This Weirdo CNN Reporter Has A Deranged Obsession With Getting Alex Jones Banned

Alex Jones has been banned from almost all major social media platforms, and now is serving a 7 day Twitter suspension for tweeting about the censorship. The Twitter suspension comes after an intense and obsessive campaign by a CNN reporter who appears to be spending every waking hour trying to get Jones banned.

Oliver Darcy, who works as a CNN senior media reporter has been writing about trying to get Jones banned for some time, and even spent time going through Alex Jones’ past tweets, trying to find something that he could report to Twitter to get Jones banned.

Darcy is constantly tweeting about Alex Jones’ activities, and it is quite clear that the CNN reporter is suffering from a derangement syndrome.

Darcy isn’t alone in his obsession with Jones, he has a CNN sidekick called Paul P. Murphy, who has been gathering intelligence on Jones and Infowars for the best part of the entire YEAR:

However, it is Darcy that is clearly the most obsessive deranged CNN freak:

He’s literally sat at a computer pressing refresh on Infowars.com:

And listening to the Alex Jones show on repeat:

In his spare time, when he’s not tweeting about Alex, and studying Infowars, or appearing on CNN to talk about how evil Alex is, Darcy appears on basement dweller podcasts, and talks about ‘taking down Alex Jones’:

Honestly, it just goes on and on and on…

So brave.

Lets remember, however, that this isn’t some triggered leftist kid in a chat room, this is a CNN reporter being paid to monitor Alex Jones and then to lobby companies to censor and deplatform him:

Crazed MSM Have A Vendetta Against Alex Jones

CNN Article Accuses Infowars of Being “Complicit in Domestic Terror”

According to CNN opinion contributor Rafia Zakaria, the banning of Alex Jones and Infowars was the first step towards criminalizing “hate speech” as “a form of terrorism.”

From CNN, “Rafia Zakaria: It’s an important step in recognizing hate speech as a form of terrorism”:

The stripping of InfoWars from Facebook, Apple and other platforms is an important step in the recognition of nativist, nationalist and white supremacist hate speech as a form of terrorism.

In the aftermath of the decision of various service providers to stop carrying InfoWars content, there are many who will say that this represents an unprecedented affront to free speech and First Amendment rights. As a Muslim-American who has seen the detestable anti-Muslim propaganda of InfoWars content replicated across the worldwide web and popularized via Apple, Spotify and others, I know nothing could be farther from the truth.

The United States denies First Amendment protections to those sharing views involving support for or agreement with foreign terror organizations. In the case of Ali Shukri Amin, the Virginia teenager who was charged with providing material support for terrorism based on his tweets and blog, a US Federal Court declared that First Amendment protections do not apply to those who are being charged under the Material Support for Terrorism statute.

For the record, Alex Jones and Infowars has consistently opposed all the Neocons’ wars in the Middle East for around two decades. CNN has pushed every last one of them.

After pushing for Trump to bomb Syria, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria said he “became president.”

Of course, none of that matters to Rafia Zakaria (relation unclear), whose work revolves around apologia for Islamic terrorism.

Zakaria continues:

Sadly, domestic terrorism, or Jones’ dangerous speech, in which he claims that he is in a holy war against Islam, is not prosecuted under that statute. This is a failing that has permitted the proliferation of platforms such as InfoWars, their presence on popular platforms a legitimization of sorts for their content.

This new decision is a step forward in recognizing that hate outlets, such as InfoWars, are complicit in domestic terror, and a relief to Muslim-Americans, like myself, who have been the target of online assaults and threats.

Rafia Zakaria is the author of “The Upstairs Wife: An Intimate History of Pakistan” (Beacon 2015) and “Veil” (Bloomsbury 2017). She is a columnist for Dawn newspaper in Pakistan and The Baffler.

In Zakaria’s world, those opposing Islamic terrorism and mass Islamic immigration to the West should be considered terrorists while Islamists carrying out actual terrorism in the West should be considered victims.

Turkey’s Financial Crisis “Infecting” World Economy

The Turkey lira meltdown is causing a global economic crisis with countries across the four corners of the world becoming infected.

The lira slipped below 7.0 to the US dollar and was down 12 percent on Friday’s value at one point this morning.

The currency is collapsing after Donald Trump doubled import duties on steel and aluminum as part of fresh sanctions on the country.

Read more

Post-Brexit Business: Kick Out EU Citizens If Unemployed

Britain should kick out EU citizens who come arrive in the country after Brexit if they have not begun contributing to the economy within three months, say business chiefs.

The Confederation of British Industry has urged Government to ensure those who are not “working, studying or self-sufficient” are made to leave.

The business lobby group, the largest in Britain, has backed maintaining close ties between the nation and the European Union.

Read more

Big Tech Shows “Net Neutrality” Battle Was About Power, Not an “Open Internet”

The de-platforming of Alex Jones and InfoWars is a subject that has a number of layers to it, including the responsibilities social media companies have to free speech — particularly in a world where the lines between Big Tech and Big Government are increasingly blurred.

While I’ll leave others to debate those particular subjects, these developments — and reactions to it — do help provide clarity to another heated tech-related debate: the hypocrisy of “net neutrality” advocates.

After all, there is a ton of overlap between those who advocated Title II regulation of the internet and those celebrating the deplatforming of Alex Jones. This is particularly true among the most powerful players in this debate, including legislators and leaders in the industry.

Consider, for example, the reaction from Big Tech to the FCC’s repeal Title II regulation last December.

Facebook’s Sherryl Sansberg published a statement saying: “An open internet is critical for new ideas and economic opportunity. … We’re ready to work with members of Congress and others to help make the internet free and open for everyone.”

Google encouraged online activists to “take action,” in order to “protect the free flow of information and help make sure the Internet is available to everyone, everywhere.”

Apple went so far as to say:

An open internet ensures that hundreds of millions of consumers get the experience they want, over the broadband connections they choose, to use the devices they love, which have become an integral part of their lives.

What consumers do with those tools is up to them — not Apple, and not broadband providers.

Fast-forward eight months later and now those that demanded ISPs treat all content equally are the very same platforms actively deciding what content is or is not permissible for consumption.

This is hardly surprising to anyone who has paid attention to the debate. Google and Apple’s lip service to the importance of protecting tech startups has never jived well with their app stores serving as the greatest filters to what new products can be easily accessed by the consumer public. Tellingly, both have caved to government pressure whenever an app — no matter how popular — has frustrated legal authorities.

What is all the more repulsive about the tech giant’s contributions to the net neutrality debate is how potentially dangerous their disingenuous crusade was to the future of internet in America.

After all, largely overlooked in FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s willingness to stand up to Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page, and the other titans of tech is that it was a major victory for the future of online service: 5G.

As industry analysts like Peter Rysavy have explained:

“[N]etwork slicing, a key architecture for 5G, will allow an operator to provide different services with different performance characteristics to address specific use cases. It’s critical that quality of service management be employed in 5G because 5G is being designed for a wider range of use cases than prior technology generations and certain applications will need higher priority than other.”…

Even with access to new spectrum and peak throughputs that will exceed 1 Gbps, 5G networks will need to manage latency, reliability, massive numbers of connections and a mix of stationary and mobile users, Rysavy added. “The United States has assumed global leadership in 4G and enjoys deep LTE penetration, leading smartphone platforms, and a vibrant application ecosystem. But globally, countries and companies are investing in and concentrating on what will come next with 5G. Constraining 5G with rules that unnecessarily undermine its potential is economic folly,” he said.

Tellingly, the imposition of FDR-era-like regulation on internet service providers correlated with a significant decrease in telecom investment, stalling the development of American 5G at a time when America’s tech dominance is threatened by rivals like China.

This is not to say that private companies have an inherent responsibility to place “national interest” over their own bottom line, companies have the right to behave cynically. At the same time, those same companies deserved to be exposed for such behavior, and allow consumers to react accordingly.

