Lucasfilm fired Gina Carano for a Holocaust comparison. So what will they do with Pedro Pascal’s tweet doing the same?

Pascal compared former President Donald Trump’s immigration policies to the Holocaust.

February 11, 2021   

On Wednesday, Lucasfilm fired actress Gina Carano for a social media post referring to the Holocaust that her critics said was anti-Semitic. But she’s not the only “The Mandalorian” actor who has posted ill-advised Holocaust comparisons on social media.

Carano, who played Cara Dune on Disney+’s popular Star Wars series was fired ostensibly for making an “abhorrent and unacceptable” social media post citing Jewish oppression at the hands of the Nazis and comparing it to censorship of conservative points of view and cancel culture. Her post triggered a social media campaign by the left on Tuesday to have her fired by Lucasfilm.

This was the latest in a series of social media controversies surrounding the actress in which voices on the left demanded that she be canceled for holding unpopular opinions. Last September, when social media demanded Carano add pronouns to her bio to “support trans lives,” she jokingly added the words “boop/bop/beep” to her Twitter name.

“They’re mad cuz I won’t put pronouns in my bio to show my support for trans lives. After months of harassing me in every way. I decided to put 3 VERY controversial words in my bio.. beep/bop/boop,” she tweeted in response to the criticism. “I’m not against trans lives at all. They need to find less abusive representation.” This was apparently transphobic.

In subsequent social media posts, Carano tweeted a meme questioning COVID-19 mask mandates, made comments calling for laws to increase election security, and liked social media posts making the point that Black Lives Matter probably shouldn’t riot if they want people to sympathize with their cause.

Each of these social media posts generated a controversy with people calling for her to be fired. On Wednesday, a spokesperson for Lucasfilm finally confirmed that Carano was no longer employed by the company, which is owned by Disney. After news broke that Carano had been canned by Lucasfilm, many of the social media users calling for her firing cheered.

But if Carano’s post, in the words of the Lucasfilm spokesperson, is “denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities” and also “abhorrent and unacceptable,” what does Lucasfilm make of this 2018 tweet from “The Mandalorian” star Pedro Pascal?

Here, Pascal is comparing former President Donald Trump’s immigration policies to the Holocaust. The tweet leaves out important context. The “kids in cages” narrative surrounding Trump’s policies was misleading, given that the Obama administration built the facilities where migrants detained under Trump’s “zero-tolerance” immigration enforcement policies were held.

There is no comparable outrage over Pascal’s tweet. No one on the left called or now calling for him to be fired, or accusing him of anti-Semitism or white supremacy for his Holocaust comparison.

The left is now nothing more than totalitarian identity politics with people that are the Mount Olympus of stupid where there is no lower level of stupidity, ignorance and less value to the planet.

The whole entire movement is in itself cannibalistic in nature and it will eat itself alive and eventually implode, as do all other socialist movements in history as is proven out.

How anyone who is left can wake up each morning and live with themselves, knowing full well that they belong to a party of cheats and liars is beyond my comprehension. Period.

SO HERE’S THE JEAPARDY QUESTION. PICTURE THE JEAPARDY THEME SONG TICKING AWAY IN THE BACKGROUND.

ANYONE WONDERING WHY BIDEN WILL DROP THIS CASE WITH A CHINESE COMPANY THAT TRUMP WANTED BANNED?

ANYONE? BUELLER. BUELLER.

Biden moves toward shutting down Trump TikTok fight

The Justice Department on Thursday motioned toward dropping a series of cases against the app TikTok, as the administration steers away from former President Donald Trump’s China strategy.

In a letter sent to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, attorneys at the Justice Department wrote that since the Biden administration is conducting “an evaluation” of Trump’s ban, the court should delay all litigation related to the issue. Biden lawyers added that it is likely that the review will “narrow the issues presented or eliminate the need for judicial review entirely.”

The Office of the Solicitor General asked that every case related to the TikTok ban be delayed until April, a position to which it said lawyers from TikTok agreed. The letter stated that the Biden administration will pursue other means of securing data security.

“The Department of Commerce remains committed to a robust defense of national security as well as ensuring the viability of our economy and preserving individual rights and data privacy,” wrote John Hall, a Justice Department attorney on the case.

Trump last year attempted to ban the popular app, owned by the Chinese company ByteDance, amid national security concerns surrounding its connections to the Chinese government. Trump’s crusade quickly became embroiled in an ongoing court battle that has played out alongside a federal push threatening to force TikTok to sell off its American operations.

In a case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, TikTok took Trump to task for issuing orders “impermissibly banning” the app. The court in December ordered the president to respond to TikTok’s complaint by Feb. 18, at which point the case would be Biden’s responsibility.

As that deadline draws nearer, it is becoming increasingly clear that Biden will not pursue the case with Trump’s vigor and may even drop it altogether.

ByteDance indefinitely shelved a sale of the app to Walmart and Oracle, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday, with people familiar with the matter saying that they expect Biden to review Trump’s executive order calling for a ban.

