Shutdowns Worse than Virus

Comments

  1. 😎

  2. Canine Weapon says:
  3. Anyone have any thoughts on the “Alternative Electors”?

    • Won’t make a difference.

      • Correct, but too limited.

        What do you think about the idea that they generated their own “alternative electors” and will, in January, presumably, make an effort (however doomed) at seating them over the electors chosen by the respective states?

        I keep hearing “you want to win at all costs” yet this sure as hell seems like the mother “win at all costs” kind of tactics to me.

        • It’s called “peaceful protest” to what tens of millions believe is massive voter fraud. I don’t think you realize just how many people believe in the fraud issue and many are really pissed off. But the former is just political theater, while the latter has yet to be determined.

          Now, a question for you, If the media covers for a person who is convicted of a crime the media is covering for, is the media breaking the law?

          • I don’t think you realize just how many people believe in the fraud issue and many are really pissed off.

            Seeing as the President of the United States and his enablers have been screaming to the rafters about it for months, it’s not surprising that millions of people believe it.

            In particular, his kool-aid drinking cultists would believe anything he says.

            What -I- think is that he’s been thrown out of court ~50 times now and if he had any proof of his claims, he’d have a better record than ~1-50.

            So what he has are claims, suppositions, implications, and hints that there might have been something amiss, but no PROOF of anything.

            So, without proof, I don’t give a good goddamn “how many people believe in the fraud” any more than I give a damn how many people believe in angels.

            Now, a question for you, If the media covers for a person who is convicted of a crime the media is covering for, is the media breaking the law?

            Are they lying?

            Actually, you know what? It probably doesn’t matter.

            The answer is no.*

            *narrow exceptions may apply

            Now, a question for you, If the media covers for a person who is convicted of a crime the media is covering for, is the media breaking the law?

            You always get me with this kind of thing.

            “The media” doesn’t do shit. “The media,” of which a significant portion is owned by conservatives, doesn’t “cover” for people nor “go after” people. It chases the almighty dollar.

            If it happens to “cover” for someone, that’s wholly incidental to the primary goal of making money.

            If it winds up reporting a story, that’s because the editors felt that that story would help the company – and its corporate overlords – make money.

            If they wind up not reporting a story, that’s because they felt that it was disadvantageous to do so. That could be because it turns off potential readers or because they don’t want to get sued or or or or. But at the end of the day, it’s about money.

            If they put a favorable slant on a story, it’s because they know that this will help attract and retain a certain kind of reader. If they put the opposite slant or bias, it’s because they are aiming to attract a different kind of reader. And from that, they will make money.

            If they are impartial, it’s because they’re trying to bolster their image of impartiality and, by doing so, attract readers who are interested in impartiality. And, from those readers, they will make money.

            If they publish tabloid-quality bullshit, they are attempting to attract readers who are interested in biasp-confirmation or conspiracy theories or whatever. Those readers will buy their rags or view their ads and they will make…. money.

            It’s ALLLLLLLLL about the money.

            The almighty dollar reigns supreme and where you see a cover-up conspiracy, I see the all-powerful hand of the free market.

            If “they” – whoever “they” are – thought they could make more money by running with the Hunter Biden Email conspiracy theory 24×7 above the fold and at the top of every hour, they would do it. There is no appetite amongst mainstream readers / viewers because mainstream readers / viewers understand it to be conspiratorial bullshit unless / until Rudy releases the evidence and proves otherwise. It’s not that “the media” is covering up anything – they just don’t see the dollar signs in covering that story.

            And if they don’t see the dollar signs, they don’t do it.

            That’s how business works.

            *Disclaimer: I am speaking here about the bigger corporate outlets, not smaller independent entities or micro blogs. They are free agents and do whatever the hell they feel like. But CNN/MSNBC/FOX/WaPo/NYT/WSJ and the major blogs. But a site like SUFA, for example, isn’t really “in it for the money” and will post whatever it wants irrespective of ad revenue.

            • Fox, NYPost, WSJ as far as I know are owned by the Murdocs. The NYT is owned by some billionaire in Mexico. WaPo is owned by Bezos. ABC is owned by Disney; CNN by AT&T; NBC by Comcast; CBS by Viacom. Other than the Murdocs, I doubt that any of these are conservative. Most big business execs swing to the left. In fact the Murdoc kids are leftists as well. It is well documented that 90% of journalists are progressives.

              • Ive read that Murdoch Sr is also left, but that Roger Ailes convinced him to allow FOX the conservative slant, BECAUSE it was a sure money maker.

            • Your blindness to the media’s bias is almost unbelievable. If they were really just following the money there would be as much right leaning content in the mainstream media as there is of the left leaning. The country is pretty evenly divided, but the media coverage it is not.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Mathius

              ““The media” doesn’t do shit. “The media,” of which a significant portion is owned by conservatives, doesn’t “cover” for people nor “go after” people. It chases the almighty dollar.”

              So there was money in it for the MSM to TANK the Hunter Biden/Joe Biden story before the election?

              There was money in it for them to tell the public Mr. Trump was full of shit when he said the vaccine would be ready by the end of the year?

              There was money in it when they failed to report on the substance of any of the allegations about vote fraud? Think about this. You asked me yesterday what it was PA did to break its own laws. It has been in the public sphere since BEFORE the election. Yet you, who follows the MSM and Left wing media could not answer the question.

        • What if it comes out that the election was a sham? There ARE still cases pending. And its being called a contested election. So what’s the problem with covering the bases now? At least then no one can say ‘sucks to be you’, ‘shoulda thought about that before’. There is precedent for deal electors.

          • grrr…dual electors

          • The Precedent is that, in 1960, Hawaii certified the vote before the final count and appointed Republican voters. When the recount finished, the governor then sent Democratic voters, too, asking congress to recognize the latter group. And when it came time for Congress to count, the motion to accept the substitute was put forward by the Vice President… Richard Nixon.. the candidate who would personally lose votes from that decision.

            This wasn’t a political event. It was a pragmatic one.

            Hawaii certified too soon, then everyone jumped through a few hoops to fix the mistake.

            It wasn’t an effort to reject the states’ choice and substitute a different one. The two are not equivalent at all.

            • The 1876 election had alternate electors as well. Me thinks you are jumping to conclusions. This is more about keeping options open rather than stealing the election. If there is significant fraud proven before Jan. 20, would you really want Biden inaugurated?

              • If there is significant fraud proven before Jan. 20, would you really want Biden inaugurated?

                No.

                I would want him shot out of a cannon.

            • The electors are picked for EACH CANDIDATE -BEFORE the election. Meaning there’s already two sets of electors. Its not like anyone is pulling a bait and switch.

    • Anyone have any thoughts on the “Alternative Electors”? Yep…….I have thoughts on them……..doesn’t the Pirate have a need for galley slaves? Or, has his new wealth eliminated those needs…..

      We do not need them…it is dumb…and to my conservative friends, you need to accept that this election was rigged and stolen…you do not have to like it…..move on. What you need to do is change the landscape in two years.

      I keep hearing “you want to win at all costs” yet this sure as hell seems like the mother “win at all costs” kind of tactics to me. No sir, this pales compared to the tactics the left pulled….pales to almost nothing. You got away with it….this time. Even if you manage to steal the Georgia races, and I feel confident that you will, this is a double edged sword. It will bite you in the ass.

      Sometimes, the wall is too high to climb….sometimes it is too wide to go around or even too deep to tunnel….but no wall is impenetrable. The main problem that I see is that conservatives do not fight dirty…..and they should.

      • Col., I don’t have any confidence that the problems will be corrected. The push for no IDs, mail in ballots, lax signature checks, disregard for the rules (esp. observers) has been relentlessly going in one direction. Add to that motor voter, unlimited immigration, DACA, amnesty…. One party rule is a real threat. We have it here in CA. It is getting worse. I see our county slowly being turned from deep red to tinges of purple as we are invaded by escapees from the Bay area. With remote work now becoming popular, this will only get worse as they will move here for cheaper housing and the rural life. This is why I hammer on Mathius so hard. Election fraud is real and significant, but unless democrats like him start demanding that this be cleaned up, nothing will happen. At this time he is happy to win by any means necessary.

        • T Ray…I understand totally but I deal in realities. Now, I am not saying that you do not pull whatever you can to yank the rabbit out of the hat, but you better be prepared for the inevitable. I am conservative, I make no pretense…I am nowhere near far right nor do I want to be. I am not a religious person so I have no dog in the hunt for the religious right but I do have disdain for those that want to eliminate religion under the guise of it does not belong anywhere or it makes people nervous.

          Election fraud is real, there is no doubt and election fraud is very significant…again no doubt. Mathius is a weird duck….he fully supported the investigation into the Trump/Russia collusion….his comments of “where there is smoke there is fire”…”a preponderance of circumstantial evidence is acceptable”…He even trusts media….

          What I find a little puzzling…is his adamant support and denial of Biden and his associations and the Hunter Biden allegations and his lack of blistering them….it is always about trump and his “win at all cost” attitude in denial of what the left has done to get Biden elected but you have to expect that because that is his candidate. You cannot convince him that Obama was a worse liar than Trump has ever been so I leave it alone. I get it…it takes two horses to have a horse race.

          So, all this to say…..you know the military…..and for the historians, think back on the Italian Campaign in WWII…..take the Progressive/Democrat party and interject them into how the US approached this campaign against the Nazis….errr….German Army. ( I don’t want Mathius to think I called him a Nazi ) The Progressive/Democrat party are the mountains in the approach to Rome….To defeat the mountains took a great deal of effort and a change in the normal way to fight mountain wars…..we have to look long term on this. The conservatives got flanked on this election…pure and simple. The legal challenges that have been submitted are good challenges but will get tossed out of court because no court, even the SCOTUS, wants to venture into state’s rights….and I agree with that. Mathius is correct in that it opens a can of worms. Even the German Army in Italy had a good strategy and campaign…but it took ingenuity to beat them. We can do the same in our politics. When we went into the Italian Campaign….we suffered some humiliating defeats…and staggering losses..but so did the German Army. Think about this……historic numbers of people turned out to vote (dead ones, illegal ones, etc) but historic none the less……a 51.3 Percent for Benghazi Biden vs 46.9 percent for Orange Man Trump is hardly a blowout. It is not even a referendum…..the Progressive/Dem party lost seats in the House when they were supposed to have a blow out. Many states gained in republican seats on local elections because the voters only voted for Biden and no down ticket items. Texas won three seats in normal democratic precincts with conservative Hispanic republicans and not a single Democratic challenger won a single seat in Texas and the same happened in many states….it is the little things that count and add up. The US in Italy repeatedly attacked mountain strongholds and got stymied……until their new strategy of attacking everything around the strongholds started….eventually cutting off the mountain strongholds. It was the little battles that won the campaign…not just the big ones. this is where the Republicans….errr….conservatives need to focus. Win the State houses and governor mansions and continue to build there.

          Try everything you can for the time being but focus on the long term…..2 years from now….this is what I would do. But…I am just a retired old Army Colonel and old coot who knows nothing.

    • It is a strategic move that provides insurance should he finally get access to the data and can show significant election fraud. Without them, Congress might be obligated to go with the original electors despite the evidence. Thus it keeps the investigation period alive until such time in January that Congress decides the issue. It means nothing if further evidence is not unearthed. I have no doubt that Republicans will vote their conscious when the time comes. I also have no doubt the Democrats will vote as a bloc no matter the evidence.

      • Ok, that’s a take… not the worst take, either.

        Question: is there anything that could convince you that Biden won? Is there any evidence that could be presented to you that could make you believe Trump legitimately lost?

        • Yes, a full investigation of what went on in the big cities in the disputed states. I want to see signatures, unfolded ballots, sudden vote count jumps, and all the other anomalies properly investigated and explained preferably by an impartial body. I want forensic analysis of the voting machines. I want to know what is going on in Spain and Germany. I want to know why want to know why software was upgraded at the last minute without recertifying the machines. I want poll workers interviewed under oath.

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            What, are they afraid of? Seems perfectly reasonable to me. After all, did we NOT spend three whole years investigating the nefarious Russian interference and Trump’s quid pro quo with Vladimir Putin?

  4. Now, with all the clamoring about Covid and how contagious it is and all the closing down of businesses and such….why are we not closing the border?

    • Especially since the Canadian border remains closed. Been closed since March.

    • If you’re looking for some kind of consistency in policy on the left, you won’t find it. To be fair, it’s hard to come by on the right as well.

