Medical Martial Law


  1. Time for a new thread.

  2. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Language is important. Caught an NBC radio news blurb yesterday how people are trying to STOP Trump from NAMING bases after Confederate leaders. Please NOTE that Trump has not named a base after anybody. What he has said is that bases named over 100 years ago should be left alone for History’s sake.
    For the uninitiated there is a big difference in NAMING (present tense) and HAD BEEN NAMED (very past tense). Matter of fact, it was so past it was long before Trump was born!

  3. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    I see Joe is promising a FREE vaccine. This is what used to be referred to as “a day late and a dollar short”.

  4. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    I wonder if those insisting on a “generic” Happy Holidays” knew?


    This just can’t be allowed to continue. Covid is killing people, but it’s a virus, it kills randomly, the government is selectively destroying people.


    The most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.

    Ronald Reagan

  7. SACRAMENTO, CA—Gavin Newsom announced a plan today to issue special government ID cards to Democrat politicians allowing them to break lockdown rules.

    Should a Democrat leader be caught eating at a fancy restaurant, flying to Hawaii with some lobbyists, or traveling to Mexico for vacation, they’ll simply need to show their Democrat politician ID card, and they’ll be off the hook.

    “We are following the SCIENCE!” Newsom said. “And the SCIENCE! says that only Republicans and poor people can really spread this thing. We Democrat leaders are a low-risk group. In fact, medical experts are telling me I am completely immune due to the large quantity of hair gel I use every day.”

    “SCIENCE!” he added for no reason in particular.

    He also proposed marking non-Democrat politicians with special patches so they are easily identifiable when they are breaking the law by walking outside or eating a burger and can be arrested on sight.

    • “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

      ― George Orwell, Animal Farm

  8. A few random thoughts this slow Saturday Night:

    Anyone been checking out the declassified stuff on UFO encounters? Some pretty strange stuff being released.

    I have no confidence in our Federal Law Enforcement Agencies. None, Zero, Ziltch.

    Who is planning on getting the “Rona virus vaccine when it becomes available? I think I’ll be waiting awhile and see how things go with those who do get it.

  9. Just A Citizen says:
  10. Just A Citizen says:

    Of course. This is appropriate but Mr. Trump’s challenges are “A threat to Democracy”.

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    I saw a post election poll the other day that was very interesting. Per this poll of those that voted they found that close to 30% of those who voted FOR Mr. Biden said that if they had heard about the Hunter/Joe Biden stories connecting them to payoffs in Ukraine, China, etc, etc. they would NOT HAVE VOTED for Mr. Biden.

    The point of the story was to show just how HUGE THE IMPACT OF MEDIA CENSORSHIP of this story was leading up to the election. What it did not cover was the affect of mail in ballots. Far to many people had voted before this story came to light. And then of there was the censorship just to make sure.

    Make no mistake about MY OPINION on this matter. This past POTUS election was stolen by the Dems. And if our elected officials do not do the dirty investigative work needed to figure this out and then rewrite the laws accordingly, it will happen again.

  12. Just A Citizen says:

    “The time frame allowed for an election contest in state statutes NEVER considered the circumstances where hundreds of thousands of ballots were submitted by mail, the process for validating those ballots rested with local officials — often partisan local offices — and the witnesses who might offer pertinent and admissible first-hand testimony are almost all employed by the opposing party in the case.” shipwreckedcrew poster at Red State and other venues. An ex US attorney with 22 yrs experience.

  13. Just A Citizen says:
  14. Just A Citizen says:

    A must read in order to understand the world we inherited. By WE I mean those of us long in the tooth who experienced the end of Korea and the beginning to end of Viet Nam.

    The younger folks will benefit as well. Note the similarities in the rhetoric used against the old guard Republicans, like Taft, and that used against Mr. Trump. Another POTUS who thought we should not be engaged in war everywhere.

  15. Just A Citizen says:

    Where oh where do we go from here?

    Click to access cps_charts.pdf

  16. Just A Citizen says:

    The great HOLE IN THE RATIONALIZATION of Progressive Taxation.

    Just like Rawl’s “Theory of Justice”, the idea of utility of wealth begins with a FALLACY.

  17. Another unexplained incident.

  18. Over the weekend, a video of Angela Marsden, the owner of the Pineapple Hill Saloon & Grill of Los Angeles, protesting the city shutting down outdoor dining with no scientific basis went viral. The video showed Marsden’s emotional plea for help as she exposed how a similar set of tents and tables were set up in the same parking lot to cater a film production approved by the city.

    Only part of Marsden’s comments made it onto NBC’s Sunday Today. But reporter Meagan Fitzgerald deceptively edited out Marsden pointing to the hypocrisy with the tents and tables. Worse yet, NBC covered up the fact that the catering was for NBC’s comedy show, Good Girls.

  19. Using sequestered Dominion Equipment, Ware County ran a equal number of Trump votes and Biden votes through the Tabulator and the Tabulator reported a 26% lead for Biden.

    • Awful and unlawful

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      Who in the hell can even believe denials these days, corporations share boards of director members. Who is independent and who is not? God only knows (with the help of a good forensic accountant)..

    • Just A Citizen says:

      This REPORT has been debunked, supposedly. The person running the elections there clearly stated that NOBODY has any of their equipment and NOBODY ran separate tallies through their equipment. Pretty darn emphatic he was.

      The discrepancy occurred during the recount and was supposedly caused by a paper jam, which required the ballots in that batch to be re-run. They forgot to delete the part of that batch which ran before the jam……… thus SOME were double counted.

      Their audit caught the problem and they removed the partial batch. He stated that they then handcounted the ballots and the total counts matched the machine counts.

      Based on how emphatic the local election supervisor was I think you can put this claim in the category of BS.

      • Thanks, JAC.

        A question for you… there may be some legitimate gripes out there… some instances of real major voting fraud… but I want to ask you about the BS claims.

        JAC, there are tons of claims such as the above with are easily debunked or unsupported and seem to spring up like weeds. Trump, himself, and his allies relentlessly amplify them and blast them out to their millions of followers. The question I would ask of you is this: what gives?

        We all expect “the other side” to lie to us… but when your own side is the one making shit up left and right and you (the royal “you”) keep buying it… just… why? Why aren’t Trump supporters getting pissed at Trump (or are they) for the constant stream of bullshit allegations they keep believing and then having to move on from as they are disproven. Why aren’t they pissed off (or are they) that he keeps feeding them false hope and lies to support a narrative and yet never delivering?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          I spent some time Friday night and this weekend looking into what you are asking. What I found is that Mr. Trump himself, and his designated people are not the ones passing this stuff around. That is the real crazy ones. It is true that Mr. Trump will Tweet or Re-Tweet something when it is first put out there. But unless it is shown to have validity he doesn’t keep on it. Where he deserves real criticism is NOT ACKNOWLEDGING when claims are in FACT proven false, when he had cited them previously. But others are pointing out those that are known to be false.

