Mass Displacement in Africa, Not Climate Change – UCL
A report from a new study conducted by University College London’s may cause a stir in the climate scaremongering industry. The report challenges the academic establishment’s standard narrative of mass displacement in Africa being principally responsible for the creation of refugees in Africa and casts doubt on a number of other assumptions about global problems.

Hurricane Harvey Climate Catastrophe Man Made?As we reported last week the Hurricane Harvey disaster which has hit the U.S. states of Texas and Louisiana has shown characteristics never before observed in any hurricane or tropical storm since records began. Meteorological depressions (because that is what hurricanes, typhoons and other intense storms are,) move and once over land quickly weaken as air pressures become normalised. Harvey has stayed in the same area, dumping massive amounts of rain on the heavily populated coastal strip and causing $$$billionsworth of damage through flooding and high winds.

Trump Announces US To Quit The Paris Climate Accord
Fulfilling another campaign pledge, US President Donald Trump yesterday announced the U.S. would withdraw from the Paris climate pact and that he will work to renegotiate the international agreement in a way that treats American workers better. “So we are getting out, but we will start to negotiate and we will see if we can …

German Scientist Confims Climate Change Ia A Politically Motivated Scam
Even as the inbred idiot Prince Charles was babbling to a hand picked audience about the skid marks in his underpants being caused by Climate Change, a somewhat more scientifically literate person, Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert, a retired geologist and data computation expert, has confirmed what those of us dubbed ‘climate deniers’ have been telling you for years …

German Scientist Confims Climate Change Ia A Politically Motivated Scam
Even as the inbred idiot Prince Charles was babbling to a hand picked audience about the skid marks in his underpants being caused by Climate Change, a somewhat more scientifically literate person, Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert, a retired geologist and data computation expert, has confirmed what those of us dubbed ‘climate deniers’ have been telling …

Obama’s Climate Change Hypocrisy – The Arrogance Of The New Patricians
It is customary for US Presidents, when they leave office either having served two terms, been defeated in an election, or of their own volition, to fade quietly into the background. This is largely good manners, for an ex President to appear to be trying to intervene on political issues and influence events or public …

Big Business Joins Climate Change Scaremongers
The Paris summit on climate change approasches, which means the tree hugging fascist tendency are turning up the volume to eleven again. Trouble is they cannot produce a shed of evidence to back up their wild claims of imminent catastrophe because global warming only exists in their mathematical models, in the real world it is not happening/

Confusion Reigns As Paris Climate Conference Draws Near
The carbon dioxide driven climate change scam is back on the agenda as yet another monstrously expensive and fossil fuel gobbling jolly for politicians, scientists, freeloaders and general wankers gather to eat, drink, talk a lot and do nothing about a problem that exists in mathematical models but not in the real world.

Volkswagen Emissions Scandal – Is It The Tip Of The Iceberg?
The real problem here is that, driven by the hysterical warnings of self interested pseudo-scientists, politicians have set unachievable targets for reducing emissions while demanding that national economies keep growing.

Climate Denial Finally Pays Off
This blog has always been sceptical of the scientific case for climate change. And we admit that NO we are not climate scientists, NO we have not published research papers in ‘peer reviewed’ science journals. Of the three main contributors (all retired or semi retired) one is an engineer who still lectures in engineering and …

Nobel Laureate Smashes the Global Warming Hoax VIDEO
Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever’s speech at the Nobel Laureates meeting 1st July 2015. Ivar points out the mistakes which Obama makes in his speeches about global warming, and shares other not-well known facts about the state of the climate.

Charlotte Church blames Syria’s brutal civil war on CLIMATE CHANGE (not ISIS, Assad or Obama)
Last Nights QT: Stephen Kinnock, Leanne Woor (obscured) Charles Moore, David Dimbleby (host) Charlotte, Stephen Crabbe (Image source) Classical singer turned left wing fuckwit showed exactly what is wrong with the left on Question Time last night Climate change played a role in Syria’s conflict, according to Charlotte Church. Speaking as part of the panel …

The Scottish Silliness

Forget what three Buckfast swilling, deep fried Mars Bar scoffing judges in chilly Jockoland said earlier in the week and whatever you have heard about Boris Johnson lying to the Queen (The Queen’s conversations with her Prime Ministers are confidential so nobody knows if Boris lied to our Betty or not, but if he did and anything he advised was illegal her own advisers would have warned her to withhold assent to the prorogation of parliament.