And late Wednesday evening, the Justice Department sent a letter to a district court judge in one of the government’s cases, asking for a delay in proceedings as the administration reconsiders Trump’s policy.

That same evening, Biden took his first phone call with Chinese President Xi Jinping, in which the world leaders discussed trade and human rights. Before the call, White House press secretary Jen Psaki deflected questions about the administration’s stance on the TikTok ban.

“We are comprehensively evaluating the risks to U.S. data, including from TikTok, and will address them in a decisive and effective fashion,” Psaki said at a press briefing. “If we have news to announce, we will announce it.”

The Justice Department declined to comment on Biden’s attitude toward the proposed TikTok ban.

The Biden administration in the past month has switched the government’s position in a number of high-profile Trump-era cases. Biden’s Solicitor General Office on Wednesday informed the Supreme Court that the federal government no longer believes that Obamacare is unconstitutional. Earlier this month, the administration convinced the high court to de-list two immigration cases: one over funding for the Mexican border wall, the other challenging Trump’s “remain in Mexico policy.”

Troop Deployments in Washington Are a Disaster Waiting to Happen

“Tyranny in form is the first step towards tyranny in substance,” warned Senator John Taylor two hundred years ago in his forgotten classic, Tyranny Unmasked. As the massive National Guard troop deployment in Washington enters its second month, much of the media and many members of Congress are thrilled that it will extend until at least mid-March. But Americans would be wise to recognize the growing perils of the militarization of American political disputes.

The military occupation of Washington was prompted by the January 6 clashes at the Capitol between Trump supporters and law enforcement, in which three people (including one Capitol policeman) died as a result of the violence. Roughly eight hundred protestors and others unlawfully entered the Capitol, though many of them entered nonviolently through open doors and most left without incident hours later.

The federal government responded by deploying twenty-five thousand National Guard troops to prevent problems during President Joe Biden’s swearing-in—the first inauguration since 1865 featuring the capital city packed with armed soldiers. Protests were almost completely banned in Washington for the inauguration.

Instead of ending after the muted inauguration celebration, the troop deployment was extended for the Senate impeachment trial. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) declared, “So long as Donald Trump is empowered by Senate Republicans, there is still the chance that he is going to incite another attempt at the Capitol.” But the Senate vote on Senator Rand Paul’s (R-KY) motion labeling the trial as unconstitutional signaled that the trial will be anticlimactic because Trump is unlikely to be convicted. The actual trial may be little more than a series of pratfalls, alternating between histrionic Democratic House members and wild-swinging, table-pounding Trump lawyers. A pointless deluge of political vitriol will make a mockery of Biden’s calls for national unity.

Then the troop deployment was extended into at least mid-March because of unidentified threats made to members of Congress. Acting Army Secretary John Whitley announced last week: “There are several upcoming events—we don’t know what they are—over the next several weeks, and they’re concerned that there could be situations where there are lawful protests, First Amendment–protected protests, that could either be used by malicious actors, or other problems that could emerge.”

“We don’t know what they are” but somebody heard something somewhere, so the military deployment will continue. Threats have occurred in waves toward members of Congress at least since the farm crisis of the 1980s, but prior menacing did not result in the occupation of the capital city.

Perpetuating the troop deployment is also being justified by melodramatic revisionism. In congressional testimony last week, Capitol Police acting chief Yogananda Pittman described the January 6 clash at the Capitol as “a terrorist attack by tens of thousands of insurrectionists.” Apparently, anyone who tromped from the scene of Trump’s ludicrous “I won by a landslide” spiel to the Capitol was a terrorist, or at least an “insurrectionist” (which is simply “terrorist” spelled with more letters). Is “walking on the Mall with bad thoughts” sufficient to get classified as a terrorist in the Biden era? 

Placing thousands of troops on the streets of the nation’s capital could be a ticking time bomb. The longer the National Guard is deployed in Washington, the greater the peril of a Kent State–caliber catastrophe. The Ohio National Guard’s volley of fire in 1970 that killed four students and wounded nine others was a defining moment for the Vietnam era. 

Forty years later, the Cleveland Plain Dealer published an investigation of the Kent State shooting based on new analyses of audio recordings from the scene. The Plain Dealer concluded that an FBI informant who was photographing student protestors fired four shots from his .38-caliber revolver after students began threatening him. That gunfire started barely a minute before the Ohio National Guard opened fire. Gunshots from the FBI informant apparently spooked guard commanders into believing they were taking sniper fire, spurring the order to shoot students. The informant denied having fired, but witnesses testified differently. (The FBI hustled the informant from the scene and he later became an undercover narcotics cop in Washington, DC.) Though there is no evidence that the FBI sought to provoke carnage at Kent State, FBI agents involved in COINTELPRO (the Counterintelligence Program) in the 1960s and 1970s boasted of “false flag” operations which provoked killings.

If some malicious group wanted to plunge this nation into chaos and fear, National Guard troops at a checkpoint would be an easy target—at least for the first moments after they were fired upon (most of the troops do not have ammo magazines in their rifles). The sweeping reaction to January 6 might be far surpassed if troops are gunned down regardless of whether the culprits were right-wing extremists, Antifa, or foreign infiltrators. An attack on the troops would likely perpetuate the military occupation and potentially spur Biden to declare martial law.