Net neutrality was about control and regulatory capture, not online freedom. What tech giants are now counting on is that brand loyalty and market size will isolate them from the increased politicization of their content — something that may not be working out so well for Netflix.

At the end of the day, on the market it is consumers that are king. Will consumer apathy allow Silicon Valley to serve as America’s censor, or will we see a new brand of #WalkAway campaign?

That’s up to the American public to decide.

Alex Jones Demands Right to Congressional Hearing

Alex Jones has asked to appear in front of a Congressional hearing to defend his right to free speech and expose the horrific precedent Big Tech has set by banning Infowars.

In a series of tweets, the radio host demanded his right to respond to Democrat lawmakers who have been lobbying Facebook and Google to ban Infowars for months.

“I respectfully ask Congress to allow me to face my accusers,” he tweeted. “There have been multiple hearings where the banning of Infowars has been discussed & lobbied for by Democrats. Now it’s happened. I want to attend an open session where I am allowed to defend my right to free speech.”

Jones is referring to hearings last month during which Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL). demanded Facebook shut down Infowars.

At a hearing last year, Democratic Congressman Mike Quigley also pressured Twitter to remove Infowars content, a request with which they complied.

Jones also demanded his right to “not to be ‘unpersoned’ by giant corporations who act like monopolies” and to “expose how this is all about moving towards a Communist Chinese-style ‘social credit score’ dystopia.”

“You may not like me, you may despise my politics, but I am the canary in the coal mine,” said Jones. “They want to set a horrendous precedent which will strangle free speech online, FOREVER.”

“Should billionaires & huge corporations get to decide what we can say and read? Don’t let them win!” he concluded.

Jones also blasted CNN, which has led an intensive lobbying campaign to have Jones banned, including claims that Infowars has encouraged “bullying” and glorified violence.

“It’s the height of hypocrisy for CNN to claim Infowars engages in “bullying,” tweeted Jones. “We don’t send camera crews to doxx and harass old ladies outside their homes like CNN did. We don’t threaten to doxx people who create memes like CNN did,” he added, referring to when a CNN film crew showed up at a Florida woman’s home to accuse her of “Russian collusion”.

“The media was weaponized mob outrage to silence “offensive” speech,” tweeted Jones. “CNN has led a lobbying campaign to shut down a competing network. This isn’t journalism, this is activism. In Russia, the government shuts down the media, in America, giant corporations take on that role.”

He went further, accusing the network of promoting wars that have killed millions of people.

“CNN accuses Infowars of glorifying violence. How many wars did CNN glorify? Your chief national security analyst advocated the invasion of Libya,” tweeted Jones in reference to a 2011 article by Peter Bergen which argued for military intervention.

“A war which led to the migrant crisis, the rise of ISIS & hundreds of thousands of deaths. How is that not glorifying violence?” asked Jones.

“Are conservatives just going to sit back and let CNN thought police the nation?” asked the radio host. “We need congressional hearings, we need a task force, we need to say no more.”

“You may despise Alex Jones and Infowars, but I’m the beta test for a wider purge. If you do nothing, you’ll be next,” warned Jones

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

Freelancer finds that CNN’s laser-focus on wiping out Alex Jones goes back a ways

As someone said in a tweet the other day, don’t make us defend Alex Jones. We don’t pay attention to Alex Jones, we rarely post about him (unless we’re ridiculing him for appearing shirtless on horseback or something), and we don’t consider him a conservative by any stretch.

But is it just us or is there some activist journalism going on over at CNN with the singular goal of purging Alex Jones and Infowars — and only Alex Jones and Infowars — from online existence? CNN first caught our eye with this:

As everyone on Twitter knows, there are plenty of people skirting the rules on these tech platforms — look at Dana Loesch’s mentions for one day if you want to see continual threats of violence.

But as Twitchy reported earlier today, it seemed that CNN was really pressuring Twitter — the sole tech holdout — to ban Jones by going through his timeline and pointing of instances of rule-breaking — and taking some glee in it. CNN was literally policing Twitter.

On Thursday evening, freelance journalist Nick Monroe took at closer look at CNN writer and producer Paul P. Murphy, who’s written a bunch of stories on Infowars for CNN. Sure, it’s easy to feel moral outrage at the Sandy Hook conspiracies Jones has been peddling, but is that what’s driving all this?

Yeah, see, this is where it gets weird. CNN was monitoring which companies’ ads were running on the Infowars’ YouTube Channel, getting in contact with them, and reporting on which ones had their ads removed. That the kind of stuff Sleeping Giants does.

Here’s the highlighted bit: “Many of the brands — including Nike, Moen, Expedia, Acer, ClassPass, Honey, Alibaba and OneFamily — have suspended ads on InfoWars’ channels after being contacted by CNN for comment.”

Sure, this isn’t unusual territory for the investigative reporter at your local news affiliate, but it seems odd for CNN to take such an activist role in de-platforming an online entity.

https://twitter.com/nickmon1112/status/1027681626627756033

As we reported too, CNN was not happy to learn that the Infowars app was still available on Apple’s and Google’s stores:

It’s like we said earlier: we’re not really comfortable having someone other than Twitter police content on Twitter (they do a bad enough job), and we really don’t want CNN stepping into the role. Is this something CNN is going to be doing for other objectionable sites? Or is Jones’ scalp all they want?

Who knows? But Alex Jones is a really easy target to start with if de-platforming online personalities is going to become a thing. If they’re taking requests, though, we know of some celebrity 9/11 truthers and anti-vaxxers who could go. See how easy it is to pick who you’d like to see vanish?


https://twitter.com/PolitiBunny/status/1027707866533322752

Maybe Brian Stelter will explain all of this this weekend on “Reliable Sources?”

Is The Censorship Of Conservatives Part Of The Reason Why Facebook Is Losing Massive Amounts Of Traffic?

The amount of website traffic that Facebook receives in the United States has “fallen by about half” since 2016, and it is anticipated that this decline in traffic will not end any time soon.

Coincidentally (or perhaps not), 2016 also happened to be the year when the censorship of conservatives on Facebook really became noticeable. The events of this week made headlines all over the globe, but the truth is that Facebook has been an egregious censor of conservative viewpoints for a very long time, and it appears that it is really taking a toll on the company. In business, one of the golden rules is to never make your customers angry, but Facebook has chosen to make conservatives very angry over and over again. It was inevitable that many of them would begin to leave, and that is perhaps part of the reason why monthly page visits are down by about four billion over the past two years…

Four billion. That, according to a new study shared with CNBC by market research firm SimilarWeb, is how many monthly page visits Facebook has shed in a slow-drip but nevertheless huge decline over the last two years.

Facebook’s traffic hasn’t just fallen by about half since 2016, according to the study. Among the consequences of such a precipitous drop is the opening it’s given to YouTube, which the study’s data shows is about to overtake Facebook to become the second biggest site, traffic-wise, in the U.S. Which would give Google ownership of the top two spots, pushing Facebook down to number three.

I knew that Facebook had been losing traffic, but I didn’t know that it had been that dramatic.

According to CNBC, the number of monthly page visits that Facebook has been receiving in the United States has plummeted from 8.5 billion two years ago to 4.7 billion today…

The five websites receiving the most traffic in the U.S. in the last several years have been Google, Facebook, YouTube, Yahoo and Amazon, in that order. However, Facebook has seen a severe decline in monthly page visits, from 8.5 billion to 4.7 billion in the last two years, according to the study. Although Facebook’s app traffic has grown, it is not enough to make up for that loss, the study said.

Growth in other regions of the world has also helped cushion the blow for Facebook, but needless to say they are in for a very troubled future if this trend continues.

Thanks to Facebook’s woes, YouTube could soon become the number two website in the U.S. after Google, and that would give Google even more power over the online world.

