So, Sarah Palin lost in the Alaska at-large special election. More importantly, the GOP lost – even though the GOP scored 60% of the total vote. This is because they use ranked-choice voting…a system designed to provide confusion and allow well organized minorities to dominate. It was put in place by the machinations of Alaska’s allegedly GOP Ruling Class because they didn’t want any more Palins. The election in November, however, even with ranked-choice voting will almost certainly produce a Republican House member.
The city of Jackson, MS is out of water: they have no water to drink. You might be surprised to hear such a thing. I mean, the city sits on the Pearl River and it isn’t like it has needed to increase water capacity as, bucking the trend in the South, it has been steadily losing population since 1980. But, out of water. It is also a majority black city, and this means that, also bucking the trend in the South, the government has been increasingly leftist over the past couple decades. So, who’s at fault for the lack of water?
You are, of course! You: white Republicans! You forced the liberal Democrat (and largely black) government of Jackson to neglect the water system! If you hadn’t been such racists, you’d have been looking closely at Jackson, MS and the minute you saw the water system starting to deteriorate, you would have parachuted the billion dollars they need to fix it. But you didn’t. Because you’re a bunch of white, racist, MAGA meanies.
Apparently at least from some power companies you can get what amounts to a smart thermostat…and they offer you some rebates if you’ll install one. Fine print: when they need to reduce power consumption, they take control of your thermostat. To me, the whole thing is kinda funny – it seems clear in the article that the victims of this are good, little liberals who wanted to do their part…until it got hot outside. One of the reasons I keep my 2004 Saturn in good repair is because it is a car which has absolutely no connection to the grid…you buy an EV, and I guarantee you outside parties can get into it and shut it off any time they want.
Reminder: the Left wants us to live in an impoverished future. The wealthy, American lifestyle is “unsustainable”, in their view. Now, I don’t think that the bosses really believe in climate change…but it is a useful tool of control, isn’t it? Sorry, guys, but we really gotta save the planet…so, no AC for you! No meat, either. Nope, you can’t have a car. Here’s your Life Pod. Eat the bug paste and shut up…
USCD has backed off plans to host a freshman orientation which excluded white people. They got some push back on it – but we are seeing more and more of this and it is happening not simply because of increased Leftism, but an increased sense that at least Pudding Brain’s DOJ won’t do anything about it. Rely on it, guys: any attempt to exclude anyone based on race – especially in any institution which receives taxpayer funds – is a massive violation of multiple federal laws. Huge criminal and civil penalties await anyone who would do such a thing…if anyone will enforce the law. Big if.
We don’t live under law any longer – haven’t, really, since Bill Clinton was allowed to skate on perjury simply because he’s a Democrat. What we live under is whatever the law-enforcers decide is the law…and if a written law doesn’t work to their favor, it is a dead letter. And if there isn’t a law you violated, they’ll make one up if they need to take you out. If we get back in 2024, we really have to send some people to jail – lots and lots of people – if we want even a chance of restoring the Rule of Law in the United States. Every officer of the law and the courts who refused their duty should be fired…and jailed if they violated even the least law while in office.
Kari is FANTASTIC
From today’s Dr. Robert Malone newsletter:
I describe that mass-formation can emerge in a more or less spontaneous way (as happened in the first stages of Nazism in Germany) or that it can be artificially provoked through indoctrination and propaganda (as in the former Soviet Union). In this process, both the elite and the population itself shoulder responsibility—he first because they actively manipulate the population and the second because they prefer to stay blind and, ultimately, commit atrocities towards those who don’t join them.
I think it is obvious that the recent acceleration of the demonization of political opposition might very well be a purposeful step toward justifying some kind of atrocity, or at the very least some kind of extreme action.
Saul Alinsky said “we are dealing with people who are merely hiding psychosis behind a political mask.” While he was saying this from behind his own mask, trying to demonize the Constitutionalist Right, he makes an excellent point, one which I have been making for years but in a more succinct fashion.
Malone also observed, in the same article: Man has always fallen prey to to….the illusion of rational understanding and control, the resistance to question oneself critically as a human, the pursuit of short-term convenience.
Several embalmers across the country have been observing many large, and sometimes very long, “fibrous” and rubbery clots inside the corpses they treat, and are speaking out about their findings.
The string-like structures differ in size, but the longest can be as long as a human leg and the thickest can be as thick as a pinky finger.
“I had a 49-year-old, was totally healthy getting ready for work, collapses dead. Next thing you know, I’m embalming him, and guess what I’m pulling out of him? The same stuff. Same stuff! He was totally fine, totally healthy. Shocked everybody. Find out, oh, yeah. Not only was he vaccinated, he was boosted,” Hirschman recalled.
Warning: Some icky photos of these kinds of clots.
Note to election rigging deniers: Your new sometimes-hero Bill Barr (who can’t pick a lane and stay in it because it always depends on who he’s sucking up to at the time) admitted to the fact that the 2020 election was rigged by him, as AG, as well as by the FBI, with the complicity of the Agenda Media.
