We're facing a
constitutional crisis. Elected officials are actively working to censor,
silence and smear anyone who disagrees with them, including Robert F.
Kennedy Jr., who is running for president
As a major
presidential candidate, Kennedy is entitled to Secret Service
protection, but Biden is blocking that too. Kennedy is the first
candidate in American history to be denied Secret Service protection
Through a
lawsuit brought against President Biden by the attorneys general of
Louisiana and Missouri, we’ve learned that the Biden administration
began censoring Kennedy on Biden’s second day in office. In early July
2023, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty of Louisiana prohibited Biden
administration officials from working with social media companies to
limit protected speech
Transactional
freedom is as important as freedom of expression, because if the
government can starve you and put you out of your home by debanking you
and blocking access to financial services, they can easily create a
slave society. As president, Kennedy would end this trend by eliminating
federal benefits and federal contracts with banks that punish people
for their beliefs. He’s also committed to blocking programmable central
bank digital currencies, and maintaining cash as legal tender in
perpetuity
Kennedy, who is
very fit, recently agreed to a pull-up competition against Russell
Brand if Brand raises $100,000 for his presidential campaign. As
president, he wants to reinvigorate the Presidential Council on Physical
Fitness to bring physical fitness back into the high school curriculum
In this video, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
discusses his presidential campaign, which has gained significant
traction, despite censorship and the barriers set up by the Democratic
National Committee (DNC).
"The polling shows my favorability rating is better than any other candidate," Kennedy says, "So ... I'm very, very happy with the way things have gone up to now."
We also discuss some of the issues he intends to tackle if he gets
into the White House. By now, it’s clear that, as a country, we're
facing a constitutional crisis. Elected officials are actively working
to censor, silence and smear anyone who disagrees with them, including
Kennedy.
In fact, we recently learned through the lawsuit brought against
President Biden by the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri that
the Biden administration began censoring Kennedy on Biden’s second day
in office.
A Direct Attack on First Amendment Rights
Kennedy had initially filed a separate class action lawsuit against Biden (Kennedy v. Biden et.al.1),
alleging key Biden officials colluded with Big Tech to censor free
speech, but due to their similarities and overlap, his case was
consolidated into Missouri v. Biden.2
In early July 2023, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty of Louisiana
granted the plaintiffs’ injunction, prohibiting federal agencies and
Biden administration officials from working with social media companies
to limit protected speech. Commenting on the judge’s decision, Kennedy
says:
"It's a 155-page decision, and it details this very
troubling chronicle of the Biden administration coming into office.
Thirty-seven hours after President Biden took the oath of office, the
White House was contacting Twitter and other social media sites ...
actually threatening them with retaliation if they did not remove me
from their platforms.
Soon after that,
they started going after many other people, including you, and many of
other people who were criticizing the COVID lockdowns and some of the
countermeasures that the public health agencies and the White House had
implemented.
And it's disturbing ... They had to make up a new
word, because so many of us were putting up information that they
couldn't actually call misinformation. In fact, Facebook and Twitter
pushed back and said, ‘This is actually true what these guys are
saying.’
They couldn't call it misinformation or
disinformation, so they invented a new word called ‘malinformation.’
That word means or denotes statements that are true but nevertheless
inconvenient for the White House or the government.
And they weren't just censoring statements about
COVID policies and COVID countermeasures. Soon after that, they began
censoring critics of the Ukraine War. In one instance, they were
censoring a satire about President Biden and his wife. This should be
shocking to every person, regardless of your political party.
The U.S. government should not be using its power to
force publishers to silence its opponents, its critics, its adversaries
or people who question government policies. That's why we have the First
Amendment.
The threat that the government, that the White House,
was applying, was that if the social media sites did not comply, did
not obey the orders to censor us, the White House would work at removing
their Section 230 immunity. That's Section 230 of the Communications
Act, and that immunity is absolutely critical to the survival of these
companies.