          As for Cons/Reps getting ticked off, it has been happening and it has been visible for a couple weeks now. I posted several Red State articles the past two weeks which show this shift in outlook. One even claiming the President’s legal team “sucks”. But it is also true that much of the claims have not been truly debunked and “trust” levels are very low among the electorate. But it appears to me that the obvious “crazy stuff” has been rejected by most Cons./Rep talking heads and media outlets. The lies will eventually damage those who created them. But it will take time.

          Part of the problem right now is there is tons of stuff coming to the surface and NO TIME to do the kind of investigation needed to either prove it true or false. The pressure of the clock is not allowing normal process to work. It absolutely doesn’t help that the MSM and the Internet Gate Keepers are preventing full disclosure and discussion in an objective and measured way. You think a lot of stuff has been debunked when it has not. It has simply been dismissed based on technicalities and opinions. Some of the cases you cited, which I suspect you got from more left leaning sources, claiming Trump losses are actually still alive in the system. Pennsylvania is a big one. Although it alone will not change the election results. Then there is the claim which an official denies and the media reports is as “debunked”. If you dive into what you claim are “tons which are easily debunked” you will find they have not been. The real crazy stuff has but much of the rest has not.

          Some Judger stating “you don’t have evidence of fraud” is NOT DEBUNKING the claim. It is a legal determination which flies in the face of rational thought and ignores the need for fair and objective evaluation of these claims. Far to much is hidden from view given the distrust that exists among the voters. The legal onus in proving election fraud is reversed from what we understand and accept as the norm. One does not have to prove their case when first asking a Judge for action. They only have to provide enough testimony or evidence to get injunctions and “discovery” ordered. Judges who so quickly dismiss these more serious accusations are just adding fuel to the fire.

          Distrust of the election system has been growing for many years. It wasn’t long ago it was the Dems claiming fraud and attacking the “machines”. We all knew that mail in ballots are ripe for fraud. So what was the natural result when we saw the Democratic Leaders trying so hard to force this on us this time around? Then the attacks on the Post Office that were proven false. How many on the left still think that was all true? So you take that growing mistrust and you add on an election which just doesn’t add up in historical or statistical terms, let alone flies in the face of what people were experiencing and you get what we have this minute. Like I said a month or so back. What do you think the reaction would have been from the Dems if Mr. Trump won, even if not bigly? If their polling was blown out once again? I am pretty sure we would see accusations of Russian hacking and Trump fraud. There is a reason that even a large number of Biden voters think something is wrong with the election.

          Bottom line, when people become convinced of something they become more and more vulnerable to information that supports their concerns or beliefs. Yes, “confirmation bias”. If and when the truth penetrates this condition they will react harshly against those who lied to them. If a true audit and investigation were done of this election and all claims proven BS, and this was done openly and fairly, I think Mr. Trump’s popularity would plummet. But what would happen if it were found to be true? That there was enough to overturn the current results, that Mr. Biden did not really win? Do you think the left would accept this and turn on their sources or leadership?

          Before you answer consider this. What exactly was the price that Adam Schiff paid for LYING to Congress and the American people about the information “he personally had” regarding Mr. Trump’s guilt, with respect to Russia and then Ukraine. How about Schumer and Pelosi? I bring these up NOT TO PLAY THE YOUR SIDE DOES IT TO card (fallacy).

          I bring it up to show just how entrenched the partisanship is today among much of the electorate. It is going to be very hard to break through the fog of confirmation bias when the media is a player instead of an objective third party.

          One other thought, but related: In a sense, our means of communicating with each other and getting sold information has been corrupted, broken if you will. So what we see is it is now easy for “Trolls” and “Partisans” to dominate the world of information. Now add that to the lack of an objective Press and the increasing ideological split in the Nation. NOT A GOOD MIX. Hell, lets admit it. It is DESTRUCTIVE.

          • The Pa one at SCOTUS should be the deciding factor and clear some things up.

            I’m also wondering how much the Crats treatment of some of the Justices might play a role.

        • We all expect “the other side” to lie to us… but when your own side is the one making shit up left and right and you (the royal “you”) keep buying it… just… why? For the very same reason you buy into the other side of the equation. You keep buying that it has not happened and you discount the obvious. Same song second verse.

          • Here comes the part where he doesn’t buy what they say on his side….he just happens to be ON that side.

      • Of course the guy running things is going to deny, what else would he be expected to do? Adamant, sure, I would be too if I was in charge of something possibly illegal.

        However, I would prefer that these machines be audited by forensic investigators who are apolitical. At this point, I don’t believe anything beyond what people have stated under oath. With that said, I wonder if the guy would state under oath what he was so adamantly denied.

        Also, I’m just not buying that Biden got 80 million votes. Obama was very popular and Joe is no Obama.

        • Also, I’m just not buying that Biden got 80 million votes. Obama was very popular and Joe is no Obama.

          You’re absolutely right!

          Trump got 74.2m votes.
          Biden got 4, maybe 5 votes.
          “Not-Trump” got 81.3m votes.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Actually, I find both their totals suspect. If you take the Total votes for POTUS you get a number close to 100% of the USA labor force.

  20. Does anyone know who “Digital Consulting Group LLC” is? They were incorporated 9 months ago, no one seems to know a damned thing about them, and they are the RNC’s biggest recipient of funds… $42 million.

    Very odd.

  21. Just A Citizen says:
    • Do you have anything to suggest that the recipients are unworthy of the distinction?

      That is, yes, they are 10 African Americans, 15 first-gen, and 1 Dreamer…. but do we doubt that every single one of them has a 4.0, a dozen extracurricular activities, a charity they started in their parents’ garage, an IQ of 150+, and an essay that looks like it was written by a Nobel laureate?

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        I have mentored Eagle Scout Projects in my time. There are EAGLE PROJECTS and there are eagle projects.

        There are 4.0 ‘s and there are 4.0’s.

        There is a modern dance major and a physics major. There is a feminist history major and there is a nuclear engineering major.

        There is a faculty adviser and there is a faculty adviser (who writes your essay).

        As I pointed out elsewhere, the absolutely greatest participation award ever given out was Obama’s Nobel. Running a close current 2nd at the moment is Governor Cuomo, the granny killer’s Emmy!

        • My brother-in-law refused to attend his HS graduation ceremony despite being valedictorian.

          Why? He (like me) took all AP courses and the hardest electives. He (unlike me) worked his ass off and got a 4.0 and earned his valedictorianship. However, another kid in his school – an animate dunce cap – took all remedial and clapping-for-credits courses with tons of advisor “support” and extra-time on tests and and and… and also got himself a 4.0. Thus they were both valedictorians.

          My brother-in-law felt that he was smart and killed himself to earn that award and giving it to a moron who took the easy path and who had all this extra help cheapened this achievement to the point where he couldn’t bring himself to attend the ceremony to collect the fruits of his labor.

          So I get where you’re coming from.


          Incidentally, I’m still bitter over not getting the “most likely to achieve” award in my highschool. You see, they handed out ballots for everyone to vote during second period, when almost the entire grade was in the same class. And a kid in that class stood up and lobbied – hey ever, vote for me!” Only, I couldn’t do anything about it. Because I wasn’t there. Because I had tested out of that class and was in an advanced course with only a handful of students. So I got a handful of votes and the moron won.

