The Article below was share by Jack Maxey and Translated by Google Translate.
(Kyiv/Washington) Things are not always what they appear or what interested parties want them to appear. More than ever in a troubled time like the present, critical thinking is required, also and especially from Catholics, also from priests. It becomes questionable when a counterpart repeats almost verbatim what was heard on the television news the night before, but remains inaccessible to other arguments that were not heard there. Supervised thinking as driven by mainstream-Media happens, while convenient, is not an acceptable form of information gathering. In order to sharpen vigilance, this should be shown with a concrete example with a current reference, because it also has to do with Ukraine, where violence is currently reigning. The fact that it came to this has indirectly to do with the example. In contrast to the mainstream , however, no opinion should be given here, but rather the need to be awakened, to question, to examine oneself and perhaps also to recognize and admit to oneself that and how it is manipulated, that one might have been manipulated oneself, in order to be immune to it in the future to be.
The shock of Trump's election victory, which changed a lot
In November 2016, Donald Trump was surprisingly elected US President, with the establishmenthad not counted, neither the republican nor the democratic one. The same in the transatlantic satellite states is also linked to this establishment and is constantly being forced to adapt. The fight against this election victory began the day after the election. It happened on two levels. Trump had previously been widely discredited throughout the primary and election campaign in an attempt to make him appear unelectable, even “impossible” in the eyes of the public. However, this strategy did not bear fruit in the USA. In Europe, on the other hand, more, as surveys have shown. Proof that opinion control in Europe is more firmly established and more densely developed. This fact should be reason enough to listen carefully and to subject the media landscape and one's own media consumption to a critical examination. Above all, there is the question of the credibility scale. To understand why aMainstream media presents consumers with what and how, it is necessary to know who owns or controls the medium and what interests are associated with it.
After Trump's election victory, the strategy changed: on one level, the new president was attacked directly in order to impede his ability to act and to boycott his term; on the other level, structural interventions should prevent an election victory like Trump's from being repeated. The latter happens mainly through the censorship of the internet. After the election of Barack Obama in 2008, the Internet was celebrated as an instrument with which real “grassroots democracy” could finally be realised. At least that's what the mainstream told people. After Donald Trump's election victory, the blame was placed on the Internet, which was "dangerous" and "subversive" because it was not controlled. Since then, ever more radical censorship measures have been established in order to force social networks in particular under the same control of the establishment that the classic mainstream media are already subject to. The censorship is arbitrary and is aimed at political opponents and undesirable opinions, whether in the 2020 US election campaign, whether on Corona... Censorship can be applied at will.
Trump's statements on Biden's Ukraine connection
The main obstacle to Trump's tenure was a special investigation into "interfering with the US election campaign" in 2016. A rigged robber's gun that ended in naught against Trump, as honest observers had predicted, but kept the President under a constant charge that continuously propagated by the mainstream media.
Trump has also been accused of wanting material from Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has been in office since 2019, to discredit Joe Biden, who was Trump's opponent in the 2020 presidential election and is now the current US President. The mainstream media , 95 percent opposed to Trump in the US, made a scandal out of it. Trump tried to do something shameful, namely to construct “false allegations” against Biden and to introduce Ukraine into the US election campaign.
Trump had claimed that the Biden family in Ukraine was personally enriched thanks to Joe Biden's vice presidency. In plain language: the state office had been misused for private interests. A legally and morally reprehensible act that also has very concrete political effects on the relationship between the USA and the country, in this case Ukraine. The Democrats around Biden and the mainstream that supports himreacted indignantly, denied everything and counterattacked. They claimed everything was a lie to harm Biden. The phone conversation between Trump and Zelenskyy when Trump inquired about Biden's business in Ukraine was intercepted by a secret service and played publicly.
It was known that Biden's son Hunter Biden had received a consulting contract with the state-owned Ukrainian gas company Burisma under Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, which brought him a whopping $ 50,000 a month. But why does the son of a US vice president get such a consulting contract in Ukraine? consultant for what? The consulting contract no longer exists because father Biden ran for the presidency, but Hunter Biden is said to continue to collect for every cubic meter of gas that flows through the pipelines through Ukraine to the west - Russian gas, by the way, that flows through the pipelines through Ukraine and for its transit to Burismamust be paid.
The Obama/Biden administration (2009-2017) was very active in its anti-Russian policies in Ukraine. First by separating Ukraine from the historically close economic ties with Russia and its reorientation to the west, then directly by supporting the Maidan coup in 2014 and installing a US-friendly president, in the transition Oleksandr Turchynov, then the aforementioned Poroshenko.
Are counter trades running? Not only political, but also private nature? Was it something in return?