The Scottish court judgement is nothing but a cheap political stunt by a bunch of biased, SNP supporting bent lawyers aimed at giving The Mad Wee Hag Sturgeon ammunition for her next bid to make Scotland independent from the UK and thus the biggest economic basket case in Europe (if Scotland was an independent nation now they would be further up shit creek and even more bereft of paddles than Greece. .

And Boggart Blog is not the only digital news sheet that thinks so. We may be a scurrilous little blog, but look at what the highly respected, subscrioption only web news site for financial professionals, Eurointelligence has to say:

We expect this to be of more significance to the debate over Scottish independence than to Brexit. Legal commentators, including the retired Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption, expect the UK Supreme Court to side with the English ruling rather than the Scottish one.

Advantage Boris who is already one set up because the High Court in England ruled in his favour, as it should, while constitutionally Scottish courts cannot possibly have jurisdiction over the whole of the UK.

Eurointelligence continued:

If the Supreme Court, as we expect, does not intervene on prorogation, that leaves Hilary Benn’s legislation – requiring Johnson to seek an extension to the Art. 50 withdrawal period – as the main tactical approach left for Remainers.

But Johnson has the possibility of launching a legal challenge to Benns law, if he wants to.

The No No Deal law does nothing if such a challenge is upheld (as it should be), but the government team may have better ideas than issuing a challenge as Eurointelligence reports:

The act has been repeatedly and mistakenly described in the British media as “taking no deal off the table”, which illustrates how few journalists have bothered to even read the plain words of its text. Johnson is required by the act to send a letter to the European Council requesting an extension until 31st January 2020. But the act only requires that he send this letter on October 19. Even then, he only has to send the letter if parliament hasn’t agreed to either a deal or a no-deal exit by that date. Both scenarios being explicitly allowed by the legislation. Moreover, it allows Johnson to withdraw the letter if the House of Commons votes in favour of either a withdrawal agreement or of no-deal exit between 19th October and 31st October.
We think the Remainers committed a strategic error. It was a mistake to leave the machinery of government in Johnson’s hands between now and October 31. He will be the only person in the room negotiating and speaking to other heads of government. It also leaves plenty of avenues at his disposal for frustrating an extension request. However watertight Hillary Benn’s legislation might seem, one thing it cannot do is muzzle the prime minister or limit his right to make political statements, both within the House of Commons and at the European Council in October. It also means Johnson now has five more weeks to dominate the UK media agenda, unimpeded by parliamentary questioning thanks to prorogation.

So in the end whatever Remainers do, short of calling a vote of no confidence and forcing an election, which after their idiotic performance over the past few week the opposition will surely lose, they cannot stop no deal. Quite simply, so long as Boris can string things out until 31 October, no deal is the default legal position. All the Remainers antics and the bigoted Jock judges have achieved is to make anything but no deal almost impossible.

Good work, Remainers.

MORE on Brexit

The Daily Stirrer

Brexit court case

Corbyn’s failure of leadership

 

Court case over suspension of Parliament a blatant attempt to block Brexit’

 


Pro Brexit protestors outside parliament accuse Remainer MPs of teason (picture RT)

In the wake of a bunch of offal scoffing, Buckie swilling, ginger whinger judges in Chilly Jocko Land declaring Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament illegal (like its anything to do with them,) we have more totally disgusting, anti – democratic shenanigans from rabid remainers in politics and the media today.

The Edinburgh establishment have always taken themselves too seriously of course, they were even delusional enough to believe their little country could be an independent nation. In fact Scotland is such an economic basket case, with only 1/12th of the total UK population it accounts for around half the deficit. And yet three old drunks in an Edinburgh court are upset at suggestions their decision to try and jerk their paymasters strings is politically motivated. Of course it was politically motivated, while most Scottish people are fine, the Edinburgh political set are obsessive haters of all things British, particularly our wealth on which their little country is dependent.