Barr has defended not making public the existence of a federal investigation into Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden’s son, before the election, saying that it would have affected the outcome.
Yes, full disclosure of important information DOES affect the outcome of elections. That’s why it is important to have important information objectively made public, so people can make informed decisions.
When anyone in power puts his thumb on the scale, to affect the outcome, he is guilty of election-rigging.
From Coffee and Covid:
This is the single most important article on my Substack (which has over 700 articles). This one article should bring down the house of cards if there is just one honest person in a position of authority in the world.
The key facts in a nutshell:
The Israeli health authority knew the vaccines were harming people: the side effects of the vaccine are neither mild nor short term. In fact, in 65% of the neurological cases that mentioned duration, the symptoms are all on-going.
They also established causality: the side effects were caused by the vaccine. This is something no one else had been able to establish before.
They don’t know how serious the harm is because they only looked at the data for the top five categories. Cardiovascular was #6. So they have only looked at a fraction of the data.
The researchers do not know the prevalence of these serious side effects because they were just provided with the numerator, not the denominator (similar to VAERS).
The Israeli authorities deliberately covered up the safety issues and hid it from the world, issuing a false report essentially saying “there is nothing new to see here folks, move along.”
The only good news in all of this is that Israel protected Palestinians from getting this very unsafe vaccine. That was very humane of the Israelis.
As of September 4, 2022 no one is being held accountable and everyone is ignoring this bombshell story:
There is a press blackout on coverage in Israel of this. The Israel media refuses to even look at the evidence.
Nobody in Israel is being held accountable for this corruption. There isn’t even an investigation.
Nobody in the worldwide medical community is speaking out about the corruption either despite the fact that it affects people everywhere in the world.
There is no coverage of this in any worldwide mainstream media.
No public official, public health official, or mainstream media anywhere in the world is even calling for an investigation, nobody wants to see the original expert report, and nobody wants to see the safety data they gathered.
We have the full video and we have the slides that were presented; use the Contact Me link if you are a health authority and want to see it before it is released to the public.
Just to be sure the CDC knows about this, I just emailed hundreds of people at the CDC who are involved in the COVID vaccines (including Rochelle Walensky) to let them know that the report and video are available. All they have to do is hit reply. I bet not a single person at the CDC wants to see it. We are about to find out just how deep the corruption runs at the CDC.
This isn’t surprising that they ignore this. All negative data on the vaccine is ignored. For example, when I discovered that young Canadian doctors were dying at a more than 12X normal after the second booster, the Canadian Medical Association, whose job it is to to be an advocate for the health of doctors, refused to comment. I sent five requests and they ignored all requests. They should change their website to say that they are an advocate for the drug companies, not the health of doctors.
The Israel Ministry of Health (MoH) took 18 months from the launch date of the vaccine before they looked at the COVID vaccine safety data to see what it said.
They only started collecting safety data in December 2021, one year after rolling out the vaccines to the public. Few people knew this.
In December 2021, they tasked an outside expert panel led by Prof. Mati Berkowitz, a leading Israeli expert on pharmacology and toxicology from Asaf Harofe hospital, to examine the safety data they collected over the next 6 months (from early December to the end of May, 2022).
The panel presented their findings to MoH personnel on or about Jun 6, 2022 in a Zoom call that was secretly recorded. They found that the COVID vaccines were much more dangerous to people than the world authorities admitted. They found serious adverse events that were never disclosed by Pfizer or any world government. These adverse events were also not found to be short term as the public was told.
They also determined causality, something no other world health authority has ever been willing to do (because other governments never looked at the data either). Causality was both obvious and easy to prove using the re-challenge data that was collected (you can’t do this using the US VAERS data, for example).
In short, the panel determined that the government was misleading the people of Israel.
We still don’t know the whole extent of how dangerous the vaccines are because the outside team only looked at the top 5 most frequently cited events.
Both the Israeli authorities and scientists analyzing the Ministry of Health (MoH) data acted to cover up the harms by releasing a fabricated report to the public to make the vaccine look perfectly safe and claim that there was nothing wrong..
It is only thanks to the efforts of one courageous individual who released the recording of the full Zoom meeting between the MoH and their expert panel that we now know what was said at that meeting and what the data actually showed. Otherwise the world would still be in the dark.
Leaders of our “trusted institutions” all over the world said absolutely nothing after the news broke on August 20, 2022. This suggests that there is widespread corruption in the medical community, government agencies, among public health officials, the mainstream media, and social media companies worldwide: they will not acknowledge any event that goes against the mainstream narrative.
This is a level of corruption that is unprecedented. The atrocities here are clear cut. Everyone should be speaking out and calling for a full investigation and fully evaluating the safety data collected by the Israel government.
What you should do
The three most important things you can do to put a stop to these dangerous vaccines are:
Read this article including the recommended links in the References section.
Share this article with as many people as you know (e.g., share on all your social media accounts now)
Sound familiar? Sound like the same kind of coverup and lie machine we have been experiencing here in the United States? To this day our own government is pushing these dangerous drugs on BABIES.