          And, yes, I will die bitter about that.


          All that said… do you have any evidence to support the idea that THESE recipients are unworthy of the distinction?

          The clear implication of the above comment is that they might have taken the easy path or had advisors do the work or or or or or. Like my brother-in-law and his co-valedictorian, that they were equal on paper, but not in reality. And, as such, that they might have taken positions away from more worthy scholars. But do you have anything to back that up?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I will just rely on the previous Rhodes Scholars criticism. No need for me to add to it.

        Although I think this old news. I lost respect for the institution when Bill Clinton and Al Gore were supposedly included in the elite group.

      • do we doubt that every single one of them has a 4.0, Yes, I do. I doubt that they have a 4.0 very seriously. No, wait, let me change that……I doubt that they have a “REAL” 4.0. In today’s time, because of the dumbing down of society and the fact that standards are much lower than they used to be…..much lower….. I doubt very seriously that they have a “REAL” 4.0. I also doubt, since they changed the IQ test to reflect lower standards, that their IQ is even a true test.

        In addition, the SAT, and the ACT and what used to be the GRE, were tests over what you learned in school at any particular time.It was based on retained knowledge…..from teachers and their ability to teach. No more….it was too hard. In today’s market, you can study JUST TO TAKE THE SAT. They have classes that teach you how to “PASS” said exams….they do not actually test you on the knowledge from what you have learned and retained. You can be as dumb as a box of rocks but still pass an SAT with 1500 or better. So, now you are spoon fed on how to pass an SAT…..and not show your work because it is too hard.

        So, while they may have a 4.0, I doubt that it is real.

        • In today’s market, you can study JUST TO TAKE THE SAT.

          I did this…. I took the SATs, then I took a Kaplan study course, took the SATs again.. and improved by… 10 points!

          … Meanwhile, my little brother likes to point out that he got a higher score on the SATs than I did, which is true. He got 10 more points than I did.

          Of course… my test was out of 1600 and his was out of 2400…

  22. This is interesting (not about politics)

    • It’s a sad commentary on the world… I’d help… but I’d be very concerned about getting accused of something. Given a saner world, I’d take the kids’ hand or pick her up and walk her around to help find her mom… but god help me if someone sees a random grown-up man holding a random little girls’ hand and “walking off” with her…

      It’s one of those things – I like kids – at least in limited doses and when they’re well behaved. If I see a cute kid in a store, I’ll smile and wave and make a silly face at them.. but every now and then, the moms will glower at me as if I’m some kind of deviant. But that never happens when I’m with my wife or kids. It changes my profile from “male –> potential predator” to “family man –> safe.”

      It’s just one of those things, I guess…

      Tangentially related:

      • Just A Citizen says:

        When we see claims such as “the public become suspicious” or “other people say” I think we should all cry out loudly “WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE?” “WE WANT NAMES”.

        We are liable to find that many of these controversies are in fact created by writers and editors to garner circulation and/or ratings.

        • We are liable to find that many of these controversies are in fact created by writers and editors to garner circulation and/or ratings.

          I will tell you that I have personally seen mothers clutch their child are glare at me for the high crime of sticking out my tongue and making a silly face at a child in the checkout line.

          Now, look, I am aware that I might be a bit intimidating to someone in the wrong mindset. But this is definitely a thing that has happened.

          We are liable to find that many of these controversies are in fact created by writers and editors to garner circulation and/or ratings.

          Likewise, I have – personally – been threatened with violence by a femi-nazi for the high crime of holding the door for her after I walked through first.


          These people are in the minority, sure – but they DO exist.

          • These people are in the minority, sure No, they are not. In Texas, and most Western fly over states, (Colorado excluded), it is common place for farmers and ranchers and raise a single finger while driving (no, not the middle one) as a way of saying hello on the roads…an acknowledgement of friendship….in Texas, and most flyover Western states (Colorado excluded), it is common for men, even city folk to tip their hat to ladies or a simple touch the brim and nod of the head, to show respect and say hello. It is common pplace to open a car door for a lady or hold open a door for a lady to pass through, or help a lady carry out groceries or help them put heavy things in the trunk of their car or back of their pick up.

            Now when you raise a finger while driving, you get the middle finger back. When you tip the hat or touch the brim and simply say, m’aam, you are a masher and disrespectful…obviously out of town transplants but then they raise their children in the same way. Common courtesy is gone in the cities…and THAT is a shame. You can tell non western people that come here very easily….it is in their mannerisms.

            • Colonel…

              Common courtesy is gone in the cities…and THAT is a shame.

              Is it possible that some of the things you see as “common courtesy” are viewed as “condescension” or just inappropriate in a modern world?

              I had an elderly family member (long dead now) who used to lament that it used to be considered a compliment to pat a waitress on the bum, but now they’re all overly sensitive and stuck up about it. He didn’t think the problem was touching a stranger’s ass, but rather that the world was now overly sensitive about this completely normal behavior. He thought the problem was that he was giving a compliment of a kind and thought it was outrageous that people “went and changed things.” Oh, sure, he conformed, but he went to his grave grumbling about it.

              I have a family member, about your age, who keeps calling women sweetie or honey, being overly familiar with them, or touching their arm or shoulder and it’s, frankly, cringeworthy to watch. You can see the discomfort on their faces as they inch away, trying to be polite and not make a scene, but clearly not wanting to be touched by strangers like that. And we tell him – repeatedly – that it’s not acceptable behavior, but he thinks we’re all just stuck up and overly sensitive and trying to be “woke.” He doesn’t think the issue is “I shouldn’t be overly familiar with strangers and touch them without consent” – he thinks the issue is that the world has changed and now considers his completely normal and acceptable behavior inappropriate.

              I wonder… I wonder… I’m hardly the Arbiter of Truth in this kind of matter.. .but I wonder… the Silent Generation thought things were ok that even you would look back and say are inappropriate… then you Boomers think things are acceptable that younger generations think are inappropriate… seems to me that we’re all standing on shifting sands and things change and failing to change with them is the actual problem.


              I look at the future and wonder where I fit in with all this… I imagine that young femi-nazi who threatened to gouge my eye out for the crime of holding the door as she passed behind me…. and I wonder… could that be the future.. not the threats of violence, but a world wherein my behavior would be considered wildly inappropriate…? Maybe. It’s hard for me to imagine.. and it sure feels overboard… but at the same time, I don’t think that old-timer from the Silent Generation would have imagined that people would stare daggers at him for calling women sugartits or that he’d ever get thrown out of a restaurant for patting a waitress on the backside.

              And if that does become the new normal… who am I to say what is “right” and what is “wrong”? What is “too far” and what is “not far enough”? There are lots of things in this world that are more-or-less arbitrarily required or prohibited within social conventions. Why should “this is how it was when I grew up” mean that’s the “right” answer for the future?

