The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
Monopolizing the Internet
by John J. Bastiat
Communism: Ignorance Isn't Bliss
by Culture Beat:  As the 100th anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution, responsible for unleashing one of the bloodiest and most oppressive epochs in world history, is upon us, a disturbing survey recently released by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation shows that a majority of Millennials favor socialism and communism over capitalism. The survey notes that 58% of Millennials would rather be living under some form of collectivist system than the free market-based system of capitalism.

          Marion Smith, executive director of the Victims of Communism, states, “Millennials now make up the largest generation in America, and we’re seeing some deeply worrisome trends. Millennials are increasingly turning away from capitalism and toward socialism and even communism as a viable alternative.” Maybe even more troubling, the survey shows that nearly one in five Millennials view Josef Stalin as a “hero.” Out on a limb, but perhaps that’s because their public school education didn’t include the fact that Stalin killed tens of millions of his own citizens.
          Indeed, what are American kids being taught in school? If the idealization of communism isn’t an indictment against America’s poor educational standards, specifically relating to historical events, then we don’t know what is. Should we be surprised that a growing number of college students support restrictions to free speech rights?
          Much of the problem may lie with the fact that most Millennials have never truly experienced tyrannically oppressive and murderous government. Nor do they appreciate the very real dangers and threats posed by communist powers during the Cold War. Too often leftist teachers and professors fill students’ minds with the flawed notions of “fairness” of equal outcome rather than the justice of equal opportunity. Historian Sean McMeekin warns, “Today’s Western socialist, dreaming of a world where private property and inequality are outlawed, where rational economic development is planned by far-seeing intellectuals, should be careful what they wish for. They may just get it.
          Factors for increasing numbers of Millennials disillusioned with capitalism may be due to the fact that a majority (53%) feel burdened by the economy, as it has been widely speculated that the Millennial generation will actually fare worse than their parents economically. A generation growing up with high levels of debt and lower earning power while being taught that they’re victims of “The System” will naturally seek to change it, rather than change themselves.  ~The Patriot Pos

Napolitano – DOJ Must Impanel Grand Juries,
Indict liar-Clinton Where Comey Refused
{} ~ Judge Andrew Napolitano says he’s argued for some time that liar-Hillary Clinton should be indicted... saying, “When the President fired Jim Comey, the stated reason was he dropped the ball on liar-Hillary Clinton. Well if he dropped the ball on liar-Hillary Clinton then the Justice Department should pick up that ball.” “That is,” explains Napolitano, “take the evidence that the FBI amassed against her of espionage, the failure to secure state secrets, bring it to a grand jury and see if the grand jury will indict.” He notes that we now also have “evidence of potential bribery, the delivery of $148 million in bundled donations to the liar-Clinton Foundation and the giving of $500,000 to liar-Bill Clinton to give a speech in Moscow” at the same time that Mrs. liar-Clinton held control over whether Russia got the deal for 20% of America’s uranium or not...
Taliban touts “Special Forces Unit”
{} ~ The Afghan Taliban recently promoted its “Special Forces Unit” that purportedly is operating in the eastern Afghan province of Laghman... Since 2015, the Taliban has advertised its so-called “Special Forces Unit” which is known to have operated in southern Afghan provinces. Afghan military officials confirmed the existence of a Taliban “Special Forces Unit”, known as the Red Group or Danger Group, in the summer of 2016. An Afghan Army special forces commander said the group uses “advanced weaponry, including night vision scopes, 82mm rockets, heavy machine guns and US-made assault rifles.” According to The Associate Press, the Red Group has fought in Helmand and other provinces. While the Taliban’s “Special Forces Unit” certainly isn’t trained to the same standards and proficiency as US special operations forces, it has proven to be effective on the battlefield against its Afghan adversaries...
Fusion GPS Partner Strikes Deal To 
Testify Before House Intel Committee
{} ~ Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson struck a deal on Wednesday to testify voluntarily before the House Intelligence Committee next week... to discuss his opposition research firm’s involvement in the Steele dossier. Simpson and his lawyer met with members of the committee for several hours to hammer out a deal for his closed-door testimony. The Daily Caller was informed that Simpson had indicated prior to Wednesday’s meeting that he would plead the Fifth during his deposition, just as his two co-founders, Peter Fritsch and Thomas Catan, did during interviews last month. But as part of the deal struck Wednesday, Simpson will not plead the Fifth...
Podesta Group Failed to Register 
as Agent for Russian Company

