Nina Jankowicz is President Joe Biden’s pick to serve as executive director of the Department of Homeland Security’s new Disinformation Governance Board—and her appointment has already met with some controversy.
— Newsweek, 4/28/22

“Controversy” is an understatement.

Psaki claimed Nina Jankowicz is an ‘expert’ with ‘extensive qualifications’ to lead DHS’ Governance Board
Biden ‘disinfo’ czar Nina Jankowicz ripped over cringeworthy Mary Poppins TikTok

Yes, it was that bad….

Nina Jankowicz is a classic test case for the liberal affliction known as psychotic “projection”.

So, who exactly is Nina Jankowicz? Certainly, not a person with any concerns about preserving freedom of speech or expression. A quick look at her Twitter history is enough to dispel that. When Facebook permanently banned Donald Trump from its service, Nina was in the wings complaining that this punishment was not harsh enough. Through a metaphor, Nina explained that only mass bans on hundreds or thousands of accounts would be enough to “fix” the disinformation “problem.”
— Revolver News, 4/29/22

So, why this now? Why is Joe Biden okay with forming such an ominous-sounding agency within DHS. Knowing Joe as we all do, it CAN’T be Joe’s idea or regarding Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter. What is this really about?

Could it be between now and the midterm election, a couple of major players in the Democrat Party could be at the center of uncomfortable attention; a couple of Democrats who MUST be protected at all costs?

During a speech at Stanford University on Thursday, former U.S. President Barack Obama presented his audience with a stark choice: “Do we allow our democracy to wither, or do we make it better?” Over the course of an hour-long address, Obama outlined the threat that disinformation online, including deepfake technology powered by AI, poses to democracy as well as ways he thought the problems might be addressed in the United States and abroad.
— Stanford News, 4/21/22

The committee for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign is seeking to block Special Counsel John Durham from obtaining certain documents related to law firm Perkins Coie and its work with the campaign, the Democratic National Committee and opposition research firm Fusion GPS. Hillary For America and the DNC are the holders of the privileges at issue, according to the filing.
— Fox News, 4/29/22

Interesting how this “disinformation” topic came out of nowhere and considering how many media outlets still have egg crusts on their faces for distributing Hillary’s Trump-Russia-collusion bullshit for four-plus years that distracted a presidential campaign, hampered a transition team, and kneecapped a presidency. It had to have been green-lighted by Hillary and Obama had to have known.

John Durham knows. He just has to have every i dotted and t crossed before he certifies proof of the greatest political scandal in American history. And when that happens, all involved in the conspiracy can’t depend on the legacy media to do all the heavy lifting. They’ll need something more and this is where Nina Jankowicz comes in.

Of all the old-and-reliable useful idiots Biden (or whomever) could have appointed for this DHS gig, he chose an expendable nutcase who’ll fit nicely under the bus when she goes after anyone and everyone who reports what may be coming from the special counsel. As usual when in the company of the like-minded, people like Jankowicz feel free to tell the truth about who they are, what they want, and what they’re willing (or not) to do to get it….

President Biden’s new disinformation czar Nina Jankowicz once belted out a raunchy parody version of a Christmas song — changing the lyrics to ask who she needed to “fuck” to be “famous and powerful,” according to resurfaced YouTube footage. “I want to be rich, famous, and powerful! Step on all my enemies and never do a thing,” Jankowicz sang in the clip from 2015.
— New York Post, 4/30/22

Looks like she got what she wanted. How…? We won’t ask.

Instead of being banned from a social media cite, Jankowicz could conceivably send goons with sub-machine guns kicking in the doors of Americans who shared a post embarrassing to Joe, Barack, Hillary, and Democrats as a whole.

After all, some things take relatively small amounts of intelligence to pull off.

So while it will be formerly known as the Disinformation Governance Board, it’s really going to be Disinformation Projection Board because like most of the so-called scandals specifically blamed on President Donald Trump, it turns out the Democrat left actually did the things the accused others of doing with no accountability.

For now.

UPDATE

It would appear the bully got too much a taste of her own medicine, and like most bullies, she ran away.