Last spring, when riots erupted after the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, President Trump warned that “the Federal Government will step in and do what has to be done, and that includes using the unlimited power of our Military and many arrests.” Many activists were justifiably appalled at the specter of Trump seizing dictatorial power over areas wracked by violent protests. But the danger remains regardless of who is president.

Martial law is the ultimate revocation of constitutional rights: anyone who disobeys soldiers’ orders can be shot. There are plenty of malevolent actors here and abroad who would relish seeing martial law declared in Washington, the paramount disgrace for the world’s proudest democracy.

Unfortunately, Biden would have plenty of support initially if he proclaimed that violence in Washington required him to declare martial law. As the Washington Post noted in 2018, a public opinion poll showed that 25 percent of Americans believed “a military takeover was justified if there were widespread corruption or crime.” The Journal of Democracy reported that polls showed that only 19 percent of Millennials in the US believed that it would be illegitimate “in a democracy for the military to take over when the government is incompetent or failing to do its job.” But trusting to military rule for Millennial wish fulfillment would be the biggest folly of them all. Support for martial law is the ultimate proof of declining political literacy in this nation.

Regardless of the risks, some politicians are clinging to the presence of the troops in Washington like Linus clutching his “security blanket” in a Peanuts cartoon. Will we now see regular alarms from a long series of politicians and political appointees working to “keep up the fear”?

History is littered with stories of nations scourged by “temporary” martial law that perpetuated itself. Anyone who believes America is immune should recall Senator Taylor’s 1821 warning against presuming “our good theoretical system of government is a sufficient security against actual tyranny.”

WAIT. THE LEFT AND LEFT IN CONGRESS ARE USING TRUMP’S WORDS, ‘FIGHT LIKE HELL’ WHICH ALL PROUD AMERICANS SHOULD DO IN POLITICS FOR THEIR RIGHTS, AS MEANING LITERALLY AND PHYSICALLY CONTACTING OTHERS.

BUT, BUT, BUT ……..

WHY WAS USING SOCIAL MEDIA TO INFLUENCE THE ELECTION BY JIM MESSINA WHEN OBUMMER WAS RUNNING FOR PRESIDDENT OK TO DO BUT NOW IF IT’S CONSERVATIVES USING SOCIAL MEDIA IT’S NOW NOT OK?

JUST WATCH THIS VERY, VERY SHORT VIDEO AND TELL ME WHY THE HYPOCRISY NOW. WHY?

I WANNA’ KNOW WHY THAT IS DAMMIT. WHY?!

FLASHBACK: Messina Touts 2012 Obama Campaign’s ‘Targeted Sharing’ Technique on Facebook

Barack Obama campaign manager Jim Messina in 2013 touted the 2012 campaign’s use of “targeted sharing” on Facebook to use supporters as a way to persuade their undecided friends and family to support Obama.

A former Obama campaign official said this week that Facebook allowed the team to access data and information to a degree it wouldn’t normally allow, except “they were on our side.”

Messina discussed the campaign’s use of “big data” to propel Obama to victory in 2012 during the Milken Institute’s global conference in 2013.

“We decided on the first day of the campaign to use data across department, because we thought it was the best avenue to the truth, and we ended up using data to inform almost every major decision we did in the campaign, and we had a singular goal to run a personalized campaign, where you got a different campaign than you did, all based on our ability to move you and persuade you to vote and support Barack Obama,” he said.

“And there’s 332 electoral votes that show it worked,” Messina added. Obama trounced Mitt Romney in the electoral college, 332-206, and he also won a majority of the popular vote for the second time, a rare feat for any president.

Messina noted a sea change in social media between 2008 and 2012; his tech team began to use targeted sharing to get Obama re-elected.

“We built this thing called targeted sharing … It allowed us to use Facebook to persuade people,” he said. “We spent a billion dollars to figure out a simple truth: What your friends and family and neighbors say is more important to your consumer decisions and your political decisions than anything else because you’re getting so much data thrown at you.”

He touted how the campaign told people targeted on Facebook to share videos with specific friends who were being also targeted by the campaign.

“So the final six days of the campaign, six million people logged onto Facebook through BarackObama.com, and they saw a 20-second Michelle Obama video, because everyone loves Michelle Obama,” Messina said. “And at the end of the 20 seconds, we had matched our data with their data, and we gave them five of their best friends who are undecided voters, and said, ‘Click here to send them a video, click here to send them information.’ Of those people, 78 percent of them voted for Barack Obama.”

NOW THERE ARE TWO FINITE STANDARDS IN THE U.S. – LEFT SOCIALISM IS GOOD WHILE ALL CONSERVATISM IS NOW WRONG, UNACCEPTABLE AND NEEDS TO BE SILENCED.

Progressives demand that conservatives practice tolerance — at all times — and if they dare to say or post anything on social media that strays from politically correct speech, then they risk being “canceled” from society. The offender may lose their jobs and livelihoods, get blacklisted in Hollywood or be run out of corporate America.