However the Buckie – soaked Jocks have managed to cause some trouble in London as their outlandish and totally unconstitutional ruling has given rabid Remainers in London an opportunity to try again to deny the democratically expressed will of the people.

The ruling has now been used to mount a challenge to the legality of PM Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament in the UK’s top courts. The case is not about the constitution or whether prorogation is legal, (it is, and is the only way to end a parliamentary session,) it is fundamentally about a group of British MPs who are hoping that when they are thrown outr of office by voters disgusted at their self interested behaviour, they can step up to lucrative EU jobs. And they believe that by reversing the result of the 2016 EU referendum they will curry favour with the EU bureaucracy, a Brexit analyst has said.

Alastair Donald, associate director of the Academy of Ideas, believes the court case against Johnson’s prorogation shows that pro-EU MPs who are upset at the prospect of the UK leaving the bloc are desperate to thwart the “democratic decision” of the British people.

Donald is also a contributor for BrexitCentral, an organization that is “unapologetically optimistic” about a post-Brexit Britain. He hit out at the decision made by the Scottish Court of Session on Wednesday that ruled Johnson’s prorogation of Parliament was “unlawful.”

The three judges at Scotland’s highest court in Edinburgh who ruled that the prorogation of parliament on Monday night by Johnson was unconstitutional denied their ruling was politically motivated and claimed that is is unacceptable to suggest judges may be biased. One of the judges, Lord Brodie, told the court that the “tactic to frustrate parliament, could legitimately be established as unlawful.”

All three are however known to be sympathetoc to the Srty’s obsessive pursuite of independence. And the pro – independence mob in Edinburgh are as blinkers as the far left loonies of Corbyn’s Labour Party. It is as unlikely that they are as incapable of being unbiased on matters pertaining to the English parliament as tortoise is of of playing a violin.

Johnson should be worried about the ruling although the High Court in England has already ruled the issue is not a matter for the courts but for parliament. This usurpation of parliamentary power should also concern British society at large, Donald insisted, because the “democratic process is being ripped up in front of our eyes.”

RELATED POSTS:
Brexit Europe
Europe Unglues
<a href="https://originalboggartblog.wordpress.com/2019/08/16/the-tory-collaborators-working-with-eu-to-stop-brexit-exposed/"The Tory Collaborators Working With EU To Stop Brexit Exposed
Anarchy In The UK — and elsewhere. (An analysis of ANARCHISM: a much misunderstood political philosophy)

Is Corbyn’s No Deal Strategy Playing Into Boris Johnson’s Hands

Jeremy Corbyn said “When no deal is off the table, once and for all, we should go back to the people in a public vote or a General Election to decide our country’s future.”


Picture: http://www.etsy.com

 

Forunately (if you are a Leave supporter,) Corbyn has been seduced by the elite faction of his party led by Sir Kier SStormer, and is following a path that is electoral suicide. Many of the constituencies that voted Leave by the biggest margins in the 2016 referendum were the solid Labour parliamentary seats of the industrial north, midlands and South Wales. These voters feel betrayed by posh boy Corbyn, elitists like SStormer and millionaire lawyers like Emily Thornberry, and rightly so. Labour is no longer “the people’s party,” it is now “the rich people’s party.”

Oh yes, politically correct virtue signalling andglobalists “one world nation” thinking are luxuries the lower paid can ill afford.

Boris Johnson’s only hope of securing a substantial conservtive mjority at the next election, barring an electoral pact with Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party,  is to purge the democracy hating rebels who were prepared to betray party and country in exchange for a seat on the EU gravy train, starting with that creepy looking little shit Hammond,  and get parliament to stop no deal. Labour’s stupidity and obsession with the idea of humiliating Boris have given him what he wants. The Conservatives are now the Leave party, Labour are the party of The Fourth Reich and the Lib Dem’s are paskudniaks, (yay multiculturalism, Yiddish has a wonderful lexicon of profanity, especially if you know whast the words really mean,) and the SNP – well what do we expect from the Scottish National Socialist Party.