              Why does “raising a finger” mean “civil greeting” unless it’s a specific finger in which case it’s an insult? Who makes these rules and why should they be immutable cannon? Why can’t they change over time? Why is this intrinsically bad?

      • In the mid 70s I was in grad school. I came home to the apartment one afternoon and while walking to the door witnessed a little girl crash on her bike. Her mouth smashed into the handle bars so the was blood, probably some tooth damage and of course lots of tears. No one else was around and I did not know were she lived and she was too hurt to tell me. So I took her to my apartment, mopped up some of the blood and got ice on her lips and teeth as fast as I could. When she was calm enough, I asked her to show me where she lived. We went to her door, knocked and met her mom. I got some strange looks but I explained the bike crash and advised her to take her to a dentist. Then left. Afterwards, it dawned on me that this could have gone wrong. I never saw her again or heard from her parents.

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          Yes, A neighborhood kid went off his bike and somehow managed to smash his cojones along the way. Boy! Did he scream. I picked the tyke up, carried him the two blocks to his house and handed him over to his Dad who asked me “where his bike was”?

          Never a thank you. The little monster later grew up to murder someone in teh town (drug deal gone bad) and was given a ridiculously light sentence because of Daddy’s political connections.

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          While vacationing on Cape Cod decades ago, a small rubber raft with two little kids got caught by the wind and was being blown across Pleasant Bay. The kids Grandfather saw this and asked two guys with a hobie cat to take him out and get the kids and raft. They did, but when the very elderly grandfather went into the water the guys on the Hobie Cat took off. The grandfather had not reached the kids on the raft yet which was being blown by the wind away from the grandfather faster than he could swim. He was visibly weakening. Myself and another guy on the beach saw what was happening and dove in. I went for the old man and he being younger went for the kids on the raft who were now hysterical and screaming for help especially for grandpa.
          Grandpa was drowning and I had to dive to get him. The other guy caught the raft and swam back to shore towing it and the kids. I had already gotten the old man ashore and performed lifesaving procedures.

          The guys on the hobie never were seen again. They never looked or came back.

          The rescued family wanted our names and addresses but would not give us theirs.

          A few weeks later I received a very nice anonymous gift on my doorstep with a nice THANK YOU card and letter.

          Another almost tragic ending for me in 1970 I saved a group of Boy Scouts on Mt Whitney. Some surely would have died from exposure that night. After securing then getting fires built, leaving all my emergency food and supplies warm clothes I ran down 10 miles at night to the Ranger Station at Whitney Portal. I almost got shot by the rangers thinking I had done something to the kids and their adult leaders.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Thanks to cell phones. we are one 911 call from the cops. You stay with the child till the police arrive.

  23. Just A Citizen says:

    Good summary of the current situation by Bonchie at Red State:

    “Joe Biden is not a moderate, and he’s not going to unify anyone. He’s a return to the status quo, and the status quo was corrupt garbage.”

    The only think missing is a complete list of names from both parties that could be inserted next to Mr. Biden’s name.

    • “Joe Biden is not a moderate

      Sure he is.

      He’s a milquetoast centrist.

      Even if he weren’t a magically-animate geriatric stuffed shirt, he’d still be only barely palatable.

      “Joe Biden is not a moderate, and he’s not going to unify anyone. He’s a return to the status quo, and the status quo was corrupt garbage.”

      Until he is (inevitably) downgraded I will refer to Biden as tepid pond scum.

      I wish I could have voted for someone who was better (pick any name from the phonebook), but my only other viable option was semi-conscious malevolent nuclear waste.

      The only think missing is a complete list of names from both parties that could be inserted next to Mr. Biden’s name.


      The only think missing is a complete list of names from both parties that could be inserted next to Mr. Biden’s name.

      To be fair…

      Lest we assume that everyone headed “away from the status quo” is good, let’s take a moment to acknowledge that there are plenty of politicians (of both parties) headed in directions which are worse than the status quo.

      A return to “status quo” isn’t necessarily a bad choice if the alternative is even worse. If your choice were, say, Biden or AOC, you’d opt for Biden… or ritualistic suicide, I suppose.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        More likely murder, not suicide.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Joe Biden is NOT a moderate. He has always been left of center. The rest of what you say is true. Which is why so many think he is a moderate. He played the game mostly where the wind blew. He in reality is a cranky and very nasty SOB more arrogant than maybe even Mr. Trump. Think Chucky Schumer with a better smile.

        • Joe Biden is NOT a moderate. He has always been left of center.

          To you, anyone left of Ghengis Khan is a raging liberal.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Well that might be true but that is not the issue here. It is that the Dems/Left have moved the center to the left.

            Think of it in reverse. Like those “right of center” folks you think of who are actually dead center or even a little to the left, of the old center.

            You are also judging Biden on the media’s narrative and the rhetoric he has used. As I said he is a bit of a windsock. But at his core he has always been on the left. Maybe not out there with AOC and crew, but he was enamored with Obama’s viewpoint.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            P.S. Genghis Khan was a leftist also. Remember STATISM is the left. I would say he was pretty much a Statist.

            • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

              I believe that the Great Kahn had a rule. Recognize him, pay him tribute and you were OK and could go about your business. NOT recognize him and you were toast. As far as I know he never demanded an mask mandate during periodic plague outbreaks.

          • To you, anyone left of Ghengis Khan is a raging liberal. And the problem is?

  24. 79 years ago today, it was not a good day in paradise.

  25. One thing I have learned is that Florida counted the mail in ballots first. Thus it was not possible to find a trove of mail in ballots once the totals were known to fix the Biden deficit.

    If we do not find fixes for this before the next election, it will reoccur. This should be universally supported but I suspect it will not be.

    • Rule #1. A post office is not a residential address. One can not reside in a post office box.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        And neither should any Govt office, like the court house, be listed as the place of residence.

  26. U.S.—A new system allows politicians to purchase “hypocrisy credits” whenever they break their own lockdown rules.

    Each credit costs just $1,000 and offsets one hypocritical action by a politician.

    “Want to go out dining when you just shut down all the restaurants, or vacation in an exotic location when you told everyone in your state to stay home? Just purchase a Hypocrisy Credit,” said HypoCredit founder Jacob Christopher.

    The credits are selling like hotcakes, with millions of dollars’ worth of the certificates having been sold in California alone. Other Democrat-controlled states are also seeing soaring sales of the credits as more governors, mayors, and legislators look for ways to break their own moral codes with impunity.

  27. Two more big lawsuits filed at the Supreme Court last night. One by the STATE of Texas, THANK YOU, in defense of the swing states and one by Trump vs Georgia election officials for not running the elections according to their state constitution.

    Mathius whistles past the graveyard…nothing to see here.

    • Texas AG Ken Paxton just filed a brilliant new lawsuit last night right before midnight. He’s taking a different approach than anyone else and his path leads straight to the SCOTUS. In a nutshell, Paxton believes that he can use “Article III” to take his lawsuits against PA, WI, and MI straight to the SCOTUS, bypassing the lower courts totally. And he’s putting it to the test. He filed a lawsuit at around midnight last night, arguing that PA, WI, and MI violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures.