Even with the expected shortened life expectancy due to these drugs—more to the point, of governments foisting them off on citizens—-the effects of this massive scheme will be felt for six or seven decades, as the people the drugs didn’t kill outright suffer debilitating conditions. This isn’t even taking into consideration the likely effects on reproduction or the possible effects on subsequent generations due to mutations in eggs and/or sperm.
This is starting to make Stalin’s purges and Hitler’s Final Solution look like warmup acts
Amazona: What was the “power” the few violent participants were seeking? None of them ever expressed, on that day or any other day, a desire to overthrow the government and assume its powers. So what, exactly, was the “power” you think was the goal?
First of all, the January 6 siege of the United States Capitol by Donald Trump supporters was just the most visible and ugly manifestation of a months-long effort by Donald Trump to overturn the 2020 presidential election—the first president in the history of the United States to do so. So that was his and their goal, and the “power” you speak of was to retain the power of the presidency by any means.
Regarding Jonah Goldberg, you explained to me that he is an expert on fascism, and his book Liberal Fascism was foundational in your understanding of politics. And yet, when Goldberg correctly recognized the January 6 insurrection, and Donald Trump’s role in it, as fascist, you quickly change your tune. Now, according to you, Goldberg has fallen victim to Trump Derangement Syndrome for reasons you can’t fathom. (Hint: He is an expert on fascism.) This is yet another example of how far you are willing to pervert your own understanding of politics. There is no point in lecturing anyone about the Tenth Amendment when you are no longer willing to honor the results of free and fair elections. It is truly sad that you would allow yourself to be compromised to this extent in order to support a man of such meager moral attributes as Donald Trump.
You claim Goldberg “can’t come up with any examples” of Trump following the path of fascism. And yet he cites the most glaring example: Trump’s attempt to overturn a legitimate election. It is smacking you in the face, but you ignore it.
You constantly downplay the seriousness of the January 6 insurrection, claiming it “fell short of a bar fight.” This is so absurd as to be dishonest. BTW, did you hear about the Jan. 6 protestor and Trump supporter who was sentence to ten years in prison last week for attacking police officers? The ironic part being that the attacker, Thomas Webster, is himself a retired police officer. Go tell him he got ten years for “a bar fight.”
How can you tell forty is lying? By the sound of his keyboard clicking.
No, Donald Trump did not, most emphatically did NOT, try to overturn the election. He tried to push investigations into its legitimacy and he tried to convince electors that they were not legally required to accept vote counts (“certifications”) that were clearly not certifiable.
It is increasingly obvious that to the Left a real investigation into the many many examples of election fraud, rigging and general malfeasance would, prior to the inauguration, likely change the outcome. So to them/you these efforts might be considered an effort to overturn the stated election results, which you choose to define as “the election” but which remain merely the stated results.
There is no point in lecturing anyone about the Tenth Amendment when you are no longer willing to honor the results of free and fair elections.
And here we come back to the issue of whether or not this WAS a “free and fair election”. And millions of us don’t think a “free and fair election” is possible with:
A federal agency in an opposition administration participating in a series of frauds to deceive a court (though perjury) and the people (with the collusion of an Agenda Media) to spy on an opposition candidate and his team and to create lies about him to influence the election.
A federal agency withholding information from the public by lying about it, while pressuring media to withhold this information as well, and having 51 officials and former officials publish a lie to conceal the truth from the public, (When the former Attorney General of the United States admits that this hidden information would have changed the outcome of the election, which is why he supported its suppression, that is proof that this was NOT a “free and fair election” but one controlled to a great extent by the Left.)
Untold tens of thousands of ballots cast under illegitimate illegally altered election laws yet counted as valid votes is not a definition of a free and fair election.
So stop with the constant bleating of the preferred narrative. The wheels fell off this months ago, and we are just waiting for a free and fair election to replace the toadies and fellow travelers and supporters of the closest thing we have ever had to a real insurrection—-#RESIST.
Goldberg could not “correctly recognize the January 6 insurrection” because under no legitimate or legal definition of that very important word could the formless, disorganized rabble that occasionally became violent on January 6 accurately be called an “insurrection”. Not even an “attempted insurrection”. Not even a wannabe insurrection. It was an insurrection about as much as the dance fighting in West Side Story was gang warfare. Without an organized violent effort to OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT with the intention of ASSUMING ITS POWERS it was just another riot. That’s legal, official, case law, which trumps (so to speak) some fanatic’s overheated emoting based on personal dislike.
You make my point for me by explaining that the “the most glaring example (of) Trump’s attempt to overturn a legitimate election” is Goldberg’s (and I assume your own) foundation for the howl of “fascist”. But this is wholly dependent on your personal conviction this was in fact a legitimate election (and the evidence that it was not is smacking you in the face but you won’t admit it) and the lie that Trump ever took a single action to “overturn” it.
