Connect with us

Politics

Forget Facebook, They Want to Revoke Your Access to Banking

Social media deplatforming is only the beginning; The ultimate social credit score nightmare is coming.

Published

on

The biggest threat that social media censorship poses is not you being unable to access Facebook or Twitter, it’s you not being able to get a mortgage or have a bank account.

The end result of Big Tech silencing conservative voices is banks and corporations removing your access to the marketplace and severely restricting your basic right to buy and sell.

We have already seen numerous instances of people being deplatformed by BANKS for the political opinions, from Mastercard telling Patreon to remove Robert Spencer’s account, to Martina Markota and Enrique Tarrio having services terminated by Chase Bank over their support for Trump.

Mastercard also recently indicated that it would hold a vote on whether to cut off payments to “global far-right political leaders”. But this will extend to everyone. Mastercard will ‘monitor’ your financial activity for indications of dissident behavior. That’s chilling.

null

Before Infowars was banned by Paypal and numerous other payment processors last year, despite having an impeccable credit score, the company was slapped with a designation akin to having ties to terrorism, making banks averse to doing any business with Infowars.

Payment processors and banks are now using similar ‘dangerous person’ designations as Facebook and other Big Tech outfits to not only deplatform, but to designate a person an “extremist” for life.

I was banned by Facebook under the same designation which bans users from the platform who engage in the following behavior;

– Terrorist activity
– Organised hate
– Mass or serial murder
– Human trafficking
– Organised violence or criminal activity

Once marked as an “extremist,” this designation is then intended to apply to every other area of your life.

This is the ultimate nightmare scenario – a Communist Chinese-style social credit system where you will be denied banking, loans and given poor credit rating if you associate with people or espouse views deemed “dangerous” by the establishment, which at this point is anything that counters their narrative.

Facebook already announced it will ban people merely for mentioning people like Alex Jones or Gavin McInnes or sharing their content without simultaneously denouncing it. In the near future, AI will make this process instantaneous.

Let that sink in. A giant corporation which controls the new public square is telling its 2.3 billion users what political opinions they must hold in order to be allowed to have free expression.

This is nothing less than one giant digital re-education camp.

The Paypal ban against Infowars was handed down just weeks after George Soros-funded group Right Wing Watch published an article demanding that PayPal terminate its agreement with Infowars for “egregious violations of the platform’s own terms of service.”

With PayPal now buying up global credit card payment processors and moving into conventional banking, we are approaching a time when a handful of corporations will control all banking just as a handful of Silicon Valley giants now control free speech.

What about Bitcoin as an alternative? Facebook is now moving into cryptocurrencies. Imagine a day when Facebook controls virtually all online payment mechanisms but you’re banned from using them because you posted a spicy meme or spoke out against mass immigration.

All of this will only be exaserbated by the fact that we are moving towards a cashless society where hard currency is eliminated. You will be forced to use a credit card and you will only be able to have access to a credit card if your social credit score is good enough.

Banned by Facebook? Punished for sharing an “offensive” opinion on Twitter? Now you’re an “extremist”. Now your social credit score has collapsed. Now your bank informs you services have been terminated. Good luck dumpster diving for tonight’s dinner.

Unless we stop this now, unless Trump takes executive action to halt corporations being able to refuse service based on political beliefs, not only will you be silenced, your life will become a living hell.

So you can live without Facebook or Instagram. Imagine trying to live without access to a loan for a car, a mortgage for a house or a bank account period.

They don’t just want you silenced, they want you destitute. They want you broke and homeless.

They want total compliance and obedience under threat of the complete ruination of your life.

Please support me in the fightback against Big Tech censorship by subscribing here.

Also, it’s imperative that you sign up for my free newsletter here so we can stay in touch.

Continue Reading
Comments

Politics

Hillary: ‘I want To Retire Trump’; ‘I Feel A Sense Of Responsibility’

Published

on

Steve Watson

Again hints at 2020 run

Two time presidential campaign loser Hillary Clinton again hinted at a third attempt for the White House in multiple interviews this week, even saying that she ‘feels a responsibility to retire Donald Trump’.

Clinton told BBC Radio 5 Live that she feels under “enormous pressure” to consider a 2020 White House run.

“I feel a sense of responsibility partly because you know my name was on the ballot, I got more votes, but ended up losing to the current incumbent in the White House who I think is really undermining our democracy in very fundamental ways. And I want to retire him.” Hillary enthused.

When directly asked if she was considering running in 2020, Hillary replied “I say never, never, never say never.”

“I will certainly tell you. I’m under enormous pressure from many, many, many people to think about it. But as of this moment, sitting here in this studio talking to you, that is absolutely not in my plans.” Hillary added.

In a separate interview, Hillary also said she thinks “all the time” about being President, and what could have transpired had she not lost to Trump.

“I think about what I would have done as president all the time … because it distresses me to see what’s happening now.” she proclaimed.

“But I’m supporting the process. I’m helping any candidate who asks for help,” she claimed, “because my goal is to retire our incumbent and get our country back and get on the right track, so that’s what I’m going to be focused on.”

In a further interview with the BBC, Clinton whined about her favorite topic, Russian election interference, saying “I’m dumbfounded that this [UK] government won’t release the report about Russian influence, because every person who votes in this country deserves to see that report before your election happens.”

