patrick.net

Did you see what happened last Monday night after Donald Trump won a landslide victory in Iowa?

Rachel Maddow announced that MSNBC would not be covering Trump’s victory speech, and CNN cut away after just a few minutes of it. Why was that?

According to Maddow, it’s because Trump and his supporters are fascist, and Trump spreads misinformation.

Russia's State Duma on Wednesday passed the first stage of a bill allowing the confiscation of property from those convicted of a number of crimes including spreading "deliberately false information" about the Russian army.
The measure will also apply to those found guilty of "discrediting" the armed forces, calling for sanctions against Russia or inciting extremist activity.
The Duma, parliament's lower house, passed the bill in the first of three required readings by 395 votes to 3.
It would allow the state to seize the property of Russians who have left the country and have criticised the war in Ukraine, but who continue to rely on revenue from renting out their houses or apartments in Russia.
Since sending its army into Ukraine in February 2022, Russia has intensified a long-running clampdown on all forms of political dissent. Under laws passed in March of that year, discrediting the armed forces or spreading false information about them are already punishable by long jail terms.

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Several outraged Republican senators have summoned Big Tech CEOs to D.C. after outrageous censorship of breaking news that could hurt the Biden campaign. Senators are vowing to hold these powerful oligarchs accountable by dragging them in front of a committee and saying mean things to them.

"It's time these Big Tech big shots march right over here and answer to us!" said Senator Lindsey Graham. "Boy, those CEOs must be quaking in their boots right now! We'll probably call them an 'embarrassment' or even a 'disgrace' if we're feeling extra feisty!"

According to sources on Capitol Hill, senators are writing some really good questions with extra harsh language to make the tech CEOs squirm in their seats.

"It's gonna be awesome," said Senator Graham. "After we question them all day, we'll send out some really cool clips to play on the YouTube with titles like 'FURIOUS Lindsey Graham RIPS into Twitter CEO.' Everyone will be like, 'WOW! Lindsey really let that guy have it!' It will be so epic."

Senators are also really looking forward to starting new fundraising campaigns encouraging voters to donate money to stop Big Tech censorship.

"Big Tech will be sorry they messed with us!" Tweeted one senator minutes before being suspended on Twitter.

So, the German authorities have filed an appeal to overturn my acquittal in criminal court last week. Apparently, their plan is to keep putting me on trial until they get a judge who is willing to convict me of something, or to bankrupt me with legal costs. Silly me, for a moment there, I was actually starting to believe this was over.

Let me quickly review how I got here for anyone just tuning in.

I am an author and a political satirist and commentator. In August 2022, I posted two Tweets criticizing mask mandates and making fun of Karl Lauterbach, Germany’s Minister of Health. Both Tweets included an image from the cover artwork of my latest book, The Rise of The New Normal Reich: Consent Factory Essays, Vol. III (2020-2021).



The German authorities did not appreciate those Tweets, so they (1) had them censored by Twitter, (2) had Amazon ban my book in Germany, and (3) dragged me into criminal court and prosecuted me on trumped-up “hate crime” charges.

Last week, a judge acquitted me of those charges, after which she launched into a tirade in which she insulted me at some length, and then strapped on a “Covid mask” and stalked out of the courtroom. During her diatribe, she made a big show of proclaiming that, by acquitting me of the fabricated hate-crime charges, she was proving that “Germany is not a totalitarian state” … you know, the kind of totalitarian state where books are banned, political speech is censored, and dissident authors are harassed by the police and subjected to ridiculous show trials.

The Biden administration pressured Amazon to censor books related to COVID-19 vaccines in early 2021 citing concerns that the material contained “propaganda” and “misinformation,” internal company emails released by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) appear to show.

Eventually, because I wasn’t making nearly enough income as a freelance journalist, I became a Substack author. So Substack actually offered me, and thousands of other writers, a work-around.

For me, this work-around was prompted largely by Facebook censoring all my Covid posts. (Since few news organizations were paying me for articles, the only place I could publish my writing was via Facebook posts.)

One might ask why Facebook went “all-in” or Orwellian Censorship. In my opinion, this was also the result of a work-around, one that traces back to how everything changed - seemingly overnight - when a “deadly” new pandemic was declared.