The Biden administration has “paused” its controversial plans to create a Disinformation Board, causing its would-be leader to resign.

In a statement Wednesday, Nina Jankowicz, the “disinformation expert” tapped to head the panel, said that “[w]ith the Board’s work paused and its future uncertain, and [sic] I have decided to leave DHS [the Department of Homeland Security] to return to my work in the public sphere.” Jankowicz’s departure and the decision to scrap the board was first reported by the Washington Post.

Whenever a liberal claims to be “mischaracterized”, it means uncomfortable truth was made public.

Jankowicz’s idea of standing up for the First Amendment included letting “verified” Twitter users “edit” other users’ tweets if the blue-checked chosen think they’re misleading. Jankowicz also repeatedly tried to spread doubt about The Post’s own reporting about Hunter Biden’s notorious laptop, telling the Associated Press in October 2020 that it should be viewed as “a Trump campaign product.” In addition, Jankowicz pushed the since-debunked claim in 2016 that then-presidential candidate Donald Trump had a tie to Kremlin-linked Alfa-Bank, an allegation at the center of an ongoing trial of a Clinton campaign lawyer accused by special counsel John Durham of lying to the FBI.

The misinformation maven was also ripped for a bizarre TikTok performance from February 2021 in which she altered the lyrics to the “Mary Poppins” song “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” to be about fake news.
— New York Post, 5/18/22

Jankowicz probably had been working on a landing spot long before her “announcement”. She’ll be back at work creating musical, pro-Democrat misinformation soon enough. After all, it IS what Nina does best.

Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe’s campaign has made a late-game push before the election, spending nearly $60,000 on a high-profile attorney known for representing Democrats and masterminding some election-related legal challenges. Less than a month before the end of McAuliffe’s race against Republican Glenn Youngkin, records show, the Democrat’s campaign spent $53,680 on the services of the Elias Law Group, a new firm started earlier this year by Marc Elias.

Elias’ name has been linked to Democrats running for office for years, as he was previously a partner at the law firm Perkins Coie. That is the same firm that was hired by the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, and it was Elias who was involved in bringing on Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research on Donald Trump – the research that included Christopher Steele’s dossier.
— Yahoo News, 10/28/21

Why would McAuliffe do this, especially if he had this election in the bag as so many in the media intelligentsia predicted?

There’s been a consistent over the last couple decades or so: if the Democrat wins, we know the final results that night. If the Republican wins, the calling of the election is delayed until the Democrats find enough votes to overturn the initial result. It appears this will probably happen in Virginia.

The Democratic Party of Virginia has filed a lawsuit alleging that local branches of the U.S. Postal Service failed to process and deliver election-related material ahead of the gubernatorial election between Democrat Terry McAuliffe and Republican Glenn Youngkin. The lawsuit, filed Friday, contends that more than 300,000 Virginians are likely to attempt to cast their ballots by mail this cycle, but USPS did not deliver the requested ballots promptly and therefore is threatening to disenfranchise thousands of Virginia voters.

Funny how the suit filer knows a specific number.

The suit was filed on behalf of the state party by the Elias Law Group, a firm headed by longtime Democratic elections attorney Marc Elias, who was involved in 32 cases against 19 states over their election laws when he represented Democratic candidates during the 2020 presidential cycle.
— Washington Times, 10/25/21

Think about it: the Founding Fathers didn’t seek to keep blacks from holding public office, or women or the uneducated or the alcoholic or the heathen or animals or even the mentally challenged. No, there was one group of people the Founders specifically targeted for disqualification from politics.

It was the lawyers.

They attempted to do so Constitutionally.

In the winter of 1983, archival research expert David Dodge, and former Baltimore police investigator Tom Dunn, discovered the Belfast Library‘s oldest authentic copy of the Constitution of the United States (printed in 1825). Both men were stunned to see this document included a 13th Amendment that no longer appears on current copies of the Constitution. Moreover, after studying the Amendment’s language and historical context, they realized the principle intent of this “missing” 13th Amendment was to prohibit lawyers from serving in government. In June of this year (1991), Dodge uncovered the evidence that this missing 13th Amendment had indeed been lawfully ratified by the state of Virginia and was therefore an authentic Amendment to the American Constitution. If the evidence is correct and no logical errors have been made, a 13th Amendment restricting lawyers from serving in government was ratified in 1819 and removed from US Constitution during the tumult of the Civil War. Since the Amendment was never lawfully repealed, it is still the Law today. The implications are enormous.
— The Missing 13th Amendment

Why would the authors of the Constitution want lawyers as far away from our political system as possible?

