Here’s What They’re Trying To Distract You From With The Trump Indictment

Everyone knows that the current Manhattan grand jury case against President Trump is dubious at best. …

So why is it getting so much media attention, especially after it was reported that the grand jury wouldn’t meet for close to a month?

Many pundits, sources, and journalists (myself included), believed that the Trump indictment was completely dead on arrival after several postponements, and the news that the grand jury would be taking an extended break.

Then, just like that, literally that same afternoon the grand jury was reported to be taking a long break from the case, the Trump indictment was announced. …

At first, I was shocked, but it very quickly dawned on me that the deep state, and the powers that be, are using this as a distraction. …

They’re trying to distract you from the biggest government power grab since the Patriot Act—the advancement and passage of the RESTRICT Act and other similar legislation.

Just take a look at this insane BS Lindsey Graham recently said on Fox News, I can’t tell if he is drunk, or simply dishonest—Graham co-sponsored the RESTRICT Act, which you can read in its entirety here:

Are you SERIOUS? Look at this deep-state RINO trying to BS us—there's NO WAY…He CO-SPONSORED THE BILL!!! https://t.co/AS0WphLxWU

— WeLoveTrump (@WeLovePresTrump) March 30, 2023

They're trying to use the Trump indictment to distract you from the RESTRICT ACT and the other Orwellian shit they're trying to pass—do NOT fall for it.#RESTRICTAct #Trump

— Vince Quill (@VinceQuill) March 30, 2023

Do NOT let them do this—remember the Patriot Act? https://t.co/zM7mYDdqdJ

— WeLoveTrump (@WeLovePresTrump) March 30, 2023

Reason Magazine sounded the alarm:

“Would the RESTRICT Act—a.k.a. the TikTok ban bill—criminalize the use of VPNs?” Reason’s Elizabeth Nolan Brown asked of the potential impact on virtual private networks that shield internet users’ identities and locations.

The answer is: in many cases, yes—but wait, there’s more! The RESTRICT Act proposed by Sen. Mark Warner (D–Va.) and a list of co-sponsors including Sen. John Thune (R–S.D.), doesn’t mention “TikTok,” or parent company “ByteDance,” or even “social media.”

Instead, it hands a whole lot of power to the government, particularly the Secretary of Commerce, “to review and prohibit certain transactions between persons in the United States and foreign adversaries” regarding information and communications technology.

 

🚨🚨🚨 Tucker Carlson sounds the ALARM on the RESTRICT bill that would restructure the internet and make us just like the CCP, don't believe the 'lawmakers' trying to ban TikTok. They just want to control YOU. 🚨🚨🚨https://t.co/p6O7E94DXw

— WeLoveTrump (@WeLovePresTrump) March 29, 2023

Think about this and think about this hard—do you really want to give any politician this power, ESPECIALLY the Biden crime syndicate? Do not allow them to use fear and crisis to control you. TikTok sucks, but the U.S. federal government sucks more.https://t.co/G2k9lNHjvP

— WeLoveTrump (@WeLovePresTrump) March 29, 2023

Bein Crypto echoed similar warnings:

The scary part is the potential punishment for violators. This includes fines of up to a million dollars or 20 years in jail, or both.

Balaji Srinivasan, the former CTO of Coinbase, maintains that The RESTRICT Act is reminiscent of China’s Great Firewall.

It creates a virtual barrier within the United States, which emulates China’s strict internet control policies with the stated goal of competing with and surpassing the Asian powerhouse.