Xi Jinping must get along great with Jao Bai Din.

China is flexing it’s muscle. Don’t believe me, just look at Davos.

The atmosphere this time around was no less surreal, at least at first glance. What is the strongman leader of the largest communist nation in the world doing headlining the premier event for the world’s free-trading liberal internationalist elite?

China is positioning itself the world's new exchange currency. They seem to feel that with Biden in office, they have a much better change of achieving their goals.

All in all, the script was thin on policy specifics and thick on textbook platitudes about globalization, as is often the case with WEF speeches. What will prove more important than what was said will be the message sent by Xi’s appearance. Davos has always been a primarily European event, and the Chinese premier was flanked this year by heavyweights such as French President Emmanuel Macron and outgoing Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel, as if symbolic of the growing ties between the EU and China.

In short, Xi wants the world to believe that it is now China, not the U.S., that forms the linchpin of the international order. He is warning Joe Biden to keep well away from Donald Trump’s belligerence, lest the Biden administration be discredited in the eyes of the kinds of people who would attend Davos.

What might a Chinese-led international order look like? According to Xi, it is one free of “ideological prejudice.” In other words: worry less about tyranny or totalitarianism and focus on keeping the gravy train running. That line surely got an extra round of applause out of Klaus Schwab.

Here's the video of the Chinese professor explaining how the Chinese government has people at the top of the U.S. "core inner circle."

All of this points to something I mentioned in 2011. It all comes down to who holds the Exchange Currency.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

Amazon is worried about the union votes being performed by mail-in ballot, instead of being done in person. I wonder why that is?

Amazon.com Inc. is asking the National Labor Relations Board to consider having workers vote in person -- rather than by mail -- on a proposal to form a union at an Alabama warehouse.

The company formally requested a postponement of the vote so the labor regulator can reconsider its earlier ruling. Under the current plan, workers will have most of the next two months to vote by mail.

A group of workers at Amazon’s Bessemer, Alabama, warehouse filed paperwork in November for an election to decide whether to be represented by the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, a rare step for workers at a company whose U.S. workforce isn’t unionized. The NLRB, which oversees union votes, earlier this month said the vote would be conducted by mail, citing standards set up during the pandemic to keep workers and staffers safe.

The world’s largest online retailer said that a mail election raised the risk of fraud and the coercion of workers. It also said the process would depress turnout, arguing that as many as 29% of its more than 5,800 employees eligible to vote wouldn’t do so or would return incorrectly completed ballots.

You can't make this stuff up.

For a full year, all we've heard about in the news is how safe and secure mail-in voting is. Not just states in the U.S., but how safe mail-in voting is as a concept. When it's obvious to anyone paying attention that mail-in voting is NOT safer and more secure than in-person voting. But don't pay attention to logic and facts, just listen to what we tell you, and believe what we tell you.

Remember. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has released a statement about the integrity of the elections and the voting machines used in the election. They state, "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised." Of course they didn't mention anything about mail-in voting in their statement, after all that's not cyber security related.

The people at Amazon know that the mail-in votes are subject to fraud --they have admitted it, that's why they are pushing against it. Amazon has a stake in keeping the union OUT of Amazon warehouses. Collective bargaining agreements always cost the employer more money, so it's understandable why Amazon want's to keep the union out.

But I thought the left is always pro-union? Leftists never operate like "good" leftists when their own interests are at stake.

Just another illustration of absurdity.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

Trump won because conservatives were fed up with the Republican Party. Trump won because people knew that Washington was not working for them.

Conservatives were tired of Republicans eloquently telling them --what they were never actually going to do.

The left doesn't have this problem. The left can go further to the left and it's NOT going to hurt them. The Bernie Bros are never going to vote for a Republican, Libertarian, or Conservative.

Democrat representatives for the most part follow through with their promises. They aren't scared to push and push endlessly to try and get what THEY want (I emphasis “they” because their constituents usually don’t know what leftist goals truly entail). Democrat politicians don't have to worry about what they say and when. With the help of the media the Democrat base doesn't pay attention to what the Democrat politicians are SAYING only what they are ACTUALLY DOING.

The majority of Americans who vote for leftists actually live their own lives rather conservatively, they don't want their own small children watching R-Rated movies and men using the women's restroom. We all know that there is a very small minority of people who actually think that's a good idea.

The Republicans have the opposite problem. The Republican base DOES pay attention. Republican voters notice when people commit double-speak and start to contradict themselves. Because of this, Republicans are held to a much higher standard by their constituency. This is why the Republican Party needed Trump.