Will it come to light a year after Biden's inauguration?
Trump was portrayed as a liar trying to rig the election in 2020, but a year after Biden was inaugurated as US President, even leading US media outlets that supported Biden's campaign and discredited Trump are now raising allegations of corruption against Biden's son, including this the most important medium of the left-liberal establishment, the New York Times . Hunter Biden hid money he received in Ukraine from the US IRS. According to the allegations, it is not only about possible tax evasion, but also about the dubious origin of the money.
Biden Sr., who is the extension of the establishment in US politics and thus globally , has always had the reputation of being a fairly unscrupulous lobbyist. And so back to what Trump tried unsuccessfully to uncover in 2020 - due to the short time until the election date - and now seems to be coming to light.
In January 2018, Joe Biden, the Democratic Party 's presidential nominee , addressed a very select circle, the Council on Foreign Relations . This is the oldest of the most influential power circles in existence, founded by the Rockefeller family in the 1920 'syears of the last century. In these circles, influence is bundled and exercised. It was a conversation moderated by Richard Haass, Chairman of the CFR. The event apparently served to strengthen the influential mentors in their belief that he, Biden, was the right candidate for the US presidency. Biden boasted (see video, from min. 52.14) that he traveled to Kyiv as US Vice President in 2016 to force the removal of the Ukrainian Attorney General Viktor Shokin.
Shokin, which Biden didn't say, was investigating Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company with which Biden Junior also did deals (and counter-deals), in a corruption scandal at the time. Shokin had made a name for himself as an anti-corruption investigator since 1998 and was appointed Prosecutor General of Ukraine by Poroshenko in early 2015 and a few days later a member of Ukraine's National Security Council .
Biden explained to the invited guests that he had traveled to Ukraine as Vice President with a billion dollars in US taxpayer money to support the US-friendly Poroshenko government:
“I remember convincing our [US government] team, our executives, that we should provide loan guarantees. And I went to Kyiv, I think, for the twelfth or thirteenth time. And I was to announce that there would be another $1 billion tranche. And I had received a promise from [President] Poroshenko and [Prime Minister] Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the Prosecutor General. But they didn't. They said they were going to a press conference. I said, 'No, I won't. We're not going to give you the billion dollars, and they said you can't do that, you don't have authority, you're not the president. I said call him [Obama]. I said: I'm telling you, you won't get the billion dollars. I'll be leaving in about six hours. If the attorney general doesn't get fired, you won't get the money. And damn it, the prosecutor got fired. And they used a reliable person.”
On April 3, 2016, Poroshenko signed the decree dismissing Shokin. That about influence in other countries that the mainstream media blames others for, but takes for granted by the US government. In any case, the investigations against Hunter Biden were off the table. The new "reliable person" then explained that no irregularities had been found.
During the 2020 campaign, when Trump spoke of it and a found Hunter Biden laptop turned up just days before Election Day, the mainstream denied it . The New York Times also claimed that behind Trump's claims was a covert, i.e. dirty, operation by the Russian secret service to influence the US elections. They put on the same record they played against Trump in 2016.
New allegations against Biden
Another allegation has recently been added: Hunter Biden is said to have been involved with his company Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners, one of the main investors in Metabiota, in setting up biological research laboratories with US participation in Ukraine. The subject was raised by the Russian side in the course of the military intervention in Ukraine. The US government initially denied it, the mainstream raged about Russian fake news and "disinformation". In the meantime, however, the US government had to admit a lot. On March 11, Russia referred the matter to the UN Security Councilwith the question. Although previously denied, the US has now admitted the existence of the labs in Ukraine, as well as US involvement. It is also denied that research on biological weapons was carried out there. The background is the same as in the Wuhan bio-lab where the suspected coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 originated, regardless of whether or not actual biological weapons research was conducted in Ukraine or in Wuhan. In the United States, laws prohibit certain highly dangerous and bioethically unacceptable research. The Obama administration in the US, after the enactment of such a law, pretended to observe it and ended research on it in the US, but in fact shifted it to as a large number of documents show, abroad, to countries where there are no legal bans, including Wuhan and the Ukraine. Not least under the influence of the Obama/Biden government, Ukraine had turned into a Wild West in the field of bioethics. In addition to allegedly banned biological research, the country also became oneEldorado for uterus rental aka surrogacy, where wealthy customers can order children.
On March 12, the Neue Zürcher Zeitung wrote on the issue of US bioweapons research:
"But first, the claim that some labs are researching bioweapons has nothing to do with theory. It may be a misrepresentation of fact.
