Meet Crazy Mazie Hirono: Subliterate Termagant, Subintellectual Laggard and Consummate Embarrassment
Leftist Activists Force Mastercard to Vote On Blacklisting The ‘Far Right’
By Chris Menahan
The ability to buy and sell goods and services may soon require folks to hold the “right” politically correct beliefs.
From Tim Pool:
Activist group “The Sum Of Us” has successfully forced Mastercard to hold a vote that would see the creation of a “human rights committee” to oversee who uses the Mastercard service.
The goal of the leftist activist group is to shut down access for ‘far right’ groups as well as politicians and activists. They stress that stopping to flow of income will stop people they do not agree with.
This may be the most dramatic escalation in the Culture War we have seen yet, the targeting of major financial institutions to shut down opposition. While it sounds noble to ban certain groups we do not like it won’t end there. Massive multi national corporations should not have the right to sever access to basic services based on bad opinions.
Far left social justice activists have pushed for restrictions and censorship and this news marks the most dramatic escalation we have seen yet.
More from Breitbart:
In its supporting statement, ThisIsUs wrote:
Companies can face risks related to human rights even when they only perform support functions. Internet infrastructure companies like web host GoDaddy, social media platform Facebook and payments firm PayPal have come under pressure for doing business with or providing a forum for neo-Nazis and other hate groups. Mastercard has received negative publicity for processing of payments to white supremacist groups. “Organizers Catch Credit Card Companies Profiting From White Supremacy: Online payment companies are complicit in authorizing transactions related to hate groups,” AlterNet, August 22, 2017; and “Color Of Change Is Attacking Hate Groups At The Source: Their Funding,” Fast Company, August 21, 2017. According to the website bloodmoney.org (accessed on December 18, 2018), Mastercard continues to process payments for organizations such as American Border Patrol, League of the South, Proud Boys and Stormfront.
In response, the board of Mastercard recommended that stockholders vote against the proposal, stating that the company operates on the principle that consumers should be able to make “all lawful purchases.”
The Proposal focuses on the use of our products by certain organizations. We operate our network on the principle that consumers should be able to make all lawful purchases, and our franchise rules ensure compliance with the laws pertaining to the acceptable use of our payment processing services by merchants, acquirers and issuers. We regularly monitor activities involving our products and services for any alleged illegal use. When we process payment transactions, we do not have visibility into goods that are purchased or the use of those goods. When we are made aware of illegal activity or rules violations, we work closely with law enforcement and acquirers to shut down those activities.
Accordingly, because Mastercard has a committee with oversight over issues of corporate social responsibility and has disclosed its commitment to and oversight of human rights issues, the Board does not believe that establishing a separate human rights committee is necessary to properly exercise its oversight of this important area, nor does it add to Mastercard’s existing commitment to social responsibility and human rights.Therefore, our Board recommends that our stockholders vote AGAINST this joint proposal.
Although Mastercard’s board says it is committed to the principle of allowing “all lawful purchases,” online payments platform Patreon says that Mastercard asked it to withdraw service from Islam critic Robert Spencer, founder of JihadWatch.org, in August 2018.
Mastercard has yet to respond to a Breitbart News inquiry into why, if Patreon’s allegation is true, the company used its influence to cut off Spencer.
Multiple cases with Mastercard, Chase Bank and Bank of America suggest these megabanks are already doing a “belief check.”
White House rips Mueller report in newly obtained DOJ letter
Published on May 2, 2019
COLLUSION: Liberal Media Was Tipped Off About Paul Joseph Watson Being Banned by Facebook Before He Was
May 2, 2019
As reported earlier today, Facebook announced that it had banned several high-profile conservative personalities from their platform for good, including an incoming ban on the Facebook-owned Instagram.
Milo Yiannopoulos, Laura Loomer, and all accounts related to Alex Jones or Infowars (including Paul Joseph Watson) were the main targets of Facebook’s latest purge and were labeled ‘dangerous’ by the social media giant.
To draw away from criticism about only banning pro-Trump figures, Facebook also claimed to be taking action against Louis Farrakhan, the Hitler-loving Nation of Islam leader.
The company alleges that all individuals or accounts engaged in the following behaviors, according to a statement given to pro-censorship CNN reporter Oliver Darcy.