At this point, Google already accounts for more than a third of all time spent online

Between the ubiquitous search engine and offshoots such as YouTube and Waze, a new report says Google accounted for over 34% of time spent online in June, according to Axios.

So why has Facebook traffic cratered so dramatically?

Well, it is quite true that Facebook has been hit with a lot of scandals lately

Facebook has faced a number of issues in the past few months, including one of the biggest share price drops in Wall Street History, shareholders attempting to oust CEO Mark Zuckerberg as chairman of the board, more questions surrounding election interference, and finally the banning of Infowars and Alex Jones from its platform has led to the social media Masters of the Universe facing criticism from multiple groups.

But scandals are just temporary. In a previous article, I pointed out that a much bigger problem for Facebook is the fact that young people are abandoning the platform in enormous numbers

Teenagers have abandoned Facebook in favour of other social media platforms such as Snapchat and Instagram, according to a study from the Pew Research Center.

Just 51% of US individuals aged 13 to 17 say they use Facebook – a dramatic plunge from the 71% who said they used the social network in Pew’s previous study in 2015, when it was the dominant online platform.

If I was working at Facebook, I would definitely be extremely alarmed by those numbers.

But many believe that the biggest problem of all for Facebook is the fact that they have alienated a substantial portion of the population.

Sure, conservatives are not a majority in America today. But even if you deeply anger only 20 or 30 percent of your customers, that can still be absolutely disastrous for your business.

Now that Facebook has made it abundantly clear that they are going to be hostile to conservatives, millions of them are going to leave, and they are never going to come back.

Personally, I barely spend any time on Facebook at this point. I post my articles and try to respond to messages when I have time, but other than that I don’t hang out on the site. It has been a good way to reach people with my articles, but with Facebook traffic declining so substantially, the truth is that the site just doesn’t have the reach that it once did.

Over time, Facebook is destined for the same fate as MySpace. Bigger and better competitors will come along, and a steady stream of people will continue to leave as Facebook continues to alienate those that were once so loyal to them.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that the trend toward more censorship of the Internet will end any time soon. It has been reported that Democrats are floating a bill that would essentially be a government takeover of the Internet, and the events of this past week have encouraged the left to call for even more censorship of conservatives.

We always knew that the golden era of the Internet wouldn’t last forever. It has empowered us to communicate with one another on a scale never seen before in human history, but now the elite are determined to get control of it.

We must never let up in the fight for Internet freedom, because ultimately it is the freedom of all of humanity that is at stake.

EU’s Proposed Trade Route to Bypass UK Actually Hurts Ireland!

European Union plans to create shipping routes between Ireland and the Continent, deliberately avoiding Britain after Brexit, have been rubbished by Irish food exporters.

The European Commission’s no-deal Brexit planners have proposed new routes between Irish ports in Dublin and Cork and Zeebrugge and Antwerp in Belgium, as well as Rotterdam in the Netherlands.

Irish haulers have warned the new routes would almost treble transit times resulting in food spoiling before it even reaches the Continent.

Read more

Farage: UK Politician “More Likely” to Become PM After Burka Remark

Nigel Farage claimed Boris Johnson could be closer to winning the next Conservative party leadership election following the controversy over the former Foreign Secretary’s remarks about Muslim women wearing burkas in public.

Speaking to Sky News, the former Ukip leader claimed any poll among Conservative party members on whether to introduce a burka ban in the UK would prove the party would be overwhelmingly in favor of it.

The support for the ban would put Boris Johnson in a favorable position at the next leadership election, Mr. Farage claimed, following his latest remarks on the religious garment.

Read more

UK Fights to Reclaim Access to Military Satellite

Ministers have been blasted for throwing away vital leverage in Brexit negotiations by dishing out massive contracts worth millions of pounds to EU firms.

Robin Southwell, former chief executive of Airbus UK, said the Ministry of Defence was signing off eye-watering deals with Brussels while the bloc restricted the UK’s access to developing the Galileo project post-Brexit.

Mr. Southwell, who is also a business ambassador to Prime Minister Theresa May, urged defense secretary Gavin Williamson to scrap a £3billion deal with Germany for the supply of army vehicles confirmed earlier this year.

Read more

France Misses Out on Billions in Post-Brexit EU Trade Route

The European Commission has excluded French ports as part of its plans for a new shipping route linking Ireland with the bloc post-Brexit in a move that could prevent them from accessing billions of euros in EU grants.

It will instead look at the routing of one of its corridors to connect Dublin and Cork with ports of Zeebrugge and Antwerp in Belgium, as well as the Port of Rotterdam in the Netherlands, to transport trade directly from Ireland to mainland Europe.

While the UK can no longer be part of EU routes after Brexit, circumventing it prevents Irish exports to Europe from getting caught up in British customs.

Read more

South Africa on Brink of “Anarchy”

South Africa’s white farmers have hit out in anger at the government’s decision to agree to constitutional changes to seize land from them.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa recently announced plans to allow white people’s land to be taken without compensation, which will then be distributed to black people in a move that he believes will be good for the economy.

The president made the announcement late on Tuesday in a televised address to the nation.

Read more

UK Fights for Sovereignty Over British Waters Post-Brexit

A ban on EU nations fishing in UK waters after Brexit has sparked panic among fishermen in Germany.

German trawlermen fear Brexit could threaten the herring fishing in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, a state in the north of the country.

The German Agriculture Minister Till Backhaus appealed to Angela Merkel’s government on Wednesday over fears the industry will not be allowed access to the British North Sea waters after Brexit.

Read more

Macron Spurs Globalist Infighting Over Brexit Stance

France’s hard line against the UK over Brexit is not shared by other European Union state members which are increasingly becoming fed up with the nation’s attitude towards the negotiations, an EU diplomat revealed as tensions stir within the bloc.

Emmanuel Macron’s government has become the fiercest opponent of London within the EU by constantly vetoing any British proposals for the Brexit deal.

In fact, Paris was the most critical towards Theresa May’s white paper, which put forward a soft Brexit expected to please the EU.

Read more

The Number Of Americans Living In Their Vehicles “Explodes” As The Middle Class Continues To Disappear

If the U.S. economy is really doing so well, then why is homelessness rising so rapidly? 

As the gap between the rich and the poor continues to increase, the middle class is steadily eroding.  In fact, I recently gave my readers 15 signs that the middle class in America is being systematically destroyed.  More Americans are falling out of the middle class and into poverty with each passing day, and this is one of the big reasons why the number of homeless is surging.  For example, the number of people living on the street in L.A. has shot up 75 percent over the last 6 years.  But of course L.A. is far from alone.  Other major cities on the west coast are facing similar problems, and that includes Seattle.  It turns out that the Emerald City has seen a 46 percent rise in the number of people sleeping in their vehicles in just the past year

The number of people who live in their vehicles because they can’t find affordable housing is on the rise, even though the practice is illegal in many U.S. cities.

The number of people residing in campers and other vehicles surged 46 percent over the past year, a recent homeless census in Seattle’s King County, Washington found. The problem is “exploding” in cities with expensive housing markets, including Los Angeles, Portland and San Francisco, according to Governing magazine.

Amazon, Microsoft and other big tech companies are in the Seattle area.  It is a region that is supposedly “prospering”, and yet this is going on.

Sadly, it isn’t just major urban areas that are seeing more people sleeping in their vehicles.  Over in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, many of the homeless sleep in their vehicles even in the middle of winter

Stephanie Monroe, managing director of Children Youth & Family Services at Volunteers of America, Dakotas, tells a similar story. At least 25 percent of the non-profit’s Sioux Falls clients have lived in their vehicles at some point, even during winter’s sub-freezing temperatures.

“Many of our communities don’t have formal shelter services,” she said in an interview. “It can lead to individuals resorting to living in their cars or other vehicles.”

It is time to admit that we have a problem.  The number of homeless in this country is surging, and we need to start coming up with some better solutions.

