What does it mean when unhinged mediocrities speak calmly while spreading unfounded fear? It almost certainly means that not even they believe their own insane rhetoric, and yet they lack the decency, intelligence, or honesty -- or, as it happens, all three -- to abandon their obvious and dangerous lies....

Jeffrey Tucker, the Founder and President of Brownstone Institute, published an article reminding readers what the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) planned during the COVID-19 scamdemic. “No matter how bad you think Covid policies were, they were intended to be worse,” Tucker writes. Tucker recalled the authoritarian policies such as lockdowns, social distancing, mask mandates, and vaccine passports. However, he writes that the public health agency had a plan for establishing “nationwide quarantine camps.” “VERY SERIOUS: of all the documents I’ve seen over 4 years of research and writing, this is the one that shocks me the most. The amount of institutional pathology that allowed for it to be written/published is beyond comprehension,” Tucker stated. VERY SERIOUS: of all the documents I've seen over 4 years of research and writing, this is the one that shocks me the most. The amount of institutional pathology that allowed for it to be written/published is beyond comprehension. https://t.co/3qG9glqPX5 — Jeffrey A Tucker (@jeffreyatucker) November 7, 2024 Per Brownstone Institute: On July 26, 2020, with the George Floyd riots having finally settled down, the CDC issued a plan for establishing nationwide quarantine camps. People were to be isolated, given only food and some cleaning supplies. They would be banned from participating in any religious services. The plan included contingencies for preventing suicide. There were no provisions made for any legal appeals or even the right to legal counsel. The plan’s authors were unnamed but included 26 footnotes. It was completely official. The document was only removed on about March 26, 2023. During the entire intervening time, the plan survived on the CDC’s public site with little to no public notice or controversy. It was called “Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings.” By absence of empirical data, the meaning is: nothing like this has ever been tried. The point of the document was to map out how it could be possible and alert authorities to possible pitfalls to be avoided. The meaning of “shielding” is “to reduce the number of severe Covid-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (‘high-risk’) and the general population (‘low-risk’). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or ‘green zones’ established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector, or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.” In other words, this is what used to be concentration camps. This certainly ranks up at the top of the list of totalitarian schemes for pathogenic control prior to vaccination.~@jeffreyatucker The CDC Planned Quarantine Camps Nationwidehttps://t.co/T9qOuBDuQB — Brownstone Institute (@brownstoneinst) November 7, 2024 * Image from Internet Archive * “This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings. This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available,” the CDC document stated. The CDC Planned Quarantine Camps for Americans NationwideNever forget what they had planned for us. No matter how bad you think Covid policies were, they were intended to be worse.  Consider the vaccine passports alone. Six cities were locked down to include only the… pic.twitter.com/TKNfpN0dgT — “Sudden And Unexpected” (@toobaffled) November 8, 2024 Per Internet Archive: The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (“high-risk”) and the general population (“low-risk”). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or “green zones” established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents. Current evidence indicates that older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions are at higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19. In most humanitarian settings, older population groups make up a small percentage of the total population. For this reason, the shielding approach suggests physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population to prioritize the use of the limited available resources and avoid implementing long-term containment measures among the general population. In theory, shielding may serve its objective to protect high-risk populations from disease and death. However, implementation of the approach necessitates strict adherence, to protocol. Inadvertent introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission among the most vulnerable populations the approach is trying to protect. The CDC Planned Quarantine Camps for Americans Nationwide Never forget what they had planned for us.https://t.co/6lVIjE60N6 — Vigilant News (@VigilantNews) November 7, 2024 “Plan for an extended duration of implementation time, at least 6 months,” the document noted. “The shielding approach proposes that green zones be maintained until one of the following circumstances arises: (i) sufficient hospitalization capacity is established; (ii) effective vaccine or therapeutic options become widely available; or (iii) the COVID-19 epidemic affecting the population subsides,” it added. Pure evil, there is no other word – please read:https://t.co/onDh2JO5lY — Ivor Cummins (@FatEmperor) November 8, 2024 Cont. from Internet Archive: The shielding approach is an ambitious undertaking, which may prove effective in preventing COVID-19 infection among high-risk populations if well managed. While the premise is based on mitigation strategies used in the United Kingdom, there is no empirical evidence whether this approach will increase, decrease or have no effect on morbidity and mortality during the COVID-19 epidemic in various humanitarian settings. This document highlights a) risks and challenges of implementing this approach, b) need for additional resources in areas with limited or reduced capacity, c) indefinite timeline, and d) possible short-term and long-term adverse consequences. Public health not only focuses on the eradication of disease but addresses the entire spectrum of health and wellbeing. Populations displaced, due to natural disasters or war and, conflict are already fragile and have experienced increased mental, physical and/or emotional trauma. While the shielding approach is not meant to be coercive, it may appear forced or be misunderstood in humanitarian settings. As with many community interventions meant to decrease COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, compliance and behavior change are the primary rate-limiting steps and may be driven by social and emotional factors. These changes are difficult in developed, stable settings; thus, they may be particularly challenging in humanitarian settings which bring their own set of multi-faceted challenges that need to be taken into account. Household-level shielding seems to be the most feasible and dignified as it allows for the least disruption to family structure and lifestyle, critical components to maintaining compliance. However, it is most susceptible to the introduction of a virus due to necessary movement or interaction outside the green zone, less oversight, and often large household sizes. It may be less feasible in settings where family shelters are small and do not have multiple compartments. In humanitarian settings, small village, sector/block, or camp-level shielding may allow for greater adherence to proposed protocol, but at the expense of longer-term social impacts triggered by separation from friends and family, feelings of isolation, and stigmatization. Most importantly, accidental introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission and increased morbidity and mortality as observed in assisted care facilities in the US. The shielding approach is intended to alleviate stress on the healthcare system and circumvent the negative economic consequences of long-term containment measures and lockdowns by protecting the most vulnerable. Implementation of this approach will involve careful planning, additional resources, strict adherence and strong multi-sector coordination, requiring agencies to consider the potential repercussion among populations that have collectively experienced physical and psychological trauma which makes them more vulnerable to adverse psychosocial consequences.  In addition, thoughtful consideration of the potential benefit versus the social and financial cost of implementation will be needed in humanitarian settings. “In four years of research, and encountering truly shocking documents and evidence of what happened in the Covid years, this one certainly ranks up at the top of the list of totalitarian schemes for pathogenic control prior to vaccination. It is quite simply mind-blowing that such a scheme could ever be contemplated,” Tucker writes. Tucker noted the CDC has 10,600 full-time employees and contractors and a budget of $11.5 billion. He logically concluded both numbers should be zero. Read the full CDC document at Internet Archive.