      • Yes, Jennie, that is correct. this is why Texas embarks on its own. The left thinks it is horrendous that Texas (1) is using its own funds to build walls in certain places, (2) Texas takes a stand on picture ID’s even in the face of court decisions, and does what is right and enforces picture ID’s, etc….we have closed the State border and will continue to close the border in defiance because we know what works and does not work….in short…we are on our own and, actually, prefer it that way.

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          My hat goes off to the Lone Star State!

          • Stephen, I think we (Texas) has a great political climate…it is under siege for sure but ever since Democratic control under Ann “Grannie Annie” Richards, we have slowly been increasing conservative influence ever since and have maintained a conservative majority. As I said, in our latest state races, the Dems lost 7 more seats in the populous Hispanic border area to conservative Hispanics. This is how we are attacking it. Plus we have a legislature and governor that believes as Trump did in America first…..we are Texas first. We must be doing something right because we are picking off huge business’ out of California and New York…

            This is what it is going to take….and a governor not afraid to tell mayors that if they do not control their cities, he will do it. We are also fortunate in that we have a very large National Guard force (30,000) and we have a very large State Guard Force (15,000) where we can patrol our own borders and such..and they have arrest and detainment authority on the border. We anticipate that the Feds under Biden will gut and hamstring the Federal ICE and Border Patrol and re-issue rubber bullets and bean bags again…..so our guard, which is fully armed with real bullets and authority, will take over when that happens.

            There is a movement in our legislature to form our own state immigration service but I have not seen anything on that yet……This is what states are going to have to do.

            We are in a unique position of having our own power grid and are not tied to the power grids of the US….so when all this green shit takes over and brown outs start flowing, we will be ok……we are also raising a lot of eyebrows in Washington with building of our own state refinery for the production of gasoline within Texas and having our own gasoline market intrastate.. It is going to take some independence to break Washington grips.

  5. CLEVELAND, OH—Due to mounting pressure from a growing consensus of 12 people on Twitter and The New York Times, the Cleveland Indians have finally chosen to change their team’s name and get rid of the highly offensive “Chief Wahoo” mascot. After testing several new names with focus groups, the owners finally settled on the highly non-offensive title “Cleveland Genderless Sports Players With No Discernable Racial Features Or Specific Ethnic Background.”

    “After listening to the earnest pleas of a few recent college grads who sat through a Native American History course once, we realized something had to change,” said owner Paul Dolan. “Once we make this change, we expect the lives of indigenous people to improve exponentially.”

    In addition to the name change, the Cleveland Indians will also replace Chief Wahoo with a generic, genderless, racially ambiguous grey face with purple hair.

    Activists are continuing to push the organization to do more to right the wrongs brought about by decades of racial insensitivity. In response, the team will offer free season tickets to anyone named “Wahoo.”

  6. (Bloomberg) — Switzerland’s foreign-exchange interventions to weaken the franc will be enough for the U.S. to qualify the country as a currency manipulator, though it has the option to hold back on the designation, according to people familiar with the matter.

    Switzerland is already one of a number of countries on the Treasury “monitoring list” for currency practices. The central bank has spent years trying to stem the franc’s appreciation, an effort that went into overdrive in 2020 amid a market rout in the early days of the coronavirus pandemic.

    Spending in the first half of the year soared to 90 billion francs ($101 billion). That’s equivalent to 12% of Switzerland’s annual economic output.
    =================
    I know this does not affect any of you but this would be a start to serious inflation worldwide….along with the manipulations of currency from Vietnam, Thailand, India, and Taiwan…..note: all are major trading partners with the US. Heads up!!

  7. All is quiet on the Western Front.

  8. Julian Assange formally asks for a pardon from Trump. Pass the popcorn.

  9. Canine Weapon says:

    Asked whether Biden is the President-Elect, Kevin Kramer (R-ND) spoke eloquently from the heart:

    Well, it seems to me that being elected by the electoral college is a threshold where a title like that is probably most appropriate and it’s, I suppose you can say official, if there is such a thing as official president-elect, or anything else-elect. And there’s an inauguration that will swear somebody in and that person will be the President of the United States, but whether you call it that or not, you know, there are legal challenges that are ongoing – not very many – probably not a remedy that would change the outcome but, so, I don’t – again I don’t know how a politician refers to another politician.”

    What a marvellous way with words.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      He is in fact the President Defect. Anyone can see that. President for life Ping must be in constant orgasim.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      You must be an AIR Dale, cause you got your nose stuck so high in the air your getting frost bite.

      ARROGANCE is not a becoming characteristic for a DOG. But then I guess like owner like dog.

  10. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Revisiting in my mind the 2016 election, most particularly Comey’s role in the Clinton scandals,. Yes then no then yes then no. Just enough to tilt the outcome perhaps.

    Has anyone ever given any serious thought that the deep state took her down on purpose? While the Russians did not collude with anyone, the US intel agencies certainly did with each other, forces within big tech and of course the media.

    Hillary, for all her flaws and innate nastiness was certainly someone no one could control. She would plot her own course and deviate for no one. It is certainly plausible that with Trump being an unknown, naive quantity, they felt he could be easily destroyed. All evidence up to including right now demonstrates they thought they could without a lot of effort. So, take her out, take out Trump and just deal with Pence until 2020.

    Speculation yes, but I never could figure Comey’s game plan with her which made absolutely no sense other than placing a huge doubt in many minds. Hell, even if she won, she would be carrying it around just like the Trump collusion.

    Thoughts on this snowy morn?

    • Good Morning!

      Considering that this was recently released: https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/06/breaking-dni-declassifies-handwritten-notes-from-john-brennan-2016-cia-referral-on-clinton-campaigns-collusion-operation/

      They all knew the Russian collusion stuff was BS from Clinton, YET, over 30 million was spent on an investigation resulting in…..NOTHING. This gives your theory some credence. The Deep State so entrenched in DC it’s worse than a stage 4 cancer.

      As for snow, I have a full 12 inches that I have to clean up this afternoon. My area was predicted to get 3-5 inches total.

    • As a wise man once said, “Don’t attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.”

      Obama was running the Trump investigation. Prior to that there is a possibility that they were also spying on Ben Carson and other R candidates. This was a Chicago style political move.

      The Hillary emails came out of Trey Goudy’s committee hearings. Thus it was dumped on Comey and something they had not actively pursued. I am sure they all knew about it before hand and just ignored it. Lynch just wanted the scandal to go away but enough in the press had gotten involved that the had to do something about the “matter”. So they swept it under the rug using the excuse that there was no intent hence no foul. They completely overlooked the obstruction of justice and the intent to thwart FIOA.

      We do know that the Secret Service hated Hillary for the rhymes with rich person she was/is. If anything, she was blackmail-able by both the Russians and the CIA.

      The next question is, had not Mayor G exposed the labtop, would they have kept it secret and used it to blackmail Biden?

  11. Food for thought: There have been a few cases of allergic reactions to the Covid vaccine. This is nothing new with vaccines and treatable. But, it’s nice to know although not a major issue.

    My issue now, is that Twitter will be censoring anything negative about the vaccine. If the Liberal Fascists are going in that direction, that concerns me about what the other problems with the vaccine may come to be. I’ll be waiting and watching….for quite awhile.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      Always going to be a cost-benefit ratio. Last week they were talking about folks with egg allergies staying away from it. All us compromised old farts should probably get it but the young? They should just let nature take its course since it very well could be that the vaccine side effects might equal the damage of getting the virus itself.

      Is it not nice to be able to think like a scientist and not a ferret like Fauci?

  12. Well, here’s the Christmas hit of 2020 we were waiting for… and it’s come from 15-year-old Wallis Schriver from Meadowbrook, Pennsylvania.

    She’s written a catchy song, “Lonely Christmas”, that many people are saying will be a holiday classic. Wallis says she wrote the song to express her feelings about the pandemic, while remaining optimistic that “everything is going to be okay.”

    The song was uploaded on December 3, but Wallis didn’t realize she had a hit on her hands until it started blowing up online. She said:

    “I expected some of my friends to maybe watch it and say ‘Hey, good job on your song!’ but I really didn’t expect this!”

  13. Just A Citizen says:

    Nothing to see hear. The STEAL is up and running the day after the elections, but NOTHING HERE.

    https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/dougcollins-ballots-staceyabrams-georgia/2020/12/16/id/1001918/?utm_source=thehill

    We are to believe that 80,000+ mostly young black voters suddenly decided to vote in a Senate runoff when they did NOT vote in the general election. Cause that was so important but this is Mostest Important, ….. I guess.

    • No question about it…the steal is in…..

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I must confess. I am having a hard time keeping up my usual jovial mood and positive outlook on life these days.

        Then I spent this AM checking out some fishing trip ideas to the S. Fork Salmon and Henry’s Fork country in eastern Idaho/western Wyoming. If I can get campsites secured we could simply spend a month over there next summer.

        You and the missus could join us and use that as base camp for your exploration of Yellowstone, if you were so inclined.

        I did feel a little better after watching about 4 hours of fishing videos on Youtube, from Canada to Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and norther Utah. Maybe it was 6 hours. Who knows, but I did not think about all this BS going on the ENTIRE TIME.

        A little like Anita’s Bushman sanctuary I think.

        • Funny you mentioned this….we were thinking almost the same thing. My spousal unit has never been on a “camping” trip to speak of. Her first husband did not venture out too much and the very little we have done, she enjoyed it. Now, I am talking camping…not holed up in some cabin with internet and electric ranges and such. What do you like to do? I have a storage room full of camping gear that rarely gets used. Sounds great, and she has never seen Yellowstone at all except for virtual trips on the internet. She has never seen big cloudless skies with huge sunsets and stars at night that blanket the sky from horizon to horizon with no street lights or even a car light anywhere. She has never heard the bugle of an elk or the screech of an eagle or the scream of a large cat in the wild. She has never known, much less seen, a fly rod or trying to land a 5 pound brown trout on a 3 pound leader. She has never seen the salmon migrating or even jumping a falls to a spawning ground.

          Being Texan, she has never even caught a wide mouth bass on a calm summer morning on a lake that does not even have a ripple on the water or even heard the plop plop of a top water lure nor felt the explosion of a strike.

          I have so much to teach her and so little time….the only reason we have not is just not taking the time to get out and do it. We were talking about spending more quality time by taking road trips or camping trips into areas she has never been. This over blown cold we call Covid is not going to stop us this year unless everyone succumbs to the fear that is being spread out there.

          all this to say….great idea.There is one problem, however. Your spousal unit and my spousal unit got along very well…..this could be dangerous for us, ya know.

        • Yup. I’m needing my bushmen more and more lately. Covid has hit my main guy squarely too. Shawn James, My Self Reliance. He didn’t get Covid, but the effect of Covid got him.. He has 40 acres. He built a First Nations style longhouse on the back of his property for a hangout spot. Suddenly, everyone is buying remote property. He recently noticed survey tape within 60′ of his longhouse. The Canadian government is putting a road in THAT close to his property. A road means traffic and people. He cannot live with that. Between that and a complete jerk for a neighbor, he has decided to pack up and start over, after 3 years hard labor and a beautiful homestead, that wasn’t even complete yet. He was finally building his workshop, but he’s decided to move the workshop build to his even more remote outpost. Now he gets to have the workshop up first on the new homestead. His viewers are stunned to say the least, but that man knows what he wants, and it ain’t people. So, we get to watch him build another homestead. Great content for his YouTube channel. I’ve found another guy building a timber frame cabin in Tennessee. Smoky Mountain Outpost. This guy is more modern while being remote. He has a sawmill and built a shop to put it in, and a tractor for hauling logs to the mill. He plans to be off grid and as self reliant as possible. But he’s creating a beauty of a cabin. And just that quickly, I’ve built my own wall of text. Simple to do on this subject. I’ll stop here before I overstay my welcome.

        • It is hard not to get a little pessimistic sometimes. That’s why I mostly read science news. It’s almost always positive. I also enjoy humanprogress.org it’s good to remember that in most ways the world is getting better and better at a faster and faster rate.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Jennie

            In general I agree although I would add, “PARTS” of it are getting better and better.

            Some of the “advancements” may turn out to be not such a great thing. I am mostly thinking about AI in this case.

            It does astound me that the more we advance in science and technology the stupider the population of humans seems to become.

  14. Just A Citizen says:

    I was just thinking back to the first Obama election. At that time I was active in the R party in Montana. I was spending a lot of time with the “Ron Paul” crowd and the “younger” members of the County Party. I spent quite a bit of time talking with the “Millenials” who were part of “The Young Republicans”. Leadership was reaching out to them to figure out where the “Party” needed to go to regain a majority in the long term.