Roseanne Barr is one such example. In 2018, her hit TV show, “Roseanne,” was abruptly canceled by ABC following a controversial tweet directed at a former Obama administration adviser. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg — if you’re a libertarian like Barr or lean right.

It’s commonplace that if you’re a professional athlete or play college sports, you risk being booted from your sports leagues over one bad tweet or post. And for nonathletes, one may be kicked out of college or see their hard-won acceptance to an Ivy League university revoked no matter how long ago the offensive transgression transpired. It doesn’t matter if you were a young, immature teenager.

If you’re a conservative, then your life and reputation could be permanently tarnished.

But that’s not the only penalty. If any conservative posts a homophobic or transphobic slur, for example, they will be swiftly banned from Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and other Big Tech platforms — possibly forever. Good riddance!

However, apparently, if you hold a top position in the Biden administration, you’re permitted to tweet homophobic smears against U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham — and suffer no consequences. Talk about a rigged system!

In a recently unearthed tweet from last August, Biden’s liberal press secretary Jen Psaki — a former CNN contributor — tweeted, “Only in 2020 does #LadyG get to push a bunch of debunked conspiracy theories while questioning @SallyQYates (aka an American hero).”

Psaki mocked Graham’s sexual identity and harassed him, actions that unequivocally violate Big Tech’s terms of service. Others who commit similar offensive acts face suspension of their accounts or worse, being de-platformed by these networks. Biden’s spokeswoman also spread a conspiracy theory that Graham is a cross-dressing homosexual despite his public statements saying otherwise. Back in 2018, following a homophobic slur by another liberal, Chelsea Handler, Graham told a TMZ reporter: “She knows zero about me. To the extent that it matters, I’m not gay.”

So, at minimum, Psaki spread fake news about Graham’s sexual orientation while appearing to shame and bully the GOP lawmaker “out of the closet,” despite it being none of her business — or anyone else’s for that matter — what is his sexual preference or identity. Make no mistake. Graham’s sexuality isn’t the issue. Who he chooses to love, and how he chooses to identify, is his prerogative.

The issue is the appalling double standard and hypocrisy in America today. Conservatives and libertarians are held to completely different standards than progressives. It’s an unfair and unequal system that’s tearing apart the fabric of our nation.

Here’s what should happen: Psaki should be held to the same standards as all Americans. Twitter and other social media should shut her accounts like they do to others, and President Joe Biden should issue a statement condemning her homophobic tweets while announcing her replacement. Or Biden’s press secretary should apologize to Lindsay Graham and be given a second chance in the court of public opinion — as should all Americans guilty of offensive speech. If the Biden administration truly seeks to unify the country, it cannot perpetuate this arbitrary system that punishes some for speech that’s repugnant and not others based on political affiliation.

That’s an irrefutable form of discrimination.

Bottom line: Until progressives practice tolerance and hold members of their own party to the same standards as others, they have lost the moral authority needed to lead the nation.

Under Biden, Mainstream Media Rebrands “Kids In Cages” To “Overflow Facility”

Under Biden, Mainstream Media Rebrands “Kids In Cages” To “Overflow Facility”

CDC Wants Negative COVID-19 Tests For Those Wanting To Fly Domestically – Evidence Of Goalpost Moving Again And Again And Again

US CITIZENS WILL NEVER REACH THE COVID GOAL POSTS BECAUSE THOSE VERY GOAL POSTS KEEP MOVING, MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER REACH THEM

In the united States, if not the world, people have moved beyond “coronavirus/CONvid-1984 fatigue” into “coronavirus/CONvid-1984 exhaustion”. Many people believe an end to this nightmare is only achieved when all people submit to government and medical tyranny through testing, injections, mask-wearing (up to however many some bureaucrat dictates), social distancing, and continued lockdowns. In other words, people should voluntarily relinquish their Rights (yes, this is intentional since it is referencing God-given Rights and not civil rights) in order to return to a pre-coronavirus “normal”. Their reason is always the same – “it’s for the good of society”.

However, the people have refused to learn from experience. From the PATRIOT Act after 9/11 resulting in violations on privacy and bodily integrity to “we collect data on everyone to ensure national security and safety” to “only a 15-day lockdown to flatten the curve” to “only after getting an injection will things return to normal” to “after the injection you will still need to wear masks, social distance, and limit movement”, the goalposts move and the people move along with the new goalposts. The Center for Disease Control (CDC), a government agency with no law-making ability have dictated that airline passengers wear masks, sometimes more than one, for airline, bus, train, taxi, ride-share, Uber, Lyft, and ship travel, as well as in public transportation hubs. But, that has not been enough. Now, the director of the CDC wants travelers to submit to coronavirus testing before traveling on a domestic airline.

NationalNews.com has the story.

The director of the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention suggested testing people for the coronavirus before US domestic flights could help to reduce transmission.

Requiring travelers to receive a negative coronavirus test before boarding domestic flights could be “another mitigation measure”, CDC director Dr Rochelle Walensky said on Monday.