But instead, many communities are simply passing laws that make it illegal for people to sleep in their vehicles…

A recent survey by the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty (NLCHP), which tracks policies in 187 cities, found the number of prohibitions against vehicle residency has more than doubled during the last decade.

Those laws aren’t going to solve anything.

At best, they will just encourage some of the homeless to go somewhere else.

And if our homelessness crisis is escalating this dramatically while the economy is supposedly “growing”, how bad are things going to be once the next recession officially begins?

We live at a time when the cost of living is soaring but our paychecks are not.  As a result, middle class families are being squeezed like never before.

A recent Marketwatch article highlighted the plight of California history teacher Matt Barry and his wife Nicole…

Barry’s wife, Nicole, teaches as well — they each earn $69,000, a combined salary that not long ago was enough to afford a comfortable family life. But due to the astronomical costs in his area, including real estate — a 1,500-square-foot “starter home” costs $680,000 — driving for Uber was a necessity.

“Teachers are killing themselves,” Barry says in Alissa Quart’s new book, “Squeezed: Why Our Families Can’t Afford America” (Ecco), out Tuesday. “I shouldn’t be having to drive Uber at eight o’clock at night on a weekday. I just shut down from the mental toll: grading papers between rides, thinking of what I could be doing instead of driving — like creating a curriculum.”

Home prices are completely out of control, but that bubble should soon burst.

However, other elements of our cost of living are only going to become even more painful.  Health care costs rise much faster than the rate of inflation every year, food prices are becoming incredibly ridiculous, and the cost of a college education is off the charts.  According to author Alissa Quart, living a middle class life is “30% more expensive” than it was two decades ago…

“Middle-class life is now 30% more expensive than it was 20 years ago,” Quart writes, citing the costs of housing, education, health care and child care in particular. “In some cases the cost of daily life over the last 20 years has doubled.”

And thanks to the trade war, prices are going to start going up more rapidly than we have seen in a very long time.

On Tuesday, we learned that diaper and toilet paper prices are rising again

Procter & Gamble said on Tuesday that it was in the process of raising Pampers’ prices in North America by 4%. P&G also began notifying retailers this week that it would increase the average prices of Bounty, Charmin, and Puffs by 5%.

P&G is raising prices because commodity and transportation cost pressures are intensifying. The hikes to Bounty and Charmin will go into effect in late October, and Puffs will become more expensive beginning early next year.

I wish that I had better news for you, but I don’t.  We are all going to have to work harder, smarter and more efficiently.  And we are definitely going to have to tighten our belts.

Many middle class families are relying on debt to get them from month to month, and consumer debt in the United States has surged to an all-time high.  But eventually a day of reckoning comes, and we all understand that.

The U.S. economy is not going to be getting any better than it is right now.  So it is time to be a lean, mean saving machine, because it will be important to have a financial cushion for the hard times that are ahead of us.

Expert: No-Deal Brexit to Spark “Sandwich Famine”

Jim Winship, Director of the British sandwich association, argued that a no deal Brexit would place serious restrictions on the type of fresh sandwiches on offer in the UK.

He said: “No deal does not mean absolutely no sandwiches because our industry is very creative and clever at coming up with new recipes.

“Certainly there would be some serious problems in terms of some of the fresh ingredients we would be bringing in from the EU.

Read more

CNN Slammed For Championing Hijab-wearing Barbie

Fake news network CNN promoted a piece championing toy maker Mattel’s new hijab-wearing Barbie doll Monday, and it did not go down well with Americans.

The doll, which was first seen last year, is now in stores as part of Mattel’s “Shero” line of toys. Yet CNN reveled in promoting the toy, calling it a “broader effort by Mattel to diversify the Barbie line”:

In addition, CNN also published a written article by Olympic fencer Ibtihaj Muhammad, who the doll is based on, and who is operating as a sports ambassador for the U.S. State Department.

In the piece, Muhammad, instead of talking about her doll, basically slammed the Trump administration.

“I love my country, but I don’t recognize it today.” Muhammad wrote, adding “Not in the Supreme Court ruling upholding the travel ban. Not in a Supreme Court nominee potentially engineered to undo reproductive choice, access to health care and the Russia investigation. Not in the family separation and detention policy. Not in our move to initiate trade wars and rally against breastfeeding and the World Health Organization. Not in the abandonment of allies and basic decency in how we treat other humans.”

The reaction to CNN once again promoting hijabs as somehow liberating was swift and brutal:

https://twitter.com/pattijaney/status/1024055155749212160

https://twitter.com/Minxky999/status/1024086878000173056

https://twitter.com/KelliThornhill1/status/1024040846679846914

EU Air Traffic Loophole Allows Terrorists to Travel Undetected

Terrorists and criminals can exploit a loophole in European Union law which enables them to travel undetected across the bloc’s borders, often avoiding security and passport checks altogether.

Miscreants can avoid the same database checks that regular holiday-makers catching commercial flights are subject to by traveling by private jets, according to an investigation by EU Observer.

All airline passengers have their information recorded when taking commercial flights, with their data saved to the EU’s Passenger Name Record.

Also:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Tells America She’d Like To Remain On The Bench ‘at Least Five More Years’

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Sunday said she wants to keep her Supreme Court seat for “at least five more years.”

“I’m now 85,” Ginsburg said Sunday in New York at a production about late Justice Antonin Scalia called “The Originalist,” CNN reported. “My senior colleague, Justice John Paul Stevens, he stepped down when he was 90, so think I have about at least five more years.”

The liberal SCOTUS justice had kind words to say about her late colleague, despite their political differences.

Read more

CNN Lies About Banned Infowars Videos In New Censorship Attempt, See the Banned Videos for Yourself

CNN and numerous other mainstream networks are flagrantly lying by claiming that Infowars is promoting “child endangerment” and “hate speech” in an attempt to have Google and Facebook shut down our channels.

UPDATE: Please subscribe to two new channels that our allies have set up – Verboten News and the Free Speech Channel.

After YouTube hit Infowars with a strike earlier this week and removed four videos from the Alex Jones Channel, CNN seized upon the issue to intensify its 6 month long lobbying campaign to have Infowars banned on YouTube and Facebook.

The most egregious claim is that Infowars is advocating “child endangerment” by posting a satirical take on a viral video that “showed an adult shoving a child to the ground,” reports CNN.

null

What CNN deliberately omitted is the fact that the child is seen repeatedly punching the adult before the man shoves him to the floor. The child is clearly not hurt. The video was entitled How To Prevent Liberalism – A Public Service Announcement and is clearly a humorous commentary on how cry-bullies on the left constantly claim to be the victims while violently attacking other people.

In no way is the video an endorsement of “child endangerment” or cruelty to children. CNN’s Paul P. Murphy knows this, but by omitting key details he strips out the context to demonize Infowars

The charge of “child endangerment” is also particularly underhanded given that one of the other videos that was banned by YouTube, Shocking ‘Drag Tots’ Cartoon Sparks Outrage, is a critique of the sexualization of children and is an attempt to protect children from endangerment.

The clip shows children interacting with and giving money to drag queens who are physically shaking their butts in the children’s faces. The video is clearly a criticism of children being subjected to this, not an endorsement of it.

Another video was banned for “hate speech” against Muslims according to CNN and YouTube.

The video contains commentary about the huge problems Europe is experiencing with violent crime as a result of mass immigration. This is not “hate speech,” it is a manifestly provable reality that has been acknowledged even by the mainstream media.

CNN is also lying in its claim that Jones called Parkland shooting survivor David Hogg a “crisis actor” and received a YouTube strike for this. The strike was removed, meaning that the video cited did not violate YouTube’s policies.

By relentlessly lying about our video content and lobbying YouTube and Facebook to shut down Infowars, CNN and others are trying to set the precedent that their electronic lynch mobs can remove content and silence competing media platforms on a whim.