    What they said was Stick to the Principles expressed in the Party Platform with TWO exceptions.

    Drop the positions on abortion and gay marriage.

    The Rest, especially the “fiscally sound” and “personal responsibility” and “liberty, freedom, justice” parts are just fine.

    Do these things, they said, and you will hold a majority for the next 40 years or more.

    I am wondering if this is still true today!

    Or have we gone to far down the “slippery slope” towards demands for Social Justice that this generation would not support such a simple political viewpoint?

    Is Govt. provided health care and forgiving college debt now paramount to getting political support? Do the Millenials REALLY support open borders or at least increases in migration that will change the very character of the USA?

  15. I just saw a report where New York City has lost 8 percent of their tax base….this is HUUUGGGEE!!!!

    • Just saw the numbers……34 billion with a B in lost revenues.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Unfortunately a double edged sword. They bring their “mentality ” with them. Remember with commies, proto commies, neo commies et al. (all disguised today as progressives) It was NEVER that they were wrong just that they did not kill enough people!

        Have a good day!

  16. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    All the reports last night eagerly gobbled up were about more RUSSIAN hacking, everything from your shoe size to your water bill to nuclear launch codes. See, before Biden is even in office we have to worry about RUSSIA, not CHINA, never CHINA. let me tell you something, the Chinese can make it look like Vladimir Putin pulled the trigger on Abe Lincoln if they want to and get YOU to believe it!

  17. I thought y’all might enjoy this. I know I did. 😀

  18. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    In the past 48 hours I have heard of two acquaintances who feigning great moral and patriotic outrage last year vowed to NEVER watch professional football again over the “kneeling” controversy. Well according to their wives, they are watching! Ya see, with the shutdown and the pandemic these professionals (and they both are professionals) just have sooooo much time on their hands they need to “relax”. Obviously telling them to read “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” or Churchill’s “History of the English Speaking Peoples” or even Ian Fleming’s “The Complete James Bond” is out of the question, so, I advised the wife to tell their wives to have them watch Porno ….. ultimately much better for the soul than traitorous, vainglorious football players preening their “wokeness”. . .

  19. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Speaking of “reading” that’s pretty much what I have been doing these last eight months between projects. I’ve done a whole lot of Teddy Roosevelt, Churchill and Fiorello LaGuardia.

    Now what I drew from my latest about Churchill’s “escape” during the Boer war and his subsequent election to parliament is that Donald Trump was born 150 years too late.

    All three of the men I have been reading on suffered from larger than life ego’s. They never let an opportunity to blow their own horn go to waste, were universally reviled by their “betters” as gross and undignified and exaggerated (never lied) like crazy.

    To be honest and not make any excuses, the one thing the three had in common which apparently Trump does not is the almost suicidal need to demonstrate raw physical courage multiple times throughout their lives. Frankly, all three should never have risen to prominence, they all should have been dead. Roosevelt in Cuba or as a cowboy, LaGuardia in flight training or as a bomber pilot on the Italian Front and Churchill just about anywhere, anytime in his career including against the Pashtuns on the Hindu Kush. Most particularly there!

  20. Covid? We don’t have no stinking Covid……trying to use my best “Badges, we don’t need no stinking badges”…voice.

    High school Friday night Championship Football games kicked off in earnest this weekend. Friday night lights all over the state….professional and college scouts flocked to the state….kids able to show off their talents….concession stands open……it is high school football playoff time……

    And what does Governor Newsom say? “What a bad example that Texas sets.” Texas says, stick up your ass Newsome…we are still free here.

  21. Just A Citizen says:

    From my mail bag this AM.

    When four of Santa’s elves got sick, the trainee elves did not produce toys as fast as the regular ones, and Santa began to feel the Pre-Christmas pressure.

    Then Mrs. Claus told Santa her Mother was coming to visit, which stressed Santa even more.

    When he went to harness the reindeer, he found that three of them were
    about to give birth and two others had jumped the fence and were out, Heaven knows where.

    Then when he began to load the sleigh, one of the floorboards cracked, the
    toy bag fell to the ground and all the toys were scattered.

    Frustrated, Santa went in the house for a cup of apple cider and a shot of Crown Royal. When he went to the cupboard, he discovered the elves had drunk all the cider and hidden the Crown Royal.

    In his frustration, he accidentally dropped the cider jug, and it broke into hundreds of little glass pieces all over the kitchen floor. He went to get the broom and found the mice had eaten all the straw off the end of the broom.

    Just then the doorbell rang, and an irritated Santa marched to the door, yanked it open, and there stood a little angel with a great big Christmas tree.

    The angel said very cheerfully, ‘Merry Christmas, Santa. Isn’t this a lovely day? I have a beautiful tree for you. Where would you like me to stick it?’

    And so began the tradition of the little angel on top of the Christmas tree.

    Not a lot of people know this.

  22. Canine Weapon says:

  23. Interesting……California to lose 1 House seat and 1 electoral vote….Texas set to pick up 2 House seats and 1 electoral vote and Florida set to pick up 2 of each….don’t know about New York but will assume they will lose as well…

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      New York, thanks to Governator Mussolini will lose TWO seats as he slowly returns 89% of “upstate” back to pastureland and primeval forest.

  24. I haven’t been following this too carefully… my understanding is that:

    1. Trump is trying to exclude illegal immigrants from the counts even though the clear text of the law says to count the “whole number of people in each state.” (Please note this is as-distinct from agreeing that it should be this way.. just that, you know, I’m a textualist) Also in open defiance of precedent, clear original intent, having been smacked down by several lower courts.

    “A lot of historical evidence and long-standing practice really cuts against your position.”
    – Amy Coney Barrett

    2. Something-something-something “processing irregularities” which impacts millions of people (possibly over-counting college towns and undercounting people living in multi-family homes and prisons?).

    3. Something about Trump pushing for an accelerated time table the Census Bureau doesn’t think it can meet.

    4. And, at the end of the day, the whole thing has to be approved by the House which is Blue Shirt controlled, and who may reject the results as has been done once or twice in the past.

    • Is someone who is here on a visitors visa a resident? How about someone here on a visitors visa who has overstayed the visa? Are foreign students here on a student visas residents? If visitors and student visa holders are not residents, then why would someone here illegally be considered a resident?

      When the Constitution was drafted, there was no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. All immigrants were legal. Per the 14th(?) amendment, children born here of diplomats are excluded from citizenship because they are subjects of another country. Would not the same rules apply to anyone here illegally. These things need to be clarified and codified.

      Col., if TX gets 2 more reps, they also get 2 more EC votes.

      • <b.When the Constitution was drafted, there was no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. All immigrants were legal.</b.

        I mean.. that's all well and good, but….

        A14.2:

        Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.

        It started off with all Free Persons, minus Indians-not-taxed, plus 3/5ths of everyone else.

        A13 ended slavery, and A14 modified this to, very plainly, “counting the whole number of persons in each state [minus Indians-not-taxed].”

        This is plain text and is not subject to interpretation unless you wish to try to make the case that an illegal immigrant is not a “person.”

        When the Constitution was drafted, there was no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants.

        You are suggesting that, since the idea of illegal immigration is functionally newer in America (though certainly not elsewhere) than the Amendment, then, therefore, the Amendment is silent on the matter. Since it is silent, the President gets to carve out an exception within the idea of who qualifies as a “person” in this context.

        By this same logic, since modern rifles are newer than the Second Amendment, we must suppose that the Amendment is also silent on these. Since it is silent, therefore, the government decide what the Second Amendment does and does not apply to.

        Is someone who is here on a visitors visa a resident? How about someone here on a visitors visa who has overstayed the visa? Are foreign students here on a student visas residents? If visitors and student visa holders are not residents, then why would someone here illegally be considered a resident?

        Who cares?

        The text of the Amendment says not a peep about “residents.”

        The text is quite plain. It’s not even, as the good colonel jests below, comparable to 2A where a weird comma following the militia clause leaves some ambiguity. The text says who to count – that’s the “whole number of persons in each state.”

        Don’t like it? That’s fine. Change it.

        But until you do, you don’t get to substitute your idea of “residents” with the text’s word of “Persons.”

        • “These things need to be clarified and codified.”

        • Sir Mathius, you are always, or have been, adamant on the intent of things. Do you not think that the spirit of the amendment applies to citizens of the United States, even though it is silent?

          • Section 1 of the 14th defines citizens being born here or naturalized and not subject to other jurisdictions (i.e. other countries). The later is the diplomat and visitor exclusion.
            Section 2 discusses representation and does use the terms whole persons. It does allow for discounting all males who participate in rebellion against the country.

            One would need to go back to the discussions in congress when this was passed. I do know there was no intention of allowing children born of ambassadors and such to be given citizenship. They were visitors. I do know know when we started issuing visas. I do know we have always made lists of immigrants landing at our ports even back in colonial times. In colonial times, men also took oaths of allegiance to the crown. Somehow I do not think they intended to count visitors to this country for representation. I have yet to see in any census report a classification of visitor. All who appear in the census reports I have read (in the hundreds) are US residents. Some census reports list year of immigration and year of naturalization. State of birth has been common from the early days.

            The purpose of the 14th was to grant citizenship to the former slaves and to negate the 3/5 count.

          • Sir Mathius, you are always, or have been, adamant on the intent of things.

            I am adamant about reading the TEXT of the law as the controlling force.

            I fall back upon original intent only as necessary to resolve an ambiguity or an archane term has shifted in meaning since writing the law. If the later, for example, the fact that a word has a new (and potentially conflicting) meaning should not alter the law. Linguistic drift is no basis for altering the law and, so, I would defer to period usage since that was the intent.

            If the law is clear, intent does not matter. If the law is unclear, then I consider “well, what did they mean when they said….”

            Supreme Court Justice Mathius is a textualist. Dr. Google puts it well: A textualist is an originalist who gives primary weight to the text and structure of the Constitution. The text means what it would have been understood to mean by an ordinary person at the time it was written.

            Do you not think that the spirit of the amendment applies to citizens of the United States, even though it is silent?

            I think… hmm…

            Well, first of all, again, I think it doesn’t matter what the “spirit” or “intent” was. They said, in plain English to count all persons.

            In point of fact, you might have a far, far, far, more interesting case if you argued that this included Fetuses….

            Come to think of it, I’d be interested to know how conjoined twins count…

            But I digress…

            Do you not think that the spirit of the amendment applies to citizens of the United States, even though it is silent?

            With bleary eyes, I have read for myself, just now, portions of the Congressional record from 1868……………. which, unfortunately, has not been transcribed.

            I would draw your attention to this initial version of the Amendment:

            Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed: Provided, That whenever the elective franchise shall be denied or abridged in any State on account of race or color, all persons therein of such race or color shall be excluded from the basis of representation.

            That says, you cound all people… minus Inidans-not-taxed.. minus everyone who is inelligible to vote based on race or color. In other words, if you don’t let black people vote, you don’t get to count them for representation purposes. A very clever approach.

            However, that version died in committee with none other than Thaddeus Stevens noting that this would “enable circumvention of the congressional purpose via imposition by the states of unanalyzable educational or property qualifications.” (Can we resurrect Stevens and let him have a crack at Gerrymandering law?) In other words, states will just find some other obtuse method to end-run the rule. And, being aware of human beings’ tendency toward doing that kind of thing, they went in the direction of leaving no such potential for abuse.

            They knew about illegal immigration (at least elsewhere), they were cognizant of citizenship, residency, and naturalization, they had a mounting pressure of undesirable immigrants from China whom they had every incentive to find a way to preclude, and they deliberately avoided putting the emphasis on race or color so as to avoid letting people find other non-race-specific ways of manipulating the count… and so they ended up with the simple terms “whole number of persons.” It, therefore, seems clear to me that the text was written as it was – with such an unambiguous clarity – for the express purpose of preventing anyone from playing grabass with the definitions to pad or reduce state populations / representation.

            No, sir: Constitutional Scholar Mathius finds that Original Intent matches with the ruling by Textualist Supreme Court Justice Mathius.

            It says what it means.

            And it means what it says.

        • I’m with Mathius on this. All illegals should be counted and added to the census, along with their locations. Of course this isn’t for the purpose of representation, because Crat are violating Federal immigration laws by allowing them to continue to reside here. My reason is simple, round them up and ship them out. Now, I can agree to some exceptions on this. The exceptions can be negotiated.

