Shana Chappell is the mother of slain US Marine Lance Cpl. Kareem Nikoui. Lance Cpl. Nikoui was killed last week when a suicide bomber was allowed into the inner perimeter of the Kabul Airport and blew himself up killing 13 American servicemen and women and over 100 Afghans.
Shana Chappell not only lost her Marine son she had her Instagram account deleted after she posted a photo and tribute message to her dead son.
** Here is the post that got her Instagram account disabled.
Shana Chappell was angry at Joe Biden and wrote about it on Instagram and for this she had her account deleted by the tech giant. No dissent against the regime is allowed.
** UPDATE: Instagram later reinstated her account.
But this didn’t stop Shana, on Monday Shana Chappell posted a letter to Joe Biden after she returned home from Dover Air Base.
President Joe Biden Joe Biden This msg is for you! I know my face is etched into your brain! I was able to look you straight in the eyes yesterday and have words with you. After i lay my son to rest you will be seeing me again! Remember i am the one who stood 5 inches from your face and was letting you know i would never get to hug my son again, hear his laugh and then you tried to interrupt me and give me your own sob story and i had to tell you “that this isn’t about you so don’t make it about you!!!” You then said you just wanted me to know that you know how i feel and i let you know that you don’t know how i feel and you do not have the right to tell me you know how i feel! U then rolled your f***ing eyes in your head like you were annoyed with me and i let you know that the only reason i was talking to you was out of respect for my son and that was the only reason why, i then proceeded to tell you again how you took my son away from me and how i will never get to hug him, kiss him, laugh with him again etc… u turned to walk away and i let you know my sons blood was on your hands and you threw your hand up behind you as you walked away from me like you were saying “ ok whatever!!! You are not the president of the United States of America Biden!!!! Cheating isn’t winning!!!You are no leader of any kind! You are a weak human being and a traitor!!!! You turned your back on my son, on all of our Heros!!! you are leaving the White House one way or another because you do not belong there!MY SONS BLOOD IS ON YOUR HANDS!!! All 13 of them, their blood is on your hands!!!! If my president Trump was in his rightful seat then my son and the other Heros would still be alive!!!! You will be seeing me again very soon!!! Btw as my son and the rest of our fallen Heros were being taken off the plane yesterday i watched you disrespect us all 5 different times by checking your watch!!! What the f*** was so important that you had to keep looking at your watch????You are nobody special Biden!!! America Hates you!!!!!
Shana Chappell then promised to drive to the White House the day after her son’s funeral and hold a protest demanding that Biden resign “and take his whole corrupt admin with him.”
She was supposed to be a major player in the Biden administration after being lauded as a historic, consequential figure in her role as America’s first female vice president.
“Harris Has the Potential To Change the Face of U.S. Politics,”read a November Politico headline that echoed many others at the time. And not long after Joe Biden was sworn in as the nation’s 46th president, the administration insisted she should be known as her boss’s equal.
“Please be sure to reference the current administration as the ‘Biden-Harris Administration’ in official public communications,” a March directive read, emphasizing Biden-Harris in boldface.
Kamala Harris may have crashed and burned as a 2020 presidential candidate, dropping out well before the first votes were cast in Iowa. But Biden chose her as his running mate anyway. It’s not clear exactly what Harris brought to the ticket outside of checking off a few demographic boxes.
Foreign policy credentials? Nope. Business experience? None. A track record of working with Republicans to pass important legislation? Not even close. In fact, an analysis by the nonpartisan GovTrack showed that she was the most liberal member of the Senate, even further to the left than democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Our ideology score placed Kamala Harris as the most liberal senator in 2019. What kinds of bills has she introduced? We looked at a selected list to see. https://t.co/02vIkZKixlpic.twitter.com/QqjjKnjwgB
But she had been California’s attorney general, so perhaps Team Biden felt her record on crime could help her lead the way in reducing the violent crime that has engulfed American cities since the summer of 2020, resulting in mass resignations and retirements among the police.
Cops Say Low Morale And Department Scrutiny Are Driving Them Away From The Job https://t.co/jMe1IBEswH
— Kerry Fehr-Snyder (@kerryfehrsnyder) June 24, 2021
Not at all. In fact, during the presidential primaries, Harris’s Twitter account publicly promoted a bail fund for rioters in Minneapolis, a city that’s seen violent crime spike under the current administration.
