Did you know that if you have even a small subsistence farm to grow and or raise food for your family it all could be confiscated. Did you know the government is currently trying to identify and register all food producers to support this goal? Whether you are aware or not, at any time the president deems necessary, the US can now confiscate key resources in the name of national security. In particular, the food you worked hard to grow or raise could be seized. Naturally, it makes no sense to spend your time and money developing a farming capability to insulate your family from hard times only to have it seized. By following a few basic rules, you can help to protect your food supply and ensure those that helped cause the collapse and refused to prepare aren’t fed on your watch.

President Obama also nationalized our nation’s food supply through executive order. This executive order effectively orders the heads of various agencies to include the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to identify critical resources under their purview and develop policies on how to ensure their production and procurement during national emergencies. As with most government regulation, this order on the surface doesn’t sound too draconian. However, the devil is in the details regarding its implementation. In order for the USDA to “secure” the US food supply, it becomes necessary to identify everyone involved in food production. Once identified, then upon order, the USDA can send nationalized goon squads to confiscate any and all “critical resources” deemed necessary for national security. National security may very soon include declaring “preppers” “extremists and depriving them of their stores of food. In this particular case, it could involve your entire crop.

Doubt this affects you? Consider this, if you live in North Carolina, you must register with the state if you have even one chicken. This is ostensibly being done to rapidly inform, monitor, and protect the state’s poultry farmers from avian flu strains. However, as soon as anyone in government starts talking about “protecting” anything, one should suspect subterfuge. In this case, the government suddenly feels that you must be forced to “register” even if you have one chicken. By the government’s own admission, small isolated flocks have almost no risk to catching or passing the current avian flu strains due to their lack of ability to intermingle with wild waterfowl and then spread the virus to other birds. As such, one must consider alternative reasons the government feels that it is necessary to pry so deeply into private citizens’ lives. I would entertain the government’s arguments if they were focused solely on large commercial poultry farms, but they are not. This North Carolina regulation targets even an owner of a single bird as a pet and as such, is far too broad to be considered justifiable. However, when considering the quiet push behind the scenes by the USDA to identify all food producers, it makes much more sense.

You may be thinking that North Carolina is an isolated incident or that this is only applicable to poultry, but it is not. Let’s look at Wisconsin, which now “mandates” livestock premises registration. Again, as in North Carolina, if the regulation was solely focused on large scale livestock operations, it could be justifiable for the monitoring and tracking of disease. However, just like in North Carolina, this applies to even the smallest of hobby farms and in fact applies to anyone that has even one animal. It is also completely unnecessary. Just like the family that has a few chickens as pets in North Carolina, the family in Wisconsin with a pot belly big or rabbits do not pose any demonstrated increased risk to the livestock of the state. As such, once again, the trend supports a motive more indicative of complete registration and tracking of “all” food resources vice monitoring and mitigation of livestock diseases. Wisconsin isn’t alone. Both Michigan and Indiana also mandate registration of “any” livestock of any number being kept anywhere. Digging a bit deeper, the state link to the USDA policy of registration, monitoring, and tracking of all livestock (under the guise of tracking infectious disease) becomes very clear. In fact, the Council of State Governments blatantly tells us the states are in fact tracking all farms and livestock at the behest of the USDA.

Again, I recognize that skeptics will assert these are nothing more than well intentioned regulations being taken out of context and that they would need to see more specific evidence. To rebut their arguments, I could write volumes about the numerous new government regulations relating to heirloom seeds, animal and plant propagation, food storage, small gardens, raw foods, off-grid living, and water rights. When these regulations are considered in their entirety they form a powerful body of evidence that supports my assertion the government is building a broad database to use in the event it decides to confiscate food. However, the willfully ignorant and blind supporters of government tyranny are not of my concern. No amount of “evidence” will overcome their cognitive dissonance. My concern is to warn and inform those of you amongst us that have proven immune to brain washing and still have free thinking independent minds. Therefore, the fact remains that there is a growing trend at both the federal and state level of forcing everyone with live stock, orchards, gardens, etc. to register with the government. Once this database is complete, the government will no doubt use it to extract taxes and fees, conduct inspections and raids, and ultimately, should the need arise, confiscate your food. To prevent mitigate possible confiscation attempts from both government agents and looters; one should consider employing my four rules of food security.
Living without power, cars, electronics or running water may seem like a nightmare scenario but to pioneers it was just the way life was. Having the skills to survive without modern conveniences is not only smart in case SHTF, it’s also great for the environment. Keep in mind that the key to a successful homestead does not only lie on being able to grow your own food but on other skills as well. Learning these skills will take time, patience and perseverance, and not all of these skills are applicable to certain situations. Hopefully, though, you managed to pick up some great ideas that will inspire you and get you started! Just like our forefathers used to do,  The Lost Ways Book teaches you how you can survive in the worst-case scenario with the minimum resources available.It comes as a step-by-step guide accompanied by pictures and teaches you how to use basic ingredients to make super-food for your loved ones.

My first rule comes from the movie “Fight Club.” Don’t talk about your food production and storage. Although it may be obvious to neighbors you garden or raise a small amount of livestock such as hogs and poultry for personal consumption, the broader public doesn’t need to know. Continuing with that point, how much food you put up for long term storage and where it is stored should never be an open topic of discussion. Let them think you have nothing in food stores even if that means using disinformation.

My second rule is to disperse your food stockpiles using food caches. If you have stored adequate amounts of food for your family properly, even a complete confiscation of your current harvest shouldn’t push you to food lines and soup kitchens. Just like with firearms, don’t store your food all in one place. Food preserved properly can be cached in the ground just like most anything else and store literally for years. In fact, well camouflaged in-ground storage areas similar to mini-root cellars are excellent places to store food. Just make sure you don’t mix foods like apples and potatoes, which will cause the other to go bad quickly in your food cache. The simplest of these food caches can be constructed by digging a hole below the frost line big enough to store what you want. Then load your cache, cover it with a board, add a layer of insulation, and cover it with a layer of dirt (dirt alone can be used to cover and insulate). To finish it, camouflage the cache site any remove traces of a trail to it. I favor using a technique where you cache a mixed bundle of food stuffs capable of supporting the basic nutritional needs of your family for a month. This method allows a cache to remain undisturbed until you actually are going to use it and includes all of your food staples. It also justifies the investment of energy making the site.

My third rule requires developing the skills to identify and use wild and edible plants. As I have written many times about any government bureaucrat with an accompanying goon squad or looter can identify a cellar of potatoes and a field of corn. However, very few will ever be able to recognize wild spinach, pokeweed, dandelions, chicory, huckleberries, and common milk weed as “food.” In fact, most will walk right past these tasty, super-nutritious wild plants assuming them to be weeds in a fallow field you didn’t plant this year. Further, even if they recognize them as potentially being cultivated, they wouldn’t have enough sense or knowledge to know when to pick them, what parts to pick, and how to prepare them without potentially poisoning themselves. Like the bureaucrats and looters though, if you don’t study this knowledge on your own, you will not be capable of employing this critical food security technique. I find that the best way to employ this technique is in a deliberate fashion. Leave small plots of your garden or fields to appear “fallow,” but in reality, plant these plots with a natural mix of wild edibles. This requires you to collect the seeds from various edible plants the season before and store them in a cool, dark, dry location. In the spring, till up the soil in that plot, mix the wild seeds, and broadcast them throughout the fresh soil. Then lightly cover the seeds and allow nature to do its work. The plot will grow up appearing as if it is a natural mix of weeds typical of any fallow field or recently disturbed ground, but in reality will be a dense mix of mutually supporting edible plants that require little to no further gardening. In fact, the yield may far exceed the yields of your cultivated plant species, will naturally choke out undesirable weeds, and require no additional work aside from harvesting. I apply the same basic concept to my fruit and nut trees. Naturally, having an orchard setting is smart, but also intentionally plant Black Walnut, Butternut, various hickory, apple, pear, plum, and pawpaw trees throughout your property and forest. These trees will also blend in to the natural flora and an untrained eye will never be able to pick them out as fruit and nut bearing trees outside of an orchard setting. Respective of livestock, one faces more difficult challenges keeping their existence hidden. One technique to leverage is to raise free range animals, which are difficult to completely account for and round up. In the event of an inspection, theft, or confiscation, it is unlikely that without the owners help, the offender will be able to locate and completely coral and capture all of the free range livestock. For animals such as ducks and chickens, this can be accomplished pretty easily; especially, if non-traditional coups are used and they are dispersed throughout the property. However, with grazing livestock and hogs, a fence must be used to limit their range. Still though, with enough property, one can let their animals roam as they graze and forage like the old cattle ranchers of the West. Ultimately, if confiscations were to begin, one could simply release their livestock to become feral and be hunted rather than allowing their livestock to be stolen or seized.

My fourth rule is to register absolutely nothing unless you absolutely have to. Whether or not you choose to comply with government regulations is a matter you must individually assess and decide upon. If registering your farm, livestock, or garden isn’t mandatory, this is a no brainer…don’t. However, when it becomes “mandatory,” one must consider the pros and cons. For example, maybe it is best if you just register “some” of your livestock to give legitimacy to your farming operation, but not draw unnecessary attention from authorities. Maybe you simply want no trouble and are willing to risk confiscation so you comply 100%. Maybe the risks are not the issue and you decide that your moral and ethical code to resist encroaching tyranny at all opportunities is more important so you register nothing. I cannot make this decision for you, but you must make it. Either way, my first three rules are designed to work equally well whether or not you decide to comply when the time comes.

In summary, the USDA working in conjunction with the military and the Department of Homeland Security have set in motion plans to identify and track all critical resources in this country to include food. The impact of this could mean that in a time of crisis, if the government deems it necessary, it will confiscate your food. To ensure your food security, I have provided you four basic rules to follow that will help you cache your food, diversify your crops, and provide for better overall food security in the face of looting or confiscation.

I’ve warned you about this before – but now there’s more proof…

A new finding from the November Capital Riot should scare the living bejeesus out of you with how the U.S. government was able to track each person in the mob individually the entire time they were in Washington.

This information is now being used to haul in every last rioter as they’re hunted down for questioning.

And they’re not the only ones who are being “hunted”…

YOU, my friend, are being tracked right now and your personal information is being shared on the “dark web”.

Make no mistake, your personal movement and information CAN (and WILL) be used against you in so many ways, it’s literally keeping me up at night.

Fortunately, I have a “secret disable key” you can use right now that will protect you.

But you have to use it NOW, before any more of your data gets shared with the wrong people.

You might be living in one of America’s deathzones and not have a clue about it
What if that were you? What would YOU do?

In the next few minutes, I’m going to show you the U.S. Nuclear Target map, where you’ll find out if you’re living in one of America’s Deathzones.

How To Stop The Government From Tracking Your Movement Via Your Smart Phone…

You see, every “smart phone” comes already implanted with a “tracking ID” that’s specific to you and everything you do.

Some of it, you already know, like what you shop for, what articles you like, what facebook ads you click on, etc.

But there are also deeper identifiers that are secretly being tracked without your knowledge… INCLUDING where you travel every single step of your day.

This includes every intimate detail of your whereabouts: gun stores, strip clubs, shooting ranges, fraternity meetings, coffee with a friend who may unknowingly be on a “watch list”.

You get it, right?

Each one of these locations is a “ping” on the government’s radar that – at will – could be used to pin you to something that you may not even know about.

And with a renewed focus on “domestic terrorism” and the government’s own records that cite WHO could be considered an “enemy of the state” – specifically:

• Believing in the 2nd Amendment
• Storing away “survival food”
• Buying more than 2 guns
• Purchasing “excessive” amounts of ammo
• Even comments you make on Facebook!

Sound like anyone you know?

Yup, me too!

Look, it’s more important than ever to safeguard your personal privacy – for your own protection.

And while I do love my smartphone for all the cool stuff it allows me to do, it can also be your worst enemy when it comes to government snooping (during a very dangerous time).

Here’s A “Secret Key” To Disable Your Smart Phone’s Tracking Device…

On an iPhone…

1. Go to “Settings”
2. Tap “Privacy”
3. Select “Tracking”
4. Disable the option that says “Allow Apps to Request to Track”

On an Android…

1. Go to “Settings”
2. Tap “Google”
3. Select “Manage your Google Account”
4. Select the “Data & personalization” tab from the account dashboard
5. Scroll down till you find Activity Controls. Here you’ll find the two options that need to be disabled. Just toggle both to the “Off” position.

Your Next Steps To Take Your Personal Information “Off The Radar”…

Of course these aren’t the ONLY steps you need to take for “complete protection”.

There are all kinds of sneaky tricks the government (and slimy marketers) are using to track you and use your information without you knowing it.

If you’re as protective of your personal information as I am, there’s a book I just got that has a simple 7-step plan to take yourself “off the radar” that I highly recommend.