    • Sort of like trying to interpret the words…well regulated militia, eh?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Mathius

      1. He was trying to exclude from the number used to apportion Congressional seats, not the gross total head count. The total count is what the Constitution requires.

      2. Per their own arguments, many if not most of our “illegal aliens” could be classified as “Indians not taxed”.

      If you are going to argue the Founders intended illegal aliens or others to be counted you are dumber than dirt. Note that while the language is plain as to everyone, Congress has itself eliminated “visitors” from the count I believe that includes those here on work Visas. As I understand the laws passed by Congress they essentially go to “permanent residency” although “illegal aliens” are NOT “legal residents”. But they do reside here.

      Now with that said, the language is plain and simple. It should be changed to reflect our “modern” views on immigration and residency. Until then, if we are going to stand on what the Constitution says, when it is plain and simple, or the Founder’s intent, then we are stuck with the current process.

      At the same time, the JUDGE who ruled against Mr. Trump on the questionnaire including a citizen question was out to lunch. The POTUS is clearly within their authority to include that and almost any other question they choose to add, in addition to those Congress has required.

      • 2. Per their own arguments, many if not most of our “illegal aliens” could be classified as “Indians not taxed”.

        JAC.. no… bad JAC! BAD!

        ::rolls up newspaper::

        “Indians not taxed” is a phrase with a clear and concise meaning. Native Americans who are not taxed.

        Are you some kind of liberal activist judge?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Mathius

          Hey, they are the ones claiming “Native American” status. So like I said, per “their own arguments”.

          NOW, remember the other day when you said I was just being sarcastic about having to keep wearing masks and social distancing AFTER GETTING VACCINATED?

          Well late last week one of the Doctors working for CDC or FDA said the exact same thing. Vaccinated people will become essentially “asymptomatic” carriers of the virus. So get your vaccination and feel safer but NOTHING ELSE WILL CHANGE.

          At least per the GREAT OZ.

          • A study out of Wuhan (of all places) of 10M people had ZERO cases of asymptomatic transmission. A Danish study out of of 6K people split about evenly into control and masked groups showed only a 15% improved performance of masks. The quantity was not statistically significant. But of course we follow the science.

      • If you are going to argue the Founders intended illegal aliens or others to be counted you are dumber than dirt.

        I am not going to argue that since there was no “illegal alien” concept in America at the time.

        But I will say that the law is perfectly plain.

        It is written with words that you and I can read and understand.

        Count the whole number of PERSONS
        Subtract Indians not Counted. (that’s native American, not Indians from India or Guatemalans here illegally… “Indians not counted”)

        Note that while the language is plain as to everyone, Congress has itself eliminated “visitors” from the count I believe that includes those here on work Visas.

        And they are wrong to do so.

        The law goes: Constitution > Congress > States.

        It’s that simple. Congress does not get to abrogate the TEXT of the Constitution and its Amendments without another Amendment.

        Don’t like it? Fine.

        Think it’s bad policy? Fine.

        Change it.

        But until you do, it says what it says and that’s what controls.

        As I understand the laws passed by Congress they essentially go to “permanent residency” although “illegal aliens” are NOT “legal residents”. But they do reside here.

        JUSTICE Mathius doesn’t care.

        JUSTICE Mathius can read words.

        “whole number of people in each state” does not leave wiggle room for such interpretations.

        A person is clear. A state is clear. Fin.

  25. Oh No……….now, the left, is rolling out ………are you ready for this…..Covid is already mutating…………get ready for this.

  26. Coronovirus Stimulus Bill……………5,500+ pages………I wonder what is written on page 3,457, third paragraph, second sentence………………..

  27. Question for Citizen Mathius……………………this will be a simple yes or no question. It does not require hyperbole, a BF answer, nor justification. Are you ready??

    Does Citizen Mathius buy into the left’s position that Trump will refuse to leave the White House when it is time. Yes or No……thank you.

    • I want you to know that I tried – I really tried – to give you a one word answer… I just couldn’t do it.

      Trump will go. He will not need to be hauled away by agents. There will be no war, no gunfight at the West Wing Corral. He will not set fire to the drapes. He will just quietly slink away in the middle of the night.

      But he will never – not ever – “concede” or admit that he lost, and he will do everything within his power until his dying day to sabotage and delegitimize the Biden administration. He will go to his grave claiming he won and insisting that it was stolen from him, and millions of his followers will, too.

      So, yes, he will physically vacate the premises. But he will only release the reigns of power when he finds that the reigns are no longer connected to anything. Until then, he will play-act as though he is the real President and zealously work to undermine the actual President.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I think that is pretty accurate. Except.

        Mr. Trump is not the only one who will always believe this election was stolen. You can put me in that category UNLESS the powers that be suck it up and show us the evidence that all the accusations made by “eye witnesses” and the “full review of the computers” shows that is was in fact on the up and up.

        Until then Mathius Mr. Biden’s presidency is seriously tainted. Illegitimate in my view.

        • I don’t think there was ever a scenario under which Trump lost and the right didn’t think it was stolen.

          I think any world in which Dear Leader lost, no matter how to whom, the right was always going to cry foul. You can’t spend years demonizing the dishonesty and maliciously evil nature of your enemy… propounding their confusingly simultaneous weakness and omnipotence.. claiming their candidate is the weakest and worst ever… and insisting that you are the most successful and beloved of all time… and then lose and admit it was a fair fight.

          The only way he could ever lose in his mind, and the mind of many on the right, is if the left cheats.

          To be clear: I’m not saying it was a fair fight. Humans are garbage. I would be absolutely shocked if there wasn’t cheating run amok by both sides. But I have seen nothing to convince me that the outcome was in any way impacted. Again, that’s not to say it wasn’t… just that I have seen nothing that credibly makes me believe it. And the repeated failure of the Trump & Co team (now 1-and-63) in court only strengthens that position.

          —————-

          As for your eyewitnesses, I know you get this.. others here may not, but I know you do: The burden of proof lies with the party making the claim.

          It is not the left’s job to satisfy the right’s endless game of whack-a-mole against an endlessly shifting web of conspiracies.

          If Trump & Co want to assert that the left cheated, let them prove it.

          It’s not the left’s job to bend over backward to facilitate a witch hunt. It’s the right’s job to investigate, prove their case, and then take it to court. If you say I stole money from you, but you don’t have the evidence, I don’t have to show you my bank statements to assuage your paranoia. If I don’t show you my bank statements, that doesn’t make you right. Because it’s not my job to prove your case. It’s your job to prove it. And until you do prove it, no one has to take your claim seriously. Maybe I did steal your money.. I do that sometimes. But if you’re making the claim, the burden of proof is on you, not me. So, by the same token, again, if Red Team wants to accuse Blue Team of cheating, the obligation is on Red Team to make their case, and it’s not Blue Team’s job to help them. (see also: Russel’s Teapot)

          When Guiliani goes to court and presents thousands of affidavits collected by web-survey on which he has done zero due diligence, only going so far as to remove the ones he knew were fake. That’s not making a case. That’s just throwing shit at the wall and then trying to reverse the burden of proof… “here’s all these claims, now prove to me, one by one, to an impossibly high standard, that every single one is false.” That’s not how this works.

          The postman who claimed he saw fraud… and then recanted and turned out to have somehow acquired $130k from GOP donors….

          The woman who saw fraud… only it turned out she didn’t, and if she hadn’t skipped orientation, she would have known better.

          The case where they claimed GOP watchers weren’t allowed in and then admitted in court that there was a “non-zero number” of them in the room and what they really wanted was to be allowed to just sit a bit closers.

          The woman who claimed Biden campaign vans rolled up and started opening envelopes and marking them in broad daylight, yet there were no other witnesses and she failed to take a picture for some reason.

          Those “suitcases” of ballots supposedly illegally counted… only when they played the tape back, we saw they were opened in full sight of the watchers, placed in the containers (not suitcases), and then duly counted because the rules specifically prohibit the counting from stopping until the opened ballot backlog was clear.

          I could go on… we both know I could…

          At each stage. For over a month. Trump & Co have thrown claim after claim after claim after claim at Biden & Co… and even though he keeps knocking them back, it’s never enough.

          There’s always just one more conspiracy. Just one more claim. Just one more witness. Just one more subpoena needed. Just one more investigation to perform. Just one more answer needed. There’s no end.

          If you get access to those voting machines and they turn out to be just fine, that won’t be enough. Because you, and the right, and Trump & Co, will just hop on the next claim and insist the matter is still open and Biden is illegitimate until that claim is disproven. There is no end.

          There can never be an end.

          There is no amount of debunking which will ever satisfy you or the right or Trump & Co.

          To you and to the right and to Trump, the left is always illegitimate.

          And because the conclusion is preordained, then the question can never be “did he cheat” but “how did he cheat” and if you are proven wrong time and time again, it doesn’t matter – it just means he cheated some other way. And if you can never find that, it doesn’t mean it’s not there.. it just means the cheaters covered their tracks too well.

          • The postal working did not recant. He was subjected to 4 hrs of psychological questioning that would confuse anyone that has not experienced it before. The audio tapes of the entire interview are on Project Veritas.

            As for your claim that Trump must prove fraud before he can gain access to the evidence, I say bunk. If he were suing a private person or company, yes he would need to show sufficient evidence to get to discover. However, the evidence is publicly owned and should be available for inspection by interested parties. It is total BS that only election officials can see the evidence. The public has a right to access it under duly authorized conditions. Such transparency is something that all citizens should support. Your intransigence on this point just makes it clear that you are no better than any other biased political patron of the democratic party.

            • The postal working did not recant. He was subjected to 4 hrs of psychological questioning that would confuse anyone that has not experienced it before. The audio tapes of the entire interview are on Project Veritas.

              “Here’s a claim I’m making. And to support my claim, I’ll point you to an audio tape of this claim. The audio tape is being hosted by a man with a proven track record of manipulating and deceptively editing tapes repeatedly in the past in order to support his agenda. Therefore, you know you can trust them.”

              As for your claim that Trump must prove fraud before he can gain access to the evidence, I say bunk.

              I don’t think I ever said that.

              What I said is that it’s not the left’s job to help him make his case.

              If he doesn’t have enough evidence, then it’s HIS job to find enough to justify having a court give him access to more.

              If I say you stole from me, but don’t have any evidence, you dont’ have to show me your bank statements. But if I can show enough probable cause, I can get a court to force you to show them to me. And if it shows what I think it shows, THEN I can make my case and prove the theft. But if I fail at any step before that, then it’s not YOUR problem, it’s MINE. My claim is unproven until -I- prove it.

              If he were suing a private person or company, yes he would need to show sufficient evidence to get to discover. However, the evidence is publicly owned and should be available for inspection by interested parties.

              You are making an assertion.

              A) There was fraud.
              B) Three is evidence of this fraud.
              C) He was wrongfully denied evidence of this fraud.

              I think this is backward.

              I don’t think you can support (A) until you have (B) and you can’t have (B) until you review it. If you haven’t reviewed it, you can’t know what it does and doesn’t show, so how can you “know” that it supports your belief in fraud? Just like my refusing to show you my bank statements – the fact that I won’t show them to you doesn’t prove that I stole your money.

              Prove to me that he was wrongfully denied evidence of this fraud that might have supported his claim as-yet-baseless belief that there was may have been fraud [which materially impacted him negatively].

              It is total BS that only election officials can see the evidence.

              If that is the case, I generally agree.

              I don’t know what evidence you’re referring to, and there may be legitimate interest(s) in keeping various aspects secret. For instance, if it relates to security measures, just showing that to everyone is a good way to let people analyze your security in order to breach it next time.

              The public has a right to access it under duly authorized conditions. Such transparency is something that all citizens should support.

              Again, generally true.

              That said, I don’t make the rules and neither do you.

              Your intransigence on this point just makes it clear that you are no better than any other biased political patron of the democratic party.

              I really don’t understand you.

              I’m not insisting that anything be kept secret.

              Given my druthers, I’d dump the whole lot of the data in the laps of both campaigns and let them have at it.

              But I don’t have that power.

              The only thing I’m – repeatedly – asserting here is that THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE PARTY MAKING THE CLAIM.

              If Trump wants to claim fraud, HE has to prove fraud.

              Other people don’t have to disprove fraud.

              And if he doesn’t have the evidence he needs, that sucks. I think he should have it. But it doesn’t change things. It’s still HIS job, not mine, not the Democrats, not Biden, not Hillary… HIS job to prove the claims he’s making.