It gives social media platforms immunity from
defamation lawsuits. In other words, if you were to publish a defamatory
statement about me in The New York Times that was not true, that was
damaging to me, I could sue you individually, but I could also sue The
New York Times. And so, for every article that goes up on The New York
Times, there are lawyers who review that article for potentially
defamatory statements.
But social media sites, if they had to hire a lawyer
to look at every post, they would be out of business overnight. So,
Congress gave them this extraordinary power that they can publish
defamatory material on their site and I can sue the guy who wrote that
material, but I can't sue Mark Zuckerberg or Facebook or Twitter.
Mark Zuckerberg has described the Section 230
immunity as existential. In other words, Facebook could not exist
without it. Well, the White House was threatening to withdraw that. In
other words, ‘We will destroy your company if you do not censor our
critics.’ That has stepped over a lot of boundaries ... [and is] a
direct attack on the First Amendment of our Constitution."
Government Acted on False Information From Hate Group
The justification for much of this censorship was the reporting of a
front group for the globalist cabal called the Center for Countering
Digital Hate (CCDH). In one of its earliest reports,3
the CCDH identified 12 individuals, including me and Kennedy, who it
claimed were responsible for 73% of vaccine misinformation on social
media.
A subsequent investigation by Facebook revealed the so-called
"disinformation dozen" were responsible for only 0.05% of all views of
vaccine-related content on the platform,4
yet the federal government continued to cite this fabricated report as
the reason for why they wanted the people listed in it censored by Big
Tech.
"You and I have been libeled, I would say, tens of
thousands of times across the media, globally, because of the false
statements of this group," Kennedy notes.
The Department of Homeland Security, FBI and CIA even used the CCDH’s
"Disinformation Dozen" report to identify us as "domestic threat
actors," which is akin to putting people on a domestic terrorist list
based on hearsay from a random barfly.
It’s definitely not what one would expect from so-called intelligence
experts. Either they didn’t do any due diligence to confirm the
accusations leveled, or they’re colluding with the CCDH and knowingly
used false information to target American civilians. I’m not sure which
is worse. Either way, it’s another reason for the rapid erosion of
people’s trust and confidence in these agencies.
Now that the Republicans are in control of Congress, they've been
able to subpoena the CCDH and, hopefully, their investigation will
expose the true intent behind this group.
"The whole thing is very sketchy," Kennedy says. "First
of all, the group Center for Countering Digital Hate is actually a hate
group by every definition. It's also foreign funded. It's funded by
dark money, but it's all foreign. And it was started by high-level
officials in the British government, who almost certainly have ties to
the British intelligence agencies ...
And then, the people who run the organization are
very, very sketchy individuals who've been skirting the law for a long
time and [been] involved with a lot of nefarious activities. It's
interesting, because a lot of people, particularly high-level officials
in the Democratic Party, have been concerned about Russian interference
in American elections.
Well, here you have a foreign government directly
censoring critics of the administration, and the administration
admittedly taking its cues from a foreign government that wanted to
censor people. So, there are a lot of ironies here and a lot of
disturbing paradoxes."
Biden Is Denying Kennedy Secret Service Protection
Kennedy is also being censored in other, rather dramatic and
downright life-threatening ways. He recently filed a request for Secret
Service protection, which Biden denied. Under Title 18 U.S.C.
3056(a)(7), all major presidential and/or vice presidential candidates
are eligible for Secret Service protection.5
By all accounts, Kennedy should qualify. As he explains, after his
father’s assassination, Congress passed a law that major candidates are
entitled to Secret Service protection for at least 120 days before the
general election. The threshold you have to meet to be considered a
"major" candidate has a poll rating of 15% for one month.
Kennedy has far surpassed that threshold. The president also has the
discretion to grant Secret Service protection to anyone at any time, not
just presidential candidates. John Bolton, for example, a former
national security adviser who retired in 2006, has Secret Service
protection to this day, as do many other former government officials.