      Interesting move, I will admit, but doubt that it will get to the SOCTUS.

      ****Mathius, while whistling a tune from “The Grinch That Stole Christmas”, he feels the ominous presence of a cross hair from the direction of the grave yard….he turns and looks but sees nothing…but the feeling stays with him and he changes his tune to the ‘Eyes of Texas”…..thus saving his life.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I think the court could take up the case. Roberts won’t want to but the other 5 might overrule him. But I do NOT THINK they will give Texas the relief they request.

        I would be shocked if SCOTUS were to overturn any election by ordering the State legislatures to pick the electors directly. More likely would be the Decertification of the State Election and thus Electors. Leaving it up to Congress and the State Legislatures to figure out what to do.

        Frankly, Spousal Unit Leader and I are rooting for Congress to be forced to Pick the President and Vice President. We would like to see the outcome of the Founder’s backup plan just once.

        Now I assume that all the lefties and Dems would absolutely accept the outcome of a LEGALLY mandated process whereby Congress does the picking because the States BROKE the law. After all, they are always crying about Following the Constitution.

        • Frankly, Spousal Unit Leader and I are rooting for Congress to be forced to Pick the President and Vice President. We would like to see the outcome of the Founder’s backup plan just once.

          So you’re rooting to see the start of Civil War 2.0?

          Now I assume that all the lefties and Dems would absolutely accept the outcome of a LEGALLY mandated process whereby Congress does the picking because the States BROKE the law. After all, they are always crying about Following the Constitution.

          I can’t speak for “THEM,” but speaking for myself, if the law says this is the outcome, then I might be supremely unhappy and aggressively demand the law be changed for the future, and I absolutely would endlessly bitch and moan about the disproportionate voting power of Red Team.. but the result is the result. If it’s legal, it’s legal. Thems the rules.

          As long as you follow the RULES, I will accept the outcome.

          Just as I might be pissed off that Trump lost the popular vote, but won the election in 2016, I accept and accepted that he did win. That doesn’t mean I have to be happy about it.

          But that doesn’t mean the 80+ million people who voted for Biden against Trump are going to accept it if Red Team somehow pulls a rabbit out of their hat and finds a way to nullify their 7m+ vote lead and instill Trump over their wishes.


          Just put yourself in their shoes for a second… Trump won by a landslide… but Blue Team found some contorted anachronistic technical bureaucratic procedure to throw out the Trump win and appoint Bernie Sanders through some other method. You, like me, might accept that “playing by the rules is fair,” though you’d still be royally pissed off. But it’s a safe bet that many on your side of the aisle would lose their shit.


          At play are two conflicting things that we might consider the “letter of the law” and the “spirit of the law”…. as long as you follow the letter of the law, I will accept it, but I can only speak for myself.

          But you can follow the letter of the law in such a way that it overrides the spirit of the law.. the spirit is that Americans get to choose their President… and if you find a way to ignore this and have a handful of partisans choose instead, you can expect Civil War 2.0.

          • So you’re rooting to see the start of Civil War 2.0?

            It has already begun, it’s just not bloody yet.

            What I think your missing is for Congress to end up doing this, it’s because Crats didn’t conduct the election by the RULES and got caught and it was proven in the highest court in the land.

            you can expect Civil War 2.0.

            Your side (so to speak) will only burn down their own towns and cities. The minute they go into the Red areas, bullets will fly….and that’s who has lots of guns and ammo ready to go.

            • What I think your missing is for Congress to end up doing this, it’s because Crats didn’t conduct the election by the RULES and got caught and it was proven in the highest court in the land.

              If that’s true and PROVEN IN COURT, then so be it.

              If Trump & Co can convince SCOTUS that the election was irreparably faulty and the Court decides the only remedy is to throw out the election entirely and go the legislative route, so be it.

              But an extraordinary remedy requires extraordinary evidence. If Trump & Co just spout off unsubstantiated conspiracy theories and the court splits along political lines and hands him the Presidency, that’s just total bullshit. It may be legal, but it’s still bullshit.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Are you OK with them throwing out the results BECAUSE the States violated their own laws and/or the US Constitution?

                Or would that just be a frivolous technicality, since no actual fraud is proven?

              • I am “ok” with whatever the LAW says. That is, I’ll accept it, but I make no promises about being happy about it.

                Evidence to the contrary, I’m not a Con Law professor.. I don’t know the intricacies of this area of law – and I don’t know that anyone does since there’s so much that hasn’t been explored in the legal system.

                Ultimately, so goes my understanding, the SCOTUS gets to interpret what the Constitution and subordinate laws do and do not say. Essentially, this gives nine people complete authority over the government of the United States because they can “interpret” whatever they want if they have a mind to do so and it is, by law, the “TRUTH.” It doesn’t matter, legally, if you and I look at them and say “you’re out of your mind.” Our opinions don’t matter. Theirs do. ONLY theirs do.

                If they say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of a free puppy to every child, that’s what it says. By law, the actual fact is that 2A guarantees a free puppy to every child, and it matters not one iota that you and I – and the rest of the country – say otherwise. There’s not a damned thing any of us can do about it. Even if we pass a new amendment clarifying, they can simply ignore it or interpret it to mean something else entirely. Even if congress impeaches them somehow, they can simply void the act. The US government will be obligated to provide free puppies. They are the all-powerful gods of American law. Only by their good graces do we persist in having any semblance – however remote – of logical cohesion within our legal system.

                To that end, if they say the legislature gets to decide, then that’s the law. It doesn’t matter if their reasoning is that they flipped a coin or that more of them wanted Trump than wanted Biden. It doesn’t matter if they give a reason at all, or if they do so in iambic pentameter. It’s the law because they say it’s the law.

                But from an outside perspective, yes, it’s the law… but they damned well better have a damned good reason and have accepted damned good evidence to impose such a significant ruling.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            I have had this “spirit of the law” used against me. As you can imagine I am not a fan.

            State violates the letter of the law then the STATE must pay a price. What you are condoning is similar to much of the other rot we find in Govt. The STATE breaks the law for “a good cause” then when those adversely affected try to overturn it the Courts rule that is was done “with good intentions” so no harm and no foul.

            This has essentially been the outcome of efforts to overturn illegal Executive Orders and/or Regulations issued for “a good cause”. There is no standard for implementing them but an onerous standard is applied to eliminating them.

  28. I am perplexed. Are the Republicans so good they never lose a ballot or so bad that they just can’t find their ballots.

  29. And then there’s Ted Cruz offering his services to Pennsylvania to argue their case at the Supreme Court. I’m not a fan of Cruz as a Senator, simply because I think he’s part of the swamp with the rest of them. I also think we’d be in a lot better shape if the lawyers stuck to lawyering and not governing. But the man has a good record arguing a case at that level, so more power to him.

    So now in the last 24 hours, we have Texas going to bat for the swing states, and Cruz going to bat for Penn. That sure helps with the sour grapes theme…people are sticking up for the USA no matter where they come from. Bout time.