              And until he proves it, it’s UNPROVEN. Yet you, and JAC, and D13, and Gman persist in treating it like a known undeniable fact, even while simultaneously griping about the fact that you don’t have the evidence – do you not see how contorted that is?

              “I know aliens are being held captive at Area 51. I know this for an absolute undeniable fact. Well, no, I’ve never seen them… no, I’ve never seen any ‘proof’ as such… but only because they won’t let me see the proof! And the fact that they won’t let me in the doors to inspect the place only goes to show how desperate they are to hide the truth from me!” See the problem? No, of course you don’t. I’m wasting my time.

              And if he’s being inappropriately stonewalled (something you have not shown, by the way), then that’s wrong and it’s bad and it should be stopped and people should be beaten with a stick for it. But it doesn’t prove the truth of his claims.

              For example, Trump has refused to release his taxes. Does that prove the left’s (baseless) claims that he’s committed tax fraud? No. No it doesn’t. Why? Because it’s the claimants’ job to make their case, not on the other side to disprove it.

              • The audio tape is being hosted by a man with a proven track record of manipulating and deceptively editing tapes repeatedly in the past in order to support his agenda.

                The last I checked, Project Veritas also posts the entire unedited videos on their site, mainly because of your media driven bullshit.

              • Let me add, prove it. And I don’t mean some liberal media lie, simply prove it.

              • Yet you, and JAC, and D13, and Gman Tut Tut……….I believe that if you searched the archives, you will find several statements by me, D13, the Colonel, that they need to put up or shut up. If you have evidence, present it…..otherwise, they need to shut the hell up. They need to not do what the Dems did on the Russia Collusion….unfortunately, the Republicans did the same thing the Dems did…..baseless accusations without proof positive. I wanted Trump……but I have to admit, I have not seen hard evidence of any of it. Do I think it happened…of course I do but it needs to be proven. And, just exactly like the Russian Collusion, there is no hard evidence. Do I think things have been erased Yes. do I think that boxes of miraculous Biden only ballots suddenly turned up…yes. Do I really think and feel the election was tainted and in the bag for Biden….along with support from the media, CIA, and the FBI…..yes. But that does not change the fact any….Biden is POTUS. It is what it is.

                Just setting the record straight.

      • Sounds like Hillary

        • Hillary conceded on November 9th, one day after the election, and never claimed that the election was stolen or that she’d really won.

          She did – absolutely – win the popular vote, but we all know that’s worthless.

          What are you referring to?

          • She conceded in name only just like Gore.

            • What did she do that you view as contrary to having accepted her loss?

              • She wrote a book and went around the country and bitched and moaned about the outcome not to mention that she was involved in the Steele Dossier and knowing it was garbage never spoke up.

              • She wrote a book

                No she didn’t.

                She hired a ghost writer, gave him some pointers, and then slapped her name on it in order to cash in.

                She wrote a book

                I didn’t read the book because, you know, I’d rather shoot myself. But maybe you could point me at something salient in it?

                and went around the country and bitched and moaned about the outcome

                I bitched and moaned about the outcome, too.

                Doesn’t mean I didn’t accept it.

                I think, maybe, you’ve got a bit of a double standard going on…

                “Acceptance of a Republican win”: Democrats must roll over and play dead for four years, fall into line, and enthusiastically welcome and approve of the new incoming administration. Anything less than full throated support is unpatriotic, anti-American, and borderline treasonous. Any political opposition is obviously due to a failure to accept their loss.

                “Acceptance of a Democratic win”: Begrudging admission that the Red Team ran a weak candidate or a poor campaign and that Blue Team didn’t really win so much as Red Team lost and, also, Blue Team probably cheated, but fine, I guess, ok, I’ll agree that your guy gets to sit in the office, but he’s “seriously tainted. Illegitimate in my view.” And total warfare and resistance are not just warranted but meritorious against the usurper.

                not to mention that she was involved in the Steele Dossier and knowing it was garbage never spoke up.

                What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

                The question at hand is “What did she do that you view as contrary to having accepted her loss?”

              • Doesn’t mean I didn’t accept it. You didn’t and still do not. Now, we need to define what you and I mean as acceptance…..You do not accept (agree) with any election that uses the EC as a determination. You may have to live with it but that is not acceptance. I have to live with Biden and Harris but I do not accept the fact that the election was fair and impartial.

                What did she do that you view as contrary to having accepted her loss? A very quick research on Google reveals several U tube interviews, a couple of books, and several meetings around the country where she sold tickets for $2.00 to anybody who would listen to her. She complained that the Russians stole the election. She complained that Trump and the “massive GOP funding machine” stole the election. She did not accept her loss and still does not.

                She hired a ghost writer, gave him some pointers, and then slapped her name on it in order to cash in. As Mathius would say…..Tomato..Tomahto…….bottom line, she wrote a book.

                “Acceptance of a Democratic win: And total warfare and resistance are not just warranted but meritorious against the usurper. I will remind you of this statement when you start complaining about Republican obstructionism.

              • What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Actually, quite a bit with the devaluations and such….

              • Just A Citizen says:

                My God Mathius. She spent the last four years claiming the election was fixed for Trump by the Russians.

                You seem to forget the thousands in the streets of D.C. wearing pink “pussy” hats in protest of Trump’s stolen victory.

      • But he will never – not ever – “concede” or admit that he lost, Of course not…I never admit I lost…perhaps out played…but I never lose.

        he will do everything within his power until his dying day to sabotage and delegitimize the Biden administration. NO, I do not think so. He has more class than Hilary and Obama….he will not sabotage anything. BUT….if he does, then I will admit that I was perhaps incorrect in my observations (remember, Colonel’s are never lost or wrong) but it will need to be proven and not a reporters observation…

        He will go to his grave claiming he won and insisting that it was stolen from him Yes, he will and he will be correct.

        Until then, he will play-act as though he is the real President and zealously work to undermine the actual President. Well, he will be the real POTUS until the PRESIDENT ELECT takes office.

        I want you to know that I tried – I really tried – to give you a one word answer… I just couldn’t do it. That’s ok…I knew it would be a serious challenge and I also knew you could not do it…..and if you managed a one word answer to me, I fear you would have exploded later this evening.

        • and if you managed a one word answer to me, I fear you would have exploded later this evening.

          My eye was starting to twitch from the effort…

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          Like Obama did not do almost everything Matt just said!

          • I’ll assume that “almost” refers to the fact that he didn’t complain about the election being stolen from him.. you know.. because he won his.. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  28. $2.3B in foreign aid the spending bill. How does this help our out of work citizens. I hope Trump vetoes this.

    • Also, they created a new industry-friendly copyright arbitration office.

      Also, they made it a fellony to stream copywritten content without permisison.

      Also, $45b for transit support (Amtrack, highways, etc) including $4b just for the NY MTA.

      Also, for some reason, a recognition of the Tibetan Dalai Lama (sp?) which is sure to piss off China.

      Also, $2 for Space Force.

      Also, establishing two new Smithsonian museums.

      Also, of course, a tax break for deducting business meals (including alcoholic beverages).

      —-

      I hope he vetoes it, too.

      • Also included is $453 million to Ukraine, on top of the $400 million Trump eventually released. No word on how much of that goes to the ‘big guy.’

        • Funding for a commission to educate consumers “about the dangers associated with using or storing portable fuel containers for flammable liquids near an open flame.”

          • Canine Weapon says:

            Funding for a commission to educate consumers “about the dangers associated with using or storing portable fuel containers for flammable liquids near an open flame.”

  29. Excuse me, I was off by 3 orders of magnitude. It is $2.3T or $2,300,000,000 or $2.3 x 10^9.

  30. CORONAVIRUSHEALTHCARENEWSVACCINESCDC Report: Over 3,000 Are ‘Unable To Perform Normal Daily Activities’ After Receiving The COVID-19 Vaccine December 21, 2020
    In a December 19, 2020 report by Thomas Clark, MD, MPH, entitled “Anaphylaxis Following m-RNA COVID-19 Vaccine Receipt”, we found a very interesting graph.

  31. Pelosi on this Covid Bill: $600 is a significant amount…

    Pelosi on significantly higher amount in tax savings unter the Trump tax cuts: Crumbs

  32. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    I think Georgia’s senate race will tell you what happened on Election day. One way or the other.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      I DISAGREE.

      Creating such focus of time and MONEY on one race distorts what did happen on election day.

  33. Isn’t it amazing that we have done nothing about Hong Kong……just….simply let it fade away.

  34. I am taking a lesson out of the Mathius book of revelation…….I am going to start a list of lies by Biden/Harris…..and see who takes top spot over Trump. I will then ask Mathius how he feels about each and every lie that Biden or his staff says, every incomplete sentence and its meanings……….this will be fun.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      He has gotten a pass on every lie he has ever told about education, speeches, “Corn Pops”, Hairy white man legs, the “drunk” driver who killed his wife et al. What makes you think he will be called out now?

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Personally I cannot wait till he shuts down fracking in Pennsylvania. Maybe then, the normal people in my folks home state will get off their asses and take care of their “career” politicians. Imagine voting (supposedly) to destroy your own economy.

  35. Canine Weapon says:

    Mathius: Doesn’t mean I didn’t accept it.
    D13: You didn’t and still do not. Now, we need to define what you and I mean as acceptance…..You do not accept (agree) with any election that uses the EC as a determination.

    This is false.

    I do not agree that it SHOULD be that way. But I do agree that it IS that way.

    And the rules are the rules are the rules and the rules say that, since Trump won the EC in 2016, he got to be President.

    Again, I don’t have to like it.

    But I do accept it.

    The fact that I think it’s an anachronistic piece of garbage system that systemically overweights the votes of yokels and underweights us city-folk doesn’t change the fact that I accepted the outcome. Nor does the fact that I want to change it for the future mean that I consider what happened in the past illegitimate.

    Mathius: What did she do that you view as contrary to having accepted her loss?
    D13: A very quick research on Google reveals several U tube interviews, a couple of books, and several meetings around the country where she sold tickets for $2.00 to anybody who would listen to her. She complained that the Russians stole the election. She complained that Trump and the “massive GOP funding machine” stole the election. She did not accept her loss and still does not.

    Perhaps you could point me at that video?

    Mathius: She hired a ghost writer, gave him some pointers, and then slapped her name on it in order to cash in.
    D13: As Mathius would say…..Tomato..Tomahto…….bottom line, she wrote a book.

    Correct.. but I just wanted to take a cheap shot at her… can ya blame me?

    “Acceptance of a Democratic win: And total warfare and resistance are not just warranted but meritorious against the usurper. I will remind you of this statement when you start complaining about Republican obstructionism.

    My point is that the expectation seems to be that, when Red Team wins, Blue Team should roll over for them. But when Blue Team wins it’s open warfare against an illegitimate usurper.

    I believe that if you searched the archives, you will find several statements by me, D13, the Colonel, that they need to put up or shut up. If you have evidence, present it…..otherwise, they need to shut the hell up.

    Yes, but by the same token, you have asserted that they would be right to believe the election was stolen.

    Mathius: He will go to his grave claiming he won and insisting that it was stolen from him

    D13: Yes, he will and he will be correct.

    So…. is your position that “he’s right but needs to shut up about things he can’t prove”? If he can’t prove them, then how do you know he’s right?

    • THAT’S NOT PROOF!!! (in my sky diving voice) And since NOTHING is proof…FINE. I hope to God it comes down to something as simple as Pence not accepting the contested states votes, dismisses them, then Trump wins by simple majority. It is, after all, a crime for Pence to accept fraudulent votes. Trump has called his warriors to DC on Jan 6. Hope its a giant victory party. Then we can say TOUGH SHIT back.

      • So you’re hoping to God that Trump enacts a coup and overthrows the will of 81m+ voters in order to stay in power?

        • How would that be a coup, Mathius? Six contested states. Dead people. 100 plus yr old people. People who don’t live there. More votes than voters. Thousands of affidavits. Videos of ballots being counted and recounted. Trump gained in however many demographics. Trump wins 800 plus counties, Biden wins 500 something counties. Rejected by how many courts. The list goes on and on and on, no matter how obtuse the left wants to be. These states are contested .Let us prove it. They won’t, soooo… Pence is under no obligation to accept the results.

          • How would that be a coup, Mathius? Six contested states. Dead people. 100 plus yr old people. People who don’t live there. More votes than voters. Thousands of affidavits. Videos of ballots being counted and recounted.