At this point Labour thinks that a couple of months of making the PM yield to everything they demand, whilst smearing and maligning him with as much historic dirt as they can find, is somehow going to tarnish Johnson enough for them to win an election. This is a severely deluded strategy. The more they attack Johnson and frustrate Brexit, the more their core voters in those old indistrial areas will support him.

Johnson is just going to keep pushing everyway he can for the no deal and calling Labour out on it. And, with a little help from Farage perhaps, he will win an election and Brexit will happen. In the process, Labour will once again have made themselves unelectable for a generation because they will have shown themselves to be the party of the Oxbridge educated intellectual elite, the party that does not give a flying fuck about the working class.

The reason why Johnson will win, is that from the moment the referendum resukt was announced, a large proportion of the people have been saying ‘they’ (the elite/Parliament/EU) would stop it.

Brexit just isn’t going to happen. Here’s why

What happens next if Britain votes to leave the EU?

I do not believe that Brexit will happen

Will Brexit Ever Actually Happen?

Parliament frustrating Brexit and betraying the democratically expressed will of the people is what people have been expecting will happen for the past three years. And for three years we have had to tolerate endless bullshit from showbiz luvvies, media talking heads, Guardianistas, “experts” and that prepubescent little faygele Owen Jones to get to this position.

And now the people who have stopped it are Labour, the self styled champions of the working class, the working class who voted by a big majority for LEAVE.

The voters are not going to look on them as heros the same way the Guardanistas do. This strategy of let’s call Johnson an idiot and use every constitutional dirty trick to stop him governing (and delivering what the voters want, isn’t ever going to reverse what people think about the betrayal of the Brexit vote. Corbyn and his Labour MPs and minor party allies are not the equivalent of 300 Spartans at Thermopylae, they are much more closely related to the “cheese eating surrender monkeys” of Vichy France.

It is for the people in a public vote or a General Election to decide our country’s future course. Parliament may be sovereign in law making, but parliament serves the people, they are not our masters.

MORE ON BREXIT
Death of Democracy
The Daily Stirrer

EU Competition Commissioner: “Google And Facebook Are Sucking Up Data From Every Corner

This blog has always been a strong critic of the way Silicon Valley tech giants have been allowed by governments, in return for their collaboration in mass surveillance projects, to gain control of the internet and then to abuse that position.

Below is the full transcript of speech delivered by Margrethe Vestager pictured below), the European Union Antitrust Chief, held at the Business Forum of the German Ambassadors’ Conference, Berlin, 27 August 2019:

Ladies and gentlemen,

It’s a great pleasure, and an honour, to be here with you today. I want to thank Heiko Maas for those kind words, and for inviting me to join you.

I’m especially glad to have the chance to meet with you, who represent Germany’s 230 diplomatic missions around the world, as well as German industry. Because all of us here have an important role to play, to prepare Europe’s economy for the challenges of the future.

And in our working day, or just reading the news headlines, we are very often confronted with the scale of those challenges. Today’s threats to the system of global trade rules pose a serious risk to growth here in Europe, and throughout the world. Brexit remains a major source of uncertainty. We need to make enormous changes to the way we power the world’s economy, to avoid climate change running out of control. And all this is happening at a time when digitisation is transforming our markets – and Europe’s future depends on being, not just an industrial powerhouse, but a digital leader.

Europe’s advantages

Indeed all these challenges can seem daunting. But it is important to remember that Europe has already proved its capacity to take on big challenges. After all, we built the European Union on the ashes of two world wars. And we have just travelled through the biggest financial and economic crisis since the Great Depression.

And we have a good starting point to also face those challenges ahead of us.

Our Single Market gives the best European companies the room they need to grow and succeed. And by keeping that market open for competition, we support the drive for improvement that makes Europe a world leader in innovation. In fact, in the World Economic Forum’s latest Global Competitiveness Report, Germany came on top as the world’s most innovative economy, ahead of the United States and Switzerland.

Our international influence gives us the opportunity to shape the world around us in a way that helps to secure our future. As the biggest trading partner for some 80 countries, including the US and China, we have a powerful voice in international trade. And we can use that voice, not just to defend the system of global trade rules, but to make sure those rules provide a level playing field for European business.

Our improving public finances are making it possible for us to invest in the future of Europe – in research and innovation, in skills, in infrastructure.

