in this we have more evidence of how the thin blue line protects and serves;


Albuquerque, NM — All too often we hear the police state apologist crowd tell those who advocate for police accountability that if people “don’t do anything wrong, they have nothing to worry about.” However, all too often, this is proven wrong as entirely innocent people are beaten, shot, or killed by cops and they did nothing wrong. As the following case illustrates, being entirely innocent is no defense from police kicking in your door and forcing their K-9 to tear you to shreds.
Dan Lucero had committed no crime. He had harmed no one and was sitting in his own living room when police kicked in his door, held him at gunpoint and forced their K-9 to maul him.
According to police, they were at Lucero’s home to “help” him because his mother had called them and asked them to conduct a welfare check.
“We aren’t here to hurt you,” an officer is heard saying in the video. “I assure you of that.”
However, that officer was lying through his teeth and hurt him, they did.
When police showed up at Lucero’s apartment that night to “help” him, no one answered the door. Lucero could’ve been sleeping, but police did not care. After waiting just two minutes, the officers couldn’t wait any longer so to “help” Lucero, they drew their guns, kicked in his door and sicced their K-9 on him.
The resultant video from the officers’ body cameras is horrifying to watch. Lucero had committed no crime and was in his own home, yet he was being torn to shreds by a police K-9 as cops pointed guns at his head.
“In this case, we don’t have any threat to officers, to citizens, to anybody,” said Lucero’s attorney, Matt Coyte. “The man is talking to them. You should respond with conversation, not with force at all.”
However, cops had no intentions of talking and as their K-9 tore into Lucero, they simply barked orders at him and put him in handcuffs..........https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/cops-break-into-innocent-mans-home-hold-him-at-gunpoint-force-k-9-to-shred-him/246924

you might think this article is about winning jeopardy, but that's really only the intro. its really about going with the herd or not;


For all practical purposes, the manner in which contestants have played “Jeopardy!” has not changed since Art Fleming provided the game show’s first “answer” 55 years ago. That is, until James Holzhauer took his place behind the podium earlier this year.
After winning 22 consecutive games by an astounding average margin of $64,913, one question must be asked: Had every one of these contestants been playing this game the wrong way?

If this is indeed the case,“a professional sports gambler from Nevada” may have shown the world what’s possible when a template - never challenged or questioned over half a century  - is blown up and replaced by another strategy that produces vastly superior results.
By now millions of Americans are familiar with James’s unorthodox “Jeopardy!” strategy. Unlike 99.9 percent of the game’s previous contestants, he starts at the bottom of the board and goes sideways.
“It seems pretty simple to me: If you want more money, start with the bigger-money clues,”  Holzhauer explained in an interview with Vulture magazine. He told NPR “What I do that's different than anyone who came before me is I will try to build the pot first” before seeking out the game’s Daily Doubles. He then “leverages” his winnings with “strategically aggressive” wagers (read: wagers far larger than any contestant before him was willing to make).
This strategy - along with the fact he’s answering 96.7 percent of the clues correctly -  has allowed James to build insurmountable leads heading into Final Jeopardy. He can then be ultra-aggressive with his Final Jeopardy wagers, including one of $60,013. It was this wager that allowed James to establish his current single-game record of $131,016. (James now holds the Top 12 all-time records for one-game winnings). .........https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-16/meet-man-who-mastered-jeopardy-ignoring-conventional-wisdom

more in the bolton series in which tucker carlson speaks of bolton's plans for war on iran;


https://youtu.be/uGSBl53JBJg

mad dog bolton revealed herein, and there are videos, and its all centered around his defense of lying to start a war;


Journalist Whitney Webb recently tweeted a 2010 video clip I’d never seen before featuring US National Security Advisor John Bolton defending the use of deception in advancing military agendas, which highlights something we should all be paying attention to as Trump administration foreign policy becomes increasingly Boltonized.
On a December 2010 episode of Fox News’ Freedom Watch, Bolton and the show’s host Andrew Napolitano were debating about recent WikiLeaks publications, and naturally the subject of government secrecy came up.
“Now I want to make the case for secrecy in government when it comes to the conduct of national security affairs, and possibly for deception where that’s appropriate,” Bolton said. “You know Winston Churchill said during World War Two that in wartime truth is so important it should be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies.”
“Do you really believe that?” asked an incredulous Napolitano.
“Absolutely,” Bolton replied.
“You would lie in order to preserve the truth?”
“If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security, I would do it,” Bolton answered..........https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/05/no_author/that-time-john-bolton-said-its-good-to-lie-about-war/

buchanan shows here why the only fools who want the empire to attack iran are mad dog bolton and his zionist horde;