“If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota,” it tweeted in June 2020 as Minneapolis was under siege to the tune of more than $500 million in damage.
All of this helps explain why Harris has been taken off the field almost completely. Last week Harris was sent to Vietnam and Singapore amid the chaos in Afghanistan. When that trip was over, she stopped off in Hawaii to visit Pearl Harbor. Any Americans who wanted to hear why Harris supported the decision to pull U.S. forces out of Afghanistan last spring would have to wait, because the press was blocked from the event.
Last year, then-Vice President Mike Pence held dozens of press conferences as the head of the White House coronavirus task force, taking tough questions on an almost daily basis from the onset of the pandemic.
Since Harris took office, she has yet to hold even one formal solo press conference. Not one.
It’s also been weeks since Harris sat down for a one-on-one interview. There’s a reason for that: Her handlers seem to know there’s very little upside in having her say anything unscripted on the crisis at the southern border, where the migrant numbers are at 20-year highs amid a pandemic.
.@LesterHoltNBC in NBC News Exclusive: “You haven’t been to the border.”
If the White House thinks its strategy of keeping Harris out of sight, out of mind is working, they should think again. Because we haven’t seen vice presidential approval numbers this low so early in an administration since Dan Quayle under George H.W. Bush.
A recent USA Today-Suffolk University poll, for example, has the vice president at 35 percent approval, 54 percent disapproval. Just seven months in, Harris is 19 points underwater. And this is someone who more than a few in the D.C. chattering class hailed as the 2024 Democratic nominee-in-waiting.
With numbers like these, it’s very hard to see Harris becoming the nominee.
As a former prosecutor and Democratic star of the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, one would think Harris would be doing more interviews and holding more press conferences. She clearly has the ability to make persuasive arguments.
But don’t expect that to happen. Her handlers seem afraid to put her out there.
The press should be pushing back, demanding more transparency, more access to this historic vice president.
Outside of a few outlets, that hasn’t been happening.
But as things continue to go south for Team Biden, expect the pile-on to officially begin, with Harris inspiring very little confidence from an already disappointed public…once she’s actually allowed to speak without a prompter again.
At the height of the coronavirus pandemic, Christian education shined.
While only 8% of public school parents could say their children’s schools never closed, 26% of parents with kids in Christian schools did, according to a newly released survey by the Herzog Foundation.
“Parents of children in Christian schools are far more satisfied with their child’s education during COVID than the parents of children in public schools,” reported the study’s authors, Todd Graves and Jacob Hawkins.
Eighty percent of Christian school parents are satisfied with their children’s experiences, while 55% of parents with kids in public schools are satisfied. The study also revelealed, though, that 41% of public school parents are “unsatisfied with their child’s education during COVID.”
“The survey found that, during the pandemic, Christian school parents found it easier to manage their child’s time, communicate with teachers, manage their child’s assignments, and were better able to keep up their child’s morale than the parents of children in public schools,” Graves wrote in a column for RealClear Education.
In addition to COVID-induced restrictions, parents are worried about the public school systems infusing critical race theory into their curricula.
Seventy percent of respondents said they do not believe their children’s schools should be teaching that “white people are inherently privileged and black people and others are oppressed.”
For example, Yvonne Bunn, director of homeschool support and government affairs with Home Educators Association of Virginia, told CBN News in July that there has been “over a 48% increase in homeschoolers for the last year” in Virginia alone.
“I do think a lot of parents are going to continue homeschool,” she said. “They’re not happy with what’s going on. Parents are wanting to move in the direction of doing something else, even the parents who work. We’ve been amazed by the number who want to continue to work from home so they can continue to teach their children.”
CDC says “required mask use among students was not statistically significant compared with schools where mask use was optional.”
QUICK FACTS:
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a report on May 28 explaining that schools that required mask-wearing had no benefit compared to schools that did not require their students to wear masks.
The CDC speculated that the fact that masks do not help to lower incidence of Covid-19 infection “might also result from differences in mask-wearing behavior among students in schools with optional requirements.”
The report also showed that schools that improved ventilation saw a 35–48% lessening of Covid-19 incidence, suggesting that “there are opportunities for many schools to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission through improved ventilation.”