But in my opinion, you have to take these steps NOW because you and I both know that the government will stop at nothing to invade our private lives for their own benefit.

You’ve been warned (again).

What Other Steps Are You Taking To Protect Your Personal Information?

Please Feel Free To Leave Your Tips Below Now…

Disclaimer: We sometimes promote other products on our website for a small commission.  It’s how our families eat, but we don’t promote anything we haven’t seen or used and nothing we wouldn’t suggest you also use.  Plus, 10% of our profits go to our 501c3 nonprofit, “Operation Save Our Soldiers” to end combat PTSD.  Thank you for supporting our efforts.

Today I’d like to share with you a “3-second survival hack” you can use to skyrocket your chances of protecting your loved ones during ANY crisis.

This technique is so powerful it can give you almost superhuman powers during the ugliest nightmares imaginable….

From natural disasters like earthquakes or tornadoes…

To explosive situations like mass shootings or even nationwide martial law.

And It doesn’t matter if you’re out of shape…

Or have no equipment…

Or even if you’re disabled living in a wheelchair.

This technique has been tested and proven by elite soldiers and real world “miracle” survivors from around the world.

Our underlying goal in a SHTF scenario is ultimately to stay alive and live without exposure to risks.  As much preparation as many of us have made, in the altered world of a SHTF crisis, there will be many dangers that lurk; and some of them will be inadvertently from our own doing.

Here are the six laws of survival. Read this. Memorize this. Apply this. One day, you will need it.]

In a survival scenario all bets are off and the following laws will keep you alive. These laws are rigid, but necessary. Harsh, but true. Keep your cards close and always have a plan.

Law 1: Wherever that crowd is running, do not join them.

This is not to say that they aren’t (initially) running in the right direction.  But what of it?  They are bound to be either captured en masse or worse (bombed, strafed, or shot).  For the horror of the IHM (the Incredible Human Mob), look no further than “War of the Worlds” with Tom Cruise where he and his family are driving the passenger van…right up and into the mob.  Look what happened there.  You can’t defeat their numbers, and you will be captive to them…another steer in the herd.

Strike out on your own, you and your family, avoiding the main thoroughfares at all cost, and avoiding the IHM.

Law 2: You have to have a place (and places) to go.

This is where thinking outside of the general herd will pay off.  We’re going to instruct by running through a checklist…. this will be a “handy-dandy” checklist that you can print out or run over in your mind to be able to follow rule #2.

• Did you preposition assets (food, weapons, money, etc.) at an initial safe location?
• Is that location within walking distance for you and your family?
• Once there, are you and your family secure for at least a 24 – 48-hour period?
• Safe from enemy troops/government “peacekeepers” on the hunt?
• Safe from fallout and/or NBC agents?
• Does it have a food and water supply to sustain all of you for 7 days?
•  If your initial safe location has been compromised, is a duplicate location nearby?
• Do you have a farther (more remote) location that you can reach on foot in 3 days?
• A secure, sustainable location with supplies for at least a month?
• Do you and your family have a handheld method of communication for each member?
• Have you formulated short-term (initial contact, 48 hours, 7 days) plans?
• Have you made long-term (1 month and month-by-month; 6 months and 6-month continuous analysis; 1 year) plans?

Guys and gals, these are just basics.  You must have these things in place in order to give you and your family a fighting chance.  Whether or not it is a foreign invasion or a domestic communist takeover of the United States, you must leave your home in suburbia or you will be rounded up, bringing us forward:

Law 3: You will be leaving your home, permanently or for a long time.

This is survival.  The majority of readers are not living in the mountains or in a remote location.  If you follow these steps and practice them on a dry-run on a regular basis…it will give you the advantage that most people will not have.  You must innovate: come up with ideas that others will not think of.  Do you know of an abandoned warehouse on the outskirts of town?  Chances are that 90% of others will think the same thing in a grid-down/Red Dawn survival scenario.  You need to find the places that are off the beaten path.  And if there are none?  It may mean that you have to create a place.

How?  By caching your supplies within the walking distances described for each part of the “safe” area.  By finding tunnels, caves, or other sub-structures that can protect you from the elements and at least afford partial protection from radiation.  By being who it is you imagine yourself to be: a prepper…a survivalist…or a survivor.  When you enter any contest, do you enter it to lose?  Do you strive for just “second place” or “second best” in this arena?  Chances are the answer is “no,” but you have to arrive on that conclusion on your own.  All of this is a challenge, and this underlines everything for you if it needs clarification:

Law 4: In survival, there is no silver medal: “second place” means death.

Forget that phrase in “The Hunger Games,” because if you are taken…the odds are not ever in your favor.  We went through a 4-article series on how to escape from the Gulag where I reiterated how important it is for you to stay out of it.  I stand by this concept.  If you are taken captive, the odds aren’t in your favor of getting out…for the duration of it.

And then guess what?  The Germans during WWII as the allies approached began to hide their transgressions by liquidating the camps…basically killing everyone that could bear any type of witness to the atrocities.  Do not think for an instant that it will not happen again.  Look at Holodomor in Ukraine and the starvation tactics the USSR used to follow after the Malthusian model.  Our enemies have very little regard for human life, and the lives they value are of their own people.  If the Chinese communists would run over their own people with tanks and sell their internal organs while they’re still alive, what will they do with us?

Which brings us to the “Malcolm X” rule:

Law 5: You must stay out and survive by any and all means necessary.

Some of you may think “JJ is a little harsh.”  I would rather be hard and harsh now, and enable you, my countrymen, to have some tools at your disposal and a “sharp tack” under the figurative buttocks of your mind to give you the impetus to do something about the situation prior to its occurrence.  The country is “long in the tooth,” and you have to grasp these concepts and act upon them now…not burn off the pages and save them in the survival archives…but use them to inculcate your own, individual plan of action now.

Rule #5 means resolving yourself to do what you must in order to protect yourself from the ravages (and not just possible, but probable death) inside of one of these camps.  These are all basic, “generic” things to begin as a base for your preparations.  This is a form of guerilla warfare!  Avoid the occupiers/oppressors at all cost!  These things will work for you…if you resolve yourself (ves) to do them.  I’ll close with a note on OPSEC (operational security): you better build off of these basics and keep all of them to yourself.

JJ is giving you the basics that you need, without revealing everything of his own plans.  Why?  Because I earned them by paying for them with years of experience and suffering, and it means my family’s survival.  Such measures would run you a lot of money and imagination; such measures come from years of practical experience and the willingness to take chances.  This thought brings us to our final rule, the failure of which means compromise leading to death:

Law 6:  Do not tip your hand or reveal your plans to anyone.

Next installment we will talk about life under occupation, be that by foreign invaders or by totalitarian state that has morphed out of a democracy.  In the meantime, prepare and plan, and when you are reasonably sure, execute a dry run.  The practice does make perfect and affords you a time and trials to iron out all of the glitches in your operations.  Until next time be good to one another and keep up the fight!

America – the greatest nation on earth – is currently facing unprecedented times of social unrest, and dare I say, this is just the beginning.

Regardless of who presides over the nation, we should always be aware of the so-called “shadow government” and their agenda. And mark my words: Our nation is in for times of massive unrest that were being plotted as early as 2015 and will continue until the “global agenda” pursued by George Soros and his allies is implemented.  The coming out-of-control riots may lead to a call for Martial Law, as I will explain.

America has been preparing for massive social uprisings for a very long time (a quick research on the topic will reveal this truth). What I am about to tell you next might come as a surprise for some of you, but most of the things that we experience are being manufactured.

Never in my lifetime have I seen America so divided.

Our politicians and the mainstream media have been endlessly pitting various groups against one another for years, and everywhere you look, hearts are growing very cold.

Trump’s victory has come as a surprise for many, but if we consider the new state of play of the world, where the economic crisis has led to global divisions driving, thus, a return to national interests over the global ones, voting for Trump has been the obvious choice. During difficult times, we must safeguard the values and interests of the American people. But manufacturing nation-wide protests during confusing times may be just what some might wish for in order to divide and destabilize the country in exchange for the ability to control us at all times. In case we don’t comply with their “desires” we will face dire consequences, as the infamous Zbigniew Brzezinski, the imperialist/globalist/war-monger and former policy advisor to Obama, said:

“Today, it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people”.

After some extensive research on the matter, I am inclined to affirm that what we’re currently experiencing is just the beginning, and the protests are rapidly turning into violent riots. Although many commentators are claiming that martial law will not be declared, we can never be sure of what is being planned for us.

Did you know that if martial law is declared, Trump will be prevented from taking office?

Returning to the fact that Soros is behind most of the protesters’ actions, we must acknowledge that the fundamental reason for inciting violence is to create favorable circumstances for the President to legitimately institute martial law if the riots continue on the same path. This is how it will work:

• The current protests are spreading rapidly, and when there is an increase in both violence and numbers, this movement will inevitably grow into a national riot.
• If needed, due to extensive clashes, martial law will be declared. Therefore, when this happens, Trump will not be able to take office because Obama will stay in power for however long is necessary until the “National State of Emergency” has passed (Bernstein), (AMBELLAS). There is a good chance that this has been the back-up plan for some liberals all along (as mentioned earlier, there’s proof the protests are being staged) in order to further advance the globalist agenda that has been denied by our President-elect Trump.

So, here’s a glimpse of how life will be when martial law comes into effect:

• Everything we own can become federal property (especially guns and food stockpiles, which will be the first to be confiscated).
• Curfews will be the new normal, while groups of armed men and women will patrol the streets at all times.
• Access to food, water and other resources will be rationed. If your life depends on a daily dose of medication, you should start storing it in advance.
• There will be sky-high inflation, and with a national debt of almost $20 trillion, the stage is set to sky-rocket a new financial crisis that will make the 1930s Depression look like a walk in the park.
• Everyone will be considered suspicious. A short chit-chat with your neighbor about the “wrong” things can put your life on the line.
• There will be no access to free Internet, while free press and the freedom of speech will be things of the past

The 6 Golden Rules of Surviving Martial Law

Prepper or no prepper, these are the 6 Golden Rules to follow if martial law comes to your town:

     1. First and foremost, talk with no one and trust no one.

Although the clear majority of preppers are already set to outlast any scenario that cuts them off from all the common supply lines, we must remember that under martial Law, everything that we own is able to become government property. Therefore, do not tell people about your supplies or secret hide-outs. I know it’s hard not to brag about your preps, but be careful to whom you’re talking

     2. Always renew your supplies and make sure you have a “basic martial law survival kit.”

A basic martial law survival kit would imply the following: electricity generator, water filters or even water generators (H2O Dynamo), weapons, food supplies for six months, first aid supplies, clothing for any type of weather, a flashlight, batteries, radio gear, and navigation equipment. Of course, you’ll need these if you want to stay put. If you want to go outside and face the music…that’s a different story.

     3. Avoid getting in the way of law enforcement or the military.

Even though some would advise that we be resilient to any violations of your constitutional rights, which, by the way, will be justified under martial law, the best survival tactics are to keep your cool and think before you react. You can always choose to fight back. These two options – bugging in or bugging out – will cause you to probably face the hardest decision of your life.

     4. Tune in and be up to date with the news.

It is crucial to stay informed and keep in touch with whomever you consider important. Every media outlet, as well as the Internet, will be controlled by the federal government, and you will not have access to any other information except what is being communicated by the state. Although this might be upsetting, you still need to know what is going to happen so you can be prepared for any situation.

     5. Cautiously develop a survival network.

Establishing a survival network would be an excellent idea considering the fact that we can never know for how long martial law will be imposed. Consequently, setting up a diverse group of preppers will ensure your long-term survival. But make sure you keep a low profile so that you and your group will not be targeted as perpetrators.

     6. Inspect and know your surroundings by heart.

You should be able to visualize your home turf even in your sleep. Ideally, you would also have a safe room. Make sure you have a blueprint of your area where you mark the closest escape routes, develop the quickest itinerary to a safe haven, and formulate the best and safest evacuation strategy.

Today I’d like to share with you a “3-second survival hack” you can use to skyrocket your chances of protecting your loved ones during ANY crisis.

This technique is so powerful it can give you almost superhuman powers during the ugliest nightmares imaginable….

From natural disasters like earthquakes or tornadoes…

To explosive situations like mass shootings or even nationwide martial law.

And It doesn’t matter if you’re out of shape…

Or have no equipment…

Or even if you’re disabled living in a wheelchair.

This technique has been tested and proven by elite soldiers and real world “miracle” survivors from around the world.

America – the greatest nation on earth – is currently facing unprecedented times of social unrest, and dare I say, this is just the beginning.