Speaking on state TV of the prospect of a war in the Gulf, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei seemed to dismiss the idea.
“There won’t be any war. … We don’t seek a war, and (the Americans) don’t either. They know it’s not in their interests.”
The ayatollah’s analysis — a war is in neither nation’s interest — is correct. Consider the consequences of a war with the United States for his own country.
Iran’s hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Air fields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.
And though Iran’s nuclear sites are under constant observation and regular inspection, they would be destroyed.Tehran knows this, which is why, despite 40 years of hostility, Iran has never sought war with the “Great Satan” and does not want this war to which we seem to be edging closer every day.
What would such a war mean for the United States?
It would not bring about “regime change” or bring down Iran’s government that survived eight years of ground war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
If we wish to impose a regime more to our liking in Tehran, we will have to do it the way we did it with Germany and Japan after 1945, or with Iraq in 2003. We would have to invade and occupy Iran.
But in World War II, we had 12 million men under arms. And unlike Iraq in 2003, which is one-third the size and population of Iran, we do not have the hundreds of thousands of troops to call up and send to the Gulf.
Nor would Americans support such an invasion, as President Donald Trump knows from his 2016 campaign. Outside a few precincts, America has no enthusiasm for a new Mideast war, no stomach for any occupation of Iran.
Moreover, war with Iran would involve firefights in the Gulf that would cause at least a temporary shutdown in oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — and a worldwide recession.
How would that help the world? Or Trump in 2020?............https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/05/patrick-j-buchanan/who-wants-this-war-with-iran/

hornberger tells it like it is, and the neo-con types wouldn't like it;

From the start of the brouhaha that President Trump initiated against North Korea for refusing to destroy its nuclear weapons, I have consistently maintained that the communist regime would never rid itself of its nukes. Even when Trump suddenly did an about-face and fell in love with North Korean communist dictator Kim Jong-Un and convinced himself that his new-found communist friend would “denuclearize,” I said it just wasn’t going to happen. I also said that there was zero chance that Kim would trade his nukes for Trump’s promise of beautiful condo projects along North Korean beaches.

Why was I so certain that Kim would never let go of his nukes? Because he knows that his nukes are what is deterring U.S. officials, including Cold War anticommunist dead-enders like John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Elliott Abrams, from initiating a regime-change war against his regime.

Oh sure, Trump could engage in the biggest love-fest in history with Kim and he could promise Trump Resorts all across North Korea, but Kim is smart enough to know that as soon as he got rid of his last nuke, all that love and all those promises would go up in regime-change flames.

After all, does anyone really think that Kim isn’t watching what “America First” Trump and Cold War dead-enders Bolton, Pompeo, and Abrams are doing to Iran and Venezuela? They are provoking the regimes in both countries, hoping and praying that their officials screw up and provide a pretext for flattening them and their citizenry with a carpet-bombing campaign, just as they did with Iraq and Afghanistan. Or they’re hoping to hoodwink the American people into believing some false pretext for another war of aggression against either country or both of them, such as finding Saddam Hussein’s long-lost WMDs hidden in Iran or Venezuela or both.

Make no mistake about it: If Iran and Venezuela had nukes, Trump would be falling in love with Venezuelan socialist strongman Nicholas Maduro and Iranian dictator Ayatollah Khamenei too, attending love-fest summits with them, and promising them beautiful condo projects,. And he would prevent the Cold War interventionists with whom he has surrounded himself and who now appear to be in charge of U.S. foreign policy from interfering with both relationships, just as he has done with respect to his relationship with Kim.

In fact, ask yourself: Why wouldn’t Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, or any other independent Third World regime that refuses to bend the knee to the all-powerful U.S. Empire not want to acquire nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons are the only thing that deters the U.S. Empire from initiating a regime-change operation agaInst any Third World nation that behaves independently or levels a modicum of criticism against U.S. officials. The U.S. Empire’s foreign policy of empire, interventionism, regime-change, assassinations, and coups is what gives rise to the desire for nuclear weapons on the part of independent Third World countries.

The best thing the American people could ever do for themselves and for the people of the world is to restore our nation’s founding principles of a limited-government republic and a non-interventionist foreign policy, which necessarily entails the dismantling, not the reform, of America’s national-security state governmental apparatus. That is a key not only to the restoration of our freedom here at home but also to a more peaceful and harmonious world........https://www.fff.org/2019/05/16/iran-venezuela-and-north-koreas-nukes/

oh, you thought this was the land of the free, but go against the medical monster and the courts will show you how your 'freedom' manifests;


The medical police state is alive and thriving in the United States, where yet another corrupt judge has ruled that it’s up to Big Pharma, and not We the People, to determine how best to take care of ourselves and our families.
As we recently reported, three-year-old Noah McAdams of Florida is one of the latest victims of this ongoing assault against health freedom, as he’s now being forced against his parents’ wishes to undergo chemotherapy treatments for a cancer he no longer has.
Little Noah was first diagnosed with lymphoblastic leukemia back in April, after which his parents agreed to have him treated with chemotherapy – a reluctant decision coerced by the state, as his parents had originally preferred to treat him naturally with vitamins, an anti-cancer dietary regimen, and medical cannabis.
After just two rounds of chemotherapy, a follow-up diagnosis showed that Noah was cancer-free, prompting his parents to stop the chemotherapy and continue him on the natural regimen that they originally intended – a decision that’s fully within their rights as his biological parents and legal guardians.
But Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital in Tampa, where Noah had received his two rounds of chemotherapy, was none too pleased with Noah’s parents having the gall to make their own autonomous medical decisions for their son............https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-05-16-corrupt-judge-orders-healthy-three-year-old-chemotherapy.html