While the CDC report does recommend “universal and correct mask use among teachers and staff members” as well as “improved ventilation” in schools, it does not recommend masking children as an effective strategy for mitigating the spread of coronavirus.
Mask Use and Ventilation Improvements to Reduce COVID-19 Incidence in Elementary Schools — Georgia, November 16–December 11, 2020 | MMWR – interesting piece- #Covid-19 prevention and schools https://t.co/IN2HmXPcuy
The CDC’s findings come as U.S. school districts consider reimposing (here, here) mask mandates among children.
Doctors from Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and Tufts Children’s Hospital have explained that masking children can be “abusive,” saying the “theory that masks can’t do any harm” simply “isn’t true.” These doctors emphasize the fact that “there’s no science behind mask mandates for children.” On the contrary, they go on to point out how masking children can cause “severe acne and other skin problems,” “distracts some children from learning,” can “lead to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the blood,” “may exacerbate anxiety or breathing difficulties for some students,” “can alter facial development,” and even cause “psychological harm.”
The Telegraph recently reported that Sweden’s decision to imposed “no lockdowns” during the Covid-19 phenomenon actually “led to better mental health, a healthier economy and happier schoolchildren.”
Comparing countries differing in their requirements to mask students, New York magazine recently noted that to date there is “no evidence of more outbreaks in schools in those countries [that “exempted students from mask mandates”] relative to schools in the U.S., where the solid majority of kids wore masks for an entire academic year and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.”
At the end of May, the CDC published a large-scale study of COVID transmission in American schools….the findings cast doubt on the impact of distancing, hybrid models, classroom barriers, and, student masking @davidzweighttps://t.co/CZmS60oeYA
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D., Calif.) earlier this month spoke at the annual gala for a pro-Beijing newspaper that has registered as a foreign agent of China due to its influence activities in the United States.
Newsom lauded Sing Tao for its “journalistic integrity” and for providing “balanced news stories” to its readers. He also said the newspaper, which publishes daily in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York City, has helped Chinese Americans acclimate to California.
Sing Tao is considered a pro-Beijing news outlet. Its owners are members of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, a government advisory group controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. One of the owners, Charles Ho, last year defended a national security law that has been used to arrest pro-democracy journalists in Hong Kong. The Department of Justice required Sing Tao to register this month under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law aimed at tracking foreign influence in the United States. Chinese state-controlled news outlets like CGTN, China Daily, and Xinhua have also registered with the Justice Department as foreign agents.
Newsom’s praise for the Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece comes as he is campaigning to remain in office. Newsom’s opponents cited California’s high tax rates, homelessness problem, and lax enforcement of immigration laws as reasons to recall the Democrat.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) has also praised Sing Tao. The “Squad” leader thanked the newspaper in June 2020 for covering a roundtable discussion she held for foreign-language media outlets. Her campaign paid $728 to Sing Tao in April 2021 for ads touting the coronavirus vaccine and $2,755 for ads in June 2020, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission. Rep. Grace Meng (N.Y.), another progressive Democrat, has paid $12,364 to Sing Tao through her campaign since 2012, the most of any lawmaker.
Former Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.) paid for $6,600 worth of ads in 2016. Royce, who was chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee until his retirement in 2019, is currently a registered lobbyist for Chinese tech giant Tencent.
The Democratic National Committee said in May that it would place ads with Sing Tao and other newspapers to raise awareness about hate crimes against the Asian-American community. The Republican National Committee paid $2,855 to the newspaper in November 2020.
Sing Tao has had most of its success cozying up to policymakers in California.
Chesa Boudin, the progressive San Francisco district attorney, spoke at the Sing Tao gala. Boudin, who once worked as a translator for the government of Hugo Chavez, the late Venezuelan communist dictator, touted an endorsement from Sing Tao during his campaign in 2019.
Like Newsom, Boudin faces a recall in San Francisco. His critics say his criminal justice reform efforts have caused a dramatic spike in crime. Chinese-American activists have criticized Boudin amid a spike in attacks against elderly people of Asian descent in San Francisco. Many of the activists blame Boudin’s soft-on-crime policies and support his recall, according to the New York Times.