Similar to how Twitter responded to pressure by partially lifting its shadow ban on conservatives, other social media giants need to stand strong in the face of this intimidation campaign and send a clear message to their users that they will uphold free speech.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Going To War With Iran, New Poll Finds

This week relations between Iran and Washington entered a heightened intensity and new war of words, with the dangerous potential for an actual war seeming to rise daily, especially after President Trump’s latest twitter warning to Iran of “consequences the likes of which few throughout history have ever suffered before…” should Iran’s leaders threaten the United States.

The US has repeatedly threatened to throttle Iran’s international oil trade as it’s moved closer to imposing sanctions on countries including key allies that don’t eliminate or significantly cut imports of Iranian oil by Nov. 4. It’s but the latest crisis to emerge after the White House pulled the US out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal in May. This is why gauging public opinion on the prospect for war with Iran is particularly important at the end of this week.

The new HuffPost/YouGov survey finds the prospect of war with Iran out of step with the American public on a bipartisan basis:

Just 23 percent of the public say they’d support the U.S. deciding to declare war on Iran, while the majority, 53 percent, oppose the idea. Just 9 percent would strongly support declaring war, while 37 percent are strongly opposed.

The survey further finds: “Voters who backed Hillary Clinton in the last election are the most vehemently against the idea, with 82 percent opposed and just 6 percent in favor; non-voters are also opposed, 48 percent to 20 percent.”

And concerning Trump supporters: “Voters who backed President Donald Trump’s campaign are more likely to support a war against Iran, but even among that group, backing remains below the majority level, with 47 percent saying they’d support declaring war, and 29 percent that they’d oppose it.”

Numbers among Trump supporters:

The poll was taken early this week, soon after Trump blasted Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani on twitter, eliciting multiple belligerent statements from Iranian military generals which followed.

The poll also found that 60% of Americans surveyed were aware of the Trump tweet through news reports, with 12% saying they’d seen in directly on twitter.

Numbers among Clinton voters:

About 60 percent of Americans polled say they’d heard about Trump’s tweet, although just 12 percent had seen it directly on Twitter, with the rest learning about it from the news.

The poll concludes of Trump’s general handling of Iran-related issues: “Overall, 36 percent of Americans say they approve of Trump’s handling of issues related to Iran, while 42 percent disapprove, and the rest is uncertain. That net -6 is slightly more positive than overall views of Trump’s job performance.”

There are a number of hawks in the Trump administration who would like to see a preemptive strike happen based on the claim of an alleged continuing nuclear weapons program, most notably among them national security adviser John Bolton and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani. Though notorious uber-hawk Bolton may have had his wings clipped by President Trump, he’s on record as wanting “regime change in Tehran” before 2019.

Farage Urges UK Politicians to Copy Trump Tactics to Reach Young Voters

During her time in the Love Island villa, Hayley confessed that she didn’t understand what Brexit was.

As a result, This Morning introduced her to Nigel Farage so that he could explain what leaving the European Union means for the country.

Speaking to hosts Sara Cox and Michael Ball, Hayley confessed: “When me and Nigel spoke, we said it was harder for the younger generation to learn about it because we sit on social media and things and it’s not like a big part on social media.”

Read more

CNN Claims Infowars Called Parkland Victims Crisis Actors, Facebook Determined That is a Lie

A CNN hit piece on Infowars and Alex Jones backfired when they sent partial video clips to Facebook asking why they are allowed on the platform and received a response explaining the truth about the content.

In a video, linked here, CNN accuses Infowars of “casting doubt on the honesty of Parkland shooting survivors.”

“Facebook has previously removed content that accused shooting survivors of being crisis actors. But these two Infowars videos are still active and have over 280k views combined,” they continued.

The two videos being referenced can be found in their original forms below.


The keyword here is CRISIS. The majority of the Parkland students who were all over mainstream media pushing gun control following the attack were literal actors and actresses who were in the school’s drama club.

The New Yorker reported in February, “The activists are grieving, too, but it’s not a coincidence that a disproportionate number of the Never Again leaders are dedicated members of the drama club.”

Jones and crew were trolling the mainstream media by saying actors, which is true, knowing they would make the false claim that Infowars called victims “crisis actors,” which never happened.

When CNN sent Facebook the two videos and asked why they are allowed on the site, Facebook actually paid attention to the context and concluded, “…no survivors were alleged to be lying, acting, or pretending to be a victim of the tragic event…”

This isn’t the first time CNN has called for Infowars to be censored. In February the network lobbied to have Infowars’ Youtube channel completely taken down.

Infowars’ Paul Joseph Watson wrote, “By lobbying to have one of its competitors shut down, CNN is engaging in tortious interference, which is when one party damages another’s contractual or business relationships with a third party, causing economic harm.”

CNN Contributor Equates Trump to President Johnson, Gets it Wrong

A contributor for CNN equated President Trump with President Andrew Johnson by implying both men share white supremacist views and “a tainted ascent to the presidency” in an op-ed that distorts American history to satisfy a far-left political agenda.

“Donald Trump likes to compare himself to Andrew Jackson, but the Andrew he really resembles is Andrew Johnson. What they have in common are delusions of personal grandeur and a tainted ascent to the presidency,” declared Manisha Sinha, the Draper Chair in American History at the University of Connecticut.

“Trump was elected by a minority of the American electorate, with help from the vagaries of the Electoral College system and from considerable Russian interference. Johnson became president thanks to an assassin’s bullet.”

While claiming Johnson’s “white-supremacist views were blatant,” and his policies “precipitated a constitutional crisis that put the President at loggerheads with Congress and his own party, the Republicans,” Sinha made one glaring factual error: Johnson was a Democrat, not a Republican.

When his home state of Tennessee voted to secede from the Union in 1861, Johnson, who was serving in the Senate and adamantly opposed to secession, fled the state and became the only Senator from a state in the Confederacy to remain in the Senate.

In his campaign for reelection in 1864, Abraham Lincoln sought to create a National Union Ticket with a Democrat as his vice president, replacing Republican Senator Hannibal Hamlin of Maine. Johnson, the country’s most prominent Southern Unionist who had left the Senate in 1862 to serve as Military Governor of Tennessee, was selected as Lincoln’s vice president and the ticket handedly defeated Democrat George McClellan.

Lambasting Republicans for not pushing back on President Trump’s criticisms of Robert Mueller, Sinha equated the situation with Congressional Republicans who, strongly opposed to Johnson’s agenda for Reconstruction, passed the Tenure of Office Act in 1867, making it illegal for the president to fire a cabinet secretary without the consent of the Senate.

When Johnson fired Secretary of War Edwin Stanton, a Radical Republican who fully supported the policy of tough Reconstruction supported by a majority of Congress, Congressional Republicans “put their country before a traitorous President” and began an effort to impeach Johnson.

Though he survived the trial by one vote, Johnson was politically weakened and was ultimately denied the Democratic Party’s nomination in 1868.

It is worth noting the Tenure of Office Act was fully repealed in 1887, and in a similar case in 1926, the Supreme Court noted “that the Tenure of Office Act of 1867, insofar as it attempted to prevent the President from removing executive officers who had been appointed by him by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, was invalid.”

“The Republican Party, like Southern slaveholders of yore, is rapidly becoming an anti-democratic force willing to sacrifice the country, democratic institutions and the sanctity of the electoral process to protect its political power and enact its reactionary political and economic agenda,” she concluded, again inaccurately equating Southern slaveholders with the Republican Party.

EU Launches UK-Crafted Satellite That UK May Never Use

British technology paid for with British money is being launched into space today as part of the controversial Galileo program – despite the fact the UK may never get to use it.

The last four satellites of the second batch of the European Union’s Galileo programme were being launched into orbit just after noon today as the bloc adds to its 22 similar navigation satellites in the Galileo constellation.

