Alexandra Bruce – Steve Pieczenik joined Alex Jones in a rather incendiary appearance to discuss the January 6th special forces raid of Democrat computers at the Capitol.
Steve triples down on his assertion that the entire election was a sting operation, “We marked the computers, we marked the ballots, we marked – everything was a sting operation. Nothing has changed. Continue reading
Joseph P Farrell – There was a strange moment during President Trump’s inauguration speech, and that strange moment seems to be catching the attention of a few people and making a few rounds of discussion, and I have (as one might suspect) my own suspicions and high octane speculations, and they don’t seem to be entirely unique to me. And while I normally don’t comment much about US domestic politics here, other then to say the Clintons, Bushes, and Obamas have left it a shambles, this one caught my eye: as Mr. Trump began his inaugural address a group of soldiers and sailors came up behind the new President, flanked him, and stood for a few seconds until another military man came up, said something, and the soldiers and sailors turn and exit.
Now, The Daily Mail is spinning this all as a “moment of confusion”; this was all accident, a mistake. And indeed, I suspect it was made at least to appear to be “a moment of confusion,” and an accident and a mistake.
One person emailed me and asked if I had caught it, and stated that for that moment, he felt like “this is it, this is the moment they assassinate him, and return power to the neo-con neo-liberal Clinton-Bush-Obama-roids.” Or words to that effect (he was a bit more “colorful” in his language).
But in my high octane speculation of the day, I am going to suggest this was no “moment of confusion” nor even an “accident”, but rather, a very clear symbolic message. Whether that message is a disturbing one is up to the individual reader to determine; I merely present my suspicions and speculations. Indeed, that message can be taken in two ways, as we’ll see.
With all the horror that took place in Boston, Massachusetts, April 15th and throughout the ensuing days until Friday night, April 19th, when the alleged suspect was captured, very little—if any—news reporting focused on significant national issues that ought to have been considered equally important to the well-being of the nation’s safety and security but apparently was overlooked. The New York Times, however, gave mention to “U.S. Engaged in Torture After 9/11, Review Concludes.”[1]Reading NYT journalist Scott Shane’s report, one realizes just how much the public doesn’t know but should, since the United States apparently committed what is being considered “war crimes.” That assessment came after a two year study by a bipartisan commission co-chaired by two former U.S. congressmen – Republican, Asa Hutchinson and Democrat, James R. Jones – of coercive interrogation methods used on prisoners by the George W. Bush administration.
The Constitution Project convened the study, which resulted in The Report of the Constitution Project’s Task Force on Detainee Treatment,[2] a 577-page document.
Although the report covers actions taken during three different administrations beginning with that of President Bill Clinton and ending with that of President Barack Obama, most of the activity studied here occurred during the administration of President George W. Bush. This is unavoidable as Bush was president when the horrific attacks on U.S. soil occurred on September 11, 2001, and thus had the burden of responding quickly and decisively to the situation.
While the report deals largely with the period of the Bush administration’s response to the attacks, the investigation was neither a partisan undertaking nor should its conclusions be taken as anything other than an effort to understand what happened at many levels of U.S. policymaking.[3]