The Facebook spokesperson said such factors include whether the person or organization has ever called for violence against individuals based on race, ethnicity, or national origin; whether the person has been identified with a hateful ideology; whether they use hate speech or slurs in their about section on their social media profiles; and whether they have had pages or groups removed from Facebook for violating hate speech rules.
Darcy, who himself has been personally involved in lobbying digital platforms to ban his political enemies, also claims that the company may end up banning accounts that share content related to any of the banned individuals.
Facebook tipped off the liberal media before they notified Paul Joseph Watson of his account being banned. Watson was banned — not because of his content — but because he works for Inforwars.
Paul tweeted out earlier.
Not likely.
Paul Joseph Watson’s YouTube videos and writings at Infowars are exceptional.
He has never come under fire for hate speech.
The Republican Party continues to be AWOL.
TUCKER RESPONDS TO BRIAN WILLIAMS FACT-CHECKING GRAHAM: ‘PLEASE, GET SOME SELF-AWARENESS’
“Just another fact-check from a guy suspended for lying.”
By Phillip Stucky
Fox News host Tucker Carlson responded to MSNBC’s Brian Williams’ decision to fact-check Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham’s speech during Attorney General William Barr’s Wednesday hearing on Capitol Hill.
“MSNBC, if you were watching, you may have noticed, could not contain its excitement during the Attorney General’s testimony. During the hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham noted quite correctly that Mueller’s report found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Brian Williams wouldn’t have it, they cut in to call Graham a liar,” Carlson began. (RELATED: Trump Lawyer Reads Directly From Mueller Report To Push Back Against Brian Williams)
“Just another fact-check from a guy suspended for lying. Nice guy, but please get some self-awareness. That wasn’t the only time something like that happened though today, an hour later they cut away again to say that Barr was a big fat liar, too,” he continued.
The Hill’s Joe Concha agreed, “Conforming to the hive, Tucker. Look, I’m a Jersey guy, he grew up down the New Jersey river, he is a nice guy by all accounts. The environment that he is in, he realizes that he has to give his audience comfort food, what they want to hear at this point.”
“And the scary part about that is that he could just pivot into being what he’s become now, which is completely and totally partisan,” Concha concluded. “Remember, he was the anchor, the NBC Nightly News for many many years. And he’s gone the full Dan Rather I would say. These guys were people that you trusted because there they are, CBS and NBC giving you the news and now instead they’ve gone completely and totally from one side to the left and they’ve destroyed legacies in the process, unfortunately.”
The segment came after Williams cut into both Graham’s and Barr’s testimony during Wednesday’s hearings to say that they were lying about the facts in the Mueller report.
“We’re reluctant to do this, we rarely do,” Williams said about interrupting the broadcast of the hearing. “The chairman of the Judiciary Committee just said that Mueller found there was no collusion. That is not correct.”
Graham asserted that Mueller reported no collusion occurred between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia, something Williams apparently disagreed with.
It wasn’t the first time Williams called Barr’s statements into question. In April, the MSNBC host called Barr “Baghdad Bill Barr,” a reference to an Iraqi Defense Minister known as “Baghdad Bob” who misstated Iraqi victories under Saddam Hussein.
“It’s already been mentioned around here — it would hearken back to a conflict decades ago — we would not be surprised if some headline writer somewhere came up somewhere with ‘Baghdad Bill Barr’ for what we saw today,” Williams claimed at the time.
Williams spent a great deal of time defending himself against claims of lying about his past when it came to light there were several stories that he reported on that were either complete fakes or greatly embellished.
NYT Confirms Hunter Biden Was Paid by Ukrainians While Father Was VP
By Rebecca Mansour
Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was paid for his work as a board member a Ukrainian oligarch-owned energy company while his father was vice president, the New York Times confirms.
According to the Times, Hunter Biden was paid “as much as $50,000 per month in some months” as a board member of Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm owned by a member of the Ukrainian oligarchy.
Vice President Biden was heavily involved in mediating U.S. policy towards the Ukraine. When a Ukrainian prosecutor launched a corruption investigation into the energy company Hunter Biden was board member of, Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees to the country if the Ukrainian government did not fire the prosecutor. As John Solomon of The Hill reported, Biden’s threat would have thrown the former Soviet republic into insolvency at a time when Ukraine was fending off threats from Vladimir Putin’s Russia.