He challenged it. Decisions are challenged all the time and the usual procedure is to then examine the facts to determine whether or not the challenge is legitimate. When Trump challenged these election results the outrage, the obstacles to openly examining the allegations, the refusal to allow certain critical aspects to be appraised, if anything lend credence to the growing belief that the Left’s obstruction of a free and fair investigation was the equivalent of overturning the election by manipulating it from beginning to end.
Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers Using a Dangerous Weapon; Civil Disorder; Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon; Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or grounds with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon; Engaging in Physical Violence in a Restricted Building or Grounds with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon; Disorderly Conduct Within the Capitol Grounds or Buildings; Act of Physical Violence Within the Capitol Grounds or Buildings
These are the charges against Webster. As you can see, out of the carefully padded-out litany of charges, all but two are basically "parading". That narrows it down to two: Engaging in Physical Violence in a Restricted Building or Grounds with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon; Act of Physical Violence Within the Capitol Grounds or Buildings And even these link the alleged severity of the acts to their location—“in a Restricted Building or Grounds” or “Within the Capitol Grounds or Buildings”, making it clear that the acts themselves were not nearly as big a deal as where they took place.
So what did this threat to democracy and the future of our nation actually DO? He hit AT an officer with a flagpole …..tackling the officer to the ground and trying to rip off his helmet. So I stand by my comment that the level of violence was less than in an average bar fight. One thing missing from all the breathless accounts of this allegedly savage attack is how badly hurt the cop was.
So please stop lying, if only for a moment, if only to see what it feels like. I never said the riot was a bar fight. I said the level of violence exhibited by the few Trump supporters convicted was a lower level than that of the average bar fight. I’m sure the cop was scared. I’m sure he felt threatened. I’m sure that having this big guy on top of him pulling on his helmet (or, as some accounts claim, his gas mask) while a crowd watched made him wonder if he was going to die. But please–being hit with a long pole while wearing body armor and then being knocked down and scared silly is hardly the stuff of deadly force.
From the actual description of what happened: (N.R. is the office who was assaulted)
WEBSTER then attempts to attack N.R. by lunging toward him with the metal flagpole.
WEBSTER strikes at N.R. with the flagpole numerous times.
(“STRIKES AT“—-it doesn’t even claim he connected with the flagpole.)
WEBSTER ultimately lunges at N.R. and tackles him to the ground.
WEBSTER’s assault of N.R. while on the ground lasts approximately ten seconds.
(In this ten seconds Webster does not strike the officer with his hands or with any weapon. He does try to remove the officer’s helmet, and the chin strap choked the officer, for some period within that ten seconds and probably less than that, but choking was never alleged to be a motive for the removal of the helmet.)
But he DID shake his finger at the officer. And he was very very rude.
I’ve only seen one bar fight, and it lasted a lot longer than ten seconds, It quickly ended up as more of a wrestling match, but punches were thrown, a shirt got ripped and one guy got a bloody nose. In other words, a lot more violent than a couple of ineffective swings with a pole and ten seconds of having some big guy sit on another and tug at his helmet.
But where would you guys be without melodrama?
You say “the “power” (I) speak of was to retain the power of the presidency by any means.
So just how would pissing off the people with the power to give final certification to flawed vote tallies result in retaining the power of the presidency?
What you all steadfastly refuse to acknowledge is that a riot totally destroyed Trump's hopes. It was so counterproductive it could only have been conceived by his enemies. He apparently had some cockamamie idea that tens of thousands of Americans standing outside the Capitol to support his petition to Congress to delay certification for ten days to allow for examination of at least some of the alleged election defects would work to his advantage. And that IS the message he wanted to deliver. That IS why he and his supporters were there. Not to "overturn" anything but to exercise their Constitutional right to petition the government. They were there to provide visual support for the letter Ted Cruz was reading to Congress. Nothing ever about overturning anything. This whole "overturning" thing is an invention of the Left, and because of its obedient media servants repeating it incessantly it has taken hold as if it was ever a goal.
It's clear that Trump misjudged this entire misbegotten thing from beginning to end. It is also clear that in his fantasy tens of thousands of peaceful supporters would peacefully gather to provide a visual of support for his petition, with thousands of National Guard troops standing by to ensure peacefulness, and with him standing in front of this crowd on the Capitol steps exhorting them to continue to demand investigations.
When his political enemies refused to allow the Guard to be present, he should have seen this for what it was—a setup, to set the stage for outside infiltration by professional rioters, activists and troublemakers. We know the FBI was warned about this—-given the Bureau's blatant partisanship and meddling in elections we don't know if they shared this with Trump But by that time his ego was in control, so he clung to the fantasy. Then his security detail wouldn't let him go to the Capitol, and the infiltrators got the violence started, and the crowd effect started to kick in and otherwise peaceful people started to act out and it all went to hell in a hurry.
But even if it had not, there is simply nothing, absolutely nothing, a crowd of people, even a crowd as organized and experienced in mob violence as the rioters we saw in other cities, could have possibly been able to do anything to ensure that Trump would or could remain in power.
