#guccification

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Reading the headlines over the last couple of days, you would think the biggest political story about this election is Trump’s pathetic attempt to challenge Vice President Kamala Harris on the size of her rally crowds.  Look at this Truth Social post!  Trump says she used AI to create fake photos of her crowd at an airport in Detroit!  There was even a story in my newsfeed from a polling expert pointing out that you cannot calculate support for a candidate by crowd size.  If crowd size were what mattered, Bernie Sanders would be president by now, he reminded us.

Political narratives are strange beasts – at least they were until Trump came along and made them even stranger.  It used to be that fights over policies and personalities and the pasts of politicians drove elections.  When John Kerry ran in 2006, Republicans took his war record in the Navy in Vietnam and “Swift-boated” him by twisting his service into something it wasn’t.  They’re trying to do the same thing with Tim Walz right now, creating a fake story that he was somehow derelict in his duty when he retired from 24 years of service in the National Guard to run for congress not long before his unit in Minnesota was deployed to Iraq.

Then Trump showed up and proved that you can do it using lies alone.  That’s what his ridiculous story that Kamala Harris is using AI to fake her crowd size was.  Trump proved that if you tell enough lies again and again and again, something will stick, and then you can run with it. 

You will notice in the above paragraphs that the political narratives I gave as examples were all driven by men:  Men running for office; men’s careers being dissected and put on display; men using lies and misinformation to create stories about each other where there really aren’t any.  Even the political narrative about Hillary Clinton during her presidential run in 2016 was created by men:  Roger Stone interfacing with Guccifer II to get Hillary’s emails leaked to the press; Trump taking the fake “issue” about “her emails” and making it a central feature of his campaign.

But this week, a campaign narrative driven by women entered the picture in a big way.  On Monday, Arizona election officials announced that they had received enough signatures on petitions – in fact 50 percent more than was required – to put access to abortion on the ballot in November.  On Tuesday, Missouri officials certified enough petition signatures to allow a measure on the November ballot that would enshrine the right to abortion in the state’s constitution.

Both of these things are a big, big deal.  The drives to collect enough signatures to get the referendum measures on the Arizona and Missouri ballots were run by women.  Referendums on abortion have already been approved for a November vote in Florida, Nevada, Colorado, and South Dakota.  Petitions have been submitted in Nebraska and Montana for similar abortion ballot measures and await approval by election officials.  State constitutional amendments will be on the ballot in New York and Maryland that will guarantee access to abortion as well.  The New York Times reminded us in a story today that ballot measures guaranteeing a right to abortion have passed in all seven states where they have been put to a vote since Roe v Wade was overturned in 2022.  The red states of Kentucky and Kansas were among the states that passed abortion rights measures by referendum. 

Arizona and Nevada are crucial battleground states in the presidential election that will be decided in November.  Having the issue of abortion on the ballot alongside the decision to vote for either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, who brags about having appointed three of the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe, is expected to help Democrats from Vice President Harris on down the ballot, including pivotal races that will determine control of the House and the Senate next year.

Abortion is not just a so-called “women’s issue.”  Until two years ago, the right to abortion was embedded in the language of the 14th Amendment which guarantees equal protection of the laws for all.  It was part of the central argument that established a right to privacy in Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965, which involved the right of couples to use birth control.  The fight over abortion rights, often framed as the right of a woman to control her own body, also involves the right to privacy for all of us.  Right wing lawsuit-factories such as the Alliance Defending Freedom have already stated their intention to sue to overturn Griswold, as well as other Supreme Court decisions based on the 14th Amendment involving same sex marriage and the right to love whoever you want in any way you want in the privacy of your bedroom.

With Kamala Harris running for president, Democrats will have the opportunity to emphasize that so-called kitchen table issues such as inflation and taxes are also women’s issues because our candidate is a woman, and that is a good thing.  It is definitely a good thing that abortion will be on the ballot in at least two key swing states, and it's even better thing that the person driving the political narrative for the Democratic Party this year is a woman. 

[mariacallous]

April 12, 2019, Updated at 12:22 a.m. ET on April 15, 2019.