Dr Walensky did not say whether the CDC would move forward with the policy, which the Biden administration is actively considering.

Transport Secretary Pete Buttigieg told Axios the discussion is continuing and the decision would be “guided by data, by science, by medicine and by the input of the people who are actually going to have to carry this out”.

Let’s stop right here and look at the language. The director of the CDC is suggesting coronavirus testing individuals before taking a domestic airline flight, which could help reduce transmission. The key here is “could help”, not “will help”, not “will reduce”. In other words, she doesn’t know; but, she is willing to “force” individuals to submit to a “medical diagnostic procedure” in order to “approve” individuals to fly on an airplane only if the test is negative. How many times would an individual need to be tested in order to fly domestically – every flight, once a month, once a week? It’s akin to saying you have to have a colonoscopy before using a public restroom. So, if you want to take a domestic airline flight, the policy may be that you are “forced” to submit to a medical procedure to do so through blackmail and coercion – both crimes.

Remember, the Biden regime is allowing illegal alien invaders to cross the borders of the united States without having to endure any type of testing for any type of illness or disease whatsoever. But, Beijing Biden is considering requiring testing for US residents to submit to a medical diagnostic procedure before taking a domestic airline flight.

Active sodomite Pete Buttigieg, appointed Secretary of Transportation, states this “policy”, not law, will be “guided by data, by science, by medicine and by the input of the people who are actually going to have to carry this out”. So far, the government has not followed any data, science, or medicine regarding this false pandemic, an actual planned scam-demic. What they have followed has been a science project by a High school child whose father works for Sandia in New Mexico that just happened to get the child’s school science project published on the National Institute of Health’s Pub Med site in 2006. And, the “preliminary data” from this child’s project was run through the “super” computers at Sandia, normally used for engineering nuclear weapons. All of these interventions were extrapolated out using a computer, not real-world data.

Yet, eight actual randomized control trials (RCTs) exist from 2009 to 2020 indicating that masks do not work to prevent the spread or transmission of illness/disease. Why isn’t that scientific data being used? The CDC in the US and the head of the Chinese CDC have admitted this “virus” was never isolated in whole using the gold standard technique for actual isolation, meaning the verified scientific definition, not the changed definition of isolate. Why isn’t that science being used? Social distancing and lockdowns have proven to be useless. How do we know? It hasn’t work in any country that has tried it. Moreover, the tests being used to “diagnose” the unisolated, non-proven virus is being misused according to its creator, Kary Mullis. The icing on the cake is numerous doctors who have indicated there is no indication of any new “illness or disease” that is circulating among the population.

The story continues.

Federal health officials have been watching for more evidence that a variant of the coronavirus now widespread in the UK will become the dominant strain in the US.

Dr Anthony Fauci, director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said that could happen by the end of March.

So far, 699 variant cases have been identified, 690 of which are the strain discovered in Britain.

Dr Walensky said the US expected to at least triple its sequencing in the next weeks, giving it a better snapshot of how widely the variants might have already spread in the US.

In case you missed it, scientific data indicates that a “virus” mutates each time it replicates. How do you determine “variants” when the initial “strain” has not been isolated or proven to exist?

“Once we have more sequencing that’s happening, we’ll have a better idea as to how many variants there are and what proportion are out there,” she said.

Dr Walensky advised state and local officials against loosening restrictions despite a decline in Covid cases.

Sequencing is another name for “testing”. Right on cue, the CDC director advises against “loosening restrictions”. So, more testing due to “new variants” is needed and restrictions cannot be lessened because of “new variants”. Are you getting the picture? You can’t reach a goal post that keeps moving farther away as you move toward it.

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds at the weekend lifted the law making masks mandatory and other guidelines implemented amid a surge of cases in the autumn.

“I’m asking everyone to please keep your guard up,” Dr Walensky said. “The continued proliferation of variants remains a great concern.”

The administration plans to release guidance on reopening schools in coming days, she said.

Officials also urged patience as Covid-19 vaccines are distributed. [This is an injected medical device, not a vaccine according to accepted medical definition.]

More than 17 million vaccine doses have been administered to people 65 and older, said Andy Slavitt, senior adviser to the Biden administration’s coronavirus response team.

You can read the rest. Important to note is that States are reallocating injections meant for long-term care residents because these injected medical devices are going “unused”. Imagine that.

But the question on everyone’s mind is, “when will life get back to pre-coronavirus normals”? Well, that question has been answered.

NationalNews.com indicates in a related article that the “answer lies in the rate of ‘vaccination’” or the rate people can be convinced to get injected with a medical device. “With vaccinations happening more rapidly in richer western countries than the rest of the globe, it will take the world as a whole seven years at the current pace.” This is reported from “Bloomberg’s vaccine tracker”.

This is propaganda at its finest. If you want to get back to normal, then you have to resist. Stop complying with dictatorial edicts no matter the source. How many times has it been said, “I don’t want to die from COVID-19”? With an overall survival rate of 99.9%, higher in some groups, it’s akin to that of influenza. Everyone will face death. God is the determiner of when and how. If someone is that afraid, that someone needs to get his or her life and his or her person right with God.