Regardless of who presides over the nation, we should always be aware of the so-called “shadow government” and their agenda. And mark my words: Our nation is in for times of massive unrest that were being plotted as early as 2015 and will continue until the “global agenda” pursued by George Soros and his allies is implemented.  The coming out-of-control riots may lead to a call for Martial Law, as I will explain.

America has been preparing for massive social uprisings for a very long time (a quick research on the topic will reveal this truth). What I am about to tell you next might come as a surprise for some of you, but most of the things that we experience are being manufactured.

Today I’d like to share with you a “3-second survival hack” you can use to skyrocket your chances of protecting your loved ones during ANY crisis.

This technique is so powerful it can give you almost superhuman powers during the ugliest nightmares imaginable….

From natural disasters like earthquakes or tornadoes…

To explosive situations like mass shootings or even nationwide martial law.

And It doesn’t matter if you’re out of shape…

Or have no equipment…

Or even if you’re disabled living in a wheelchair.

This technique has been tested and proven by elite soldiers and real world “miracle” survivors from around the world.

Never in my lifetime have I seen America so divided.

Our politicians and the mainstream media have been endlessly pitting various groups against one another for years, and everywhere you look, hearts are growing very cold.

Trump’s victory has come as a surprise for many, but if we consider the new state of play of the world, where the economic crisis has led to global divisions driving, thus, a return to national interests over the global ones, voting for Trump has been the obvious choice. During difficult times, we must safeguard the values and interests of the American people. But manufacturing nation-wide protests during confusing times may be just what some might wish for in order to divide and destabilize the country in exchange for the ability to control us at all times. In case we don’t comply with their “desires” we will face dire consequences, as the infamous Zbigniew Brzezinski, the imperialist/globalist/war-monger and former policy advisor to Obama, said:

“Today, it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people”.

After some extensive research on the matter, I am inclined to affirm that what we’re currently experiencing is just the beginning, and the protests are rapidly turning into violent riots. Although many commentators are claiming that martial law will not be declared, we can never be sure of what is being planned for us.

Did you know that if martial law is declared, Trump will be prevented from taking office?

Returning to the fact that Soros is behind most of the protesters’ actions, we must acknowledge that the fundamental reason for inciting violence is to create favorable circumstances for the President to legitimately institute martial law if the riots continue on the same path. This is how it will work:

• The current protests are spreading rapidly, and when there is an increase in both violence and numbers, this movement will inevitably grow into a national riot.
• If needed, due to extensive clashes, martial law will be declared. Therefore, when this happens, Trump will not be able to take office because Obama will stay in power for however long is necessary until the “National State of Emergency” has passed (Bernstein), (AMBELLAS). There is a good chance that this has been the back-up plan for some liberals all along (as mentioned earlier, there’s proof the protests are being staged) in order to further advance the globalist agenda that has been denied by our President-elect Trump.

So, here’s a glimpse of how life will be when martial law comes into effect:

• Everything we own can become federal property (especially guns and food stockpiles, which will be the first to be confiscated).
• Curfews will be the new normal, while groups of armed men and women will patrol the streets at all times.
• Access to food, water and other resources will be rationed. If your life depends on a daily dose of medication, you should start storing it in advance.
• There will be sky-high inflation, and with a national debt of almost $20 trillion, the stage is set to sky-rocket a new financial crisis that will make the 1930s Depression look like a walk in the park.
• Everyone will be considered suspicious. A short chit-chat with your neighbor about the “wrong” things can put your life on the line.
• There will be no access to free Internet, while free press and the freedom of speech will be things of the past

The 6 Golden Rules of Surviving Martial Law

Prepper or no prepper, these are the 6 Golden Rules to follow if martial law comes to your town:

     1. First and foremost, talk with no one and trust no one.

Although the clear majority of preppers are already set to outlast any scenario that cuts them off from all the common supply lines, we must remember that under martial Law, everything that we own is able to become government property. Therefore, do not tell people about your supplies or secret hide-outs. I know it’s hard not to brag about your preps, but be careful to whom you’re talking

     2. Always renew your supplies and make sure you have a “basic martial law survival kit.”

A basic martial law survival kit would imply the following: electricity generator, water filters or even water generators (H2O Dynamo), weapons, food supplies for six months, first aid supplies, clothing for any type of weather, a flashlight, batteries, radio gear, and navigation equipment. Of course, you’ll need these if you want to stay put. If you want to go outside and face the music…that’s a different story.

     3. Avoid getting in the way of law enforcement or the military.

Even though some would advise that we be resilient to any violations of your constitutional rights, which, by the way, will be justified under martial law, the best survival tactics are to keep your cool and think before you react. You can always choose to fight back. These two options – bugging in or bugging out – will cause you to probably face the hardest decision of your life.

     4. Tune in and be up to date with the news.

It is crucial to stay informed and keep in touch with whomever you consider important. Every media outlet, as well as the Internet, will be controlled by the federal government, and you will not have access to any other information except what is being communicated by the state. Although this might be upsetting, you still need to know what is going to happen so you can be prepared for any situation.

     5. Cautiously develop a survival network.

Establishing a survival network would be an excellent idea considering the fact that we can never know for how long martial law will be imposed. Consequently, setting up a diverse group of preppers will ensure your long-term survival. But make sure you keep a low profile so that you and your group will not be targeted as perpetrators.

     6. Inspect and know your surroundings by heart.

You should be able to visualize your home turf even in your sleep. Ideally, you would also have a safe room. Make sure you have a blueprint of your area where you mark the closest escape routes, develop the quickest itinerary to a safe haven, and formulate the best and safest evacuation strategy.

On December 6th President Trump’s words shook the world.

For the first time in over 2000 years, Jerusalem was recognized as the capital of Israel.

Whether he knows it or not, President Trump fulfilled his part in a frightening biblical prophecy exactly as the scriptures predicted.

Only the top church leaders and Bible scholars know the real meaning behind this great and terrible moment, yet no one is saying a thing about it…

So pay chose attention because this video will change your life forever for the good!

Pfizer Skipped Critical Testing and Cut Corners on Quality Standards, Documents Reveal

New documents obtained by TrialSite News suggest routine quality testing issues were overlooked in the rush to authorize use of the Pfizer COVID vaccine.

New documents obtained by TrialSite News suggest routine quality testing issues were overlooked in the rush to authorize use of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID vaccine, and that U.S. and other governments are conducting a massive vaccination program with an incompletely characterized experimental vaccine.

Regulatory documents revealed Pfizer didn’t thoroughly examine biodistribution and pharmacokinetics issues relating to its vaccine before submitting the vaccine to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for review.

In fact, in key studies — called biodistribution studies, which are designed to test where an injected compound travels in the body, and which tissues or organs it accumulates in — Pfizer did not use the commercial vaccine (BNT162b2) but instead relied on a “surrogate” mRNA that produced the luciferase protein.

According to TrialSite News, the EMA reviewers shared this explicit admission: “No traditional pharmacokinetic or biodistribution studies have been performed with the vaccine candidate BNT162b2.”

Pharmacokinetics refers to the study of what the body does with a drug and the drug’s movement throughout the body — the time course of its absorption, bioavailability, distribution, metabolism and excretion.

Regulatory documents also show Pfizer did not follow industry-standard quality management practices during preclinical toxicology studies of its vaccine, as key studies did not meet good laboratory practice (GLP).

Good laboratory practice or GLP is a set of principles intended to assure the quality and integrity of non-clinical laboratory studies used as the basis for research or marketing permits for products regulated by government agencies. The term GLP is most commonly associated with the pharmaceutical industry and the required non-clinical animal testing that must be performed prior to approval of new drug products.

“The implications of these findings are that Pfizer was trying to accelerate the vaccine development timeline based on the pressures of the pandemic,” said TrialSite founder and CEO Daniel O’Connor. “The challenge is that the processes, such as Good Laboratory Practices, are of paramount importance for quality and ultimately for patient safety. If such important steps are skipped, the risk-benefit analysis would need to be compelling.”

O’Connor pointed to the example of generic repurposed drugs that when under evaluation, even if they are approved, must go through “ever more studies to prove their worth.” Yet in the case of the Pfizer vaccine, O’Connor said, “Pfizer was given more discretion even with a radically new life science-based technology.”

According to TrialSite News, it’s standard practice for the EMA to disclose its assessment of investigational new drug submissions. In the case of Pfizer’s vaccine, the EMA assessment included a summary of the agency’s evaluation of the non-clinical vaccine distribution studies reported to EMA by Pfizer — but the EMA did not disclose the results of Pfizer’s biodistribution studies in its public EMA summary.

Studies submitted to the EMA were carried out using two methods: use of mRNA that produces the luciferase protein and use of a radioactive label to mark the mRNA.

The studies revealed the majority of radioactivity initially remained near the injection site. But within hours, a subset of the stabilized mRNA-containing particles became widely distributed throughout the bodies of test animals.

Rapporteur Filip Josephson, (a person appointed by an organization to report on the proceedings of its meetings) and Co-Rapporteur Jean-Michael Race suggested Pfizer used “a qualified LC-MS/MS method to support quantitation of the two novel LNP excipients” and “the bioanalysis methods appear to be adequately characterized and validated for use in the GLP studies.”

However, the studies performed and submitted by Pfizer were non-GLP.

Additionally, the EMA document states, “Biodistribution: Several literature reports indicate that LNP-formulated RNAs can distribute rather nonspecifically to several organs such as spleen, heart, kidney, lung and brain. In line with this, results from the newly transmitted study 185350 indicate a broader biodistribution pattern.”

This EMA observation corresponds with a growing number of adverse events and aligns with data TrialSite obtained through FOIA showing concentrations of LNP-formulated RNAs in the spleen, ovaries, other tissues and organs.

TrialSite News contacted Dr. Robert W. Malone, the original inventor of mRNA vaccine technology and a senior regulatory specialist who serves as  president of a prestigious European association who wished to remain anonymous.

When asked to review and comment on the EMA assessment, Malone noted normal pharmacokinetic and pharmaco-toxicology studies had not been performed before EUA authorization for the product.

“I was particularly surprised that the dossier of regulatory documents indicates allowance for use in humans based on non-GLP PK and Tox studies relying on formulations which are significantly different from the final vaccine,“ Malone said.

After completing a review, TrialSite’s other source noted the following:

“A quick review the Toxicology Section (2.3.3) of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) Assessment Report on Comirnaty (COVID-19 mRNA vaccine) issued on 19 February 2021, raises concerns about data applicability of preclinical study findings to clinical use:

“To determine the biodistribution of the LNP-formulated modified mRNA (modRNA), the applicant did study distribution of the modRNA in two different non-GLP studies, in mice and rats, and determined the biodistribution of a surrogate luciferase modRNA.

“Thus, one might question the validity and applicability of non-GLP studies conducted using a variant of the subject mRNA vaccine.

“In addition, no genotoxicity data were provided to EMA.”

According to official government accounts, minimal risk is associated with COVID vaccines when compared to the risks of COVID infection. This belief forms the basis of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Emergency Use Authorization approval, which is based on a risk-benefit analysis.

However, a search in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) revealed 294,801 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines, including 5,165 deaths and 25,359 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and May 28, 2021.

Though the U.S. government argues none of the deaths have been formally linked to COVID vaccines and the reported adverse event risk is low, the discovery of these documents and associated information may alter the risk-benefit assessment underlying the EUA decision, TrialSite News reported.

As The Defender and TrialSite News reported, documents obtained by scientists through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) revealed pre-clinical studies showing the active part of the vaccine (mRNA-lipid nanoparticles) — which produce the spike protein — did not stay at the injection site and surrounding lymphoid tissue as scientists originally theorized, but spread widely throughout the body and accumulated in various organs, including the ovaries and spleen.

Research suggests this could lead to the production of spike protein in unintended places, including the brain, ovaries and speen, which may cause the immune system to attack organs and tissues resulting in damage, and raises serious questions about genotoxicity and reproductive toxicity risks associated with the vaccine.

Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist and associate professor at University of Guelph, Ontario, who was awarded a $230,000 grant by the Canadian government last year for research on COVID vaccine development, said he and a group of international scientists filed a request for information from the Japanese regulatory agency to get access to Pfizer’s biodistribution study.

The biodistribution study obtained by Bridle showed the COVID spike protein gets into the blood where it circulates for several days post-vaccination and then accumulates in organs and tissues including the spleen, bone marrow, the liver, adrenal glands and in “quite high concentrations” in the ovaries.

“We made a big mistake. We didn’t realize it until now,” said Bridle. “We thought the spike protein was a great target antigen, we never knew the spike protein itself was a toxin and was a pathogenic protein” that could cause damage in our body if it gets into circulation.

In early 2020, there was a lot of chatter about where the virus, later named SARS-CoV-2, actually came from.

In an excellent, detailed article written earlier this month for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, former New York Times science writer Nicholas Wade described how two short pieces published in March 2020 — one in The Lancet and one in Nature Medicine — determined how this chatter would be channeled to the public.