            You’re throwing a lot of accusations at me here, but none of this is substantiated.

            Here’s what is substantiated: every state has certified the vote, the Electoral College has voted, and they voted for Biden.

            If Trump still has some kind of Constitutionally valid procedure that would let him legally pull a rabbit out of his hat and ignore that, then, well, I’d sure be pissed off, but thems the breaks. (Speaking for myself here.. the left, in general, would probably burn this country to the ground)

            Trump wins 800 plus counties, Biden wins 500 something counties.

            What was the population of those counties…?

            Rejected by how many courts.

            You say that like it supports you case.

            Trump is now 1-and-63.. or thereabouts. Seems to me that he either has a really shitty case, or really shitty lawyers.. or both.

            (my money is on both)

            The list goes on and on and on, no matter how obtuse the left wants to be.

            You haven’t made your case. You’re demanding that we accept your conspiracy theories on faith and then calling us obtuse for not believing the very things that you freely admit you cannot prove.

            If you cannot prove them, why are WE wrong if we do not accept your claims.

            I believe there is a fine china teapot orbiting somewhere between Earth and Mars right now. Oh, sure, I can’t prove it, but I know it’s true! And millions like me know it, too! And I feel it in my bones that it’s true! And my leaders tell me it’s true! And the news I watch says it’s true! So how can you be so obtuse as to fail to accept the truth of the existence of this teapot?

            YOU said it, not me, YOU said “let us prove it.” By the very fact that you want TO prove it, you must admit that you have not already proven it. And if you have not already proven it, then YOU DO NOT KNOW.

            And if you DO NOT KNOW, then it is not ME who is obtuse for failing to agree with something you cannot prove to me.

            These states are contested.

            These states are NOT contested.

            They WERE contested.

            Now they have certified their votes and voted.

            Let us prove it. They won’t,

            I know I keep saying this.. . I’m just not sure why no one is hearing me say it.

            THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIES WITH HE (or she) WHO MAKES THE CLAIM. NOT WITH THE OTHER SIDE TO DISPROVE IT.

            soooo… Pence is under no obligation to accept the results.

            You’ll have to show me the Constitutional pathway for this. If it’s there legally, then yes, ok, that’s the law.

            But if it’s just some fantasy version of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting “la la la I don’t believe it, so they don’t count, so I’m not leaving!,” then no.

            The former would suck, and it would piss me off to no end, but the law is the law and thems the breaks (precisely what I said and how I felt about Trump winning after losing the EC four years ago).

            The latter would be sedition and he should be tried, convicted, and sentenced accordingly along with all his enablers and co-conspirators.

  36. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    What constitutes “proof” these days? Seems to me that just about anything the Trump people say these days has far more credence that ANYTHING brought forward by Col. Videman or Rep.Schiff. Yet, we spent three years dragging that crap through a Star chamber proceeding milking it for all it was worth.

    As Mr, Giuliani said the other morning. The courts have not said there is no proof, we have never even gotten to that point, the courts have said that there is no standing or that there is a lack of procedure.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Let me sum that up for Mathius.

      “I saw people counting the same ballot over and over”. Judge: Sorry but you are not credible in my opinion, because the State says you are wrong. Case dismissed.

      “I talked to a guy who talked to a guy who said he heard the POTUS say he was going to black mail Ukraine”. Pelosi: Sounds right to me………..IMPEACH.

      • JAC… that’s not a good summation.

        For starters, you’ll note that I never approved of impeachment. True, I wasn’t never overtly hostile to it either, but I considered it from the get-go exactly what it was: political theater.

        Secondly, “I talked to a guy who talked to a guy” was one of the actual court cases Trump & Co brought. A worker claimed that she heard another poll worker claim that he heard instructions to change dates on late ballots. That which was thrown out for being… “inadmissible hearsay within hearsay.”… which, yes, I don’t credit. To be clear, that’s not to say “it’s wrong,” but just that it doesn’t rise to the level of credibility where I have to take it any more seriously than I would a National Enquirer article about Bat Boy.

        Third, I don’t reject claims of having seen fraud personally as you describe.. at least, not outright… but the ones that I know of are certainly not credible or have been reasonably explained. Perhaps you’d like to point me to this eye-witness who saw this with her own eyes and was called a liar by the judge without trial… or did you simply make that up?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          I am sorry but did I mention you as the one hearing or making the judgement? NO!

          I was just trying to simply the example so you and your obnoxious dog could understand it.

          And one last time Mathius. The accusations made whiteness testimonies were NOT EVEN EXAMINED during many of these supposed court cases you cite. That is the whole point TRay, SK and I have been trying to get through your thick skull. Mr. Trump’s crew cannot PROVE fraud when the level of evidence YOU REQUIRE, along with Judges, all Democrats and the media, cannot be obtained without digging into the ballots/envelopes, the tally machines, the computers and taking depositions of those identified as doing bad things. But NONE of this has happened.

          The attorneys for Mr. Trump explained a week ago that the Courts are not allowing them to even get to the point where they can request the depositions and deeper investigation. They are using process to stop them before they can get to that point.

          As one Retired Judge stated late last week, “The Courts have been intimidated by the Democrats/Left”.

          One report clearly stated that of all the cases brought, only ONE has been actually reviewed. I believe that was Wisconsin.

          And PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND AGAIN with your litany and long list of more BS.

          You don’t believe any of this because your standards of proof for this exceed any possibility of proof that can be achieved under the systems in place. So there you have it. Got it. No need to explain further.

          • I can feel your frustration here.. I’m sorry if this is getting contentious…

            The accusations made whiteness testimonies were NOT EVEN EXAMINED during many of these supposed court cases you cite. That is the whole point TRay, SK and I have been trying to get through your thick skull.

            Thick skull notwithstanding, could you point me at a case which you believe was mishandled? Where a witness testimonial should have been examined, but – improperly – wasn’t?

            I’d like to review it.

            • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

              If the court holds “no standing” then they never hear testimony on any aspect of teh case being brought because it is moot.

              • That is accurate. Standing is a bitch, and courts are super finicky about it.

                Which case would you like me to review which you believe was improperly dismissed or wherein a witness was improperly denied a fair and full hearing?

                Please note “improper” is the keyword. It seems unreasonable to me to take a stance (not that you are doing so) that says something along the lines of “courts should have broken their own rules in order to hear out Trump & Co’s witnesses.”

          • Canine Weapon says:

            you and your obnoxious dog

            The hell, man!

            I’m not his dog.

            If you review the record, you’ll see that I was adopted by none other than USW, himself.

            But, yea, obnoxious.. that’s fair 🙂

  37. Just A Citizen says:
  38. Fun story… would anyone like to know why Georgia has run-offs in the first place?

    It’s unusual, right? Most states don’t have them. But Georgia does.

    Nothing wrong with run-offs per se, just observing that it’s uncommon, so maybe there’s a story there?

    ::opens invisible history textbook::
    ::reads::
    ::reads::
    ::oh… oh no…::

    Welp!

    Turns out that Georgia is located in the South, and you all know what that means, right?

    The fear in 1963 was that, if the black vote coalesced around a single candidate, the white vote might be split, and the result would be a black plurality, and we can’t have that, now can we?

    Having served as a state representative in the early 1950s, [Denmark] Groover [who would later go on to introduce the runoff election proposal] was defeated for election to the House in 1958. The Macon politico blamed his loss on “Negro bloc voting.” He carried the white vote, but his opponent triumphed by garnering black ballots by a five-to-one margin.

    So, it seems that fear was entirely justified… if those darn negros worked together, they could defeat a divided white population.

    Earlier efforts at a kind of Mini Electoral College system called the “Country Unit” that systematically underweighted cities (which just so happened to be where the black voters lived) had just been ruled Unconstitutional. So, what’s a staunch segregationist to do?

    He devised a system where that situation couldn’t happen, where a divided white vote wouldn’t have to face off against a unified black vote. In a runoff, the white vote couldn’t be split unless both candidates were white (in which case it didn’t really matter). If it came to a black candidate vs a white candidate, the white vote wouldn’t split, and their greater numbers would always ensure that the white candidate won. There was no longer any way for the black voting bloc to win.

    Now, you might argue – and I even might agree – that a run-off IS, despite this, a fairer system of voting. That the minority bloc shouldn’t actually win over the majority preference. But that’s neither here nor there.. this is a tale of history wherein we examine whether this was a deliberately imposed system to quash the black vote.

    “BUT,” I hear you saying, “it’s a fairer system… surely, it’s possible that it was just a reasonable attempt at making a fairer system. After all, Groover suffered a loss that, quite reasonably, he would have viewed as unfair, and so fixing that system might have been a noble and reasonable goal of his! Maybe you, Mathius, are just misconstruing the narrative to paint everything as racism – typical lying liberal loudmouth loser – you see racism everywhere you look!”

    Well… you got me there.. well, I mean, unless, by some chance, there was something like this:

    Two decades after introducing the majority vote plan, he [Groover] candidly admitted that back in the 1950s and 1960s, “I was a segregationist. I was a county unit man. But if you want to establish if I was racially prejudiced, I was. If you want to establish that some of my political activity was racially motivated, it was.”

    “Hey!” you argue, “that only proves he was a segregationist and that some of his political activity was racially motivated, not all of it!”

    True. Anway, said Groover, on the House Floor:

    “[W]e have got to go to the majority vote [runoff system] because all we have to have is a plurality and the Negroes and the pressure groups and special interests are going to manipulate this State and take charge if we don’t go for the majority vote.”

    And, of course, there’s the timing of it all! That Country Unit system which had been ruled unconstitutional… that was in 1963 as well… which makes the imposition of the runoff system in 1963 all the more pertinent.

    The Associated Press reported Groover declaring that a majority vote provision “would again provide protection which . . . was removed with the death of the county unit system,”

    Well, there ya have it… make of that what you will!

    ::closes invisible history book::

    • Two can play that game. We have jungle primaries in CA.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      So I wonder why the other States that use this also adopted a run off system?

      • Dunno. It’s not a bad system.

        I’d like to see more runoffs or, better yet, ranked choice voting.

        My first choice would be a lottery… a random draft of an eligible person within the district who is forced at gunpoint to serve a single term. If you have citizenship, are 35 years old, and have a pulse, you might be forced to be the next President of the United States. Or maybe the Secretary of State. Or the dog catcher. Who knows? But it can’t be much worse than the current arrangement.

    • Groover is just who you would vote for, a damn CRAT

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark_Groover_Jr.

  39. Woops.. looks like even NewsMax is going to have to eat some crow on this one..

    https://www.newsmax.com/us/smartmatic-dominion-voting-systems-software-election/2020/12/19/id/1002355/

    Funny thing… what percentage of the people who consumed the initial breathless coverage of a Hugo Chavez company programmed to change votes will read and accept this retraction?

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2020/12/21/fox-news-newsmax-walk-back-election-fraud-claims-after-voting-machine-manufacturer-threatens-legal-action/?sh=3a472185cfd2

    The First Amendment offers a great deal of protection and latitude to reporters, even “opinion” tabloid-caliber “news.” For Fox and NewsMax to be so cowed, they have to truly have nothing. If they had even a scintilla of support for their claims, they’d tell Dominion and Smartmatic to go [redacted] themselves in the [redacted] with a rusty [redacted].

    • Just A Citizen says:

      So far there is NO CROW to eat by anyone. The past three days has seen lawyers getting in there to issue CYA statements in case litigation actually occurs. Of course, if these outfits sue then those accused will get a chance to dig into the systems completely in their defense.

      There has been NO RETRACTION Mathius. And the people who are upset seem very aware of what is going on. Newsmax covered and provided an outlet for people like Powel making the accusations. That is no different than what CNN or CBS does when it covers some Democrats’ view points on Russian Collusion or such.

      There is growing anger on the “right” and it is not just about the courts ignoring all the charges made by witnesses or other “experts”. There is also this growing sense that a bunch of “grifters” got to much time in the spotlight and have mucked the whole thing up.

      I cannot think of a better way to destroy a grass roots movement than to discredit everyone who they look to for leadership and/or information. Now who benefits most from that happening?

      • Researchers have demonstrated that these machines are capable of switching votes among other “features”.

        • Let me help you out here.. the machines are capable of whatever they’re programmed to do.

          If a malicious attacker gets physical access to a device and knows what he’s doing, there is no amount of security on god’s green earth that’s going to stop him from doing whatever the hell he wants to the data.

          I drill this into the skull of my employees. There is no amount of security I can realistically put on a machine that is going to protect our data if you a competent and motivated hacker gets ahold of it.