There is a choice to make. Only you can make it. But, make that choice based on all the information, not off of fear and propaganda. And, certainly not off “trust” in government or government agencies.

If you haven’t learned by now, that the goal posts keep moving because of an agenda and not because of any type of new illness or disease, then there is no help for you. May God give you some kind of peace.

NY Times Accidentally Exposes They Are Tracking You…EVERYWHERE. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INSULTING AND FRIGHTENING!

In 2019, a source came to us with a digital file containing the precise locations of more than 12 million individual smartphones for several months in 2016 and 2017. The data is supposed to be anonymous, but it isn’t. We found celebrities, Pentagon officials and average Americans.It became clear that this data — collected by smartphone apps and then fed into a dizzyingly complex digital advertising ecosystem — was a liability to national security, to free assembly and to citizens living mundane lives. It provided an intimate record of people whether they were visiting drug treatment centers, strip clubs, casinos, abortion clinics or places of worship.Surrendering our privacy to the government would be foolish enough. But what is more insidious is the Faustian bargain made with the marketing industry, which turns every location ping into currency as it is bought and sold in the marketplace of surveillance advertising.Now, one year later, we’re in a very similar position. But it’s far worse.A source has provided another data set, this time following the smartphones of thousands of Trump supporters, rioters and passers-by in Washington, D.C., on January 6, as Donald Trump’s political rally turned into a violent insurrection. At least five people died because of the riot at the Capitol. Key to bringing the mob to justice has been the event’s digital detritus: location data, geotagged photos, facial recognition, surveillance cameras and crowdsourcing.

From Trump’s Rally to Congress

This time-lapse animation shows smartphones as they moved from Donald Trump’s rally to the Capitol.

8:00 a.m.6:00 p.m.

*Unable to produce time-lapse. Sorry.

---

This is Ronnie Vincent. This traced a phone inside the Capitol to Mr. Vincent’s home in Kentucky. Confirming his identity led to his Facebook page, where it was found a few photos of him standing on the steps of the building during the siege. Another photo shows a crowd standing in front of the Capitol, its doors wide open.

At the Capitol

Smartphones tracked between 2 p.m. and 5 p.m. record the seige on the Capitol.A phone “ping” tied to Ronnie Vincent. A phone “ping” tied to Ronnie Vincent U.S. Capitol Satellite imagery: Microsoft Corporation and Digital Globe. “Yes we got inside. One girl was shot by the DC cops as she was knocking on the glass. She probably will die. We stopped the voting in the house,” he wrote. Shortly after he posted the photos, Mr. Vincent, a pest control business owner in Kentucky who goes by the nickname Ole Woodsman, took them down. When reached by phone, he insisted he never entered the Capitol. “There is no way that my phone shows me in there,” he said. Yet it did!

For all its appearance of omniscience, the data can be imprecise. In a situation such as the Capitol riot, exact locations matter. A few feet can be the difference between a participant who committed a serious crime and an onlooker.While some location data is accurate to within a few feet, other data is not. Location companies can work with data derived from GPS sensors, Bluetooth signals and other sources. The quality depends on the settings of the phone and whether it is connected to Wi-Fi or a cell tower. Issues like population and building density can sometimes play a role in the quality of the data.Mr. Vincent told us that when he wrote “we got inside,” he meant “we the people got in. ”He added, “I did not go in. ”Can we say definitively Mr. Vincent was inside the Capitol on Jan. 6? No, and that is one of the problems with this type of data.

Ronnie Vincent’s Journey

It was easier to identify Mr. Vincent — and discover the path he took to get to Washington, D.C. — because an email was matched to the phone’s anonymous advertising ID.The trip to Washington, D.C. OHIO Washington, D.C. WESTVIRGINIA Home VIRGINIA KENTUCKY Home location has been obscured. The day of the protest Hyatt Regency hotel at 1:48 p.m.7:30 a.m. Rally stage8:17 a.m. Around the Capitol Building at 3:00 p.m. At the Capitol Accuracy 322 feet187 feet Note: Location pings may not be precise. Satellite imagery: Microsoft Corporation, Earthstar Geographics, SIO, Maxar•By The New York Times While the power and scope of this commercial surveillance come into sharp focus when we look at the specific time of the attack on the Capitol, it’s important to remember that it is recording the movements of millions of Americans all day, all night, all year, wherever they are. The data set Times Opinion examined shows how Trump supporters traveled from South Carolina, Florida, Ohio and Kentucky to the nation’s capital, with pings tracing neatly along major highways, in the days before the attack. Stops at gas stations, restaurants and motels dot the route like bread crumbs, each offering corroborating details.In many cases, these trails lead from the Capitol right back to their homes.