In the end, the man who reportedly smeared feces on the walls of his lodgings, mistreated his kitten, and variously blamed the ills of the world on feminists and bespectacled Jewish writers was pulled from the Ecuadorian embassy looking every inch like a powdered-sugar Saddam Hussein plucked straight from his spider hole. The only camera crew to record this pivotal event belonged to Ruptly, a Berlin-based streaming-online-video service, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of RT, the Russian government’s English-language news channel and the former distributor of Julian Assange’s short-lived chat show.

RT’s tagline is “Question more,” and indeed, one might inquire how it came to pass that the spin-off of a Kremlin propaganda organ and now registered foreign agent in the United States first arrived on the scene. Its camera recorded a team of London’s Metropolitan Police dragging Assange from his Knightsbridge cupboard as he burbled about resistance and toted a worn copy of Gore Vidal’s History of the National Security State.

Vidal had the American national-security establishment in mind when he narrated that polemic, although I doubt even he would have contrived to portray the CIA as being in league with a Latin American socialist named for the founder of the Bolshevik Party. Ecuador’s President Lenín Moreno announced Thursday that he had taken the singular decision to expel his country’s long-term foreign guest and revoke his asylum owing to Assange’s “discourteous and aggressive behavior.”

According to Interior Minister María Paula Romo, this evidently exceeded redecorating the embassy with excrement—alas, we still don’t know whether it was Assange’s or someone else’s—refusing to bathe, and welcoming all manner of international riffraff to visit him. It also involved interfering in the “internal political matters in Ecuador,” as Romo told reporters in Quito. Assange and his organization, WikiLeaks, Romo said, have maintained ties to two Russian hackers living in Ecuador who worked with one of the country’s former foreign ministers, Ricardo Patiño, to destabilize the Moreno administration.

We don’t yet know whether Romo’s allegation is true (Patiño denied it) or simply a pretext for booting a nuisance from state property. But Assange’s ties to Russian hackers and Russian intelligence organs are now beyond dispute.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of 12 cyberoperatives for Russia’s Main Intelligence Directorate for the General Staff (GRU) suggests that Assange was, at best, an unwitting accomplice to the GRU’s campaign to sway the U.S. presidential election in 2016, and allegedly even solicited the stolen Democratic correspondence from Russia’s military intelligence agency, which was masquerading as Guccifer 2.0. Assange repeatedly and viciously trafficked, on Twitter and on Fox News, in the thoroughly debunked claim that the correspondence might have been passed to him by the DNC staffer Seth Rich, who, Assange darkly suggested, was subsequently murdered by the Clintonistas as revenge for the presumed betrayal.

Mike Pompeo, then CIA director and, as an official in Donald Trump’s Cabinet, an indirect beneficiary of Assange’s meddling in American democracy, went so far as to describe WikiLeaks as a “non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.” For those likening the outfit to legitimate news organizations, I’d submit that this is a shade more severe a description, especially coming from America’s former spymaster, than anything Trump has ever grumbled about The New York Times or The Washington Post.

Russian diplomats had concocted a plot, as recently as late 2017, to exfiltrate Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy, according to The Guardian. “Four separate sources said the Kremlin was willing to offer support for the plan—including the possibility of allowing Assange to travel to Russia and live there. One of them said that an unidentified Russian businessman served as an intermediary in these discussions.” The plan was scuttled only because it was deemed too dangerous.

In 2015, Focus Ecuador reported that Assange had aroused suspicion among Ecuador’s own intelligence service, SENAIN, which spied on him in the embassy in a years-long operation. “In some instances, [Assange] requested that he be able to choose his own Security Service inside the embassy, even proposing the use of operators of Russian nationality,” the Ecuadorian journal noted, adding that SENAIN looked on such a proposal with something less than unmixed delight.

All of which is to say that Ecuador had ample reasons of its own to show Assange the door and was well within its sovereign rights to do so. He first sought refuge in the embassy after he jumped bail more than seven years ago to evade extradition to Sweden on sexual-assault charges brought by two women. Swedish prosecutors suspended their investigation in 2017 into the most serious allegation of rape because they’d spent five years trying but failing to gain access to their suspect to question him. (That might now change, and so the lawyer for that claimant has filed to reopen the case.) But the British charges remained on the books throughout.