          Voting machines are no different.

          They cannot be trusted.

          They should never be trusted.

          They should not be used.

          Not in any capacity.

          They should not be allowed within 100 miles of a voting location or a vote counting center.

          Anyone who even thinks about using machines for voting should be summarily executed and blotted from the pages of history.

          • Your missing the point on these machines. All voting machines will have a set up module that allows them to be programmed for the candidates and their positions on the ballots. In addition to these standard and expected options, these dominion machines also have variables that allow for transfer of partial votes from one candidate to another as well as other features. It takes no hacking or code modification to make these changes, just malicious intent in the set up process.

            • In addition to these standard and expected options, these dominion machines also have variables that allow for transfer of partial votes from one candidate to another as well as other features. It takes no hacking or code modification to make these changes, just malicious intent in the set up process.

              I keep seeing claims along these lines. Can you provide reputable support?

              Why would such a feature exist in the official version of the software?

              What is a “partial vote”?

              • side note T-Ray. I see a big blank space here where the pdf should be shown. Is this what you were talking about the other day when you said to download the pdf first before posting? That day I saw the actual pdf…today I see a blank space

              • Mathius, have another Red Bull, you are not awake this morning. We have gone through this discussion before. The software uses floating point arithmetic to represent votes instead of integers. It also has a weighting function ostensibly for ranked voting methods that can shift fractions of a vote from one candidate to another. Thus a vote for candidate A can register as 0.99 votes for A and 0.01 votes for B. Thus B gets every one hundredth vote cast for A.

                There are video demonstrations out there showing that one can slide in a new USB thumb drive, read in a set of ballots with 9 votes for A and 1 vote for B and come up with a result of 3 votes for A and 7 votes for B. This did not require any compiled code changes, just a simple change in weighting factor.

                I assume all the setup information for a particular precinct is stored in a .ini file. This file should be encrypted, passworded and have a CRC check but I do not know how sophisticated they are with their security. It should take a supervisory password entry to read a new setup.

                The data output can be in a csv file or a JSON format file. Of the JSON format data I have seen, it is not very sophisticated and incomplete. It shows an integer number for total votes and then fractional percentages for each candidate instead of integer votes for each candidate.

        • If – IF – I were going to run an election, and you held a gun to my head and forced me to use a voting machine….

          1. There would be a paper ballot backup system.
          2. The machines would be programmed from a central source, then examined independently by both main parties and an independent 3rd party.
          3. The code would be posted online and all three would attest that it was accurate and accurately installed.
          4. The computer will have no networking capabilities (that’s not to say it’s “disable,” but that there is no network card).
          5. Inside the box would be a battery powered GPS device, a battery powered live streaming camera with a 360 view of the inside of the cage, and a 150 decibel alarm that will go off if the box is opened.
          6. The box itself would be locked and then welded shut and anti-tamper seals wrapped around the device by each main party and an independent 3rd party. All this would be done on camera, broadcast live from no fewer than 3 angles.
          7. From the moment each box is certified, it must remain on-camera from no fewer than 3 angles – all HD – all streaming live to the internet, all publicly viewable, at all times.
          8. They are to travel to each polling location under guard and must remain under guard for the during of the election.
          9. The faces of voters is to be digitally blurred, but the buttons they press is not.
          10. After the election, the machines are returned under full surveillance and heavy guard and public survellance.
          11. Each device must be removed from its seal, pried open, and re-certified by both parties and the independent 3rd party, including verification of the code and the calibration of any touch screens.
          12. THEN the vote count(s) can be added to the total.

          And even then, I’d give it a 50-50 chance that someone pulled a fast one.

      • There is also this growing sense that a bunch of “grifters” got to much time in the spotlight and have mucked the whole thing up.

        Boy, now that has the ring of truth to it!

        As I’ve said, I’d be shocked – shocked to find that wasn’t some cheating going on. How much, on what scale, in whose interest, and at what scale are all open questions in my mind, but that there was some cheating… I find that unlikely.

        But, yea, it’s as though someone let loose a bunch of monkeys in a room and they all started hurtling poop in every direction.. then you assert that there was a bad smell in the room beforehand. Well, you may be right, but the monkeys have made such a mess of things, you’d be hard pressed to prove it.

        One of the thing things I’ve often thought about this whole charade is that if Trump & Co had seized on one thing and said “this! This is fraud, this is the smoking gun! We have to gnaw at this bone until the truth comes out!” they could have made their case. But instead, they hurtled dozens of overwhelmingly baseless accusations and DOA lawsuits. There very well may have been a legitimate case buried in there somewhere, but with the Rudy this and the Sidney Powell that…. like a bunch of poop-flinging monkeys.

        I guess there’s a case to be made that they didn’t know what might turn out to be a true smoking gun and that there wasn’t time to investigate everything fully beforehand to pick and choose their battles, so they opted to just fling ALL the poop they could at the wall and see what stuck… but now whatever legitimate arguments they might have had are…. well.. you get the idea.

  40. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Lesee, $900,000,000,000 divided by 330,000,000 comes out to $ 2,727.27 for every man, woman and child in the United States. Instead they get $ 600.00 and the rest goes to various “administrators” of “incredibly important” institutions who have not missed a paycheck yet and the Sudan. Neat trick!

    • Here, Mr. SKT, you and I are brothers.

      Fuck that bullshit! There’s more pork and grift in this than stimulus. And that’s not even conceding the validity of direct stimulus.

      I swear to God, the calculation these assholes are making is “what is the absolute maximum I can take for myself and my interests and what is the absolute minimum I can give to the average Joe without having them rise up and guillotine me.”

      Red, Blue, makes no difference. Every goddamned one of them who votes for this shit-pile needs to be tarred and feathered.

      ———–

      And, of course, on top of this, as expected, once again, I’ll never see a fucking penny.. too poor to benefit from the 0.1%-grift but too rich to benefit from the handout to the common man.. once again, I sit in the sweet spot of governmental “go fuck yourself” with all the tax and none of the perks.

  41. Canine Weapon says:

  42. Unbelievable…..nothing has changed in Congress….5,500+ pages of a bill submitted 42 minutes before vote….another one of those you have to pass it before you read things…..I am shocked..SHOCKED..I say that even CNN said the bill was terrible…..81% of the bill NON COVID RELATED…

    I hope that Trump does not sign it.

    • He knows

      • Its like they threw everything plus the kitchen sink in, daring him to veto, so they can override the veto saying Trump vetos Covid relief. Then they get their slush fund while making Trump the bad guy. Trump can just pocket veto their stunt.

        • Trump has nothing to lose at this point. Congress, however, isn’t making many people too damn happy these days. Trump should veto and keep Congress in session thru Christmas until they get it right.

        • Anita… that’s a very astute read… color me impressed…

          I was merely looking at it as a simple grift piggybacked on a “must pass” bill.

          One thing that doesn’t add up on it, though, is that it had to pass the Red Shirt controlled senate.. and THEY aren’t inclined to go out of their way to make Trump look bad… thoughts?

          • McConnell wants Trump outta there just as bad as Pelosi. I keep TELLING you (skydiving voice again), they are the Uniparty.

      • Setting aside some of the flaming bullshit in there, his broader point is absolutely right.

        This is a pork-bill with stimulus tacked on so that it could pass.

        That said, I like how this was cut together from multiple takes and he still sounds like somebody’s drunk uncle rambling on after too much Thanksgiving turkey.

        • This is much more than a pork and stimulus bill, it funds the government which runs out of money on Monday. If Congress goes into recess, then Trump can pocket veto and the government shuts down on Tuesday. One thing they can do is pass a quick short term spending bill to push off the government shut down until Jan. 21 when it will be Biden’s responsibility. The new Congress gets sworn in on Jan. 3. I assume this one must adjourn no later than Dec. 31 but I could be wrong.

          Only 6 R senators voted no. That is because they all had pork in the bill and do not care if Trump gets a bad rap on the way out the door. In fact that is preferred because it makes it more difficult for him to run again in 2024. We fired the wrong 2 people. Should have fired the 535.

          • Only 6 R senators voted no.

            Who are the six? I need to send them thank you cards.

            They may be assholes in need of firing, but they should know when they do something right.

            We fired the wrong 2 people. Should have fired the 535.

            Should have fired 537.. actually.. all the mayors, governors, state legislators, lt governors, dog catchers, town councilors……….

  43. Anita, down here!

    ————————————————————————-

    Well that’s incredibly frustrating.. I had a reply mostly written out, and my computer crashed, deleting it… UGH

    Oh well..

    Firstly, I asked for a “reputable source” and you gave me Democrat Election Fraud .blogspot.com run by none other than user “Joe Biden Sniffs Children.”

    Of course, I trust the impartiality of this site like a hole in the head.

    That said, this site is well produced – conspicuously so – and first started publishing on November 5th – the same day user “Joe Biden Sniffs Children” appeared. This user seemingly exists nowhere else, nor has he interacted (as far as I can tell) in any other way than to post these many, many entries, something that must have consumed hundreds of hours of painstaking work.

    OK, setting that aside, the manual appears to be authentic and is sourced back to the SOS of Colorado, so I accept it as valid. God bless people who include links to original source materials!

    The claim is in two steps:
    1. The “user” (that is, the administrator) moves a result to Rejected State.
    2. The user deletes / purges the record of Rejected votes.

    Nifty trick… mark ’em invalid, then delete the invalids… et viola!

    The problem here is a few things.

    1. The Result State management exists within the reporting environment and does not destroy or alter original records.
    2. for Validated Status results, results are no longer editable.
    3. “The RTR system will disable Result State buttons to prevent invalid state
    transitions”

    So, putting on my hacker hat… does a hole still exist here or is this just total BS…? Welp.. ok, I can see that “Validated” status results are not editable… but to get to Validated, someone has to approve the Initial status results… so it’s just one more step (or lack thereof), right? Just don’t approve them, then they’re still editable, and you can delete them omit them from the tabulated results.

    So it all comes down to Initial State…. And I find the language here ambiguous…..

    I think the read is as follows:
    1. Results are edxtracted from the raw data and loaded in as “Initial.”
    2. Write-ins can be manually resolved.
    3. If the data was manually entered (rather than loaded from the system), it is still editable.
    4. If the data was manually entered, it can still be deleted.

    I find 3-4 somewhat irrelevant.. if you’re manually entering the data, then you can manually enter whatever you want.. no need to edit it post hoc. Just feed it the result you want. Maybe there’s potential for abuse there, but it seems pointless since, you know… it’s like saying “if you leave your window unlocked, a burglar might break in, while ignoring that your front door is wide open.” What importance is a security hole right next to a gaping vulnerability much easier to exploit?

    But that MIGHT not be the case.
    #4 might actually read: all initial data can be deleted by the user.

    That’s a significant difference.

    What I think belies this latter read is the text of the Validated State which follows and notes, more specifically than I mentioned above, “Manual results in this state are no longer editable.”

    The implication of this is that manual result (in Initial) were editable.. but as it goes to the trouble of specifying that it’s just locking the manual results, then the implication is that the non-manual (loaded) results were never editable in this fashion to begin with.

    This latter is, of course, the more logical way to do things if you’re not looking to make a back door into your reporting system. But, as the accusation is that such a back door deliberately exists, then we have to question that assumption. Also, you know, people are stupid, so we shouldn’t necessarily believe they did things right as a base assumption.

    ———————–

    THAT SAID, again, this is only in the reporting functionality. This whole section falls within the results and tabulation functionality, and does not affect underlying any data.

    Something telling is that, to even get to the starting point of the above, you have to first run a search on the underlying data and choose what to include. Were you so inclined to mess around with the results, you could include or exclude from your initial set without ever bothering to alter anything. If one were to rely entirely on the system-tabulated results, there would be no need for such complications, just omit the votes you don’t want from being included in the set in the first place.

    ———————–

    Conclusion: I would like to have a discussion with someone familiar with the machines. There is room for confusion and I cannot reject-as-false the assertions by Joe Biden Sniffs Children, but neither can I confirm it.

    The potential is there. But only in the reporting and not in the underlying data, nor do I see any means by which a vote for one candidate could be flipped to another (except for write-in ballots).

    ———————–

    Conclusion 2: While such potential exists within the reporting system, I find this generally moot. The fact is that the “user” has enough control and access to the reporting system to report whatever they want to report through other means including loading false data sets, selectively including source data, etc.