Thrash legends, metalcore heavyweights and rising hardcore ragers are included in next year's Grammy nominations!

An Iranian asset and two others have been charged in a plot to assassinate 47th President-elect Donald Trump.

Special counsel Jack Smith asked for a pause in the lawfare cases against Donald Trump. He went back to the judge to ask him if he can hit a “pause” and give him a month to formally request how to move forward. It could be the first step in ending the prosecution. Smith asked that […] The post Jack Smith Seeks a “Pause” in Lawfare Cases Against Donald Trump appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Ah, the sweet triumph of victory.  It’s a beautiful time for democracy, for freedom, and for America. On Tuesday, November 5, the people gave a decisive “hell no” to the Democrats despite their control of the media, the entertainment industry, academia, and major corporations. We came together as a nation to beat back the force of wokeism that was poised to destroy what so many of our ancestors died to build and protect.  Some have referred to these election results as the revenge of the normies – those “garbage” folks who just want to get back to normal American life free from crippling inflation, open borders, and radical left-wing gender theory. Good news everyone – we did it. Donald Trump was elected the 47th president of the United States in a landslide victory. “Many people have told me that God spared my life for a reason,” president-elect Trump told supporters during his victory speech Tuesday night. “And that reason was to save our country and to restore America to greatness.” The fight is far from over, but that doesn’t mean we can’t celebrate this enormous win right now.  “Donald Trump is the man built for these times. Built for them. And built damned tough,” Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro shared on X Tuesday night.  World leaders reacted in a variety of ways to the news.  Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described Trump’s win as “historic” and called it one of “history’s greatest comebacks” that would provide “a new beginning for America and a powerful recommitment to the great alliance between Israel and America.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he appreciated Trump’s ‘peace through strength’ approach to governing and claimed he looked forward to “personally congratulating” the new president. Even more inspiring was the reaction from young patriots across the country, electing to “Fire” Kamala Harris and emulate Trump’s signature dance.   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Grant Godwin (@the_typical_liberal) Ready to celebrate? So are we. It’s time to rejoice in the sweetness of success. First up, delight your senses with the Smells Like Victory – Churchill candle, available with two scent profiles. It’s the perfect candle to keep burning while tuning in to MSNBC and watching the hosts spiral into confusion and despair. And to continue the celebration, save 20% with code VICTORY for a limited time. Burn it long and bright, friend. You’ve earned it. Next, the Jeremy’s Victory Bundle is here for all your personal grooming needs. This limited-edition bundle combines premium products to keep you feeling fresh, sharp, and unbreakable. It’s also 47% off for a limited time to celebrate America’s new favorite number. This superior razor starts with our ergonomically designed handle, which is built tough to last. Each shave is precise with our 5-blade razor cartridges. Our Green Tea & Menthol Shave Cream and Post-Shave Balm soothe and refresh your skin, while our charcoal-infused Body Wash cleanses with vigor.  For the hair, our Tea Tree Shampoo and Conditioner with Argan Oil and Peppermint invigorate the scalp and restore shine. Stay odor-free with two aluminum-free natural deodorants in bold scents, Salt Stone and Musk. You can stash it all in the waterproof, socialism-resistant travel case – because your values deserve protection wherever you go.   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by The Daily Wire (@realdailywire)

Leftist columnists at The New York Times were mocked this week after they published a two-minute video panicking over what might happen during Donald Trump’s second presidency. The video comes after President-elect Trump dominated Vice President Kamala Harris in this week’s election, beating her in every swing state and winning the popular vote. The video opens with columnist Ezra Klein stating: “The worst version of a Donald Trump administration is very, very bad.” Several of the newspapers columnists then describe what they believe would be “the worst version of a Trump administration.” MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+ The columnists state: NICK KRISTOF: One that is not only extremist, but also effective in that extremism. LYDIA POLGREEN: Emboldened by a series of Supreme Court rulings, perhaps bolstered by support in both houses of Congress, Trump will fulfill his promise to be a dictator on day one. MICHELLE GOLDBERG: He sends troops into neighborhoods like my own to try to round up undocumented immigrants. That he sets up a network of camps … JAMELLE BOUIE: Mass deportations. It would likely plunge the United States into something like a recession. His tariffs likewise promise to spike prices for most Americans and cause costs that go up dramatically. DAVID FRENCH: That version of Trump could result in abandoning Ukraine to advancing Russian armies. Could result in extraordinarily erratic foreign policy in the Middle East. EZRA KLEIN: I mean, Donald Trump often talked about things like bombing Mexico to deal with drug cartels. People stopped him from doing that. GOLDBERG: But there’s not going to be any adults in the room this time. BRET STEPHENS: The worst version of a Trump administration seeks various forms of retribution against Trump’s enemies, real and perceived. BOUIE: He uses the power given to him to harass and undermine his political opposition. ROSS DOUTHAT: This leads to substantial resistance, mass protest, and also drives his enemies into a cycle of radicalization, intensifying unrest and conflict. BOUIE: And in the process, doing profound and possibly permanent damage to American democracy. MASHA GESSEN: Basically when nothing we can do by voting or using our existing institutions will reverse the consolidation of power. CHARLES BLOW: They are democracy ending, if really manifest in the ways that he and other conservatives have discussed them. GESSEN: And I have a great fear that that’s exactly what’s going to happen over the next four years. WATCH: If Jonestown had recorded a final video pic.twitter.com/fVmd1ub13C — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) November 7, 2024 The video went viral shortly after being posted to X, with numerous commentators mocking and laughing at the columnists’ fearmongering. “There may be no other creature on Earth more pathetic than the New York Times journalist,” said podcast host Dave Rubin. Columnist John Podhortez posted that he wanted The New York Times op-ed page video department “to make apocalyptic two-minute films every day.” “Not since I watched Peter Sellers suck a bird into a vacuum cleaner in The Return of the Pink Panther have I laughed this hard,” he said. Writer and author David Harsanyi wrote: “It’s funny watching Bouie warn about tariffs (which I agree with) after spending years championing higher corporate and a socialist wealth tax.” “This video should be mocked yes — but the fearmongering is actually divisive and reckless in a way that is disturbing,” said writer Mark Hemingway.