  30. New York State Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte said Monday that officials have discovered additional uncounted ballots amid an ongoing legal dispute related to the outcome of the race in New York’s 22nd congressional district. In a hearing Monday to determine how to proceed with the certification process, DelConte noted that 12 uncounted ballots were found in a drawer in rural Chenango County last week, the Observer-Dispatch reported. Last week, officials discovered another 55 uncounted ballots in the same county. Of those 55 votes, 11 were cast by unregistered voters.

    And the SAGA continues, but I am sure that Sir Mathius will continue to walk whistling his new tune.

    Any bets on finding new uncounted votes to take this election?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Added info. NY 22nd is a race where the R was winning comfortably. After several batches of “discovered” ballots I think she was still ahead by like ELEVEN votes. The Dems were going to court to try and get a judge to change votes to the Dem side over some issue I don’t recall now.

  31. For your entertainment

  32. SACRAMENTO, CA—California has announced a bold new initiative: all rockets produced or launched in the state must run on wind power just ten years from now.

    Governor Newsom claimed the executive order was guided by SCIENCE and MATH.

    “We are following the SCIENCE here!” Newsom said. “We are once again leading the nation with initiatives that other states are too stupid to enact. Those backward hillbillies in states like Texas and Florida say they are pro-business because they have primitive technology like electricity, gasoline, and cars, but really, they just want the world to burn.”

    Giggles could be heard behind the curtain at the press conference, causing many to suspect it was a practical joke. But Newsom managed to keep a straight face, saying, “With SCIENCE on our side, we can go where no man has gone before, fully powered by green energy like wind and solar.”

    Early wind rockets have been unsuccessful, as the first one just fell over and then blew into an angry neighbor’s yard. Another one got stuck in a tree. But Newsom is confident the technology will be ready in a decade.

    Newsom and the state legislature were then shocked as Elon Musk announced SpaceX would be moving to Texas. A spokesperson for Texas said the state is excited to have Musk and that “that rootin-tootin space cowboy can build any kind o’ rocket he wants down here, shoot, I tell you what.”

  33. Question……………………for all……………..even Mathius…………………..

    With the relief bill stalled again, it seems that there are two major sticking points…..(1) the bail out of government pension plans, and (2) the liability protection for employers against law suits arising from closings etc…….


    • No pension bailouts – if you did a shit job at managing your pension, that’s your problem.

      No liabilities shields – if you make your workers work in unsafe conditions, then you can be sued for it. It’s no different to me than any other unsafe workplace suits.

      I have no doubt whatsoever that the majority of whatever “relief” they provide is going to wind up in the hands of the ultra-rich and/or the big corporations. Honestly, given the bullshit these bills are probably stuffed with, we’d all be better off if they just printed up a trillion dollars and flew around the country dropping it out of airplanes.

    • I’m with Mathius on this one. IF an employee gets Covid from work, why should that any different than getting the flu?

      No help that the Feds can craft will help those small business’s that are probably already dead. Crat led Cities and States have made sure of that. Even Goldman-Sachs is moving out of NYC because of the piss poor leadership and HIGH TAXES.

  34. RIP Chuck Yeager. Heard this yesterday but just found out he was 97. Wow. Pretty sure he got to heaven in less than 10 seconds.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Good one my dear. Quite the life this guy had.

      “…… he reached out and touched the face of God”.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        In case anyone didn’t recognize the reference, thought you might like the whole poem.

        High Flight
        by John Gillespie Magee

        Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth
        And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;
        Sunward I’ve climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
        Of sun-split clouds, – and done a hundred things
        You have not dreamed of – wheeled and soared and swung
        High in the sunlit silence. Hov’ring there,
        I’ve chased the shouting wind along, and flung
        My eager craft through footless halls of air…

        Up, up the long, delirious burning blue
        I’ve topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace
        Where never lark, or ever eagle flew –
        And, while with silent, lifting mind I’ve trod
        The high untrespassed sanctity of space,
        Put out my hand, and touched the face of God.

        • You ever read The Right Stuff by Tom Wolfe?

          • yes

          • Just A Citizen says:


            No. But I did see the movie. It was pretty good.

            I suggest you read Yeager’s autobiography if you haven’t already.

            • And I suggest you stop what you’re doing, go to a bookstore, buy a copy, and don’t come back here until you’ve read it.

              Wolfe has one hell of a command of the English Language.

          • Yes good read about the early space program, but Yeager’s autobiography is better because it covers his whole military life. The guy never got the recognition in the Air Force he deserved because he did not have the coveted brass ring. He started as a non-com. He had incredible long range vision and knew his planes’ technical capabilities thus he could get more from an aircraft than anyone else.

            In the movie “Right Stuff” Yeager is the bartender at Ponchos.

            • I never saw the movie.

              Wolfe is one of those authors.. like Neil Gaiman and Pat Conroy.. who have such a way with words that it actually makes me angry when I think about how I’ll never be able to express myself the way they do.

              I sometimes see these sentences that border on art. And I wonder how long it took, how many revisions, to complete just the one line… it’s a real gift.

    • Nooooooooooooooo!

  35. Just A Citizen says:

    Along the lines of HUMOR this AM, I got a chuckle out of this one.

  36. Just A Citizen says:

    The new defense bill includes language “requiring” the renaming of military installations named after anyone serving the Confederacy. Trump has threatened a veto but Congress is trying to get about 60% support in both houses to scare Mr. Trump into allowing it to pass.

    I agree with him on this point. The claim that this is needed to “deal with the outcome of slavery and the Civil War” is absolutely ridiculous. Many of these Confederate officers were serving in the US Army before the war and some served again after. What this really is about is a bunch of social justice warrior socialists litigating the war all over again. Opening wounds for absolutely no good reason. A Civil War involves members of States and Families on all sides. There is no rational reason to not honor those who fought bravely for either side.

    Mr. Trump also wants the bill to include language removing the litigation protection for internet companies.

    I STRONGLY disagree with him on this point. Simply removing the protection is short sighted and will backfire.

    • First let me say. I don’t give a shit. I have no horse in this race.

      While I happen to “agree” with the anti-Confederacy crowd and their point of view, I sincerely don’t care.

      That said…

      The claim that this is needed to “deal with the outcome of slavery and the Civil War” is absolutely ridiculous.

      These men took up arms against the government and people of the United States and killed men in uniform, serving the United States.

      We should not have any “monuments” toward those who committed armed insurrection against the United States. How do you think Mr. The Colonel would feel if we erected a Jane Fonda monument in Laguna Madre?

      Many of these Confederate officers were serving in the US Army before the war and some served again after.

      Does that change the fact that they committed armed insurrection against the United States? Or that ~620,000 Americans died as a direct result?

      What this really is about is a bunch of social justice warrior socialists litigating the war all over again.

      There’s no need to relitigate the war.

      We won the war.

      We literally had a war in lieu of litigating it.

      And we won.

      Y’all are acting like you (and, yes, I’m lumping you in with the southerners) didn’t lose.

      But you did.

      So you don’t get participation trophies.

