I really hope he stays safe, because he seems like a good dude, but either way he's going to wake up lots of people.
Discussion
I appreciate his shifting the Overton Window by frequently supporting Bitcoin.
But I don’t see how he’s just out there saying the CIA assassinated his dad and uncle, and there’s no retaliation despite the efforts to keep that info hidden.
It’s not making sense on its face.
It makes sense if they either don't perceive him as a real threat or feel that taking him out would do more to validate his claims than letting him talk.
Discrediting him is probably politically “cheaper” than “neutralizing him”. We already live in a world where going against the government sponsored narrative is “baseless conspiracy theory”.
I also think they believe he won’t be taken seriously because they can also write him off on his vaccine views.
Who knows.
Perhaps denying him Secret Service protection is a form of retaliation for what he's saying.
After what the Deep State state did to his uncle and father, in collusion with the Secret Service, I'm not sure he should trust them for security...
And what kind of name is the "Secret Service" for an agency in a "democratic" government?
I see your mistake: we don't live in a "democratic" society. We live in a "Democratic" society, which just means rule by Democrats. It's a neat little bit of word play.
I like that definition of "rule by Democrats." That's definitely what the Democrats want, a one party state, like the Nazis had and the Communists have. I notice that the Democrats always like to state that the U.S. is a "democracy," while Republicans are often stressing that, no, the U.S. is a republic. They're both wrong.
If you pay close attention, you'll notice that Democrats usually say we live in a "Democracy" (obviously there's no way to tell if you're hearing them talk.), and with the definition I gave, they are correct.
As far as I can tell, this is the only way to make sense of so many seemingly hypocritical statements made by Democrats.