The government - and/or the world’s Shadow Rulers who tell the government what to do - clearly wanted everyone in the world to panic over Covid. Among other desired results, mass fear of death would make almost everyone rush out to get a new mandated or coerced “vaccine.”

However, the government wouldn’t get the mass panic it needed - and thus its new mRNA vaccines - if people like me were making copious posts on Facebook saying, “The Pandemic is a scam! Don’t trust the experts!”

The government’s work-around was to create a massive Censorship Industrial Complex which would silence potentially influential dissenters like myself. Facebook bought into this program since its CEO, Mr. Zuckerberg, was smart enough to know he should stay on the good side of the world’s 900-pound gorilla.

So the government’s Covid work-around (We have to censor people so we can get our vaccines) sent me scurrying to the sanctuary of Substack as my own micro work-around.

Globalist lawmakers in Canada are pushing a disturbing new piece of legislation that seeks to jail members of the public who question the “Net Zero” agenda of the unelected World Economic Forum (WEF).

The push aims to tackle so-called “climate skepticism” as governments around the world scramble to meet the WEF’s “Net Zero” goals.

The legislation, Bill C-372, was introduced by Canada’s left-wing socialist New Democratic Party (NDP).

Under the bill, the promotion of fossil fuel use will be outlawed with restrictions similar to tobacco advertising applied.

Those who speak in favor of fossil fuels, or criticize plans to eliminate them, will face massive fines and possible prison time.

Michigan lawmaker stripped of committee post, staff after sharing Jack Posobiec meme about the replacement of white people



I'm confused.

Conspiracy theories are ideas about associations of conspirators that are pushing to implement some plan, but they are called theories because there is no solid evidence.

In the case of "Great Replacement," it's just a fact.





... Jack Poso's meme is clearly conveying this reality with a low-information meme. The guy pops up on my feed hourly. I don't agree with him all the time, but he's not saying white people are superior. He's not saying black people are evil. What he is saying is that there is a sustained, coordinated effort to diminish anything associated with the "white" Christian West, including celebrating the making of our communities less white.

And it just so happens that a GOP rep in Michigan retweeted this very baseline conservative observation.

After all, how is it a theory when everyone is admitting the conspiracy?

For a few days now, the internet has been telling me that the French National Assembly passed a law making “any criticism of [the] mRNA platform punishable with up to 3 years imprisonment and 45,000 euros.” As is often the case, the reports beneath these headlines were slightly less sensational. There, one typically reads that the law targets not mere criticism of the mRNA jabs, but explicit advice against vaccination. That may not sound like a big difference, but details always matter. I have now read both the law itself and many reports from the French press about its origins and the controversies attending it. I can report that it is indeed bad, but perhaps not quite as terrible as some have claimed.

I could hardly believe my eyes reading the reports about the French Parliament adopting on Wednesday, in first reading, the bill aimed at strengthening the fight against “sectarian excesses” (“Projet de loi visant à renforcer la lutte contre les dérives sectaires”) in the field of the practice of medicine. Upon closer verification, it all turned out to be true. With a few bumps along the way, the government was able to push through the bill with the notable Article 4, with 182-137 votes in favour. Here’s the complete Article 4, in all its glory:

Article 4 (Amendments n°CL128, n°CL47)

After article 223-1-1 of the penal code, article 223-1-2 is inserted as follows:

“ Art. 223‑1‑2. – Provocation to abandon or abstain from following therapeutic or prophylactic medical treatment is punishable by one year of imprisonment and a fine of 15,000 euros, when this abandonment or abstention is presented as beneficial for the health of the persons targeted when it is, in the state of medical knowledge, clearly likely to result in serious consequences for their physical or psychological health, taking into account the pathology from which they suffer.”

“Provocation to adopt practices presented as having a therapeutic or prophylactic purpose for the persons concerned is punishable by the same penalties when it is clear, in the state of medical knowledge, that these practices expose them to an immediate risk of death. or injuries likely to result in mutilation or permanent disability.”

“When the provocation provided for in the first two paragraphs has been effective, the penalties are increased to three years of imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros.”