The Times of London leader writer Oliver Kamm has noted that quite apart from being a “victim of a suspension of due process,” Assange is “a fugitive from it.” Yet to hear many febrile commentators tell it, his extradition was simply a matter of one sinister prime minister cackling down the phone to another, with the CIA nodding approvingly in the background, as an international plot unfurled to silence a courageous speaker of truth to power. Worse than that, Assange and his ever-dwindling claque of apologists spent years in the pre-#MeToo era suggesting, without evidence, that the women who accused him of being a sex pest were actually American agents in disguise, and that Britain was simply doing its duty as a hireling of the American empire in staking out his diplomatic digs with a net.

As it happens, a rather lengthy series of U.K. court cases and Assange appeals, leading all the way up to the Supreme Court, determined Assange’s status in Britain.

The New Statesman’s legal correspondent, David Allen Green, expended quite a lot of energy back in 2012 swatting down every unfounded assertion and conspiracy theory for why Assange could not stand before his accusers in Scandinavia without being instantly rendered to Guantanamo Bay. Ironically, as Green noted, going to Stockholm would make it harder for Assange to be sent on to Washington because “any extradition from Sweden … would require the consent of both Sweden and the United Kingdom” instead of just the latter country. Nevertheless, Assange ran and hid and self-pityingly professed himself a “political prisoner.”

Everything about this Bakunin of bullshit and his self-constructed plight has belonged to the theater of the absurd. I suppose it’s only fair that absurdity dominates the discussion now about a newly unsealed U.S. indictment of Assange. According to Britain’s Home Office, the Metropolitan Police arrested Assange for skipping bail, and then, when he arrived at the police station, he was further arrested “in relation to a provisional extradition request from the United States.”

The operative word here is provisional, because that request has yet to be wrung through the same domestic legal protocols as Sweden’s. Assange will have all the same rights he was accorded when he tried to beat his first extradition rap in 2010. At Assange’s hearing, the judge dismissed his claims of persecution by calling him “a narcissist who cannot get beyond his own selfish interests.” Neither can his supporters.

A “dark moment for press freedom,” tweeted the NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden from his security in press-friendly Moscow. “It’s the criminalization of journalism by the Trump Justice Department and the gravest threat to press freedom, by far, under the Trump presidency,” intoned The Intercept’s founding editor Glenn Greenwald who, like Assange, has had that rare historical distinction of having once corresponded with the GRU for an exclusive.

These people make it seem as if Assange is being sought by the Eastern District of Virginia for publishing American state secrets rather than for allegedly conniving to steal them.

The indictment makes intelligible why a grand jury has charged him. Beginning in January 2010, Chelsea Manning began passing to WikiLeaks (and Assange personally) classified documents obtained from U.S. government servers. These included files on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and U.S. State Department cables. But Manning grew hesitant to pilfer more documents.*

At this point, Assange allegedly morphed from being a recipient and publisher of classified documents into an agent of their illicit retrieval. “On or about March 8, 2010, Assange agreed to assist [Chelsea] Manning in cracking a password stored on United States Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Networks, a United States government network used for classified documents and communications,” according to the indictment.

Assange allegedly attempted to help Manning do this using a username that was not hers in an effort to cover her virtual tracks. In other words, the U.S. accuses him of instructing her to hack the Pentagon, and offering to help. This is not an undertaking any working journalist should attempt without knowing that the immediate consequence will be the loss of his job, his reputation, and his freedom at the hands of the FBI.