During the Biden-Harris administration, Democrats called to eliminate the filibuster and add justices to the Supreme Court in order to bolster their political power. Now, with a Republican president and Republican Senate majority incoming, The Daily Wire thought it would reach out to Senate Democrats to see if they’ve changed their minds. The Daily Wire reached out to every Democrat Senate office, even Sens. Sherrod Brown (OH), Bob Casey (PA), and Jon Tester (MT), who all lost re-election, to ask for their stance on the two subjects. We also reached out to independent Sens. Angus King (ME) and Bernie Sanders (VT), who caucus with Democrats. For those who have not publicly supported or who have publicly opposed either the elimination of the filibuster or packing the Supreme Court, they were asked what they would say to their fellow Democrats who have supported such measures. The Daily Wire also reached out to the incoming Democrat Senators, who all expressed a desire to end the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court (except for Rep. Elissa Slotkin, who is not on record saying she would add Supreme Court seats) to see if they still supported these positions now that Trump won and Republicans have taken back the Senate. Here are their responses. Current Democrat Senators: Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) Sen. Baldwin’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) Sen. Bennet’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) Sen. Blumenthal’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) Sen. Booker’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Sherrod Brown  (D-OH) Sen. Brown’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Laphonza Butler (D-CA) Sen. Butler’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) Sen. Cantwell’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) Sen. Cardin’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) Sen. Carper’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Bob Casey  (D-PA) Sen. Casey’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Chris Coons (D-WI) Sen. Coon’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) Sen. Cortez Masto’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) Sen. Duckworth’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) Sen. Durbin’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) Sen. Fetterman’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) Sen. Gillibrand’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) Sen. Hassan’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) Sen. Heinrich’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. George Helmy (D-NJ) Sen. Helmy’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) Sen. Hickenlooper’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) Sen. Hirono’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) Sen. Kaine’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) Sen. Kelly’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Angus King (D-ME) Sen. King’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) Sen. Klobuchar’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM) Sen. Lujan’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) Sen. Markey’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Jeff Merkley  (D-OR) Sen. Merkley’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) Sen. Murphy’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) Sen. Murray’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) Sen. Ossoff’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) Sen. Padilla’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) Sen. Peters’ office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) Sen. Reed’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) Sen. Rosen’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) Sen. Sanders’ office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) Sen. Schatz’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Chuck Schumer  (D-NY) Sen. Schumer’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) Sen. Shaheen’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN) Sen. Smith’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Sen. Stabenow’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Jon Tester  (D-MT) Sen. Tester’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) Sen. Van Hollen’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) Sen. Warner’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) Sen. Warnock’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) Sen. Warren’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Peter Welch (D-VT) Sen. Welch’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) Sen. Whitehouse’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Sen. Ron Wyden  (D-OR) Sen. Wyden’s office did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Incoming Democrat Senators: Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) Rep. Gallego did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) Rep. Schiff did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) Rep. Slotkin did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE) Rep. Blunt Rochester did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry. Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) Alsobrooks did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry.

Democrats had counted on young voters flocking to Vice President Kamala Harris, but as Tuesday night went on the party had a rude awakening. Gen Z did not swing as hard for Harris as Democrats counted on — Harris won voters ages 18 to 29 by just 11 points, way down from President Joe Biden’s 24 points and Hillary Clinton’s 19 points. President-elect Donald Trump bet hard on young men, including those in their teens and early 20s casting their very first ballot. He appeared on a slew of “bro” podcasts popular with that demographic, among them comedian Theo Von’s “This Past Weekend,” Andrew Schultz’s “Flagrant” podcast, YouTuber Jake Paul’s show, and the country’s most popular podcast “The Joe Rogan Experience,” a three-hour affair. That strategy paid off — men under 30 voted for Trump over Harris by 2 points. Back in 2020, Biden won the young male vote by 11 points. Harris focused on motivating young women. She appeared on the popular “Call Her Daddy” podcast, whose millions of listeners are mostly women. She was criticized for appearing on the show while thousands suffered through the devastation from Hurricane Helene, however. Her “Brat” summer trend, based on a Charlie XCX album, went viral, but it had fizzled by the fall. However, Trump also gained ground with young women despite Democrats hammering the abortion issue. Harris won under-30 women by 24 points, more than 10 points down from Biden’s 35-point advantage with young women. Trump’s social media strategy also involved a lot of viral memes, such as his appearance at McDonald’s where he worked the fry cooker, another way his team worked to appeal to young people. Overall, Trump won a bigger percentage of voters under 30 than any Republican presidential candidate since 2008, NBC News exit polling showed. On Wednesday, videos flooded TikTok showing college students celebrating Trump’s win on their campuses. The Harris campaign had believed young voters were energized to vote for Harris. Long lines at college campuses in swing states like the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Arizona State University seemed to confirm this. “They are doing their part to make sure Donald Trump is defeated, abortion rights are protected and Democracy is saved,” said David Hogg, co-founder of Leaders We Deserve and March for Our Lives. However, the economy turned out to be a much more potent driver for voters under 30, who are struggling financially, researchers noted before the election. Even immigration, Trump’s strongest issue, did not rank as high as financial health for young people. The economy was the most important issue to young voters, and those who said it was their top issue voted for Trump 78% to Harris’ 21%, NBC exit polls showed. MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+ More than 41 million Gen Z voters cast a ballot this election. Young voters notoriously do not turn out, but every cycle since 2018 more and more have been showing up at their polling places. Based on the numbers, the young generation’s higher turnout does not automatically mean more votes for Democrats. This election has put them on the defensive.