And – no less importantly – our commitment to the values that built our Europe, to values like freedom and fairness and democracy, gives us the solid foundation we need to shape the digital world. So that digitisation supports people’s freedom and opportunities, instead of undermining them.

Platforms and competition

This is why, in recent years, we’ve been looking very closely at digital platforms. Because those platforms often provide the infrastructure that allows the digital world to work. And that can give them enormous power to affect our lives.

Take Google. Its main platform – the Google search engine – dominates the market for web searches in every country in the single market.

And that’s not the only area where Google is powerful. Some 80% of the world’s smartphones and tablets use Google’s Android operating system, which dominates the market for operating systems that other phone makers can use.

And Google is also an advertising broker in online search advertising. Any company with a search box on its website can turn to Google to find ads that are linked to the things those users search for. And Google dominated this market, too, with more than 70% of the European market between 2006 and 2016.

All these markets are vital to our digital economy. In all of these markets, Google used its power to undermine competition, and keep out innovation.

Tackling self-preferencing

And dealing with these markets has also brought us face to face with the most fundamental questions which digitisation raises.

For instance, many platform businesses act as both player and referee – they run a platform, and also compete with other companies that rely on that platform. There’s an obvious conflict of interest here, an obvious temptation to adjust the way the platform works, to favour their own services ahead of others.

That’s what Google did, when it used the power of its search engine to favour its own comparison shopping service. By doing that, it harmed competition and consumers – which is why we fined the company nearly two and a half billion euros, for breaking the competition rules. And we’re looking right now at whether the same thing may have happened with other parts of Google’s business – like the job search business known as Google for Jobs.

But this is about more than the competition rules. There’s also a broader issue for our societies, of whether we think it’s right for companies like Google and others to have such control over the success or failure of other companies, and be free to use that power in any way they like. If we don’t, then we may find that we need regulation, to make sure that these platforms use their power in a way that’s fair and doesn’t discriminate.

And in the end, the best way to protect our interests – as consumers and as citizens – may be a combination of competition policy and regulation.

The role of data

That also goes for the way that we deal with another fundamental issue in the digital world – the way platforms collect and use data.

Platforms like Google or Facebook collect data from consumers – not just the posts we like on Facebook or the searches we make on Google, but much more unexpected things. Like the Onavo VPN app, which users downloaded to hide their browsing from prying eyes – but which also sent information to Facebook about the apps they used, and the websites they visited.

And those platforms also collect large amounts of data from their business customers, through services like Google Analytics, which track how visitors use their site – but at the same time, those trackers pass data to Google.

So these companies are a bit like one of those robot vacuum cleaners, working their way into every corner of the digital world, and sucking up data. Except, of course, that what they’re collecting isn’t rubbish – it can be a vital way for these companies to outdo their rivals.

The way that these companies collect and use data can undermine competition – and if it does, then we may need to take action, to enforce the competition rules. But once again, we shouldn’t assume that we can deal with all the challenges that digital technology creates for our way of life, just by thinking about how it affects competition. The way companies collect data, the way they use it, the decisions they make about who they share it with – these are all things that can affect competition; but as our world becomes more digital, they’re also choices about how our society works. And making sure that these choices don’t do us harm will have to be a team effort.

International cooperation

Because we do have the power to shape digitisation, in a way that meets the needs of Europe’s economy, and our society. But to do that, we need to work together. And that also means using our influence to build an international environment that helps us reach our goals.

For instance, Europe’s governments need fair international tax rules, so that digitisation doesn’t allow companies to avoid paying their fair share of tax.

The OECD is leading work to reach an international agreement on taxing digital companies. But we need to help to keep the pressure up, to reach a quick conclusion. That’s why Ursula von der Leyen has made very clear that if there’s no global solution by the end of 2020, the EU should be willing to act alone.

Conclusion

There’s no doubt that Europe has the influence that we need to help us reach our goals. The real issue is whether we can use that influence effectively, to get the best results for Europeans.

That’s why Ursula von der Leyen, in her Political Guidelines, has committed to a coordinated approach to Europe’s external action. And it’s also why Europeans need to work together, at national as well as European level. Because our strength as a Union is multiplied many times over, when we make use of the influence of both Europe and its nations.

