John Eastman, the Claremont Institute scholar and conservative firebrand who stood by President Trump’s side all throughout some of the darkest days in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election when the republic was on the line, will have his story told for the first time on the silver screen come the new year. The documentary, titled The Eastman Dilemma: Lawfare or Justice, is slated for a fitting January 6^th, 2025, release date, the fourth anniversary of the January 6^th demonstration (but will premiere at Mar-a-Lago in a special event two days earlier). The film marks the culmination of a years-long ordeal that has seen Eastman, once universally revered as a foremost authority in constitutional construction and history, targeted by one of the most ruthless and sustained lawfare campaigns against any attorney in American history. Eastman, alongside former US Assistant Attorney General Jeff Clark and Mayor Rudy Giuliani, were systematically maligned, censured, and even disbarred for simply arising to a timeless call of both client and their profession by providing legal representation.

PLEASE CLICK ON THE ABOVE LINK TO VIEW THE VIDEO AND READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE

By Tyler Durden   December 16, 2024

Authored by Josh Stylman via The Brownstone Institute,

Let me start by saying I loathe politics. I’ve always been drawn to liberal ideas—individual freedom, protecting the vulnerable, questioning authority, and the fundamental belief that consenting adults should be free to live their lives however they choose as long as they’re not harming others. These aren’t political positions to me; they’re basic human principles. But the game of politics itself repulses me. What I’m about to share isn’t about politics; it’s about our shared reality and how we’ve lost touch with it.

The Mindvirus

What’s truly mind-numbing to me is how people don’t see what’s happening right in front of them. The media has devolved into nothing more than a propaganda mouthpiece for the establishment, programming people to react rather than think. I’ve experienced this firsthand: When I drew historical comparisons between vaccine mandates and 1933 Germany’s early authoritarian policies, I was instantly labeled an extremist and cancelled by my NYC community. Yet now, these same people casually call everyone at Trump’s MSG rally Nazis. The irony would be funny if it weren’t so tragic.

My Liberal Foundation

I still believe deeply in core liberal principles:

• Genuine free speech, not the controlled corporate version we see today
• Standing against establishment overreach
• Opposing unchecked corporate power
• Fighting against unnecessary wars
• Complete bodily autonomy – your body, your choice, in ALL contexts
• Defending individual rights consistently, not selectively

These aren’t just political positions—they’re principles about human dignity and freedom.

The Democratic Party’s Transformation

The Democratic Party’s drift from these values didn’t happen overnight. Many of us, exhausted by Bush’s brutal wars, lies about weapons of mass destruction, and the Patriot Act’s assault on civil liberties, invested our hopes in Obama’s promise of change. But instead of the transformation we sought, we got what felt like Bush’s third and fourth terms.

Under Obama, we watched as corporate influence grew stronger, not weaker. The Snowden revelations exposed massive surveillance programs. The housing crisis devastated ordinary Americans while Wall Street got bailouts. Rather than challenging institutional power, the Democratic establishment became increasingly entangled with it.

 

The betrayal of liberal values became even clearer with Bernie Sanders. Like Trump, Bernie tapped into something real—a deep frustration with a system that had left ordinary Americans behind. Both men, from vastly different perspectives, recognized that working people were suffering while elites prospered. But the Democratic establishment couldn’t allow an actual progressive challenger. They used every trick in the book—from media manipulation to primary shenanigans—to block him from the nomination. Most disappointing was watching Bernie himself bend the knee to the same establishment he had railed against, leaving millions of supporters feeling betrayed and politically homeless.

(more…)

Vance highlighted all the things that went wrong with the 2020 election without taking the Democrats’ bait.

The legacy media continues to push Sen. J.D. Vance to say Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, with Martha Raddatz on Sunday’s “This Week” being the latest in a string of interviewers pressing the vice-presidential candidate on that question. While Vance responded as before, that “of course Donald Trump and I believe there were problems in 2020,” the full exchange revealed that the fundamental flaw is in the question — not Vance’s answer.