Trump Supporters Go to Washington

While protesters may have felt anonymous, their journeys to Washington and back were recorded in meticulous detail by apps on their phones.Washington,D.C.NewMexicoFloridaSouthCarolinaFloridaNew HampshireNew YorkSatellite imagery: Microsoft Corporation and Earthstar Geographics.In the hands of law enforcement, this data could be evidence. But at every other moment, the location data is reviewed by hedge funds, financial institutions and marketers, in an attempt to learn more about where we shop and how we live.Unlike the data we reviewed in 2019, this new data included a remarkable piece of information: a unique ID for each user that is tied to a smartphone. This made it even easier to find people, since the supposedly anonymous ID could be matched with other databases containing the same ID, allowing us to add real names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses and other information about smartphone owners in seconds.The IDs, called mobile advertising identifiers, allow companies to track people across the internet and on apps. They are supposed to be anonymous, and smartphone owners can reset them or disable them entirely. Our findings show the promise of anonymity is a farce. Several companies offer tools to allow anyone with data to match the IDs with other databases.

How “Anonymous” Pings Could Be Identifiable

If the Jan. 6 rioters didn’t know before, they surely know now the cost of leaving a digital footprint. Tip lines at the Federal Bureau of Investigation have been flooded for weeks in an effort to identify participants, and detectives in Miami and other police departments are using facial recognition software. Amateur investigators on TikTok, Instagram and other platforms have launched their own identification efforts. Law enforcement has used cellphone footage from the siege to identify participants. As of February 4, there were 181 federal cases pending against individuals involved in the Capitol Hill siege, according to an analysis by George Washington University’s program on extremism. Affidavits show that federal investigators were easily able to cross-reference footage with public social media posts. A leak of data from the social media platform Parler also helped investigators and journalists place rioters in the building, using posts that were geotagged with GPS location data. For some, like 38-year-old Oath Keepers member Jessica Watkins, there was no need for precise location data. Her words tell the story: “Yeah. We stormed the Capitol today. Teargassed, the whole, 9. Pushed our way into the Rotunda. Made it into the Senate even,” she wrote on Parler. Which is to say that law enforcement may not need this data. But as a recent Wall Street Journal report shows, military agencies use these data sets — without a warrant, no less. How? They purchase it. Because we have seen what’s in the data, that revelation is deeply troubling. While some Americans might cheer the use of location databases to identify Trump supporters who converged on the Capitol, the use of commercial databases has worrying implications for civil liberties. The American criminal justice system is set up for a judge or jury to determine whether, in fact, Ronnie Vincent broke any laws on Jan. 6. But the data leads us directly to him, and in the hands of law enforcement officials — or rogue employees of the company that collected the data — it could narrow their search for participants and offer clues about their activity.

---

To focus attention only on those people present at the deadly sacking of the Capitol is to lose sight of the larger context of the campaign of incitement and lies from Mr. Trump, right-wing media and members of Congress that set the stage for it. Just as focusing on the movements of Mr. Vincent’s cellphone is to lose sight of the larger surveillance ecosystem that he — and all of us — are trapped in. The location-tracking industry exists because those in power allow it to exist. Plenty of Americans remain oblivious to this collection through no fault of their own. But many others understand what’s happening and allow it anyway. They feel powerless to stop it or were simply seduced by the conveniences afforded in the trade-off. The dark truth is that, despite genuine concern from those paying attention, there’s little appetite to meaningfully dismantle this advertising infrastructure that undergirds unchecked corporate data collection. This collection will only grow more sophisticated. This new data set offers proof that not only is there more interest in location data than before, but it is also easier to deanonymize. It gets easier by the day. As the data from Jan. 6 eerily demonstrates, it does not discriminate. It harvests from the phones of MAGA rioters, police officers, lawmakers and passers-by. There is no evidence, from the past or current day, that the power this data collection offers will be used only to good ends. There is no evidence that if we allow it to continue to happen, the country will be safer or fairer. In our previous investigation, we wrote that Americans deserve the freedom to choose a life without surveillance and the government regulation that would make that possible. While we continue to believe the sentiment, we fear it may soon be obsolete or irrelevant. We deserve that freedom, but the window to achieve it narrows a little more each day. If we don’t act now, with great urgency, it may very well close for good. Related Read more from Charlie Warzel and Stuart Thompson on location tracking. Opinion Total Surveillance Is Not What America Signed Up For Opinion How Your Phone Betrays Democracy Opinion Where Even the Children Are Being Tracked

Biden Administration Quietly Drops Trump Proposal To Track Chinese Influence In US Schools

The Biden administration quietly withdrew a rule proposed by the Trump administration that would have required American schools and universities to disclose their partnerships with Confucius Institutes, which some U.S. officials allege are front groups for Chinese Communist Party propaganda.

The Trump administration submitted a proposed rule to the Department of Homeland Security on Dec. 31, 2020, entitled “Establishing Requirement for Student and Exchange Visitor Program Certified Schools to Disclose Agreements with Confucius Institutes and Classrooms.”

Around 500 K-12 schools and 65 colleges in the U.S. have partnerships with the Confucius Institute U.S. Center, a U.S.-based affiliate of the Beijing-based Confucius Institute Headquarters. The institute, also known as Hanban, is affiliated with the Chinese Ministry of Education.

