Open Thread

So, you’ve started on Kings and Queen and you suddenly figure out a really cool plot development – one which will just make the story vastly more interesting and fun…and then realize it means you’re going to have to do quite a bit of ret-con on Shadow Army because of it. You smile and do it anyway – because fun is what stories are supposed to be about.

Trump is still battling away. He’s got the next week to get something so strong that the Courts and/or the State legislatures can’t ignore it. We’ll see if he can do this. To me, the obviousness of the steal grows day by day…but I’m not a Court nor am I a GOP State legislator who simply may be chicken. At all events, Biden’s best hope is to crawl into the White House with no real authority and a complete inability to permanently alter anything. Meanwhile, looming in 2022 is what may be a blowout GOP year.

And I heard that Trump is considering appointing a special counsel to look into voter fraud in 2020. To be sure, Biden could immediately fire the guy and the MSM would cheer…but for all fair minded people, that would essentially be an admission of guilt. Here is a good rundown on all the oddities of 2020’s vote.

Looks like the GOP will win IA-02 by six votes. Never doubt that you should vote. There are seven Iowa Democrats kicking themselves this morning.

The GOP – including Trump – are all-in on the Georgia Senate runoffs. I’ve been swatting at GOPers (or supposed GOPers) telling us to boycott the campaigns. That would be suicidal. I know the GOP sucks – but it’s all we got. And we can’t let the Democrats take the Senate. The end.

18 thoughts on “Open Thread

  1. Amazona November 29, 2020 / 5:17 pm

    I’m listening to the Michael Knowles podcast this morning while building a device to keep
    Boogie the Cat from breaking into his automatic feeder to cheat on his diet. (I do have an exciting life.) Anyway, after about the 40th repetition of the word “concede”—-Dems think Trump should concede, some alleged Republicans think Trump should concede, what will happen if Trump doesn’t concede, blah blah blah—I had to take a break to comment on the strange idea that the outcome of the election is up to Trump, and that if he would just “give up” it would be over.

    I think this ties in with the superficiality of understanding so many, perhaps even most, Americans have of systems. What if Trump were to come out and say “I give up, Joe. I concede.” And then the Court rules that millions of votes were illegal and according to the law, Trump was the winner all along based on legal votes? The sillies would claim that wouldn’t matter because he “conceded”. Well, this is not a cage match where if you tap out you lose, no matter what. This is a SYSTEM that is bases the winner of the election on who received the most legal votes.

    I haven’t heard anyone point out that it is not within the power of the president to declare himself the loser, any more than it is within the power of the former vice president to do legitimately declare himself the winner. They can “declare” and “concede” all the want to, it is still going to come down to the numbers.

    • Retired Spook November 29, 2020 / 5:39 pm

      It seems to me that the standard for conceding has already been set by the Demcrats. Hillary Clinton told Joe Biden not to concede under any circumstances, and even though she did eventually call Trump and concede in 2016, she spent the next 4 years trying to take it back.

  2. dbschmidt November 29, 2020 / 7:47 pm

    Well, aside from a judge trying to steal the election for a NY house seat by fiat just ran across a story that ” Former Vice President Joe Biden’s plan to do away with the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) could bankrupt the entire firearms industry.” Even though I tend to prefer off calibers–I have been hunting for a Henry Bigboy H006 for months and all local “Gold Dealers” do not have or are on back order. Get what you can while it is still America.

    On the other hand…A site I go to for a little warped humor has among other things a meme of Rod Serling (Twilight Zone) pronouncing “Image a world where YouTube, Twitter and Facebook merge to become known as YouTwitFace.”

  3. simoneee9 November 29, 2020 / 7:55 pm

    Did we ever work out exactly what Ivanka was being paid to do?

    • Retired Spook November 29, 2020 / 8:04 pm

      Did you ever work out what Hunter Biden was being paid to do?

      • simoneee9 November 29, 2020 / 9:16 pm

        Pretty sure Hunter isn’t a Presidential Advisor.

      • Retired Spook November 29, 2020 / 10:44 pm

        Good thing.

    • Amazona November 30, 2020 / 3:04 pm

      Did we ever “work out” that Ivanka is even being paid? Only those deep in the fever swamp of hysterical Trump hatred would fret about something like this without even finding out. Poor sad stilly little fussbudgets, snouting around for something to be outraged about.

      The 36-year-old is working as a White House advisor for her father, President Donald Trump, but her annual salary in that position is a big fat zero.

      According to The Associated Press, Ivanka and husband Jared Kushner chose not to take a salary in the White House

    • Amazona November 30, 2020 / 3:09 pm

      No, Hunter was a Vice Presidential adviser, letting Daddy know he was going to be investigated so Daddy could step in with taxpayer dollars to save his sorry a**. and advising Daddy on which “business” deals he could use his status and position as Vice President as leverage to make them both rich.