San Francisco mayor London Breed (D.) and state senator Scott Wiener (D.) also spoke at the Sing Tao gala.
Newsom, Ocasio-Cortez, and the Democratic National Committee did not respond to requests for comment.
In January 2020, Hubei and more than a dozen other provinces in mainland China implemented totalitarian lockdown measures, such as the closure of schools and workplaces, and strict restrictions on travel and mobility, including the suspension of all public transport, the cancellation of flights, blocking train and bus routes, and closing highway entrances. Efforts to bring the outbreaks under control in these provinces also included mask mandates and strict stay-at-home orders. By the end of February 2020, the pandemic was largely under control in most Chinese provinces, which led the government to start easing many of the oppressive lockdown measures the following month. The lockdown was officially lifted on April 8, 2020, seventy-six days after it was initially implemented.
On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared that the covid-19 outbreak was being upgraded from a public health emergency to a pandemic. In response, government officials in many liberal countries, along with a handful of unelected medical experts, did not hesitate to adopt containment measures similar to the ones imposed in China, including internal and external border closures, and “extremely coercive and restrictive lockdowns and physical distancing measures for the stated purpose of bringing the pandemic under control and preventing future outbreaks.” That means, instead of managing a situation that spontaneously emerged with the tools of spontaneous order (also known as free and open societies), which F.A. Hayek described as a self-generating, self-regulating, and self-correcting system, these politicians and their unelected medical experts consciously chose to implement an artificial order that was imported from China. This was done despite the fact that, historically, these countries have been persistently critical of artificial order (also known as designed, involuntary or exogenous order), which refers to the deliberate central planning of all aspects of a society by a head of state (or a group of people) for the purpose of attaining predetermined ends. Hayek warned that states that turned to artificial order in order to achieve their predetermined goals would inevitably resort to coercion and the imposition of a set of practical rules that would dictate the actions, conduct, and values of individuals in public, as well as in their private spheres. According to him, all totalitarian regimes, including Bolshevist Russia, Nazi German, and Fascist Italy, were artificially ordered societies. Contrary to a spontaneously ordered society, where there are no predetermined and intricately planned large-scale collective goals to be achieved by a superior authority, and each individual executes their own plans based on their own will, values, and choices, in an artificial order, “the planner’s own plan” replaces “the plans of his fellow-men.”1 In other words, the planner seeks to “deprive all other people of the power to plan and act according to their own plans. He aims at one thing only: the exclusive absolute pre-eminence of his own plan.”2
Even though artificial order is a novel system for formerly liberal countries, their governments have enthusiastically embraced their newly acquired totalitarian powers, as well as associated discourses, propaganda techniques, language, and oppressive, coercive, and dictatorial policies. They have also silenced and censured dissenting views, including those of many writers and credentialed scientists and doctors, who have been attacked and labeled “covidiots,” conspiracy theorists, and selfish. Perhaps most concerning is the way in which they have incessantly promoted the full vaccination of their populations with mRNA vaccines with unknown future side effects via highly sophisticated marketing and propaganda techniques designed to induce fear and paranoia. In recent weeks, many of these totalitarian regimes, which are still in their infancy, have stepped up their efforts to vaccinate those citizens who are proving to be more unwilling or hesitant to being injected with mRNA technology by turning to punitive measures like withholding “privileges” with vaccine passports and threatening their livelihoods through vaccine mandates. In fact, the introduction of vaccine passports is proceeding in a number of Western countries in spite of the fact that recent data from Israel, the UK, and many other nations with high vaccination rates suggest that the mRNA injections are of very limited effectiveness in preventing the spread of disease. The gradual imposition of various totalitarian measures aimed at coercing the masses into getting their injections should not be particularly surprising, given Hayek’s warning that the achievement of the ruler’s ends via artificial arrangements entailed continuous intervention, regulation, and coercion on the part of the ruling authority.