How would taking control of the Capitol accomplish this? Just what mechanism, exactly, COULD result in this mantra of "overturning the election" or "retain the power of the presidency". Brainstorm a little here. Pretend that the people who went to show support for Trump were not really middle-aged Middle America middle class people but were secretly trained to be highly effective paramilitary operatives organized into battle formations. Pretend that 20,000 of these covert trained people had weapons under their hoodies and high school team jackets, and that they managed to completely overtake the Capitol building. In what way could that possibly result in keeping Trump in office? Would it convey legal authority to him? Would it let him retain the position of Commander in Chief, and then would he/could he bring the might of the American military to support his coup? Just how would this beloved and elaborate fantasy spun out in the feverswamp of Leftist delusion work?
"We've got your desks and chairs, so give us the government"?
Of course not. It's all ridiculous, and all examples of the shallowness of what passes for "thought" on the increasingly hysterical Left.
There was no attempt at overthrow – it was a legitimate expression of doubt that the results were legally valid. Now, that some yahoos (who were escorted into the Capitol by the police and egged on by federal agents) got slightly out of hand (nothing even remotely like the BLM/Antifa riot outside the White House just a few months prior) doesn’t alter the fact that there were and remain very serious questions about how the electoral votes were apportioned among the two candidates.
And Trump was right – Pence should have disallowed the EC votes from the four disputed States. He should have made this clear a month earlier – but at the latest on 1/6. It isn’t a legitimate result if half or nearly half the people think its bogus. You can’t have a democratic system unless nearly everyone is confident that the result is valid. All this would have done, by the way, was throw the election to the House, which would almost certainly have elected Biden. And that would have been the right way to do it – completely legal and in conformity with the Constitution…not by merely accepting at face value results which were so fogged by fraud and deception that nobody can ever sort out just how many fraudulent votes were added to the mix. Trump wouldn’t have liked the House opting for Biden but that would have been the end of it – and likely the end of Trump.
By just ramming through a result that half the people thought fraudulent, all that was accomplished was to give Trump the hook to keep himself in the game…and now latest polling shows him crushing Biden in places like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin…and he’s back to drawing gigantic, enthusiastic crowds and the GOP is set for huge gains in 2022.
By cheating and then ramming through the cheat…all your side did was create a political earthquake which will bury you. And I laugh…just a little bit of honesty and some basic respect for the opinions of your opponents and you would have got around us, easy.
If the Left truly has nothing to hide, they could defuse this whole J6 thing by committing to working with Right to have a full-throttle investigation, nothing hidden, let the chips fall where they may.
So we might get answers to questions like “who opened the magnetically locked doors to the Capitol?” and “who were the rioters who were not Trump supporters?” and “why did Pelosi and Bower nix the National Guard plan?” and so on.
But the Left is like the guy who shoves his hand in his pocket right before the expensive watch goes missing, refuses to show what is in his hand or his pocket, and then whines and goes a Victimhood because he is suspected of stealing the watch.
Nothing to hide? Work with us. But they won’t, for two obvious reasons. One is that they do have something to hide, and the big one is that they get way too much mileage out of the J^ lies to give that up
“There was no attempt at overthrow – it was a legitimate expression of doubt that the results were legally valid.”
Really? Violently forcing your way into the United States Capitol while Congress is in session is merely a legitimate expression of doubt? It’s just amazing to me how you all rationalize and minimize the events of January 6. What is the hold that Donald Trump has on you? It’s almost unbelievable how he has caused you to no longer think straight, to reject pretty much everything you once claimed to believe—like, oh, I don’t know, law and order. You all are correct that this didn’t start with Trump. It is obvious that you were willing to following any authoritarian figure down any path, violence included, so long as he did your bidding. That’s why all of your posturing about adhering to the Constitution is complete hogwash. When push comes to shove, you resort to non-Constitutional means to achieve your aims.
“And Trump was right – Pence should have disallowed the EC votes from the four disputed States.”
There was no dispute except for the made-up one by Trump’s lackeys.
“He tried to push investigations into its legitimacy and he tried to convince electors that they were not legally required to accept vote counts (“certifications”) that were clearly not certifiable.”
But they were certified. Do you really not understand that? They were certified. The supposed other slates of electors were fake, not certified by anything at all. You and I could have created a fake set of electors with as much legitimacy.
“It isn’t a legitimate result if half or nearly half the people think its bogus”
First off, a majority of Americans do believe the results of the 2020 election were legitimate, so you’re just wrong. But why do so many Donald Trump supporters not believe it? Maybe because Donald Trump told them not to believe it, with no evidence whatsoever. Show us the evidence. Not cockamamie conspiracy theories, but actual evidence that can hold up to scrutiny. You can’t. You never have.
“But please–being hit with a long pole while wearing body armor and then being knocked down and scared silly is hardly the stuff of deadly force.”
So now it’s okay to assault police officers so long as you don’t kill them? What the hell, Amazona? Not only that, look at the context. Assaulting police officers protecting the United States Capitol while the United State Congress is in session certifying the 2020 election is hardly the same as your garden variety bar fight. The more you attempt to rationalize the Capitol riot, the more it reveals how morally bankrupt you are.