Many of Hanban’s directors are members of the Chinese Communist Party or have close ties to the organization, The Daily Caller has previously reported.

The Trump-era proposal was withdrawn from consideration on Jan. 26, according to information at RegInfo.gov, the website for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which operates under the Office of Management and Budget and the White House.

The OIRA website does not provide any other information about the proposal, or why it was tabled. The website does say that at any point in the review process for a proposed rule, “an agency may withdraw its rule from review and choose not to move forward with it or to resubmit it after further consideration.”

China’s Vice President Xi Jinping unveils the plaque at the opening of Australia’s first Chinese Medicine Confucius Institute at the RMIT University in Melbourne on June 20, 2010. (WILLIAM WEST/AFP via Getty Images)

A spokesperson for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a component of DHS, confirmed that the rule was withdrawn on Jan. 26.

The spokesperson did not elaborate on the reason for withdrawing the rule, and declined to speculate on whether the Biden administration will re-submit it.

“ICE does not speculate about future pre-decisional proposed rules or policies,” the spokesperson told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

President Joe Biden has pledged to review and potentially nullify many of President Trump’s executive orders, particularly those related to immigration issues, which fall under the control of DHS.

Axios reported on Jan. 11 that the Trump administration was trying to push through a rule that would require colleges and K-12 schools to disclose any financial ties to Confucius Institutes. The story noted that Biden could quickly undo the rule once he took office. (RELATED: Trump Administration Designates Confucius Institute As Foreign Mission In Response To Chinese Community Party Influence)

In August, the Trump administration labeled the Confucius Institutes U.S. Center a “foreign mission” of the Chinese Communist Party, a designation typically used for foreign embassies and consulates.

The Foreign Missions Act applies to entities that are “substantially owned or effectively controlled by a foreign government.”

Trump administration officials said that the Chinese government used the Confucius Institutes as part of its propaganda and influence efforts in the U.S.

Sec. of State Mike Pompeo, who spearheaded many of the Trump administration’s China initiatives, said on Aug. 13 that the Confucius Institute was “an entity controlled by the PRC that advances Beijing’s global propaganda and malign influence campaign on U.S. campuses and K-12 classrooms.”

Biden’s ☭ CIA Pick Was President Of Think Tank That Took Millions From Chinese Communist Party Affiliates

CCP in the White House. They own the demented segregationist. Hell, they own the party.

President Joe Biden’s nominee to be the next director of the CIA, William Burns, was the president of a think tank that reportedly took millions of dollars from entities linked to the Chinese Communist Party.

“As president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Burns also invited nearly a dozen congressional staffers to attend a junket to China, where they met with a communist party operative and a president of a Chinese front group,” The Daily Caller News Foundation reported. “Burns, who was paid $540,580 last year as president of Carnegie, will appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee for a confirmation hearing likely to be held this month.”

Burns, who has been president of the think tank for nearly six years, welcomed Chinese businessman Zhang Yichen, CEO of CITIC Consulting, to the think tank’s board of trustees, saying that they were “very fortunate” to have him. The report said that Zhang donated between $500,000 and $999,999 to the think tank over a one-year span between 2017 and 2018 and gave an additional $250,000 and $549,999 to the think tank in the last fiscal year.

“Zhang is a member of two organizations linked to the Chinese Communist Party, according to his biography at CITIC Capital: the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and the Center for China and Globalization,” the report said. “CPPCC is an advisory group for the Chinese Communist Party that is affiliated with China’s united front system, which promotes Chinese government initiatives abroad.”

The think tank also received funding from the China-United States Exchange Foundation (CUSEF), a Hong Kong-based think tank that has reportedly come under scrutiny in recent years over its ties to China’s communist government.

“CUSEF donated between $100,000 and $249,999 to Carnegie in 2015 and the same amount between July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017, according to archived versions of Carnegie’s donor page,” the report said. “According to the Jamestown Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank led by retired U.S. intelligence officials, CUSEF is ‘a major player in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s organizational apparatus for conducting united front work in the United States.””https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1358968431761104905&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2Fbidens-cia-pick-was-president-of-think-tank-that-took-millions-from-chinese-communist-party-tied-entities-report%3Futm_source%3Dfacebook%26utm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_campaign%3Dbenshapiro%26fbclid%3DIwAR2HJuur1jdF73TN-wEcOuvPB666TkDYazCo90c2ahXK8Nc5sT5nHlAbGmQ&siteScreenName=realDailyWire&theme=light&widgetsVersion=889aa01%3A1612811843556&width=500px

The news comes as the Biden administration has faced mounting pressure over whether it will confront communist China over a wide range of issues. Biden has repeatedly downplayed the threat China poses to the United States and even repeatedly refused to call China an “opponent” during an appearance on CNN last year.

During an interview that aired in-part on Sunday, Biden praised Chinese President Xi Jinping, saying that he was “very bright.”

“He’s very tough. He doesn’t have – and I don’t mean it as a criticism, just the reality, he doesn’t have a democratic, small-D, bone in his body,” Biden said. “But … the question is, I’ve said to him all along, that we need not have a conflict.”