Het infrastructuurplan van de regering-Biden focust op oneigenlijke wijze op ‘gelijkheid’. USA2021 degeneert steeds sneller naar een horror-scenario.

De racisme-obsessies van de Democraten voeren de boventoon. Op de achtergrond spelen bovendien diverse politieke processen een grote rol.

En buiten beeld van de meerderheid van de Amerikanen, is het onderdeel van en al langer lopende agenda, zo blijkt. Een agenda waarbij de gelijkheidsagenda weer haar lelijke gezicht toont. Geen gelijkheid door verheffing, maar door iedereen in dezelfde ellende te dompelen.

Duur: 30:47 min

Publicatie  28 juni.

Veel Republikeinse oppositie van dit moment loopt via Tucker Carlson. Het is daarom weinig verbazingwekkend dat de regering-Biden zijn programma-communicatie bespioneert.

Tucker Carlson says an NSA whistleblower has stepped forward and provided evidence that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been spying on him.

De Democratische Partij heeft er een lief ding voor over van Carlson af te geraken:

“Yesterday we heard from a whistleblower within the US government, who reached out to warn us that the NSA (National Security Agency) has been monitoring our electronic communications and is planning to leak them in an attempt to take this show off the air,” said Carlson.

Dat dit alle potentie heeft tot een grote rel uit te groeien is duidelijk:

Tucker Carlson says a whistleblower told him that he is being spied on by the NSA and that he filed a FOIA request for information:

"The Biden administration is spying on us. We have confirmed that." pic.twitter.com/LY2vmDLFTK

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) June 29, 2021

Pijnlijker nog is dat dit niet op zichzelf staat:

• NSA Agrees To Release Records On FBI’s Improper Spying On 16,000 Americans

• Shockingly Expected: US NSA & Danish Intelligence Spied On “EU Allies”

• NSA Dodges Questions About Controversial “Backdoors” In Tech Products

•  China Blasts US As “Empire Of Hacking” After Damning NSA Report Spotlights Beijing

• NSA Chief Who Oversaw Sweeping Domestic Phone Surveillance Joins Amazon Board As Director

Al bijna even pijnlijk als de manier waarop Trump-advocaat Giuliani uit zijn ambt van advocaat werd gezet: de gezaghebbende jurist Jonathan Turley krijgt er in ieder geval de rillingen van:

Below is my column in The Hill on the suspension of Rudy Giuliani by the New York Bar. The widespread hatred for Giuliani may be blinding many to the more troubling aspects of the opinion by the New York Supreme Court.

Turley windt er geen doekjes om:

This week, New York’s Supreme Court took the extraordinary step of suspending Rudy Giuliani, former federal prosecutor and counsel to former President Trump, from practicing law. As a long-standing critic of Giuliani for his baffling, self-defeating and at times bizarre statements, I found the action was, on some level, reaffirming.
However, the fluid standard applied in Giuliani’s case raises serious concerns over how and when such suspensions will be imposed against lawyers in public controversies. Indeed, the Giuliani standard would seem to implicate a wide array of attorneys who straddle the line of legal and political advocacy.
The 33-page opinion is damning and embarrassing; in all likelihood, it will result in Giuliani’s eventual disbarment. It also is deeply concerning in its heavy reliance on Giuliani’s statements out of court. While lawyers have been disciplined for out-of-court statements in some cases, this suspension seems primarily a judgment on Giuliani’s public advocacy. The court states that when he uses

“his large megaphone, the harm is magnified. … One only has to look at the ongoing present public discord over the 2020 election, which erupted into violence, insurrection and death on January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol, to understand the extent of the damage that can be done when the public is misled by false information about the elections. The AGC [Attorney Grievance Committee] contends that respondent’s misconduct directly inflamed tensions that bubbled over into the events of January 6, 2021 in this nation’s Capitol.”

Such rhetoric leaves the impression that the investigators and the court itself were eager to impose judgment on Giuliani for the Capitol riot and other unrest through a bar action. In an actual case for incitement, such a causal connection would be rejected by any court as a violation of free speech. Many lawyers can be accused of fanning unrest or even violence, in cities ranging from Washington, D.C., to Portland, Ore., through their declarations on subjects ranging from police shootings to election fraud.

Dat we hier politiek revanchisme zien is duidelijk. Er wordt evenmin een aanklacht tegen Giuliani voorbereid, men neemt hem eenvoudig zijn status van advocaat af. Afrekeningen van dit type zijn een democratie onwaardig.

---

USA2021 zal naar wij verwachten naadloos overgaan vanuit USA2020. De respectievelijke links naar eerdere artikelen vindt u hier en hier.