by Steve Byas
{} ~ For several months, Americans have been treated to a steady diet of allegations that President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians in an effort to engineer his victory over Democratic Party opponent liar-Hillary Clinton... The indictment of Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort on October 30 for failure to register as an agent of the Government of Ukraine by Special Counsel Robert Mueller has revealed, however, that the more definite and serious ties with the Russian government involve liar-Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President liar-Bill Clinton. When liar-Hillary Clinton took over as secretary of state for President Barack liar-nObama in 2009, she promised a “reset” of relations with Russia. She was among those in the liar-nObama administration who had to approve of the sale of Uranium One, an international uranium mining company headquartered in Canada with operations in the United States, to the state-owned Russian nuclear energy corporation Rosatom, an action that essentially allowed the Russian government to take over one-fifth of American uranium assets. Uranium, obviously, is used in the production of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons...
Monopolizing the Internet
by John J. Bastiat:  It’s long past time for government to break up Google and Facebook. Or so writes Yelp’s vice president of public policy, Luther Lowe, in The Wall Street Journal. Lowe spiritedly argues his case that Congress — or the executive branch, or somebody — needs to break up the Google and Facebook “monopolies.” How quaint: A veep of the site cornering a very sizable portion of the brick-and-mortar, ratings-and-reviews market says the government should shut down his competition. Of course it should. No doubt Ford and Chevy likely wouldn’t object to the same kind of treatment for Toyota and Honda, nor would a host of other contenders mind too much if the federal government weighed in against their competition, too. Even so, notwithstanding Lowe’s overtly self-serving op-ed, he raises a topic worth analyzing: Should Google and Facebook be broken up under antitrust laws — like Ma Bell, in the early ‘80s? If not, why not?

          Certainly, that case is being made. For instance, according to Lowe, 99 cents of every dollar spent on online advertising goes to Google and Facebook, collectively. This, along with the duping of the two sites into service as puppets in Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election, is reason enough in Lowe’s mind to warrant federal action. Setting aside the “monopoly” argument to which we will shortly return, do any other “root causes” explain the sudden momentum change against these two giants? Indeed.
          Only two months ago, for example, we chronicled Google’s censoring efforts; we covered Facebook’s algorithm manipulation only a few months before that. It’s no secret neither company loves either conservatives or Republicans, but events like these — in which both efforts were designed to suppress conservative news and views — show the extent to which both companies have overplayed their left-orthodoxy hand. The broader public is starting to sit up and take notice — and not just our public.
          For instance, the European Union (EU) just pistol-whipped Google with a record-breaking $2.7 billion fine for breaking its antitrust laws, stating Google had “abused its dominant position by systematically favoring” its own shopping service in its search results. The penalty is almost three times the previous record, meted out to Intel in 2009. The EU’s precedent could open the door for even more litigation over Google’s basic search engine, and a much deeper legal dive into its search algorithms. Moreover, since Facebook is already under the gun for algorithm-tinkering, Google’s exposure before the EU will likely only amplify scrutiny of Facebook, as well.
          Nor is public opinion the two companies’ only setback. Ever since the Democrats’ blunt-trauma contact with the reality of the election of Donald Trump, party faithful have been relentlessly searching for a scapegoat sufficiently worthy to put their runaway train back on its ideological tracks. That scapegoat has variously taken the form of “Trump’s ‘collusion’ with the Russians,” “Russian meddling with the 2016 presidential election,” or some variation in between the two. Central to this truth-twisting group think has been notion the Google and Facebook ads were manipulated by the Russians to change the American voter’s mind. How else could Trump have won, they wonder. Never mind the fact Facebook, Twitter and Google have each stated the amount of Russian-backed content on their sites was negligible. Indeed, Facebook even quantified its assertion, noting the amount of news produced by the Russians under the auspices of the shill “Internet Research Agency” was less than a hundredth of 1%.
          Sadly, such facts do not dissuade such crack forensic experts as Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Kookland). During a recent meeting of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, she told these social media conglomerates, “I must say, I don’t think you get it. Because you bear responsibility. You created the platforms … and now they’re being misused. And you have to be the ones who do something about it — or we will.” Of course: Congress needs to step in and censor, break up, or otherwise ruin yet another segment of our erstwhile “free” market society, because Democrats have been hurt by it … somehow. Just what the nation needs: More laws and more regulation from the same buffoons who haven’t even the slightest notion of how a free market economy works.
          That said, given the size and influence of these social-media monoliths, no one should be surprised at the general feeling — both from the Left and the Right — that they should be “brought in line.
          But how? Given its abysmal track record on “fixing” problems —and by “problems” we mean any problem — is government really the answer? It is true Silicon Valley has proven time and time again it is wholly incapable of breaking out of its far-left-leaning box or restraining itself from censoring content it finds “offensive” (read: conservative viewpoints). But are these sufficient reasons to make good on Feinstein’s “do-something-about-it-or-we-will” threat? God help us if they are: The worst remedy to this problem is to summon the unholy demons of federal intervention. The proof: Simply observe this was the Democrats’ immediate, go-to play: The polar opposite  of that play is clearly the right move. That solution is the free market.
          We note at the outset of our free market rejoinder that true “monopolies” cannot exist apart from government intervention. One need only briefly survey the past two centuries’ worth of history on this topic to understand that once a company reaches a certain size, it is no longer capable of carving through economic landscapes with the speed and custom-tuned response demanded by newer, smaller customers. That is, “one-size-fits-all” answers to customer demands never prevail in the long term, absent government-imposed constraints limiting the available options.
          What then, is the conservative answer to the problems of Google and Facebook? As a philosophical first step, we would caution not to throw the baby out with the bath water. Both Google and Facebook serve worthy purposes, even from a conservative point of view. Second, remember the conservative concept of a “limiting principle”: Once Google, Facebook and Twitter are decimated, what’s to stop the onslaught against other e-giants? How about Amazon? Or, for that matter, Mr. Lowe, what about Yelp? Aren’t they, too, “monopolies” of a type? What is a “monopoly,” anyway, and how is one “broken up”? These questions allude to a more fundamental problem: Getting government involved in anything out of its lane — such as picking winners and losers in the so-called free market — makes a bad situation much worse.
          In contrast, free market solutions — alternative platforms and applications, public exposure of leftist ideologies and biases infused in search algorithms, public awareness initiatives on the value of free speech in social media, litigation campaigns which force Google, Facebook, Amazon and other online juggernauts to publicly admit their positions and beliefs, boycotts and social media blitzes designed to alert the public of censorship or bias activities by online platforms, etc. — are surely much more effective and much less damaging to the national economy than draconian government intervention. Remember, the government chose the winners and losers in the 2008 financial meltdown — not the free market. Today, the U.S. is still recovering from those hastily made and utterly foolish choices. Let’s not repeat such recklessness less than a decade hence.  ~The Patriot Pos

