Puppet Masters
Australia and Facebook have been locked in a stand-off for more than a week as Canberra pushed ahead with the measure, aimed at tech behemoths, such as Facebook and Alphabet Inc's Google.
But a new bill proposed by House Democrat Rep. John Sarbanes (D-MD) concedes numerous concerns about voting machines that were of bi-partisan complaint both prior to and after the presidential election.
The "For the People Act of 2021," or H.R. 1, as it currently stands in the 117th Congress, contains major reforms to the use of voting machines in United States elections.
In Section H of the bill encompassing the "use of voting machines manufactured in the United States," it permits voters who do not wish to use voting machines the right to request and cast hand-marked paper ballots that are counted by hand and not voting machines.
The following analysis of the current bill provided by the Brennan Center for Justice confirms the proposed federal regulations over voting machines:
Comment: Would there be any level of reform if the Republicans hadn't exposed the whole country to the farce of the 2020 election process? How many Democrats stepped forward? The above proposed changes are by no means the end-all to ensure a fair and equitable process takes place, should even these dubious protocols come to fruition.
News outlets mentioned are MSM.
Scratching the surface: The Brennan Center, connected to and funded ($7M [13][14][15]) by Open Society Foundations - George Soros, is connected to Ballot Initiative Strategy Center and is one of some 100 organizations in a national left-lean coalition. It works closely with Democracy 21, an opposition network actively against Trump and his administration.
Justin Danhof of the National Center for Public Policy Research stated:
"The Brennan Center is on a mission to undermine support for voter integrity measures, claiming that state-level voter ID provisions will disfranchise millions of voters and that voter fraud rarely occurs. However, some of its major reports concerning voter ID measures and voter fraud are wrought with bias and have been refuted by election scholars."
Noting that there will be more cases, hospitalizations, and deaths whenever the UK decides to lift its lockdown - whether that's immediately or in nine months - Johnson told Parliament there is "no credible route to a zero-Covid Britain or, indeed, a zero-Covid world."
"We cannot persist indefinitely with restrictions that debilitate our economy, our physical and mental well-being, and the life chances of our children."
Comment: Meanwhile, in keeping with the mind games that the government routinely partake in these days, ITV reported that he also said:
"We can't, I'm afraid, rule out re-imposing restrictions at local or regional level if evidence suggests they are necessary to contain or suppress a new variant which escapes the vaccines."See also: Psychologists accuse UK government of using 'unethical' fear tactics on people to enforce lockdown
Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei recently issued a new fatwa - an authoritative, non-binding legal opinion on a point of Islamic law given by a recognised higher authority - declaring that women in cartoons and animated films must all be shown wearing the hijab, according to al-Arabiya, citing Iran's Tasnim news agency.
Comment: Does that mean that animated representations of non-Muslim women should be forbidden? Or must they be "Islamified"? Or does it only apply to Muslim characters? Either way, what utter nonsense.
Khamenei was said to have been responding to a question asked by a Telegram channel user regarding whether observing compulsory hijab rules was necessary for characters in cartoons, claims the report.
"Although wearing a hijab in such a hypothetical situation is not required per se, observing hijab in animation is required due to the consequences of not wearing hijab," answered Khamenei, according to a translation offered by the IranWire news website.
Comment: Fundamentalistic logic, i.e., paralogic.
There has not been any official comment from the Iranian government on the discourse.
Corporations are prohibited from directly donating to campaigns. But their employees are free to donate as individuals. USA's Federal Election Commission requires individuals who contribute USD 200 or more to report their employer.
The companies have declined to comment after the WSJ reveal.
Microsoft employees donated USD 3.2 million to Biden in the election. Microsoft employees have long been a top source of money for Democratic presidential candidates.
Facebook employees have emerged as another top source of money, donating USD 1.9 million to Biden's campaign.
Employees of Amazon contributed a total of USD 2.8 million to Biden's campaign.
Asked Monday evening by The Hill about his visit to the former commander-in-chief's Palm Beach estate, Graham (R-South Carolina) said the two spent a great deal of time reaching out to candidates on the ballot in 2022.
The two "just talked about the 2022 cycle," Graham explained, adding that, "He's very involved in helping the team win." Trump "made a bunch of phone calls," specifically with GOP senators, and is "trying to get the best team on the field."
When asked by a CNN reporter which senators he spoke to, Graham declined to say, only noting that Trump's message was, "You've been there for me and I'll be there for you."
Some of the 20 Republicans up for reelection in the 2022 cycle include Sens. Tim Scott (R-South Carolina), Marco Rubio (R-Florida), John Boozman (R-Arkansas), John Thune (R-South Dakota), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin), Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) and James Lankford (R-Oklahoma).
Asked late Monday on Hannity if there was any indication he would run again in 2024, Graham said, "Stay tuned."
"Yes, I do sir, I certainly do regret signing, resigning. I love this agency. I love the women and men of this agency and I regret the day I left," Sund responded to Republican Arizona Sen. Ron Johnson in a Senate hearing on Tuesday.
Sund announced his resignation as United States Capitol Police chief on Jan. 7, a day after a mob of former President Donald Trump's followers breached the Capitol building on Jan. 6 after a protest turned into a deadly riot against the Electoral College's certification of the presidential election results.
Sund and the former House and Senate sergeants-at-arms said they hadn't seen the FBI's warning report delivered on Jan. 5 to the Capitol police about possible unrest, according to The Washington Post.
WATCH:
Comment: Sund also testified that he requested the National Guard multiple times before the 6th, but his requests were denied.
