Joe Biden’s America gasps at Trump’s last laugh

Featured

President Trump roasts San Fran Nan with a letter

As revealed on Lou Dobbs on 14 January 2021, President Trump sent the Speaker of the House the following letter/executive order.

Dear Madam Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby report that I have issued an Executive Order taking further steps to deal with the threat posed by the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) increasing exploitation of United States capital to resource and to enable the development and modernization of its military, intelligence, and other security apparatuses which continue to allow the PRC to directly threaten the United States homeland and United States forces overseas, including by developing and deploying weapons of mass destruction, advanced conventional weapons, and malicious cyber-enabled actions against the United States and its people.

Through the national strategy of Military-Civil Fusion, the PRC increases the size of the country’s military-industrial complex by compelling civilian Chinese companies to support its military and intelligence activities. Those companies, though remaining ostensibly private and civilian, directly support the PRC’s military, intelligence, and security apparatuses and aid in their development and modernization. At the same time, they raise capital by selling securities to United States investors that trade on public exchanges both here and abroad, lobbying United States index providers and funds to include these securities in market offerings, and engaging in other acts to ensure access to United States capital. In that way, the PRC exploits United States investors to finance the development and modernization of its military.

To deal with that threat, I signed Executive Order 13959 on November 12, 2020. Executive Order 13959 prohibits certain purchases involving publicly traded securities, or any securities that are derivative of, or are designed to provide investment exposure to such securities, of any Communist Chinese military company. Those companies are ones the Department of Defense has listed, or will list, pursuant to section 1237 of Public Law 105-261, as amended, or are identified as Communist Chinese military companies or their subsidiaries by the Secretary of the Treasury using similar criteria.

Today, I signed an Executive Order amending Executive Order 13959. The amendments prohibit certain sales as well as purchases of publicly traded securities, or any securities that are derivative of, or are designed to provide investment exposure to such securities, of any Communist Chinese military company. They also prohibit possession of such securities by United States persons 1 year after a company is determined to be a Communist Chinese military company. And, finally, they allow the Secretary of Defense publicly to list whether a company is a Communist Chinese military company using the criteria in section 1237(b)(4)(B) of Public Law 105-261, as amended by section 1233 of Public Law 106-398 and section 1222 of Public Law 108‑375, regardless of whether the Secretary must report that determination under section 1237(b)(2).

I am enclosing a copy of the Executive Order I have issued.

Sincerely,

DONALD J. TRUMP

This should be fun

From what I hear, the documents that will be released in the near future will cause the Democrats to go into self-preservation mode. These will be a compilation of Obama scandal issues (from the known ones to — I am sure — many yet unknown scandals).

From an unverified source, I heard that European Union officials have resigned. (If you visit this blog later and find this statement struck out (like this), you will know that I dug deeper and found the story to be false.

A good resource

Featured

Having run into the Restricted Republic, I can only recommend them

Recently, I ran into Restricted Republic (a video journalism venue that presents the deep set of sources that it presents with each story). After reviewing several of their products, I can only recommend them. Their work is thorough and (though I might quibble with a point or two) spot on.

For example, the following video delves into the events leading up to the Capitol invasion of 6 January. For that video, the journalists present a set of sources (refer below the video for a copy of the sources).

As you can tell, Restricted Republic is on Rumble. They can also be found on Gab and MeWe.

Joe Biden’s Democrats and RINO’s impeached Trump on false charges

Featured

Trump was impeached on the charge of doing what Democrats have done

President Trump was impeached a second time without any hearings and without testimony. After six months of Nancy Pelosi’s dragging her feet on COVID-19 relief, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats produced articles of impeachment in days (according to NPR) that accused the President of doing the exact things that they have done.

Resolution impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, the Donald John Trump, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following article of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:
Article of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

ARTICLE 1: INCITEMENT OF INSURRECTION

The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment” and that the President “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment, for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Further, section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits any person who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the United States from “hold[ing] and office … under the United States.’ In his conduct while President of the United States — and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, provide, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed — Donald John Trump engaged in high Crimes and Misdemeanors by inciting violence against the Government of the United States, in that:

On January 6, 2021, pursuant to the 12th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Vice President of the United States, the House of Representatives, and the Senate met at the United States Capitol for a Joint Session of Congress to count the votes of the Electoral College. In the months preceding the Joint Session, President Trump repeatedly issued false statements asserting that the Presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted by the American people or certified by State or Federal officials. Shortly before the Joint Session commenced, President Trump, addressed a crowd at the Ellipse in Washington, D.C. There, he reiterated false claims that “we won this election, and we won it by a landslide.” He also willfully made statements that, in context, encouraged — and foreseeably resulted in — lawless action at the Capitol, such as: “if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.” Thus incited by President Trump, members of the crowd he had addressed, in an attempt to, among other objectives, interfere with the Joint Session’s solemn constitutional duty to certify the results of the 2020 Presidential election, unlawfully breached and vandalized the Capitol, injured and killed law enforcement personnel, menaced Members of Congress, the Vice President, and Congressional personnel, and engaged in other violent, deadly, destructive and seditious acts.

(Read the rest at NPR if you are masochistic and lacking razor blades)

In 2017, Nancy Pelosi tweets “Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts.”

In a 16 May 2017 tweet, Nancy proclaimed essentially the same thing as “we won this election” when she said:


PelosiTweet1

Therefore, it seems that President Trump was impeached for doing exactly what San Fran Nan did. However, there may also be a problem with the logic behind impeaching him for inciting insurrection.

For President Trump to have incited insurrection, people could not have already been planning insurrection

FBI and NYPD reports that the 6 January 2021 attack had been planned

Even the Washington Post recognized at least part of the idiocy of blaming Trump’s 6 January 2021 speech for the Capitol incursion.

A day before rioters stormed Congress, an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and “war,” according to an internal document reviewed by The Washington Post that contradicts a senior official’s declaration the bureau had no intelligence indicating anyone at last week’s demonstrations in support of President Trump planned to do harm.

A situational information report approved for release the day before the U.S. Capitol riot painted a dire portrait of dangerous plans, including individuals sharing a map of the complex’s tunnels, and possible rally points for would-be conspirators to meet in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and South Carolina and head in groups to Washington.

“As of 5 January 2021, FBI Norfolk received information indicating calls for violence in response to ‘unlawful lockdowns’ to begin on 6 January 2021 in Washington, D.C.,” the document says. “An online thread discussed specific calls for violence to include stating ‘Be ready to fight. Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in, and blood from their BLM and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled. Get violent. Stop calling this a march, or rally, or a protest. Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die. NOTHING else will achieve this goal.”

BLM is probably a reference to the Black Lives Matter movement for racial justice. Pantifa is a derogatory term for antifa, a far-left anti-fascist movement whose adherents sometimes engage in violent clashes with right-wing extremists.

Yet even with that information in hand, the report’s unidentified author expressed concern that the FBI might be encroaching on free-speech rights.

(Read more at the Washington Post for a thoroughly leftist perspective)

This article does not mention how certain key Antifa and BLM members have been arrested (such as John Sullivan, a known BLM member who was arrested, released, and now re-arrested due to the many recordings of him directing and encouraging violence. This article also does not mention the logistics (generally ignored by the press — as they ignored the Holly Zoller distribution of Antifa weapons in the Northwest) of getting numerous weapons (such as the pipe-like weapons being distributed, as shown in a recent blog) to an area that normally has tight security.

Was it the repetition of a claim that the Democrats hold as false that makes it impeachable?

If it is repetition of falsehood that can be an offense, then the whole content of this blog and countless other blogs should prove the guilt of the Democrats. However (since it is only fair to provide proof of my claim), consider how we have been lied to by Democrats over the past four years on:

Ok. Maybe Trump wasn’t impeached for making claims about the last election or lying.

Maybe Trump was impeached was because the Democrats claim he incited violence

Problem is, if you go to the full text of his speech (available here), you will not find incitements to violence.

However, if you listen to the words of Democrat senators and representatives from 2016 to 2020, you find something quite different:

Ok, maybe President Trump was not impeached for claiming the election was hijacked or inciting insurrection (before others started planning it) or inciting violence …

Maybe President Trump was impeached for encouraging people to come to Washington

Maybe just calling people to come to Washington was an impeachable offense. Maybe just calling people who might disagree with the current Democrat regime might be a reason to impeach.

If that is the case, let’s get out the handcuffs for San Fran Nan, who allowed climate change activists to take over her office and spoke glowingly of them.

PelosiTweet2

1984_FB&TDeathOfFreedom

Dems

TwitterNazis

TwitterEvolution

A_Moron

MAGA

et_tu

BidenDementedHeal

Whistleblowers

Joe Biden’s America comes to resemble a second train to the gulags

Featured

Known Antifa members identified in DC on 6 January 2021

The New York Post reported in a 7 January 2021 article how at least two Antifa members were identified in the crowd that broke into the capitol buildings.

At least two known Antifa members were spotted among the throngs of pro-Trump protesters at the Capitol on Wednesday, a law enforcement source told The Post.

The Antifa members disguised themselves with pro-Trump clothing to join in the DC rioting, said the sources, who spotted the infiltrators while monitoring video coverage from the Capitol.

The infiltrators were recognized due to their participation in New York City demonstrations, and were believed to have joined in the rioting so that Trump would get blamed, the source said.

A Washington Times report initially claimed two other protesters were actually Philadelphia-based Antifa members — citing a retired military officer with access to facial recognition software — but the outlet deleted the article after the software company told Buzzfeed News that the story was “outright false.”

(Read this with additional links at the New York Post)

You can’t convince me that someone wearing a buffalo horn hat and demanding a vegan jail diet is conservative

While I cannot find an English language article on the booking of Jake Angeli (aka Jacob Anthony or Jake Angel or Jacob Chansley), I have seen numerous articles showing this man with his face painted and in costume as he stands in the House. These articles usually go to great depths explaining how this guy belongs to the “qanon” cult and make various attempts to tie the group to Trump. One Arizona television station (KVOA) reports that he has been associated with the Phoenix BLM.

Additionally, it has been rumored that the buffalo horn guy wore gloves to cover a hammer and sickle tattoo on his left hand.

Twitter boots Trump after Democrats ask it to. Next, Biden plans to implement Patriot Act 2

Red State outlines the destruction of our republic in an 8 January 2021 article.

We’re starting to see a lot of craziness in reaction to the Capitol protest. Or perhaps I should say, using that as an excuse to crack down on the right and on their speech.

Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and other social media are cracking down on any non-approved narratives.

Twitter locked President Donald Trump’s account and then released it after about a day or so. Then Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and others are calling for Trump to be pulled. Now as we just reported, Twitter has banned the president permanently. Twitter is now literally doing the bidding of the Democrats.

Facebook and Instagram already suspended Trump for at least two weeks and possibly permanently. Shopify even pulled MAGA goods from their online stores. Because MAGA hats are apparently evil now.

Democrats and media are also blaming Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and calling on them to resign or be expelled.

This is crazy. It was a riot. With thousands of peaceful people and some who were not. Yet it’s being used to shut down the opposition and to shut down any election questions. Objecting to the electoral count is not illegal, it’s not “sedition” or whatever craziness Democrats want to spread. It’s exactly part of the Constitutional order, which was something Democrats understood when they in fact objected over the last three Republican presidents, as we previously reported here and here.

Now word comes from Joe Biden that he is working on a bill to go after “domestic terrorism” with a redefinition of the term, to go after the “ideologically-inspired.”

Remember how when Trump was talking about prosecuting Antifa for demonstrable crimes against the federal government during the rioting/statue attacks? The left freaked out that he might be going after people for political opinion/ideological reason. Attorney General Bill Barr made it very clear that it wasn’t about ideology but crime. Here’s Joe Biden literally using the term “ideological inspired” and defining the Capitol protesters, all of them, as “domestic terrorists,” making no distinction on the basis of crime or no crime. “Don’t dare call them protesters,” Mr. Biden said in remarks from Wilmington, Del. “They were a riotous mob. Insurrectionists. Domestic terrorists. It’s that basic. It’s that simple.”

Democrats seemed to think that was just fine. But those on the right and the folks more on the left, like Glenn Greenwald, raised the warning red flag.









(Read the closing [central line] at Red State)

This hand-in-glove cooperation between leftist Big Tech and leftist government is too reminiscent of the national socialist movement of the 1930’s

Although I don’t have the answers to all of the happenings on 6 January, a lot of the events seem to at least create questions that point toward an involvement of Antifa and the Democrats. For example, why was one guy in a black vest and fatigue pants and another in a black coat and blue jeans handing out what seemed to be metal rods to people who passed those items off to others dressed as police?

Additionally, since some videos show police facilitating the entry of some of the protesters to the Capitol building, there are questions as to whether this is an invasion of the Capitol or a staged event.

Representative Gohmert tells of accounts from Capitol police saying they knew of Antifa infiltration

Was this coordinated to kill Senator Cruz’s protest to the certification?

As the following video explains, the violent portion of the whole thing may have been a false flag used to kill Senator Cruz’s protest to the certification.

After months of Portland riots, we find that 91% of arrests were not being prosecuted

The Portland Tribune reported in a 5 January 2021 article that 91% of Portland arrests (where Antifa spent months burning cars, barricading streets, and trying to storm the federal courthouse).

Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler has vowed to crack down on “antifa anarchists” after a riot on New Year’s Eve, but months of catch-and-release policing has skeptics wondering if anything will change.

“Right now there’s a lot of people that are emboldened to just do whatever they want,” Gabe Johnson, co-founder of the Coalition to Save Portland, told KOIN 6 News. Johnson feels city and county officials have set a precedent that will be hard to reverse, and thinks the mayor’s announcement is “just more words.”

Out of more than a thousand arrests reported by the Portland Police Bureau and other local law enforcement since late May 2020, only about 8.4% of cases are still open, according to court records. The rest have been dismissed or listed as no complaint, which means authorities are not currently pursuing charges. Multnomah County District Attorney Mike Schmidt has repeatedly argued cases could be reopened later, but KOIN 6 News could only find a handful of instances where that has happened in the past seven months.

Meanwhile, demonstrators have embraced the lack of prosecutions as a win.

“If (the police) want to arrest 50 people a night, then, OK, that’s what they’re going to do,” Braxton with Black Unity PDX told KOIN 6 News in December. “Their jail is too small. They don’t have room for that many people and the DA isn’t prosecuting anymore. So we won that, too.”

Braxton hasn’t been arrested at the protests, but said he knows many people who have. He described PPB’s process as “BS.”

“They just arrest you, you get let out in the morning, depending on how much they hate you they’ll either let you out at like 3 a.m. or like 9 a.m.,” he said. “Like if there’s somebody who always yells at them and they know you, then you’re not getting out until sometimes the afternoon.”

First timers or people who aren’t being “obnoxious” often get let out right away, Braxton observed.

(continued)

There are instances where charges like criminal mischief (vandalism), riot or assaulting an officer have also been dropped. Schmidt said PPB sometimes refers cases to his office without enough evidence to prosecute.

When KOIN 6 News spoke with PPB spokesman Greg Pashley in December, he didn’t disagree with the district attorney. Pashley said many of the arrests had to do with public order, such as blocking streets, and therefore did not involve damage. He also said many arrests happen late at night, when it’s difficult to contact victims or collect video surveillance or other evidence to refer to the DA’s office.

“From the police standpoint, we could make an arrest based on probable cause in the middle of the night, but still have follow-up to do in the days and weeks following in order to make that a good case,” Pashley said. “And the district attorney has of course a slightly different view of that case and then has to make decisions based on the information that they’re provided after that initial arrest.

“It seems to be that you can almost get away with anything in this city, and this is what we’re not OK with,” said Angela Todd, cofounder of the Coalition to Save Portland. “It’s OK for everyone to feel like they have rights, but as soon as those take away rights of other people, we have some concerns.”

(Read more at the Portland Tribune)

Odd that the Capitol police have so many arrests and charges while the Portland federal courthouse was attacked and burned (to have all but 9% of the dismissed or thrown out)

If we are concerned about attacks on federal buildings, why did so many Portland arrests get thrown out?

If the only reason for the attack on the Capitol was to derail Ted Cruz’s objection to the electors, then it seems to have done its job.

Pearl-Clutchers on Parade

Canada Free Press compares the actions of Antifa and Black Lives Matter (sic) to those on the right.

Time to get out the ledger.

On the left––literally––we have had nearly eight months of rampaging criminality and violence in the many Democrat-controlled cities in our country, all conducted by thugs belonging to groups called Black Lives Matter and Antifa. This is the short list of what they have done:

  • Committed widespread arson, including burning down hundreds of minority-owned businesses in the Latino, Asian and black communities (the black owners clearly didn’t matter);
  • Incinerated cars and burned down buildings, court houses, police stations, et al;
  • Shot laser beams in the eyes of policemen;
  • Assaulted civilians, resulting in 30 deaths and thousands of hospitalizations;
  • Smashed plate-glass windows of numerous businesses, both large and small and then engaged in looting, stealing and grand theft;
  • Terrorized and then dragged people out of restaurants;
  • Tore down historic statues, including those of black icons (duh);
  • Defaced streets and avenues with BLM’s block-long, block-lettered, yellow-painted name.
  • Terrorized the citizenry of entire neighborhoods and towns for months on end;
  • Attacked people in locked cars;

In all those eight months––220 days, over 5,000 hours––what was the reaction of Democrats, both elected and civilian?

A thunderous silence. Not a word of opprobrium or disapproval or condemnation. Not. One. Word.

Why?

Left'sActingOut
Because, as the esteemed Daniel Greenfield points out, Democrats heartily approve of violent acting-out riots ––as long as they support Democrat ideology! In 2018, he reminds us, there were “glowing stories” about the hundreds of Women’s March members who were engaging in “direct action” to disrupt the Senate’s Kavanaugh hearings. They blocked hallways, shouted down Senate members, and draped protest banners from balconies. Democrats cheered them on.

“In 2020,” Greenfield continues. “Black Lives Matter rioters vandalized the Lincoln Memorial and the WW2 Memorial, along with statues of Gandhi, General Kosciuszko, and Andrew Jackson. And Democrat House members proposed bills to protect the racist mobs from law enforcement.

“Meanwhile the BLM mob besieged the White House and battled Secret Service personnel, allegedly forcing the evacuation of President Trump and his family to a bunker. And a bail fund backed by Senator Kamala Harris and the Biden campaign staffers focused on helping the rioters and looters get out of prison.

“Now, as the Democrats expect to take power,” Greenfield writes, “they suddenly decided that rioting is bad.”

And let’s not forget that it was only last summer that Kalamity Harris encouraged her supporters to donate to the Minnesota Freedom Fund to provide bail money to the militant anarchists facing charges for setting fire to Minneapolis.

But don’t tell these things to Democrats who observed 55,000 hours of BLM and Antifa destruction with nary a critical word but watched the 4-5 hour incursion into the U.S. Congress on January 6th and could only wring their hands, clutch their pearls, gasp in horror and exclaim: the building, the building, the history, the sanctity, the inviolability!
LeftistCallsToViolence

Back to the Ledger

On the right––literally––you have a president who has been conducting dozens of rallies over the past four years with jaw-dropping attendance. The “Stop the Steal” rally on January 6th was estimated to have about 150,000 attendees––with no untoward incident, upheaval, or arrest until the Capitol was breached. Back to this later.

Before this rally, the president chalked up accomplishments that made America safer, stronger, and richer. But because he repudiated both the paltry achievements and political philosophies of all his predecessors and the corrupt shills they left behind in the swamps of D.C., and because he had access to their indictable criminality, he became the biggest threat to the political establishment that ever existed. That said, President Trump:

  • Lowered taxes (which Democrats hate and never vote for);
  • Boosted the economy to all-time highs (which Democrats hate, which is why they vote for socialists);
  • Elevated black employment to an all-time high (which Democrats really hate, the reason why blacks have never risen during Democrat rule);
  • Strengthened our military (which Democrats hate since they loathe the military);
  • Signed the first law ever to make cruelty to animals a federal felony;
  • Signed Right-To-Try legislation allowing terminally ill patients to try experimental treatment that wasn’t allowed before.
  • Signed the First-Step Act prison-reform bill that frees mostly black prisoners from unfair sentences.
  • Supported and strengthened Israel by moving her capital to Jerusalem, giving Israel control over the Golan Heights, establishing peace treaties with the United Arab Emirates, Sudan, Morocco, Bahrain and several to follow (which will never happen under Biden since his first priority is resurrecting the genocidal-to-Israel Iran deal––which Pres. Trump canceled––which the mullahs have oft-stated is necessary for them to fulfill their Number One goal––to eradicate Israel forever! Yet Democrats, including Jewish Democrats, support a candidate who wants to revive this deal, partly because their poor hearts bleed for the people who call themselves Palestinians….you know, the people who routinely strap suicide bombs on three-year-old toddlers and celebrate the death of Jews with streets named after the murderers and lifelong pensions).
  • Supported the pro-life movement, which the Democrats hate more than anything, given their devotion to abortions. In NY, the entire Democrat legislature stood and applauded when they allowed abortion up to the moment of birth! Not to be outdone by the Democrat Governor of VA, Ralph Northam, M.D., who signed a law that allows infanticide after the baby is born!
  • Here are some of President Trump’s other staggering achievements for the American people.

So what was the coup all about?

On November 3, 2020, the presidential election was held. Routinely, polls close at about 7 or 8 p.m., the votes are tallied electronically, and the Democrat operatives who pose as TV reporters start calling states as early as 9 or 10 p.m., with the final result usually not known until noon or so the next day.

On November 3rd, the entire world––which follows American elections assiduously––witnessed something unprecedented in the history of American voting. Just as President Trump was winning a huge number of states––and electoral votes––and appeared to be winning most or all of the six battleground states by a landslide, the tallying stopped abruptly. And it didn’t start again. Not for an hour. Not for two hours. Not for three hours. After three hours it did start again, and the whole world saw actual MAGIC befitting David Blaine, even Harry Houdini!

All of sudden, Joe Biden magically gained hundreds of thousands of votes, ultimately enough to win the election. This in spite of a Mt. Everest of reports of massive voter fraud into the multimillions, including (this is the short list):

All were strangely rejected by American courts––the same courts that believe traffic violations deserve their attention––but apparently not presidential voter fraud! Umm…does anyone else smell the rat I do?

(Read the last paragraph at Canada Free Press)

I am glad to see that reporting on American matters still flourishes North of the border

While Canadians may not be able to comment on Bible verses that would condemn homosexuality, at least they can comment on American government without fear of reprisal.

Cancel culture continues

MAGA Conservatives reports that Democrats have threatened to throw out Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz using the 14th amendment.