The president can also extend the length of time that a candidate can be
under Secret Service protection before the general election.
"My uncle was given Secret Service protection for almost 500 days prior to the election, even when he was not even a candidate," Kennedy says, "and he was given that protection by President Carter, with whom he had a very adversarial relationship.
He ended up running against President Carter and they
didn't like each other, but President Carter was a classy person and
did what he should have done, which is to provide Teddy with protection.
Barack Obama, I think got it 500 days early. Shirley
Chisholm and Jesse Jackson got it early. John McCain was offered it
early. I think there's probably about 20 or 30 candidates who've been
offered it early in recent history. And as far as we've been able to
tell, there has never been a candidate who applied for Secret Service
protection to whom it was denied.
I'm the first. It was an historical event and it was
clearly a political choice. It was not based upon a threat assessment.
It was clearly based upon a political calculation. And I think that's
disturbing ...
I have stalkers that I deal with on an everyday
basis, literally every single day, and I get death threats quite often. I
had a death threat two weeks ago that appears to have been calculated
to try to shut down one of my rallies in Charleston, South Carolina ...
About three weeks ago, a month maybe now, I had a mentally ill person
come into my home, [and made it] to the third floor."
Of course, knowing the history of what happened with Kennedy’s father
and uncle, one wonders whether he could really trust the Secret Service
with his life anyway. He’s currently protected by a private security
firm, Gavin de Becker and Associates, which is one of the leading
security firms in the country.
Transactional Freedom Is Essential
As many of you know, JP Morgan Chase Bank recently debanked my business,
along with two of my top executives and their families. This debanking
trend is, I believe, a precursor to a social credit score system where
people will be punished by association. If elected president, what does
Kennedy intend to do to stop this?
"As president, I will end this practice by the banks," he says. "I
will ... cut off all federal benefits and federal contracts with banks
that are punishing people for political beliefs, that are denying them
access to institutional banking services because of their political
beliefs or because of their political statements. It's wrong, and it's
the ultimate weapon of totalitarian regimes.
We saw this happen in Toronto during the truckers
protest ... It was a peaceful protest. If you look at the videos of it,
it was like Woodstock. There were clearly false flag events going on
during that protest, where government or somebody was trying to frame
the truckers ...
The government of Canada under the Trudeau regime
used surveillance techniques, including facial recognition systems and
other techniques to capture the license plates of the trucks to identify
their owners and then freeze all their bank accounts.
So, the leaders and the participants in the protest
all woke up one day and their bank accounts had been frozen. These are
people who had not violated the law. They weren't charged with violating
the law. They were never convicted. And yet, suddenly, they found
themselves in a position where they could not pay their bills.
They could not buy gasoline. Their credit cards
didn't work. They couldn't feed their children. I talked to one trucker
who was in criminal trouble because he couldn't pay his alimony. They
couldn't pay their mortgages and they couldn't pay their rent.
It occurred to me then that transactional freedom is
as important as freedom of expression, because if you have a government
that can essentially starve you to death and put you out of your home,
you can easily make an entire society a slave society ...
If the government has the power to do that to you,
then it really has ultimate power over all of us. One of the things that
I've been fighting against the issuance ... [of] a central bank digital
currency (CBDC), to eliminate paper dollars. And in that case, every
transaction that you make — if you buy a porn magazine, if you buy
alcohol, whatever you do — the government is going to know about it and
you will be subject to blackmail or pressure.
It’s a calamity for human rights and for civil
rights. And so, as president, I will end the efforts to move toward a
central bank digital currency. I'll do everything I can to maintain
paper cash as legal tender in this country, and make sure that we're
committed to doing that forever.
Americans know how basic it is to their rights. And
then there are other alternatives like Bitcoin, which give you even a
better protection than cash. It also gives you protection from inflation
and all of the other hazards that come along with fiat currencies."