Repeating her tired conspiracy theory, Hillary declared “That should be an absolute condition, because there is no doubt, we know it in our country. We’ve seen it in Europe, we’ve seen it here, uh, that Russia in particular is determined to try to shape the politics of western democracies, not to our benefit, but to theirs.”

Clinton’s remarks will once again fuel speculation that she will join the race, with some presidential polls also having recently found that the ‘crooked’ one would be an instant front runner if she does.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rand Paul: Trump “Has Every Right To Withhold Aid”

Published

on

Steve Watson

Every politician in Washington is trying to manipulate Ukraine to their purposes.

Senator Rand Paul argued Sunday that President Trump is within his rights to to withhold aid from any country that he believes corruption is taking place in, and that charges of quid pro quo against the White House are misplaced.

Transcripts from the House impeachment inquiry have revealed that several administration officials believe Trump tied military aid for Ukraine to the nation opening investigations into Joe Biden and the 2016 election.

“I think we’ve gotten lost in this whole idea of quid pro quo,” Paul said on NBC’s “Meet The Press”.

“If you’re not allowed to give aid to people who are corrupt, there’s always contingencies on aid.” Paul continued.

“Even President Obama withheld aid, you know, he was supposed to give lethal aid. Congress said, ‘Give them $300 billion in lethal aid,’ and he sent them blankets.” Paul said.

“Presidents since the beginning of time have resisted Congress and there’s been this sort of back and forth jockeying over what is sent. But also, presidents have withheld aid before for corruption. I think it’s a mistake to say, ‘Oh, he withheld aid until he got what he wanted.'” The Senator added.

“If it’s corruption and he believes there to be corruption, he has every right to withhold aid,” Paul urged.

However, Paul, who will act as a juror in the Senate trial if Trump is impeached by the House, also argued that it is a “mistake” for the Trump administration to argue that the president didn’t engage in a quid pro quo.

“Every politician in Washington other than me, virtually, is trying to manipulate Ukraine to their purposes.” he said.

“Menendez tried it, Murphy tried it, Biden tried it, Trump’s tried it — they’re all doing it. They are all trying to manipulate Ukraine to get some kind of investigation, either end an investigation or start an investigation.” he declared.

Paul also noted that he opposes aid to Ukraine altogether.

“I wouldn’t give them the aid because we don’t have the money,” the senator said. “We have to actually borrow the money from China to send it to Ukraine, so I’m against the aid and I think it’s a mistake to do the aid so I wouldn’t have played any of these games.”

White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham has argued that the transcripts from the hearings actually exonerate Trump.

“These transcripts are actually … good for the president,” Grisham stated last week.

Continue Reading

Politics

Jury in Roger Stone Trial Packed With Pro-Obama, Anti-Trump Jurors

Judge in case tells media to leave, cuts live video feed to media room.

Published

on

The jury in the Roger Stone trial has been packed with anti-Trump jurors in a transparent conflict of interest as the judge in the case ordered the media to leave the court room.

As Tucker Carlson highlighted on his show last night, the judge in Stone’s case is Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee who is “transparently and aggressively political.”

Jackson has already prevented Stone from publicly defending himself in the case, allowing the media to continue to slander Stone without him being able to defend himself under threat of imprisonment.

Carlson said Jackson’s behavior in court has turned out to be “even more ludicrous and unprofessional,” rolling her eyes and snorting at Stone to suggest “he’s guilty before the trial even started.”

One of the prospective jurors turned out to be a former press secretary in the Obama administration who “despises Donald Trump and has friends in the federal prosecutors office which is trying the case.”

The potential juror absurdly claimed that she had followed the Mueller investigation closely but hadn’t heard of Stone and didn’t have a strong opinion on the issue.

Jackson refused to remove the woman from the jury pool, arguing, “personal conflicts were not automatically disqualifying.”

“What ought to be automatically disqualifying is Amy Berman Jackson behavior from the bench, no fair person could condone it,” said Carlson.

Sources close to the trial tell us that out of 82 prospective jurors, just two indicated that they were Republican and were immediately struck down out of hand.

Even one woman who had once worked for the Reagan administration was dismissed as a potential juror because of a supposed conflict of interest.

However, jurors who have worked under Obama or who have expressed their hatred for Trump have been selected with no qualms whatsoever.

The judge also held reporter Jacob Engels in contempt of court for trying to manipulate jury selection process by pointing out that former Obama employee had worked for Obama.

Jackson also reportedly told the media to leave the courtroom yesterday and then cut the live video feed to the media room.

Pro-Stone demonstrators are also not allowed anywhere near the courthouse yet activists from Right Wing Watch are allowed to be permanently on site and yell slurs at Stone.

Meanwhile, in a related story, Will Sommer over at the Daily Beast erroneously suggested Infowars was threatening jurors because “(Alex) Jones and his attorney were joined by a person dressed as the Grim Reaper and wielding a sickle,” during yesterday’s show.

In reality, the Grim Reaper character was related to a street stunt Jones was involved in regarding the “suicide” of Jeffrey Epstein and had nothing whatsoever to do the jurors in the Stone case.

null

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.

Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Trending