In other words, we do have the power to make a difference. We do have the power to make sure that digitisation works for Europe’s people, not against them.

There’s just one condition. We need to work together.

Thank you.

*  *  *

thanks to Sara Carter for putting this into the public domain

 

SaraACarter.com

 

MORE ON BIG TECH
Facebook privacy piracy
Faceboiok fake news
Facebook index

Google surveillance society
Google privacy issues
Google omnibus

Google Spends Just $20 Million A Year To Control The U.S. Government
Facebook Takes Another Hit After Report Zuckerberg Knew Of “Questionable” Privacy Practices
Facebook takes a step towards control of news

Google and YouTube are the most evil monopolies

Paedo Epstein’s Lawyers Tell Court He Died After Assault

Let’s be realistic, when news broke that convicted paedophile and serial sex offender Jeffrey Epstain had been found dead in his prison cell having committed suicide while awaiting trial on further charges of having sex with and procuring for sex girls and boys under the legal age of consent, and trafficking under age people around the world for the purpose of prostitution, we all thought the “suicide” bit was FAKE NEWS.

When you consider that among Epstein’s known associates who had travelled on his “Lolita Express,” the private jet that ferried the rich and famous to Epstein’s private island in The Caribbean for “house parties,” included former U.S. President Bill Clinton, the second son of Queen Elizabeth of England, Prince Andrew, top civil rights lawyer Alan Dershowitz, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, actor Kevin Spacey and a host of wealthy and prominent figures from politics, business, law, entertainment and media, there were a lot of people who stood to lose both money and resputation if their names came out in a court case involving sexual misdemeanours. Now do you still believe the official narrative about Epstein hanging himself in prison?

Apparently Epstein’s defense team, the lawyers who would have tried to argue his case don’t buy the suicide narrative either. Reports are circulating that one of the lead lawyers voiced deep skepticism that Epstein hanged himself, while addressing a final hearing in a Manhattan US District Court on Tuesday, which was held to formally dismiss the charges as is typical in U.S. law when the accused is deceased, but also to still allow the testimony of crime victims to be heard in public.

Defense lawyer Reid Weingarten told Judge Richard Berman during the hearing that Epstein’s injuries were “far more consistent with assault” than suicide, especially the broken bones in his neck discovered during the autopsy after he was found dead in his jail cell on Aug. 10. It was previously revealed that Epstein’s defense attorneys had successfully lobbied for him to be taken off suicide watch on July 29, about a week before he was found dead in his cell, according to ABC News.

                      Lawyer Reid Weingarten. Image source: Getty/CNBC

“Weingarten cited the defense’s own medical sources. Broken bones were found in Epstein’s neck during an autopsy after he died Aug. 10,” reports CNBC. “Such fractures are more common in cases of strangulation than in hanging.”

Weingarten told the court that Epstein didn’t appear suicidal during discussions with his lawyers and interactions the evening before his apparent early morning hours death. “We did not see a despairing, despondent, suicidal person,” the lawyer said.

Tuesday’s hearing was held to allow about 20 female witnesses, many choosing to remain anonymous, to tell the court and the world what happened to them at the hands of the wealthy sex predator and human trafficker.

Judge Berman wrote of the hearing, “The Court believes that where, as here, a defendant has died before any judgment has been entered against him, the public may still have an informational interest in the process by which the prosecutor seeks dismissal of an indictment.”

It would also appear, to Boggart Blog and The Daily Stirrer contributors that material seized from Epstein’s properties while he was held on remand contains, if reports are accurate, sufficient evidence to open investigations leading to the prosecution of several high profile Epstein associates. Ironically, this week’s District Court hearing marked the close of the federal criminal case and provide an excuse the sweep the whole sordid affair under the carpet, given Epstein’s “conveniently-timed” death.

RELATED POSTS:

Court Documents Expose Jeffrey Epstein’s Perverted Escapades With ‘Over 100 Young Girls’

You Don’t Have To Be A Conspiracy Theorist For The ‘Suicide’ Of Jeffrey Epstein To Stretch Your Credulity

Greenteeth Digital Publishing
The Daily Stirrer