I might further direct you to Assange’s own unique brand of journalism, when he could still be said to be practicing it. Releasing U.S. diplomatic communiqués that named foreigners living in conflict zones or authoritarian states and liaising with American officials was always going to require thorough vetting and redaction, lest those foreigners be put in harm’s way. Assange did not care—he wanted their names published, according to Luke Harding and David Leigh in WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy. As they recount the story, when Guardian journalists working with WikiLeaks to disseminate its tranche of U.S. secrets tried to explain to Assange why it was morally reprehensible to publish the names of Afghans working with American troops, Assange replied: “Well, they’re informants. So, if they get killed, they’ve got it coming to them. They deserve it.” (Assange denied the account; the names, in the end, were not published in The Guardian, although some were by WikiLeaks in its own dump of the files.)**

James Ball, a former staffer at WikiLeaks—who argues against Assange’s indictment in these pages—has also remarked on Assange’s curious relationship with a notorious Holocaust denier named Israel Shamir:

Shamir has a years-long friendship with Assange, and was privy to the contents of tens of thousands of US diplomatic cables months before WikiLeaks made public the full cache. Such was Shamir’s controversial nature that Assange introduced him to WikiLeaks staffers under a false name. Known for views held by many to be antisemitic, Shamir aroused the suspicion of several WikiLeaks staffers—myself included—when he asked for access to all cable material concerning ‘the Jews,’ a request which was refused.

Shamir soon turned up in Moscow where, according to the Russian newspaper Kommersant, he was offering to write articles based on these cables for $10,000 a pop. Then he traveled to Minsk, where he reportedly handed over a cache of unredacted cables on Belarus to functionaries for Alexander Lukashenko’s dictatorship, whose dissident-torturing secret police is still conveniently known as the KGB.

Fish and guests might begin to stink after three days, but Assange has reeked from long before he stepped foot in his hideaway cubby across from Harrods. He has put innocent people’s lives in danger; he has defamed and tormented a poor family whose son was murdered; he has seemingly colluded with foreign regimes not simply to out American crimes but to help them carry off their own; and he otherwise made that honorable word transparency in as much of a need of delousing as he is.

Yet none of these vices has landed him in the dock. If he is innocent of hacking U.S. government systems—or can offer a valid public-interest defense for the hacking—then let him have his day in court, first in Britain and then in America. But don’t continue to fall for his phony pleas for sympathy, his megalomania, and his promiscuity with the facts. Julian Assange got what he deserved.

[mothlau]

GIRL IN MY TEAM JUST WENT 'OH CMON IT LOOKS GUCCIFER' WHAT DOES THAT FUCKING MEANNNNNN

[sethshead]

It’s ironic that if anything undercuts Assange, it’s the contrast between how lenient his plea deal appears to be, compared to the persecution his supporters claimed the US government had in store for him. Surprise: we are not the sorts of vindictive authoritarian states with which Assange usually collaborates.

And that’s why I’m disappointed by the leniency: Assange *is* acting in concert with a hostile power to subvert American democracy and empower fascists. This thread proves the contortions Wikileaks engaged in to mask their contacts with Russian intelligence and the Trump campaign. His hand was in the shit cookie jar and he deserves more than to simply have it slapped.

[rpgse7enx4]

All that glitters is not gold - The realities behind the image/story/object (a real life aspect): Political meddling in the US Elections, 2016 - By RPG.

United States of America, 2016.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton battle for a place on the US's metaphorical throne. A battle between the Democrats and Republicans.

It being the 58th quadrennial president election, it was a pretty major event that year; sparking new interests for either a "new America", or an America interested in repairing its society.

Trump wanted to bring a right-wing approach to US politics as a political candidate, advertising a campaign which was followed by masses; in the form of populist, nationalist rallies and visits to different states in hopes to convince those with power to vote.

The election was faulted, very much so in fact. December 9th 2016 gave light to a new internal controversy that exposed the inner workings of a operation to swindle the election onto one side. To thwart the potential of a win by the Democrats.

Headed by the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), an thorough investigation was launched that spearheaded and identified the entity behind multiple cyber attacks; those of Russian origin.

As the CIA issued an assessment to lawmakers in the US senate, the FBI followed suit. Barrack Obama intialised a "full review" into what exactly happened, and what had caused it to happen. DNR James R. Clapper, in early 2017, testified that the campaign to swindle the election was more than just base-level hacking of email services and internal agency computer systems; making light that fake news was to blame for much of it, and that dissemination of such problem would need to be rid of to partially uncover how the operation took place.

Facebook revealed during the election that a company with Russian origin, owned by Yevgeny Prigozhin (Former leader of Wagner Group, businessman who owns "Concord Catering", Putin's chef and internal delegate to Vladimir Putin), had bought advertisements amounting to $100,000 of which 25% of the total were specifically targeting the US.