In a speech last year before the Council on Foreign Relations, the former vice president bragged about his successful use of these strong-arm tactics to get the prosecutor fired, saying that he told the Ukrainians, “If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.” Biden then boasted, “Well, son of a bitch, he got fired.”
Kenneth Vogel and Iuliia Mendel report at the Times:
It was a foreign policy role Joseph R. Biden Jr. enthusiastically embraced during his vice presidency: browbeating Ukraine’s notoriously corrupt government to clean up its act. And one of his most memorable performances came on a trip to Kiev in March 2016, when he threatened to withhold $1 billion in United States loan guarantees if Ukraine’s leaders did not dismiss the country’s top prosecutor, who had been accused of turning a blind eye to corruption in his own office and among the political elite.
The pressure campaign worked. The prosecutor general, long a target of criticism from other Western nations and international lenders, was soon voted out by the Ukrainian Parliament.
Among those who had a stake in the outcome was Hunter Biden, Mr. Biden’s younger son, who at the time was on the board of an energy company owned by a Ukrainian oligarch who had been in the sights of the fired prosecutor general.
Hunter Biden was a Yale-educated lawyer who had served on the boards of Amtrak and a number of nonprofit organizations and think tanks, but lacked any experience in Ukraine and just months earlier had been discharged from the Navy Reserve after testing positive for cocaine. He would be paid as much as $50,000 per month in some months for his work for the company, Burisma Holdings.
The current Ukrainian general prosecutor, Yuriy Lutsenko, has reopened the corruption probe into Burisma Holdings, The Hill reports.
Hunter Biden’s involvement with the Ukrainian energy firm and his sweetheart deals with China’s communist regime while his father was vice president were exposed in Peter Schweizer’s bestselling book Secret Empires.
In an interview last month on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight, Schweizer explained, “Joe Biden was the Obama administration’s point-person on policy towards Ukraine. He steered $1.8 billion in aid to that government and while he was doing so, his son got a sweetheart deal with this energy company that — we’ve been able to trace over just a 14-month period — paid $3.1 million into an account where Hunter Biden was getting paid.”
“Suffice to say, Hunter Biden has no background in Ukraine,” Schweizer noted. “He has no background in energy policy. There’s really no legitimate explanation as to why he got this deal with this energy company, other than the fact his father was responsible for doling out money in Ukraine itself.”
“It’s a huge problem,” Schweizer added. “And it goes to this question of corruption and potential payoffs and bribes that these foreign entities were making to the Bidens in exchange for hopefully getting favorable treatment.”
‘Still salty about losing’: Twitter users stunned by Hillary calling for China to hack Trump
Hillary Clinton appeared on TV proposing China illegally hack into President Donald Trump’s tax returns, prompting Twitter users to question both her ability to move on from her presidential election defeat, and her sanity.
Clinton made the call on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show Wednesday night, suggesting Democratic 2020 presidential candidates should seek out the help of the “only other adversary of ours, who’s anywhere near as good as the Russians” to hack Trump’s tax returns.
Ignoring the outcome of the Mueller Report and doubling down on her years of unfounded accusations that Russia colluded with election rival Donald Trump, Clinton said: “Since Russia is clearly backing Republicans, why don’t we ask China to back us?”
“And not only that, China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?” Clinton continued, echoing comments by Trump in Florida during the 2016 campaign in which he asked if Russia might find Clinton’s deleted emails, but did not outright call for her to be hacked.
READ MORE: ‘Mind-bendingly bizarre’: Barr hearing shows ‘Russiagate’ still has hold on US politics
The fact that Clinton is still peddling a three-year-old ‘Russiagate’ conspiracy theory after it was debunked by the Mueller report, and calling for a foreign power to hack the US president, did not go unnoticed by Twitter commenters, including Kim Dotcom, who called the former secretary of state “salty.”
It appears Hillary was toeing the Clinton family line, as the comments come days after her husband and former US President Bill Clinton questioned how it would be received if a Democratic presidential candidate asked China to hack opponents during the 2020 election.
Tom's Blog 