      Opening wounds for absolutely no good reason.

      See, here, JAC.. no.

      Just.. JAC.. no.

      You’re better than this.

      You can’t act like the “wounds” are closed and all healed over. YOU don’t get to decide that on behalf of everyone else.

      THEY don’t feel that the wounds are closed. In fact, THEY feel that the presence of these monuments and bases named after confederates are an ongoing grievance – a persistent praising of those who fought to keep slavery alive. People who took up arms for the right to own their ancestors as one might own chattel.

      Now YOU might disagree.

      And I might call that oversimplified.

      But you don’t get to decide for them that the wounds are closed and then take umbrage at them for “reopening” them.

      It’d be as if I punched you in the face and then said “well, it’s in the past, this matter is settled” and then get mad at you for hitting me. Why the hell do I get to set the marker for when our “wound” is closed? Did YOU agree that the matter is closed? When you hit me, are you going to accept it that I accuse you of reopening old wounds? Or to you, was it a continuation of an ongoing matter?

      A Civil War involves members of States and Families on all sides. There is no rational reason to not honor those who fought bravely for either side.

      Sure there is.

      They fought an armed insurrection against the government of the United States of America and resulted in the death of 620,000 people.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Lived up to your reputation for spewing Bull Shit. Well done.

        Black Flag

      • Just A Citizen says:


        You are hilarious. “I don’t give a shit” and then a thousand words later claims that the wounds for a Civil War fought 136 years AGO were not healed.

        I must have missed those Civil War Vets and Citizens who are leading this charge against names and statues. Or maybe it was their children or grandchildren? Darn, most of them are dead as well.

        • I may not give a shit, but “THEY” sure as hell do.

        • What is even more interesting, the persons wanting to rename……do not even know why they are doing it. They have absolutely no concept who these people were nor their politics. It is a culture thing by individuals who have no idea of history.

        • I must have missed those Civil War Vets and Citizens who are leading this charge against names and statues.

          Maybe.. .but did you also miss the millions of black people who feel – regardless of what YOU believe – that racism is alive and well and that there shouldn’t be moments glorifying those who fought to perpetuate slavery?

          That YOU disagree does not change what THEY believe.

          And to THEM, this isn’t something that “ended” 136 years ago.. it’s something ongoing, from slavery-through-reconstruction-through-Jim-Crow-through-Civil-Rights-through-modern-day.

          I must have missed those Civil War Vets and Citizens who are leading this charge against names and statues.

          To my knowledge SKT is the only surviving Civil War vet – he was a drummer boy, as I recall.

      • Y’all are acting like you (and, yes, I’m lumping you in with the southerners) didn’t lose. No… we did not. We just quit fighting for awhile. Texas never gave up, we are still acting like we are a Republic. Make us stop.

        How do you think Mr. The Colonel would feel if we erected a Jane Fonda monument in Laguna Madre? Ohhhhhhh….puhhleeeeesssseee do it……By the way, when Jane Fonda was nominated or elected woman of the year by some outfit, she was coming to Fort Worth, Texas to speak at my club…Ridglea Country Club (took JAC there for steaks) … seems that there was this member there that organized a protest from veterans to stop her from speaking there. The protest worked and she was exiled to speak in Dallas…..

        • Just A Citizen says:

          They should have made her walk to New Mexico.

          • No….no…..Walking Jane Fonda through west Texas? Have you no decency, man? Well, she would not have made it. She barely made it out of Fort Worth….as a matter of fact, when she heard that Vietnam Veterans were waiting for her at the club…..she left town and never showed up.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Sir, I think you know me to be a decent and polite person.

              But in her case I stand by my comment.

      • With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

  37. Just A Citizen says:

    Mathius and I were crossing train tracks on the way to the pub.

    About half way across I yelled to Mathius to get off the tracks. There is a train coming.

    How do you know there is a train coming? Where is your proof?

    Feel that rumbling under your feet? The rails starting to sing?

    Yeah, but what is to say that is not due to a small earthquake or maybe a passing cement truck? And that singing could be a choir in the distance.

    Get off the tracks you fool, I screamed as I jumped back.

    You have no proof of a train JAC.

    I raised a glass to his memory as the paramedics were picking up the pieces across the street. I toasted him for his great intellect as he had once again proven his prowess in debate. As it turned out it was not a train. Just an Engine hooked in tandem with another.

    • A small remedy requires small evidence.

      A great remedy requires great evidence.

      To ask me to get off the tracks is a small matter and, so, requires small proof.

      To ask a court to throw out 150m+ votes and decide the election on their behalf is a drastic remedy.. and so requires comparably profound proof.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        You are so CONFUSED.

        • I am?

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Yes, you are.

            I am commenting on your methods of argumentation, not the election results.

            You Sir often cannot see the forest for the trees. Or in your case, the illusion of trees because I cannot prove they are trees instead of large shrubs or that because they live together they comprise an actual forest. Because after all, the concept of “forest” is a subjective human construct.


      • Yes it requires proof. So let’s depose the poll workers and observers, let’s check the signatures, let’s look for mail in ballots w/o folds, let’s look for machine copied ballots, let’s forensically analyze the machines, LET’S FINALLY HAVE A REAL INVESTIGATION INSTEAD OF “IT’S ALL BEEN DEBUNKED.”

        • But T Ray….we can’t do that….if we did that we would never see another Dem elected. They can’t win without all this stuff.

          • If Democrats can’t win without cheating, they don’t deserve to win.

            If Republicans can’t win without the fact that the skew of gerrymandering and the Electoral College meaning their votes count more than mine, then they don’t deserve to win either.


            Come to think of it, both parties deserve to lose.

  38. Just A Citizen says:
    • Bad scat happens all the time.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        More like the Hospital killed her.

        • We luckily escaped clean from my wife’s 6 day stay in the hospital. CA is nearly in a full lock down. I am not sure what they plan to accomplish by that. Many small businesses have finally reached their limits. Bankruptcy lawyers are going to make a fortune. Our county has had 5 deaths out of 200K but we have to lock down because hospital capacity is near full supposedly. Full of what I do not know. We only have 2 hospitals one in Placerville and one in S. Lake Tahoe, both small. The wife was in the Folsom Hospital which is bigger but still not metro size. There were no beds in the general wards so she ended up in ICU for several days. There were empty beds in the ICU.

  39. It’s 11:59 AM on January 20th and President Trump, with one minute remaining in his term signs a pardon. “I hereby pardon myself for all federal crimes.”

    At 12:03 PM, JUSTICE Mathius receives a petition from congress asking to void the pardon.

    Hmmmm…… What to do… what to do… let’s hear oral arguments… what says SUFA…?

    • Justice Mathius has no choice……..He, like all Presidents, have the power of pardon. It is one of those lawful but awful things you always harp about.

    • I don’t think anyone, Presidents or governors,should be able To pardon themselves. Not sure what the Constitution says. I suspect, per the attorneys, it is open to interpretation.