These two extraordinarily influential pieces, each published under the heading “correspondence,” were parroted by mainstream media for a year. Both were plainly intended to shut down any discussion of the possibility that the virus originated in a lab.

Listen here as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and I discuss these issues:

https://anchor.fm/rfkjr/embed/episodes/Faucis-Smoking-Gun-with-Dr–Meryl-Nass-e125krv

As I read both the Lancet and Nature papers in March 2020, it became immediately apparent each was designed as a propaganda tool. Neither was based on science.

I was so intrigued by these articles, I searched the web to better understand them. That’s when I discovered Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), who had blogged on March 26, 2020, about the Nature article, suggesting the article should put an end to conspiracy theories about lab origin.

Collins wrote:

“Either way, this study leaves little room to refute a natural origin for COVID-19. And that’s a good thing because it helps us keep focused on what really matters: observing good hygiene, practicing social distancing, and supporting the efforts of all the dedicated health-care professionals and researchers who are working so hard to address this major public health challenge.”

I wondered why five otherwise credible scientists would sign their names to the Nature article — and why Collins would endorse the article’s conclusion — when the arguments made in the paper were nonsensical, in my opinion.

I eventually concluded the authors had been put up to writing the paper by a “hidden hand.”

How had I reached that conclusion, even before Dr. Anthony Fauci’s emails were uncovered Wednesday?

Months ago, in another email drop obtained by U.S. Right to Know, we learned Peter Daszac, CEO of the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, was the primary but hidden author of the Lancet article.

Daszac was also the primary beneficiary of the article’s conclusion — that the virus evolved in nature — as his organization had been used as the pass-through to send money from the National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases (NIAID), headed by Fauci, to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, in Wuhan, China. (Some might consider this method of giving out grants as a fancy way of money laundering.)

Daszac, like Fauci, earned more than $400,000/year. He was also a member of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) COVID origins investigative team, and had been selected as the head of the Lancet COVID origins investigative team, which appears now to be dead in the water.

The WHO and the Lancet thus seem to be co-conspirators, choosing the fox (Daszac) to guard the henhouse (the theory that COVID evolved in nature).

The release Wednesday of Fauci’s emails, obtained by BuzzFeed News through the Freedom of Information Act, help to further clear up some of the mystery behind why five well-known scientists co-authored drivel — which the venerable Nature journal published, and which was then used as the foundation to support the natural origin theory.

One of the emails strongly indicates Andersen, lead author of the Nature paper, knew he was participating in a con job. In a Feb. 1, 2020, email to Fauci, Andersen expressed his own concerns about some of the “unusual features of the virus.” Andersen appears to be worried these features suggest laboratory tampering.

But Andersen then reassures Fauci these “unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered.”

In another email to Fauci, Andersen thanks three incredibly important people — Fauci, Collins and Sir Jeremy Farrar — for their “advice and leadership” regarding the paper. All three are M.D. researchers who dole out more money for medical research than anyone else in the world, with the exception perhaps of Bill Gates.

Fauci runs the NIAID, Collins is the NIH director (nominally Fauci’s boss) and Farrar is director of the Wellcome Trust. Farrar also signed the Lancet letter. And he is chair of the WHO’s R&D Blueprint Scientific Advisory Group, which put him in the driver’s seat of the WHO’s Solidarity trial, in which 1,000 unwitting subjects were overdosed with hydroxychloroquine in order to sink the use of that drug for COVID.

Farrar had worked in Vietnam, where there was lots of malaria, and he had also been involved with SARS-1 there. He additionally was central in setting up the UK Recovery trial, where 1,600 subjects were overdosed with hydroxychloroquine.

Even if Farrar didn’t have some idea of the proper dose of chloroquine drugs from his experience in Vietnam, he, Fauci and Collins would have learned about such overdoses after Brazil told the world about how they mistakenly overdosed patients in a trial of chloroquine for COVID. The revelation was made in an article published in the JAMA in mid-April 2020. Thirty-nine percent of the subjects in Brazil who were given high doses of chloroquine died, average age 50.

Yet the Solidarity and Recovery hydroxychloroquine trials continued into June, stopping only after their extreme doses were exposed.

Fauci made sure to control the treatment guidelines for COVID that came out of the NIAID, advising against both chloroquine drugs and ivermectin. Fauci’s NIAID also cancelled the first large-scale trial of hydroxychloroquine treatment in early disease, after only 20 of the expected 2,000 subjects were enrolled.

What does all this mean?

1. There was a conspiracy between the five authors of the Nature paper and the heads of the NIH, NIAID and Wellcome Trust to cover up the lab origin of COVID.
2. There was a conspiracy involving Daszac, Fauci and others to push the natural origin theory.
3. There was a conspiracy involving Daszac to write the Lancet letter and hide its provenance, to push the natural origin theory and paint any other ideas as conspiracy theory. Collin’s blog post is another piece of this story.
4. Farrar was intimately involved in both large hydroxychloroquine overdose trials, in which about 500 subjects total died.
5. Farrar, Fauci and Collins withheld research funds that could have supported quality trials of the use of chloroquine drugs and ivermectin and other repurposed drugs that might have turned around the pandemic.
6. Are the four individuals named here — Fauci, Daszak, Collins and Farrar — intimately involved in the creation of the pandemic, as well as the prolongation and improper treatments used during the pandemic?

For more background, read by two earlier posts on this subject from March and April 2020. I don’t want to take credit improperly for these discoveries — Dan Sirotkin noticed and wrote about the Nature article before I did, and wrote lucidly about it. I did not see his writing until much later.

We don’t necessarily see it on a day-to-day basis, but the value of the dollar is a variable thing.

Once upon a time, that value was based on gold, then when there wasn’t enough gold to back our money, silver became the standard. But in 1933, FDR took the dollar off the gold standard, where our money was backed by physical gold in the vaults of Fort Knox. The final nail in this coffin was pounded home in 1971, when then-president Nixon announced that the US government would no longer convert dollars to gold.

What this means is that the US, like the currencies of many other countries, only has value because we all believe it has value. In essence, the dollar is a product and the value of it goes up and down according to how much of a demand there is for it.

This is one of the more essential functions of the financial markets, centered on Wall Street in New York City, Bond Street in London and other financial centers around the world.

Yet the value of the dollar is clearly dropping. It has dropped over six percent this year, with an expectation by some that it will drop another 20% before the end of the year. Such a loss in value could have serious repercussions, both for the nation and for us individually.

On the most basic level, the value of the dollar is calculated based upon how much people are willing to pay for it on an international level. All currencies are valued based on this exchange rate, comparing the value of one country’s currency to another.

In most cases, they are compared to the US dollar, as it has been the world’s reserve currency since the end of World War II. On the other hand, the dollar’s value is in comparison to other major currencies, like the Euro.

Threats Against the Dollar

The fact that the dollar is the world’s reserve currency is mostly due to the strength of the US economy.

Not to malign anyone who fought in the war, but it was US industrial might, more than anything, else, that led to the winning of World War II.

At the end of the war, we were the only major global power left standing, economically speaking. That’s what led to the dollar becoming the world’s reserve currency and the currency of international trade.

But things have changed since then. The other countries involved in that war have rebuilt, in some cases with US aid. In the process of rebuilding, they have striven to go far beyond where they originally were, growing their economies. Today, some of those countries are our biggest trading partners.

When the European Union was formed in 1993, one of its prime purposes was to create a joint economy that would allow them to compete better in the global market. While their combined GDP is still about 40% lower than the USA, they are working on closing that gap. At this time, their joint economy is third in the world, after the US and China and they are one of the world’s biggest trading blocks.

This has led to the Euro slowly gaining a foothold in taking over as the world’s reserve currency, with roughly 20% of international commerce taking place in Euros, compared to 60% for dollars.

But the EU isn’t the only threat on this particular horizon.

China and Russia have signed an agreement to trade in their national currencies, as have China and Japan.

This process of moving away from the dollar, called dedollarisation, is weakening the US financial position, as we are losing the advantage of having other countries need our dollars to do business. From the end of WWII until 2011, that has helped to prop up the value of the dollar.

Effects of the Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic, which swept the world, has had devastating effects on both our national economy and the world’s. With so many people staying home in response to government lockdowns, the demand for products and services declined as well.

This has been most devastating to small businesses, with millions of businesses have shuttered their doors for good; but it has also had a direct affect on the value of the dollar. With a lowering of product demand, there has also been a lowering of international trade by roughly 15.4%.

That has reduced the demand on the dollar, one of the prime factors in driving the price of the dollar.

While we should see a recovery of the demand for the dollar as the pandemic ends and people return to their normal lives, there’s no guarantee of that. An awfully lot depends on what the “new normal” is going to look like and how closely it will match the normal that existed before the pandemic.

We’re already experiencing somewhat of an economic recovery from the pandemic, most especially in the housing market. People are now spending the money they were saving during the pandemic, especially on large purchases.

The housing market is booming, to the point where it has created lumber shortages, driving up the cost of lumber so much that the average cost of a new home is $35,000 more than a year ago.

But we are yet to see just how the international trade markets will shake out.

There’s currently a lot of anti-Chinese sentiment in the country, due to the way that the Chinese government handled the pandemic and suspicions that it was an intentional act against us and the rest of the world.

More and more people are leaning towards accepting that the virus came out of a Chinese bio-laboratory and are having a hard time accepting the idea that it could have been accidental.

At the same time, US businesses are struggling to recover from the pandemic, with many retail outlets shutting down stores in an attempt to avoid bankruptcy.

Small manufacturers are suffering as well, unable to take up the slack. We are literally in a place where we need China’s trade goods.

We’re Out Own Worst Enemy

Perhaps the biggest part of this though is contained within our borders. More specifically, it’s housed within the halls of Congress. All those stimulus checks that everyone was happy to receive have come with a price; that of over four trillion dollars.

Congress went on a spending spree, creating several trillion dollar plus “relief” bills, which included much more than relief to those who suffered from the devastating effects of COVID on the economy.

Unfortunately, this has taught Congress something that they had merely suspected before; that they can spend massive amounts of money with impunity.

While the various COVID relief bills did contain money for relief and economic stimulus, much of it was pure pork, pet projects for one political party, powerful lawmaker or another. It was disguised as help for the average person or small business; but it was really about getting money to their friends; crony capitalism at its best.

Billions were sent abroad from those packages, to pay for pet projects in other countries. Other billions were given to cities to cover their financial shortfall, disguised as “Coronavirus reparations” but actually covering poor policy decisions that had put those cities in financial straits before the pandemic started. I could go on, but there’s no sense in raising my blood pressure.

There are three clear results of creating all this money out of thin air. The first is that Congress is on a spending spree, looking to see how many other trillion plus dollar packages they can vote into law. The second is that they have led to the expected inflation.

Somehow our lawmakers have never learned the lesson that you can’t create money out of thin air, without watering down the value of existing money. That’s the true cause of inflation, not greedy companies raising prices.

We are currently facing the highest inflation that we’ve seen in over a decade. All through both Obama and Trump’s presidencies, inflation has been hovering around one percent, sometimes lower. Yet we are now facing inflation of nearly five percent, the highest in over 30 years.

International markets have taken note of this and are concerned about the US economy in general.

The good news about the coronavirus vaccine has actually added to this inflation, as well as lowering the pressure on the price of the dollar, helping it to go down.

With the vaccines now available, there is increased hope that economies around the world will recover. That has, in turn, reduced the need for international investors to buy dollars, as a hedge to protect their money.

While the dollar is always seen as a secure investment, there are other places where they can invest their money and expect a better return on that investment.

Should We Be Concerned About All This?

All of this is actually very concerting. Not only does it speak of the US economy becoming more shaky; but we can expect the cost of goods to increase due to inflation.

That will continue the upwards push on inflation, which may very well stick around for a while.

We’re already seeing major increases in the cost of some items, like the aforementioned lumber, as well as gasoline.

Overall, energy prices have gone up, as well as the cost of food. We can expect these things to continue climbing, as well as the cost of housing.

Overall, the buying power of the consumer will decline, as well as the amount of disposable income we have available to spend.

Less disposable income means less money for buying what are considered non-essential purchases, such as clothing, new cars and new televisions. While people will still be buying those items, they will also be hanging on to them longer, rather than replacing them. That reduces the sales of those categories of goods, affecting jobs.

Basically, what this all boils down to is that we’re heading into another recessionary period. The Federal Reserve Bank is doing everything they can to stop that, with the prime interest rate at 3.25%; lower than it was even a year ago. But any action the Fed takes doesn’t have a visible effect on the economy for several months; sometimes over a year. So it may be some time before we see things turning around again.