A second modus operandi of Russian involvement in the campaign swindling was from the GRU, or Russia's Main Directorate of General Staff of the Armed Forces. This was exposed when the FBI, along with a slew of other government agencies uncovered that emails of volunteers and employees of the Clinton political campaign, along with the campaign chairman John Podesta, and the hacking of computer systems of the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee) and the DNC (Democratic National Committee). As a result of these breaches, the GRU obtained hundreds of classified documents; of which the GRU arranged leaks of damaging documented material to WikiLeaks, and under GRU alias/personas "Guccifer 2.0" and "DCLeaks".

You could say it was like a game of cat and mouse; the GRU having its tail chased by the FBI and the GRU always finding a way to escape and cover up. The greed of those perpetrators who wanted nothing but good for themselves and misdeed for others; hypocritical and two-faced.

RPG-7

[luxuryandsports1]

Gucci Guccification Fashion Logo Luxury Brand Premium Bedding Set Price From: 86.99 | | [Buy it now at] : https://luxuryandsports.com/product/gucci-guccification-fashion-logo-luxury-brand-premium-bedding-set/ ✅http://Luxuryandsports.com https://Facebook.com/luxuryandsports/ https://Pinterest.com/luxuryandsports2022/ ✅https://twitter.com/luxuryandsport2 https://www.instagram.com/luxuryandsports.official/ #Trend #halloween #chirstmas #gift #funny #cool #Sum Gucci Guccification Fashion Logo Luxury Brand Premium Bedding Set Gucci Guccification Fashion Logo Luxury Brand Premium Bedding Set Introduction Experience the epitome of luxury with the Gucci Guccification Fashion Logo Luxury Brand Premium Bedding Set. This exquisite bedding set combines the iconic Gucci fashion logo with premium materials to create a truly elevated sleeping experience. Cra...

[superhyp01]

Gucci Guccific Logo Brand Bedding Set Be... Get here: https://superhyp.com/product/gucci-guccific-logo-brand-bedding-set-bedspread-bedroom-luxury-home-decor/?feed_id=31815&_unique_id=6530dd558a3b2

[mychampagne-mybubbles]

Guccification

Just a reminder, there is no such a thing as RANDOMNESS with Harry.

At the doors of the second THE NORTH FACE GUCCI collection, Mr. Gucci Ambassador appeared enrolled with iconic TNF padded jacket in his papwalks around Boston at 60F/15C wearing training shorts.

October 2021 Love on tour

As a side note, hubby have ofc easy access. This makes me wonder about their deals…

[slumsaintt]

[clotheshorse90]

#nationalhandbagday ok they are not handbags but they come courtesy of @Gucci @hermes . . Share your favourite bag and @ me. . #leroydawkins #gucci #guccigang #guccibag #guccy #guccicommunity #guccify #guccifyyourself #guccification #guccimane #accessories (at London, United Kingdom) https://www.instagram.com/p/BowwNShlcfi/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=lyttsf5rmzzw

[citrinetrend-blog]

Check this awesome item for sale on my eBay store, link in bio! #gucci #guccitshirt #guccibelt #guccification #lv #prada #streetwear #gg #guccicap #guccishoes #guccibag #luxuryfashion #luxurylifestyle https://www.instagram.com/p/BnGGaB8AEI6/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=bkgl0yw0x52

[minimallyaesthetic]

Look at this... 👀

Look at this... 👀 https://pin.it/57kTXKa

https://www.redbubble.com/i/t-shirt/Guccification-Cute-Grey-Nerdy-Cat-Aesthetic-Design-x-Minimal-Already-Dead-by-MinimalWearX/102284317.FB110.XYZ

[sleepybrowne]

Dodgers to the World Series

[hazydreamtime]

I have been obsessed with Gucci for a good while now. I finally bought the wallet that goes with my bag! The Gucci Courrier special collection has been my favorite so far. Thank you Gucci! #gucci #guccicourrier #guccify #guccification #gucciobsessed #guccifyyourself