      He may have advised Daddy to take that no-interest five million dollar “loan” from the Communist Party of China, especially as it seems to lack some details, like when it has to be repaid.

  4. Retired Spook November 30, 2020 / 8:00 pm

    I figured someone might try to off Joe Biden before the inauguration, but I never suspected it might be his dog.

    • Amazona November 30, 2020 / 8:26 pm

      You bring up an interesting question: If someone is actually elected to the presidency (unlike Joe Biden at this point) and he dies before he is inaugurated, does the person who ran for the vice presidency on the same ticket then get inaugurated instead? I never looked up the line of succession for a situation like this.

      I always thought that having Kammy waiting in the wings would be only marginally less threatening than having Hillary there. Yikes. Talk about having a bullseye on your back! Maybe we should start now having bumper stickers printed saying Joe Biden Did Not Commit Suicide.

      Anyway, I really can’t see Joe being so active in playing with Fido that he would get hurt. More likely, he stumbled over the dog on his way to his Lazy-Boy with his bowl of tapioca and then asked Jill “Do we have a dog?”

      • Retired Spook November 30, 2020 / 8:42 pm

        Several people addressed your question immediately after the election.

        Bottom line, it’s not exactly certain what happens if the winning candidate dies before the Electoral College votes or before Congress certifies that vote in early January since it’s never happened.

      • Retired Spook December 1, 2020 / 11:27 am

        If someone is actually elected to the presidency (unlike Joe Biden at this point) and he dies before he is inaugurated

        I think a more important question would be, what happens if Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are inaugurated on January 20th, and in subsequent days, weeks or months, irrefutable evidence surfaces that there indeed was massive fraud, including, but not necessarily limited to thousands of dead people voting, tens of thousands of people voting in a state where they were no longer residents or voting in multiple states, hundreds of thousands of people who didn’t vote, but someone stole their mail-in ballot and voted for them where the signature wasn’t verified, and millions of votes that completely defy statistical analysis? And that doesn’t even address the likely tens of millions of votes that social media changed by censoring information and directing searches in ways that hurt Trump and/or benefited Harris/Biden.

        We all remember multiple news organizations descending on Florida in early 2001, bound and determined to prove that Al Gore actually won, only to find (unanimously) that George Bush did indeed win. Now I doubt that ANY complicit agenda media organization will go on a crusade to prove that Trump actually won in 2020, but the way we get news has changed so dramatically since 2001, that there is no way that efforts by independent investigative journalists (YES, JOURNALISTS) like John Solomon, Kimberley Strassel, Lara Logan, Sharyl Attkisson, and Sara Carter, just to name a few, will be silenced. Add to that the entire crew at The Blaze, as well as a number of writers at, and you’ve got a formidable group.

      • Amazona December 1, 2020 / 5:42 pm

        As far as I can tell, if a president is inaugurated he is the president, period, barring impeachment and a subsequent vote to remove him from office. And it would be hard to impeach Joe himself on this fraud, because its planning and execution are clearly way above his ability to understand much less orchestrate and execute.

        While the Constitution does not address overturning a presidential election due to fraud, it does give the Court the ability to rule based on the Constitution, and it is possible that a ruling that this election violated the Constitution could end up getting the election declared invalid. However, I doubt that the Court would then award the presidency to Trump—it would be more likely to call for a new election. Even the Catholic Church in its most rigid eras agreed that a marriage based on fraud was not legitimate or binding and I am sure this is abundant case law making the same point. However, if both Biden and Harris were declared to not have a legal claim to their offices, that would leave the presidency open until a new election could be held, and it would probably devolve onto the Speaker of the House.

        Or, backing up to the Electoral College, if the votes from several states were determined to be invalid due to fraud perhaps the Electoral College vote itself would be declared invalid as well, and a new EC would have to be named and vote, without the states named in the fraud being allowed to be represented.

        But no matter what the remedies might be, I do think that it is a general matter of law that a contract based upon a fraud is not binding.

  5. Cluster December 1, 2020 / 8:27 am

    “Do we have a dog?”

    hahahahahahahahahaha good one

    So for 3 years the media chased a Russia collusion hoax because they were convinced there was chicanery in the 2016 election that went to Trump. They parsed every angle of that story 24/7 alarming their viewers that the “walls are closing in on Trump”, despite zero evidence. We all now know there was not even one morsel of evidence that could lead anyone to that conclusion but that did not stop our national media.

    Fast forward to 2020 and this statement from a world renowned cyber security expert:

    I conclude with high confidence that the election 2020 data were altered in all battleground states resulting in hundreds of thousands of votes that were cast for President Trump to be transferred to Vice President Biden. These alterations were the result of systemic and widespread exploitable vulnerabilities in DVS, Scytl/SOE Software and Smartmatic systems that enabled operators to achieve the desired results. In my view, the evidence is overwhelming and incontrovertible.