As long as Congress keeps spending money like kids in a candy store, we can expect the value of the dollar to keep dropping and inflation to keep rising. But there doesn’t seem to be any desire to change that around in Washington, with Democrats pushing a two-trillion plus dollar “infrastructure bill” that has little to do with infrastructure and President Biden proposing a six-trillion plus dollar federal budget, by far the largest we’ve ever seen.

Just like a parent who looks at their teenager’s spending habits, when that child asks for more money, the world’s financial markets are going to see the trend in irresponsible spending in the halls of Congress.

As long as it continues, they’re not going to be any more interested in giving us money, through buying US bonds, than that parent would be in giving their child a hundred dollars of their hard-earned money to blow.

While more revelations about the Bill Gates–Jeffrey Epstein relationship have begun trickling out following the Gates’s divorce announcement, the strong evidence pointing to their relationship beginning decades prior to 2011 continues to be covered up by the media—not necessarily to protect Bill but to protect Microsoft.

In early May, the announcement that Bill and Melinda Gates would be divorcing after twenty-seven years of marriage shocked both those that praise and those that loathe the “philanthropic” power couple.

Less than a week after the initial announcement of the divorce, on May 7, the Daily Beast reported that Melinda Gates had allegedly been “deeply troubled” by Bill Gates’s relationship with child sex trafficker and intelligence asset Jeffrey Epstein. The report suggested that Melinda was a major reason for her husband’s decision to distance himself from Epstein around 2014 because of her discomfort with Epstein after they both met him in 2013. That previously unreported meeting had taken place at Epstein’s mansion on New York’s Upper East Side.

The Daily Beast also revealed that the details of the Gates’s divorce had been decided several weeks prior to the official announcement. Then, on May 9, the Wall Street Journal published a report suggesting that the plans for divorce went back even farther, with Melinda having consulted divorce lawyers in 2019. Allegedly, that consultation was made after details of Bill Gates’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein had gained considerable mainstream media attention, including from the New York Times.

While mainstream media outlets apparently agree that Jeffrey Epstein was a likely factor in the Gates’s recently announced split up, what these same outlets refuse to cover is the real extent of the Bill Gates–Jeffrey Epstein relationship. Indeed, the mainstream narrative holds that Gates’s ties to Epstein began in 2011, despite the evidence pointing to their relationship beginning decades earlier.

This blanket refusal to honestly report on the Gates-Epstein ties likely is due to Gates’s outsized role in current events, both in terms of global health policy as it relates to COVID-19 and in his being a major promoter and funder of controversial technocratic “solutions” to a slew of societal problems. What is more likely, however, is that the nature of the relationship between Gates and Epstein before 2011 is even more scandalous than what transpired later, and it may have major implications not just for Gates but for Microsoft as a company and for some of its former top executives.

This particular cover-up is part of an obvious tendency of mainstream media to ignore the clear influence that both Epstein and members of the Maxwell family wielded—and, arguably, continue to wield—in Silicon Valley. Indeed, the individuals who founded tech giants such as Google, LinkedIn, Facebook, Microsoft, Tesla, and Amazon all have connections with Jeffrey Epstein, some closer than others.

This investigation is adapted from my upcoming book One Nation Under Blackmail, which will be released early next year and will include a more complete investigation into Epstein’s ties to Silicon Valley, scientific academia, and intelligence agencies.

The Evening Standard Mystery

In 2001, perhaps the most important article ever written about Jeffrey Epstein was published. The article, which focused mainly on Ghislaine Maxwell’s and Epstein’s relationship with Prince Andrew, was published on January 22, 2001, in London’s Evening Standard. The article, written by Nigel Rosser, was never retracted and was published well before Epstein’s first arrest and the onset of his public notoriety. It has, nevertheless, since been removed from the Evening Standard’s website and can now only be found on professional newspaper databases. I made a PDF of that article and several other scrubbed Epstein-related articles publicly available in October 2019.

Key statements made in the article make it clear why it was removed from the internet, apparently in the wake of Epstein’s first arrest in Florida. Rosser introduces Epstein as “an immensely powerful New York property developer and financier,” a nod to Epstein’s past in the New York real estate market. Later in the article, he notes that Epstein “once claimed to have worked for the CIA although he now denies it,” one of several likely reasons why the article was removed from the internet well before Epstein’s second arrest in 2019.

Much of the article notes the closeness of Epstein and Maxwell to Prince Andrew and suggests that both wielded considerable influence over the prince, largely due to Maxwell’s role as his “social fixer.” It states that Maxwell was “manipulating” the prince and that “the whole Andrew thing is probably being done for Epstein.”

One line stands out, however, as the first major clue toward demystifying the true origin the of the Gates-Epstein relationship. Soon after Rosser introduces Epstein in the article, he states that Epstein “has made many millions out of his business links with the likes of Bill Gates, Donald Trump and Ohio billionaire Leslie Wexner, whose trust he runs.”

Both Wexner’s and Trump’s relationships with Epstein prior to 2001 are well known and date back to 1985 and 1987, respectively. Mainstream media, however, continue to report that Gates and Epstein first met in 2011 and have declined to follow the leads laid out by Nigel Rosser. I am personally aware of this withholding of information to a degree as a BBC reporter contacted me in 2019 for details about this 2001 Evening Standard article, which I provided. To date, the BBC has never reported on the contents of that article. Notably, the BBC has received millions in funding for years from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Not only was Rosser’s article never retracted, but neither Gates, Trump, nor Wexner disputed the claims made in the article at the time, which was well before Epstein became notorious. In addition, given that Gates is named alongside two known close Epstein associates at the time—Donald Trump and Leslie Wexner—it further suggests that Gates’s ties to Epstein prior to 2001 were considerable enough to warrant his mention alongside these two other men.

In addition to the Evening Standard article, there is evidence from Maria Farmer, an Epstein victim who was employed by Epstein and Maxwell from 1995 to 1996, that she recalled hearing Epstein mention Bill Gates in such a way as to imply they were close friends and which gave her the impression that the Microsoft cofounder might soon be visiting one of Epstein’s residences.

Microsoft, McKinley, and Isabel Maxwell

Beyond these two key pieces of evidence, there is also the fact that, prior to the Evening Standard article, Gates already had a documented connection to a business run by Ghislaine Maxwell’s sisters in which Ghislaine had a financial stake, which may offer a clue as to the nature of the “business links” alluded to by Nigel Rosser. Furthermore, the odd nature of Gates’s relationship with Isabel Maxwell, who has ties to the PROMIS software espionage scandal and to Israeli intelligence, is documented in a 2000 article from the Guardian.

Twin sisters Christine and Isabel Maxwell, along with their husbands at the time, created the McKinley Group in January 1992. Christine and Isabel had both previously worked for the front company Information on Demand used by their father Robert Maxwell to sell the backdoored PROMIS software to the US government. After Robert Maxwell’s death, Christine and Isabel “wanted to circle the wagons and rebuild” and saw McKinley as “a chance to recreate a bit of their father’s legacy.”

The McKinley Group, however, was not just a venture of Isabel, Christine, and their husbands, as Ghislaine Maxwell also had “a substantial interest” in the company, according to a Sunday Times article published in November 2000. That same article also noted that Ghislaine, throughout the 1990s, had “been discreetly building up a business empire as opaque as her father’s” and that “she is secretive to the point of paranoia and her business affairs are deeply mysterious.” She chose to describe “herself as an ‘internet operator’” during this period, even though “her office in Manhattan refuses to confirm even the name or the nature of her business.”

Ghislaine Maxwell posing with her siblings, including twin sisters Isabel and Christine in 2019 in London

Another article, appearing in The Scotsman from 2001, separately notes that Ghislaine “is extremely secretive about her affairs and describes herself as an internet operator.” It is unclear how involved Ghislaine actually was in the McKinley Group’s affairs. However, during this period, she was operating an intelligence-linked sexual-blackmail operation with Jeffrey Epstein, and there was considerable overlap of their finances, as noted in press reports from the time and afterward.

McKinley created what became known as the Magellan Internet Directory, remembered as “the first site to publish lengthy reviews and ratings of websites.” Magellan’s “value-added content” approach attracted several large corporations, resulting in “major alliances” with AT&T, Time-Warner, IBM, Netcom, and the Microsoft Network (MSN) that were all negotiated by Isabel Maxwell. Microsoft’s major alliance with McKinley came in late 1995, when Microsoft announced that Magellan would power the search option for the company’s MSN service.

McKinley’s fortunes fell, as its effort to become the first search engine to go public failed, igniting a stand-off between Christine Maxwell and Isabel’s then husband that also resulted in the company essentially falling behind other market leaders. As a result, McKinley missed the window for a second IPO attempt and continued to lag behind in adding ad revenue to their business model. Excite, which was later acquired by AskJeeves, ultimately bought the McKinley Group and Magellan for 1.2 million shares of Excite in 1996, which was then valued at $18 million. It was said that it was Isabel Maxwell who made the deal possible, with Excite’s CEO at the time, George Bell, claiming she alone salvaged their purchase of McKinley.

Despite McKinley’s lackluster end, the Maxwell twins and other stakeholders in the company, Ghislaine Maxwell among them, not only obtained a multimillion-dollar payout from the deal but also forged close connections with Silicon Valley high rollers. It is unclear if the money Ghislaine received from the sale was used to further the sexual blackmail operation she was then conducting alongside Jeffrey Epstein.

After the sale of McKinley/Magellan, the overt ties of Christine and Isabel Maxwell to intelligence in both the US and Israel grew considerably. Isabel’s ties to Microsoft also persisted following the sale of the McKinley Group. She became president of the Israeli tech company CommTouch, whose funding was linked to individuals and groups involved in the Jonathan Pollard nuclear spying affair. CommTouch, an “obscure software developer” founded in 1991 by former Israeli military officers, focused on “selling, maintaining and servicing stand-alone email client software products for mainframe and personal computers.” The company specifically courted Isabel because she was the daughter of Israeli “super-spy” Robert Maxwell. Isabel had similar reasons for joining the company, telling Haaretz that leading the company gave her “a chance to continue her father’s involvement in Israel.”

Of all the alliances and partnerships Isabel negotiated during her early years at CommTouch, it was her dealings with Microsoft cofounders Bill Gates and Paul Allen that put CommTouch “on the map.” Microsoft’s cofounders did much more than put CommTouch “on the map,” however, as they essentially intervened to prevent the collapse of its initial public offering, a fate that had befallen Isabel Maxwell’s previous company, the McKinley Group, not long before. Indeed, CommTouch kept pushing back its IPO until a massive investment from firms tied to Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen was announced in July 1999.

The investments from Allen’s Vulcan and Go2Net resulted in a jump in “interest in the stock sale and in CommTouch, until now an obscure software developer,” according to a Bloomberg report, and also inflated their stock price immediately prior to their going public. The money from the Allen-linked companies was specifically used “to expand sales and marketing and build its presence in international markets.” Allen’s decision to invest in CommTouch seems odd from a financial perspective, given that the company had never turned a profit and had over $4 million in losses just the year before. Yet, thanks to Allen’s timely investment and his apparent coordination with the company’s repeated delays of its IPO, CommTouch was valued at over $230 million when it went public, as opposed to a $150 million valuation just weeks before Allen’s investment.

Paul Allen and Nicole Junkermann at Cinema Against AIDS Cannes in Cannes, France. Source: Vocal Media

It is not exactly clear why Paul Allen came to the rescue of CommTouch’s IPO and what he expected to gain from his investment. It is worth pointing out, however, that Allen later became among the members of an elite online community set up in 2004 called A Small World, whose membership also included Jeffrey Epstein and Epstein-linked figures such as Lynn Forester de Rothschild and Naomi Campbell, as well as Petrina Khashoggi, the daughter of Adnan Khashoggi, a former client of Epstein’s. A Small World’s largest shareholder was Harvey Weinstein, the now-disgraced media mogul who was a business partner of Epstein and who has since been convicted of rape and sexual abuse. Around this same time, Paul Allen was photographed with Epstein associate Nicole Junkermann, herself an intelligence asset.

Less than three months after Allen’s investments in CommTouch in October 1999, the company announced that it had struck a major deal with Microsoft whereby “Microsoft will utilize the CommTouch Custom MailTM service to provide private label web-based email solutions for select MSN partners and international markets.” In addition, per the agreement, “CommTouch will provide MSN Messenger Service and Microsoft Passport to its customers while building upon its Windows NT expertise by supporting future MSN messaging technologies.” “We are looking forward to further enhancing our relationship with Microsoft by integrating other state-of-the-art Microsoft products,” Gideon Mantel of CommTouch said at the time of the deal’s public announcement.

In December 1999, Microsoft announced that it had invested $20 million in CommTouch by purchasing 4.7 percent of its shares. The announcement pushed CommTouch stock prices from $11.63 a share to $49.13 in just a few hours’ time. Part of that deal had been finalized by Richard Sorkin, a recently appointed CommTouch director. Sorkin had just become a multimillionaire following the sale of Zip2, Elon Musk’s first company of which Sorkin had been CEO.

It further appears that Bill Gates, then head of Microsoft, made a personal investment in CommTouch at the behest of Isabel Maxwell. In an October 2000 article published in the Guardian, Isabel “jokes about persuading Bill Gates to make a personal investment” in CommTouch sometime during this period.

The Guardian article then oddly notes, regarding Isabel Maxwell and Bill Gates:

“In a faux southern belle accent, [Isabel] purrs: ‘He’s got to spend $375m a year to keep his tax-free status, why not allow me to help him.’ She explodes with laughter.”

Given that individuals as wealthy as Gates cannot have “tax-free status” and that this article was published soon after the creation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Isabel’s statements suggest that it was the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust, which manages the foundation’s endowment assets, that made this sizable investment in CommTouch.

Furthermore, it is worth highlighting the odd way in which Isabel describes her dealings with Gates (“purring,” speaking in a fake Southern accent), describing her interactions with him in a way not found in any of her numerous other interviews on a wide variety of topics. This odd behavior may be related to Isabel’s previous interactions with Gates and/or the mysterious relationship between Gates and Epstein during this time.

Isabel Maxwell as CommTouch President

After 2000, CommTouch’s business and clout expanded rapidly, with Isabel Maxwell subsequently crediting investments from Microsoft, led by Gates, and Paul Allen for the company’s good fortune and the success of its effort to enter the US market. Maxwell, as quoted in the 2002 book Fastalliances, states that Microsoft viewed CommTouch as a key “distribution network,” adding that “Microsoft’s investment in us put us on the map. It gave us instant credibility, validated our technology and service in the marketplace.” By this time, Microsoft’s ties to CommTouch had deepened with new partnerships, including CommTouch’s hosting of Microsoft Exchange.

Though Isabel Maxwell was able to secure lucrative investments and alliances for CommTouch and saw its products integrated into key software and hardware components produced and sold by Microsoft and other tech giants, she was unable to improve the company’s dire financial situation, with CommTouch netting a loss of $4.4 million in 1998 and similar losses well into the 2000s, with net losses totalling $24 million in 2000 (just one year after the sizable investments from Microsoft, Paul Allen and Gates). The losses continued even after Isabel formally left the company and became president emeritus in 2001. By 2006, the company was over $170 million in debt. Isabel Maxwell left her position at CommTouch in 2001 but for years retained a sizable amount of CommTouch stock valued at the time at around $9.5 million. Today, Isabel Maxwell is, among other things, a “technology pioneer” of the World Economic Forum.

Epstein, Edge, and Nathan Myhrvold

Another indication of a relationship between Epstein and Gates prior to 2001 is Epstein’s cozy ties with Nathan Myhrvold, who joined Microsoft in the 1980s and became the company’s first chief technology officer in 1996. At the time, Myhrvold was one of Gates’s closest advisers, if not the closest, and cowrote Gates’s 1996 book, The Road Ahead, which sought to explain how emerging technologies would impact life in the years and decades to come.

In December of the same year that he became Microsoft’s CTO, Myhrvold traveled on Epstein’s plane from Kentucky to New Jersey, and then again in January 1997 from New Jersey to Florida. Other passengers accompanying Myhrvold on these flights included Alan Dershowitz and “GM,” presumably Ghislaine Maxwell. It is worth keeping in mind that this is the same period when Gates had a documented relationship with Ghislaine’s sister Isabel.

In addition, in the 1990s, Myhrvold traveled with Epstein in Russia alongside Esther Dyson, a digital technology consultant who has been called “the most influential woman in all the computer world.” She currently has close ties to Google as well as the DNA testing company 23andme and is a member of and agenda contributor to the World Economic Forum. Dyson later stated that the meeting with Epstein had been planned by Myhrvold. The meeting appears to have taken place in 1998, based on information posted on Dyson’s social media accounts. One photo features Dyson and Epstein, with a time stamp indicating April 28, 1998, posing with Pavel Oleynikov, who appears to have been an employee of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center. In that photo, they are standing in front of the house of the late Andrei Sakharov, the Soviet nuclear scientist and dissident, who is alleged to have had ties to US intelligence. Sakharov and his wife, Yelena Bonner, were supporters of Zionist causes.

The photos were taken in Sarov, where the Russian Federal Nuclear Center is based. That same day, another photo was taken that shows Epstein inside a classroom full of teens, apparently also in Sarov, given the time stamp.

Another Dyson image, one without a visible time stamp but with a caption stating the photo was taken “at Microsoft Russia in Moscow” in April 1998, shows Nathan Myhrvold. Dyson’s caption further states, “This was the beginning of a three-week trip during which Nathan and a variety of hangers-on (including a bodyguard) explored the state of post-Soviet science.” Epstein appears to be one of the “hangers-on,” given the photographs, dates, and the described purpose of the trip.

Myhrvold and Epstein apparently had more in common than an interest in Russian scientific advances. When Myhrvold left Microsoft to cofound Intellectual Ventures, Vanity Fair reported that he had received Epstein at the firm’s office with “young girls” in tow who appeared to be “Russian models.” A source close to Myhrvold and cited by Vanity Fair claimed that Myhrvold spoke openly about borrowing Epstein’s jet and staying at his homes in Florida and New York. Vanity Fair also noted that Myhrvold has been accused of having sex with minors provided by Epstein by none other than Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, who stands accused of the same crime and who had previously flown with Myhrvold on Epstein’s private plane.

In addition, a former colleague of Myhrvold’s at Microsoft later developed her own ties to Epstein. Linda Stone, who joined Microsoft in 1993 and worked directly under Myhrvold, eventually became a Microsoft vice president. She introduced Epstein to Joi Ito of the MIT Media Lab after Epstein’s first arrest. “He has a tainted past, but Linda assures me that he’s awesome,” Ito later said in an email to three MIT staffers. In Epstein’s famous little black book, there are several phone numbers for Stone, and her emergency contact is listed as Kelly Bovino, a former model and alleged Epstein coconspirator. After Epstein’s 2019 arrest, it emerged that Epstein had “directed” Bill Gates to donate $2 million to the MIT lab in 2014. Epstein also allegedly secured a $5 million donation from Leon Black for the lab. Ito was forced to resign his post as the lab’s director shortly after Epstein’s 2019 arrest.

Nathan Myhrvold, Linda Stone, Joi Ito, Esther Dyson, and Bill Gates were all members of the Edge Foundation community (edge.org website), alongside several other Silicon Valley icons. Edge, which is described as an exclusive organization of intellectuals “redefining who and what we are,” was created by John Brockman, a self-described “cultural impresario” and noted literary agent. Brockman is best known for his deep ties to the art world in the late 1960s, though lesser known are his various “management consulting” gigs for the Pentagon and White House during that same period. Edge, which the Guardian once called “the world’s smartest website,” is an exclusive online symposium affiliated with what Brockman calls “the Third Culture.” Epstein appears to have become involved with Brockman as early as 1995, when he helped to finance and rescue a struggling book project that was managed by Brockman.

Edge, however, is more than just a website. For decades, it was also instrumental in bringing together tech executives, scientists who were often Brockman’s clients, and Wall Street financiers through its Millionaires’ Dinner, first held in 1985. In 1999, this event rebranded as the Billionaires’ Dinner, and Epstein became intimately involved in these affairs and the Edge Foundation itself. Epstein was photographed attending several of the dinners as was Sarah Kellen, Ghislaine Maxwell’s chief “assistant” and coconspirator in the Epstein/Maxwell-run sex trafficking and blackmail scheme.

Nathan Myhrvold, Microsoft and Jeffrey Epstein at the 2000 Edge Billionaires’ Dinner

From 2001 to 2017, Epstein funded $638,000 out of a total of $857,000 raised by Edge. During this period, there were several years when Epstein was Edge’s only donor. Epstein stopped giving in 2015, which was incidentally the same year that Edge decided to discontinue its annual Billionaires’ Dinner tradition. In addition, the only award Edge has ever given out, the $100,000 Edge of Computation prize, was awarded in 2005 to Quantum computing pioneer David Deutsch—it was funded entirely by Epstein. A year before he began donating heavily to Edge, Epstein had created the Jeffrey Epstein VI Foundation to “fund and support cutting edge science around the world.”

Since the Epstein scandal, regular attendees of the Billionaires’ Dinner, sometimes called the Edge annual dinner, have referred to the event as an “influence operation.” If one follows the money, it appears it was an influence operation largely benefitting one man, Jeffrey Epstein, and his network. The evidence points toward Myhrvold and Gates as being very much a part of that network, even before Epstein’s involvement in Edge increased significantly.

A Tale of Two Bills

It is worth exploring the ties between the “philanthropic” endeavors of Bill Gates and Bill Clinton in the early 2000s, particularly given Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s ties to the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative during that period. According to former Israeli intelligence operative Ari Ben-Menashe, Bill Clinton had been the main focus of Epstein’s sexual blackmail operation in the 1990s, a claim supported by Epstein victim testimony and Epstein’s intimate involvement with individuals who were close to the former president at the time.

Bill Gates at the White House Conference on the New Economy in 2000, Source: LA Times

Despite tensions arising from the Clinton administration’s pursuit of Microsoft’s monopoly in the late 1990s, the Gates and Clinton relationship had thawed by April 2000, when Gates attended the White House “Conference on the New Economy.” Attendees besides Gates included close Epstein associate Lynn Forester (now Lady de Rothschild) and then secretary of the treasury Larry Summers, who has also come under fire for his Epstein ties. Another attendee was White House chief of staff Thomas “Mack” McLarty, whose special assistant Mark Middleton met with Epstein at least three times at the Clinton White House. Middleton was fired after press reports surfaced detailing his ties to illegal donations linked to foreign governments that had been made to Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign. Another participant in the conference was Janet Yellen, Biden’s current Secretary of the Treasury.

Gates spoke at a conference panel entitled “Closing the Global Divide: Health, Education and Technology.” He discussed how the mapping of the human genome would result in a new era of technological breakthroughs and discussed the need to offer internet access to everyone to close the digital divide and allow the “new” internet-based economy to take shape. At the time, Gates was backing a company, along with American Telecom billionaire Craig McCaw, that hoped to establish a global internet service provider monopoly through a network of low-orbit satellites. That company, Teledesic, shut down between 2002 and 2003 and is credited as being the inspiration for Elon Musk’s Starlink.

Bill Clinton and Bill Gates entered the world of philanthropy around the same time, with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation launching in 2000 and the Clinton Foundation, in 2001. Not only that but Wired described the two foundations as being “at the forefront of a new era in philanthropy, in which decisions—often referred to as investments—are made with the strategic precision demanded of business and government, then painstakingly tracked to gauge their success.”

Other media outlets, however, such as the Huffington Post, challenged that these foundations engaged in “philanthropy” and asserted that calling them such was causing “the rapid deconstruction of the accepted term.” The Huffington Post further noted that the Clinton Global Initiative (part of the Clinton Foundation), the Gates Foundation, and a few similar organizations “all point in the direction of blurring the boundaries between philanthropy, business and non-profits.” It noted that this model for “philanthropy” has been promoted by the World Economic Forum and the Milken Institute. It is also worth noting that several of Epstein’s own “philanthropic” vehicles were also created just as this new era in philanthropy was beginning.

The Milken Institute was founded by Michael Milken, the notorious Wall Street “junk bond king,” who was indicted on 98 counts of racketeering and securities fraud in 1989. He served little prison time and was ultimately pardoned by Donald Trump. Milken committed his crimes while working alongside Leon Black and Ron Perelman at Drexel Burnham Lambert before its scandalous collapse. Black was deeply tied to Epstein, even having Epstein manage his personal “philanthropic” foundation for several years, even after Epstein’s first arrest. Perelman was a major Clinton donor whose 1995 fundraiser for the then president was attended by Epstein and whose companies offered jobs to Webster Hubbell and Monica Lewinsky after their respective scandals in the Clinton administration. Like Gates, Milken has transformed his reputation for ruthlessness in the corporate world into one of a “prominent philanthropist.” Much of his “philanthropy” benefits the Israeli military and illegal Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine.

Years after creating their foundations, Gates and Clinton discussed how they have “long bonded over their shared mission” of normalizing this new model of philanthropy. Gates spoke to Wired in 2013 about “their forays into developing regions” and “cites the close partnerships between their organizations.” In that interview, Gates revealed that he had met Clinton before he had become president, stating, “I knew him before he was president, I knew him when he was president, and I know him now that he’s not president.”

Also in that interview, Clinton stated that after he left the White House he sought to focus on two specific things. The first is the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), which he stated exists “thanks largely to funding from the Gates Foundation,” and the second is the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), “where I try to build a global network of people to do their own thing.”

The Clinton Health Access Initiative first received an $11 million donation from the Gates Foundation in 2009. Over the last twelve years, the Gates Foundation has donated more than $497 million to CHAI. CHAI was initially founded in 2002 with the mission of tackling HIV/AIDS globally through “strong government relationships” and addressing “market inefficiencies.” The Gates Foundation’s significant donations, however, began not long after CHAI’s expansion into malaria diagnostics and treatments. Notably, in 2011, Tachi Yamada, the former president of the Gates Foundation’s Global Health program, joined CHAI’s board alongside Chelsea Clinton.

Bill Gates and Bill Clinton at the annual Clinton Global Initiative in 2010

Regarding the CGI, Epstein’s defense lawyers argued in court in 2007 that Epstein had been “part of the original group that conceived of the Clinton Global Initiative,” which was first launched in 2005. Epstein’s lawyers described the CGI as a project “bringing together a community of global leaders to devise and implement innovative solutions to some of the world’s most pressing challenges.” The Gates Foundation gave the CGI a total of $2.5 million between 2012 and 2013 in addition to its massive donations to the CHAI and an additional $35 million to the Clinton Foundation itself. In addition to the Gates Foundation donations, Gates’s Microsoft has been intimately involved in other “philanthropic” projects backed by Clinton.

In addition to these ties, Hillary Clinton established a partnership between the Clinton Foundation and the Gates Foundation in 2014 as part of the Clintons’ No Ceilings initiative. That partnership sought to “gather and analyze data about the status of women and girls’ participation around the world” and involved the two foundations working “with leading technology partners to collect these data and compile them.” Months before the partnership was announced, Gates and Epstein met for dinner and discussed the Gates Foundation and philanthropy, according to the New York Times. During Hillary Clinton’s unsuccessful run for president in 2016, both Bill and Melinda Gates were on her short list as potential options for vice president.

In addition, Epstein attempted to become involved in the Gates Foundation directly, as seen by his efforts to convince the Gates Foundation to partner with JP Morgan on a multibillion-dollar “global health charitable fund” that would have resulted in hefty fees paid out to Epstein, who was very involved with JP Morgan at the time. Though that fund never materialized, Epstein and Gates did discuss Epstein becoming involved in Gates’s philanthropic efforts. Some of these contacts were not reported by the mainstream press until after the Bill and Melinda Gates divorce announcement. Yet, as mentioned, it was known that Epstein had “directed” Gates to donate to at least one organization—$2 million in 2014 to the MIT Media Lab.

Recent revelations about Gates and Epstein meetings that took place between 2013 and 2014 have further underscored the importance Epstein apparently held in the world of billionaire “philanthropy,” with Gates reportedly claiming that Epstein was his “ticket” to winning a Nobel Prize. Norwegian media, however, reported in October 2020 that Gates and Epstein had met the Nobel Committee chair, which failed to make a splash in international media at the time. It is worth asking if Epstein managed to arrange such meetings with other individuals who also coveted Nobel Prizes and if any such individuals later received those prizes. If Epstein had such connections, it is unlikely that he would use them only once in the case of Bill Gates, given the vastness of his network, particularly in the tech and science worlds.

The year 2013 is also when Bill and Melinda Gates together met with Epstein at his New York residence, after which Melinda allegedly began asking her soon-to-be ex-husband to distance himself from Epstein. While the stated reason for this, in the wake of the Gateses’ divorce announcement, was that Melinda was put off by Epstein’s past and his persona, it could potentially be related to other concerns about Melinda’s reputation and that of the foundation that shares her name.

Indeed, 2013 was also the year that the Gates mansion systems engineer, Rick Allen Jones, began to be investigated by Seattle police for his child porn and child rape collection, which contained over six thousand images and videos. Despite the gravity of his crime, when Jones was arrested at the Gates mansion a year later, he was not jailed after his arrest but was merely ordered “to stay away from children,” according to local media reports. From Melinda’s perspective, this scandal, combined with Bill Gates’s growing association with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein may have posed a threat to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s reputation, well before Epstein’s 2019 arrest.

2013 was also the year that the Maxwells become involved in the Clinton Foundation. That year, Ghislaine Maxwell’s TerraMar Project, which officially supported UN Sustainable Development Goals as they relate the world’s oceans, made a $1.25 million commitment to the Clinton Global Initiative as part of an effort to form a Sustainable Oceans Alliance. TerraMar shut down shortly after Epstein’s 2019 arrest.

Isabel Maxwell and Al Seckel at the World Economic Forum’s 2011 Annual Meeting

Notably, Ghislaine’s TerraMar Project was in many ways the successor to Isabel Maxwell’s failed Blue World Alliance, which was also ostensibly focused on the world’s oceans. Blue World Alliance was set up by Isabel and her now deceased husband Al Seckel, who had hosted a “scientific conference” on Epstein’s island. The Blue World Alliance also went under the name Globalsolver Foundation, and Xavier Malina, Christine Maxwell’s son, was listed as Globalsolver’s liaison to the Clinton Foundation. He was previously an intern at the Clinton Global Initiative.

Malina later work ed in the Obama administration at the Office of White House Personnel. He now works for Google. It is also worth noting that during this same period, Isabel Maxwell’s son, Alexander Djerassi, was chief of staff at the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs in the Hillary Clinton–run State Department.

Gates Science and Epstein Science

While the Gates Foundation and the Clinton Foundation intermingled, and the latter had ties to Epstein and Maxwell, it also appears that Epstein had significant influence over two of the most prominent science advisers to Bill Gates over the last fifteen years—Melanie Walker and Boris Nikolic.

A screenshot from a 2019 presentation Melanie Walker gave for Rockefeller Foundation, where she is a fellow. Source: YouTube

Melanie Walker, now a celebrated neurosurgeon, met Jeffrey Epstein in 1992 soon after she graduated from college, when he offered her a Victoria’s Secret modelling job. Such offers were often made by Epstein and his accomplices when recruiting women into his operation and it is unclear if Walker ever actually worked as a model for the Leslie Wexner-owned company. She then stayed at a New York apartment building associated with Epstein’s trafficking operations during visits to New York, but it is unclear how long she stayed there or at other Epstein-owned properties. After she graduated from medical school in 1998, she became Epstein’s science adviser for at least a year. By 1999, she had grown so close to Prince Andrew that she attended a Windsor Castle birthday celebration hosted by the Queen along with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. During this period, Melanie appears on Epstein’s flight logs under her birth name, Melanie Starnes, though it looks like “Starves” on the flight logs.

The close relationship between Prince Andrew and Melanie Walker came under scrutiny after Epstein’s former housekeeper at the Zorro Ranch property, Deidre Stratton, stated in an interview that Prince Andrew had been “given” a “beautiful young neurosurgeon” while he stayed at Epstein’s New Mexico property. Given that only one neurosurgeon was both close to Prince Andrew and a part of Epstein’s entourage at the time, it seems highly likely that this woman “gifted” to Andrew was Melanie Walker. According to Stratton, Andrew “kept company” with this woman for three days. The arrangement was set up by Epstein, who was not at the property at the time. The exact timing of the stay is uncertain, but it likely took place between 1999 and 2001.

Stratton said the following about the stay:

“At the time, Jeffrey had this, she supposedly was a neurosurgeon, quite young, beautiful, young and brilliant, and she stayed in the home with him… At one point we had all these different teas and you could pick the teas that you wanted and she asked me to find one that would make Andrew more horny.

I’m guessing she understood her job was to entertain him because I guess, the fear, I don’t know; the fear would be that Andrew would say, “No I didn’t really find her that attractive.” . . . He would tell Jeffrey that and then she would be on the ropes.

I’m guessing that, another theory is, that Jeffrey probably had her on retainer and she knew what her job would be, should be, to make these people happy. . . . Sex was all they thought about. I mean, I know for sure that Jeffrey would ideally like three massages a day.”

Sometime later, Walker moved to Seattle and began living with then Microsoft executive Steven Sinofsky, who now serves as a board partner at the venture capital firm Andreesen Horowitz. Andreesen Horowitz notably backs Carbyne911, the Israel intelligence-linked precrime start-up funded by Epstein and his close associate, former prime minister of Israel Ehud Barak, as well as another Israeli intelligence-linked tech company led by Barak, called Toka. Toka recently won contracts with the governments of Moldova, Nigeria, and Ghana through the World Bank, where Melanie Walker is currently a director and a former special adviser to its president. It is unclear when, how and under what circumstances Walker met Sinofsky.

After moving to Seattle to be with Sinofsky and after a brief stint as a “practitioner in the developing world” in China with the World Health Organization, Walker was hired as a senior program officer by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in 2006. Given that the main feature of Walker’s resume at the time was having been a science adviser to another wealthy “philanthropist,” Jeffrey Epstein, her hire by the Gates Foundation for this critical role further underscores how Bill Gates, at the very least, not only knew who Epstein was but knew enough about his scientific interests and investments to want to hire Walker. Walker went on to become deputy director for Global Development as well as a deputy director of Special Initiatives at the foundation. According to the Rockefeller Foundation, where she is a fellow, Walker later advised Gates on issues pertaining to neurotechnology and brain science for Gates’s secretive company bgC3, which Gates originally registered as a think tank under the name Carillon Holdings. According to federal filings, bgC3’s focus areas were “scientific and technological services,” “industrial analysis and research,” and “design and development of computer hardware and software.”

During her time at the Gates Foundation, Walker introduced Boris Nikolic, Gates’s science adviser, to Epstein. Today, Melanie Walker is the cochair of the World Economic Forum’s Global Future Council on Neurotechnology and Brain Science, having previously been named a WEF Young Global Leader. She also advises the World Health Organization, which is closely linked to Bill Gates’s “philanthropy.”

At the WEF, Walker wrote an article in 2016 entitled “Healthcare in 2030: Goodbye Hospital, Hello Home-spital,” in which she discusses how wearable devices, brain-machine interfaces, and injectable/swallowable robotic “medicines” will be the norm by 2030. Years before COVID-19 and the Great Reset–inspired efforts to change health care in just this way, Walker wrote that while the dystopian scenario she was painting “sounds crazy . . . most of these technologies are either almost ready for prime time, or in development.” Of course, a lot of those technologies took shape thanks to the patronage of her former bosses, Jeffrey Epstein and Bill Gates.

In the case of Boris Nikolic, after being introduced to Epstein through Walker, he attended a 2011 meeting with Gates and Epstein where he was photographed alongside James Staley, then a senior JP Morgan executive, and Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and a close Epstein associate. Nikolic was chief adviser for science and technology to Bill Gates at the time, advising both the Gates Foundation and bgC3. According to the mainstream narrative, this is supposed to be the first time that Gates and Epstein had ever met. In addition, this may have been when Epstein pitched the joint Gates Foundation–JP Morgan “global health charitable fund.”

The 2011 meeting at Jeffrey Epstein’s Manhattan mansion attended by James E. Staley, Larry Summers, Jeffery Epstein, Bill Gates and Boris Nikolic

In 2014, Nikolic “waxed enthusiastic” about Epstein’s supposed penchant for financial advice ahead of a public offering for a gene-editing company that Nikolic had a $42 million stake in. Notably, both Nikolic and Epstein were clients of the same group of bankers at JP Morgan, with Bloomberg later reporting that Epstein regularly helped those bankers attract wealthy new clients.

In 2016, Nikolic cofounded Biomatics capital, which invests in health-related companies at “the convergence of genomics and digital data” that are “enabling the development of superior therapeutics, diagnostics and delivery models.” Nikolic founded Biomatics with Julie Sunderland, formerly the director of the Gates Foundation’s Strategic Investment Fund.

At least three of the companies backed by Biomatics—Qihan Biotech, eGenesis, and Editas—were cofounded by George Church, a Harvard geneticist with deep ties to Epstein and also closely associated with the Edge Foundation. Biomatics investment in Qihan Biotech is no longer listed on the Biomatics website. Church’s Qihan Biotech seeks to produce human tissues and organs inside pigs for transplantation into humans, while eGenesis seeks to genetically modify pig organs for use in humans. Editas produces CRISPR gene-editing “medicines” and is also backed by the Gates Foundation as well as Google Ventures.

Church has been accused of promoting eugenics as well as unethical human experimentation. Epstein’s significant interest in eugenics was made public after his death, and Bill Gates, as well as his father William H. Gates II, have also been linked to eugenics movements and ideas.

After Epstein’s death in 2019, it was revealed that Nikolic had been named the “successor executor” of Epstein’s estate, further suggesting close ties to Epstein despite Nikolic’s claims to the contrary. After details of Epstein’s will were made public, Nikolic did not sign a form indicating his willingness to be executor and did not ultimately serve in that role.

The Epstein Cover-Up Continues

Despite the relatively abrupt shift in the mainstream media regarding what is acceptable to discuss regarding the Jeffrey Epstein–Bill Gates relationship, many of these same media outlets refuse to acknowledge much of the information contained in this investigative report. This is particularly true in the case of the Evening Standard article and Bill Gates’s odd relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell’s sister Isabel and CommTouch, the company Isabel previously led.

The likely reason for the continued cover-up of the true extent of Epstein’s ties to Gates has much more to do with Gates’s company Microsoft than with Bill Gates himself. While it is now permissible to report on ties that discredit Gates’s personal reputation, the information that could tie his relationship with Epstein and the Maxwells to Microsoft has been omitted.

If, as the Evening Standard reported, Epstein did make millions out of his business ties with Gates prior to 2001 and if Gates’s ties to Isabel Maxwell and the Israeli espionage–linked company CommTouch were to become public knowledge, the result could easily be a scandal on a par with the PROMIS software affair. Such a disclosure could be very damaging for Microsoft and its partner the World Economic Forum, as Microsoft has become a key player in the WEF’s Fourth Industrial Revolution initiatives that range from digital identity and vaccine passports to efforts to replace human workers with artificial intelligence.

There are clearly powerful actors with a vested interest in keeping the Epstein-Gates narrative squarely focused on 2011 and later—not necessarily to protect Gates but more likely to protect the company itself and other top Microsoft executives who appear to have been compromised by Epstein and others in the same intelligence-linked network.

This is hardly an isolated incident, as similar efforts have been made to cover up (or memory hole) the ties of Epstein and the Maxwells to other prominent Silicon Valley empires, such as those led by Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk. One key reason for this is that the Epstein network’s blackmail operation involved not only sexual blackmail but electronic forms of blackmail, something used to great effect by Robert Maxwell on behalf of Israeli intelligence as part of the PROMIS operation. Given its nature, electronic forms of blackmail through illegal surveillance or backdoored software can be used to compromise those in power with something to hide, but who were uninclined to engage in the exploitation of minors, such as those abused by Epstein.

That Isabel and Christine Maxwell were able to forge close business ties with Microsoft after having been part of the front company that played a central role in PROMIS-related espionage and after explicitly managing their subsequent companies with the admitted intention to “rebuild” their spy father’s work and legacy, strongly points to the probability of at least some Microsoft products having been compromised in some fashion, likely through alliances with Maxwell-run tech companies. The lack of mainstream media concern over the documented ties of the Epstein network to other top Microsoft executives of the past, such as Nathan Myhrvold, Linda Stone, and Steven Sinofsky, makes it clear that, while it may be open season on the relationship between Bill Gates and Epstein, such is not the case for Microsoft and Epstein.

The ties of Epstein and the Maxwells to Silicon Valley, not just to Microsoft, are part of a broader attempt to cover up the strong intelligence component in the origin of Silicon Valley’s most powerful companies. Much effort has been invested in creating a public perception that these companies are strictly private entities despite their deep, long-standing ties to the intelligence agencies and militaries of the United States and Israel. The true breadth of the Epstein scandal will never be covered by mainstream media because so many news outlets are owned by these same Silicon Valley oligarchs or depend on Silicon Valley for online reader engagement.

Perhaps the biggest reason why the military/intelligence origins and links to the current Silicon Valley oligarchy will never be honestly examined, however, is that those very entities are now working with breakneck speed to usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which would make artificial intelligence, automation, mass electronic surveillance, and transhumanism central to human society. One of the architects of this “revolution,” Klaus Schwab, said earlier this year that rebuilding and maintaining trust with the public was critical to that project. However, were the true nature of Silicon Valley, including its significant ties to serial child rapist and sex trafficker Jeffery Epstein and his network, to emerge, the public’s trust would be significantly eroded, thus threatening what the global oligarchy views as a project critical to its survival.

At the start of the Biden era, America is being torn apart by more allegations of treason than at any time since the Civil War. Historian Henry Adams observed a century ago that politics “has always been the systematic organization of hatreds.” And few things spur hatred more effectively than tarring all political opponents as traitors.

The Founding Fathers carved the Constitution in light of the horrific political abuses that had proliferated in England in prior centuries. That was why there was a narrow definition of treason in the Constitution: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

After the end of Reconstruction, treason charges became relatively rare in American politics. Wars were probably the biggest propellants, with anyone who opposed American intervention abroad being tagged with the scarlet T. But by the late 1960s, when the futility of the Vietnam War was becoming clear, treason charges had largely lost their political clout. Gen. Alexander Haig, who later became Richard Nixon’s last White House chief of staff, denounced the Pentagon Papers as “devastating … a security breach of the greatest magnitude of anything I’ve ever seen … it’s treasonable” But the Nixon administration’s protests failed to sway the Supreme Court to block the New York Times from publishing the secret official records of decades of U.S. government deceit on Indochina.

Unfortunately, the political exploitation of the 9/11 attacks included reviving treason accusations against anyone who did not cheer George W. Bush’s promise to “rid the world of evil.” On December 6, 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft informed the Senate Judiciary Committee, “To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and … give ammunition to America’s enemies.” At that point, Bush had already suspended habeas corpus and his underlings were busy sabotaging laws limiting federal surveillance of American citizens. But regardless of how many civil liberties were actually destroyed, critics were traitors.

Run-up to 2016

While Bush was rehabilitated by the mainstream media in recent years as a reward for criticizing Donald Trump, his 2004 reelection campaign relied on tacit treason accusations to tarnish Democrats, liberals, and even a few libertarians. At the 2004 Republican National Convention, keynote speaker Democratic Sen. Zell Miller implied that political opposition was treason: “Now, at the same time young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrats’ manic obsession to bring down our commander in chief.”

There was no evidence that such criticism of Bush’s foreign policy was ripping America asunder — but trumpeting the accusation made Bush critics appear a pox on the land. Other Republicans used the same theme. John Thune, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate in South Dakota, denounced Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle: “His words embolden the enemy.” Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman condemned the Kerry campaign for “parroting the rhetoric of terrorists” and warned, “The enemy listens. All listen to what the president said, and all listen to what Senator Kerry said.” Former New York City Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik, stumping for Bush, told audiences, “Political criticism is our enemy’s best friend.” Six weeks before the 2004 election, the Washington Post noted, “President Bush and leading Republicans are increasingly charging that Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry and others in his party are giving comfort to terrorists and undermining the war in Iraq — a line of attack that tests the conventional bounds of political rhetoric.”

In 2006, the New York Times revealed that the Bush administration was illegally seizing personal financial information of millions of Americans. Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, declared, “We’re at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous.” Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) also labeled the Times guilty of “treason.” Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tex.) suggested that the Times had become the “Benedict Arnold Press.”

After Barack Obama was elected in 2008, treason allegations simmered down, except for occasional allegations that Obama was a secret Muslim scheming to impose Sharia law on America. Former NSA employee Edward Snowden’s leak of NSA documents was the biggest treason boomlet of that era. Numerous congressmen called for Snowden to be charged with treason, though the Founding Fathers neglected to include “embarrassing the government” in the Constitution’s definition of treason. House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and former NSA chief Michael Hayden publicly joked about putting Snowden on a government kill list.

But the Snowden uproar was a kerfuffle compared to the Pandora’s box opened by the 2016 presidential campaign. Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton repeatedly effectively asserted that Republican nominee Donald Trump was a Russian tool, betraying the nation.

Treason in the White House

After Trump’s surprise victory in November 2016, treason became the coin of the realm for denigrating political opposition. Democratic politicians, activists, and their media allies responded to Hillary Clinton’s surprise defeat by smearing Donald Trump for colluding with Russia. Leaks to the media from the FBI, CIA, and other federal agencies spurred raging controversies that contributed to Trump’s firing FBI chief James Comey. That resulted in the appointment of Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate Trump. Endless wrangling followed, including a claim by prominent Democrats claiming that Republicans would be guilty of treason if they released a memo detailing the FBI’s abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Mueller quickly became sacrosanct; liberals even bought votary candles with his likeness. A piece I wrote for The Hill on Mueller’s lawless record as FBI chief spurred 1,500 comments, including denunciations of me as a treason weasel, bearded grifter, Alt-moron, lackey, lickspittle, and librarian (some folks can’t spell “libertarian”). In April 2019, Mueller finally admitted that there was no substantive evidence of collusion but that did not stop the endless “RussiaGate” refrain and treason accusations from Trump critics. Most of Trump’s presidency was permeated by charges of treason against him.

But the Mueller-induced treason prattle was child’s play compared to what followed disputes over the 2020 presidential election. As law professor Jonathan Turley noted, after the media announced Biden won, “All court challenges [to election results] then became unethical for lawyers and all congressional challenges became sedition for members.” Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro this past December denounced one challenge to the election results as a “seditious abuse of the judicial process” that was guilty of “misleading the public about a free and fair election and tearing at our Constitution.” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) wailed, “The most serious attempt to overthrow our democracy in the history of our country is under way.” Twitter’s left-wing tilt has helped spur hashtags such as #GOPSeditiousTraitors and #TreasonAgainstAmerica. One leftist activist got 65,000 “likes” when he declared that “Donald Trump should replace Benedict Arnold in history as America’s most reviled traitor.”

On the other side of the political divide, some Republicans sounded equally hellbent on demonizing any opposition to their demands. Republican lawyer Lin Wood declared that Vice President Pence would be guilty of treason for certifying the election results and that he “will face execution by firing squad.” The Pro-Trump duo Diamond and Silk tweeted, “After listening to the leaked call put out by the Washington Post we are convinced that Georgia’s secretary of state and his lawyer need to be arrested for Treason!”

After protesters crashed into the U.S. Capitol on January 6 (some crashed into the building while others sauntered in), treason accusations went into overdrive. The definition of treason was vastly expanded to include members of Congress who filed a lawful challenge against the 2020 electoral tally. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared that Republicans who signaled they would not ratify the Electoral College results earlier that month “gave aid and comfort to [protesters] with the idea that they were embracing a lie … that the election did not have legitimacy.” A court of law would never convict Republican members of treason, but Pelosi can convict them in the court of public opinion, thanks to the hanging judges at CNN and MSNBC.

Civil War politics

Many Trump opponents are invoking 1861, denouncing any Republican challenges to the election as the same type of treason supposed to have been committed by states that exited the union. But the Civil War illustrates the catastrophic damage that can result from broad-brush definitions of treason. Northern politicians quickly persuaded their supporters that all Southerners were traitors — a capital offense. In 1864, Gen. William Sherman wired the War Department in Washington, “There is a class of people — men, women, and children — who must be killed or banished before you can hope for peace and order.” Union armies in Virginia, Georgia, and elsewhere late in the war intentionally devastated civilian populations who were considered collectively guilty of secession and treason.

Unfortunately, many pundits and politicians know only a fairy-tale version of the Civil War. The fact that Trump had high support in many southern states is spurring bizarre proposals that would be the final coffin nails into any hope for a semblance of peaceful coexistence between Americans with different views and values. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), the media’s favorite progressive congresswoman, declared, “The only way our country is going to heal is through the actual liberation of southern states.” She didn’t specify whether she favored the type of military dictatorship that was ended only by a historic compromise after the fraud-ridden 1876 presidential election. Politico, one of the most respected Washington publications, printed a piece titled, “What Ulysses Grant Can Teach Joe Biden about Putting Down Violent Insurrections.” The piece stressed, “Grant’s approach relied on a combination of brute military force and a drastic curtailment of civil liberties, yet it nevertheless has relevance for the current moment.” The article stressed the need for “overwhelming force” to suppress the type of people who violated the sacred space of the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

Any federal attempt to expunge political dissent in America with “brute military force and a drastic curtailment of civil liberties” would very likely provoke a civil war. But that could be the end result of current trends of presuming that political opponents are traitors who must be exterminated. While Democratic members of Congress and some Biden officials are comforted by the thousands of National Guard troops now occupying Washington at their behest, they would be unwise to presume the troops would obey orders to scourge their countrymen in every nook of the land.

Perhaps the ultimate cause of the proliferation of treason accusations is that politicians have captured far too much control over Americans’ lives. The more power politicians seize, the more unhinged political rhetoric becomes.

American politics is increasingly becoming toxic because presidents nowadays are elective dictators. Rather than a process of selecting a chief executive who will uphold the Constitution and enforce the laws, elections nowadays confer a license to run amok over the lives and property of practically anyone who falls under federal sway. Government has amassed so much power that the vast majority of Americans no longer trust Washington.

The surest recipe for curtailing political vitriol is to reduce political power so elections are not demolition derbies that doom losing sides. Thomas Jefferson in 1799 offered the ideal that can rescue America from strife today: “In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” And if presidents and members of Congress choose to openly scorn their oaths of office and constitutional constraints on their power — well, many Americans would consider that to be treason.