But the controversial alternative to the US GPS system has become a major political football and Brexit issue – with some high-ranking EU politicians saying Britain cannot have full access to the system post Brexit claiming it would pose a security risk.

Read more

CNN Leaks Confidential Trump-Cohen Recording

The attorney for President Trump’s former longtime personal attorney Michael Cohen has given CNN a copy of a secretly recorded conversation between Trump and Cohen, in which they discuss purchasing the rights to a Playboy model’s claim that she and Trump had an affair. The discussion took place in September 2016, in the lead-up to the presidential election.

The model, Karen McDougal, claims to have had a nearly yearlong affair with Trump in 2006, right before Melania Trump gave birth to their son Barron. McDougal sold her story to the National Enquirer for $150,000 as the 2016 presidential campaign was in its final months, however the tabloid sat on the story which kept it from becoming public in a practice known as “catch and kill.”

Cohen, who secretly recorded the conversation, can be heard telling Trump that he needs “to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend David,” likely referring to American Media Inc. head David Pecker.

“I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend David,” Cohen said in the recording, likely a reference to American Media head David Pecker.

Trump interrupts Cohen asking, “What financing?” according to the recording. When Cohen tells Trump, “We’ll have to pay.” Trump is heard saying “pay with cash” but the audio is muddled and it’s unclear whether he suggests paying with cash or not paying. Cohen says, “no, no, no” but it is not clear what is said next.

* * *

While Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani previously insisted Cohen suggested using cash to buy the story, Davis pointed to the audio as proof that it was Trump’s suggestion all along. Davis is a columnist for The Hill.

Giuliani contested Davis’s interpretation and released the Trump team’s version of the transcript, which contradicts Davis. While Davis said Trump was suggesting the two pay cash, Giuliani’s version of the transcript says Trump is saying, “Don’t pay with cash…check.”

Davis smiled when CNN anchor Chris Cuomo read him Giuliani’s version of the transcript.

“Everybody heard just now Donald trump say the word ‘cash,'” Davis said. “After Michael Cohen mentioned financing. When Mr. Giuliani … accused my client, Mr. Cohen, of saying the word ‘cash,’ I said, ‘Wait for the tapes.'”

“The tape contradicts Giuliani,” Davis continued. “The only people who use cash are drug dealers and mobsters,” he added.

* * *

Alan Futerfas, a lawyer for the Trump Organization, denied that the audio proved that Trump was offering to pay in cash.

“Whoever is telling Davis that cash in that conversation refers to green currency is lying to him,” Futerfas told CNN.

“There’s no transaction done in green currency. It doesn’t happen. The whole deal never happened. If it was going to happen, it would be a payment to a large company that would obviously be accompanied by an agreement of sale. Those documents would be prepared by lawyers on both sides.”

Throughout the interview, Davis painted Cohen as a victim of attacks by Trump, Giuliani and their allies.

He said Cohen is ready to “turn a new corner” and tell the truth about what transpired between himself and the president.

* * *

The Enquirer’s chairman, David J. Pecker, is a personal friend of Trump’s, and McDougal has accused Cohen of taking part in the deal. Cohen was Trump’s longtime personal lawyer and fixer; however, he has sought to distance himself from the president in recent weeks, fueling speculation that Cohen could flip on Trump.

By burying Ms. McDougal’s story during the campaign in a practice known in the tabloid industry as “catch and kill,” A.M.I. protected Mr. Trump from negative publicity that could have harmed his election chances, spending money to do so.

The authorities believe that the company was not always operating in what campaign finance law calls a “legitimate press function,” according to the people briefed on the investigation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. That may explain why prosecutors did not follow typical Justice Department protocol to avoid subpoenaing news organizations when possible, and to give journalists advance warning when demanding documents or other information. –New York Times

While Trump never paid for the rights, Lanny Davis says that the recording, made in 2016, shows Trump knew about the payment.

On Saturday, President Trump broke his silence over the recording, tweeting: “Inconceivable that the government would break into a lawyer’s office (early in the morning) – almost unheard of. Even more inconceivable that a lawyer would tape a client – totally unheard of & perhaps illegal. The good news is that your favorite President did nothing wrong!” Trump tweeted.

The release of the tape has sparked a widespread debate about the sanctity of attorney-client privilege, and its use in “one-party” consent states.

Meanwhile, Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani confirmed with the New York Times last week that Trump and Cohen had discussed payments – and that “there was no indication on the tape that Mr. Trump knew before the conversation about the payment from the Enquirer’s parent company, American Media Inc., to Ms. McDougal.”

Nothing in that conversation suggests that he had any knowledge of it in advance,” said Giuliani, adding that Trump had previously told Cohen that if he were to make a payment related to the woman, to write a check instead of sending cash so that the transaction could be properly documented. “In the big scheme of things, it’s powerful exculpatory evidence,” Giuliani added.

Cohen made a similar payment of $130,000 to porn star and stripper Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford. Cohen said at the time “In a private transaction in 2016, I used my own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Ms. Stephanie Clifford.”

Clifford – whose husband just filed for divorce, is suing Trump over a nondisclosure agreement so that she can “tell her story” (in the form of a book, we imagine), while she is also suing both Trump and Cohen for libel after Trump called her statements “fraud” over Twitter, while claiming that Clifford fabricated a story that she was threatened by a man after she went to journalists with the story of her affair.

Shortly before the 2016 election, former Trump campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks said that McDougal’s allegations were “totally untrue.”

Terror police boost MP’s security after she is accused of racism by activists for condemning the grooming of girls by Asian sex gangs

An MP has been given heightened security measures after receiving death threats for condemning the grooming of girls by Asian sex gangs. it was reported.

Sarah Champion, Labour MP for Rotherham, was accused by activists of ‘industrial-scale racism’ for highlighting the ‘common ethnic heritage’ of those involved in the town’s sexual abuse scandal.

The former shadow minister for Women and Equalities hit the headlines when she spoke out after 17 men from Asian backgrounds were convicted of or admitted offences in a series of trials related to child sexual exploitation.

She warned people were failing to tell the truth about child abuse because they were afraid of being called racist.

She also said it was ‘predominantly Pakistani men’ involved in such cases ‘time and time again’.

Miss Champion followed up her comments with a column in the Sun, headlined: ‘British Pakistani men ARE raping and exploiting white girls – it’s time we faced up to it.’

Read more

EU Countries Secretly Prepare for No-Deal Brexit

Countries across Europe are ramping up preparations for a no-deal Brexit in the wake of a disastrous week for Prime Minister Theresa May’s attempts to propose a Brexit blueprint to the UK government.

Theresa May’s narrow aversion of defeat in the House of Commons over her proposal for the Brexit deal has cast fresh doubt on her ability to negotiate an acceptable agreement with the continent.

Public and private sectors are bracing for a hard Brexit which could hit long-term EU economic output by up to 1.5 percent, according to a report on the consequences of the UK withdrawal published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Read more

CNN Smears Tucker Carlson For Highlighting Mexico’s Interference In US Elections

CNN’s Raul Reyes attacked Fox News’ Tucker Carlson as a “racist” for highlighting Mexico’s interference in US elections, but he himself has written column after column highlighting the same “interference” as a positive.

Reyes wrote Wednesday on CNN:

When in doubt, blame brown people. That’s what one leading voice on the right is doing in response to the fallout over President Donald Trump’s disastrous summit with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland.

In an interview with “The Five,” Fox News host Tucker Carlson said that Russia had sought to meddle in US affairs. But he asserted that other countries, such as Mexico, have been more successful in doing so. “I don’t think Russia is our close friend or anything like that. I think of course they try to interfere in our affairs. They have for a long time. Many countries do. Some more successfully than Russia, like Mexico, which is routinely interfering in our elections by packing our electorate.”