Thus far, the oppressive measures being adopted by the novice dictators of formerly liberal societies have created “a state of affairs which from the point of view of their advocates is worse than the previous state which they were designed to alter.”3 Unfortunately, this is unlikely to deter them from pressing forward and making things even worse. According to Ludwig von Mises, when faced with the failure of their “first intervention,” these dictators would not be “prepared to undo … [their] interference,” recommit to the forces of the spontaneous order, and return to a free society; instead, they would likely add to their “first measure more and more regulations and restrictions.” Mises further added that “proceeding step by step on this way it finally reaches a point in which all economic freedom of individuals” has disappeared, along with general freedom.4 This leaves the door open for the emergence of “socialism of the German pattern, the Zwangswirtschaft of the Nazis.”5
Hayek pointed out that supporters of artificial order are incapable of recognizing the diverse nature of human beings in terms of their will, goals, characteristics, beliefs, habits, customs, situations, and physical, intellectual, and psychological capacities. Accordingly, the rulers of the artificial order determine the daily activities of individuals, while totally stripping away their diversity. The rulers do this under the assumption that a mass majority of people are homogenous in nature, and that they are too mechanical, submissive, primitive, and selfish to distinguish between information and indoctrination through mass media, sophisticated advertising methods, and various propaganda techniques. At the same time, supporters of the artificial order are also conscious of the fact that they will not be able to reach the souls of the minority via their sophisticated propaganda techniques. Consequently, they will try to entice these individuals into compliance through various forms of incentives and bribes (e.g., offering vaccinated people lotteries, gift cards, jewelry, computers, phones, phone plans, discounts at various stores, cash, etc.). Finally, to deal with the most stubborn holdouts that do not submit to these incentives, they will implement increasingly coercive measures, including expensive fines, vilification, physical and mental abuse, termination of employment, and imprisonment. Through such policies and measures, the rulers of the artificial order are able to create a “state of affairs in which what structure society still possesses is imposed upon it by government and in which the individuals have become interchangeable units [like any object] with no other definite or durable relations to one another.”6
Contemporary practitioners of artificial order “pretend that their plans are scientific and that there cannot be disagreement with regard to them among well-intentioned and decent people,” not unlike the planners of various totalitarian regimes over the last century.7 However, Mises warned that “there is not such a thing as a scientific ought. Science is competent to establish what is. It can never dictate what ought to be and what ends people should aim at.”8 Since the importation of Chinese artificial order, novice dictators of formerly open societies have been imposing fixed values that not only lie well beyond the limits of a state’s action according to liberal thought, but also exceed the scope and purposes of science. Moreover, they refuse to accept that “men disagree in their value judgments.”9
The idea that Western countries could successfully import and apply an artificial order that took the People’s Republic of China more than seven decades to master was not only misguided, it also exposed the poverty in the thinking, judgment, knowledge, policymaking, caring, and imaginations of Western leaders and their handpicked medical experts, who have taken it upon themselves to violate the fundamental principles of liberalism, democracy, and human rights. After more than eighteen months, there is no scientific evidence to suggest that the artificial order imported from China has eliminated the virus, nor has it improved the social and economic conditions or the healthcare systems in formerly “open societies.”
Unfortunately, it appears as though the totalitarian strategies that have been embraced by formerly liberal governments will continue to persist for the foreseeable future in spite of their poverty. They are steadfast in their commitment to maintaining their artificial order, despite considerable evidence that it has already caused irreparable harm by contributing to the deaths of many people, depriving many others of healthy lifestyles, violating freedom, and facilitating economic damage and ruin. In fact, some experts believe that the physical, moral, intellectual and emotional damage that has been caused by lockdowns is worse than a quick death. Meanwhile, many economists are concerned about the effects of the massive job losses, higher inflation, reductions in earnings, growing gender gaps, rising extreme poverty, and large deficits that have been attributed to coercive lockdown measures. Moreover, by implementing Chinese artificial order, Western politicians and their handful of unelected medical experts have proven themselves to be ignorant of the fact that liberal thought and principles have been strongly and systematically opposed to artificial order on account of the danger that it poses for the advancement and progress of spontaneous order. That is to say, they failed to understand the premise that if men are “left free” to act spontaneously, they often achieve “more than individual human reason could design or foresee.”10 Consequently, the spontaneous actions of individuals often produce outcomes “which can be understood as if it were made according to a single plan, although nobody has planned it.”11
Mises would be very critical of the type of artificial order that is currently being implemented in liberal countries, as he argued that “it is insolent to arrogate to oneself the right to overrule the plans of other people and to force them to submit to the plan of the planner.”12 He questioned: “[W]hose plan should be executed? The plan of Trotsky or that of Stalin? The plan of Hitler or that of Strasser?”13 He further cautioned that “if one master plan is to be substituted for the plans of each citizen, endless fighting must emerge. Those who disagree with the dictator’s plan have no other means to carry on than to defeat the despot by force of arms.”14 Similarly, Alexis de Tocqueville warned that if freedom is ever lost as a consequence of despotism and people have been brought to despair, then they will inevitably “appeal to physical force,” leading to the emergence of anarchy.15 History has demonstrated that “when people were committed to the idea that in the field of religion only one plan must be adopted, bloody wars resulted. With the acknowledgment of the principle of religious freedom these wars ceased.”16
1.Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, trans. J. Kahane (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1962), p. 538.