The Dems in the house are readying new articles of impeachment against President Trump and it will pass in the house making him the only president impeached twice in our history.

The Dems may hold off sending the articles to the Senate – Mitch said he would not take them up until Jan 19 and they don’t want this to impact Biden getting his nominations confirmed – until 100 days into the Biden administration. They would do this after he left office to bar him from ever holding office again. And yes, they can do this.

But in bad news for some GOP members, the Dems are talking about using the 14th amendment to kick out Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz and others from Congress over the debacle in the Capitol.

Can they do this? Yes. What can the GOP Reps do? They can overrule this if they get 2/3 vote (which they don’t have) in the House.

In short, expect a deal between the GOP and the Dems where some of their members (probably the freshmen like Lauren Boebert) get kicked out while the rest with seniority (like Jim Jordan) remain.

(Read more at MAGA Conservatives)

Thugs. The current crop of Democrats seem to be nothing but thugs.

Like the brown shirts of the thirties, the Democrats are not willing to debate or risk exposing the corruption at the base of their movement. They just shut their opposition  up.

Angela Merkel, not an American, points out the problem with Twitter dumping a president

The New York Post lets Germany’s leader point out the problem with allowing a media company to limit the free speech rights of a nation’s leader.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel considers it “problematic” that Twitter would toss President Trump off its social media platform, saying through a spokesman Monday that the president’s ability to express his opinion is a fundamental right of “elementary significance.”

“This fundamental right can be intervened in, but according to the law and within the framework defined by legislators — not according to a decision by the management of social media platforms,” Merkel spokesman Steffen Seibert told reporters in Berlin.

“Seen from this angle, the chancellor considers it problematic that the accounts of the US president have now been permanently blocked,” he added.

Twitter permanently banned Trump’s Twitter account last Friday, citing “the risk of further incitement of violence” — two days after a mob of his supporters stormed the Capitol.

But for weeks the social media platform had tagged the president’s tweets about the Nov. 3 presidential election.

Seibert said Twitter and other platforms like Facebook and Google have a right to flag content they consider objectionable, but they also “bear great responsibility for political communication not being poisoned by hatred, by lies and by incitement to violence.”

Facebook last week banned Trump until after he leaves office on Jan. 20.

(Read more at the New York Post)

World Leaders denounce Big Tech censorship of President Donald Trump

The Epoch Times points out how leaders worldwide have condemned Twitter’s removal of the President.

Political elites worldwide have criticized big tech companies for banning President Donald Trump from their social media platforms.

At present, the president has been banned from Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, Snapchat, Reddit, and Instagram.

Twitter permanently removed Trump’s account, saying that his recent posts were in violation of the “Glorification of Violence Policy.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel called Twitter’s ban on Trump “problematic,” and said that freedom of opinion is an essential right of “elementary significance,” her spokesperson, Steffen Siebert, said on Jan 11.

“This fundamental right can be intervened in, but according to the law and within the framework defined by legislators—not according to a decision by the management of social media platforms,” Siebert said.

“Seen from this angle, the chancellor considers it problematic that the accounts of the U.S. president have now been permanently blocked,” he said.

Members of the French government agreed.

Clement Beaune, the junior minister for European Union affairs, said he was “shocked” a private company made this kind of decision.

“This should be decided by citizens, not by a CEO,” he told Bloomberg TV on Monday. “There needs to be public regulation of big online platforms.”

French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire also condemned the move and said that tech giants were part of a digital oligarchy that was a threat to democracy.

Manfred Weber, the leader of the European People’s Party—a centre-right political party—echoed Beaune and called for Big Tech firms to be regulated.

“We cannot leave it to American Big Tech to decide how we can or cannot discuss online. Today’s mechanisms destroy the compromise searching and consensus-building that are crucial in free and democratic societies. We need a stricter regulatory approach,” he wrote on Twitter on Jan. 11.

Meanwhile, Norway’s left-wing Labor Party leader Jonas Gahr Støre said that Big Tech censorship threatens political freedom around the world.

He said Twitter needs to apply the same standard globally that it did to Trump.

“This is a line where freedom of expression is also at stake,” said Støre. “If Twitter starts with this sort of thing, it means that they have to go around the world and look at other people completely astray, and shut them out.”

The Australian government has also called the ban on Trump an act of “censorship.”

Acting Prime Minister Michael McCormack said, “There’s been a lot of people who have said and done a lot of things on Twitter previously that haven’t received that sort of condemnation or indeed censorship. I’m not one who believes in that sort of censorship.”

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said he was uncomfortable with Twitter’s ban on Trump. “Those decisions were taken by commercial companies, but personally, I felt uncomfortable with what they did,” he said.

Quoting Voltaire’s famous line: “I may not agree with what you say, but I defend the right to say it,” Frydenberg said that freedom of speech is fundamental to a democratic society.

Fellow Liberal Party member and senator, Alex Antic, said he will push for a Senate Select Committee into Big Tech’s influence and censorship of political ideas when the Australian Parliament resumes next month.

Antic told The Epoch Times on Jan. 12 that he is concerned that Big Tech can so easily censor one side of the debate.

“Our democratic process is founded on our ability to share ideas freely and to be exposed to challenging and opposing viewpoints. It is crucial to the integrity of that process that Big Tech companies do not censor one side of the debate,” Antic said.

Mexican President Manuel López Obrador also echoed his global counterparts, with Reuters reporting that he said it was a bad sign when private companies try to censor opinion.

Obrador said a “court of censorship like an inquisition to manage public opinion.”

“I don’t like anybody being censored or taking away from the right to post a message on Twitter or Face(book),” he said.

In Russia, the opposition leader, Alexey Navalny, who is an outspoken anti-corruption campaigner, said he believed the ban was an unacceptable form of censorship and was based not on a genuine need but rather Twitter’s political preferences.

In a thread posted on the platform on Jan. 10, Navalny said: “Don’t tell me he was banned for violating Twitter rules. I get death threats here every day for many years, and Twitter doesn’t ban anyone.”

(Read more — yes, there is more — at The Epoch Times)

In the past, the Left was consumed with how we looked to the World

In the Obama administration, the concern was that America would look backward to the sophisticated Europeans. Now, the Democrats are taking the public execution practices of the Communist Chinese to heart by publicly shaming their victims and daring anyone to censure them.

Ignoring the concerns of Republican voters will destroy the U.S.

Real Clear Politics publishes an article by Jason Whitlock explaining why ignoring the voters is bad.

Wednesday afternoon, angry, unarmed, mostly peaceful protesters stormed the Capitol. They caused hundreds of dollars in damages to “The People’s House,” the taxpayer-funded building where elected lawmakers work.

They took pictures seated at Nancy Pelosi’s desk. They shoved furniture out of place. They pushed their way past unprepared and overwhelmed law enforcement. They shattered a window or two.

If not for police shooting and killing an unarmed, female 14-year Air Force veteran, the protest staged by Trump supporters would have more in common with a 1950s fraternity panty raid than political riot.

Here, I guess, I should apologize for not joining the rest of the media in feigning outrage and calling for the trespassers to be tried for treason. But I’m neither outraged nor feeling vengeful because of their act of civil disobedience.

I understand it. It was an inevitable repercussion from 2020 and what we’ve all witnessed the last decade. It was Sir Isaac Newton’s third law come to life.

“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”

For four years now, the billionaire and millionaire elites who control academia, the mainstream media, politics, popular culture, and the sports world have framed Trump supporters as racist deplorables worthy of elimination from society.

These same elites spent the past decade elevating Michael Brown, George Floyd, Jacob Blake, Rayshard Brooks, Eric Garner, and other resisting criminal suspects to icon status while simultaneously raising bail money for protesters willing to riot, loot, burn, and vandalize in the name of racial justice.

This blatant hypocrisy will not go unchallenged. You cannot ignore the desires, concerns and feelings of 74 million citizens. You cannot write them off as Nazis and answer all their complaints with allegations of racism or sexism. That’s fascism.

At this point, the Deplorables should be commended for their restraint. Antifa and Black Lives Matter search, burn, and destroy well into the wee hours. The Deplorables returned to their hotel rooms by nightfall and watched our lawmakers return to work inside the Capitol by 8 p.m.

The critics say President Trump provoked Wednesday’s political “violence.” His refusal to concede a corrupt election baited his followers to overrun the Capitol with flags, put Ashli Babbitt in harm’s way, and do enough property damage to delay the Electoral College confirmation three or four hours.

Fine. Guilty as charged.

But our president for the next two weeks was not Lee Harvey Oswald, a lone provocateur. He had plenty of collaborators. They work on all the major and cable news and sports networks. They play in the NFL and NBA. They represent both political parties, hold high positions in Hollywood, at Netflix, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

The people wagging their fingers the hardest at Trump and the Deplorables sanctioned, financed, and promoted political violence throughout all of 2020 and for much of the past decade.

Ashli Babbitt’s blood is on the hands of Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg as much as, if not more than, on President Trump’s. That’s why Dorsey and Zuckerberg rushed to silence Trump on their respective platforms, Twitter and Facebook.

Political tension and violence are fomented, planned, and monetized on Silicon Valley’s social media platforms. Wednesday’s “violence” hit the wrong target. The Capitol is where global elites exchange cash for influence and privilege. It’s where $150,000-a-year politicians become multimillionaires building cozy relationships with Big Tech lobbyists and American corporations looking to curry favor with China.

The Capitol is sacred ground for elites. The way you might revere a church edifice is the way millionaires and billionaires revere the Capitol.

The NBA multimillionaires said they played with “heavy hearts” Wednesday night after seeing the Capitol desecrated. They made twisted, illogical analogies between nonviolent civil disobedience and the rioting, looting, and violence that occurred in Minneapolis, Atlanta, Kenosha, and across this country all summer.

“It reminds me of what Dr. Martin Luther King has said, that there’s two split different Americas,” Boston Celtics star Jaylen Brown told reporters. “In one America, you get killed by sleeping in your car, selling cigarettes or playing in your backyard. And then in another America, you get to storm the Capitol and no tear gas, no massive arrests, none of that.”

Brown is right. There are two different American realities. There’s the false reality world created by and for elites and their groupies. In this world, progressive elites feign concern for poor black people by championing the cause of a tiny handful of black resisting criminal suspects harmed by white police officers tasked with subduing them. The elites have no interest in the thousands of black men and boys killed annually due to random gang, street, and drug violence. Those black lives do not matter. Progressive elites live inside a social media matrix where they call the Crips and the Bloods to protect them from the police.

The rest of America lives in an alternate universe driven, at least partially, by reality, facts, and common sense. We don’t see the norms of Western Civilization as the root of all evil. We have no interest in disrupting the nuclear family. We don’t think the storming of the Capitol is analogous to the months of looting, arson, shooting, rioting, and anarchy we watched throughout 2020.

Philadelphia 76ers coach Doc Rivers, a man I greatly respect, lives in a different reality than I do. His interpretation of Wednesday’s chaos baffles me.

“No police dogs turned on people, no billy clubs hitting people. People peacefully being escorted out of the Capitol,” Rivers told reporters Wednesday. “So it shows you can peacefully disperse a crowd. It basically proves a point about a privileged life in a lot of ways. I will say it, because I don’t think a lot of people want to: Can you imagine [Wednesday], if those were all black people storming the Capitol, and what would have happened? That, to me, is a picture worth a thousand words for all of us to see, and probably something for us to reckon with again.”

What is he talking about? We’ve watched buildings burned to the ground this summer. We’ve seen “protesters” prowling the streets of Atlanta with semi-automatic weapons. We’ve seen protesters berate and spit on police officers. David Dorn, a 77-year-old, black retired cop, was assassinated. Parts of Portland have been under attack from Antifa and Black Lives Matter for months.

There have been no dogs, no billy clubs.

We don’t have to imagine how law enforcement would react to black, lawless protesters. It has aired on CNN, MSNBC, and FOX News all summer. The police have been remarkably restrained.

The media, athletes, and celebrities have treated black protesters as heroes. Politicians have taken knees and worn kente cloth to show allegiance with black protesters. Every national sportscaster and head coach has gone along with the facade that police pose a greater threat to black men than black men. We’re inundated with television commercials promoting Black Lives Matter. The NFL has celebrated criminals involved in drive-by shootings. A laundry list of media personalities have taken turns rationalizing every violent, lawless action taken by Antifa or Black Lives Matter. No one cares that George Floyd stuck a gun in a pregnant black woman’s belly or that Jacob Blake sexually assaulted a black woman. The New York Times commissioned a group of black female reporters to rewrite American history to fit the narrative of the critical race theory taught at our academic institutions.

The concerns propagandized by the ministers of black victimhood are a high priority in American society. Sinners are excommunicated from their employment. There is so much money, fame, and adulation from joining the Church of Black Victimization that white people such as Shaun King and Rachel Dolezal have disavowed their natural heritage to identify as black.

A Trump supporter? He or she is an American pariah. A racist. A coon. An idiot. A sellout. Someone to be silenced or ignored.

Trump supporters will not go away quietly or peacefully. It’s their country, too. Their concerns are legitimate. The lawmakers they chased to the basement of the Capitol sold out the American working-class man and woman.

They sold out my mom and dad and the way of life that allowed me to rise from poverty to a life of comfort and privilege. My dad was a small businessman in Indianapolis who owned a tavern that catered to hourly, union factory workers. My mother was a factory worker in Indianapolis and Kansas City.

The black people I grew up with, the ones who frequented the Masterpiece Lounge and went on bowling trips with my mom, were not global citizens. They were hardworking high school graduates who wanted their kids to move up the economic and social ladder.

They had a lot in common with Trump supporters. We can’t see that common ground now because the mainstream media and social media have us so irrationally polarized that we think skin color explains everything.

Skin color does not explain the Trump phenomenon, the passion of his followers. Trumpism is rooted in a rejection of the elitism, idolatry, and secularism pervasive in modern American culture.

In September 1620 — four hundred years ago — 102 passengers boarded the Mayflower, fleeing southern England and the elitist society constructed there. They were the original Trumpers, the dregs of European society in search of freedom of religion and expression.

Trumpism is the cry of American citizens uninterested in adopting the cultures and customs of France, China, Italy, Cuba, Venezuela, Canada, or any of the other places global elites romanticize. Trumpism is the cry of the working class who believe the Big Tech billionaires are building an America that cuts them out of the American Dream. Trumpism is the cry of Americans who value authenticity over the fraudulence of political correctness.

The price of ignoring their cries will be war, a civil war.

(Read this at Real Clear Politics)

Something tells me that Mitch and his Chinese wife and many Democrats and their Chinese interests will tell America to go to h*ll

I really don’t think that many politicians have the betterment of America in the front of their minds. They only seek power.

Joe Biden’s America comes to resemble a train to a gulag

Featured

Twenty-eight times political Democrats and media Democrats excused violence by Antifa and BLM

The Federalist listed twenty-eight times that Democrats in the media and political office excused violence by Antifa and Black Lives Matter.

Here is the introduction and the first fourteen items in their list:

After excusing and ignoring riots from leftists all year, Democrats and their allies in the media are ready to condemn riots now that the turmoil has shifted to fit their narrative.

Democrats and their allies in the media are ready to condemn riots now that the turmoil has shifted to fit their narrative.

TimeOn Wednesday, a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol building. It was an astonishing display of anarchic protest that delayed congressional certification of the Electoral College vote formally handing former Vice President Joe Biden the keys to the White House.

The scenes from the dark day of disaster demonstrations illustrated a deteriorating country, repulsed millions, and traumatized a nation still recovering from the death, despair, and disruption that came to define the dystopian months of 2020. Above all, what happened Wednesday served as a grim reminder that the institutional stress test of 2020 has followed us into 2021.

For the left, however, the chaos at the Capitol has opened an opportunity to refute the perception they own the monopoly on widespread political violence. Democrats and left-wing media elites have already capitalized on the violent outbreak, where four people died, to characterize conservatives as the creatures of chaos.

At this point, it’s undeniable that the political far-right calls home to its own Antifa-like anarchists. It is also undeniable, however, that reaction to the protests from conservative leaders roundly condemning the violence from their own side stands in remarkable contrast to the way Democrats and corporate media spent months going out of their way attempting to justify the deadly actions of militant leftists.

Not one prominent conservative pundit or politician with any significant platform was reported to have tried endorsing the mob of Trump supporters infiltrating the U.S. Capitol. To the contrary, conservatives spent months vilifying Democratic leaders for not doing enough in their own states and cities to crack down on the militant mobs of leftists taking streets under siege, normalizing the kind of political violence on track to appear routine in the nightmare 2020 decade.

It was only seven months ago that Washington D.C. was last on fire.

A trip down memory lane chronicling the left’s reaction to last year’s eruption of unrest claiming the lives of at least 30 people not only exposes the hypocrisy suffusing Democrats’ condemnation of political violence, but also illustrates a sobering reality that there’s plenty of blame to go around for the situation in which the United States now finds itself.

1. Kamala Harris Urges Followers to Cover Rioters’ Bail

Incoming Vice President Kamala Harris encouraged her supporters last summer to donate to the Minnesota Freedom Fund, which provided bail money to the militant anarchists facing charges for setting fire to Minneapolis.
HarrisTweet

2. Chris Cuomo: Who Said Protests Were Supposed To Be Peaceful?

CNN’s Chris Cuomo showcased his ignorance of the First Amendment in June when dismissing the idea that militant protests sweeping the nation in the aftermath of George Floyd’s death were illegal.

“Please, show me where it says protesters are supposed to be polite and peaceful,” Cuomo demanded.

Here’s the text from the First Amendment, emphasis added:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

3. MSNBC Reporter Describes Fiery Scene ‘Mostly A Protest’

MSNBC’s Ali Velshi stood in front of a liquor store burning behind him in Minneapolis and called the riots surrounding the camera crew “mostly a protest” that is “not, generally speaking, unruly.”

“But fires have been started,” Velshi made clear to note.

4. CNN Labels Burning Protest ‘Fiery But Mostly Peaceful’

CNN continued to parody itself in August as a second wave of mass unrest swept the country with Kenosha, Wisconsin as its focal point. After the label “fiery but mostly peaceful” had become a trolling phrase online to describe legacy media’s coverage of the summer riots, the network literally adopted the words to describe events unfolding in Kenosha while a reporter stood in front of a several burning vehicles.

5. Democratic National Convention Refuses To Condemn Riots

Democrats went through their entire online convention without condemning the epidemic of left-wing violence that engulfed the nation in the preceding months.

6. Pulitzer Prize-Winning New York Times Writer: Destroying Property Isn’t Violence

The New York Times’ architect of the “1619 Project,” Nikole Hannah-Jones, explicitly rejected the idea that destroying property fits the definition of “violence.”

“Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence,” Hannah-Jones said on CBS, to which the anchors offered no challenge.

“It’s a great point that you make, Nikole,” CBS’s Vladimir Duthiers replied.

Hannah-Jones also said it would be “an honor” for 2020 riots be deemed the “1619 Riots” despite destroying minority businesses.

7. Government-Funded PBS Reporter Denies Anarchists Are ‘Anarchists’

PBS White House Correspondent Yamiche Alcindor tried and failed to fact-check President Donald Trump in May, apparently faulting the president for not providing any evidence when calling the anarchists terrorizing cities “anarchists.”

8. CNN’s Don Lemon Compares Leftist Riots to Boston Tea Party

CNN prime time anchor Don Lemon celebrated the Floyd riots as a 21st-century version of the Boston Tea Party.

“And let’s not forget if anyone is judging this, I’m not judging this,” Lemon said as CNN cameras rolled with footage of riots in Washington D.C. and Los Angeles. “This is how this country was started.”

9. CNN’s Chris Cillizza Complains About the Term ‘Riot’

10. New York Times Columnist Finds Portland Anarchists In Piece Titled, ‘Help Me Find Trump’s ‘Anarchists’ In Portland’

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof penned an op-ed in July headlined, “Help Me Find Trump’s ‘Anarchists’ In Portland,” in which he actually appears to find them.

11. MSNBS’s Joy Reid: BLM Riots Are Really Just Undercover White Nationalists Causing Trouble

12. Huffington Post Releases Video Outlining ‘How Riots Built America’

The Huffington Post published a brief four-minute mini-documentary outlining “How Riots Built America” to draw parallels between the 2020 riots against police with periods of unrest throughout American history.

13. NBC News Allegedly Instructed Staff to Avoid the Term ‘Riot’

14. Seattle Mayor On Anarchists Taking Control of Downtown: Don’t Be Afraid of Democracy

Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan returned fire on Trump in June when the president demanded an end to the city’s partial occupation by socialist protestors.

“Seattle is fine,” Durkan wrote on Twitter despite the insurgency. “Don’t be so afraid of democracy.”

(Read the other fourteen at The Federalist)

Just so you don’t feel cheated, here are cases 29 – 33

President Trump’s 6 January 2021 speech

In contraposition to the overt calls for violence from Democrats provided above, LifeSite News provides the words of President Trump’s 6 January 2021 speech. (Note: Anti-free-speech Google removed the speech from YouTube.)

Media will not show the magnitude of this crowd, even I when I turned on today, I looked and I saw thousands of people here.

But you don’t see hundreds of thousands of people behind you because they don’t want to show that we have hundreds of thousands of people here. And I just want them to be recognized by the fake news media.

Turn your cameras, please, and show what’s really happening out here, because these people are not going to take it any longer. They’re not going to take it any longer.

Go ahead. Turn your cameras, please. Would you show they came from all over the world, actually, but they came from all over the country. I just really want to see what they do.

I just want to see how they cover it. I’ve never seen anything like it, but, it would be really great if we could be covered fairly by the media, the media is the biggest problem we have as far as I’m concerned, single biggest problem, the fake news and the big tech, big tech is now coming into their own. We beat them four years ago. We surprised them. We took them by surprise and this year they rigged it election. They rigged it like they’ve never rigged an election before. And by the way, last night, they didn’t do a bad job either, if you notice. I’m honest and I just again, I want to thank you. It’s just a great honor to have this kind of crowd and to be before you and hundreds of thousands of American patriots who are committed to the honesty of our elections and the integrity of our glorious republic. All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical left Democrats, which is what they’re doing and stolen by the fake news media.

That’s what they’ve done and what they’re doing. We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn’t happen.

You don’t concede when there’s theft involved.

Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore, and that’s what this is all about. And to use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will ‘stop the steal.’ Today, I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election. You know, I say sometimes jokingly, but there’s no joke about it. I’ve been in two elections. I won them both. And the second one, I won much bigger than the first. OK. Almost seventy five million people voted for our campaign, the most of any incumbent president by far in the history of our country, 12 million more people than four years ago.