[…]That this brand of racism is still alive and well speaks volumes about the state of conservative thought in the age of Trump. American citizens of Hispanic descent who are voting are participating in democracy. And for the record, there is no evidence to support Carlson’s claims.

Besides being false, Carlson’s comments are insidious because they go back to the tired trope of “illegals” being somehow responsible for everything that ails America, from social ills to violent crime. […]

It is telling that Carlson made his comments about Mexico influencing our elections without citing any data to back it up.

Just two days before Reyes column came out, he shared an article on Twitter highlighting how Arizona could soon turn blue due to its expanding “Latino electorate.”

Reyes also wrote a column in 2016 highlighting how “non-citizen Latinos” could “help decide the outcome of the upcoming presidential election.”

In 2012, he wrote a column saying Latinos “may lead the way to gun control in the future” as “our numbers continue to grow.”

In San Francisco, non-citizens were just given the right to vote in local elections. College Park, Maryland also gave non-citizens the right to vote in local elections last year. Chicago also allows non-citizens to vote in school board elections.

What Tucker Carlson said was absolutely correct. Reyes’ own columns are proof enough.

Liberal Media Claims #WalkAway A Russian Bot Campaign With Zero Proof

Several left-wing media outlets are claiming hashtag #WalkAway is a Kremlin attack on Democrats leading up to the 2018 midterm elections.

CNN, Huffington Post, Salon and others published articles accusing Russia of using #WalkAway to try and “wound Democrats.”

The website being sourced, Hamilton 68, is run by the Soros-linked Alliance for Securing Democracy, which keeps tabs on Russian activity on the American internet.

However, Hamilton 68 clearly states on its homepage that not all content being tracked comes from Russian government operatives.

Content is not necessarily produced or created by Russian government operatives, although that is sometimes the case. Instead, the network often opportunistically amplifies content created by third parties not directly linked to Russia.

This declaration didn’t stop outlets like CNN from saying, “#WalkAway has also now been connected to Kremlin-linked Russian bots,” as if it were a fact.

#WalkAway is a grassroots movement of former Democrats explaining their reasons for leaving the party in the age of Trump.

The mainstream media’s attempt to associate the campaign with Russia is meant to discredit the large amount of liberals leaving the Democrat party plantation.

In reality, the hashtag is being used by people like New York hairdresser and aspiring actor Brandon Straka who started the trend by posting the Facebook video below where he announces his departure from liberalism.

Watch Straka discuss his awakening on The Alex Jones Show and find out details on his upcoming nationwide unity march against partisan hatred.

Watch: UK Hungry for “Trump-Style” Brexit Approach

Brexit supporting businesswoman Michelle Dewberry has claimed the UK is coming round to the prospect of a Trump-style negotiation with the European Union adding British people have “had enough.”

Michelle Dewberry claimed the country was growing frustrated with the Government going “around in circles” over Brexit.

The businesswoman added that she thought the appetite of a “no deal” Brexit was growing as a result of the current state of negotiations.

Read more

Watch: Protestor Dragged Out Trump-Putin Conference

Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump’s new conference in Helsinki has been gatecrashed by a nuclear weapons protester just before the leaders arrived to address reporters.

Security guards scrambled to restrain a man as he held aloft a sign reading “Nuclear weapons ban treaty” ahead of the Russian and US Presidents arriving to their post-summit press conference.

Shock video showed the suited man, writer and activist Sam Husseini being bundled out of the room after trying to catch the attention of the world’s media as they waited for Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump.

Read more

Emergency: Big Tech’s Plot to Kill Free Speech Revealed

The biggest and yet least talked about issue facing conservatives and Trump supporters heading into the mid-terms and the 2020 presidential elections is social media censorship and big tech’s efforts to rig elections by manipulating their algorithms.

In association with Mike Adams, Infowars has published a detailed master compendium on censorship that will serve as a roadmap for lawmakers and for President Trump as we begin the fight to return the battleground of ideas to a level playing field.

The original document is embedded below and should be read in full. What follows below is a brief summary of the major talking points of this document.

Slaves to the algorithm

Algorithms are the most pernicious form of censorship because the target cannot conclusively prove they are being censored yet experience the impact of censorship anyway.

As Robert Epstein has documented, “Google’s search algorithm can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some demographic groups—with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated.”

Epstein asserts that Google has the power to flip over 25% of elections worldwide and that “The search giant’s algorithms are manipulating people every minute of every day.”

By favoring certain search results over others, Epstein and his team discovered that Google could, “boost the proportion of people who favored any candidate by between 37 and 63 percent after just one search session.”

“More alarmingly, we also demonstrated this shift with real voters during an actual electoral campaign—in an experiment conducted with more than 2,000 eligible, undecided voters throughout India during the 2014 Lok Sabha election there—the largest democratic election in history, with more than 800 million eligible voters and 480 million votes ultimately cast. Even here, with real voters who were highly familiar with the candidates and who were being bombarded with campaign rhetoric every day, we showed that search rankings could boost the proportion of people favoring any candidate by more than 20 percent—more than 60 percent in some demographic groups.”

In other words, it’s entirely possible that Google determined the winner of the largest democratic election in history and could do so over and over again.

During its back and forth conversation with CNN, Facebook admitted that it artificially demotes Infowars content to censor our reach.

“We work hard to find the right balance between encouraging free expression and promoting a safe and authentic community, and we believe that down-ranking inauthentic content strikes that balance,” said Facebook spokeswoman Lauren Svensson. “In other words, we allow people to post it as a form of expression, but we’re not going to show it at the top of News Feed.”

As Mike Adams’ master report documents, Facebook has already deplatformed countless prominent natural health and conservative political channels.

Google intensifies its crackdown

Over the course of the last year, we have also noticed a clear change in Google’s search results in which mainstream media articles that denigrate Infowars appear well above Infowars in search results, even when one specifically searches for an exact headline from Infowars.

Google is already directing teams of employees to flag content that is deemed “upsetting” or “offensive” and bury such websites in order to “improve the quality of its search results”.

“The new “upsetting-offensive” flag instructs quality raters to “flag to all web results that contain upsetting or offensive content from the perspective of users in your locale, even if the result satisfies the user intent,” according to the Associated Press.

One of the examples cited that would get flagged is a website that criticizes the religion of Islam.

Google-owned YouTube has also deliberately ranked legacy media-produced videos above independently produced videos about major news events, even when the independently produced videos are more popular.

As we reported in February, Robert Thompson, CEO of News Corp., the publishing arm of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, brazenly admitted that big corporations are pushing for the likes of Google and Facebook to censor alternative media outlets so that News Corp-owned publications can make more money.

Thompson complained that “misinformation” is being promoted at the expense of media properties such as the Wall Street Journal (which just happens to be owned by News Corp).

“The potential returns for our journalism would be far higher in a less chaotic, less debased digital environment,” he asserted, acknowledging the financial incentive behind censorship.

The tyranny of partisan “fact checkers”

Google has also hired so-called “fact checkers” from the Southern Poverty Law Center to police content on YouTube. The SPLC is a hyper-partisan left-wing organization whose business model revolves almost exclusively around fanning the flames of hysteria about “hate speech” and defaming good people as extremists.

As we have previously documented, another fact checker being used by Google, Snopes.com, presents itself as a non-partisan outfit, yet has proven itself to be a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party and the left on numerous occasions.

Snopes previously tried to “debunk” claims that the New York Times had colluded with Clinton’s campaign by warning them in advance about potentially negative stories that were about to be published, despite Wikileaks emails proving this to be true on two separate occasions.

As the Daily Caller reported, Kim Lacapria, Snopes’ main political “fact checker,” describes herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She has previously equated Tea Party conservatives with jihadists.

In December 2016, an investigative report revealed how Snopes was accused of using company money to pay for prostitutes.