Trump suffered less from his contradictions because he actually accomplished things. Republicans forgave Trump for the things he said and didn’t do --because of the things that he DID do.

I experienced this when talking with a far-left person at work. He lives his life conservatively but voted for Joe Biden and always votes for leftist candidates. When arguing, he sounds like a conservative complaining about a leftist candidate only he's talking about Trump. He sees all of the contradictions that Trump has said over time and points them out --while I am focused on all of the things Trump has accomplished.

We’re arguing the exact same points from two different sides, BUT IN THE EXACT SAME WAY! I suppose it’s just human nature, but it brings me to my next point.

I don’t know if Trump thought all of this through and was truly playing “4D chess.” I don’t believe that. I believe it’s simpler than that. It’s keeping people focused on what you want them focused on. Directing their focus is how you get elected. Convincing enough people that what you are proposing will actually become reality. That’s where Republicans have failed for years now, largely because they haven’t been getting anything done. Even when they had the ability to do so. Republican voters called their bluff.

It's the same way Obama was elected. He had an incredible ability to convince people that he was onboard with what THEY were proposing, when in reality, he was never going to implement any of their ideas. He just made people feel comfortable that he would.

On the face of it, there is nothing overwhelmingly stirring about Sen. Obama. There is a cerebral quality to him, and an air of detachment. He has eloquence, but within bounds. After nearly two years on the trail, the audience can pretty much anticipate and recite his lines. The political genius of the man is that he is a blank slate. The devotees can project onto him what they wish. The coalition that has propelled his quest -- African-Americans and affluent white liberals -- has no economic coherence. But for the moment, there is the illusion of a common undertaking -- Canetti's feeling of equality within the crowd. The day after, the crowd will of course discover its own fissures. The affluent will have to pay for the programs promised the poor. The redistribution agenda that runs through Mr. Obama's vision is anathema to the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and the hedge-fund managers now smitten with him. Their ethos is one of competition and the justice of the rewards that come with risk and effort. All this is shelved, as the devotees sustain the candidacy of a man whose public career has been a steady advocacy of reining in the market and organizing those who believe in entitlement and redistribution.

A creature of universities and churches and nonprofit institutions, the Illinois senator, with the blessing and acquiescence of his upscale supporters, has glided past these hard distinctions. On the face of it, it must be surmised that his affluent devotees are ready to foot the bill for the new order, or are convinced that after victory the old ways will endure, and that Mr. Obama will govern from the center. Ambiguity has been a powerful weapon of this gifted candidate: He has been different things to different people, and he was under no obligation to tell this coalition of a thousand discontents, and a thousand visions, the details of his political programs: redistribution for the poor, postracial absolution and "modernity" for the upper end of the scale.

It was no accident that the white working class was the last segment of the population to sign up for the Obama journey. Their hesitancy was not about race. They were men and women of practicality; they distrusted oratory, they could see through the falseness of the solidarity offered by this campaign. They did not have much, but believed in the legitimacy of what little they had acquired. They valued work and its rewards. They knew and heard of staggering wealth made by the Masters of the Universe, but held onto their faith in the outcomes that economic life decreed. The economic hurricane that struck America some weeks ago shook them to the core. They now seek protection, the shelter of the state, and the promise of social repair. The bonuses of the wizards who ran the great corporate entities had not bothered them. It was the spectacle of the work of the wizards melting before our eyes that unsettled them.

It's worth noting that that last paragraph was the group that Donald Trump attracted. It was because he said things without ambiguity.

Even if he didn't do everything he set out to do, he did do, what I consider to be the most important thing of all.

THE BIGGEST THING THAT TRUMP HAS ACCOMPLISHED IS TO PROVE THAT THE POLITICIANS IN WASHINGTON ARE LARGELY FRAUDS! Trump has been able to turn things around in just a few years, when Washington politicians have been complaining, and promising to fix them for as long as I can remember 30+ years. That's why he must go, and I believe that's why Republicans and Democrats would like to see him gone. The "Swamp" is flooded with politicians from both parties. The Swamp exists entirely on broken promises. Trump broke the first rule of The Swamp, actually getting things done.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

I find it interesting that so many leftists are attacking Mike Lindell. Moveon.org is calling for a petition to get more people to boycott of MyPillow, Mike Lindell’s product line.

The CEO of MyPillow, supports thee racist, sexist, and homophobic policies of Donald Trump When you purchase his products, you support those policies. A nation-wide boycotted, must be initiated to protest by strong NON-violent means. Do not patronise this company.