Views: 11


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center


Facebook & Twitter


Nuclear Official Says Hillary Clinton Engaged In Extortion
Secret FBI Informant Is Set To Blow Open Uranium-One Scandal

According to “Clinton Cash,” author Peter Schweizer, then Senator Hillary Clinton extorted a Kazakh official involved in the Uranium-One deal. It is possible Schweizer misspoke and meant to say Secretary of State Clinton.

The Breitbart News editor-at-large did not go further into detail, merely alluding to the fact that the secret FBI informant’s testimony on the Uranium-One scandal next week will be “very interesting.”

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Transcript via Grabien:

SCHWEIZER: “Well, I have to say upfront, I have not met him. I don’t know him. But, what I understand by looking at legal documents involving this case. This guy was an insider’s insider. He was being paid by the Russian company $50,000 a month to serve as a lobbyist. And in the legal filings, what you find is his job was to basically carry the flag for this entity in Washington, D.C. And that job included setting up meetings with high ranking administration officials.

This would have been the Obama Administration. People on Capitol Hill. And other elite influence, you know, makers. So, he was working in a very, very high level. And what has leaked out seems to indicate he has got a lot of information that relates specifically to uranium one. So, it’s going to be very exciting and I think it’s important to point out, judge, also, remember, we already have a foreign government official saying that involving uranium one that he and his fellow government employees were extorted by the Clintons then senator Hillary Clinton.

This comes from the head of their atomic agency saying that Senator Clinton refused to meet with officials unless and until they granted uranium concessions to ended up giving more than $100 million to the Clinton Foundation. So we have got that testimony. We have got this new witness coming out. It’s going to get very interesting here in the weeks ahead.

William D. Campbell has come forward as the secret FBI informant in the Uranium-One deal. The informant revealed he is eager to testify because of his “concerns about Russia’s activities in the United States, but declined to comment further,” reports Reuters.

“I have worked with the Justice Department undercover for several years, and documentation relating to Uranium One and political influence does exist, and I have it,” Campbell told Reuters.

According to a report by Andrea Noble, Campbell personally bribed a Russian businessman working for state-owned energy giant Rosatom. The informant then attempted to recoup the money — but failed.

Washington Times reports: A FBI informant who gave the government information about a Russian bribery plot implicated in the sale of U.S. uranium rights tried unsuccessfully last year to recover upwards of $700,000 in bribes he said he was authorized to pay as part of the FBI investigation.

William D. Campbell has emerged now as the key figure in a congressional probe into Russia’s 2010 purchase of U.S. uranium rights and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s role in approving the deal.

His identity had been shielded for weeks, but court records obtained by The Washington Times, as well as a report by Reuters, identified the man.

Mr. Campbell has not returned calls from The Washington Times seeking comment, but his civil suit, describing his involvement in the FBI investigation, matches details of the criminal case brought against Vadim Mikerin. Mikerin, who was the head of U.S. operations for Tenex, a subsidiary of Russia’s atomic energy giant Rosatom, was convicted of money laundering and other crimes and in 2015 sentenced to four years in prison.

As The Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft reported on Thursday evening, Investigative reporter John Solomon told Sean Hannity that the Campbell has video of briefcases full of money in the bribery of case on Hillary Clinton.

Solomon says the Reuters report today downplaying the informant is completely inaccurate.

The informant says he is in fear for his life since he was outed by the Sessions DOJ.
Campbell will reportedly testify on Monday.

The informant will testify next week before Congress.


© 2017   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service