In Colonial America, attorneys trained attorneys but most held no “title of nobility” or “honor”. There was no requirement that one be a lawyer to hold the position of district attorney, attorney general, or judge; a citizen’s “counsel of choice” was not restricted to a lawyer; there were no state or national bar associations. The only organization that certified lawyers was the International Bar Association (IBA), chartered by the King of England, headquartered in London, and closely associated with the international banking system. Lawyers admitted to the IBA received the rank “Esquire” — a “title of nobility”.

We DO see a lot of lawyers with “Esquire” after their names….

“Esquire” was the principle title of nobility which the 13th Amendment sought to prohibit from the United States. Why? Because the loyalty of “Esquire” lawyers was suspect. Bankers and lawyers with an “Esquire” behind their names were agents of the monarchy, members of an organization whose principle purposes were political, not economic, and regarded with the same wariness that some people today reserve for members of the KGB or the CIA.

Article 1, Sect. 9 of the Constitution sought to prohibit the International Bar Association (or any other agency that granted titles of nobility) from operating in America. But the Constitution neglected to specify a penalty, so the prohibition was ignored, and agents of the monarchy continued to infiltrate and influence the government (as in the Jay Treaty and the US Bank charter incidents).

Therefore, a “title of nobility” amendment that specified a penalty (loss of citizenship) was proposed in 1789, and again in 1810. The meaning of the amendment is seen in its intent to prohibit persons having titles of nobility and loyalties to foreign governments and bankers from voting, holding public office, or using their skills to subvert the government.
— American History from Revolution to Reconstruction and Beyond

Think about the lawyers that wouldn’t have had a negative influence on our lives: Bill and Hillary Clinton, Terry McAuliffe, Ted Kennedy, Amy Klobuchar, Eric Holder, Sally Yates, Joe Kennedy III, Mario Cuomo, Joe Scarborough, Kirsten Gillibrand, Jeff Sessions, Preet Bharara, Reince Priebus, Christopher A. Wray, Janet Reno, Mazie Hirono, Dick Durbin, Ed Markey, John Warner, Jennifer Granholm, Jackie Speier, Jerrold Nadler, Adam Schiff, Janet Napolitano, William Weld, Maggie Hassan, Stacey Abrams, Michelle Lujan Grisham, Andrew Yang, Liz Cheney, Lori Lightfoot, Gretchen Whitmer, Rashida Tlaib, Robert Mueller, Hank Johnson, Eric Schneiderman, Richard Blumenthal, Ben Cardin, Steny Hoyer, Cory Booker, Letitia James, Sheldon Whitehouse, Janet Mills… like roaches, there are a lot of them.

Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution, in a very forceful way, suggests lawyers shouldn’t be trusted and would use “their skills to subvert the government”. How insightful considering how we currently have lawyers like Marc Elias running around, who caused enough mayhem to not only successfully subvert the Trump Administration with fictions acted upon by government agencies and amplified by a partisan media.

The distraction of the Civil War prevented the intention and ratification of the 13th Amendment, which was quite clear.

Think about how many vague and unnecessary laws wouldn’t be written if they were authored by non-lawyers. Those that were written would be brief and spelled out in plain English; not today’s standard legalese that require reams of paper in order to be submitted and a law degree to decipher.

So as election night in Virginia rolls around, it won’t be like the old days when you could stay up to 10 or 11pm and get the final results. It could be a relatively early night if McAuliffe has a sizable lead and is declared the winner. Even if Glenn Youngkin is winning by as much as 10% or more, he won’t be declared the winner and McAuliffe won’t concede. We’ll be told to wait for ALL the outstanding votes to be counted, no matter where they’re coming from and who sent them.