Another Option: State Banking Systems
Another alternative is for states to do what North Dakota has done,
which is to create a state banking system that is locally owned and
bypasses the Federal Reserve. As explained by the Institute for Local
Self-Reliance:6
"In North Dakota, the banking sector bears little
resemblance to that of the rest of the country. North Dakotans do not
depend on Wall Street banks to decide the fate of their livelihoods and
the future of their communities, and rely instead on locally owned banks
and credit unions ... And these local banks and credit unions control a
resounding 83% of deposits in the state ...
What has enabled North Dakota to go its own way? Much
of the answer lies in the Bank of North Dakota, the only state-owned
bank in the country.
Since 1919, when it was founded to free North
Dakotans from the tyranny and crushing interest rates of Minneapolis
banks, BND has worked to nurture the state’s economy and communities ...
BND does most of its lending in partnership with local banks and credit
unions, granting its support to their productive lending activities."
To learn more about this, check out attorney Ellen Hodgson Brown’s websites, webofdebt.com and ellenbrown.com, her Web of Debt Substack, or her book, "Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth About Our Money System and How We Can Break Free."7 She’s also the president of the Public Banking Institute, where you can get more information.
Federal Reserve Must Be Reigned In
Kennedy stresses that one of his objectives, as president, would be
to "get the Federal Reserve under control," to make sure the American
people have sovereignty over our money supply, and that we have
transparency.
"There are a lot of different options that we're looking at right now," Kennedy says. "We're
talking about them with leading economists around the country. People
like David Stockman, Jeffrey Sachs, Jeff Werner and many other experts
in that area.
A lot of people have really good ideas about how to
get the Fed under control, and we are going to do something about it. I
just don't know exactly what we're going to do. [State owned banks] is
an interesting option that I need to run by our economics team and put
in the mix."
"We need local sovereignty," Kennedy says. "We
need to move away from centralized control and particularly any control
institutions like the WHO that are not subject to U.S. control. It's an
insane idea ...
And as you’ve stated, Bill Gates has taken over
control of the WHO. It’s become his vessel for what he calls
philanthrocapitalism, which is a way of making a lot of money by
controlling these international institutions that make public health
policy.
For example, to get the WHO, which funds most of the
African health departments, to use its power and leverage over those
departments and mandate vaccines for children in those countries. Those
vaccines are made almost invariably by companies in which Gates has a
private financial interest or which his foundation has a private
financial interest.
It was the same thing he did with the Green
Revolution in Africa. He got African countries to switch from
traditional agriculture ... to GMO monocultures, with this idea that
this is part of globalization that will bring big corporations in who
will buy your products, give you cash and lift everybody's standard of
living up. That was the promise. But exactly the opposite happened ...
It's been an absolute calamity for the people of
Africa. I think there's 30 million additional people who have become
food insecure as a direct result of Gates' Green Revolution, but Gates
and his companies have made a killing ... In each philanthropical effort
he makes, there's always, at the end of it, some moneymaking scheme for
Gates and his foundation."
Kennedy Is a Health and Freedom Candidate
To me, Kennedy is the most logical choice for the Democratic
nomination. He's smart, honest, hardworking, and aligned with many
preventive strategies that can help everyone in this country take
control of their health. He’s also very healthy and fit himself, so he
walks the talk.
Videos showing a shirtless Kennedy working out, revealing what
Russell Brand calls a "jacked" and "stacked" physique, recently set
social media abuzz. Many were shocked at how fit this 69-year-old
presidential candidate is.
Brand subsequently challenged Kennedy to a pullup contest (see video
above). If Brand raises $100,000 for Kennedy’s campaign, Kennedy will
compete against Brand to see who can do the most pullups. (If Kennedy
wins, Brand has agreed to attend an unspecified number of Kennedy’s
campaign events.)
Following suit, and raising the stakes, I’m now challenging Kennedy
to an arm-wrestling match. Kennedy and I are both 69 years old, so we’re
well-matched in that regard. If we raise $250,000 for his campaign,
Kennedy has agreed to arm wrestle me.