15.Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America: Historical-Critical Edition of “De la démocratie en Amérique,” vol. 2, ed. Eduardo Nolla, trans. James T. Schleifer. French-English ed. (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 2010).
China’s increased scrutiny of capital markets isn’t restricted to tech IPOs. It’s also taking a harder look at private funds.
Driving the news: China’s top securities regulator, Yi Huiman, today said in a speech that VC and buyout fund managers must better align their interests with those of limited partners, adding that the government is dedicated to rooting out embezzlement and public equities masquerading as private equities.
Huiman also decried public solicitation for private funds, which he said are at “in a critical period of transformation and development.”
By the numbers: Chinese private equity and VC funds manage an estimated $2 trillion, more than tripling over the past four years. A lot of that growth was actively encouraged, and sometimes even directly enabled, by a government that believed its private sector was too reliant on bank lending.
The bottom line: This was a shot across the bow; a “clean your room or else” sort of message. If it’s not heeded, Chinese regulators might be much more prescriptive, or even punitive, the next time around.
(Global Research) The Chinese authorities announced on January 7, 2020 that they had isolated and identified “a new type of virus”. Then on the 28th of January 2020, the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated that the novela corona virus had been isolated.
Christine Massey, M.Sc conducted an extensive report over a period of more than a year. The central question raised in her study is the following: “is there reliable evidence that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated from an “unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient”?
Christine Massey submitted Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to some 90 Health /Science institutions.
Does the Virus Exist? The responses to these requests confirm that there is no record of isolation / purification of SARS-CoV-2 “having been performed by anyone, anywhere, ever.”
Video: Christine Massey and Michel Chossudovsky. Does the Virus Exist. Has SARS-CoV-2 Been Isolated
On Sunday morning the Pentagon announced it had successfully launched a drone strike against what officials said was an explosive packed vehicle occupied by two suicide bombers. The names of the terrorists targeted haven’t been released.
But according to reporting from the ground, the strike ended up killing a family with small children.
Hours after a U.S. military drone strike in Kabul on Sunday, Defense Department officials said that it had blown up a vehicle laden with explosives, eliminating a threat to Kabul’s airport from the Islamic State Khorasan group.
But at a family home in Kabul on Monday, survivors and neighbors said the strike had killed 10 people, including seven children, an aid worker for an American charity organization and a contractor with the U.S. military.
Zemari Ahmadi, who worked for the charity organization Nutrition and Education International, was on his way home from work after dropping off colleagues on Sunday evening, according to relatives and colleagues interviewed in Kabul.
As he pulled into the narrow street where he lived with his three brothers and their families, the children, seeing his white Toyota Corolla, ran outside to greet him. Some clambered aboard in the street, others gathered around as he pulled the car into the courtyard of their home.
It was then that they say the drone struck.
This is Zemari's son, Farzad, sitting in the same courtyard we visited today. Also killed in the drone strike. pic.twitter.com/76qm7PNUQ7
Whether Colorado election fraud is a real problem or not will remain unknown, as the state’s George Soros-backed SecState will permanently ban Arizona-style third-party audits.
Colorado Politics reported on Friday that Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold “is permanently adopting the emergency rules rolled out earlier this summer to block future efforts at an Arizona-style ‘forensic audit’ conducted by a third party.”
How’s that for restoring people’s faith in election integrity?
My office just issued rules prohibiting sham election audits in the State of Colorado. We will not risk the state’s election security nor perpetuate The Big Lie. Fraudits have no place in Colorado. https://t.co/PFLCjJJmZg
Left unsaid: Exactly how a third-party audit is either a sham or would put the state’s “election security” at risk.