BTW, I do agree that we can’t have a democratic system when so many people refuse to accept the results of elections. Indeed, that is very bad for the United States of America, and because of it I think we are headed to a very dark place.
This could easily be resolved, in the same way I just posted the J6 thing could be resolved. That is, have the Left agree to fully enable and participate in a no-holds-barred, nothing kept back, full investigation of every single allegation made about election fraud.
So let’s examine the actual pieces of paper that represent alleged mailed-in ballots, not just photocopies, so they can be examined for metadata to see if they were printed on a copier/printer, see if they were folded to fit into envelopes and so on. Interview the people who signed sworn affidavits, under penalty of perjury, and assure them there will be no repercussions for anything they say. Subject random machines for testing.
And admit that some things, like the withholding of Biden corruption information and illegal election law changes, DID change the outcome of the election—and in return we agree to drop it there as long as safeguards are in place to keep it from happening again.
This kind of shared responsibility and shared willingness to admit when a side is wrong could mend a lot of broken fences. It’s the screeching that there is nothing to hide, while hiding stuff, that feeds the perception that there really IS something to hide.
We’ve got two years so there is time to go through every single state, if necessary, to cover every single question or concern.
And stop the lying about how making it easier to vote is racist and voter suppression, etc. Perhaps a good-faith truly bipartisan effort could even result in a voluntary pact among states to implement some nation-wide rules and safeguards, without impinging on state sovereignty regarding how they run elections.
It’s time to grow up, learn to objectively analyze problems and then focus on fixing them.
I started to respond and then realized that I can’t, because your entire screed is one lie, one
misstatement of fact, one distortion after another. One example of many:
being hit with a long pole while wearing body armor and then being knocked down and scared silly is hardly the stuff of deadly force.”
So now it’s okay to assault police officers so long as you don’t kill them
At no time did I ever justify any assault on any police officer. Ever. Don’t lie and claim I did. It’s this kind of truly vicious twisting of what is said that makes you such a disgusting person to us here. But a rational honest person (that is, not you) would admit that a lifelong traumatic brain injury, or being blinded by a laser, injuries suffered in real riots and ignored by the Left, is a lot more significant than briefly being scared and having a metal pole bounce off body armor. (And when you read the actual document it turns out that the rioter TRIED to hit the cop—there isn’t even testimony that he did.)
Do you understand that the word “certify” is another of those words with an actual legal definition? The fact that it’s inconvenient to the Left just puts it in the same category as “traitor” and “insurrection” and other words you constantly misuse. To certify means to attest to, to guarantee, the accuracy of something. It’s so important there are laws against false certification. If I certify my odometer reading knowing it is not accurate, I have broken the law. I don’t need to know what the real figure IS, I just need to know that the numbers on the dashboard are not true.
We started down this rabbit hole when the people given the very important legal duty of certifying the accuracy of the vote tallies they were then going to submit to Congress treated this as a mere formality, where they would simply blindly rubber-stamp whatever was put in front of them.
The same basic conversation took place in several states. Basically, the Right pointed out irregularities, double voting, accepting ballots in violation of state election laws, etc. and the response was “Yeah, we know this happened, but now those votes are mixed in with the others and there is no way to pull them out, and we don’t have any way of knowing who got them”.
And the statement ” we don’t have any way of knowing who got them” is the very DEFINITION of uncertifiable. If you don’t know, if you can’t know, then you say sorry but I can’t sign off on this because the figures I have been given can’t be proved to be accurate. It’s bad enough if someone buys a car with a lot more miles than he is told, or a cubic zirconia a jeweler certified as a diamond, or a house certified to be mold-free with an attic full of Stachybotrys. It seems obvious to me, and many others, that it’s a lot more important when the direction of the governance of the nation is at stake.
But you are saying once the signatures are on the document its accuracy is immaterial, and I am saying that falsely certifying a vote tally known to be inaccurate is wrong and those doing it should be held accountable,
I have NEVER tried to rationalize the riot. Ever. But I am also not compelled by some malignant inner force to exaggerate or lie about what happened. It was bad, it was wrong, it was stupid, it was harmful to the psyche of the nation, it was illegal, there is absolutely nothing about it that was good in any way, shape or form. But on the other hand it was not an organized effort to overthrow the government and assume its powers (the definition of “insurrection”) nor was it an effort to overturn the election. The ONLY thing that could possibly make it more significant is the assignment of motives by the Left, and lies about what happened, the severity of what happened, etc.
The more you attempt to sensationalize the Capitol riot, the more it reveals how morally bankrupt you are.
You have so much fun spewing the bizarre lies that seem to define you, I wonder if you even understand how they paint you as a truly vile person.
No one ever said, or hinted, or suggested, that ” Violently forcing your way into the United States Capitol while Congress is in session is merely a legitimate expression of doubt.” The comment referred to the original rally, which disintegrated into random unfocused violence no longer related to the legitimate expression of doubt. I suppose it’s technically, clinically, feasible that you didn’t understand this but given your unbroken record of purposely distorting what people say I think it highly unlikely.
