For two days, much has been made of the storming of the U.S. Congress, with the left pointing the finger at President Trump and his supporters. Yet, strangely, these people don’t seem to care about the truth of the incident, such as why did the retired military woman and a Capitol police officer lose their lives? How many Antifa elements were mixed into the crowd? Who actually led the onslaught? Although lives were at stake, they did not offer their condolences to the two dead, and no one took a knee for them. Their real intention seems to be: to label many Trump supporters as “thugs” and “rebels” and use them to fight.
Recently, a series of events in the social media, online media and political circles have signaled a political purge by the left.
Social media block accounts to stifle freedom of expression
On the evening of Jan. 8, Twitter permanently suspended President Trump’s account, with the company posting, “After carefully reviewing recent tweets posted from Trump’s (Trump’s) account and the context of those tweets, we have permanently deactivated the account given the risk of further incitement to violence.”
The same day, Twitter also suspended the accounts of attorney Sidney Powell and General Flynn, a ban that appears to be permanent. Previously, on Jan. 6, Stop the Steal organizers Michael Coudrey and Ali Alexander were both banned from Twitter, and on Jan. 7, attorney Linwood’s Twitter account was removed.
Clearly, the target of the Twitter ban is clear – influential individuals and institutions that support President Trump and investigate election fraud.
On January 7, Facebook founder Zuckerberg posted that “President Trump is trying to use the rest of his term to impede the peaceful and legal transition of power to his successor, Joe Biden,” and that “we think it’s too risky to allow the president to continue using our services during this time. “. The company will therefore extend the block on its Facebook and Instagram accounts indefinitely, and may not unblock them until at least two weeks after a peaceful transfer of power.
Such a statement is highly puzzling, as President Trump has never encouraged violence to his supporters on Facebook or Twitter. He mentioned in a video released on Jan. 7 that he would shift his focus to a smooth, orderly and seamless transfer of power.
So what are the “risks” that Facebook is worried about? The answer, I’m afraid, is not violence, but more evidence and insider information about election fraud that could affect Biden’s inauguration.
At around 8 p.m. EST on January 8, a video news item posted on YouTube by NTD English Channel (NTD) was forcibly annotated: “The following content was deemed inappropriate or offensive to some viewers by the YouTube community,” and viewers were required to click again to watch it.
Netizen Vasiliy Penkov left a comment saying, “I am offended by the oil pipe calling this content offensive. ntd says it is what it is.” Cicel Clenci commented, “Censorship is a sign of communism.”
Left Media Intimidation Purge
On the evening of Jan. 7, the ABC News website published an article by Rick Klein and MaryAlice Parks with the subtitle “Until Wednesday, Republicans who indulged Trump seemed to pay little price. According to the authors, “The truth is, it’s easy to purge Trump. Cleaning up the movement he leads, or what he represents for so many Americans, would be another matter.”
Klein’s use of the word “cleansing,” reminiscent of Nazi ethnic cleansing and Soviet communist purges of dissidents, sparked controversy and criticism, and he later replaced it with “cleaning up,” though he kept the pre-update text in his Twitter postings.
Thus, it is clear that the left is not only targeting President Trump, but also eradicating the ideas and spirit shared by a large conservative population, which naturally includes traditional values, respect for American history, and the preservation of rights granted by the U.S. Constitution.
On the same day, Paul Krugman published a similar opinion piece in the New York Times titled “The Downside of Appeasement to the Fascist Trump.
Krugman calls Donald Trump and “many of his supporters” “fascists” and calls for an end to “appeasement” and an inability to “give in to fascism.
There are many holes in this professor’s presentation. For example, he claims that “many Republicans joined him in trying to reject the will of the electorate – nearly two-thirds of House Republicans voted against accepting Pennsylvania’s electors after a riot by Trump supporters.”
One, the truth about the congressional storming and whether it was a “riot” has yet to be investigated; two, not all of those who stormed Congress were “Trump supporters”; three, Republicans like President Trump questioned the rigging of the election and investigated it in order to preserve the rights of all Third, President Trump and other Republicans challenged the election as rigged and investigated it to protect the rights of all legal voters, in line with the wishes of the large number of voters who also challenged. Fourth, voting against accepting voters in a particular state has nothing to do with storming Congress; the two are separate events.
Krugman’s text both unleashes the killing spirit and exposes itself to the left’s fears: “You’re certainly worried – what Trump might do again between now and Inauguration Day. I’m certainly not the only one who’s worried that something will happen at the inauguration.
Even if the inauguration goes well, the threat is still there. If you think that once Biden is in the White House, the people who stormed the Capitol will go away, you’re delusional.”