For a full two minutes during yesterday’s interview, Raddatz demanded Vance say Trump lost the 2020 election. “Why won’t you say that?” she asked, to which Vance replied: “Because, Martha, I believe that in 2020, when Big Tech were censoring American citizens, that created very serious problems.”

“I don’t understand why you won’t just say that you believe it?” Raddatz retorted. “Did Donald Trump lose? That’s the question, and you know that’s the question.”

It was here that an exasperated Vance made his point clear: “Martha, I’ve said repeatedly I think the 2020 election had problems, you want to say ‘rigged,’ you want to say, ‘he won,’ use whatever vocabulary term you want.” What happened, Vance stressed, was the “censoring of fellow citizens in a way that ‘violated our fundamental rights,’” and that was a bigger problem, Vance explained, than what words he used to frame the issue.

(more…)

According to the investigators’ nearly 300-page report, “overwhelming evidence demonstrates that Biden participated in a conspiracy to monetize his office of public trust to enrich his family.”

“Among other aspects of this conspiracy, the Biden family and their business associates received tens of millions of dollars from foreign interests by leading those interests to believe that such payments would provide them access to and influence with President Biden,” said the report.

Bank records reportedly show that when accounting also for the Biden family’s business associates and their companies, the international “influence peddling schemes totaled over $27 million from foreign sources” just from 2014 to 2023.

By Ben Weingarten

August 12, 2024

America’s speech police are reassembling to once again influence our elections. At the same time the security state is creating potential pretexts for renewed censorship by issuing warnings of cyberattacks that could “hinder public access to election information,” they are also reprising old claims of coming Russian election interference on behalf of Donald Trump.

The little-noticed development comes in a report from the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) on the DOJ’s efforts to “Coordinate Information Sharing About Foreign Malign Influence Threats to U.S. Elections” — a euphemism for the chief law enforcement agency’s prior censorship activities.

During the 2020 election, as revealed in litigation, congressional oversight, and reporting, national security and law enforcement agencies used the threat of foreign misinformation and disinformation on social media to U.S. elections as a pretext to surveil and suppress domestic news and opinions deemed derogatory to our ruling regime.

An alphabet soup of agencies coerced, cajoled, and colluded directly and via cutouts with social media companies to get those companies to squash all manner of wrongthink on election integrity and outcomes at mass scale.

While the OIG explicitly omitted the “FBI’s information sharing with social media companies with respect to domestic actors” from its report, the DOJ’s response to the office’s recommendations will likely have substantial bearing on Americans’ speech.

That response, appended to the report, comes in the form of a DOJ memo revealing that the law enforcement agency has now codified its protocols for reporting purported “foreign malign influence” information with social media companies, and is redoubling its efforts to do so in the run-up to the 2024 election.

In fact, the FBI has been implementing new Standard Operating Procedures since February.

Under those procedures, the FBI is required to identify “specific, credible, and articulable facts that provide high confidence for assessing that the information at issue relates to activity attributable to a foreign government, foreign non-state actor, or their proxy engaged in an FMI [foreign malign influence] operation.”

The Bureau is also required to include a disclaimer — akin to one authorities often included in censorship requests from 2020 — explaining it “does not request or expect” recipients to take any specific action based on shared information.

A related summary of the procedures posted on the FBI website notes that communications to social media platforms must make clear that the FBI “does not investigate solely based on First Amendment-protected activity.” [Emphasis mine]

On top of implementing these procedures, the memo adds that the FBI will be resuming regular meetings with social media companies regarding foreign malign influence threats; that FBI field offices will be engaging in outreach efforts to foster relationships with social media companies in their jurisdictions, in coordination with the FBI’s “Foreign Influence Task Force” — a key cog in censorship activities in 2020; and that senior DOJ officials will be making the rounds with relevant stakeholders to discuss their information sharing strategy.

The Justice Department assures us that its extensive interaction with Big Tech companies is of a completely passive nature, solely concerning clear-cut foreign influence operations, and will strictly protect our right to free speech.

(more…)