I know no one—and I mean NO ONE—on the Right, and certainly not here, who has “rejected law and order”. Again, own your sick twisted spin on reality but don’t blame it on others.
“Show us the evidence. Not cockamamie conspiracy theories, but actual evidence that can hold up to scrutiny. ” We have, and you just ignore it. Courts have ruled on it. There are records of illegally changing election rules and then counting illegitimate ballots cast under illegitimate new rules as valid. We have videos of hired mules sneaking boxes of ballots into unsecured drop boxes in the middle of the night, in violation of rules. This has all been scrutinized, but you don’t like it so you don’t just ignore it, you lie about it.
“When push comes to shove, you resort to non-Constitutional means to achieve your aims.” Again, a total lie, but being in the midst of so many others it barely stands out. I challenge you to find a single fact or example to back it up.
Again, why does the blog tolerate this vandalism?
IT WON’T. ///MODERATOR
I know you didn’t bother to read the government charges, what with facts merely being annoing clutter getting in the way of you fire-hose spewing of lies. but this is the sworn testimony in the trial:
WEBSTER then attempts to attack N.R. by lunging toward him with the metal flagpole.
WEBSTER strikes at N.R. with the flagpole numerous times.
Attempts to attack
No testimony, not a word, that the flagpole connected with N.R.’s body
Therefore, while trying to hit someone can technically be called “assault”, the entire actual violence visited upon the cop was being knocked down and held down while the bad guy tried to steal his helmet. He wasn’t punched or kicked or bit. He was just scared for, according to the testimony, about ten seconds.
This was wrong. This was illegal. No one excuses it. No one justifies it. But calling for ten years of hard time in prison?
There was outrage over the light sentence given to a man who committed arson and killed a man in the fire. Arson and murder get ten years. Ten seconds of holding a cop down and trying to steal his helmet deserves the same?
Montez Terriel Lee, 26, of Rochester, Minnesota, was sentenced in January to 10 years in prison followed by three years of supervised release for setting fire to the Max It Pawn Shop on East Lake Street in Minneapolis on May 28, 2020, according to the Minnesota US Attorney’s Office.
On July 20, 2020, authorities discovered the body of a 30-year-old man in the rubble. The Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office attributed the man’s death to “probable inhalation of products of combustion and thermal injury (building fire).”
Matthew Beddingfield was out on bail for attempted first degree murder when he joined up with other rioters on January 6. Attempted first degree murder gets bail—sitting on a cop gets ten years.
Now court records say he is also facing a slew of felony charges related to the riot, including assaulting officers, impeding officers during a civil disorder, and carrying a deadly or dangerous weapon on restricted Capitol grounds. He has also been charged with several misdemeanors.
Mar 1, 2022 — Tacoma woman sentenced to 5 years in prison for arson at downtown Seattle protest.
Many charged in connection with violence surrounding last year’s Portland riots have completed community service and won’t be tried. COMMUNITY SERVICE !
Protestors such as Charles Comfort and David Bouchard, both charged with seriously assaulting officers in Portland, walked free. SERIOUSLY ASSAULTING.
Noting the outrageous disparity between treatment of other rioters and those identified as “Trump supporters” is in no way excusing or justifying what they did—it is merely commenting on the political nature of multi-tiered “justice”
And Spook, I note that this post went unanswered:
BTW, I noticed that an Indiana Oath Keeper was arrested in connection with the Jan. 6 siege of the capitol: Michael Greene, aka Michael Simmons. Do you know him?
Per the Indianapolis Star, “The indictment states Greene participated in an online meeting Nov. 9, 2020, in which Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, founder and leader of the Oath Keepers, outlined a plan to stop the transfer of presidential power. Rhodes later chose Greene to be an operations leader for Jan. 6 and Greene transported firearms, ammunition and other related items to Washington D.C. in early January 2021, according to the news release.”
I thought you and I had a discussion about Oath Keepers a month or two ago, but it could have been with Fielding. Indiana Oath Keepers, of which I am a lifetime member, disassociated ourselves with the National Organization several years ago and incorporated as a separate entity following a face to face meeting with Stewart Rhodes during which we became disillusioned with his agenda. Because of my age and the deteriorating health of my wife, I haven’t been active in Indiana Oath Keepers for a couple of years. I do not know the individual in question.
BTW, your presence here is getting really tiresome. You add zero to the conversation. Why don’t you go pollute some other Conservative blog.
forty is just recycling a page from his script.
BTW, I would like to see the transcript of Rhodes’s statement because this reeks of careful parsing of words to create a false impression.
I believe it was Greene who testified they were going to be in the DC area to be ready to be called upon if necessary, so stocked a motel room far from the rally site with weapons “just in case”. and in the meantime volunteered to provide security for some people. I don’t remember which people, and have no intent to go looking for the reference. I have no problem in agreeing that this was a goofy idea, but I see it as middle-aged men wanting to play at being heroes, not some sinister effort to overthrow the government.