DC MPD Chief Robert Contee also testified:
"I was stunned at the response from Department of the Army, which was reluctant to send the D.C. National Guard to the Capitol," acting MPD Chief Robert Contee wrote in a statement submitted ahead of a joint hearing Tuesday between the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and Senate Rules Committee. "On the call, in an effort to seek clarification, I asked the Capitol Police Chief if he were, in fact, requesting the assistance of the National Guard and then asked the U.S. Army representatives on the call if they were refusing to deploy the Guard to assist. The Army staff responded that they were not refusing to send them, but wanted to know the plan and did not like the optics of boots on the ground at the Capitol."
Contee, whose officers were called in by Capitol police only after the attack began, said law enforcement and military officials spoke in a call about who was responding but that defense officials were concerned about the optics of sending in the military.
"While I certainly understand the importance of both planning and public perception, the factors cited by the staff on the call, these issues become secondary when you are watching your employees, vastly outnumbered by a mob, being physically assaulted," said Contee, who got neighboring cities and states to send in police officers within hours.
"I was honestly shocked that the National Guard could not, or would not, do the same," he said.

White House Chief Medical Adviser on Covid-19 Dr. Anthony Fauci listens to US President Joe Biden (out of frame) speak during a visit to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland, February 11, 2021.
Most Americans are exasperated, tired of all the uncertainty and long for life to return to normal. But will the powers-that-be ever allow us to?
During an interview with CNN, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, announced that Americans might need to wear masks until sometime next year, and that he couldn't predict when things in the US will return to normal.
Comment: This is a good analysis of what is really going on with the Covid-19 hoax pandemic; psychopaths have maneuvered themselves in a positions of power and are using their status to gain even more control. What they're doing was never about caring for the health of the general population.
The true virus is the pathological thinking and hysteria being induced by psychopaths. And they have been infecting humanity for a very, very long time.
See also:
- 'Do as I say, not as I do'? Twitter goes berserk after mask advocate Fauci forgoes his own Covid-19 guidances
- Biggs: Dr. Fauci 'Scared the crap out of Americans'
- Dr. Fauci contradicts 'double-maskers': Debunks rage he had fueled within the same week
- Dr. Anthony Fauci opposes controlled study on effectiveness of masks
- Fauci recommends encasing entire body in bubble wrap to protect against Coronavirus
- 'Fire Fauci, let us work': Texans rally at state Capitol against Covid-19 lockdown
- 'Masks Are Symbolic,' say Dr Fauci and The New England Journal of Medicine
- Now masks are not enough! Fauci claims eye protection might be required for 'perfect' Covid-proofing
Congressional Democrats are targeting cable providers for carrying conservative leaning news outlets Fox, Newsmax and One America News Network, accusing the networks of spreading "disinformation and extremism" by broadcasting "conspiracy theories and misleading or patently false information" regarding the COVID pandemic and the November presidential election.
The New York Times reported Monday about a letter sent to cable providers by House Democrats:
In advance of the Wednesday hearing, called "Fanning the Flames: Disinformation and Extremism in the Media," members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee sent a letter on Monday to Comcast, AT&T, Spectrum, Dish, Verizon, Cox and Altice, asking about their role in "the spread of dangerous misinformation."
The committee members also sent the letter to Roku, Amazon, Apple, Google and Hulu, digital companies that distribute cable programming.
..."To our knowledge, the cable, satellite and over-the-top companies that disseminate these media outlets to American viewers have done nothing in response to the misinformation aired by these outlets," two Democratic representatives from California, Anna G. Eshoo and Jerry McNerney, wrote in the letter, which was reviewed by The New York Times.
...The lawmakers' letter asks the companies, "What steps did you take prior to, on, and following the November 3, 2020 elections and the January 6, 2021 attacks to monitor, respond to, and reduce the spread of disinformation, including encouragement or incitement of violence by channels your company disseminates to millions of Americans?"
"Are you planning to continue carrying Fox News, OANN, and Newsmax on your platform both now and beyond the renewal date?" the letter continues. "If so, why?"
Comment: The dismantlement of free speech in the US is occurring right before our eyes. And at breakneck speed. Facts and freedom be damned.
Garland, who is President Joe Biden's nominee for U.S. Attorney General, was questioned at his confirmation hearing by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO):
Sen. Hawley: Let me ask you about assaults on federal property in places other than Washington, DC — Portland, for instance, Seattle. Do you regard assaults on federal courthouses or other federal property as acts of domestic extremism, domestic terrorism?
Judge Garland: Well, Senator, my own definition, which is about the same as the statutory definition, is the use of violence or threats of violence in attempt to disrupt the democratic processes. So an attack on a courthouse, while in operation, trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases, that plainly is domestic extremism, domestic terrorism. An attack simply on a government property at night, or any other kind of circumstances, is a clear crime and a serious one, and should be punished. I don't know enough about the facts of the example you're talking about. But that's where I draw the line. One is — both are criminal, but one is a core attack on our democratic institutions.
Comment: Judge Merrick Garland appears to be living in a pseudo-reality where the law doesn't quite apply to Leftist rioters.
Conclusion: Garland is perfect for the job as Biden's pick for Attorney General because he understands what extreme biases are politically in favor among the Dems.














Comment: RT reports: This shows just how powerful Big Tech is. Moreover, where does this put small, independent, and alternative news organisations that don't have the bargaining power and legal representation that the large corporations have?