Snopes’ obvious far-left bias is genuinely disconcerting given that it is being used by the likes of Google and Facebook as a supposedly independent “fact checker” to combat “fake news” online.

As Mike Adams explains, “What Robert Mueller accused the Russians of doing—interfering with U.S. elections—is actually being carried out right now by tech giants, the establishment media and third-party fact-checkers.”

CNN lobbies social media giants to shut down Infowars

Not content with seeing Infowars be disabled in terms of being downranked by algorithms, CNN, along with a media echo chamber that amplifies their narratives, has openly lobbied both Google-owned YouTube and Facebook to shut down Infowars.

Earlier this year, CNN repeatedly contacted YouTube in an attempt to have our channel closed down because we challenged the gun control narrative that emerged after the Parkland school shooting.

At one point, Infowars was one strike away from losing its YouTube presence and being terminated on the platform forever.

After failing to trigger the deletion of our YouTube channel, CNN’s senior media reporter Oliver Darcy re-appeared last week, this time attempting to lobby Facebook to shut down Infowars under the excuse of combating “fake news”.

Darcy’s zeal to silence Infowars was so persistent that he eventually forced Facebook to back themselves into a corner and admit that they supported free speech, which is quite the commitment for a company that has been so aggressive in policing the content on its platform.

The fact that an international media brand with vast resources like CNN would direct its journalists to launch a campaign to shut down a smaller competitor is not only chilling, it smacks of total desperation.

In Russia or Turkey, the government shuts down media outlets. In the United States, CNN apparently thinks that’s its role.

The fallacy of fake news

While the legacy media routinely publishes misleading, harmful and downright duplicitous news with wanton abandon, the “fake news” narrative was amplified after the election as a means of discrediting and de-legitimizing the presidency of Donald Trump and populist movements across Europe.

Much like the term “post-truth world,” fake news is a contrived moral panic created by elites to deflect from the fact they are increasingly unable to manufacture consent.

A major Stanford University study found that “even the most widely circulated fake news stories were seen by only a small fraction of Americans,” and that the most widely believed fake news stories were those that benefited Hillary Clinton.

Fake news had virtually no impact on the election, but the establishment media weaponized the term as part of an agenda to silence and censor voices of dissent, including media platforms, that had opposed Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

It is completely hilarious to realize that the legacy media created the contrived “fake news” hysteria but thanks to Trump and their own malicious agenda, it just ended up defining them. According to an April poll by Monmouth University Polling Institute, 77 per cent of Americans believe that the traditional media is guilty of fake news.

In a 2017 CNN opinion piece written by Hossein Derakhshan and Claire Wardle, who are affiliated with the globalist Council of Europe, the authors argued that the term “fake news” had “become meaningless” and lost its power because politicians (primarily Donald Trump) hijacked it as a way to “undermine” the media establishment.

The authors decried the fact that many people now believe the mainstream media peddles “fabricated stories” and that information monopolies are being challenged by the ability for “anyone in the world” to have a platform.

As Sharyl Attkisson documents in her presentation below, the attempt to focus America’s attention on the idea of “fake news” was itself a propaganda effort.

Fake news is a baseless conspiracy theory invented by elites as an excuse to explain why their arguments no longer resonate with a majority of people.

The master document created by Mike Adams explains some of the solutions to these problems – real steps that can be implemented very quickly to turn the tide and return the Internet and social media to a level playing field.

Solutions

They include;

1) Declaring the dominant online platforms to be “public commons” communication infrastructure to protect free speech.

2) Outlawing the censoring of content based on “political views” or “unpopular views”.

3) Requiring social media platforms to make transparent all their algorithms and requiring platforms to disclose down-ranking content policies

4) Requiring complete transparency on all reasoning for shadow bans, content bans and account bans.

All of these measures and more could be introduced in a special Online Digital Rights bill that could be passed and signed into law by President Trump.

“Google, Facebook, YouTube, CNN and even the ACLU are all conspiring to defraud the United States of America by silencing conservative voices, en masse, in the run up to a critical election that may decide the fate of our nation,” writes Adams.

We are running out of time. The mid-term elections are just months away. Every day that goes by without these fundamental problems being addressed, the state of online free speech becomes ever more precarious.

We must act now before it’s too late.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

Trump Seeks Patriotic Makeover For Air Force One

President Trump is looking to update Air Force One’s paint job, which hasn’t been changed since the early 60’s, by making the aircraft “more American.”

In February, Trump met with Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg to discuss a $4 billion purchase of two 747s for use as replacements to Air Force One.

According to Axios, the president asked to change the blue and white color scheme designed by former President John F. Kennedy and First Lady Jackie Kennedy.

A red, white and blue theme will reportedly take place of the legendary Robin’s-egg blue.

POTUS also requested an upgrade in the quality of beds on the airplanes which look to be in service by 2021.

CNN says Trump is deeply involved in the redesign of the aircraft, but that no final decisions have been made yet.

Trump Rips Merkel Over Russian Energy Reliance

Donald Trump has lashed out Angela Merkel over Germany’s reliance on Russia for energy describing it as a “tragedy” and “horrific” that the nation would send “billions” on the pipeline.

The US President in an explosive press conference with Theresa May hailed Brexit a “blessing” and declared he is prepared to do “whatever it takes” to maintain the special relationship with the UK.

However, on the US’ relationship with the U.S., Mr. Trump was less complimentary.

Read more

5 Of The Most Controversial Moments From Peter Strzok’s Chaotic Testimony To Congress

On Thursday, Peter Strzok finally received his well-deserved congressional grilling, and it was quite a chaotic affair.

Over nearly ten hours, there were shouting matches between Strzok and congressional Republicans, there were shouting matches between Republicans and Democrats, and there were quite a few moments that none of us will ever forget. It was a joint hearing of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees, and the meeting room was absolutely packed. More than 70 members of the House were in attendance, and many came ready with some very pointed questions. The following are five of the most controversial moments from Peter Strzok’s ten hour testimony to Congress…

#5 Bob Goodlatte asks Strzok how he can “smell” Trump supporters at a Wal-Mart in southern Virginia…

#4 John Ratcliffe confronts Strzok about using “official FBI phones” on “official FBI time” to talk to Lisa Page about “stopping Trump” and “impeaching Trump”. The following comes from CNN

“When you said you never crossed that bright, inviolable line, what you meant to say was except for 50,000 times, except for hundreds of times a day where I went back and forth, expressing my personal opinions about ‘f’ing’ Trump and stopping Trump and impeaching Trump on official FBI phones, on official FBI time,” said Rep. John Ratcliffe of Texas.

“Agent Strzok, are you starting to understand why some folks out there don’t believe a word you say?” he added.

#3 Darrell Issa forces Strzok to read back some of the anti-Trump text messages that he sent to Lisa Page…

#2 Trey Gowdy uses his extensive legal skills to absolutely grill Strzok about his contradictory statements…

#1 Congressman Gohmert went where nobody else was willing to go when he asked Strzok “how many times did you look so innocent into your wife’s eye and lie to her about Lisa Page?” The following comes from CNN

“I’ve talked to FBI agents around the country. You’ve embarrassed them; you’ve embarrassed yourself,” Gohmert said. “And I can’t help but wonder, when I see you looking there with a little smirk, how many times did you look so innocent into your wife’s eye and lie to her about Lisa Page?”

You can see video of this exchange between Strzok and Congressman Gohmert right here

If it was virtually anyone else, I would feel very badly for them.

But if this is the worst that Strzok gets, then he will be getting off very easy.

Strzok definitely qualifies as a member of “the deep state”, and it is very rare for anyone in “the deep state” to be held accountable on this level.

We are in a struggle for the soul of our government, and if we ever hope to turn things around we have got to clean out swamp creatures such as Peter Strzok. I believe that Thursday’s hearing was certainly a step in the right direction, and hopefully Congress will do much more to restore our faith in the integrity of our law enforcement agencies.