This may be the deeper reason why the Democratic Party wants to impeach President Trump again and why the left wants to purge the pro-Trump public. Because of President Trump’s insistence on not conceding defeat and his efforts to restore the truth about the election; Trump supporters of all ethnicities reject the left’s socialist agenda – their presence is an ever-present threat to the left.
According to Krugman, “law enforcement should try to find ways to arrest those involved in Wednesday’s attack,” “anyone who tries to violently interfere with the transfer of power should also be arrested,” “there is a need to account for any crimes that have occurred in the last four years,” and “accountability for past actions is critical.”
These suggestions coincide with leftist journalist Jennifer Rubin’s call to “burn all Republicans. This is clearly not in the spirit of any American law. In the United States, the presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle, and one cannot arrest someone for “fear” of their behavior, or for their subjective assumptions about their “intentions”. How would an officer feel if he thought Krugman was “trying” to arrest him?
Republican lawmaker who challenged voter results threatened
On January 7, the Daily Mail published an article about the political purge of more than 100 Republican lawmakers who challenged the electoral results on January 6, including eight senators and 139 members of the House of Representatives. According to the report, they were labeled as “treasonous preppers”.
In the wake of the congressional storming, freshman Democratic Rep. Cori Bush (D-N.Y.) quickly drafted a bill asking Congress to “expel” Republican lawmakers who had publicly pledged to challenge electoral votes in the disputed state. She claimed that the Trump-supporting lawmakers were trying to “incite domestic terror attacks by overturning elections.
On Jan. 8, far-left Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) tweeted a call for the resignation of Senators Cruz and Hawley, accusing Cruz of starting a “riot” and saying that if he did not resign, “the Senate should If he doesn’t resign, “the Senate should expel him”.
But the problem is that those Republican lawmakers challenging the electoral votes of the disputed states is their right under the law, a perfectly legal act, and one that the voters who voted for them wanted or called on them to do. Therefore, no one other than the voters who voted them out of office has the authority to expel them for their lawful exercise of their legitimate rights.
On January 7, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley decided to sue publisher Simon & Schuster for canceling his publishing contract.
In response, Simon & Schuster said it canceled the contract because Hawley opposed electoral votes in certain states during a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6. In a statement, the company said, “As publishers, it is always our mission to spread a variety of voices and perspectives, but at the same time, we take seriously our larger public responsibility as citizens and cannot support Senator Hawley after his involvement in ‘dangerous threats. “
This statement contradicts and negates its stated mission of “spreading the voices and opinions”. What is a “dangerous threat”? How does the company prove that Senator Hawley was involved in a “dangerous threat”? Challenging electoral injustice and seeking to restore fairness to elections is a public responsibility for all voters. Is it possible that this publisher cannot support Hawley, but must support the party suspected of fraud?
On the evening of January 4, a group of Antifa members threatened Hawley’s wife and infant daughter in front of his Washington, DC home after he took the lead in publicly announcing his intention to challenge the Electoral College vote in several states on January 6.
Moral Kidnapping and Political Weapons
The above blocking, name-calling and attacks are déjà vu, and many of the tricks are the usual CCP tricks. Behind this Red Cultural Revolution atmosphere, one wonders if there is any CCP backing or backing.
The Communist Party is the best at purging dissidents. Now, the left’s “purge” agenda has been made possible by Biden’s congressional certification, and given superficial “legitimacy” by the bizarre congressional storming.
The January 6 congressional storming was characterized by the left as a “riot” or even a “terrorist attack” without investigation, and they went a step further by smearing many Trump supporters (actually conservative voters) as “thugs They went a step further and slandered many Trump supporters (actually conservative voters) as “thugs” and “traitors” who wanted to overturn the election results, in order to divert attention from the investigation of election fraud. Morally abducted, some people have retreated or gone along with the trend in an attempt to be “politically correct.
For more than two months, in the ups and downs of the U.S. election, the widespread degradation of the U.S. political, judicial, and media sectors has been on display at every level, to the point of shock. Despite the overwhelming evidence of election fraud, investigations and revelations of this major crime have encountered numerous obstacles, and whistleblowers, witnesses, lawyers, and legislators have been harassed, threatened, and dismissed from their positions, and other injustices have been committed, turning right and wrong upside down.
At this time, when a bigger storm is brewing, the perseverance for conscience and justice is even more valuable. All politicians and people from all walks of life who put aside their personal gains and losses and persist in challenging election fraud without fear of intimidation deserve deep admiration.
At present, some people are undermining the rule of law under the banner of democracy, selling out American interests under the banner of patriotism, blocking speech under the banner of freedom, and planning persecution under the banner of equality. How can this “heal the wounds” and “reshape the soul of America”? What kind of prospect will this bring to the United States is really worrying and makes people reflect.
Recent Comments