    Where’s the media?? Absent. AWOL. No curiosity whatsoever, no walls closing in. They are all mouthing the establishment/ruling class narrative and coronating the pedophile.


    • Amazona December 1, 2020 / 9:05 am

      The media are still pounding the idea that evidence is the same as proof, so in the absence of proof like you get in courts the evidence simply doesn’t matter. It’s what they do, and their mindless minions regurgitate it.

      For a little while, till it got too ridiculous for even them to keep it up so they just dropped the whole subject and pretended like it didn’t exist at all, one of the ways they tried to dismiss the significance of the Hunter Biden laptop was that it represented mere “hearsay”. Aside from the fact that that was profoundly stupid—it was in Hunter’s own words—they seem to have forgotten that the ENTIRE impeachment charade was based on hearsay. And faulty distorted hearsay at that. But they get away with it, because their audience is dumb and doesn’t know the difference between hearsay and testimony.

      Ditto for the testimony of the poll watchers and other witnesses to the many many frauds perpetrated by the Dems in the election—it is often sneeringly dismissed as mere “hearsay”. No, dummies, when you personally observe something and tell someone what you saw that is testimony—and testimony IS evidence.

      The dumbing down of America is the ONLY thing that has let the Left get as strong as it it.

      As for “reforming” the media, first you have to pick a medium—in this case you are probably talking about the television “news” medium, which I think is the biggest culprit. That is tricky territory, as it involves dealing with the 1st Amendment. I think the only thing we could do is try, somehow, to define the role of the press as media—print, television and radio–required to present to the public actual and accurate accounting of events.

      Just as we are now talking about removing the legal protections of Section 230 so that the major social media platforms could lose legal protections against slander, libel and other accusations because they have proved to be not just a conduit of statements from third parties but active participants in what is and is not disseminated through their platforms. That makes them part of the messages, which should make them liable for the messages.

      Finding some way to make the alleged “news” media, whether television or print, responsible for what they say is more problematic because they have a 1st Amendment right to express their opinions. It is when those opinions are presented as objective fact that we run into problems with them, but I don’t see a way to control what they say without violating our own standards and belief systems.

      I think the approach in the case of the 2020 election would be to identify the opinions of the media as, because they are so flagrantly biased and skewed to promote a specific political agenda and party, in-kind political contributions and deal with them as such. Perhaps we should have a Congressional investigation into election interference and require those being grilled to run the entire thing on their stations, so those who watch can learn that they were lied to, manipulated and herded into a Leftist pen where they were harvested for their votes.

      We might consider the possibility of requiring a chyron stating that the person speaking is giving his or her personal opinion and this should not be considered as objective fact when someone like Nicole Wallace or Joy Reid is gabbling on about some hate-driven nonsense. The problem with requiring labeling of “opinion” vs “news” is that it comes down to an judgment made by a person, or persons, and that is where everything always falls apart.

      But the best, and easiest, solution is to provide an alternative—an alternative that not only provides real unadulterated news but also educates an ignorant public about the difference between news and opinion.

      • Cluster December 1, 2020 / 9:21 am

        The dumbing down of America is the ONLY thing that has let the Left get as strong as it is.

        Correct, and by design. Our kids now are weaponized, over emotional apparatchiks who subscribe to the manufactured issues of climate change and systemic racism which gives space to the ruling class to exert more control in the name of equality. Anyone who doesn’t see that has their head up their ass.

        Re: media reform, I have no problem with opinion shows and actually encourage Democrats to speak loudly about who they are and what they actually believe in, but that doesn’t happen. They are dishonest so they always cloak their lunacy but that lunacy needs to be disclosed so MSNBC, CNN, Fox, etc. should be clearly labeled as “Opinion Based Programming” period. The word “news” or “journalism” should never be mentioned.

  6. Cluster December 1, 2020 / 8:47 am

    It would be hard to find a bigger piece of shit than Obama. The most unimpressive “man” in any room just finished writing his third book about himself and said this when interviewed:

    In an interview with Stephen Colbert to promote his new memoir, former US president Barack Obama said that ‘puzzling out’ the biggest political issues was ‘professionally really satisfying’. Obama is constitutionally barred from seeking a third term after his two election victories in 2008 and 2012. The pair also swiped at Donald Trump, with Colbert saying that the current president had shown that ‘there’s a whole bunch of stuff you don’t actually have to do’ and Obama responding: ‘Who knew’?The pair also swiped at Donald Trump, with Colbert saying that the current president had shown that ‘there’s a whole bunch of stuff you don’t actually have to do’ and Obama responding: ‘Who knew’?

    Trump accomplished more constructive results for this country in one year than Obama did in eight years, but that doesn’t stop the sycophant Colbert from bringing out his knee pads for “the one they have all been waiting for”.

    America would be much better off without “men” like this

Comments are closed.