Senate Control Stolen in the Middle of a Saturday Night: The battle is about information control and who decides its quality

You can never allow a centralized authority to control what information is. And clearly, the goal has been to use this China model of information control decided upon by some administrative state who would determine what information is and that would then become the standard for reality. Our concern is playing out in the election of 2022, as it was during the election of 2020, and the global push to control the message around Covid.   But then again, we’ve seen this behavior at the local level in the school district I live in, where those who represent the administrative state have insisted that they control reality by defining what information is. When bad behavior was questioned by the public of those in charge of the school, the action against the public was almost identical to what we are seeing nationally and internationally from what have conveniently been called globalists. Maybe it’s not surprising since most people get their education from the same controlled sources so that they would think alike shouldn’t be such an abnormality. But the insistence on altering reality with collective belief to support some mass agreement that decides whether information is relevant or not is bizarre. In the case of the local school issue, many who have come under attack by that trending insistence of information control and giving control entirely to the authority figures to decide what information is or isn’t had to be reminded of the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 270 (1964) case. Information is merit-based, and good information or bad information is decided by the quality of the information, not who controls the definition of it. Which is undoubtedly applicable to the FBI, the Biden administration, or the Desecrators of Davos who insist that the greatest threat to the world is climate change, as it’s clear that what really matters is who controls the votes in the world and by what means. 

Overnight during the first weekend after the election of 2022, where Republicans had been trending ahead for control of the Senate, it was announced by the Fox News desk that Catherine Cortez Mastro would keep control of the Senate, beating Adam Laxalt in Nevada. With the election taking over a week to process and the obvious vote counting slowing down to a drip, drip, the obvious strategy was to wear everyone out, announce the results over the weekend while everyone was sleeping and retain power in at least one of the houses of Congress in America who represent the needs of the Desecrators of Davos. There will be a runoff in Georgia to determine a seat, and there is still lots of smoke in the Alaska race that has obviously been built to control how information is processed and distributed to the public to show control when it clearly doesn’t represent what voters wanted. It’s the same kind of situation as we just witnessed in the elections in Brazil with Bolsonaro. The good news is that we are not talking about the obvious, we have watched people we formally trusted, such as Leader Mitch McConnell, the Fox News Team, and even the Associated Press let us down for some goals that were not specifically American in their value. But it’s like Trump has said all along, it’s not the voter that matters as much as the people who count the votes. And in controlling that information, people who don’t deserve to be in power have been able to retain it. Was there a Red Wave in the 2022 elections? Well, yes. More than 6 million more Republican voters voted for Congress members, so they were energized to give input into their government and the management of the information it uses to govern our country. Then the reason that reality didn’t translate to more flipping of seats to acquire power is the evidence that shows information of massive voter irregularities that show the wrong people are representing our country in government. But to hide that from the public, the authority figures, just like the local school system functioning from the same value systems, insist that they determine what information and value it has to the public. Anybody who doesn’t follow their narrative is a domestic terrorist. Essentially, the China model. 

But what is to be done about this? Well, just as in the Sullivan case utilized above, we do have a constitutional means to deal with this very problem before everyone goes for the Second Amendment to attack the problem of blatant election fraud to keep the powers of government that have been selling America out, in the position to decide what the definitions of information are so that they can then control mass society even in bizarre ways that leave people shaking their heads in disgust. I would offer that the pressure of competing information to dispute falsehoods is the best way to solve all these problems. Free speech is the immeasurable remedy to all this blatant corruption. The reason that corruption exists at all is that we have trusted the sources of information too much over time, empowering these corrupt malcontents and letting them think they would get away with all this information manipulation. The forces in power decide what is true or not authentic based on their power needs. Not on what reality decides. That has been wondrously obvious with the local issue I mentioned, and there are good lessons to learn from it that certainly apply to the mess at the national and international levels. The bad guys are in a fight to claim the definition of what information is, and they insist through force on altering your opinions of everything to enforce it in ways that serve them. So to fix that problem, we must attack them there. 

The way to defeat bad information is with good information, and the plan for many years now has been to gain control of the means of distributing that information, whether it was corporate media, the record industry, print media, the Associated Press, or whatever people trusted as information. The belief was that if those sources could be captured and controlled, then control over America’s mass population could occur. The vile manipulators who wanted to take America down from within thought they’d have an easy time of it if only they could shut people up and control the definitions of good information from bad information. But information is what it is, good or bad; it is merit that decides its quality. And when information is competitive, people can then decide through free will what its value to society is. Without good information to fight bad information, the FBI could then decide what reality is and enforce it in society accordingly. That is why the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 270 (1964) case was so important. It is relevant for local problems, but it’s just as relevant for national and international issues as well. Reality is decided by the most truthful information as determined in the battlefield of ideas. And in the wake of the very good elections of 2022, we can clearly see what good and bad information is. There will be lots of talk about election fraud that will be correct. The corrupt behavior was on full display for all to see because there was freedom of information to pass judgment on the behavior, whereas other places in the world do not have such an ability.   People in other countries might grumble at the local grocery about their corrupt governments. But in America, we can do so, and the authorities are not allowed to come and arrest us and put us in jail over it. Or destroy us in the courts. They have certainly tried to give us that impression. But they have not been successful. They may have stolen the 2022 election and held power cosmetically. But we learned a lot in the process, and that information will be infinitely more valuable. And a better future is on the horizon because of it. 

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business