      • Don’t fret V, it’s all just liberal conspiracy theory psycho babble

      • I agree VH, self pardons should not be legal. I think this is mostly a MSM/Dem talking point to keep TDS alive. Note the article names unnamed sources; they have been so reliable in the past. This is the same BS as needing troops to carry him out of the WH on Jan. 20.

    • What is he pardoning himself for??? Russia Collusion maybe! BWAHAHAHA

    • You are doing a poor job of presenting arguments.

      Alright… GMAN, I’m appointing you to the complainant’s side – you are responsible for arguing that a President cannot pardon himself.

      V., I’m appointing you on the respondent’s side – you are responsible for arguing that a President can pardon himself.

      Colonel, you’re the bailiff.

      • President Trump cannot pardon himself, period. One must commit a crime to be pardoned and since that hasn’t occurred (except in those suffered from TDS), it is clearly a joke against the highly biased Liberal media. He may have been thinking that the MSM needs SOMETHING to complain about to stay in business, after he clearly has exposed them as part of the DNC. In addition, President Trump would have to be leaving office, which is in serious question right now.

        In addition, everyone knows that ONLY Democrats can do such things and be called heroes by the water carrying MSM. Geez, where have you been?

    • I keep seeing this…he’s going to jail. I keep asking…FOR WHAT?

      • I don’t know. What’s Biden going to jail for? That’s not the question. The question is whether he has the authority to pardon himself. You are welcome to file an amicus brief before this Court.

        • Maybe Trump should pardon Biden before he leaves office. This would clear him of any wrong doing in the Russia hoax, Gen. Flynn’s railroading, the Ukraine scandal, and ties to China. It would put as much of an asterisk on his legacy as the impeachment has on Trump’s.

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          Treason for openers. Then extortion, bribery, theft.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Thought I would step in here as your para-legal to help you prepare your arguments before Justice Mathius and the court. Following is a draft for your review and approval.

        The pardon powers of the President are based on Article Two of the United States Constitution (Section 2, Clause 1), which provides:

        “The President … shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of impeachment.”

        The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language to include the power to grant pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines and forfeitures, respites, and amnesties.[11]

        A pardon is an executive order granting clemency for a conviction. It may be granted “at any time” after the commission of the crime.[12] As per Justice Department regulations, convicted persons may only apply five or more years after their sentence has been completed.[13] However, the President’s power to pardon is not restricted by any temporal constraints except that the crime must have been committed. EMPHASIS…. “THE CRIME MUST HAVE BEEN COMMITTED”. TO WHICH I AGAIN ASK THE COURT, WHAT CRIME?

        A pardon is an expression of the President’s forgiveness and ordinarily is granted in recognition of the applicant’s acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence. It does not signify innocence.[14] Its practical effect is the restoration of civil rights and statutory disabilities (e.g., firearm rights, occupational licensing) associated with a past criminal conviction.[13] In rarer cases, such as the pardon of Richard Nixon, a pardon can also halt criminal proceedings and prevent an indictment.
        A commutation is the mitigation of the sentence of someone currently serving a sentence for a crime pursuant to a conviction, without cancelling the conviction itself.[13]


      • Just A Citizen says:


        You are probably going to have to address this before the Court. I would expect Justice Mathius to bring it up.

        Your response might read something like:



        • Could you speak to the pardon of Vietnam draft avoiders?

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Well first my immediate and simple reaction is that it was BS of the greatest magnitude. I understand the politics of it but it should NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. Cassius Clay at least took his medicine. I felt this way then and my view has not changed over time. Even if in JAC Land there would be no such laws. They were in place and they should have been enforced.

            From a purely legal perspective however, I would have to go back to the legislation governing draft dodging. Preliminarily I would say it might be allowed if the Law and Regulations basically established guilt and penalty by the act of avoiding either registration or induction. If the sentence was set by law and no trial for conviction needed then it could be considered a commutation of the sentence.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        And finally, feel free to provide this as a summary of the prevailing legal view of self pardons. I suggest you hold this back and use it only after Justice Mathius goes off on one of his rabbit chases, as might be expected. This might bring him back to earth.

        Arguments against self-pardons include constitutional themes of self-judging and self-dealing, the unjust nature of the president being above the law, violations of the public trust, the inclusion of the word “grant” in the relevant clause (one cannot grant something to oneself), the definition of “pardon” (because one cannot grant forgiveness to oneself), and the inadequacy of other safeguards such as political consequences.[10]

        Here is the citation noted at the end of the paragraph.

        Conklin, Michael (April 28, 2020). “Please Allow Myself to Pardon … Myself: The Constitutionality of a Presidential Self-Pardon”. Rochester, NY. SSRN 3587921.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      You know Mathius, I think this whole issue is primarily a propaganda topic for the Dems.

      BUT, given how things have turned out and how Mr. Trump can be when attacked, I would NOT BE SHOCKED if he did this. Not to actually pardon himself but to just create an explosion of heartburn among the left and media. Ok that was redundant.

    • JUSTICE Mathius dismisses the case for lack of standing – Texas has to be a state to vote, not a sovereign nation.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Justice Mathius has no authority to dismiss. That lies with a majority of the court. And Justice JAC would like to point out that when a lower court judge, Justice Mathius ruled on many occasions that Texas was in fact a State and had signed away its sovereignty when it rejoined the Union.

      • We the People overrule and sentence Justice Mathius to the Group W Bench.

        The short version in We the People plain English is Texas has disenfranchised voters by the millions, since certain states decided to go full idiot and cheat their way to a President Elect. The effect of the cheat was enough that now Texas’ vote for president is void.

  40. interesting blurb on the news………Dateline Nevada…….1,511 dead people actually voted, according to the Sec of State….and 42,248 persons voted more than once with one voter having voted 4 times in four different polling locations in one county.

    Now, I don’t know if this rises to fraudulent action…….^^cough cough^^

  41. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Today I managed to listen to both the NY State Attorney General’s office and the NY County DA, Cyrus Vance’s office talk about how they will prosecute former President Trump.
    Of all the Stalinist hate tactics I have ever seen, this beats them all. There is NO crime I have seen alleged worthy of the name.
    Letta or Lucretia Borgia up in Albany says he will. “NOT GET AWAY WITH HIS CRIMES AS PRESIDENT”. What crimes?
    This is nothing more than a blatant attempt to bankrupt the Trump family at the expense of New Yorkers.

    • Biden’s pick for DH&HS is CA AG Bacerra. He is another political hack. He has filed dozens of suits against the Trump administration over the last 4 years all at my expense. he has no experience in health or human services so this is just another political payoff.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        But, but, but T-Ray. Haven’t you gotten the memo yet? We are all supposed to be OVER JOYED at the return to the “status quo”, don’t ya know!

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Tax evasion and bank fraud, for overstating asset values. That is their plan.

      Wonder what the Governor’s books look like, let alone his slimy TV brother.

  42. Just A Citizen says:

    Time has stood still, Aliens landed on the moon, the sun rises in the west.

    I have come to a place where I find myself AGREEING with a bunch of Democrats and that ass-hat named Amash.

%d bloggers like this: