
Welcome to medical tyranny…


One of the weirder stories from last year involved a gargantuan FBI honeypot operation designed to catch crooks all over the world. According to Motherboard, that operation had a bigger imprint in the U.S. than originally believed.
During “Operation Trojan Shield,” the feds used a secret relationship with an encrypted phone company, called Anom, which sold devices exclusively to career criminals looking for a secure way to communicate with one another. The product’s developer, who had previously been busted for drug trafficking, agreed to act as a high-level federal informant and for at least two years sold devices to criminals while also secretly cooperating with authorities. Meanwhile the FBI, along with its international partners, intercepted all of the communications, which allowed them to capture evidence of widespread criminal malfeasance on a global scale.
It made for one helluva weird story when the bureau finally revealed what it had been up to last June, and “Shield” led to the arrest of hundreds of alleged criminals in countries all around the world—many of which are accused of using the phones to organize drug trafficking and other forms of organized crime. The arrests continue to this day.
Byrd made a point to note that he had been investigated by several law enforcement agencies and was exonerated by the federal government for his actions when he appeared on “NBC Nightly News” with Lester Holt.
“There’s an investigative process and I was cleared by the DOJ, and FBI and Metropolitan Police,” he told Holt this past August.
According to several sources and documents reviewed by RealClearInvestigations, Byrd never conducted a formal interview with any law enforcement agency.
Byrd did answer questions about the shooting from Holt, alleging that he gave Babbitt a warning before firing. but these details were likely never shared with investigators because Byrd refused to answer their questions.


A recent study published in American Political Science Review, a quarterly peer-reviewed academic journal published by Cambridge University, begins with a teasing question: “Is authoritarian power ever legitimate?”
For many, the answer is clearly no, concedes the study’s author—Ross Mittiga, an assistant professor of political theory at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile. But Mittiga, in the abstract to the study, suggests otherwise:
“While, under normal conditions, maintaining democracy and rights is typically compatible with guaranteeing safety, in emergency situations, conflicts between these two aspects of legitimacy can and often do arise. A salient example of this is the COVID-19 pandemic, during which severe limitations on free movement and association have become legitimate techniques of government. Climate change poses an even graver threat to public safety. Consequently, I argue, legitimacy may require a similarly authoritarian approach.”
The study caught the eye of Alexander Wuttke, a Twitter user who studies political behavior at the University of Mannheim in Germany.
“In my reading, it explicitly argues that we must put climate action over democracy and adopt authoritarian governance if democracies fail to act on climate change,” tweeted Wuttke.
In an extensive thread, Wuttke explained why he disagrees with Mittiga.
“I am genuinely puzzled about the origins of this anti-democratic intuition that seems to give rise to the entire endeavor of exploring whether we should sacrifice democracy for the sake of a higher good,” Wuttke says at one point. “The article argues that crises not only can legitimize but may require authoritarian governance. This is not true. Democracies have fought the pandemic without giving up being democratic.”
The Boston Police department has been robbing citizens of their cash — many of whom were never accused of a crime — to buy surveillance technology off the books, to spy on citizens.
As their report points out, an August investigation by WBUR and ProPublica found that even if no criminal charges are brought, law enforcement almost always keeps the money and has few limitations on how it’s spent. Some departments benefit from both state and federal civil asset forfeiture. The police chiefs in Massachusetts have discretion over the money, and the public has virtually no way of knowing how the funds are used.
Boston cops have stolen so much money that they are secretly buying more expensive gear to seemingly get better at stealing money. According to the report:
[I]n 2019 the Boston Police Department bought the device known as a cell site simulator — and tapped a hidden pot of money that kept the purchase out of the public eye.
A WBUR investigation with ProPublica found elected officials and the public were largely kept in the dark when Boston police spent $627,000 on this equipment by dipping into money seized in connection with alleged crimes.
Because this spy equipment was bought with funds stolen from citizens, not even the Boston city council knew police had it.
Boston city councilors interviewed by WBUR said they weren’t aware that the police had bought a cell site simulator. Councilor Ricardo Arroyo, who represents Mattapan, Hyde Park and Roslindale, said, “I couldn’t even tell you, and I don’t think anybody on the council can necessarily tell you … how these individual purchases are made.”
Only because ProPublica obtained the documents, does anyone know the department is using stingray devices to spy on citizens. So much for transparency.
On March 16, 2020, the Trump administration released a 15-day plan to slow the spread of the coronavirus in the US. That was 663 days ago. We are now nearly two years, 2 presidents, 6 trillion dollars, and countless stolen rights into slowing the spread.
Over the last two years, one of the largest power grabs in the history of the world has taken place as fearful citizens willingly surrendered their rights to the state for the promise of safety. But that safety never came and it never will.
What did come, however, was a slew of arbitrary and often ridiculous mandates and decrees from politicians who think that government force can stop a pandemic. Despite the economically devastating draconian lockdowns that killed countless small businesses, vaccine passports, and mask mandates, COVID-19 returned — with a vengeance.
One of the most heavily vaccinated places on the planet, with the strictest vaccine mandates in the country, New York City, accounted for nearly 10% of all cases in the U.S. But that is not all. Even as states across the country continue to close schools, force citizens to wear masks and fire people for refusing the jab, the U.S. set a record for the highest daily case count in the entire world — at 1 million.
The Washington State Board of Health may soon amend state law to authorize the involuntary detainment of residents as young as 5 years old in Covid-19 “internment camps” for failing to comply with the state’s experimental vaccine mandate.
WAC 246-100-040, a proposed revision to include Covid protocol under the state’s Communicable and Certain Other Diseases act, outlines “Procedures for isolation or quarantine.” The measure would allow local health officers at “his other sole discretion” to “issue an emergency detention order causing a person or group of persons to be immediately detained for purposes of isolation or quarantine.”
Health officers are required to provide documentation proving unvaccinated residents subject to detention have denied “requests for medical examination, testing, treatment, counseling, vaccination, decontamination of persons or animals, isolation, quarantine and inspection and closure of facilities” prior to involuntarily confinement in quarantine facilities, the resolution states.
The amended law would also allow health officers to deploy law enforcement officials to assist with the arrest of uncompliant Washington residents.

You must be logged in to post a comment.