In any case, once a designated protectee was escorted from a building the OK guys left, went to the motel, packed up their guns and went home. Whatever they thought their “mission” was, it was over, with no government toppled, no powers assumed.
“operations leader for Jan. 6 ” sounds so…..ominous, and overthrowy and insurrectiony and so on. Yet it is an undefined term, meaningless without the context of the planned “operation”. Not the imaginary operation provided by the loons, but the real intent. And “transport(ing) firearms, ammunition and other related items to Washington D.C” is not a crime nor prima facie evidence of intent to commit a crime—any crime, much less the overthrow of the government to assume its powers. And the presence of those weapons, which were never even in the vicinity of the riot, had absolutely nothing to do with the heinous crimes Greene is accused of: ” five charges including conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to prevent an officer from discharging any duties, entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds and tampering with documents or proceedings.” So he “conspired” to obstruct some unnamed proceeding, then did so, then conspired to prevent an officer from discharging his duties (sure sounds like 3 counts for the same action, doesn’t it? ) and then remaining where he wasn’t supposed to be (trespassing) and “tampering” with something that could be documents, could be “proceedings”. Does that make 4 counts for the same action? Sure sounds like it.
We as a nation can all breathe easier knowing that this guy did not, at least, “parade”.
Unlikely as it is, I suppose it IS possible that you do serve a purpose here, if only to bring us examples of Agenda Media at work, carefully phrasing information to advance an agenda. Is it worth it to put up with you?
I vote no
A couple of days ago I characterized a Casper post as ten pounds of shit in five pound bag. This evidently inspired forty to produce thirty pounds of shit in a one pound bag.
I was reading through the Indy Star article again and caught something I missed the first time through.
One of the reasons our local group parted ways with Stewart Rhodes was that he refused to give us a list of Indiana residents who were national members of Oath Keepers. All we wanted to do was contact them and let them know that there was an active Indiana chapter. To bad there wasn’t a whistleblower back then.
I attended every Indiana Oath Keepers State Convention from around 2014 or 15 through 2019. Typical attendance at state conventions was between 50 and 100 people. I was Vice State Commander for a year, so I got to meet and talk with most of them. I don’t remember ever meeting Scott Baldwin or hearing that a State Senator was a member. This ties into the Left’s and the Media (redundancy – sorry) dishonest portrayal of Oath Keepers from the very beginning. I make no apologies for what the leadership of Oath Keepers did WRT January 6th, but the group was founded on the noble principles of constitutional awareness and community preparedness. It’s membership was restricted to those who had taken the oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. One of the basic concepts behind Oath Keepers was to constantly remind elected officials just exactly what that oath means, and to hold them publicly accountable when they violate it.
You and I are on the same road, regarding the importance of keeping oaths. I’m just in the fast lane.
I have not changed my mind about the benefits of making oaths binding. That is, treating an oath of office as a contract. Take an oath to uphold the law and then refuse to do so, lose your job and associated benefits. Take an oath to defend and honor the Constitution and then violate the Constitution by, as one example, passing laws federalizing national elections that the Constitution firmly places in the sole control of the individual states, and get replaced. Not eventually voted out, maybe, but immediately charged and removed once the evidence—the vote itself—is entered.
Yes, it could be abused—-but then every law is abused. No, it would not be perfect. But while you talk about holding people “publicly accountable” for violating their oaths, merely embarrassing them is not enough. Cliches become cliches because they are relevant enough to be cited a lot, and the cliche of not letting the perfect get in the way of the good holds true here.
I contend that making the oaths of office binding would have much the same effect as allowing pilots and teachers to carry guns—-the mere presence of such a law would make people stop and think before doing wrong, because the POSSIBILITY of consequences would be there. Every governor thinking of declaring his state a “sanctuary state”, every judge wanting to flout the law because of personal bias, every legislator who votes for a bill that violates the Constitution, would do so under the looming shadow of possibly being fired and losing that pension and other benefits. I think that is well worth the original confusion and chaos and flood of reports of violations clogging up the new system.
I could not agree more.
The path the Biden administration took could have gone one of two ways. The regime could have fallen back on the power of moderation, restoring the isolated Washington uniparty by staffing the executive branch with prominent Republicans who always preferred the Clintons and Bidens over Trump—even if the smart ones refused to say so explicitly—while pursuing a standard policy agenda of foreign intervention, reckless spending, and fortifying the supremacy of the federal government over state control. These policies would have continued American decline but could have served to lull Americans to pre-Trump apathy by reminding them that federal elections have no real consequences for Washington.
Instead, the Biden regime doubled down on the excesses of the Obama era, attacking hot-button issues such as gun rights, tying state funding to public school promotion of child mutilation and sterilization, and leveraging their control over large corporations to censor political opponents and mandate covid vaccinations of employees. Along the way, they secured funding to increase, arm, and expand the scope of federal agencies—an Imperial Guard for Washington elites to remind red states who is truly in charge.