Fair disclosure: While I’ve only arm wrestled once, (and won, against Dr. Marcos de Andrade, a fitness buff 30 years my junior), I do KAATSU training,
which involves blood flow restriction and really helps to strengthen
your Type 2 muscle fibers. So, my muscle fibers are well-trained for
this type of event. I’ll be sharing my workout strategy with Kennedy,
though, to even the odds.
If we reach the $250,000 goal, we’ll sponsor the event at our campus
in Cape Coral, Florida, followed by a Town Hall meeting where you’ll
have the opportunity to pepper Kennedy with your questions. So, if you
want to see an arm-wrestling match between Kennedy and me, and/or want
to attend this Town Hall meeting, make a donation today!
Bring Back the Presidential Council on Physical Fitness
Like me, Kennedy is firmly committed to health and fitness, and he
understands the importance of setting a good example, which is why he’s
accepting these fitness challenges. As president, he also wants to
rejuvenate his uncle’s Presidential Council on Physical Fitness,8 which used to set school children on the path of health and kept them on it, often for life.
"That was a really big thing when we were young," he says. "If
you look at the old films, which are out there, of the way the kids
looked back then and the performance they were doing, it's almost
unbelievable how good a shape they were in compared to today's kids.
We now have the sickest children in the world. We
have the highest chronic disease burden of any country in the world ...
and one of the ways to deal with that is to focus on your physical
health and your diet. Of course, the pharmaceutical industry and their
captive regulators just want to use [drugs].
For them a sick population is an economic boom, and
we now have the highest health care costs per capita of any country in
the world — $4.3 trillion, and $3.7 trillion of that is for chronic
disease ... If we can reduce those chronic disease rates, we reduce our
health care costs enormously, and I want to do that."
Via : https://www.profession-gendarme.com/. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1AU30Tnojo 28 juil. 2026 VIDÉO RE-POSTÉE POUR CAUSE DE CONTENU PROTÉGÉ PAR DES DROITS D'AUTEUR Eric Mercier : infirmier D.E. dans le soin depuis 1991 (BSPP / Mitha / APHP / Libéral rural / Hémodialyse / Formateur en EHPAD). Voici son adresse de courriel : suppressionprojetloieuthanasie@gmail.com ⮕ Pour consulter le compte X d’Eric Mercier : https://x.com/Art50Mercier ⮕ La ROSP, ou Rémunération sur Objectifs de Santé Publique : https://www.ameli.fr/medecin/exercice... ⮕ "Gasping for Air", la grande étude du Dr Joël Zivot : https://www.npr.org/2020/09/21/793177... ⮕ "Gasping for Air", article sur la grande étude du Dr Joël Zivot : https://news.law.fordham.edu/blog/202... ⮕ Alicia Duncan explique le Midazolam : • ALICIA DUNCAN EXPLIQUE LE MIDA...
https://markcrispinmiller.substack.com/p/for-banning-this-essential-video? Mark Crispin Miller 31 juillet 2026 Pour avoir censuré cette vidéo essentielle en 2021, YouTube (Google) devrait être accusé de démocide, et tous ses responsables condamnés à la prison à vie sans possibilité de libération conditionnelle. Ce géant industriel, avec son credo initial « Ne soyez pas malveillants », devrait être classé au même titre qu'IG Farben, Bayer, Dow et IBM. John Leake s'exprime sur les propos psychopathes de Susan Wojcicki, PDG de YouTube, qui se vante d'avoir banni un million de vidéos qualifiées de « désinformation dangereuse » — une projection malsaine, car ces vidéos ont été bannies pour avoir révélé des vérités qui auraient sauvé d'innombrables vies. Lisez l'article inspirant de Leake, puis regardez son interview interdite avec le Dr Peter McCullough. Comme toujours, ceux — ou nous — qui avons dit haut et fort (ou essayé de dire) la terrible vérité se so...
Commentaires
Enregistrer un commentaire