And behind it all, again, will be Marc Elias… a lawyer.

In simpler words, Joe Biden won the election, there was no cheating, the “media” said so; shut the fuck up… or else.

Dominion Voting Systems is even going as far as issuing million dollar lawsuits against anyone who dare imply their machines did anything to alter the solemn votes of Americans in favor of one candidate over another.

Lawyers for Dominion Voting Systems have asked Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Parler to preserve posts about the company, even if the material was already removed for spreading misinformation.

The posts need to be kept “because they are relevant to Dominion’s defamation claims relating to false accusations that Dominion rigged the 2020 election,” according to the demand letters from Dominion’s law firm Clare Locke. Dominion sued Rudolph W. Giuliani and Sidney Powell for more than $1.3 billion each in January, alleging that the lawyers defamed Dominion by saying the machines were used to steal the election from President Donald Trump.

Dominion warned in its letters to the social media companies that more lawsuits would be coming.

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube all have policies against spreading election-related misinformation. They have been removing — with varying degrees of success — posts falsely suggesting the election had been rigged since the baseless rumors began spreading in November. Parler was effectively knocked offline in January when Amazon, Apple and Google stopped providing it technical services for violating their policies against online posts that incite violence.
— Washington Post, 2/4/21

If ANY mention of voting machine “irregularities” can and will be met with a lawsuit, why are voting machines being blamed for an election loss?

Respondent the Oswego County Board of Elections (“Oswego County”) encountered “voting machine issues in Constantia Districts 1 and 3 and Williamstown,” which required all ballots cast to be “hand counted and added to the machine totals in those election districts.”

In this case, there is reason to believe that voting tabulation machines misread hundreds if not thousands of valid votes as undervotes, (supra at 4), and that these tabulation machine errors disproportionately affected Brindisi, (id.).
— Memorandum in Support of Proposed Order to Show Cause of Respondent Anthony Brindisi, Perkins Coie LLP, 2/1/21

Upstate New York’s Oswego County uses voting machines and software provided by IMAGECAST®.

Who makes IMAGECAST® machines and software?

Uh oh.

And what lawyer, who values his or her license to practice and speak freely, would risk it all to imply a Dominion voting system provided problematic results in an election?

Marc Elias, the election lawyer who represented Democratic challenges to state rules throughout the 2020 election, alleged in a court filing this week that a close congressional race in upstate New York was marred by faulty voting machines.

In the congressional race for New York’s 22nd district, Republican Claudia Tenney currently leads incumbent Democrat Anthony Brindisi by a razor-thin margin of 125 votes. Tenney declared victory on Tuesday, though challenges continue. In a legal filing Monday requesting a manual audit of the election, Elias, whose Perkins Coie law firm is representing Brindisi, argued that there were “substantial errors and irregularities in the conduct of the election.”

Citing alleged discrepancies between votes counted by hand and votes counted by ballot machines, Elias argued that the error rate, extrapolated across the entire district, could mean that thousands of votes were improperly counted by the machines.

Marc Elias has made a nice living casting doubt and trying to overturn the results of elections; ONLY elections where the Democrat lost.

Elias is also representing defeated Democrat Rita Hart in Iowa’s 1st congressional district, who lost by six votes to Republican Rep. Mariannette Miller Meeks (R-IA). He is asking the Democrat-controlled House to overturn the result of the election and seat Hart, despite certification of the vote by state election authorities, bypassing Iowa courts in the process.

In addition, as Breitbart News has noted, “Elias was responsible for hiring opposition research firm Fusion GPS, on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee, [which produced] the fraudulent “Russia dossier” on then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016.”
— Breitbart, 2/3/21

Of course, and as usual, the hypocrisy is in your face.

If you’re a Democrat who lost a race in 2020 due to voting irregularities with a Dominion voting machine, everything necessary can and will be done to overturn the results of that election with no fear of media criticism and legal repercussion on the horizon.

However, if you’re a Republican who makes similar claims and dares mention Dominion, you will be publicly labeled a kook sharing fact-checked and debunked misinformation, be banished from social media and sued into oblivion.

Welcome to the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, circa 2020-21.