Media Mockingbird – The Battery That Never Dies

Once again the bizarre rhetoric from the New York Times defies logic or reason.  They state that,  “While President Trump has described the wall’s progress, not a single mile of extended wall has been constructed since he took office.”  The statement is true, but it purports to denounce Trump, his statements, and twist reality into some sort of negative afront. What it does accomplish is this subconscious inciting of anger.

The budget that was in place only allowed for remediation to the existing wall.  And that is how Trump spent the money.  Legally.  Since then, yes he has hit a proverbial wall in attempting to extract, redistribute, funds from other areas in favor of ‘finishing what was initiated by Bush and Obama’.  That is – the point.

Over and over again there are multiple memes in which Obama, Hillary, Billy, and even Schumer are on record denouncing illegal immigration and firmly espousing the need for a wall.  And appropriations were made in order to erect what we have in place.

But it is insufficient. Obviously.   Or we wouldn’t continue to have a problem – Houston…

While Congressional members continue to claim their paychecks despite the government shutdown, the working people, the laborers are left dry, not because Trump called for the shutdown, but because from a business point of view, the Democrats refuse to acknowledge what it means to negotiate, compromise, and act like professionals.

Even Communist China understands that sticking point!

But many in Congress have never held a real job, they have no understanding of the real world.  Negotiation and strategy are foreign concepts.  I remember having a argument with my youngest son’s teacher who then called for backup, a board, to address my concerns. They sat eight to one.  My son had left his homework in his locker, the teacher refused to allow him to get it in order to turn it in, and instead gave him a zero.  Their argument?  They were teaching him a lesson in how the real world would react in a business environment.  A. none of them had ever worked in a business environment.   B.  If a subordinate left the power point presentation in his office down the hall, would his boss refuse to allow him to obtain it and present it before the client?  Of course NOT!  What an idiotic rationale.  But that is the same attitude we are now facing with the Pelosi/Schumer Democrats.

In a nutshell, what most people understood when they voted for Trump was that a career politician would do – nothing.  We did and do understand that the incredible depth of The Swamp can not be obliterated in minutes, months, or two years.   We understand that the world does not revolve around our agenda, as in the Me, I generation.   And we understand that we are NOT the center of the universe.

Pelosi’s strategy is to say she will give nothing $0, and could care less about the fact that this serves no one except her ego, her house compound, her personal wall.

But it isn’t just Democrats who are the negative naysayers, conservative, Ann Coulter, has been less than supportive, claiming the glass isn’t half full or half empty, but nonexistent.   She represents the naysayers, the doom and gloom, highly critical of everything, and completely unable to be ‘pleased’.  You can’t even begin to converse or have a dialogue with that kind of attitude. And I see it in the Liberal dialogue endlessly.

As such, the House is now drooling for Trump to use Department of Defense funding, or claim a National Emergency, so they can pounce, scratch, rip, tear, and devour – Trump. It has nothing to do with the Wall, which they have all previously supported, and everything to do with trying to force Trump into a corner that gives them cause for impeachment.

It all goes back to the Clintons.  Revenge. Vengeance.  Clinton wasn’t impeached because he was set up, or because Congress daily tried antagonized him, verbally assault him, and force him to have sex with his interns and visit Epstein Island for hookups.   He acted freely on his egocentric testosterone grid and tripped himself up.   But the Clintons don’t see it that way.  They see blood.  Hillary lost, and she has no intention of not punishing the victor.

The country is angry! Divided!  And the media continues to stoke the flame over and over again. That is the Mockingbird.

Enter Ocasio, a nobody from a nothing District, who has the mental capacity of a frog.  Yet she manages to make front page in the mainstream media daily.  Why? Because she generates rage, she stokes anger, incites violence, and is calling for an actionable civil war.

And thus, the Media and Wiley Mittens Romney, turn with glazed popping eyeballs and – blame Trump. The idea is that most Americans are too stupid to realize they are being mind manipulated and will froth at the mouth until blind violence is all they see.  Civil War within the US is the end game.  The Arab Spring, the EU Spring, the US Spring, the provocation of China, the destruction of Venezuela, and Russia is left, the last man standing. How?  Because Soros and the Rothschilds can’t get a foothold in the country in order to stoke their demise.  They hate Russia.  But because they didn’t get the opportunity to infiltrate their schools and indoctrinate their youth, Russia is still immune.

The good news?

Mexico has a new President who is determined to stem the caravans and illegal immigrants.  Eastern Europe is growing ever stronger modeling after Trump’s sovereignty, Brazil has a new President who is seemingly pro-Trump, and more and more across the globe people are shaking off this mental warfare and seeing the Truth.

UN Migration Pact: Ponzi Scam

While speaking before the UN General Assembly, Germany’s Merkel made an interesting announcement:  If 2/3rds of the UN member states, totaling 193, vote for the Migration Pact, then The Pact will be adopted for ALL member states and will become legally binding.   To date, there are not nearly enough countries that have opted out.  Therefore, the only way to not be subject to the law of the Pact, would be to completely drop out of the UN.  There are only three countries that are non-members:  Vatican City, Kosovo, and Palestine.

On December 19th, the final vote will determine whether this Migration rule of law will proceed.

The legal issue is inserted because of the new definition of migration – Human Right.  Therefore, while the pact loosely states it is non-binding, in fact the rule of law would pursue a violation of Human Rights against a country that does not comply.   Brought before the International Criminal Court, the UN and its court can recommend sanctions, and demand reparations for ‘victims’.  Acting as a mega-NGO, the UN could create a class-action of migrants that were disallowed into states that refused, and order those UN member states to pay off the migrant for violating his/her Human Right to migrate.

In addition, anyone, including the media, who thereafter references ‘illegal migration’ can be charged with criminal hate speech and subject to jail and fines.

A few days ago, the Leader of the latest Mexican Caravan demanded $50,000 for every migrant that came to Tijuana and was not permitted into the US.  Currently, that would be considered extortion.  Under ICC law, the UN could impose those fees and redefine them as reparation once the Migration Pact becomes law.

The members this UN/NGO would likely target first would be those who refused to sign;  US, Italy, Hungary, Austria, Poland, Australia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Israel, Switzerland, and Slovakia.

While the Pact claims to be non-binding, the UN gives itself the power to ‘collectively manage’ migration for all countries so as to protect human rights whereby ‘illegal’ immigration no longer exists as borders are open to anyone and everyone.  While the UN claims that member states must still ‘manage borders in an integrated, secure and coordinated manner,” and to ‘increase legal certainty and predictability of migration procedures,’ they are assuring that they, the UN, have no monetary responsibility to assure that borders are orderly.  Nor will they have any financial responsibility to send immigrants to their designated country, those costs would be born by the country’s taxpayers.

Both the Pope and the UN Special Rapporteur, Felipe Morales, have stated that the US needs to buck up and take in anyone and everyone or face charges… given security should not over-shadow Human Rights.

Bottom Line:  this is classic legal double-speak which means that a country is not bound to accept immigrants, however, if they don’t, they may be subject to Criminal Human Rights Violation Charges by the ICC and subject to whatever monetary and other outcomes this court determines.