    If the voting is counted off the RTR (reporting, tabulation and something system), then the whole exercise is moot – it’s wide open – perhaps not as described on Democrat Election Fraud .blogspot, but in other ways. For all intents and purposes, it might as well spit out an unprotected Excel file that you can just open up and change at will. Whoever holds that file can do to it whatever they want with it.

    If, however, the tabulation is conducted under appropriate supervision, then it’s fine. You can’t, for instance, choose to omit a Republican-leaning precinct from the results when a Republican observer is standing over your shoulder watching you. (for that matter, neither could you do the reject/delete method). None of these vulnerabilitys (as described) permit a systematic method of skewing or altering or omitting votes from the tabulation system – they must all be done by the user at the point of extraction, thus having a poll-watcher watching would negate these possibilities. Conversely, doing so in private / secret removes any possibility of confidence in the accuracy of the reported total.

    Alternatively, if the tabulation is conducted off the source-data through some other means than the built-in RTR system, then this whole exercise is irrelevant.

    ———————–

    Conclusion 3: DON’T TRUST MACHINES!!!!

    • I still would like to know how the States that did not run dominion software are able to count their votes by 0700 the next morning and no one else is? Riddle me that, please….

  44. T-Ray,

    Mathius, have another Red Bull, you are not awake this morning.

    Sorry.. kid’s got the sniffles and a cough and we’re waiting on test results… sleep has been a bit elusive…

    Anyway.. I’ll take your advise.. one sec..

    ::elevator music::

    ::Mathius returns with a can of Cranberry Red Bull::

    We have gone through this discussion before. The software uses floating point arithmetic to represent votes instead of integers. It also has a weighting function ostensibly for ranked voting methods that can shift fractions of a vote from one candidate to another. Thus a vote for candidate A can register as 0.99 votes for A and 0.01 votes for B. Thus B gets every one hundredth vote cast for A.

    This is a claim. I certainly understand float point errors and number types in programming – as I know you do, as well. But you are asserting, essentially, that Dominion code classes votes as Float or Doubles and not Integers.

    That’s a claim you are making.

    Wholly aside from the ability to do anything nefarious with that fact, I would ask you to support the assertion that this is present in Dominion code.

    If I hired a programmer to count “people” and they used something other than Int without a damned good reason, I’d execute them on the spot.

    There are video demonstrations out there showing that one can slide in a new USB thumb drive, read in a set of ballots with 9 votes for A and 1 vote for B and come up with a result of 3 votes for A and 7 votes for B. This did not require any compiled code changes, just a simple change in weighting factor.

    Firstly, please link to this video.

    Secondly, as previously discussed, when in possession of the hardware, anyone can do anything they want. That includes nefarious poll-manipulators as well as nefarious fraud-claiming-youtubers.

    I assume all the setup information for a particular precinct is stored in a .ini file. This file should be encrypted, passworded and have a CRC check but I do not know how sophisticated they are with their security. It should take a supervisory password entry to read a new setup.

    According to the manual, initial setup is conducted by a Dominion employee with “deep understanding” of the systems and the needs of the district. One supposes that such initialization would be sufficiently encrypted, checksummed, and protectect with a strong/secure/individualized password and MFA.. but you know as well as I do that people cannot be relied upon to behave as we would wish.

    Odds are good that some machines were programmed by some guy’s Cousin Bob because he was good with computers and willing to do it cheap.

    The data output can be in a csv file

    Therein lies one of the fundamental problems I mentioned in the above for Anita. A CSV (or Excel) file is just raw data and wholly open to manipulation post hoc. It matters not one iota how secure or not the actual machine and its software may be if the output is something that you can just open on a computer and change.

    or a JSON format file. Of the JSON format data I have seen, it is not very sophisticated and incomplete. It shows an integer number for total votes and then fractional percentages for each candidate instead of integer votes for each candidate.

    Given the manual, and the extensive nature of the RTR system, I would suggest that the data is extractable to a wide degree of customization and detail. Whatever you have seen is probably not indicative of the capabilities of the extraction.

    THAT SAID, again, it’s all meaningless because YOU CANNOT TRUST MACHINES!

    • We debated the merits of integer vs real number representation 4 or 8 years ago. You adamantly argued for real numbers at the time. So we are making some progress. Glad to see that the youngun can learn.

      On the JSON data, it was what the NYT published, admittedly a highly suspect source.

      I have been arguing against computer voting since 2000.

      • We debated the merits of integer vs real number representation 4 or 8 years ago. You adamantly argued for real numbers at the time.

        I cannot imagine ever having argued for non-int variables in code counting whole persons. Maybe something with a 16-bit limit in some languages..?

        I would request that you go hunt down this alleged conversation.

        Actually, you know, I’ll do it for you..

        ::hops in Way Back Machine to November 2012::

        ::looks around::

        Nope. Nothing here…

        ::hops in Way Back Machine to November 2016::

        Ah, got it… ok, your point was that someone could rig the voting machine to use a double to count a 1.01 votes for their team and 0.99% for the other team and, over a million votes each, create a disparity of, in this instance, 200k votes.

        My argument was that, if that were the case, the issue isn’t the choice of variable but that the programmers had made a deliberate decision to rig the vote and were only using the variable type as a means to do so. That is, a FPE should average out with some votes over and some votes under and, in any event, never approach the level of a 1% difference. Maybe, maybe cumulative FPE over a million votes might amount to +/- 10 votes. That’s not to say it’s preferable, but that it’s irrelevant.

        We debated the merits of integer vs real number representation 4 or 8 years ago. You adamantly argued for real numbers at the time.

        Sooooo… no… no I did not.

        I argued that real numbers are not necessarily a sign of fraud and are not, in-and-of-themselves cause for alarm or doubt.

        As I said at the time, “I choose my vartypes based on my mood and the phase of the moon.”

        What I asserted then, and still hold now, is that, programmed properly, the choice of a non-int variable over an int variable should have vanishingly small (and unpredictable) impact on results. The only way for this to be otherwise if the programmers maliciously programmed it to count incorrectly – and if that is the case, it’s not the variable choice that’s the problem, but the math employing them.

        If I’m willing to manipulate the math in the code, I can do so just as easily in Int as double. But there’s no way I can think of to reliably deploy doubles to materially and directionally control the value of votes without manipulating the logic around them.

        I have been arguing against computer voting since 2000.

        Because you are wise beyond your years.

  45. T-Ray,

    One more thing to add here, then I need to go do some work…..

    There are video demonstrations out there showing that one can slide in a new USB thumb drive

    I’ve said before that there should be no access points to the hardware – that if such access exists, security cannot be assured… I remember… years and years ago… someone describing the issue with security and the USB port on voting machines…

    The company said something like “the software runs antivirus and anti-intrusion measures on the USB port” to which someone observed, “that’s great, but it’s like your child’s teacher saying ‘don’t worry, I always wear a condom while teaching’.. sure, I mean, yea, I guess that’s a good thing.. but how wrong do you have to be doing your job in order to need that?”

    There’s no reason to have a “secure” USB port, because there’s no reason to even have a USB port.

    There should be no access to the system other than the touchscreen through controlled interfaces. If you must include a USB port, it should be physically air-gapped and disconnect from the device while in public operation and only reconnected as necessary during the setup/tabulation processes.

    If someone can stick in a USB drive and load anything, then I’ve already lost whatever little faith I ever had in the integrity of the system and its outcome.

    Anyone who has access to the hardware to demonstrate this flaw also has all the access they need to create this flaw. The demonstration is therefore meaningless.

    YOU CANNOT TRUST MACHINES!

  46. There seems to be a trust problem with the Covid vaccine. I wonder why?

    Maybe because pre-election the media and Crats said they wouldn’t trust it?
    Maybe because the media has put people getting it on TV live, and not many people trust the media?
    Maybe, just maybe it’s a simple as Orange Man Bad?

    What say ya’ll?

    • Damnit, Gman! I’m tryin’ to get some work done here and you come and post this!

      Ok, fine.

      Why?

      Ok, well, it was super-duper rushed for starters. That always makes me a bit paranoid.

      Second, it’s new. New (any medicine) is always suspect.

      That said, I do find it interesting that the very people at the top who were calling COVID a hoax and overblown and whatnot are somehow the same people to skip to the front of the line to get the vaccine. Odd, that, no?

      eg: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13544412/joni-ernst-blasted-getting-covid-vaccine-called-it-hoax/

      My thinking goes, setting aside the hypocrisy, that if Congressional swamp creatures are willing to take the shot, it’s probably safe for the rest of us. So, to that end, I guess, their decision to go first should help encourage people on the fence to get their shots, so that’s good at least.

      ——————

      To his credit.. to the best of my knowledge.. Trump declined to get higher preference for the vaccine for himself and his staff. As someone who downplayed the disease perhaps more than anyone else, I do appreciate that he didn’t hypocritically hop the line to get the vaccine preferentially.

  47. Local restaurant/bar owners hired a lawyer due to Governor Wolf’s shutdowns and restrictions. The bars are now fully open as Wolf’s orders are not laws and cannot be enforced. Folks are SO TIRED of Liberal Crat bullshit.

    • (Oh god… what now…?)

      Ok… got it..

      I support the law.

      In his filing, Elias claims that state election officials excluded 22 valid “curbside and absentee” ballots, 18 of which were supposedly cast for Hart. He also says that some recounts at the county level failed to “conduct a hand review of ballots that were recognized as ‘overvotes’ or write-in ballots by the [voting] machines.”

      If this is true, and he can prove it in court, then he should do so.

      If he wins, and if the result of that win is sufficient to overturn the election, then that is what should happen.

      Likewise, I have said more or less the exact same thing – repeatedly – about Trump & Co.

      I cannot speak to the validity of his arguments as I have no idea what the rules are in Iowa.

      I can say, just off the cuff, that I would be highly doubtful that 22 extra votes are going to change anything. [Hi, Future Mathius here.. this is wrong – the election came down to 6 votes, so this could be decisive] I don’t favor wasting the court’s time with futule gestures that can’t merit the remedies being sought (eg Trump requesting the court overturn the election in Michigan over a 100-ish votes). Without knowing more, I’d wonder why the courts haven’t thrown it out already. Perhaps the hand-count aspect is more significant?

      One other thing to wonder about it laches. The idea is, essentially, that one must file in a timely manner. You can’t sit back and wait and then try to overturn the apple cart a month after the dust has settled. This is something Trump failed on (repeatedly) and so I would wonder what is going on, once again, that he’s not getting thrown out.

      For the avoidance of doubt, I support equal justice before the law, including equal application of the hurdles of standing and laches and burdens of proof. Insofar as Trump rightfully failed on these, ceterus paribus, I would expect (and want!) this case to fail as well..

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Symptomatic! Just like the military ballots found opened and discarded in PA BEFORE the election.

      • They did not take it to court, they are asking Pelosi and the House to decide the issue.

        • If that is a legal avenue, then I cannot object. If Pelosi et all have the legal authority to grant the remedy, then I cannot object.

          THAT SAID, setting aside my lawyer hat, Citizen Mathius would consider such a move to be an abomination and scathingly condemn all involved.

          Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        God you constantly reveal your ignorance which is disguised by lengthy retorts.

        Mr. Trump DID NOT LOSE ANY CASE due to the principle of laches. Got it?

        • The Doctrine of Laches, not “principle.”

          And, yes, he did, as some cursory googling confirmed:

          Two examples off the cuff:
          1. Tyler Kistner et al. v. Steve Simon, et al.
          2. PA Supreme Court cites laches in throwing out lower court ruling.

          Perhaps “repeatedly” was overselling the comment – but it has bitten him at least twice.

  48. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Hydroxychloroquine

    Correct me if I am wrong here but last week the FDA approved the use of this drug as effective to treat early stage Covid Cases. If you have ANY doubt at all about tech censorship you should Google it. You will find NO reference at all to that approval as of five minutes ago. You WILL find much earlier reports touting its USELESSNESS.

    So, thousands upon thousands of patients have been allowed to progress to the final stages of Covid from earlier treatable ones all because they hated Trump so badly they had to make him look like a quack.
    .
    Please share this with your less than bright friends.

  49. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    In answer to Matt’s question let us use the word that has zoomed to the top of the mostoftenabused word chart this past year. The finding of discrepancy after discrepancy from town to town,. city to city, state to state but only in “certain types of towns, cities, states, would lead one to believe that we are dealing with SYSTEMIC fraud!

    Get it? System wide fraud! Goes along with the wildly accepted Systemic racism!

  50. There is a new thread posted.

%d bloggers like this: