Jon Letendre

Article from 2019: In photos obtained by DailyMail.com, Ehud Barak is seen hiding his face as he entered Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan mansion in January 2016 The 77-year-old, Israel's former prime minister, has long had business ties to Epstein, which current PM Benjamin Netanyahu's team is now trying to exploit Barak was wearing a camo-style neck gaiter which he pulled high over his face almost to his glasses and later, he was wearing it as a hat Barak admitted the photos are of him, blaming his bizarre attire on being cold, but claims he has 'never met Epstein in the company of women or young girls' However, a bevy of young women were also seen going into the multi-millionaire's lavish home on the same day that married Barak was snapped Epstein, 66, was arrested last week and charged with sex trafficking and conspiracy to traffic minors for sex https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7250009/Netanyahu-challenger-Ehud-Barak-hides-face-enters-entering-Jeffrey-Epsteins-mansion.html

I can't see voting machine software code. I did see enormous discrepancies in objective manifestations of support, in the 2020 general election and in the 2020 Dem primaries. Bernie had been filling large venues for years, Biden was a big fat zero. A lot of people talked about it when Obama chose him for the 2008 campaign. People were dumbfounded. In government his whole life, never achieved anything of note and no one liked him. Obama's win was no surprise, the enthusiasm of the voters was evident in his rallies and people from all walks of life wanted him. When Biden was rising in the primaries and all the Dems were dropping out I couldn't find anyone, anyone at all, who wanted Biden. The mainstream polling outfits and media were reporting his rising support but nothing I observed myself has ever lined up with that messaging.

"Former prime minister Ehud Barak met with the late disgraced financier and child sexual abuser Jeffrey Epstein dozens of times beginning in 2013, according to a new report on Wednesday by the Wall Street Journal. "According to the WSJ’s Wednesday report on the calendar’s contents, Barak visited Epstein about 30 times between 2013 and 2017 at his estates in Florida and New York, including a time in 2014 when the former Israeli premier flew with Epstein on his private aircraft from Palm Beach to Tampa, after which Epstein went on to New York. Barak said his wife and an Israeli security guard were also on that flight. [The best part ... wait for it ... ] "The meetings came well after Epstein’s 2008-2009 conviction and sentencing, but Barak has maintained that he had no knowledge of Epstein’s activities." https://www.timesofisrael.com/ehud-barak-met-with-jeffrey-epstein-dozens-of-times-flew-on-private-plane-report/ The former Israeli defense minster and prime minister gets on private jets with his wife and dozens of times visits the homes of people whose background neither he nor his security services bother to check. That's a good one.

Yeah the 2020 Dem primaries were quite the spectacle. How anyone could watch that and believe it was organic is way beyond me. They all bowed out one after the other for no good reasons at all and well, that left Joe Biden. Joe Biden, who no one wanted as seen by his inability to fill even just a high school gym (compared to Trump who sold out huge venues breaking several records including beating Elton John's attendance record at a stadium in New Hampshire.)

CIA in the news again. Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell pimped underage girls to clients around the world. She was sentenced to 20 years in prison for grooming and trafficking underage girls with Epstein. Yet, to this day not one of their clients has been charged with any crime. If said clients were ordinary people with ordinary lives do you think they would still be walking free? "A review of the private calendar of Jeffrey Epstein has revealed that the convicted sex offender and financier had meetings not previously reported on with several prominent Americans, including the current CIA director." https://news.yahoo.com/biden-cia-director-met-jeffrey-165326094.html The director is not the first person to claim they didn't know anything about Epstein when they spent time with him in his home or visited his private island. (Epstein had already spent time in prison in 2008 for trafficking girls, but gosh, the then deputy secretary of state and future CIA director just didn't know anything about that.) MIT and Harvard also claimed for years that they didn't know anything about Epstein's activities, but note how careful they were to hide the source when documenting his millions in donations: "The GP report identified Executive Vice President Israel Ruiz and former Vice President and General Counsel Greg Morgan as the members of the senior leadership team most culpable in allowing the donations from Jeffrey Epstein. Not only were both senior administrators aware of Epstein’s prior conviction as a sex offender, but in 2013 they developed a framework for allowing donations from Epstein so long as they were recorded as anonymous and were under 10M dollars." https://facultygovernance.mit.edu/sites/default/files/202001-02Epstein_and_MIT-The_Unanswered_Questions.pdf A couple years ago Harvard too acknowledged the same practice of hiding the source of his millions in donations, but I couldn't find those links online today. As George Carlin would say, "It's a big club and you ain't in it."

Law Professor Jonathan Turley: "The Whitmer conspiracy was a production written, funded, and largely populated by FBI agents and informants. At every point, FBI literally drove the conspirators and controlled their actions. In the end, a majority of the “conspirators” were actually FBI agents or informants." https://nypost.com/2022/04/13/inside-fbis-probe-and-entrapment-of-a-michigan-militia-crew/

It would be really nifty if Doug ever just tried to get out of his information bubble, if he sought information outside of the mainstream messaging, if he attempted to look into any of the information offered by people in these discussions instead of sitting back uniformed and pretending that asking for proof every time, every detail, every discussion, is an adequate substitute. It really is like holding a child's hand through every step, and not like having an intellectual discussion wherein both parties have done their homework and are prepared to discuss an issue intelligently. If he tried, even just a little, he would already know that the facts mentioned in this discussion about the FBI's behavior came out at trial and are uncontroversially true. Jonathan Turley, civil libertarian, liberal, hardly right wing to say the least, Professor of Law at George Washington University: "The Michigan case stands as one of the most chilling examples of entrapment techniques used by the FBI. While Whitmer declared Trump “complicit” in her planned execution, the FBI increasingly appeared more “complicit” in the creation of a government-inspired, government-funded, and largely government-staffed plot." https://jonathanturley.org/2022/04/20/top-prosecutor-drops-out-of-whitmer-kidnapping-case/

The problem is that it is not just a legal entity. Rather, it is a government entity, empowered with government functions and powers, and controlled by a single corporation. That corporation obtained that special privilege in the '60s by corrupting the Florida legislature. Let's be clear—Disney is not some free market hero who fought government and improved property rights for all. Rather, they bribed and corrupted a state legislature to gain exemptions from law, special privileges and their own local government, for themselves. That is not capitalism, it is crony-statism.

The modus operandi is to under-cover recruit vulnerable people to participate in what they are told will be a violent crime. Basically, entrap some highly suggestible and evil people who then in fact do their part in what they think will be a big violent crime, then arrest them. There is never any chance of the event taking place because every element of its execution (aside from the entrapped persons) is made up, doesn't exist. Then they tell the public it was a real conspiracy with a real chance of coming to fruition but they stopped it and saved lives.

Right. You didn't engage in ad hominem and/or an argument from intimidation and/or guilt by alleged association. You never did anything wrong at all. All you were doing was resisting someone else who did do something wrong. Thank you for that perfect response that buttresses my point. You're a master.

You are an impressive accountability dodger, Doug. A specimen of truly elegant gaslighting skill. You have your cake, shove it into other people's mouths, and deny ever having had it, too -- and you make it look effortless.

Democrat Presidential candidate RFK, Jr: ”There are 14,000 Ukrainian civilians who have died, but 300,000 troops. Russians are killing Ukrainians at a seven-to-one, eight-to one-ratio. They cannot sustain this. Well, what we're being told about this war is just not true.”

We hear it everywhere because the Predator Class liars who drive the mainstream narratives are concerned that the truth is coming out and they are losing control. Their tactic is to scare the sheeple with the “dangers of misinformation” then smear all the truth-tellers with it and justify censorship with it. The censorship will get a pass from many people like Doug who become convinced “misinformation” is no less than a threat to security.

But now, anyone who thinks elections are in any way vulnerable are gullible rubes with no respect for reason or standards of evidence, white supremacist conspiracy theorists and a danger to our democracy.

Me: "In 2017 (and '18 and '19) elections couldn't be trusted, they were, in effect, hackable." I am using hackable as a synonym of vulnerable, not as unauthorized access to a computer system. All of you believe-anything-anti-Trump mainstream normies said that the 2016 election was illegitimate as it had suffered "Russian collusion," an idea that was never supported in any grounded facts, was always stupid, has since been proven false and was dishonestly and feverishly pumped for years by the same mainstream voices you blindly trust to this day.

Note also that Fox is only worth about $17 billion, market capitalization. Pfizer alone is worth about $220 billion. The small clique of Wall Street institutions that own 80% and 70% of those two companies would view even the total destruction of Fox as a very net positive business decision if it ended mainstream media criticism of their pharma companies which together are worth orders of magnitude more than Fox is worth. We are expected to believe in the classical economic paradigm that companies always promote their own interests and behave according to market principles. But that paradigm obviously breaks down when all of them are vast-majority owned by the same institutional owners. Under this condition rational self interest will lead those owners to see past the atomic interests of individual companies and to press for those outcomes which promote their best net interest. I am not prepared to say that RFK Jr's thesis is the only or even best explanation for Tucker's firing, just that its plausibility is well grounded in facts, no matter what the clingers to braindead mainstream narratives say. RFK Jr, April 24, 2023: Fox fires @TuckerCarlson five days after he crosses the red line by acknowledging that the TV networks pushed a deadly and ineffective vaccine to please their Pharma advertisers. Carlson’s breathtakingly courageous April 19 monologue broke TV’s two biggest rules: Tucker told the truth about how greedy Pharma advertisers controlled TV news content and he lambasted obsequious newscasters for promoting jabs they knew to be lethal and worthless. For many years, Tucker has had the nation's biggest audience averaging 3.5 million — 10 times the size of CNN. Fox just demonstrated the terrifying power of Big Pharma.

You and your grand narratives. Nevermind the Wall Street institutions that own 80% of Fox and similar of big pharma. The family that owns under 20% of the company just didn't like Tucker anymore. The "fact is" that's the "easiest explanation." lol

In 2017 (and '18 and '19) elections couldn't be trusted, they were, in effect, hackable. Trump was illegitimate due to "collusion with the Russians!" That idea was always stupid but notice that the usual suspects pretended to believe it with all their heart and have fastidiously stopped talking about it ever since it was proven not only false but also fabricated by Hillary and elements of the intelligence services. In 2021 (and '22 and '23) elections are secure and only conspiracy theorists and white supremacists would disagree and "Respect our Democracy!"

Doug you seem unwilling to contemplate that our overlords intentionally overstated covid deaths as has been obvious to many of us from the start. I can't help you with that. Lethal and worthless are RFK Jr's words, not mine. Suffice to say I understand that you still trust the establishment media (who rely upon big pharma advertising and are controlling-interest owned by the same very small group of Wall Street elites who control big pharma*.) You still blindly trust them about this and about so much more and you can cite their many insistences that the unvacc'ed are dying more and I can cite others saying it's not so ( https://brownstone.org is doing a good job.) Forgive me if I don't engage you further in "debate." I've seen how you operate over many years. You play games and make no attempt at genuine engagement with what the other side presents. Arguing with normie simpletons is like trying to play chess with a pigeon, it won't work because he's just going to knock over all the pieces and strut around like he won. *Both Fox and Pfizer are well over 50% owned by a small clique of Wall Street institutions. Just Blackrock, Vanguard and State Street together own at least a third of FOX and a quarter of PFE. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/FOXA/holders https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/PFE/holders

RFK Jr: Fox fires @TuckerCarlson five days after he crosses the red line by acknowledging that the TV networks pushed a deadly and ineffective vaccine to please their Pharma advertisers. Carlson’s breathtakingly courageous April 19 monologue broke TV’s two biggest rules: Tucker told the truth about how greedy Pharma advertisers controlled TV news content and he lambasted obsequious newscasters for promoting jabs they knew to be lethal and worthless. For many years, Tucker has had the nation's biggest audience averaging 3.5 million — 10 times the size of CNN. Fox just demonstrated the terrifying power of Big Pharma. Last edited11:20 AM · Apr 24, 2023 · 12M Views

People everywhere are coming to see that smear as nothing more than an evasion aid for information that upsets one's worldview, information the implications of which one is not comfortable facing. For example, "covid hospitalizations" and "covid deaths" overcounting has been an easily confirmable fact since the beginning of the Scamdemic. But normie simpletons refused to look at the information and relied instead on their favorite smear. The truth is that very few people, including self-identifying Objectivists, are willing to think for themselves. Too often people will reject objective evidence they don't like with smears of the messenger and wait until "respectable outlets" (or Mr. Brook) tell them what to think.

During a speech, this weekend at Hillsdale College, Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. spoke about the PATRIOT Act and the 2001 Anthrax attacks: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2023/04/11/robert_f_kennedy_jr_suggests_2001_anthrax_attack_was_done_by_cia_to_pass_the_patriot_act.html#!

The shame is that while we argue about the appropriate age for schools to introduce kids to strap-ons and while we lament about books on systemic racism being taken away along with the strap-on instructionals, "half of U.S. adults can’t read a book written at the 8th-grade level." https://www.wyliecomm.com/2021/08/whats-the-latest-u-s-literacy-rate/ Schools should be about educational basics. Parents who can't fathom their kids not knowing about strap-ons can give their kids books about strap-ons. Parents who can't fathom their kids not knowing that the world is stacked against them can give their kids books that teach them the world is stacked against them. Maybe if all of that were banned in schools and there was nothing left but real education, then the kids might turn out able to read at all.

Sure. That ninth grade example was just one example of material (conveniently for decpetive school boards) kept out of the record of board meetings. The earlier example I posted: “Every one of the kids in this book partakes in taking drugs, drinking alcohol, buying liquor with a fake ID, watching porn, having sex, and bullying other kids." The audiobook is available at Spring Hill Elementary library. Oodles of examples like this exist around the country for anyone willing to research it a bit. But not if you close your eyes and chalk it all up to paranoid and pushy Christians. By this logic there is no problem with public schools indoctrinating kids with marxist ideology, or anything else whatsoever, starting at any age -- and trying to stop it is misguided since parents can simply "give them tools." If it is reasonable to say that nothing being taught at school is a problem since parents can give their kids tools, then is it also reasonable to say that the absence of any book from their school is no problem since parents can go on Amazon or to a municipal library?

I don't make that mistake, of course it's real. And non-religious-based objections to the left's agenda of corrupting children at younger and younger ages is also real. People from all walks of life and all ideological persuasions are noticing it and objecting to it.