Second, mere denials by the US and Ukraine on such a sensitive issue are not worth much in the search for truth. For example, the US has also vehemently denied for years that it has set up prisons in Poland and elsewhere to treat terrorism suspects using methods banned in the US. Only years later did the Polish government confirm this.”
Hunter Biden laptop authenticity confirmed
Now the authenticity of Hunter Biden's laptop has been confirmed. This no longer affects the outcome of the 2020 presidential elections, but shows that the public was misled at the time - not by "conspiracy theorists" or "Russian secret services", but by the mainstream media and the now resident of the white house.
The evaluation of the laptop (Maxey had received a copy of the hard drive from Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and Donald Trump's attorney) was carried out in "tireless work" (Maike Hickson) by one man in particular, the devout Catholic Jack Maxey, a former employee of Steve Bannon. It is thanks to him that Biden's laptop is back in the headlines. As Maike Hickson reconstructed for LifeSiteNews , Maxey announced last February 16 with the New York Timesto be in touch and to have provided their footage from the Biden laptop. The newspaper, which had spoken of “Russian disinformation” during the 2020 election campaign, checked the material and confirmed the laptop’s authenticity for the first time. Biden left the laptop in April 2019 at a repair shop in the state of Delaware because of moisture damage. The repair was never paid for and the laptop was never picked up. Wilmington, Delaware, store owner John Paul Mac Isaac eventually called the FBI because the customer was registered as Hunter Biden and the laptop says it belongs to the Biden Foundation, named after Hunter Biden's late brother . The FBI confiscated the computer. Apparently, however, copies of the hard drive had previously been made, those of the New York Postwere leaked. In October 2020, Rudy Giuliani urged the Attorney General for the State of Delaware (where the Bidens live and where the repair shop is located) to open an investigation into suspected criminal dealings evidenced by the computer. So far, only the confiscation file is known from the FBI. Biden's campaign team and the mainstream media claimed the FBI was involved because it was investigating a "Russian disinformation campaign." If the indications given by Giuliani at the time are confirmed, Biden's counterattack would have been a diversionary maneuver. The FBI has not yet commented on this. The New York Times wrote on March 16th:
Jack Maxey has brought Hunter Biden's laptop back into the headlines.
"The email and others in the cache have been confirmed to be authentic by people familiar with them and the investigation."
Hickson said, "As many observers note, the New York Times has not yet corrected its earlier statements on the matter. But the story is finally getting under way, and numerous media outlets are calling out to the 51 intelligence experts who, just before the 2020 election, declared that this laptop was Russian disinformation. Senator Ben Johnson has also criticized the New York Times and former intelligence analysts for their role in the presidential election by denying the laptop's authenticity. Joe Biden had disputed the authenticity of the laptop before his presidential electionand assured the American public that 'there was nothing in all this. This is all slander. Every major organization, every reputable investigator has pointed out that this is slander. It's a classic smear'.”
There is no doubt that the contents of the laptop, had its authenticity been confirmed in 2020, would have influenced the election. Now it's expected that there will finally be an in-depth investigation of "every crime, corruption and sexual misconduct found on this laptop," Hickson said.
This should play a not insignificant role in the upcoming US midterm elections in November, in which the House of Representatives and a third of the Senate will be elected.
Jack Maxey announced on March 9 , just before the New York Times confirmed the laptop's authenticity, that he would not only turn over all the footage to law enforcement, but also make it available to the world public. "It's all coming out now," said Maxey, who revealed on March 19 that he had informed the New York Times of his plans, putting it under pressure.
Maxey wrote yesterday that by the end of the week all the material will be available to everyone worldwide. He also issued a warning:
afraid for his life? Maxey shows his rosary.
“The world is not yet ready for what my team and I have found. My advice is to contain your anger and look to the Constitution to save us first.”
It will be seen how these words are to be understood. In any case, the revelations are not just about dubious business and a combination of political and private interests of the Biden family. Hickson recalls that Maxey also announced that some of Hunter Biden's photos and films on the laptop "concern underage girls and even his own niece."
When asked about his personal safety , Maxey his rosary beads. Regarding Hickson:
“Let us all pray for this devout Catholic. May he win his fight for the truth and for our country. If the Biden administration begins to crumble under the laptop revelations, it will be in large part due to Maxey's work."
In the end, the question remains as to why the New York Times changed direction. Is it just the pressure Maxey's announced revelations create? Or has the decision already been made that Biden will no longer be a candidate for president in 2024, which is why he no longer has to be given such consideration? We will see.
The example shows, based on various stages, how necessary it is to deal critically with the media. Information is conveyed through them. But they are also controlled. The mainstream is second to none when it comes to fake news, manipulation and, above all, opinion control.