While Griswold’s rules would prevent potentially shady people who haven’t passed a background check from accessing voting machines, they would also block trusted “third parties, such as the Cyber Ninjas firm brought in by Republicans in the Arizona state Senate,” according to Colorado Politics.
Griswold, a former Barack Obama activist, is one of many Democrats throughout the state receiving generous financial backing from the George Soros family.
Colorado switched to all-mail-in voting in 2014, making it easier for groups like those affiliated with Soros to drive up turnout, but raising questions about Colorado election fraud.
A recent poll showed that the overwhelming majority of American voters — 63% — actually “reject the Democrat narrative regarding a number of election integrity issues, over three-quarters indicating they support basic election integrity safeguards such as voter ID and signature verification.”
Griswold’s refusal to even entertain notions of a third-party audit won’t do anything to set those questions aside.
The fact is that Americans from both parties no longer trust our elections.
Democrats still howl that 2016 was stolen somehow by Donald Trump, and Republicans are on firmer ground with questions about the integrity of the 2020 election. As I’m sure you’ll recall, that race was tainted with last-minute rules changes by unelected judges, mail-in balloting in states with no experience with them, questionable voting machines, Big Tech money, and more.
Third-party audits — and lots of them — might go a long way toward restoring faith.
But not here in Colorado. Not under Jena Griswold.
CA Gov. Newsom Praises News Outlet Owned by Chinese Communist Party
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D., Calif.) earlier this month spoke at the annual gala for a pro-Beijing newspaper that has registered as a foreign agent of China due to its influence activities in the United States.
Newsom lauded Sing Tao for its “journalistic integrity” and for providing “balanced news stories” to its readers. He also said the newspaper, which publishes daily in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York City, has helped Chinese Americans acclimate to California.
Sing Tao is considered a pro-Beijing news outlet. Its owners are members of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, a government advisory group controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. One of the owners, Charles Ho, last year defended a national security law that has been used to arrest pro-democracy journalists in Hong Kong. The Department of Justice required Sing Tao to register this month under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law aimed at tracking foreign influence in the United States. Chinese state-controlled news outlets like CGTN, China Daily, and Xinhua have also registered with the Justice Department as foreign agents.
Newsom’s praise for the Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece comes as he is campaigning to remain in office. Newsom’s opponents cited California’s high tax rates, homelessness problem, and lax enforcement of immigration laws as reasons to recall the Democrat.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) has also praised Sing Tao. The “Squad” leader thanked the newspaper in June 2020 for covering a roundtable discussion she held for foreign-language media outlets. Her campaign paid $728 to Sing Tao in April 2021 for ads touting the coronavirus vaccine and $2,755 for ads in June 2020, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission. Rep. Grace Meng (N.Y.), another progressive Democrat, has paid $12,364 to Sing Tao through her campaign since 2012, the most of any lawmaker.
Former Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.) paid for $6,600 worth of ads in 2016. Royce, who was chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee until his retirement in 2019, is currently a registered lobbyist for Chinese tech giant Tencent.
The Democratic National Committee said in May that it would place ads with Sing Tao and other newspapers to raise awareness about hate crimes against the Asian-American community. The Republican National Committee paid $2,855 to the newspaper in November 2020.
Sing Tao has had most of its success cozying up to policymakers in California.
Chesa Boudin, the progressive San Francisco district attorney, spoke at the Sing Tao gala. Boudin, who once worked as a translator for the government of Hugo Chavez, the late Venezuelan communist dictator, touted an endorsement from Sing Tao during his campaign in 2019.
Like Newsom, Boudin faces a recall in San Francisco. His critics say his criminal justice reform efforts have caused a dramatic spike in crime. Chinese-American activists have criticized Boudin amid a spike in attacks against elderly people of Asian descent in San Francisco. Many of the activists blame Boudin’s soft-on-crime policies and support his recall, according to the New York Times.
San Francisco mayor London Breed (D.) and state senator Scott Wiener (D.) also spoke at the Sing Tao gala.
Newsom, Ocasio-Cortez, and the Democratic National Committee did not respond to requests for comment.