There’s a Facebook page dedicated to boycotting MyPillow.

Now you have a major retailors removing Mike’s products from their shelves.

Lindell has maintained that fraud led to President Donald Trump's losing the election in November. He has used his Twitter account, where he has nearly 474,000 followers, and the MyPillow account to specifically spread falsehoods that machine voter fraud led to President-elect Joe Biden's victory.

Claims of voter fraud have been widely rejected.

Election experts have uniformly declared that the 2020 election was conducted fairly. A union of every senior federal and state official who oversaw the election declared it “the most secure in American history."

There is one simple thing to take from this. I understand that Dominion is suing Mike Lindell, that’s the response you would expect. But that’s not where this stops. If it were simply a matter of Mike spreading false information, the lawsuit would suffice. But the leftists don’t stop there, they’re trying to destroy his business. Why go so far?

It’s odd that people are cheering this. Because right now it’s Mike Lindell, is there any doubt that they won’t do the same thing to private citizens?

In fact, they’re already setting up for that right now, calling for an army of citizens to monitor and report Trump supporters.

The greatest threat facing America today comes from within: radical extreme conservatives, also known as domestic terrorists. They’re hidden among us, disguised behind regular jobs. They are your children’s teachers. They work at supermarkets, malls, doctor’s offices, and many are police officers and soldiers.

“I’m proposing we form a citizen army,” he says. “Our weapons will be computers and cell phones. We who are monitoring extremists on the internet and reporting their findings to authorities.”

Outrageously, the clip then compares this “army of citizens” against Trump supporters to the monitoring and discovery of arch-terrorist Osama bin Laden.

“No one in #TrumpsNewArmy should be given a pass,” he wrote in one tweet while clarifying in another that members of “Trump’s New Army” include Sen. Ted Cruz, Sen. Josh Hawley and GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert.

Many on the left have already begun promoting the clip and encouraging viewers to sign on.

This is where we are headed as a country. All the talk of "unity" is a false narrative. There will only be "unity" when all of the conservatives have been silenced.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

I've seen a lot of bizarre things as of late, but none as bizarre as this.

"FBI Vetting Guard Troops in DC amid Fears of Insider Attack."

U.S. defense officials say they are worried about an insider attack or other threat from service members involved in securing President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration, prompting the FBI to vet all of the 25,000 National Guard troops coming into Washington for the event.

This is very bizarre indeed.

Insider threats have been a persistent law enforcement priority in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. But in most cases, the threats are from homegrown insurgents radicalized by al-Qaida, the Islamic State group or similar groups. In contrast, the threats against Biden’s inauguration have been fueled by supporters of President Donald Trump, far-right militants, white supremacists and other radical groups. Many believe Trump’s baseless accusations that the election was stolen from him, a claim that has been refuted by many courts, the Justice Department and Republican officials in key battleground states.

The FBI is seriously more worried about Trump supporters than al-Qaida or the Islamic State?

Let that sink in. The FBI is more worried about a U.S. President being attacked by a "Trump supporter" than a foreign adversary? Why is it that the FBI believes that Biden's true enemies are Americans?

It gets even more bizarre!

Joe Biden's inauguration ceremony will be covered by a security company, that Uncle Sam is paying handsomely, to keep the President-elect safe -- and by the looks of everything they're equipped to do, he'll be in good hands.

TMZ obtained federal procurement docs that show the Secret Service has hired a company called Showcall Security Services to help out with the inauguration in January. The company scored a $7.5 million contract for the job ... and it sounds like they'll be worth every dime of taxpayer money.

That being said, it was Osama bin Laden who was plotting to assassinate Obama -- because he believed that Joe Biden would "lead the U.S. into a crisis."

Before his death, Osama bin Laden boldly commanded his network to organize special cells in Afghanistan and Pakistan to attack the aircraft of President Obama and Gen. David H. Petraeus.

“The reason for concentrating on them,” the al-Qaeda leader explained to his top lieutenant, “is that Obama is the head of infidelity and killing him automatically will make [Vice President] Biden take over the presidency. . .Biden is totally unprepared for that post, which will lead the U.S. into a crisis. As for Petraeus, he is the man of the hour. . .and killing him would alter the war’s path” in Afghanistan.

Does anyone think that Biden is "more prepared" to be president now?

It looks like we now have Osama bin Laden's first choice for the next U.S. President -- because he's a hapless fool.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.