“When these offenses are committed through the written or audiovisual press, the specific provisions of the laws which govern these matters are applicable with regard to the determination of the persons responsible.”

Soros Prepares Takeover of 200 Radio Stations Ahead of US Election

A federal judge on Wednesday handed Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Children’s Health Defense (CHD) a partial win in their landmark censorship case alleging the Biden administration colluded with social media platforms to unlawfully censor online content.

Judge Terry A. Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting key Biden administration officials and agencies from coercing or significantly encouraging social media platforms to suppress or censor online content.

Judge Terry A. Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting key Biden administration officials and agencies from coercing or significantly encouraging social media platforms to suppress or censor online content.

Biden's FBI to detain Blaze reporter for J6 reporting. Aren't you glad you don't live in a banana republic, comrades? ...

Remind me, how many journalists did Trump arrest? ...

These are for unknown charges! They won't even tell him or his lawyers what they're bringing him in for until he appears before the magistrate!

Steve did enter the Capitol in his capacity as a journalist, like many other journalists and photographers, after hundreds of other individuals had posted pictures and videos from the J6 event that, apparently, contradicted the narrative.

No matter what they charge Baker with, this is his crime.

But don't worry! The Biden White House is a return to normalcy!

"Democracy" is safe!

White House Orders Fox News to Retract Reports on Biden Bribery Allegations

The reports focus on allegations that the president and his son, Hunter Biden, took millions of dollars in bribes from foreign nations to peddle their influence in Washington D.C.

It has been alleged that while he was vice president, Biden pressured Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor, who was investigating Burisma Holdings at the time.

Last year, for example, students at Stanford Law School – law students, who should understand the value of the First Amendment better than anyone else on campus – shouted down a federal judge whose views they didn’t like. When a Stanford diversity dean – yes, that’s an actual position – appeared on the scene, she didn’t back the judge. Instead, she instead lectured him, asking, “Do you have something so incredibly important to say?” and, infamously, “Is the juice worth the squeeze?”

This was far from an isolated incident.

Adults, particularly left-leaning young adults, truly believe they have the right not to hear words or concepts that might bother them. They refer to “microaggressions” and “unsafe environments.” ...

The solution for those of us who believe in free speech is to let advocates and opponents, of the Covid vaccines or anything else, talk to each other, or past each other, or at each other – while the world listens, or doesn’t. ...

Why have journalists and academics – the very people who should care most about free expression - lost their appetite for free speech? And how did I get caught in its crosshairs?

The simple two-word answer is Donald Trump.

Trump’s election in 2016 set our elite institutions into a spiral of anger – not merely at Trump, but at the Americans who had the temerity to resist Hillary Clinton’s coronation and elect him instead.

But Trump is not the only answer.

After all, 2016 wasn’t just the year of Trump. It was the year of Brexit. It was the year when elites on both sides of the Atlantic fundamentally lost their ability to set the so-called Overton window, the acceptable parameters of political discussion. No one serious in Washington or New York or Los Angeles or San Francisco – Republican or Democrat - wanted Donald Trump elected in 2016. And no one serious in London, Tory or Labor, wanted Britain to pull out of the European Union.

And the elites, correctly, saw large social media sites, Facebook and Twitter in particular, as the largest single engine of their loss of control.

Curation of the public discourse makes a self-referential parody of democracy: the legitimacy of the Regime nominally rests upon the will of the People, but the will of the People is whatever the Regime wills the people to will. In a sense, this has been the case in industrial technocracies more or less since their inception. Whoever controls the organs of opinion formation – the news and entertainment media, the schools, the universities – controls the mass mind, and therefore controls politics. The openly totalitarian regimes of the Democratic People’s Republics did this blatantly, with direct state management of the press and the academy; the more subtle liberal democracies did this behind the scenes, with nominally independent, private media and universities manipulated via back-channel communications, government grants, intelligence agency inserts (e.g. Project Mockingbird) and so on. The Great Shuttening is partly a reaction to the loss of influence of these legacy institutions, and a panicked attempt to assert control over the unruly many-to-many communications networks that have been displacing them.