And I was told by the real pollsters, we do have real pollsters, they know that we were going to do well and we were going to win.

Well. I was told if I went from sixty three million, which we had four years ago, to sixty six million, there was no chance of losing. Well, we didn’t go to sixty six, we went to seventy five million and they say we lost. We didn’t lose.

And by the way, does anybody believe that Joe had 80 million votes? does anybody believe that?

He had 80 million computer votes. It’s a disgrace. There’s never been anything like that. You could take Third World countries, just take a look, take third world countries. Their elections are more honest than what we’ve been going through in this country.

It’s a disgrace. It’s a disgrace.

Even when you look at last night, they’re all running around like chickens with their heads cut off with boxes and nobody knows what the hell is going on.

There’s never been anything like this. We will not let them silence your voices. We’re not going to let it happen, not going to let it happen.

And I’d love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed — the military, the Secret Service that we want to thank you and the police, law enforcement, great, you’re doing a great job — but I’d love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us.

Is that possible? Can you just let them come up, please?

And Rudy, you did a great job.

He’s got guts, you know what, he’s got guts, unlike a lot of people in the Republican Party. He’s got guts, he fights, he fights.

And I’ll tell you. Thank you very much, John. Fantastic job. I watched… that’s a tough act to follow those two.

John is one of the most brilliant lawyers in the country, and he looked at this and he said, ‘What an absolute disgrace that this can be happening to our Constitution.’ And he looked at Mike Pence, and I hope Mike is going to do the right thing.

I hope so. I hope so, because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do, all this is from the number one or certainly one of the top constitutional lawyers in our country, he has the absolute right to do it — we’re supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our constitution and protect our Constitution — states want to revoke, the state’s got defrauded, they were given false information, they voted on it.

Now they want to recertify, they want it back.

All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president, and you are the happiest people. And I actually I just spoke to Mike, I said, Mike, that doesn’t take courage.

What takes courage is to do nothing. That takes courage.

And then we’re stuck with a president who lost the election by a lot and we have to live with that for four more years.

We’re just not going to let that happen. Many of you have traveled from all across the nation to be here.

And I want to thank you for the extraordinary love — that’s what it is, there’s never been a movement like this ever, ever — for the extraordinary love for this amazing country and this amazing movement. Thank you.

By the way, this goes all the way back past the Washington Monument, you believe this? Look at this.

Unfortunately, they gave the press the prime seats, I can’t stand. But you look at that behind, I wish they’d flip those cameras and look behind you.

That is the most amazing sight. When they make a mistake, you get to see it on television. Amazing. Amazing. All the way back.

And don’t worry, we will not take the name off the Washington Monument. We will not cancel culture. You know, they wanted to get rid of the Jefferson Memorial, either take it down or just put somebody else in there. I don’t think that’s going to happen. It damn well better not.

Although with this administration, if this happens, it could happen. You’ll see some really bad things happen. They’ll knock out Lincoln, too, by the way, they’ve been taking his statue down. But then we signed a little law. You hurt our monuments, you hurt our heroes. You go to jail for 10 years and everything stopped. You notice that it stopped.

It all stopped.

And they could use Rudy back in New York City. Rudy, they could use you. Your city is going to hell. They want Rudy Giuliani back in New York. We’ll get a little younger version of Rudy. Is that OK, Rudy?

We gathered together in the heart of our nation’s capital for one very, very basic and simple reason, to save our democracy.

You know, most candidates on election evening and of course, this thing goes on so long, they still don’t have any idea what the votes are.

We still have congressional seats under review. They have no idea. They’ve totally lost control. They’ve used the pandemic as a way of defrauding the people in a proper election.

But, you know, you know, when you see this and when you see what’s happening, number one, they all say, sir, we will never let it happen again.

I said, that’s good, but what about eight weeks ago? You know, they try and get you to go.

They say, sir, in four years, you’re guaranteed. I said, I’m not interested right now. Do me a favor. Go back eight weeks. I want to go back eight weeks. Let’s go back eight weeks.

We want to go back and we want to get this right because we’re going to have somebody in there that should not be in there and our country will be destroyed and we’re not going to stand for that.

For years, Democrats have gotten away with election fraud and weak Republicans, and that’s what they are. There’s so many weak Republicans and we have great ones – Jim Jordan and some of these guys, they’re out there fighting, the House guys are fighting. But it’s incredible. Many of the Republicans I helped them get in. I helped them get elected. I helped Mitch get elected.

I helped… I could name twenty four of them, let’s say. I won’t bore you with it. And then all of a sudden you have something like this and it’s like, oh, gee, maybe I’ll talk to the president sometime later.

No, it’s amazing, they’re weak Republicans, they’re pathetic Republicans. And that’s what happens.

If this happened to the Democrats, there’d be hell all over the country going on.

There’d be hell all over the country. But just remember this: you’re stronger, you’re smarter, you’ve got more going than anybody. And they try and demean everybody having to do with us. And you’re the real people. You’re the people that built this nation.

You’re not the people that tore down our nation.

The weak Republicans, and that’s it, I really believe it, I think I’m going to use the term the weak Republicans, you got a lot of them and you got a lot of great ones, but you’ve got a lot of weak ones. They’ve turned a blind eye even as Democrats enacted policies that chipped away our jobs, weakened our military, threw open our borders and put America last. Did you see the other day where Joe Biden said, ‘I want to get rid of the America first policy?’ What’s that all about? Get rid of? How do you say I want to get rid of America first?

Even if you’re going to do it, don’t talk about it. Right?

Unbelievable what we have to go through.

What we have to go through and you have to get your people to fight, and if they don’t fight, we have to ‘primary’ the hell out of the ones that don’t fight. You primary them.

We’re going to, we’re going to let you know who they are.

I can already tell you, frankly. But this year, using the pretext of the China virus and the scam of mail-in ballots, Democrats attempted the most brazen and outrageous election theft — and there’s never been anything like this — so, pure theft in American history. Everybody knows it, that election, our election was over at 10 o’clock in the evening. We’re leading Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes. And then late in the evening or early in the morning, boom, these explosions of bullshit.

And all of a sudden, all of a sudden, it started to happen.

Don’t forget when Romney got beat, Romney, hey, did you see his I wonder if he enjoyed his flight in last night, but when Romney got beaten, you know, he stands up like, you’re more typical, ‘well, I’d like to congratulate the victor.’ The victor? Who is the victor, Mitt? I’d like to congratulate… They don’t go and look at the facts. Now, I don’t know. He got he got slaughtered. Probably, maybe, it was OK. Maybe it was…that’s what happened. But we look at the facts and our election was so corrupt that in the history of this country, we’ve never seen anything like it.

You can go all the way back. You know, America is blessed with elections. All over the world, they talk about our elections. You know what the world says about us now. They said we don’t have free and fair elections. And you know what else? We don’t have a free and fair press.

Our media is not free. It’s not fair. It suppresses thought. It suppresses speech. And it’s become the enemy of the people. It’s become the enemy of the people. It’s the biggest problem we have in this country.

No third world countries would even attempt to do what we caught them doing. And you’ll hear about that in just a few minutes. Republicans are constantly fighting like a boxer with his hands tied behind his back. It’s like a boxer. And we want to be so nice. We want to be so respectful of everybody, including bad people.

And we’re going to have to fight much harder and Mike Pence is going to have to come through for us, and if he doesn’t, that will be a sad day for our country because you’re sworn to uphold our Constitution.

Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy.

And after this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you. We’re going to walk down. We’re going to walk down anyone you want. But I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the Capitol.

And we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen-and-women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them, because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong.

We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today, we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections, but whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time, far longer than this four year period. We’ve set it on a much straighter course, a much…and I thought, you know, four more years. I thought it would be easy. We created the greatest economy in history. We rebuilt our military. We get you the biggest tax cuts in history, right? We got you the biggest regulation cuts.

There’s no president, whether it’s four years, eight years or in one case, more, got anywhere near the regulation cuts. [It] used to take 20 years to get a highway approved. Now we’re down to two. I want to get it down to one, but we’re down to two.

And it may get rejected for environmental or safety reasons, but we got it down to safety. We created Space Force. Look at what we did.

Our military has been totally rebuilt. So we create Space Force, which by and of itself is a major achievement for an administration. And with us, it’s one of so many different things. Right to try everybody know about, right to try. We did things that nobody ever thought possible. We took care of our vets, our vets. The VA now has the highest rating, ninety one percent, the highest rating that it’s had from the beginning.

Ninety one percent approval rating. Always you watch the VA, it was on television every night, people living in a horrible, horrible manner. We got that done. We got accountability done. We got it so that now in the VA, you don’t have to wait for four weeks, six weeks, eight weeks, four months to see a doctor. If you can’t get a doctor, you go outside. You get the doctor, you have them taken care of, and we pay the doctor. And we’ve not only made life wonderful for so many people, we’ve saved tremendous amounts of money, far secondarily, but we’ve saved a lot of money and now we have the right to fire bad people in the VA. We had 9000 people that treated our veterans horribly. In primetime, they would not have treated our veterans badly, but they treated our veterans horribly and we have what’s called the VA Accountability Act. And the accountability says, if we see somebody in there that doesn’t treat our vets well or they steal, they rob, they do things badly, we say, Joe, you’re fired. Get out of here. Before you couldn’t do that. You couldn’t do that before. So we’ve taken care of things. We’ve done things like nobody’s ever thought possible.

And that’s part of the reason that many people don’t like us because we’ve done too much, but we’ve done it quickly. And we were going to sit home and watch a big victory and everybody had us down for a victory. It was going to be great. And now we’re out here fighting. I said to somebody I was going to take a few days and relax after our big electoral victory. Ten o’clock it was over. But I was going to take a few days, and I can say this: Since our election, I believe — which was such a catastrophe when I watch and even these guys knew what happened, they know what happened. They’re saying, wow, Pennsylvania is insurmountable. Wow. Wisconsin, look at the big leads we had, right — even though the press said we could lose Wisconsin by 17 points, even though the press said Ohio’s going to be close, we set a record.

Florida is going to be close. We set a record. Texas is going to be close.

Texas is going to be close, we set a record and we set our record with Hispanic, with the black community, we set a record with everybody. Today we see a very important event, though, because right over there, right there, we see the event going to take place and I’m going to be watching because history is going to be made. We’re going to see whether or not we have great and courageous leaders or whether or not we have leaders that should be ashamed of themselves throughout history, throughout eternity. They’ll be ashamed. And you know what? If they do the wrong thing, we should never, ever forget that they did, never forget.

We should never, ever forget.

With only three of the seven states in question, we win the presidency of the United States. And by the way, it’s much more important today than it was twenty four hours ago because, and don’t…I spoke to David Perdue, what a great person, and Kelly Loeffler, two great people. But it was a setup and, you know, I said, we have no backline anymore. The only backline, the only line of demarcation, the only line that we have is the veto of the President of the United States.

So this is now what we’re doing, a far more important election than it was two days ago.

I want to thank the more than one hundred and forty members of the House – those are warriors, they’re over there working like you’ve never seen before. Studying, talking. Actually going all the way back, studying the roots of the Constitution because they know we have the right to send the bad vote that was illegally gotten, they gave these people bad things to vote for and they voted because what did they know? And then when they found out a few weeks later, again, it took them four years to devise this screed. And the only unhappy person in the United States, single most unhappy is Hillary Clinton, because she said, why didn’t you do this for me four years ago?

Why didn’t you do this for me four years ago? Change the votes, 10000 in Michigan.

You could have changed the whole thing, but she’s not too happy, you notice you don’t see her anymore. What happened? Where’s Hillary? Where is she?

But I want to thank all of those congressmen-and-women. I also want to thank our 13 most courageous members of the US Senate, Senator Ted Cruz, Senator Ron Johnson, Senator Josh Hawley, Kelly Loeffler and Kelly Loeffler, I’ll tell you, she has been, she’s been so great, she’s worked so hard, so let’s give her and David a little special hand because it was rigged against him. Let’s give her and David, Kelly Loeffler, David Perdue.

They fought a good race. They never had a shot. That equipment should never have been allowed to be used.

And I was telling these people, don’t let them use this stuff. Marsha Blackburn, terrific person, Mike Braun, Indiana, Steve Daines, great guy, Bill Hagerty, John Kennedy, James Lankford, Cynthia Lummis, Tommy Tuberville, to the coach, and Roger Marshall, we want to thank them, Senators who have stepped up. We want to thank them.

I actually think, though, it takes, again, more courage not to step up, and I think a lot of those people are going to find that out and you better start looking at your leadership because your leadership has led you down the tubes.

You know, [they said] ‘we don’t want to give two thousand dollars to people.’

We want to give them six hundred dollars.’ Oh, great. How does that play politically? Pretty good? and this has nothing to do with politics.

But how does it play politically? China destroyed these people, we didn’t destroy. China destroyed them, totally destroyed them. ‘We want to give them six hundred dollars.’ And they just wouldn’t change. I said give them two thousand dollars, we’ll pay it back, will pay it back fast. You already owe twenty six trillion. Give them a couple of bucks, let them live.

Give them a couple of bucks and some of the people here disagree with me on that.

But I just say, look, you got to let people live. And how does that play, though? OK, number one, it’s the right thing to do, but how does that play politically?

I think it’s the primary reason, one of the primary reasons, the other was just pure cheating, that was the primary, super primary, reason. But you can’t do that. Got use your head.

As you know, the media has constantly asserted the outrageous lie that there was no evidence of widespread fraud. You ever see these people? ‘While there is no evidence of fraud’… Oh, really. I’m going to read you pages. I hope you don’t get bored listening to it. Promise? Don’t get bored listening to it. All those hundreds of thousands of people back there. Move them up, please. All these people, don’t get bored, don’t get angry at me because you’re going to get bored because it’s so much, the American people do not believe the corrupt fake news anymore. They have ruined their reputation. But, you know, it used to be that they’d argue with me, I’d fight. So I’d fight, they’d fight, I’d fight, they’d fight, bop, bop. You’d believe me, you’d believe them, somebody comes out, you know, they had their point of view. I had my point of view. But you’d have an argument. Now, what they do is they go silent. It’s called suppression, and that’s what happens in a communist country. That’s what they do, they suppress. You don’t fight with them anymore unless it’s a bad story. They have a little bad story about me. They make it ten times worse and it’s a major headline. But Hunter Biden, they don’t talk about him. What happened to Hunter? Where is Hunter? Where is Hunter? They don’t talk about him.

Now watch, all the sets will go off. Well, they can’t do that because they get good ratings. The ratings are too good. Now, where’s Hunter? You know, and how come Joe is allowed to give a billion dollars of money to get rid of the prosecutor in Ukraine? How does that happen? I’d ask you that question. How does that happen? Can you imagine if I said that? If I said that it would be a whole different ball game? And how come Hunter gets three and a half million dollars from the mayor of Moscow’s wife? And gets, hundreds of thousands of dollars to sit on an energy board, even though he admits he has no knowledge of energy. And millions of dollars up front and how come they go into China and they leave with billions of dollars to manage? ‘Have you managed money before?’ ‘No, I haven’t.’ ‘Oh, that’s good. Here’s about three billion.’ No, they don’t talk about that. No, we have a corrupt media, they’ve gone silent, they’ve gone dead. I now realize how good it was if you go back 10 years, I realize how good, even though I didn’t necessarily love them, I realized how good it was, it was like a cleansing motion, right? But we don’t have that anymore. We don’t have a fair media anymore. It’s suppression. And you have to be very careful with that. And they’ve lost all credibility in this country.

We will not be intimidated into accepting the hoaxes and the lies that we’ve been forced to believe. Over the past several weeks we’ve amassed overwhelming evidence about a fake election. This is the presidential election. Last night was a little bit better because of the fact that we had a lot of eyes watching one specific state, but they cheated like hell anyway. You have one of the dumbest governors in the United States. And, you know, when I endorsed him — I didn’t know this guy— at the request of David Perdue, he said, he’s a friend of mine is running for governor. ‘What’s his name?’ And you know, the rest. He was in fourth place. Fifth place, I don’t know. He was way [down], he was doing poorly. I endorsed him. He went like a rocket ship and he won.

And then I had to beat Stacey Abrams with this guy, Brian Kemp. I had to beat Stacey Abrams and I had to beat Oprah. Used to be a friend of mine. You know, I was on her last show her last week. She picked the five outstanding people. I don’t think she thinks that anymore. Once I ran for president, I didn’t notice there were too many calls coming in from Oprah. Believe it or not, she used to like me, but I was one of the five outstanding people. And I had a campaign against Michelle Obama and Barack Hussein Obama against Stacy and I had Brian Kemp — he weighs one hundred and thirty pounds — he said he played offensive line and football. I’m trying to figure that out. I’m still trying to figure that out. He said the other night ‘I was an offensive lineman.’ I’m saying really, that must have been a very small team. But I look at that and I look at what’s happened, and he turned out to be a disaster.

This stuff happens, you know. Look, I’m not happy with the Supreme Court. They love to rule against me. I picked three people.

I fought like hell for them, one in particular, I fought. They all said, sir, cut him loose, he’s killing the senators, you know, very loyal senators. They’re very loyal people. Sir, cut him loose. He’s killing us, Sir. Cut him loose, Sir. I must have gotten half of the senators.

I said, no, I can’t do that. It’s unfair to him and it’s unfair to the family. He didn’t do anything wrong. They made up stories, they’re all made up stories, he didn’t do anything wrong. Cut him loose, Sir. I said, no, I won’t do that. We got him through. And you know what, they couldn’t give a damn, they couldn’t give a damn. Let him rule the right way. But it almost seems that they’re all going out of their way to hurt all of us and to hurt our country, to hurt our country.

You know, I read a story in one of the newspapers recently how I control the three Supreme Court justices.

I control them. They’re puppets. I read it about Bill Barr that he’s my personal attorney, that he’ll do anything for me. And I said, you know, it really is genius because what they do is that…and it makes it really impossible for them to ever give you a victory because all of a sudden, Bill Barr changed, if you hadn’t noticed. I like Bill Barr, but he changed because he didn’t want to be considered my personal attorney. And the Supreme Court, they rule against me so much. You know why? Because the story is — I haven’t spoken to any of them, any since virtually they got in — but the story is that they’re my puppet, right?

That they’re puppets. And now the only way they can get out of that, because they hate that it’s not good on the social circuit, that the only way they get out is to rule against Trump.

So let’s rule against Trump and they do that. So I want to congratulate them. But it shows you the media’s genius. In fact, probably if I was the media, I’d do it the same way. I hate to say it, but we got to get them straightened out. Today for the sake of our democracy, for the sake of our Constitution and for the sake of our children, we lay out the case for the entire world to hear.

Do you want to hear it? In every single swing state, local officials, state officials, almost all Democrats made illegal and unconstitutional changes to election procedures without the mandated approvals by the state legislatures. That these changes pave the way for fraud on a scale never seen before, and I think we can go a long way outside of our country when I say that.

So just in a nutshell, you can’t make a change on voting for a federal election unless the state legislature approves it. No judge can do it. Nobody can do it. Only a legislature. So as an example, in Pennsylvania or whatever, you have a Republican legislature, you have a Democrat mayor, and you have a lot of Democrats all over the place. They go to the legislature. The legislature laughs at them, says we’re not going to do that. They say thank you very much. And they go and make the changes themselves. They do it anyway. And that’s totally illegal. That’s totally illegal. You can’t do that.

In Pennsylvania, the Democrat secretary of state and the Democrat state Supreme Court justices illegally abolished the signature verification requirements just 11 days prior to the election. So think of what they did. No longer is there signature verification. Oh, that’s OK. We want voter ID, by the way, but no longer is there signature verification. 11 days before the election, they say we don’t want it. You know why they don’t want it? Because they want to cheat. That’s the only reason. Who would even think of that? We don’t want to verify a signature? There were over two hundred and five thousand more ballots counted in Pennsylvania. Now, think of this. You had two hundred and five thousand more ballots, then you had voters. That means you had two…where did they come from? You know, where they came from, somebody’s imagination, whatever they needed. So in Pennsylvania, you had two hundred and five thousand more votes than you had voters. And the number is actually much greater than that now. That was as of a week ago and this is a mathematical impossibility unless you want to say it’s a total fraud. So Pennsylvania was defrauded. Over 8000 ballots in Pennsylvania were cast by people whose names and dates of birth match individuals who died in 2020 and prior to the election. Think of that. Dead people. Lots of dead people, thousands and some dead people actually requested an application. That bothers me even more. Not only are they voting, they want an application to vote. One of them was twenty nine years ago died. It’s incredible. Over 14000 ballots were cast by out-of-state voters, so these are voters that don’t live in the state. And by the way, these numbers are what they call outcome determinative, meaning these numbers far surpass, I lost by a little bit. These numbers are massive, massive. More than 10000 votes in Pennsylvania were illegally counted even though they were received after Election Day.

In other words, they were received after Election Day. Let’s count them anyway. And what they did in many cases is they did fraud. They took the date and they moved it back so that it no longer is after Election Day.

And more than 60000 ballots in Pennsylvania were reported received back. They got back before they were ever supposedly mailed out. In other words, you got the ballot back before you mailed it.

Which is also logically and logistically impossible, right? Think of that one.

You got the ballot back. Let’s send the ballots so they’ve already been so. But we got the ballot back before they were sent. I don’t think that’s too good, right. Twenty five thousand ballots in Pennsylvania were requested by nursing home residents, all in a single giant batch, not legal, indicating an enormous illegal ballot harvesting operation. You’re allowed to do. It’s against the law. The day before the election, the state of Pennsylvania reported the number of absentee ballots that had been set out. Yet this number was suddenly and drastically increased by four hundred thousand people.

It was increased. Nobody knows where it came from by four hundred thousand ballots, one day after the election. It remains totally unexplained. They said, well, we can’t figure that. Now, that’s many, many times what it would take to overthrow the state. Just that what element.

Four hundred thousand ballots appeared from nowhere right after the election. By the way, Pennsylvania has now seen all of this. They didn’t know because it was so quick.

They had a vote. They voted, but now they see all this stuff. It’s all come to light. Doesn’t happen that fast.

And they want to recertify their votes. They want to recertify. But the only way that can happen is if Mike Pence agrees to send it back.

Mike Pence has to agree to send it back.

And many people in Congress want to send it back. And think of what you’re doing. Let’s say you don’t do it, somebody says, well, we have to obey the Constitution and you are because you’re protecting our country and you’re protecting the Constitution. So you are. But think of what happens. Let’s say they’re stiffs and they’re stupid people and they say, well, we really have no choice.

Even though Pennsylvania and other states want to redo their votes, they want to see the numbers, they already have the numbers, go very quickly and they want to redo. Their legislature, because many of these votes were taken, as I said, because it wasn’t approved by the legislature, you know. That in itself is like…and then you have the scam and that’s all of the things that we’re talking about. But think of this. If you don’t do that, that means you will have a president of the United States for four years with his wonderful son. You will have a president who lost all of these states or you will have a president, to put it another way, who was voted on by a bunch of stupid people who lost all of these states. You will have an illegitimate president, that’s what you’ll have, and we can’t let that happen.

These are the facts that you won’t hear from the fake news media. It’s all part of the suppression effort. They don’t want to talk about it. They don’t want to talk about it. In fact, when I started talking about that, I guarantee you a lot of the television sets and a lot of those cameras went off and that’s a lot of cameras back there, but a lot of them went off. But these are the things you don’t hear about. You don’t hear what you just heard. I’m going to go over a few more states, but you don’t hear it by the people who want to deceive you and demoralize you and control you — big tech media — just like the suppression polls that said we’re going to lose Wisconsin by 17 points.

Well, we won Wisconsin. They don’t have it that way because I lost by just a little sliver. But they had me down the day before — Washington Post ABC poll — down 17 points. I called up a real pollster. I said, what is that? Sir, that’s called a suppression poll. I think you’re going to win Wisconsin, Sir. I said, but what are they? Make it four or five points because then people vote. But when you’re down 17, they say, hey, I’m not going to waste my time. I love the president, but there’s no way.

Despite that, despite that, we won Wisconsin. You’ll see. But that’s called suppression, because a lot of people, when they see that, it’s very interesting. This pollster said, Sir, if you’re down three, four or five people vote. When you go down 17, they say, let’s save, let’s go and have dinner and let’s watch the presidential defeat tonight on television, darling. And just like the radical left tries to blacklist you on social media, every time I put out a tweet, even if it’s totally correct, totally correct, I get a flag. I get a flag and they also don’t let you get out. You know, on Twitter, it’s very hard to come on to my account. It’s very hard to get out a message. They don’t let the message get out nearly like they should. But I’ve had many people say, I can’t get on your Twitter. I don’t care about Twitter. Twitter’s bad news. They’re all bad news. But you know what? If you want to get out a message and if you want to go through a big tech social media, they are really, if you’re a conservative, if you’re a Republican, if you have a big voice, I guess they call it a shadowban, right? Shadowban, they shadowban you.

And it should be illegal. I’ve been telling these Republicans, get rid of Section 230. And for some reason, Mitch and the group, they don’t want to put it in there and they don’t realize that that’s going to be the end of the Republican Party as we know it, but it’s never going to be the end of us, never. Let them get out.

Let the weak ones get out. This is a time for strength. They also want to indoctrinate your children in school by teaching them things that aren’t so, they want to indoctrinate your children. It’s all part of the comprehensive assault on our democracy. And the American people are finally standing up and saying, no. This crowd is again a testament to it. I did no advertising. I did nothing. You do have some groups that are big supporters. I want to thank that, Amy and everybody. We have some incredible supporters. Incredible. But we didn’t do anything. This just happened. Two months ago, we had a massive crowd come down to Washington. I said, what are they there for? Sir, they’re there for you. We have nothing to do with it. These groups they’re forming all over the United States. And we got to remember, in a year from now, you’re going to start working on Congress and we got to get rid of the weak congresspeople, the ones that aren’t any good, the Liz Cheney’s of the world. We got to get rid of them.

We got to get rid.

You know, she never wants a soldier brought home. Twenty, I brought a lot of our soldiers home, I don’t know, somewhat like it. They’re in countries that nobody even knows the name. Nobody knows where they are. They’re dying. They’re great, but they’re dying. They’re losing their arms, their legs, their face. I brought them back home, largely back home. Afghanistan, Iraq. Remember I used to say in the old days, don’t go in Iraq, but if you go in, keep the oil. We didn’t keep the oil. So stupid, so stupid. These people. And Iraq has billions and billions of dollars now in the bank.

And what did we do? We got nothing. We never get…but we do actually. We kept the oil here. We did good. We got rid of the ISIS caliphate. We got rid of plenty of different things that everybody knows and the rebuilding of our military in three years.

People said it couldn’t be done and it was all made in the USA, all made in the USA. Best equipment in the world. In Wisconsin, corrupt Democrat-run cities deployed more than five hundred illegal, unmanned, unsecured drop boxes, which collected a minimum of ninety one thousand unlawful votes, it was razor-thin the loss. One thing alone is much more than we would need. But there are many things.

They have these lock boxes and you know, that pick them up and they disappear for two days. People would say, where’s that box that disappeared? Nobody even knew where the hell it was. In addition, over one hundred and seventy thousand absentee votes were counted in Wisconsin without a valid absentee ballot application. So they had a vote, but they had no application. And that’s illegal in Wisconsin, meaning those votes were blatantly done in opposition to state law. And they came one hundred percent from Democrat areas such as Milwaukee, and Madison, one hundred percent. In Madison, seventeen thousand votes were deposited in so-called human drop boxes, you know what that is, right, where operatives stuffed thousands of unsecured ballots into duffel bags on park benches across the city in complete defiance of cease and desist letters from state legislature.

Your state legislature said, don’t do it. They’re the only ones that can approve it.

They gave tens of thousands of votes. They came in and duffel bags. Where the hell did they come from? According to eyewitness testimony, Postal Service workers in Wisconsin were also instructed to illegally backdate approximately 100000 ballots. The margin of difference in Wisconsin was less than 20 thousand votes, each one of these things alone wins us the state, great state. We love the state. We won the state. In Georgia, your secretary of state, who I can’t believe this guy is a Republican, he loves recording telephone conversations, you know, that was a…I thought it was a great conversation personally, so did a lot of others, people loved that conversation because it says what’s going on. These people are crooked. They’re one hundred percent, in my opinion, one of the most corrupt, between your governor and your secretary of state, and now you have it again last night. Just take a look at what happened. What a mess. And the Democrat Party operatives entered into an illegal and unconstitutional settlement agreement that drastically weakened signature verification and other election security procedures.

Stacey Abrams. She took them to lunch. And I beat her two years ago with a bad candidate, Brian Kemp. But they took…the Democrats, took the Republicans to lunch because the secretary of state had no clue what the hell was happening, unless he did have a clue.

That’s interesting. Maybe he was with the other side, but we’ve been trying to get verifications of signatures in Fulton County.

They won’t let us do it. The only reason they won’t is because we’ll find things in the hundreds of thousands. Why wouldn’t they let us verify signatures in Fulton County, which is known for being very corrupt? They won’t do it. They go to some other county where you would live. I said that’s not the problem. The problem is Fulton County, home of Stacey Abrams.

She did a good job. I congratulate her. But it was done in such a way that we can’t let this stuff happen. We won’t have a country if it happens.

As a result, Georgia’s absentee ballot rejection rate was more than 10 times lower than previous levels because the criteria was so off. Forty eight counties in Georgia with thousands and thousands of votes, rejected zero ballots. There wasn’t one ballot. In other words, in a year in which more mail-in ballots were sent than ever before and more people were voting by mail for the first time, the rejection rate was drastically lower than it had ever been before. The only way this can be explained is if tens of thousands of illegitimate votes were added to the tally.

That’s the only way you could explain it. By the way, you’re talking about tens of thousands.

If Georgia had merely rejected the same number of unlawful ballots as in other years, they should have been approximately forty five thousand ballots rejected, far more than what we needed to win just over 11000.

They should find those votes. They should absolutely find that. Just over 11000 votes, that’s all we need. They defrauded us out of a win in Georgia and we’re not going to forget it.

There’s only one reason the Democrats could possibly want to eliminate signature matching oppose voter I.D. and stop citizenship confirmation. Are you a citizen? You’re not allowed to ask that question. Because they want to steal the election. The radical left knows exactly what they’re doing, they’re ruthless, and it’s time that somebody did something about it.

And Mike Pence, I hope you’re going to stand up for the good of our Constitution and for the good of our country. And if you’re not, I’m going to be very disappointed in you, I will tell you right now, I’m not hearing good stories.

In Fulton County, Republican poll watchers rejected, in some cases physically, from the room under the false pretense of a pipe burst — water main burst, everybody leave — which we now know was a total lie. Then election officials pulled boxes, Democrats and suitcases of ballots out from under a table — you all saw it on television, totally fraudulent — and illegally scanned them for nearly two hours, totally unsupervised, tens of thousands of votes. This act coincided with a mysterious vote dump of up to one hundred thousand votes for Joe Biden, almost none for Trump. Oh, that sounds fair. That was at 1:34 a.m. The Georgia secretary of state and pathetic governor of Georgia average…although he says I’m a great president, you know, I sort of maybe have to change, he said the other day. Yes, I do. I disagree with the president, but he’s been a great president. Oh, good, thanks, thank you very much. Because of him and others, yeah, Brian, can’t vote him the hell out of office, please. Well, his rates are so low, you know, his approval rating now, I think it just reached a record low. They’ve rejected five separate appeals for an independent and comprehensive audit of signatures in Fulton County. Even without an audit, the number of fraudulent ballots that we’ve identified across the state is staggering. Over ten thousand three hundred ballots in Georgia were cast by individuals whose names and dates of birth matched Georgia residents who died in 2020 and prior to the election. More than two thousand five hundred ballots were cast by individuals whose names and dates of birth match incarcerated felons in Georgia prison, people who are not allowed to vote. More than four thousand five hundred illegal ballots were cast by individuals who do not appear on the state’s own voter rolls. Over eighteen thousand illegal ballots were cast by individuals who registered to vote using an address listed as vacant, according to the Postal Service. At least eighty eight thousand ballots in Georgia were cast by people whose registrations were illegally backdated. Sixty six thousand votes, each one of these is far more than we need.

Sixty six thousand votes in Georgia were cast by individuals under the legal voting age, and at least 15000 thousand ballots were cast by individuals who moved out of the state prior to the November 3rd election. They say they moved right back. They move right back. Oh, they moved out. They moved right back. OK, they missed Georgia’s that much. I do. I love Georgia, but it’s a corrupt system.

Despite all of this, the margin in Georgia is only eleven thousand seven hundred and seventy nine votes. Each and every one of these issues is enough to give us a victory in Georgia, a big, beautiful victory. Make no mistake, this election was stolen from you, from me and from the country, and not a single swing state has conducted a comprehensive audit to remove the illegal ballots. This should absolutely occur in every single contested state before the election is certified. In the state of Arizona, over thirty six thousand ballots were illegally cast by non-citizens. 2000 ballots were returned with no address. More than twenty two thousand ballots were returned before they were ever supposedly mailed out. They returned, but we haven’t mailed them yet. Eleven thousand six hundred more ballots and votes were counted more than there were actual voters. You see that? So you have more votes again than you have voters. One hundred and fifty thousand people registered in Maricopa County after the registration deadline. One hundred and three thousand ballots in the county were sent for electronic adjudication with no Republican observers. In Clark County, Nevada, the accuracy settings on signature verification machines were purposely lowered before they were used to count over one hundred and thirty thousand ballots. If you sign your name as Santa Claus, it would go through.

There were also more than forty two thousand double votes in Nevada, over one hundred and fifty thousand people were hurt so badly by what took place, and fifteen hundred ballots were cast by individuals whose names and dates of birth match Nevada residents who died in 2020 prior to the November 3rd election. More than a thousand votes were cast by individuals who had no address and probably didn’t live there. The margin in Nevada is down at a very low number. Any of these things would have taken care of the situation. We would have won Nevada also. Every one of these were going over. We win. In Michigan quickly, the secretary of state, a real great one, flooded the state with unsolicited mail-in ballot applications sent to every person on the rolls in direct violation of state law. More than seventeen thousand Michigan ballots were cast by individuals whose names and dates of birth match people who were deceased.

In Wayne County, that’s a great one, that’s Detroit, one hundred and seventy four thousand ballots were counted without being tied to an actual registered voter. Nobody knows where they came from. Also in Wayne County, poll watchers observed canvassers re-scanning batches of ballots over and over again, up to three or four or five times. In Detroit, turnout was 139 percent of registered voters. Think of that. So you had 139 percent of the people in Detroit voting. This is in Michigan. Detroit, Michigan. A career employee of the Detroit, city of Detroit, testified under penalty of perjury that she witnessed city workers coaching voters to vote straight Democrat while accompanying them to watch who they voted for. When a Republican came in, they wouldn’t talk to them. The same worker was instructed not to ask for any voter I.D. and not to attempt to validate any signatures if they were Democrats. She also [was] told to illegally and was told [to] backdate ballots received after the deadline and reports that thousands and thousands of ballots were improperly backdated. That’s Michigan. Four witnesses have testified under penalty of perjury that after officials in Detroit announced the last votes had been counted, tens of thousands of additional ballots arrived without required envelopes. Every single one was for a Democrat. I got no votes. At 6:31 a.m. in the early morning hours after voting had ended, Michigan suddenly reported one hundred and forty seven thousand votes. An astounding 94 percent went to Joe Biden, who campaigned brilliantly from his basement. Only a couple of percentage points went to Trump. Such gigantic and one-sided vote dumps were only observed in a few swing states and they were observed in the states where it was necessary. You know, it’s interesting, President Obama beat Biden in every state other than the swing states where Biden killed them, but the swing states were the ones that mattered. They’re always just enough to push Joe Biden barely into the lead. We were ahead by a lot and within a number of hours we were losing by a little.

In addition, there is the highly troubling matter of Dominion voting systems. In one Michigan county alone, 6000 votes were switched from Trump to Biden, and the same systems are used in the majority of states in our country. Senator William Ligon, a great gentleman, chairman of Georgia’s Senate Judiciary Subcommittee, Senator Ligon, highly respected on elections, has written a letter describing his concerns with Dominion in Georgia. He wrote, and I quote, ‘The Dominion voting machines employed in Fulton County had an astronomical and astounding 93.67 percent error rate’ — it’s only wrong 93 percent of the time — ‘in the scanning of ballots requiring a review panel to adjudicate or determine the voter’s interest in over one hundred and six thousand ballots out of a total of one hundred and thirty thousand.’ Think of it: you go in and you vote and then they tell people who you’re supposed to be voting for, they make up whatever they want. Nobody’s ever even heard. They adjudicate your vote. They say, well, we don’t think Trump wants to vote for Trump. We think he wants to vote for Biden. Put it down for Biden. The national average for such an error rate is far less than one percent, and yet you’re at 93 percent. ‘The source of this astronomical error rate must be identified to determine if these machines were set up or destroyed to allow for a third party to disregard the actual ballot cast by the registered voter.’ The letter continues:

‘There is clear evidence that tens of thousands of votes were switched from President Trump to former Vice President Biden in several counties in Georgia. For example, in Bibb County, President Trump was reported to have twenty nine thousand three hundred ninety one votes at 9:11 p.m. Eastern Time, while simultaneously Vice President Joe Biden was reported to have seventeen thousand two thirteen. Minutes later’ — just minutes — ‘at the next update, these vote numbers switched with President Trump going way down to seventeen thousand and Biden going way up to twenty nine thousand three ninety one.’ — and that was very quick — ‘a twelve thousand vote switch, all in Mr Biden’s favor.’

So, I mean, I could go on and on about this fraud that took place in every state. And all of these legislatures want this back.

I don’t want to do it to you because I love you and it’s freezing out here. But I could just go on forever. I can tell you this. So when you hear, when you hear, while there is no evidence to prove any wrongdoing, this is the most fraudulent thing anybody said. This is a criminal enterprise. This is a criminal enterprise, and the press will say, and I’m sure they won’t put any of that on that because that’s not good. And, did you ever see, ‘while there is no evidence to back President Trump’s assertion’ – I could go on for another hour reading this stuff to you and telling you about it. There’s never been anything like it. Think about it. Detroit had more votes than it had voters. Pennsylvania had two hundred and five thousand more votes than it had more. But you don’t have to go any…between that, I think that’s almost better than dead people, if you think, right? More votes than they had voters, and many other states also. It’s a disgrace that the United States of America, tens of millions of people, are allowed to go vote without so much as even showing identification. In no state is there any question or effort made to verify the identity, citizenship, residency or eligibility of the votes cast.

The Republicans have to get tougher. You’re not going to have a Republican Party if you don’t get tougher.

They want to play so straight. They want to play so ‘Sir, yes, the United States the Constitution doesn’t allow me to send them back to the States.’ Well, I say yes, it does, because the Constitution says you have to protect our country and you have to protect our Constitution and you can’t vote on fraud.

And fraud breaks up everything, doesn’t it?

When you catch somebody in a fraud, you’re allowed to go by very different rules. So I hope Mike has the courage to do what he has to do, and I hope he does listen to the rhinos and the stupid people that he’s listening to. It is also widely understood that the voter rolls are crammed full of non-citizens, felons and people who have moved out of state and individuals who are otherwise ineligible to vote. Yet Democrats oppose every effort to clean up their voter rolls. They don’t want to clean them up. They’re loaded. And how many people here know other people that when the hundreds of thousands and then millions of ballots got sent out, got three, four, five, six, and I heard one who got seven ballots? And then they say, ‘you didn’t quite make it, Sir.’

Ah, we won in a landslide. This was a landslide.

They said it’s not American to challenge the election. This is the most corrupt election in the history maybe of the world. You know, you could go third world countries, but I don’t think they had hundreds of thousands of votes, and they don’t have voters for them, I mean, no matter where you go, nobody would think this, in fact it’s so egregious, it’s so bad that a lot of people don’t even believe it. It’s so crazy that people don’t even believe it. ‘It can’t be true.’ So they don’t believe it. This is not just a matter of domestic politics. This is a matter of national security. So today, in addition to challenging the certification of the election, I’m calling on Congress and the state legislatures to quickly pass sweeping election reforms and you better do it before we have no country left.

Today is not the end. It’s just the beginning. With your help over the last four years, we built the greatest political movement in the history of our country and nobody even challenges that. I say that over and over. And I never get challenged by the fake news, and they challenge almost everything we say. But our fight against the big donors, big media, big tech and others is just getting started. This is the greatest in history. There’s never been a movement like that. You look back there all the way to the Washington Monument, it’s hard to believe. We must stop the steal and then we must ensure that such outrageous election fraud never happens again, can never be allowed to happen again. But we’re going forward. We’ll take care of going forward. We got to take care of going back. Don’t let them talk, ‘OK, well, we promise.’ I’ve had a lot of people, ‘Sir, you’re at 96 percent for four years.’

I said I’m not interested right now. I’m interested in right there. With your help, we will finally pass powerful requirements for voter ID. You need an ID to cash a check. You need an ID to go to a bank, to buy alcohol, to drive a car. Every person should need to show an ID in order to cast your most important thing, a vote.

We will also require proof of American citizenship in order to vote in American elections.

We just had a good victory in court on that one, actually. We will ban ballot harvesting and prohibit the use of unsecured drop boxes to commit rampant fraud. These drop boxes are fraudulent. They disappear and then all of a sudden they show up, it’s fraudulent. We will stop the practice of universal unsolicited mail-in balloting. We will clean up the voter rolls that ensure that every single person who cast a vote is a citizen of our country, a resident of the state in which they vote and their vote is cast in a lawful and honest manner. We will restore the vital civic tradition of in-person voting on Election Day so that voters can be fully informed when they make their choice.

We will finally hold big tech accountable. And if these people had courage and guts, they would get rid of Section 230, something that no other company, no other person in America, in the world, has.

All of these tech monopolies are going to abuse their power and interfere in our elections, and it has to be stopped and the Republicans have to get a lot tougher and so should the Democrats. They should be regulated, investigated, and brought to justice under the fullest extent of the law.

They’re totally breaking the law.

Together, we will drain the Washington swamp and we will clean up the corruption in our nation’s capital. We have done a big job on it. But you think it’s easy. It’s a dirty business. It’s a dirty business. You have a lot of bad people out there. Despite everything we’ve been through looking out all over this country and seeing fantastic crowds, although this I think is our all-time record, I think you have two hundred and fifty thousand people, two hundred and fifty thousand, looking out at all the amazing patriots here today, I have never been more confident in our nation’s future.

Well, I have to say, we have to be a little bit careful, that’s a nice statement, but we have to be a little careful with that statement.

If we allow this group of people to illegally take over our country, because it’s illegal when the votes are illegal, when the way they got there is illegal, when the states that vote are given false and fraudulent information.

We are the greatest country on earth, and we are headed and we’re headed in the right direction, you know, the wall is built, we’re doing record numbers at the wall now, they want to take down the wall, ‘let’s let everyone flow in. Let’s let everybody flow in.’

We did a great job in the wall. Remember the wall? They said it could never be done, one of the largest infrastructure projects we’ve ever had in this country. And it’s had a tremendous impact. We’ve got rid of catch and release. We got rid of all of the stuff that we had to live with.

But now the caravan’s — they think Biden’s getting in — the caravans of forming again. They want to come in again and rip off our country. Can’t let it happen. As this enormous crowd shows, we have truth and justice on our side. We have a deep and enduring love for America in our hearts. We love our country. We have overwhelming pride in this great country and we have a deep in our souls. Together, we are determined to defend and preserve government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Our brightest days are before us, our greatest achievements still await. I think one of our great achievements will be election security, because nobody until I came along had any idea how corrupt our elections were.

And again, most people would stand there at nine o’clock in the evening and say, I want to thank you very much. And they go off to some other life.

But I said something’s wrong here. Something’s really wrong. Can’t have happened. And we fight. We fight like hell.

And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.

Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun.

My fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children and for our beloved country, and I say this despite all that’s happened, the best is yet to come.

So we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give — the Democrats are hopeless, they’re never voting for anything. Not even one vote — but we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I want to thank you all.

God bless you. And God bless America. Thank you all for being here. This is incredible. Thank you very much. Thank you.

(Read this at LifeSite News)

 These words do not encourage violence

He did say “we are going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue,” but he is speaking to American citizens who the Constitution says have a “right  to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

In contrast, he did not say, “Get up in the faces of some Congresspeople …” (as did Cory Booker).

He did not say, “Protesters should never let up” (as did Kamala Harris).

Nor did he say, “I just don’t know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country” (as Nancy Pelosi did).

Joe Biden’s America: Back to two standards

Featured

A purported investigation into the murder of a Trump supporter

New footage yields more questions regarding the woman shot and killed inside the Capitol building

Townhall reports that new video sequences raise questions about the shooting of Ashli Babbitt.

CapitolArrestsThere are many questions from yesterday. Why was it so easy for demonstrators to storm the Capitol? Was the city prepared? Regardless, the fact is that while Congress was debating certifying the 2020 Electoral College results, senators and representatives had to recess and flee to safety as Trump supporters broke into the building. Guns were drawn inside the House chamber as police barricaded the door to prevent protesters from coming inside. The Senate floor was breached. Inside the building, tear gas was deployed and a rumble between police and protesters broke out in the Rotunda. Also, a woman was shot and killed. The footage is not pleasant. You can watch it here [WARNING: Graphic content].

It clearly shows a police officer shoot the woman who is trying to bust down the door, but as Ben Domenech of The Federalist noted, “This is crazy. There were other cops right behind her.

Was there an attempt at an arrest? I also understand that this is one of those situations where you could potentially be shot by police. We’ll let the investigation begin as there always is with an officer-involved shooting, but I’m sure more questions will be raised before we get any answers. Also, Twitter is not the place to debate or argue this event at all. Dan Cohen of Behind the Headlines had the clip, by the way.

I’m watching “leftists” transform in real time into apologists for police murder.

There are a hundred different ways cops could’ve handled this situation that didn’t involve lethal force. pic.twitter.com/SV9DQzJgCT

— Dan Cohen (@dancohen3000) January 7, 2021

What we do know is that the woman was named Ashli Babbitt, a Trump supporter, and Air Force veteran. She served for 14 years. Her family found out about her death through the news (via NY POST):

The President Trump supporter killed in the Capitol building Wednesday was an Air Force vet from California who tweeted a day earlier how “nothing will stop us” and “the storm is here.”

Ashli Babbitt, who had 14 years in the service and did four tours of duty, was married and lived near San Diego, her husband Aaron told KUSI-TV.

“I’m numb. I’m devastated. Nobody from DC notified my son and we found out on TV,” the husband’s mother, Robin Babbitt, told The Post, saying of her daughter-in-law, “She is a Trump supporter.”

Everything is “pretty surreal,” added Aaron’s brother, Justin. “It’s hard, because we haven’t been officially notified.”

(Read more at Townhall)

Not only were there cops right behind her, there was an Antifa/BLM leader directly behind her (and he was released)

Yes. Not only were police behind her, the Antifa/BLM agitator was behind her (and was later released — refer to the response to the NewsMax article).

DOJ to “investigate” Capitol shooting death of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt

NewsMax claims that the Department of Justice will “investigate” the shooting death of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt even though the Antifa/BLM agitator behind her was released.


ashli-babbittThe Department of Justice is opening an investigation into the death of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt, 35, who was shot in the chest by a Capitol Police officer during Wednesday’s riot at the Capitol while trying to climb through a window and enter the House chambers.

Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin told CBS News that his office has opened a formal investigation into whether excessive force came into play in relation to Babbitt’s death, senior investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge reported through Twitter.

The office’s civil rights division will be the lead prosecutors for the case, which is also under investigation by the FBI and the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, Herridge also reported.

Sherwin’s office has also opened a homicide investigation into the death of Capitol Hill Police officer Brian Sicknick, who died of injuries Thursday night from the injuries he sustained while responding to the riots and engaging physically with attackers during the melee, reports CNN, quoting a statement from the Capitol Police.

Sicknick joined the department in July 2008 and had most recently served in the department’s First Responders Unit.

Babbitt, a California native, had served for 14 years in the Air Force. According to a friend and fellow veteran, she was an avid supporter of President Donald Trump and flew across the country to be at the president’s massive rally on Wednesday, reports The New York Post. Babbitt also live-streamed a part of the march from the rally to the Capitol.

(Read more at NewsMax)

Whatever they do, it probably will not be justice

More than likely they will prosecute any of the crowd who have not paid their Democrat party dues, wait a few weeks, and then release the rest (as they already have with John Sullivan). Of course, like most stories that would benefit the conservative side, this story will be buried by the press.

On civility between the parties

House may wait until after Biden’s first 100 days to send impeachment articles against Trump to Senate

The Hill parrots James Clyburn in his claim that the House will forward articles of impeachment after Biden’s first 100 days.

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) suggested Sunday that the Democratic House may wait until after President-elect Joe Biden’s first 100 days in office to send the Senate articles of impeachment against President Trump.

Asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper if he thought impeachment proceedings would take time away from confirming Biden’s Cabinet, Clyburn responded, “Yes, I do have concerns. And so does Speaker Pelosi.”

“Mitch McConnell is a pretty good legislator. And he’s doing what he thinks he needs to do to be disruptive of President Biden. But I would say to Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi is smarter than that,” added the No. 3 House Democrat, referring to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

“We will take the vote that we should take in the House. And [Pelosi] will make the determination as to when is the best time to get that vote and get the managers appointed and move that legislation over to the Senate,” Clyburn added.

“[L]et’s give president-elect Biden the 100 days he needs to get his agenda off and running,” Clyburn added. “And maybe we will send the articles some time after that.”

Clyburn went on to say he expected the House to have its final articles of impeachment sometime Monday and take floor action on them by Tuesday or Wednesday. While Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has written a single article for incitement to insurrection in relation to last week’s deadly Capitol riots, Clyburn said House leaders are also exploring articles relating to the president pressuring Georgia officials to change election results.

(Read more at The Hill)

So, unless the Democrats change the rules again (as they did with the nuclear option) this will do nothing

Unless the the turncoat Republicans (aka Mitch McConnell, Dan Crenshaw, Michael McCaul, …) are willing to further motivate conservatives to start preparing for the next election, then the Democrats will either have to change the rules again or settle for having this second again impeachment do nothing.

On the other hand, Biden says he wants us to “unite”

Nothing says unite like prosecuting an impeachment for free speech (where President Trump told his followers to march peacefully).

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer calls for “unity” and “healing” before trolling Secretary DeVos

Townhall points out how Governor Whitmer made a call for unity and then followed that by trolling Education Secretary DeVos.

WhitmerIn the wake of violence at the United States Capitol carried out by supporters of President Trump, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D) joined calls for unity and a peaceful transition of presidential power in a joint statement with former Michigan Governor Rick Snyder (R-MI).

“What is unfolding today in our nation’s capital is truly appalling. Violence, vandalism, and insurrection have no place in this great country of ours. We are a nation of laws, not mobs,” Whitmer wrote. “Now is the time to put this election behind us once and for all. We must unify as one nation to defeat our real enemy, which is the pandemic that has taken far too many of our friends, neighbors, and loved ones.”

Just one day after calling for bipartisan unity, however, Whitmer took to Twitter to troll outgoing Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

Republicans in Michigan blasted Whitmer for lack of leadership:


(Read more at Townhall)

This is not the first instance of hypocrisy with Whitmer

Of course, there was Memorial Day 2020 where Ms. Whitmer ordered everyone in Michigan to self quarantine; however, she dressed down a marina owner for not releasing the Whitmer family boat.

Then there was the time Ms. Whitmer told the people of her state not to travel to their summer homes, but her vehicles were seen in front of her summer home.

WhitmerDistancing

Joe Biden’s America: Hypocrisy on parade

Featured

Simon & Schuster drops book by Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley

Davenport, Illinois NBC affiliate KWQC reports that Simon and Schuster has broken a contract with Senator Josh Hawley due to his having challenged the electors of Arizona.

HawleyA planned book by Sen. Josh Hawley, who objected to President-elect Joe Biden’s win and backed baseless claims that the election was stolen, has been canceled by its publisher in the wake of the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol by a mob of pro-Trump supporters, a decision the Missouri Republican called “Orwellian” and vowed to fight in court.

In a statement Thursday, Simon & Schuster announced that “After witnessing the disturbing, deadly insurrection that took place on Wednesday in Washington, D.C, Simon & Schuster has decided to cancel publication of Senator Josh Hawley’s forthcoming book, ‘The Tyranny of Big Tech.’

“We did not come to this decision lightly,” the publisher added. “As a publisher it will always be our mission to amplify a variety of voices and viewpoints: at the same time we take seriously our larger public responsibility as citizens, and cannot support Senator Hawley after his role in what became a dangerous threat to our democracy and freedom.”

Thousands of Trump supporters had gathered in Washington on Wednesday to protest Congress’ formal certification of Biden’s win and many ended up storming into the Capitol and occupying it for hours, delaying the process into early Thursday morning. A widely seen photo, taken before the occupation, shows Hawley raising a fist in solidarity to the crowd.

Hawley has often been cited as possible future presidential candidate and his book, scheduled to come out in June, was an intended forum for a favorite theme — the undue power of Google, Facebook and other internet giants. Soon after news broke that his book was dropped, Hawley tweeted, and tagged his comments directly to Simon & Schuster, that he was being unfairly censored and punished: “I was representing my constituents, leading a debate on the Senate floor on voter integrity, which they have now decided to redefine as sedition.”

“This could not be more Orwellian… Let me be clear, this is not just a contract dispute. It’s a direct assault on the First Amendment… I will fight this cancel culture with everything I have. We’ll see you in court.”

(Read more at KWQC)

What deals were dropped from Barbara Boxer when she challenged the electors of Ohio

When Senator Barbara Boxer challenged the electors of Ohio who supported President George W. Bush, her attempt failed. What happened to Barbara Boxer after she made that challenge? She made millions while in her seat as a senator for California and enjoyed the praise of Democrat colleagues — praise that extended even into 2021.

Far Left activist John Sullivan from Utah who was arrested for storming the US Capitol is released without charges

According to the Gateway Pundit, and  one of the many Antifa members identified as breaching the capitol has been released.

SullivanEarlier this week CNN interviewed John Sullivan from Utah after the shooting death of Ashli Babbit by Capitol Hill police.

John Sullivan, a noted leftist leader from Utah, stormed the US Capitol with fellow activists on Wednesday.
John Sullivan is a Black Lives Matter goon from Utah who was flown into DC during the planned “Stop the Steal” rally.

In August John Sullivan threatened to “rip President Trump from the White House” during violence in Washington DC. Sullivan was flown to DC for the protests.

From our earlier report: “We About to Go Get that MotherF***er! – It’s Time for Revolution!” – VIDEO – BLM Threatens to Rip President Trump from White House

John Sullivan stormed the US Capitol. He was near Ashli Babbit when she was killed by Capitol police.

Amy Mek at RAIR Foundation reported:

On Friday investigative journalist Millie Weaver ran into John Sullivan in Washington DC. She overheard him say he was not being charged.

John Sullivan organized a BLM-Antifa action at the Washington Memorial on Wednesday, January 6th — then he was seen storming the US Capitol!
How many of his Antifa buddies were with him?

(Read this with additional links at the Gateway Pundit)

I don’t remember the press or the politicians complaining about Seattle, DC, and other Antifa or BLM riot locations

Even when there were murders in the CHAZ, I don’t remember the Democrats in the media or the FBI calling for prosecution. All I remember was the “summer of love” and silence from Pelosi.

However, I do remember DC when Republicans were attacked in August 2020. I remember life savings burning in Minneapolis while Democrats gave Antifa and BLM space to riot. I remember monuments across America being destroyed by Anitfa and BLM and we were told to understand.

I even remember that AOC and Pressley raised bail funds for Antifa members who attacked police in Boston.

On un-American censorship in Big Tech

Having suppressed Biden’s bad news, Big Tech works to suppress news from other venues:

Google removes Parler from app store, could also be removed from Apple’s if it doesn’t implement a moderation plan

USA Today unknowingly points out the hypocrisy of the left as it tells how Google has removed Parler from its app selections and Apple may follow suit if Parler does not start to impose a leftist speech code on its subscribers.

1984Google removed the social media app Parler Friday evening because it posed a “public safety threat.”

The social network, launched in 2018, became popular among conservatives and an unmoderated home to more extreme views in 2020 when both Facebook and Twitter tightened up their content moderation and labeling.

“In order to protect user safety on Google Play, our longstanding policies require that apps displaying user-generated content have moderation policies and enforcement that removes egregious content like posts that incite violence,” said a Google spokesperson in a statement to USA TODAY.

Following the events of Wednesday, President Donald Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts were blocked from posting “indefinitely.” Twitter took a stronger step by permanently suspending the 45th president from its platform on Friday night.

“We’re aware of continued posting in the Parler app that seeks to incite ongoing violence in the US. We recognize that there can be reasonable debate about content policies and that it can be difficult for apps to immediately remove all violative content, but for us to distribute an app through Google Play, we do require that apps implement robust moderation for egregious content,” the statement continued.

Apple also threatened to remove Parler from its App Store after for failing to moderate incitements to violence and illegal activity, according to a notice obtained by multiple media sources.

Apple reportedly ordered Parler to implement a moderation plan and wipe “objectionable content” from its platform within the next 24 hours.

Parler CEO John Matze said in a post on Thursday it was against the moves by Facebook and Twitter.

“It’s clear that Facebook and Twitter believe the ends justify the means. They believe the American people are weak. They insult our founding fathers by suggesting Zuckerburg and Dorsey know what is best for us. Parler is not an arbiter of truth. We believe in you,” Matze said.

(Read a little more of the same at USA Today)

Hasn’t it been totalitarian regimes that require everyone to stick to the propaganda?

I have never lived in a totalitarian regime, yet. However, I have read stories of resistance to the Third Reich, Stalinist Russia, Fidel’s Cuba, Maduro’s Venezuela, and the fictional Big Brother of 1984 — all stories where the little guy resists being brainwashed by the overlord.

Odd, isn’t it, that these “progressive” companies (backed by the “progressive” politicians) have all levelled the “Nazi” label at conservatives, but are fully acting like totalitarians?

Since the left is so quick to defend this, will they also defend silencing by communist regimes?

YouTube says it will move more quickly to suspend channels posting videos claiming widespread voter fraud

CNBC repeats the party line by informing America that videos claiming widespread voter fraud will not be tolerated.

YouTube says it’s going to suspend any channels posting new videos of false widespread voter fraud claims, rather than giving them a warning as was its previous policy.

“Due to the disturbing events that transpired yesterday, and given that the election results have now been certified, starting today any channels posting new videos with false claims in violation of our policies will now receive a strike,” the company said in a statement Thursday.

YouTube’s regular policy allows channels to get one warning for posting false content before giving them a strike. Channels that receive a strike are suspended from posting or livestreaming for one week. If they receive three strikes in the same 90-day period, YouTube will permanently ban them.

YouTube said that over the last month, it has removed thousands of videos that spread misinformation claiming widespread voter fraud changed the result of the 2020 presidential election, including “several” videos President Donald Trump posted to his channel.

YouTube removed a video Trump posted Wednesday that made false claims about the results of the election but has not yet issued any formal statement about banning his channel or blocking him from posting. A spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment.

YouTube is not going nearly as far as its competitors in cracking down on Trump. Facebook announced Thursday that it would take the unprecedented step of blocking Trump from posting at least until Inauguration Day. Twitter blocked several Trump tweets containing false claims and put a 12-hour moratorium on new posts until he removed those tweets.

(Read more tripe at CNBC)

If you did bother to read more at CNBC, you might have asked the same question I asked

In the next paragraph of this Democrat propaganda piece, you would have read (emphasis is mine)

However, many have argued these changes are too little, too late, and the public has long been calling for the company to take more action against conspiracy theories, which have fueled beliefs leading to the violence that occurred this week.

Many of what have argued for more censorship? Many out-of-touch leftist TV talk show hosts like the women of The View? Many frightened and angry politicians who think that we are going to forget about their failures when videos on widespread fraud remain banned?

Although Democrats have always been good at promoting seminar callers, I find it hard to believe that “the public” has been calling for the company to take more action. Especially when a Rasmussen poll finds that Trump’s approval ratings rose after his speech against fraud on 6 January 2021.

SameOld

GeorgiaRunoff

COVID

Northam

No reason to remain true to any but a few Republicans

Featured

Eight Republican senators voted to investigate voter fraud

The Gateway Pundit relayed the names of the eight Republicans who voted to investigate the fraud of Joe Biden.

The National Review reported:

HawleySenators Josh Hawley (R., Mo.) and Ted Cruz (R., Texas), who led initial efforts to object to the Electoral College results, both voted in favor of the objections to Arizona’s and Pennsylvania’s electoral votes. The two were joined by Senators Hyde Smith (R., Miss.), Roger Marshall (R., Ka.), and Tommy Tuberville (R., Ala.).

John Kennedy (R., La.) voted only for the Arizona objection while Rick Scott (R., Fla.) and Cynthia Lummis (R., Wy.) voted only for the Pennsylvania objection.

The UPI reported:

The House and Senate on Wednesday night voted to strike down an objection raised against Arizona’s electoral votes after the process of confirming the result of the 2020 presidential election was delayed for several hours due to a siege on the Capitol building by supporters of President Donald Trump.

CruzSenators voted 93-6 and the House voted 303-122 to reject the objection brought by Rep. Paul Gosar of Wyoming, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and other Republicans challenging Arizona’s electors and prompting Congress to retire to their respective chambers for debate.

Cruz and his fellow Republican Sens. Josh Hawley, Cindy Hyde-Smith, Roger Marshall, John Kennedy and Tommy Tuberville voted to sustain the objection.

(Read more at the Gateway Pundit)

Ted Cruz has won my loyalty

Ted Cruz has won my loyalty; however, for those who think themselves kingmakers — remember that Mitch McConnell was cutting out non-swampers like Cruz before he did the same to Trump. The primary reason that Trump came about was the swamp effect of Obama/McConnell and the rest of the Washington establishment. As the latest Supreme Court refusals to hear cases proved, the swamp reaches into areas where people have built “conservative” resumes.

These are the representatives who stood against voter fraud

According to the New York Times, these are the House members who stood to investigate voter fraud:

  • Robert B. Aderholt, Ala.
  • Mo Brooks, Ala.
  • Jerry Carl, Ala.
  • Barry Moore, Ala.
  • Gary Palmer, Ala.
  • Mike Rogers, Ala.
  • Andy Biggs, Ariz.
  • Paul Gosar, Ariz.
  • Debbie Lesko, Ariz.
  • David Schweikert, Ariz.
  • Rick Crawford, Ark.
  • Ken Calvert, Calif.
  • Mike Garcia, Calif.
  • Darrell Issa, Calif.
  • Doug LaMalfa, Calif.
  • Kevin McCarthy, Calif.
  • Devin Nunes, Calif.
  • Jay Obernolte, Calif.
  • Lauren Boebert, Colo.
  • Doug Lamborn, Colo.
  • Kat Cammack, Fla.
  • Mario Diaz-Balart, Fla.
  • Byron Donalds, Fla.
  • Neal Dunn, Fla.
  • Scott Franklin, Fla.
  • Matt Gaetz, Fla.
  • Carlos Gimenez, Fla.
  • Brian Mast, Fla.
  • Bill Posey, Fla.
  • John Rutherford, Fla.
  • Greg Steube, Fla.
  • Daniel Webster, Fla.
  • Rick Allen, Ga.
  • Earl L. “Buddy” Carter, Ga.
  • Andrew Clyde, Ga.
  • Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ga.
  • Jody Hice, Ga.
  • Barry Loudermilk, Ga.
  • Russ Fulcher, Idaho
  • Mike Bost, Ill.
  • Mary Miller, Ill.
  • Jim Baird, Ind.
  • Jim Banks, Ind.
  • Greg Pence, Ind.
  • Jackie Walorski, Ind.
  • Ron Estes, Kan.
  • Jacob LaTurner, Kan.
  • Tracey Mann, Kan.
  • Harold Rogers, Ky.
  • Garret Graves, La.
  • Clay Higgins, La.
  • Mike Johnson, La.
  • Steve Scalise, La.
  • Andy Harris, Md.
  • Jack Bergman, Mich.
  • Lisa McClain, Mich.
  • Tim Walberg, Mich.
  • Michelle Fischbach, Minn.
  • Jim Hagedorn, Minn.
  • Michael Guest, Miss.
  • Trent Kelly, Miss.
  • Steven Palazzo, Miss.
  • Sam Graves, Mo.
  • Vicky Hartzler, Mo.
  • Billy Long, Mo.
  • Blaine Luetkemeyer, Mo.
  • Jason Smith, Mo.
  • Matt Rosendale, Mont.
  • Dan Bishop, N.C.
  • Ted Budd, N.C.
  • Madison Cawthorn, N.C.
  • Virginia Foxx, N.C.
  • Richard Hudson, N.C.
  • Gregory F. Murphy, N.C.
  • David Rouzer, N.C.
  • Jeff Van Drew, N.J.
  • Yvette Herrell, N.M.
  • Chris Jacobs, N.Y.
  • Nicole Malliotakis, N.Y.
  • Elise M. Stefanik, N.Y.
  • Lee Zeldin, N.Y.
  • Adrian Smith, Neb.
  • Steve Chabot, Ohio
  • Warren Davidson, Ohio
  • Bob Gibbs, Ohio
  • Bill Johnson, Ohio
  • Jim Jordan, Ohio
  • Stephanie Bice, Okla.
  • Tom Cole, Okla.
  • Kevin Hern, Okla.
  • Frank Lucas, Okla.
  • Markwayne Mullin, Okla.
  • Cliff Bentz, Ore.
  • John Joyce, Pa.
  • Fred Keller, Pa.
  • Mike Kelly, Pa.
  • Daniel Meuser, Pa.
  • Scott Perry, Pa.
  • Guy Reschenthaler, Pa.
  • Lloyd Smucker, Pa.
  • Glenn Thompson, Pa.
  • Jeff Duncan, S.C.
  • Ralph Norman, S.C.
  • Tom Rice, S.C.
  • William Timmons, S.C.
  • Joe Wilson, S.C.
  • Tim Burchett, Tenn.
  • Scott DesJarlais, Tenn.
  • Chuck Fleischmann, Tenn.
  • Mark E. Green, Tenn.
  • Diana Harshbarger, Tenn.
  • David Kustoff, Tenn.
  • John Rose, Tenn.
  • Jodey Arrington, Texas
  • Brian Babin, Texas
  • Michael C. Burgess, Texas
  • John R. Carter, Texas
  • Michael Cloud, Texas
  • Pat Fallon, Texas
  • Louie Gohmert, Texas
  • Lance Gooden, Texas
  • Ronny Jackson, Texas
  • Troy Nehls, Texas
  • August Pfluger, Texas
  • Pete Sessions, Texas
  • Beth Van Duyne, Texas
  • Randy Weber, Texas
  • Roger Williams, Texas
  • Ron Wright, Texas
  • Burgess Owens, Utah
  • Chris Stewart, Utah
  • Ben Cline, Va.
  • Bob Good, Va.
  • Morgan Griffith, Va.
  • Robert J. Wittman, Va.
  • Carol Miller, W.Va.
  • Alexander X. Mooney, W.Va.
  • Scott Fitzgerald, Wis.
  • Tom Tiffany, Wis.

(Read the article at the New York Times)

Whenever possible, I will support these representatives

For example, if Louie Gohmert primaries John Cornyn (the senator who I will never again vote for), I will vote for Louie Gohmert.

Here’s the list: 83 GOP lawmakers refused to object to rampant fraud in the Arizona Presidential election

The Gateway Pundit also provided a list of 83 RINO representatives who would not support looking into rampant fraud in the Arizona Presidential election.

Amodei Republican Nevada NAY
Armstrong Republican North Dakota NAY
Bacon Republican Nebraska NAY
Balderson Republican Ohio NAY
Barr Republican Kentucky NAY
Bentz Republican Oregon NAY
Buchanan Republican Florida NAY
Buck Republican Colorado NAY
Bucshon Republican Indiana NAY
Chabot Republican Ohio NAY
Cheney Republican Wyoming NAY
Comer Republican Kentucky NAY
Crenshaw Republican Texas NAY
Curtis Republican Utah NAY
Davis, Rodney Republican Illinois NAY
Emmer Republican Minnesota NAY
Feenstra Republican Iowa NAY
Ferguson Republican Georgia NAY
Fitzpatrick Republican Pennsylvania NAY
Fortenberry Republican Nebraska NAY
Foxx Republican North Carolina NAY
Gallagher Republican Wisconsin NAY
Garbarino Republican New York NAY
Gonzales, Tony Republican Texas NAY
Gonzalez (OH) Republican Ohio NAY
Graves (LA) Republican Louisiana NAY
Grothman Republican Wisconsin NAY
Guthrie Republican Kentucky NAY
Herrera Beutler Republican Washington NAY
Hill Republican Arkansas NAY
Hinson Republican Iowa NAY
Hollingsworth Republican Indiana NAY
Huizenga Republican Michigan NAY
Johnson (SD) Republican South Dakota NAY
Joyce (OH) Republican Ohio NAY
Katko Republican New York NAY
Keller Republican Pennsylvania NAY
Kinzinger Republican Illinois NAY
Kustoff Republican Tennessee NAY
LaHood Republican Illinois NAY
Latta Republican Ohio NAY
Mace Republican South Carolina NAY
Massie Republican Kentucky NAY
McCaul Republican Texas NAY
McClintock Republican California NAY
McHenry Republican North Carolina NAY
McKinley Republican West Virginia NAY
Meijer Republican Michigan NAY
Meuser Republican Pennsylvania NAY
Miller-Meeks Republican Iowa NAY
Moolenaar Republican Michigan NAY
Mooney Republican West Virginia NAY
Moore (UT) Republican Utah NAY
Murphy (NC) Republican North Carolina NAY
Newhouse Republican Washington NAY
Owens Republican Utah NAY
Pence Republican Indiana NAY
Reed Republican New York NAY
Rodgers (WA) Republican Washington NAY
Roy Republican Texas NAY
Schweikert Republican Arizona NAY
Scott, Austin Republican Georgia NAY
Simpson Republican Idaho NAY
Smith (NJ) Republican New Jersey NAY
Smucker Republican Pennsylvania NAY
Spartz Republican Indiana NAY
Stauber Republican Minnesota NAY
Stefanik Republican New York NAY
Steil Republican Wisconsin NAY
Stewart Republican Utah NAY
Stivers Republican Ohio NAY
Taylor Republican Texas NAY
Thompson (PA) Republican Pennsylvania NAY
Turner Republican Ohio NAY
Upton Republican Michigan NAY
Van Duyne Republican Texas NAY
Wagner Republican Missouri NAY
Waltz Republican Florida NAY
Wenstrup Republican Ohio NAY
Westerman Republican Arkansas NAY
Wittman Republican Virginia NAY
Womack Republican Arkansas NAY
Young Republican Alaska NAY

(Read the full post at the Gateway Pundit)

Representative Dan Crenshaw has seen the last vote from me, but far from the last opposition

My representative is on the list above. Thus, if a conservative primaries him, I will vote for his opposition.

If he makes it past the primaries, I will just leave that vote blank. If a pro-life libertarian runs against him, I will vote for the pro-life libertarian.

Lies and Coronavirus in Joe Biden’s America

Featured

Lies (truth unreported in the main stream media)

It was BLM and Antifa at the Capitol

With a hat tip to Hocuspocus13 for his comment on Bunkerville — The Marshall Report provided a number of tweets that point toward the Capitol invaders being from Antifa and Black Lives Matter.

There is plenty of good footage showing the Patriots were shocked that others went into the capitol, and they were staying outside, they are heard saying things like, “Oh my God, a bunch are trying to break in the Capitol!” “It’s getting dangerous, we’re leaving.” I’m not going in. No one was storming to get INSIDE but the ANTIFA thugs who stormed over the fences who had assistance from the start to avoid check points and just go right on into the event. Then had assistance to get inside!


PaulSperryTweet
linn-woodtweetcrisis-actors-2crisis-actors-3

The last and only breech on the Capitol was over 200 years ago (1814) during the war of 1812 and that took more than breaking a window to get into…which…by the way is not possible to break with a stick. This breech had to be assisted with lots of coordinated inside help. Pelosi et al involved I am sure. Why else was one of them inside Pelosi’s office? Even when told they could get inside they said no and could not believe others went in past police.

(See ten more tweets and additional photos proving the point at The Marshall Report)

Whether this was Antifa, BLM, or other, it was not your standard 45 to 60-year-old Trump supporter

In contrast to BLM rioters who burned Kenosha and were labeled “mostly peaceful” by CNN, the Trump protesters (until the minority of Antifa and BLM infiltrators were introduced) were entirely peaceful.


More election fraud: 32,400 votes removed from Senator Perdue’s votetally live on TV

The Gateway Pundit points out how the vote counts for David Perdue went down on live TV while CNN broadcast election results.

Not only last night did CNN and ABC News show 5,000 votes removed from David Perdue in the Georgia senate race, now we have evidence of 32,400 votes being removed from Perdue earlier in the evening as well.
Perdue’s vote tally went from 2,130,535 down to 2,125,535.

The vote count total change came on CNN after a black box appeared over tally.

Perdue’s Democrat opponent Jon Ossoff’s tally did not change.

Now we have evidence earlier in the evening where 32,400 ballots were removed from the Perdue column:

As the Gateway Pundit reported earlier Tuesday evening, Democrat-leaning Georgia county called it quits for the night with thousands of vote yet to be counted as the two Republican U.S. Senate candidates held on to slim leads after being behind the Democrats most of the evening after polls closed.

These vote drops were reported in the November 2020 election as well.  They are not normal.  People don’t go back into a polling place and decide not to vote for someone.

(Read the last and central two sentences at the Gateway Pundit)

This seems to be the wave of the Democrats

Expect more of the same.

Coronavirus

Lockdowns catastrophic for recovering addicts and those suffering from mental health issues

The Epoch Times reports in a 5 January 2021 article that the COVID-19 lockdowns have put a strain on recovering addicts and those struggling with mental health issues.

Overseeing sober living homes for newly recovering drug addicts is difficult in the best of times. But the endless shutdowns have created conditions that are challenging for healthy people, let alone those who are fresh out of rehab, vulnerable, and still reeling.

Matt Royce, 35, oversees seven sober-living homes in Minneapolis. All of his houses, each holding between 9 and 13 people, have been “pretty full the whole time.”

No overdose deaths had occurred in his homes in almost three years, but last summer he lost two people, while another three were revived from overdoses with opioid-blocker Narcan.

Depression has “skyrocketed” since the lockdowns began, Royce said. Recovering addicts are struggling even more now due to boredom, inability to see family and friends, and lack of social activities.

“A lot of these guys, they just need the simple things in life. And when they’re prohibited from being able to get those things, it’s tough,” Royce said.

“Hopefully this changes sooner rather than later, because I can’t even tell you how many times I was dealing with relapses every single day of the week … heavily, heavily from June all the way until about October. It was non stop. It was definitely more than normal, there’s no doubt about that.”

Nationally, drug overdose deaths are at historic highs.

In lockstep with widespread shutdown measures, overdose deaths accelerated, especially between March and May last year, according to an emergency health advisory issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Dec. 17, 2020.

More than 81,230 people died from a drug overdose between June 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020, the CDC provisional data shows. The final number, which is up 18 percent over the same period the year prior, is expected to be higher.

(Read more at The Epoch Times)

So will Democrats continue to use COVID-19 as a bludgeon or will they quickly solve this purported conundrum?

Will the “COVID-19 crisis” continue to be the reason that petty dictators on the Democrat side continue to ruin lives? Or (now that they have established one-party rule) will they let the crisis evaporate?

Joe Biden’s America: 6 January 2021 edition

Featured

Speaker Pelosi silences the voice of the minority

One America News Network reports the imposition of new House rules governing speech of representatives.

pelosi-job-covidAs newly re-elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi looks forward to the Democrats slim chances of retaining the House again in 2022, she’s using her most powerful weapon as speaker. The move comes with majority influence over the House Rules Committee to weaken the power of Republicans who make up the chamber’s minority.

On Monday, Democrat House Rules Committee chairman Jim McGovern and Speaker Pelosi watched as the House passed the new rules package for the 117th Congress. The bill passed in a 217-to-206 vote and has taken heavy criticism from Republican lawmakers, who have gone so as far as to call provisions in the bill “Soviet style.”

Two of the most criticized aspects of the package include alterations to the MTR or Motion to Recommit, which is a tool minority parties can use to push last minute changes to bills on the House floor before passage.

Republicans will now have to send bills back to committees before passage, which will greatly limit Republican lawmakers abilities to advance the interests of their constituents on specific bills. It’s something that was highlighted by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy on the House floor Monday.

“You cannot pass a motion to recommit on the floor unless you have a majority of the people in the body to vote for it,” he stated. “Are you so afraid that you can’t hold people that you oughta’ take it away? ”

Another rule change is new exemptions from PAYGO, or Pay As You Go, provisions. The rule previously kept lawmakers from spending more than the budget allowed by requiring spending cuts in other parts of the overall budget.

However, the new rules offer an exception for PAYGO, but only for programs related to public health and climate change. This is specifically consequential as Democrat proposals like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal come with very large price tags.

Republicans have said it’s a clear indication Democrats are trying to push through the Green New Deal and Medicare for all regardless of the cost.

(Read more at One America News Network)

What did you expect under Democrats? Free speech? Freedom of Association?

From here on (or at least until there is enough of a revolution to throw out the socialists [aka Democrats]), we will have to provide civil disobedience to unconstitutional restrictions on our rights. If that means that I will need to defy the government to go to church, I will defy the government. If that means that I talk in ways not sanctioned by San Fran Nan, I will.

Google Maps disabled direction requests for Washington D.C. as the Trump supporters converged

As shown by the following tweets, Google Maps tried to make it hard for Trump supporters to make their way to the nation’s capitol.




Police violate the rights of right-wingers who formerly supported the police

Biz Pac Review goes through an instance where police have started burning bridges between themselves and their supporters.

In a strange twist of fate, pro-Trump protesters at a “Mass Civil Disobedience Rally and March” in the left-wing sanctuary of Salem, Oregon, were caught on video this New Year’s Day chanting “f–k the blue” and stomping on “thin blue line” flags.

Organized by Oregon Women for Trump, the protest against “ridiculous shutdowns of businesses, schools, people’s livelihoods, and the phony mask mandate” devolved into madness when armed left-wing Antifa/Black Lives Matter extremists showed up.

According to reports from multiple witnesses, during the physical and verbal altercations that predictably ensued, the police kept focusing their attention on the pro-Trump protesters instead of the left-wing Antifa/BLM extremists.

In one particularly jarring instance, a police officer warned a BLM extremist to not point a loaded paintball gun at him. Yet the officer said nothing about the extremist reportedly pointing the gun directly at a pro-Trump protester.

Watch (*Graphic content/Language warning):

During the protest, multiple Trump supporters were reportedly “charged at,” hit with sting balls and arrested, even as left-wing extremists like the paintball gun-wielding one above were apparently allowed to continue agitating and provoking them.

See more footage from the otherwise reportedly peaceful protest below:




Note what the guy said in the last video: “No more backing the blue!”

See more footage from the protest below:



What only exacerbated the boiling anger against the police was the stark contrast between how they chose to treat otherwise reportedly peaceful pro-Trump protesters and how they’ve repeatedly been seen treating violent Antifa/BLM extremists.

Note: Unlike Antifa/BLM extremists, the pro-Trump protesters didn’t vandalize any businesses, start any fires or attack any police officers.

“[T]here were no reports of injuries or property damage,” Portland station KOIN confirmed.

Yet this is how they were treated … a fact that eventually led to the “no more backing the blue” sentiment seen earlier to explode into chants of “f–k the blue.”

Watch:


In a video published Saturday, classically liberal commentator Tim Pool noted that their behavior and rhetoric, or at least in regard to the police, is now equivalent to that of Antifa and BLM. However, he argued, they’re not wrong to feel this way.

“These individuals, right-wing and conservative, being confronted by the police in this way for the first time was shocking to many of them, and now they’re saying many of the things we’ve heard from the left,” he said.

“The police are losing what little support they had left, and boy is this a mistake [on their part]. There’s no longer an argument that cops are just trying to keep us safe.”

(Read and watch more at Biz Pac Review)

The police needs to provide equal enforcement of the law

If a gun or two is allowed to be carried by those on the left, you can bet that there will be a push back for equal representation from the right. If those in power don’t allow us to legally provide our own self-protection, you can prepare yourself for civil disobedience in the realm of self protection.

In contrast to those from Antifa and BLM, when those of us on the right employ civil disobedience — we do it in defense of rights ranging from self defense rights to our pursuit of happiness (known more succinctly during the time of Locke as pursuit of property). Antifa and BLM burn down businesses that people have put their life savings into. Right wingers just start punching back when government (cops, San Fran Nan, un-accountable ballot counters, etc.) push one step too far.

A prayer for today

Featured

Praying the scriptures always works

First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time. For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying) as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth. Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and dissension. (1 Timothy 2:1‭-‬8 NASB)

What will be the results of these three insults?

Featured

First, if you rightfully got mad about the election fraud, did you also get mad about other events?

While it is right for you to get mad if Mitch McConnell kills debate on election fraud …

MitchKillsDebateOver the past few months, this blog has called for its readers to pull away from Republicans if Mitch McConnell kills the debate on 6 January 2021.

If the deep-state Republicans (also known as RINO’s or Republicans In Name Only) go along with Biden’s election fraud, they will be doing several things.

  1. They will be removing our voice of representation from government. When we cannot have free and fair elections (obviously without the force of fraud), we cannot have any say in our government.
  2. They will be further cementing the two-tiered justices system where elites get to violate the law while peons are expected to toe the line.
  3. They will be destroying the common citizen’s trust in the effectiveness of the vote.
  4. They will be creating a class of elites who rule over the peons who have no say in who becomes elite.

If you got mad about voter fraud, then here are RINO’s to avoid in all future elections based on this denial of our vote

Here are Republicans In Name Only who deserve no support at the ballot box in my opinion for their standing against investigating voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election:

Secondly, did you also get as angry when Nancy limited the free speech rights of Representatives?

Nancy Pelosi imposes transgender-friendly House rules for speech

Breitbart quotes Representative Tom Cole regarding the elimination of “gendered terms” (father, mother, son, daughter, … ) from debate.

pelosi-job-covidRepresentative and ranking member of the House Rules Committee Tom Cole (R-OK) issued a statement in response to the Nancy Pelosi’s proposed House Rules for the 117th Congress — including the elimination of gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, and daughter” — calling the package “a blatant and cowardly assault on the voices and views of the Republican minority,” as well as “a dark day for the preservation of free and thoughtful debate.”

“I am very disappointed by the proposed House Rules for the 117th Congress put forward by the Democratic majority,” said Rep. Cole in a statement responding to the rules for the 117th Congress, which were unveiled on Friday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rules Committee Chairman James McGovern (D-MA).

“This package is a blatant and cowardly assault on the voices and views of the Republican minority, which represents a growing number of seats in the House following the general election in November,” Cole continued.

“Alarmingly, the package includes eliminating the longstanding motion to recommit in its current form and censoring opposing ideas,” the congressman added. “Clearly, this proves that Democrats are afraid of Republican ideas, and they cannot effectively defend their own points of view.”

Cole went on to say that such proposals confirm that “Pelosi knows she is unable to rally and effectively lead her own slimmed down caucus.”

“Rather than unify her own members, her solution is to punish and silence Republicans by overturning now-inconvenient precedents and traditions of the House,” said Cole, adding:

In addition to limiting procedural tools historically available to the minority party in Congress for more than a century, I am very disturbed that the package attacks the right to free speech by creating an ethics violation for members and employees of the House who post or share things that others think are unfounded or inappropriate.

Such a rule is rife with the possibility of abuse and likely to be enforced in a way that creates a double standard between the majority and minority. This is a dark day for the preservation of free and thoughtful debate in the institution and indeed, all members elected by the people and for the people.

On Friday, Pelosi and McGovern unveiled the rules for the 117th Congress, which contain “future-focused” proposals, including the elimination of gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, and daughter.”

(Read more at Breitbart)

If Nancy can force this on the House, she will try forcing it on the populace

If you think that this power grab will remain limited to the U.S. House of Representatives if you do not act, you are wrong.

Thirdly, did you get angry at the prostituting of the Congress through the opening words presented by Emanuel Cleaver?

Not a prayer for unity, but a speech to Democrats over political correctness

With a hat tip to Truth2Freedom, we heard by way of the New York Post how Representative Emanuel Cleaver opened the 117th Congress in a “prayer” that inspired the paper to focus on the last two words spoken. To whit, the New York Post begins their analysis with these paragraphs:

emanuel-cleaverA House Democrat tasked with leading the body in an opening prayer for the new Congress has gendered the word “amen.”

To close a prayer he delivered from the House chamber Sunday to mark the swearing in of the 117th Congress, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), an ordained minister, altered the traditional “amen” to say “amen and awoman.”

(Read more of their pontifications at the New York Post)

However, if you listen to or read the whole speech, you will find that Emanuel Cleaver is not praying to one God, but mentions several gods as he crafts a speech that:

  1. Lulls nominal Christians into complacency through the use of familiar phrases
  2. Further lulls them into complacency by using a noun generally assigned among Christians exclusively to God
  3. Adds more complacency by using phrases out of the Bible
  4. Asks for peace when Democrat allies Antifa and BLM are all about violence (and the leaders of the Democrat party have never denounced Antifa or BLM by name)
  5. Lands its first mocking blow by starting to say that this is all “in the name of the monotheistic god” Brahman (who, in the Hindu tradition, is not a monotheistic god)
  6. Next lands another mocking blow by acknowledging that the speech is to a “god known by many names, by many different things” (and, therefore, this speech in front of the party who booed God is not to any god at all)
  7. Of course, Emanuel ends this with “Amen” (which is a transliteration of the Hebrew word (אָמֵן) “a-meen” which means “may it be so.”) and then tacks on “a woman” (which is either a nod to Nancy Pelosi’s transgender-friendly rules or a violation of it).

Let us pray.1

Eternal God, marvelously, we bow before your throne of grace as we leave behind the politically and socially clamorous year of 2020. We gather now in this consequential chamber to inaugurate another chapter in our roller coaster representative government.2

The members of this august body acknowledge your sacred supremacy and therefore confess that, without your favor and forbearance, we enter this new year relying dangerously on our own fallible natures.

God, at a moment that many believe that the bright light of Democracy is beginning to dim, empower us with an extra dose of commitment to its principles.3 May we of the 117th Congress refuel the lamp of liberty so brimful that generations unborn will witness its undying flame.

And may we model community healing, control our tribal tendencies, and quicken our spirit that we may feel thy priestly presence even in moments of heightened disagreement.4 May we so feel Your presence that our service here may not be-soil by any utterance or acts unworthy of this high office.

Insert in our spirit a light so bright that we can see ourselves and our politics as we really are, soiled by selfishness, perverted by prejudice, and inveigled by ideology.

Now, may the God who created the world and everything in it bless us and keep us. May the Lord make His face to shine upon us and be gracious to us.5 May the Lord lift up the light of His countenance upon us6 and give us peace, peace in our families, peace across this land, and dare I ask, O Lord, peace even in this chamber now and evermore. We ask it in the name of the monotheistic god, Brahman7, and god known by many names, by many different things8. Amen and a woman9.

What can we gather from this speech?

  1. By leading with this line, this man is lying. This is not a prayer, but a speech.
  2. This Democrat overestimates the importance of the House in God’s scheme.
  3. By his reference to “a moment that many believe that the bright light of Democracy is beginning to dim,” even Democrats recognize that Biden’s election fraud dims the light of democracy.
  4. When Mr. Cleaver says “may we model community healing, control our tribal tendencies, and quicken our spirit that we may feel thy priestly presence even in moments of heightened disagreement,” does this mean that he will condemn members of Black Lives Matter if they beat or murder a white person or police officer? Or is he only preaching to Trump supporters who he imagines to be exclusively White (not Black or Hispanic)?
  5. Democrats have become adept at manipulating some nominal Christians by using words like “Lord.”
  6. Like Lucifer quoted and twisted the intent of scripture to Jesus in Matthew 4:1-11, this Democrat quoted and slightly changed the blessing of Numbers 6:25 when he said
    May the Lord make His face to shine upon” us
    (of course, the original blessing was directed outward to “you” — not inward to “us”).
  7. This Democrat also showed no love for monotheists, polytheists, or anyone in-between by mixing the traditions willy-nilly (since Brahman is a polytheistic god from the Hindu pantheon and the pronouns and nouns used to this point have been those used in Christian circles).
  8. When this Democrat calls (not prays) to “many different things,” it is evident that all of us have been played from the beginning of this prayer-like speech.
  9. Finally, considering that this Democrat has made this speech to godless Democrats, it was pointless to end the speech with “Amen.” Likewise, if any moderate Republican had ended his or her speech with “Amen and a woman,” he or she would have been roasted by Democrats for:
    • Genderizing “Amen”
    • Splitting it into only two genders
    • Pandering to the transgender community
    • Insulting Jews and Christians
    • Ignoring other faiths

So, are you going to let yourself get played by the Democrats (or other politicians)?

Starting in 1 Kings 18:21, Joshua implored the people of Israel:

Elijah came near to all the people and said, “How long will you hesitate between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.” But the people did not answer him a word. Then Elijah said to the people, “I alone am left a prophet of the Lord , but Baal’s prophets are 450 men. Now let them give us two oxen; and let them choose one ox for themselves and cut it up, and place it on the wood, but put no fire under it; and I will prepare the other ox and lay it on the wood, and I will not put a fire under it. Then you call on the name of your god, and I will call on the name of the Lord , and the God who answers by fire, He is God.” And all the people said, “ That is a good idea.”

So Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, “Choose one ox for yourselves and prepare it first for you are many, and call on the name of your god, but put no fire under it. ” Then they took the ox which was given them and they prepared it and called on the name of Baal from morning until noon saying, “O Baal, answer us.” But there was no voice and no one answered. And they leaped about the altar which they made. It came about at noon, that Elijah mocked them and said, “Call out with a loud voice, for he is a god; either he is occupied or gone aside, or is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and needs to be awakened.” So they cried with a loud voice and cut themselves according to their custom with swords and lances until the blood gushed out on them. When midday was past, they raved until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice; but there was no voice, no one answered, and no one paid attention.

Then Elijah said to all the people, “Come near to me.” So all the people came near to him. And he repaired the altar of the Lord which had been torn down. Elijah took twelve stones according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, to whom the word of the Lord had come, saying, “Israel shall be your name.” So with the stones he built an altar in the name of the Lord , and he made a trench around the altar, large enough to hold two measures of seed. Then he arranged the wood and cut the ox in pieces and laid it on the wood. And he said, “Fill four pitchers with water and pour it on the burnt offering and on the wood.” And he said, “Do it a second time,” and they did it a second time. And he said, “Do it a third time,” and they did it a third time. The water flowed around the altar and he also filled the trench with water.

At the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, Elijah the prophet came near and said, “O Lord , the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, today let it be known that You are God in Israel and that I am Your servant and I have done all these things at Your word. Answer me, O Lord , answer me, that this people may know that You, O Lord , are God, and that You have turned their heart back again.” Then the fire of the Lord fell and consumed the burnt offering and the wood and the stones and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. When all the people saw it, they fell on their faces; and they said, “The Lord , He is God; the Lord , He is God.” (1 Kings 18:21‭-‬39 NASB)

What was sauce for the goose in 2017 will become sauce for the gander in 2021

Featured

In 2017, 11 times VP Biden was interrupted during Trump’s electoral vote certification

CNN provides details of the eleven objections to certifying electors for Trump in 2017.

Vice President Joe Biden presided over a joint session of Congress Friday, where members officially tallied electoral votes from the 2016 presidential election. President-elect Donald Trump’s 304 electoral votes weren’t counted without incident, however. During the course of the certification, House Democrats tried to object to electoral votes from multiples states, with Biden gaveling them down for failure to follow the rules.

Objections to the votes needed to be in writing and signed by both a member of the House and a member of the Senate. Every House member who rose to object did so without a senator’s signature.

01 mcgovern1:09 P.M. ET: Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts rose to object to the certificate from Alabama.

“The electors were not lawfully certified, especially given the confirmed and illegal activities engaged by the government of Russia,” McGovern said.

Biden denied McGovern on the grounds that he didn’t have a senator’s signature on his written objection.

02 raskin1:14 P.M.: Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland rose to object to 10 of Florida’s 29 electoral votes.

“They violated Florida’s prohibition against dual office holders,” Raskin said.

Again, despite the fact that Raskin pointed out that he had his objection in writing, he failed to get a senator’s signature.

03 jayapal1:15 P.M.: No sooner had the Florida question been settled than its neighbor to the north was the subject of another objection, when Washington’s Rep. Pramila Jayapal objected to Georgia’s vote certificate.

“It is over,” Biden told the congresswoman.

04 lee1:21 P.M.: Rep. Barbara Lee of California brought up voting machines and Russian hacking when she objected following the counting of Michigan’s votes.

“People are horrified by the overwhelming evidence of Russian interference in our election,” Lee said.

Once again, her objection was denied for the lack of a senator’s signature. They also turned off her microphone.

05 jackson-lee1:23 P.M.: After New York’s tally was read, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas stood up to object.

“I object on the massive voter suppression that included –” Jackson Lee began.

“The debate is not in order,” Biden interrupted. Again, the congresswoman lacked a senator’s signature.

06 grijalva1:28 P.M.: Arizona’s Rep. Raul Grijalva rose to object after North Carolina’s tally. He tried to object on violations of the Voting Rights Act, but Biden shut him down.

As you may have guessed, he didn’t have the signature of a senator.

Once he gave up, Jackson Lee tagged him out and tried to object to the votes herself. They cut off her microphone, too.

“There is no debate. There is no debate. There is no debate,” a visibly agitated Biden said as he gaveled.

07 jackon-lee1:31 PM: Jackson Lee made another appearance minutes later after South Carolina’s certification.

“There is no debate in the joint session,” Biden said, shutting her down once more.

08-lee1:36 PM: Biden must have thought, after five minutes of peace and getting through the state of West Virginia, that the House members might observe the rules. Lee wasn’t even able to make it through her objection before Biden said, “There is no debate.”

They cut off her microphone again.

09 jackson-lee1:37 PM: Wisconsin’s votes had been read. With just Wyoming to go, the finish line was in reach.

Jackson Lee once again tried to make an objection on the grounds of Russian interference in the election.

“The objection cannot be received,” Biden said.

10 waters1:38 PM: The final state’s votes had been read. Then entered California Rep. Maxine Waters.

Taking a play from her own book – she objected to the certification of George W. Bush’s 2000 election – Waters admitted that she didn’t have a senator’s signature on her objection.

“I wish to ask: Is there one United States senator who will join me in this letter of objection?” Waters asked. Through House Speaker Paul Ryan’s chuckle and boos from the rest of the chamber, it was clear that there was not.

1:40 PM: The states were counted, but three protestors started yelling from the visitors’ gallery of the chamber. At least one of them was reciting the Constitution as he was taken away by security.

Biden did not look thrilled.

But at the end of the day, despite the objections, Trump’s election was certified by Congress.

(Read this at CNN)

By doing this pointless exercise, are these Representatives pandering, are they trying to cheat the system, or are they just being unstudied and dumb?

At the end of the day of 6 January 2017, the Democrats seemed to want to deny Donald Trump his victory at the polls. They seemed to want to use Hillary Clinton’s opposition research (aka the Steele dossier — a file fed to former British spy Ken Steele alleging that Trump held connections to Russia) to deny electoral votes from Republican states. However, in the end, they seemed to fail. Why?

Was it really only their goal to pander? Because a number of them may have known that most citizens do not know that it is the Congress that certifies the election, were they building reputations as underdog fighters (even though they knew they were doing nothing)? Were they just shadow boxing? Did Representative Jackson-Lee get up there three times so that she could point back and say, “Look at me! I fought against the seating of President Trump!”

Conversely, was this another attempt to cheat the system? Did they think that, since Republicans like Mitch McConnell seem to always want to go along to get along with their fellow “civil servants,” that Joe Biden would bend the rules? Had he been able to do this under the cover of darkness between 1 and 2 a.m. and behind windows covered by Democrats, then maybe he might have. However, this was performed in accordance with the yet-unchanged Constitution where Congress meets at 1 p.m. on 6 January in view of cameras that broadcast to the entire world.

Finally, did they do it because they were just dumb? Considering that Sheila Jackson-Lee was one of the representatives who got up to speak more than once after being told that their attempts were insufficient (and how those attempts were insufficient), maybe so. Also considering that Representative Jackson-Lee (on another occasion) thought to ask of the Mars Rover operators, “What, what, is it going to go where the astronauts planted the flag?” Rather than being abjectly stupid, maybe they just completely underestimate their opponents. Maybe they don’t know that a number of conservative opponents know that it takes a written (not spoken) object that is signed by both at least one senator’s and one representative’s signature to object to the electors for one state. We also know that once the objection for that state’s electors is submitted, then the House and Senate retire to separate chambers to debate the objection. If the electors for only up to four states gather written objections with signatures from both the House and Senate happen on 6 January and if the Congress cannot resolve the issue within eight cumulative hours of debate, then the issue goes to the governor of each state involved. However, if the electors from more than four states are contested and if the debate stretches to a period longer than eight hours, the matter goes to state delegations in the House. Each state gets one vote. Currently, there are 26 Republican state delegations, 20 Democrat state delegations, and 4 split. The same ratio of Republican, Democrat, and mixed delegations were in place in 2017. Therefore, it would have been stupid to have gathered signatures from both sides if more than four states had been at the center of objections. That would have resulted in the vote on the electors going to 26 Republican state delegations.

GOP senators (including Cruz, Blackburn) to “reject the electors from disputed states” on 6 January

Breitbart explains how a select set of senators have committed to rejecting the electors of disputed states.

GOP senators, including Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Steve Daines (R-MT), John Kennedy (R-LA), and Mike Braun (R-IN), are joining Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) in objecting to electoral college votes on January 6, they announced on Saturday in a joint statement alongside four senators-elect.

The senators and incoming lawmakers — including Sens.-elect Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Roger Marshall (R-KS), Bill Hagerty (R-TN), and Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) — released a joint statement on Saturday, expressing their intent to “reject the electors from disputed states” on January 6, explaining that the 2020 presidential election featured “unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.”

“And those allegations are not believed just by one individual candidate. Instead, they are widespread,” the lawmakers said, citing a Reuters/Ipsos poll showing that over one-third of Americans, or 39 percent, believe the election was “rigged.”

“That belief is held by Republicans (67%), Democrats (17%), and Independents (31%),” the Republicans said, noting that some members of Congress disagree, “as do many members of the media.”

“But, whether or not our elected officials or journalists believe it, that deep distrust of our democratic processes will not magically disappear. It should concern us all. And it poses an ongoing threat to the legitimacy of any subsequent administrations,” they continued, explaining that, in an ideal world, the courts “would have heard evidence and resolved these claims of serious election fraud.”

The Supreme Court, however, declined to do so on two occasions, they argued.

“On January 6, it is incumbent on Congress to vote on whether to certify the 2020 election results. That vote is the lone constitutional power remaining to consider and force resolution of the multiple allegations of serious voter fraud,” they said, explaining the “long precedent of  Democratic Members of Congress raising objections to presidential election results, as they did in 1969, 2001, 2005, and 2017.”

They wrote:

And, in both 1969 and 2005, a Democratic Senator joined with a Democratic House Member in forcing votes in both houses on whether to accept the presidential electors being challenged.

The most direct precedent on this question arose in 1877, following serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct in the Hayes-Tilden presidential race. Specifically, the elections in three states—Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina—were alleged to have been conducted illegally.

In 1877, Congress did not ignore those allegations, nor did the media simply dismiss those raising them as radicals trying to undermine democracy. Instead, Congress appointed an Electoral Commission—consisting of five Senators, five House Members, and five Supreme Court Justices—to consider and resolve the disputed returns.

We should follow that precedent. To wit, Congress should immediately appoint an Electoral Commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. Once completed, individual states would evaluate the Commission’s findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote, if needed.

“Accordingly, we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not ‘regularly given’ and ‘lawfully certified’ (the statutory requisite), unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed,” they announced.

The GOP lawmakers contended that support of election integrity should “not be a partisan issue” and called for a “fair and credible audit” completed prior to inauguration day, expressing the belief that such would “dramatically improve Americans’ faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President.”

“We owe that to the People,” they continued:

These are matters worthy of the Congress, and entrusted to us to defend. We do not take this action lightly. We are acting not to thwart the democratic process, but rather to protect it. And every one of us should act together to ensure that the election was lawfully conducted under the Constitution and to do everything we can to restore faith in our Democracy.

The senators’ announcement puts them alongside Hawley, the first GOP senator to announce his intention to object to the electoral college votes in key states.

In a Wednesday release, the Missouri lawmaker explained that he could not vote to certify the results “without raising the fact that some states, particularly Pennsylvania, failed to follow their own state election laws.” He also said he could not do so “without pointing out the unprecedented effort of mega corporations, including Facebook and Twitter, to interfere in this election, in support of Joe Biden.”

He, too, called on Congress to investigate allegations of voter fraud and adopt election security measures. At this point, Hawley added, Congress failed to properly act on the matter.

“For these reasons, I will follow the same practice Democrat members of Congress have in years past and object during the certification process on January 6 to raise these critical issues,” he said.

At least 140 House Republicans are expected to object to an immediate certification of a Joe Biden victory, as Breitbart News detailed.

(Read the central point in the article as contained in the last two sentences at Breitbart)

Now this raises four questions

The first question is: “Are they really going into this to find the answers to questions that both Democrats and the Democrat press have suppressed since 3 November 2020?” If these Republicans are, then I fully support their efforts (that must be held in full view of everyone).

If the second question turns out to be: “Are they just pandering?” Then their actions will bear them out and we will see them for the empty shells and minions of Mitch McConnell that they are.

“Do they think that we are stupid?” If this question (along with the second) becomes evident, then we will know how to respond. We will know that we cannot elect another liberal or incumbent.

“Do they underestimate us?” If this question (along with the second and third) comes up, it is only because we complacently let it.

Damning confessions by liberals

Featured

Lockdowns were inspired by the Chinese Communist Party

Do you remember the computer modeler who predicted that millions in the US would die from coronavirus? Do you remember how politicians like Dallas Judge Clay Jenkins and Harris County Judge Lina Hidlago used these predictions to shut down large parts of our country? Breitbart reported in a 27 December 2020 article that the reason British liberals felt so comfortable with locking down entire communities was the way the Chinese Communist Party locked down Wuhan.

Neil-FergusonProfessor Neil Ferguson, the discredited Imperial College computer modeller behind Britain’s draconian lockdown policies, has come clean about his inspiration: none of it would have been possible without the shining example of the Chinese Communist Party.

In an extraordinary interview with the Times (of London), Ferguson admits that if it hadn’t been for China’s example, no Western country would ever have dreamed of putting its populace under house arrest.

Back in 2019, about the time someone was getting infected by a bat, no European country’s pandemic plans seriously entertained the prospect of putting a country on pause.

Then, that’s what China did. “I think people’s sense of what is possible in terms of control changed quite dramatically between January and March,” Professor Ferguson says.

Ferguson appears to find the idea of emulating a totalitarian state exciting rather than embarrassing or shaming because he boasts about it again later in the interview.

In January, members of Sage, the government’s scientific advisory group, had watched as China enacted this innovative intervention in pandemic control that was also a medieval intervention.

“They claimed to have flattened the curve. I was sceptical at first. I thought it was a massive cover-up by the Chinese. But as the data accrued it became clear it was an effective policy.”

Then, as infections seeded across the world, springing up like angry boils on the map, Sage debated whether, nevertheless, it would be effective here. “It’s a communist one party state, we said. We couldn’t get away with it in Europe, we thought.” In February one of those boils raged just below the Alps. “And then Italy did it. And we realised we could.”

That phrase ‘get away with it’ is instructive. It implies that, at least on a subconscious level, Ferguson is aware that copying Communist China’s lockdown policy was not a morally acceptable act, merely one that peculiar circumstances made possible.

Though the lockdowns are unprecedented in modern history and have, in the UK, been responsible for the biggest collapse in GDP in 300 years, as well as the destruction of many thousands of businesses and hundreds of thousands of jobs, Ferguson shows zero contrition for having provided the computer modelled doomsday scenarios responsible for all this misery.

(Read more at Breitbart)

Maybe the same can be said about American liberals who imposed lockdowns

By extrapolation, maybe even American liberals like Clay Jenkins and Lina Hidalgo can be said to have gained inspiration from the Communist Chinese.

Democrats fear possibility that COVID-19 will cost Nancy Pelosi her job

With a hat tip to The Lone Cactus, the New York Post reported in a 26 December 2020 article how Democrats fear the overapplication of restrictions and underapplication of mercy might cost them.

pelosi-job-covidCongressional Democrats are sweating about the possibility that the coronavirus may cost Nancy Pelosi her job.

The party is facing a far narrower majority next year and some members fear a coronavirus outbreak that disproportionately hit Dems could upend her expected reelection as Speaker of the House.

“Let’s say, just theoretically, we had six or eight people out with COVID and the Republicans have none. They probably could elect [Kevin] McCarthy,” Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.), told The Hill, speaking of the current Republican House leader.

Making sure her caucus shows up is also only half the battle. During her last campaign for speaker two years ago, she triumphed despite 15 members of her own party voting against her. She won’t have that margin of error this time around.

At least three Democrats, Pennsylvania’s Conor Lamb, Maine’s Jared Golden and Michigan’s Elissa Slotkin have all said they intend to oppose Pelosi’s reelection to the speaker’s chair.

Washington, DC, has not been spared as the coronavirus continues to spread across the country. This week alone, five new members of the House tested positive for the deadly virus — bringing the total lawmakers with confirmed infections to 35.

“There’s the usual suspects who make it part of their brand to vote against her,” Connecticut Democrat Jim Himes added to the paper.

(Read more at the New York Post)

These admissions to reporters seem to be a confession (in kind) to the cumulative COVID sins of Democrats

Maybe some Democrats see that holding relief checks for over 9 months until she could say, “but that’s OK now, because we have a new president” does not cut it for the citizens of many states and counties locked down by primarily Democrat politicians. Add to this the insult: these politicians live by “Do as I say, not as I do” even when it comes to swearing-in ceremonies).

Maybe some Democrats have seen how many feel a number of “little tyrant” Democrats seem eager to strip citizens of their right to earn a living. The line that we will have to endure COVID “just a few more months” is starting to ring hollow.

Maybe other Democrats have grated at Nancy’s “Let them eat ice cream” attitude. Others may have seen the hypocrisy of her maskless, indoor hair salon visit at a time that all other hair salons were shut down.

Of course, a number of “moderate” Democrats (if those exist), Nancy might be faulted for allowing all of Joe’s socialist talking points to slip in. Odd thing is that — if these were winning topics for Joe — why didn’t they work for the rank-and-file? Why did Biden win with winning topics like “defund the police”, Green New Deal, studen loan forgiveness, Medicare for all, and other winning topics while other Democrats lost like Biden had no coattails?

Maybe it could have something to do with anchoring the Democrat tug to a sinking ship

Could it have been that when the polling places all shut down at near 1 a.m. (you know, when Trump was in the lead) in all six battleground states, Biden’s people only had time to determine the need, create, and run ballots that were only for their guy.

But, as Democrats, surely they Believe in Biden. They believe that Biden outperformed Obama in key cities of battleground states, but underperformed Obama everywhere else. They believe that Biden outperformed Hillary in four cities, but underperformed her everywhere else. They believe that Biden won despite losing the bellwether counties.

Media_noncoverage_Biden

CNN_noncoverage_Biden

DemocratTyrrany2

DemocratTyrrany

Joe-Linus

LetsHopeNotTime

6 January 2021 explained (in part)

Featured

Trump urges supporters to gather in DC on 6 January 2021

The Epoch Times notes how President Trump has called for supporters to march on DC on 6 January. They also note that (at the writing of this 23 December 2020 article) they observed 11 Republicans who will be in the House who had committed to standing against the electoral votes.

President Donald Trump on Sunday urged supporters to join the planned protests in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.

MarchForTrump“See you in Washington, DC, on January 6th. Don’t miss it,” Trump wrote in a tweet, promising more information later.

A number of groups are planning to gather in the nation’s capital next month as members of Congress convene in a joint session to count electoral votes.

At least 11 members or members-elect in the House of Representatives plan to object to electoral votes. They have not yet received a commitment from a senator; challenges require both a representative and a member of the upper congressional chamber. The objection wouldn’t be upheld unless a majority of each chamber vote in favor of it.

Trump has repeatedly called on Republican senators to object to the votes, alleging widespread election fraud in swing states.

About two dozen GOP senators have already said they will not object to the votes, according to an Epoch Times tally. Others have indicated they would not join in an objection.

Five senators have said they’re open to objecting to the votes, as is Sen.-elect Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), while the rest haven’t ruled it out.

(Read more at The Epoch Times)

When politicians like Biden pull off fraud in the dark, we need to both put it in the light and make him feel the heat of the populace

Hearings before Congress will get things that the media refuses to cover into the light.

Crowds in the streets will help the Democrats (and Republicans) feel the heat. Who knows? Maybe Republicans getting rowdy for a change might help.

It seems that Antifa’s and BLM’s riots have John Roberts cowed.

Happenings on the the 6th of January in Congress

Although The Epoch Times begins its 29 December 2020 article by focusing on the debated role of the Vice President, there are concerning the counting of the electors.

(continued)

CongressThe Constitution simply states that electors of each state have to meet, make a list of their votes, “which they shall sign and certify,” and send those to the president of the Senate, meaning Vice President Mike Pence.

“The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted,” the 1804 amendment says.

The Electoral Count Act of 1887, currently known as 3 U.S. Code Section 15, establishes a procedure for how the votes are counted, how to raise objections, and how to resolve disputes. First, it says that the vice president indeed presides over the proceedings. Then, it says the House and Senate leaders each designate two tellers. The VP opens the envelopes with the vote certificates and hands them to the tellers for counting. The tellers then read them out loud, count them, and hand them back to the VP to announce the results.

Then, in rather convoluted language, the law says that Congress members can object. At least one objection from each chamber is needed to trigger a separate vote by both House and Senate on the objections. If both chambers agree, the objected voters are rejected. That’s virtually out of the question given the Democrats’ majority in the House.

If two sets of electors are presented for counting, the House and Senate need to separately vote on which set is legitimate and which should be rejected. If each chamber votes differently, the set certified by the state’s governor should count. That would hand the victory to Biden.

The problem is, there’s a voluminous body of legal analysis arguing that the Electoral Count Act is unconstitutional. Congress has no business granting itself the authority to decide which slate of electors is the correct one and which votes should be rejected. Nor does Congress have the power to designate state governors as the final arbiters, a lineup of legislators and legal scholars have argued.

There are two arguments for who has the constitutional power to decide which electors to choose.

Some jurists say it’s the VP who has the sole discretion to decide which votes to count. The argument is that the framers intended for the VP to be the sole authority over the counting of the votes because the unanimous resolution attached to the Constitution said that the Senate should appoint its president “for the sole purpose of receiving, opening, and counting the votes for president.”

Moreover, before the adoption of the Electoral Count Act, it was always the VP counting the votes, sometimes despite major objections from Congress. Thomas Jefferson did so as the VP in the 1800 election, counting Georgia’s constitutionally deficient votes and de facto securing his own presidency.

Arizona state lawmakers and GOP electors, together with Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), have filed a federal suit asking for the court to clarify the law to the effect that the Electoral Count Act is unconstitutional and the VP’s power is paramount.

Not everybody agrees, though.

University of Virginia professor John Harrison, an expert on constitutional history, says the VP doesn’t have “any constitutional power to make decisions” over which votes to count.

He argued that the law is deficient to the effect that “Congress doesn’t have the power to make the announcement [of its decisions regarding the vote count] conclusive.” But that doesn’t mean it can’t prescribe any rules at all.

“The Constitution does call for counting the votes with both houses present, so I think that setting up procedures for a count is within Congress’s power,” he told The Epoch Times via email.

The second argument is that the Constitution grants the authority to determine how electors are picked to state legislatures. As such, any disputes over which votes should be counted should be resolved by state legislatures.

The problem is, state legislatures aren’t in session and they can’t assemble in a special session without a call from the governors, who have refused to do so. Meanwhile, the legislatures have usually delegated the power to certify electors to the Governors and Secretaries of State, undermining their own authority on the matter.

The conservative Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society has filed a federal lawsuit arguing that the power of the legislatures is both “exclusive and non-delegable,” and thus any state and federal statutes to the contrary are unconstitutional and void.

That would not only knock down some provisions of the Electoral Count Act, but also render electoral votes that haven’t been certified post-election by state legislatures illegitimate.

Regardless of what the courts will say, the core question is what will take place in the House chambers on Jan. 6? Will Pence refuse to follow the Electoral Count Act? Will some of the tellers dissent? If things go wrong for the Democrats, will House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) try to end the session prematurely?

(Read the introduction at The Epoch Times)

Since I am only a technical writer and adjunct professor, why am I the only one to look to the history books?

Yes, there are many scenarios that “can” occur if we don’t have to strictly follow the Constitution. However, what happened in the past when there were such disputes?

Does nobody remember the battle for the White House waged between Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, William Crawford, and Henry Clay? Even though Jackson won more of the popular vote and the greatest part of the electoral college, Congress selected John Quincy Adams as President for that term (and, somehow, Clay was selected as Secretary of State). Of course, Jackson came back four years later and won the presidency.

With Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina too close to call (and both sides claiming fraud), Democrat Sam Tilden ended election day with 250,000 more ballots and 19 more electoral votes than Republican Rutherford B. Hayes. However, with neither side having the majority (185), Congress established a 15-member commission of senators, congressmen, and justices to decide the election. After a swing vote fell to Hayes, the Democrats agreed not to filibuster on the condition that Hayes remove federal troops from the South (thus ending the Reconstruction).

Then there was the race between Bush and Gore (where the entire hopes of Gore centered on three counties in Florida where it seems either there was fraud in his favor or many people in those three counties that could not figure out how to use paper ballots). When the “equal under the law” provisions of the Constitution were about to be enforced across Florida (and the standards of the three counties would be used for all counties), Gore conceded.

Although the last of these examples expressed itself in the courts by seeking what was Constitutional in the situation, the rest were purely political. That is where the pressure from the masses comes in.

Dozens of Republicans plan to challenge the Electoral College results

The Epoch Times outlines a list of Republicans who have committed to contesting the electoral college results.

HawleyAt least 25 Republicans plan on challenging electoral votes during next month’s joint session of Congress, according to a tally by The Epoch Times.

Twenty-four representatives and representatives-elect, who will enter office several days before the session, plan on filing objections. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) is the only member or member-elect of the upper chamber to commit to an objection.

“You’ve got 74 million Americans who feel disenfranchised, who feel like their vote doesn’t matter. And this is the one opportunity that I have as a United States senator, this process right here, my one opportunity to stand up and say something, and that’s exactly what I’m going to do,” Hawley said on Wednesday.

Objections are filed in writing and must have support from at least one member of each chamber. If they do, they trigger a two-hour debate and a vote by the House of Representatives and the Senate. A simple majority in each chamber is required to uphold the challenge.

Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) told The Epoch Times that the group plans to file objections against the votes from six states, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, and Nevada. They’re mulling an objection to votes from New Mexico.

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) was the first to announce plans to file an objection.

“In my judgment, based on what I have seen so far and my own personal experience with voter fraud and election theft by Democrats, in my judgment, if you only could count lawfully cast votes by American citizens, Donald Trump won the Electoral College,” Brooks told The Epoch Times “American Thought Leaders” last month.

A slew of members or members-elect have said this week they’re joining the group plotting the objections.

“If irregularities exist, we should examine and provide solutions to make sure our electoral process is accurate and represents the will of the people,” Rep.-elect Burgess Owens (R-Utah) told news outlets in a statement. “Millions of Americans across this country are concerned about the electoral process and we do them a great disservice by merely ignoring their voices.”

Republican Senate leadership opposes the planned objections. About two dozen GOP senators have said they will not object, while others have indicated opposition. A small group—Sens. Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)—have said they may object.

Virtually all Democrats have said they will not object, and have criticized those who plan to challenge votes.  Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s spokeswoman told reporters on Wednesday that the team views the counting of electoral votes as a mere formality, while House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) expressed confidence Biden would be confirmed as president-elect.

Here are the lawmakers planning on challenging votes:

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.)
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.)
Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.)
Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas)
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas)
Rep. Ted Budd (R-N.C.)
Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.)
Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas)
Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.)
Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.)
Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.)
Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.)
Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.)
Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.)
Rep.-elect Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.)
Rep.-elect Barry Moore (R-Ala.)
Rep.-elect Bob Good (R-Va.)
Rep.-elect Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.)
Rep.-elect Ronny Jackson (R-Texas)
Rep.-elect Burgess Owens (R-Utah)
Rep.-elect Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.)
Rep.-elect Jerry Carl (R-Ala.)
Rep.-elect Yvette Herrell (R-N.M.)
Rep.-elect Diana Harshbarger (R-Tenn.)

(Read this at The Epoch Times)

They miss a few things, but not much

One thing that they have mentioned repeatedly is that it only takes one objection from the House and one from the Senate to start this. If there is one Representative and one Senator, that is enough. However, The Epoch Times seems to have missed the multiple announcements from Tommy Tuberville.


The reason for the 6 January gathering: Who’s stealing America?

The Epoch Times lays out many of the reasons for the whole conflict.

The year 2020 has been most unusual.

It started with an unprecedented global pandemic caused by the CCP virus, and it’s concluding with the U.S. presidential election, which has captivated the world.

On election night, on Nov. 3, an assortment of anomalies were observed, followed by a large number of specific allegations of election fraud. As the integrity of the election continued to be questioned and evidence continued to emerge, most mainstream media stuck to a one-sided narrative by calling the 2020 election the most secure in American history, and sought to silence opposing voices.

The results of the 2020 election will not only decide the future of the United States, but also determine the future of the world.

Following election night, The Epoch Times’ investigative team quickly went to work. In an attempt to uncover the issues behind the election, investigative reporter Joshua Phillip traveled across the country to swing states to interview whistleblowers, big data experts, and election experts.

This is the first investigative documentary published on election integrity in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

Why was the vote count halted in key swing states on election night? What are the problems and potential fraud associated with mail-in ballots? Is Dominion Voting Systems secure or not? What lies behind the $400 million received by the parent company of Dominion Voting Systems less than a month before the election? Who is trying to manipulate the U.S. election behind the scenes? Who is the benefactor of an increasingly divided American society? What will become of America at this historical juncture?

What choice should you, I, and every American patriot make? The Epoch Times’ investigative team presents to you a detailed investigative report.

(Read more and watch the additional videos at The Epoch Times)

If you can look at the Independents, Democrats, and Republicans who testified against the coordinated fraud and wonder who is behind it, remember Biden’s words

Remember that Joe Biden bragged that he had assembled the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.

If you don’t think that Biden would brag about something bad, remember also that Joe Biden bragged about getting the Ukrainian prosecutor who investigated his son fired.

Pennsylvania lawmakers urge McConnell and McCarthy to dispute Pennsylvania election results

It seems that Pennsylvania lawmakers want Congress (aka, Senate Majority Leader McConnell — who has already proclaimed Biden to be “President-Elect” before 6 January — and House Minority Leader McCarthy) to dispute the Pennsylvania election. This comes via The Epoch Times.

A group of 27 Pennsylvania GOP lawmakers on Dec. 30 penned a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), calling on them to dispute the Pennsylvania election results until an investigation is conducted into numerous claims of fraud.

Pointing to allegations of fraudulent activity and violations of election law, the lawmakers said in the letter that their effort has “nothing to do with overturning any election results, but rather ascertaining if the allegations of fraud corrupted the outcome of the vote.”

“There are simply too many questions that remain unanswered to say that the results can be trusted and therefore the certification is premature, and the results must be disputed until an investigation is completed,” wrote the group, comprised of eight Pennsylvania state senators and 19 state representatives.

Key allegations include statistical anomalies in votes, witnesses claiming interference with poll watchers’ ability to do their jobs, delays in opening or closing polling locations on Election Day, illegal ballot harvesting, improper ballot “curing,” lapses in chain of custody of ballots and election materials, and outright submission of fraudulent ballots.

The lawmakers also claimed a “massive vote deficit” in Pennsylvania, alleging that over 200,000 more votes were counted than the total number of voters who voted in the Nov. 3 election. They provided a reference to a recent statement put out by a group of Pennsylvania lawmakers, who compared Department of State records to DoS/SURE system records in claiming this discrepancy.

“These numbers just don’t add up, and the alleged certification of Pennsylvania’s presidential election results was absolutely premature, unconfirmed, and in error,” the lawmakers said in a release.

The Pennsylvania secretary of state’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment on the discrepancy. A spokesperson for Kathy Boockvar, Pennsylvania’s secretary of state, told The Washington Examiner in a statement that the Republican lawmakers’ “so-called analysis was based on incomplete data” and that both state and federal judges “have sifted through hundreds of pages of unsubstantiated and false allegations and found no evidence of fraud or illegal voting.”

In their letter to McConnell and McCarthy, the lawmakers also allege that around one-third of the 121,000 voters whose gender on state voter rolls is noted as “Unidentified,” are fraudulent, and that around 90,000 of them voted in 2020.

They also referred to a Senate Majority Policy Committee hearing on Nov. 25, during which hours of testimony was presented regarding alleged voter fraud and violations of Pennsylvania election laws. Some of the irregularities presented during the hearing, which the lawmakers referred to in their letter, include claims that mail-in ballots were improperly inspected, hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots were processed with “zero civilian oversight,” poll watchers were denied meaningful access, and timeline spikes showing more ballots being processed at a given time than voting machines are able to tabulate.

“In one such spike, close to 600,000 votes were dumped in a processing facility, with 570,000 of these votes going for Biden, and a paltry 3,200 for Trump,” they wrote.

The lawmakers argued that the hearing showed “rampant election fraud” in Pennsylvania, and that this “must be investigated, remedied, and rectified.”

They also alleged that in Pennsylvania the state Supreme Court and members of the executive branch undermined the state election code by such actions as eliminating signature verification while “allowing the proliferation of drop boxes with questionable security measures and the unauthorized curing of ballots.”

(Read more at The Epoch Times)

This puts pressure on Mitch to protect our voting process

If Mitch works to protect the corrupt Biden, we will know to never NEVER vote for another incumbent.

Small pieces of the ignored and media-discredited evidence in the President’s election fraud case

Featured

First, look at the videos of witnesses providing sworn testimony

While this blog did not capture all of the testimony concerning election fraud, it did capture videos and the related text regarding testimony from:

After the Georgia presidential election was certified, a state report reveals fraud

According to a report released by Georgia (available here in pdf format) after their Electoral College electors were initially certified by the state, multiple forms of fraud were witnessed in Georgia. Among these were:

  • Violation of ballot/computer security procedures during both early voting and on election day
    • Bridget Thorne testified toward thousands of ballots being scanned without observing chain of custody, making oaths, or following procedures. Additionally, she found that anyone in the warehouse could print ballots.
  • Counting votes without monitoring or meaningful monitoring
    • On election day, video revealed that State Farm Arena in Fulton County had an election worker approaching poll watchers. Media reports coroborate that poll watchers were told to go home at about 10 p.m. on election night. Six workers stayed behind to illegally process ballots from a set of suitcases. During the next 2 hours, multiple machines processed up to 3,000 ballots per hour.
    • David Cross provided testimony that illustrated how 136,155 votes suddenly appeared in Biden’s vote column at 1:59 a.m. on the day after Election Day.
    • Scott Hall of Fulton County testified that there were stacks and stacks of ballots that were left in the open.
    • Mr. Hall also noted that the restriction of 1 poll watcher per 10 ballot counting tables was far from effective.
    • Mark Amick said that DeKalb County allowed only one monitor for 10 tables of 16 recounters. The monitors were kept six feet away and poll watchers could not see the totals on the screens.
    • Susan Voyles of Sandy Springs observed pallets of ballots before being told to go home for the night on 14 November. When returning on 15 November, those pallets were gone.
  • Fifteen pages of testimony are included in this report

Peter Navarro releases damning report on 2020 election fraud

In an 17 December 2020 installment, the Dan Bongino Show explains the main points of the Navarro Report along with a link to the full report.

Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy and Assistant to the President Peter Navarro released a thirty-six page report on the 2020 election earlier this morning.

Titled “The Immaculate Deception: Six Key Dimensions of Election Irregularities,” the report focuses on outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, equal protection clause violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies.

A summary of the report’s key allegations from its executive summary are as follows:

  • The ballots in question because of the identified election irregularities are more than sufficient to swing the outcome in favor of President Trump should even a relatively small portion of these ballots be ruled illegal.
  • All six battleground states exhibit most, or all, six dimensions of election irregularities.
  • This was theft by a thousand cuts across six dimensions and six battleground states rather than any one single “silver bullet” election irregularity.

A table from the report breaks down which irregularities apply to each state analyzed. It also compares Biden’s reported margin of victory to the number of potential illegal ballots in each state.

Immaculate-Deception-Navarro-Report1

Of the above chart, the report states:

  • Significant irregularities appear to be ubiquitous across the six battleground states. Only Arizona is free of any apparent widespread ballot mishandling while only Pennsylvania lacks significant statistical anomalies. The rest of the matrix is a sea of checkmarks and occasional stars.

Of dead and “ghost” voters, the report states:

  • In Pennsylvania, for example, a statistical analysis conducted by the Trump Campaign matching voter rolls to public obituaries found what appears to be over 8,000 confirmed dead voters successfully casting mail-in ballots. In Georgia – underscoring the critical role any given category of election irregularities might play in determining the outcome – the estimated number of alleged deceased individuals casting votes almost exactly equals the Biden victory margin.
  • On the Ghost Voter front, a “Ghost Voter” is a voter who requests and submits a ballot under the name of a voter who no longer resides at the address where that voter was registered. In Georgia for example, it is alleged that over 20,000 absentee or early voters – almost twice the Biden victory margin – cast their ballots after having moved out of state.

In the section of the report on election voting machine irregularities, the report makes note of a number of improbable vote surges all in favor of Biden:

  • At least one instance of a large and inexplicable vote switching and vote surge in favor of Joe Biden took place in Antrim County, Michigan – and it is associated with the controversial aforementioned Dominion-Smartmatic voting machine hardware-software combo. In this Republican stronghold, 6,000 votes were initially, and incorrectly, counted for Joe Biden. The resulting vote totals were contrary to voter registration and historical patterns and therefore raised eyebrows. When a check was done, it was discovered that the 6,000 votes were actually for Donald J. Trump. A subsequent forensic audit of the Antrim County vote tabulation found that the Dominion system had an astonishing error rate of 68 percent. By way of comparison, the Federal Election Committee requires that election systems must have an error rate no larger than 0.0008 percent.
  • In Georgia, there were numerous “glitches” with the Dominion machines where the results would change. The most notable of these changes was a 20,000 vote surge for Biden and 1,000 vote decrease for Trump

Read the report for yourself *here.*

(If you can’t download it from Bongino, here is another link to the pdf file)

A video provides a case (both circumstantial and evidentiary) against the Biden campaign, built on the reports and testimony above (and more)

Testimony on the Texas House provides circumstantial evidence that may work against Justice Roberts

Joe Biden’s America – 30 December 2020 edition

Featured

Liberals show their true colors

Public radio “reporter” arrested for firebombing police cars

With a hat tip to the Gateway Pundit, we find that Biz Pac Review has identified one public radio reporter who has been arrested for throwing Molotov cocktails into police cars and cutting their tires.

One of four criminal suspects who were arrested earlier this month for fire-bombing police vehicles in Little Rock back in August has been outed as a far-left activist “reporter” for an Arkansas-based public radio station.

On Dec. 17th, the Department of Justice published a press release announcing the arrest of four suspects: “Brittany Dawn Jeffrey, 31; Emily Nowlin, 27; Renea Goddard, 22; and Aline Espinosa-Villegas, 24; all of Little Rock.”

Three of the four — Nowlin, Goddard and Espinosa-Villegas — allegedly prepared Molotov cocktails at Jeffrey’s home and then threw them into several Little Rock Police Department cruisers during a “protest” on Aug. 25th. They also allegedly punctured the vehicles’ tires.

Renea Baek GoddardOne of the four, Goddard, has since been outed as Renea Baek Goddard, a radical, far-left “gay rights” and “trans rights” activist who’s worked as a “reporter” for local public radio station KUAR since 2018.

Her LinkedIn profile shows that she graduated from the University of Arkansas at Little Rock last year and is a member of a plethora of far-left activist organizations, including Queer Youth Leading the South, the UALR Gay-Straight Alliance and A.W.A.R.E.

In her LinkedIn page, she describes most of the groups as “intersectional.”SG-Renea-Baek-Goddard-LinkedIn

Intersectionality is a bigoted left-wing ideology that attempts to classify people into a hierarchy based on their race, their religion, their gender, their sexuality, etc.

According to its twisted ideology, white people are at the bottom of the hierarchy because they allegedly were always the “oppressors” in history. As such, their viewpoints and demands don’t matter.

Conversely, gay/trans people like Goddard are at the top of the hierarchy and thus must not be criticized or spoken of negatively. As such, anyone who does criticize them is a “homophobe” or “TERF.”

Goddard’s Twitter account profile says that she’s also written for Truthout, Arkansas Public Media and Thought Catalog.

In one article she wrote for the far-left site Truthout last year, she falsely accused President Donald Trump of saying that neo-Nazis are “very nice people.”

(Read more at Biz Pac Review)

Much as Antifa and BLM have built credentials as thugs, certain individuals seem to need to build their reputation

By looking at this activist’s LinkedIn profile, this person has set herself in a class that will likely only find wide acceptance on the East and West coasts.

As has been noted here and elsewhere, social media and safe spaces have allowed some of us to use social media to locate people of similar beliefs and customs to our own (thus creating “confirmation bias” in opinions that we share). Obviously, for people like Ms. Goddard who already find themselves hanging on the edge of reality, this can be a dangerous place.

Never-Trump Republicans, fake conservatives, and those held down by Democrats come out with day-late/dollar-short revelations on the election

Pennsylvania GOP lawmakers say analysis finds presidential election numbers don’t add up

The Epoch Times reports in a 29 December 2020 article that a group of Pennsylvania Republicans has found discrepancies in the election.

A group of Pennsylvania lawmakers has claimed a “troubling discrepancy” between the number of votes counted and the number of voters who voted in the 2020 election, alleging that the certification of presidential election results was “absolutely premature, unconfirmed, and in error.”

The Republican lawmakers said in a press release on Monday that their analysis is based on a comparison of official county election results to the total number of voters who voted on Nov. 3 in Pennsylvania.

They said that Department of State figures show “that 6,962,607 total ballots were reported as being cast, while DoS/SURE system records indicate that only 6,760,230 total voters actually voted.”

Among the 6,962,607 total ballots cast, 6,931,060 total votes were counted in the presidential race, including all three candidates on the ballot and write-in candidates, according to the lawmakers.

They said the difference of 202,377 more votes cast than voters voting, together with the 31,547 over- and under-votes in the presidential race, adds up to a discrepancy of 170,830 votes, which is more than twice the reported statewide difference between President Donald Trump and Democrat challenger Joe Biden.

“These numbers just don’t add up, and the alleged certification of Pennsylvania’s presidential election results was absolutely premature, unconfirmed, and in error,” the lawmakers wrote.

The Pennsylvania secretary of state’s office did not immediately respond to a query from The Epoch Times.

A spokesperson for Kathy Boockvar, Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State, told The Washington Examiner in a statement that the Republican lawmakers’ “so-called analysis was based on incomplete data” and that both state and federal judges “have sifted through hundreds of pages of unsubstantiated and false allegations and found no evidence of fraud or illegal voting.”

Certified results of the election in Pennsylvania put Biden ahead of Trump by 80,555 votes.

A review of the DoS/SURE system records indicates that there were 4,216,030 ballots cast in-person on Election Day in Pennsylvania; 2,637,065 mail and absentee ballots were cast and counted for the election; and 115,899 provisional ballots were cast, of which 90,684 were counted, 5,644 were partially counted, and 19,571 were rejected. This yields 6,949,423 votes counted, including those partially counted.

The DoS/SURE system also shows 9,090,962 as the certified voter registration number, and notes that 76.5 percent of this was the general election voter turnout, which yields 6,954,586 as the number of registered voters who voted.

(Read more at The Epoch Times)

Now that they think we cannot do anything about it, they start with the “we’ll fix it” stories

If Biden is installed, there will not be another round of RINO or non-resistance voting for me. I will not vote for another incumbent or liberal again. When issues come up, I may write and express support for issues with incumbents, but I will not vote for incumbents that will not band together in sufficient numbers to protect our voting now.

Promising laws down the road that will disallow Biden’s actions in the future — that is just window dressing. That will not fly with me.

Look for the unintended consequences of Hunter Biden to blossom daily — even during winter

Computer repair shop owner sues Twitter for defamation over handling of Hunter Biden story

The Washington Examiner tells us how the repair shop owner has been driven out of business and threatened by “mostly peaceful” Democrats. Now he is suing Twitter for defamation.

A former Delaware computer repair shop owner is suing Twitter for defamation over how it handled a New York Post story on President-elect Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden.

John Paul Mac Isaac filed his lawsuit on Monday in the Southern District of Florida, claiming he was forced to shut down his business in part because he says Twitter labeled him a hacker.

The New York Post articles in question, published in October, claimed the publication received a copy of a laptop hard drive belonging to Hunter Biden from Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for President Trump. Giuliani allegedly obtained the hard drive from Mac Isaac’s repair shop, and Mac Isaac said he’d also provided a copy to the FBI after Hunter Biden had left it behind after dropping it off for repairs in April 2019.

The outlet reported that emails from the hardware showed evidence of a possible meeting between Hunter Biden, then-Vice President Joe Biden, and a top executive at a Ukrainian energy firm, which the now president-elect denies took place as was described in the reporting. The newspaper also detailed Hunter Biden’s financial dealings with shady Chinese businessmen.

When the publication attempted to post the articles on its Twitter account, the social media company claimed that doing so violated its rule against sharing “hacked” materials.

“Plaintiff is not a hacker and the information obtained from the computer does not [constitute] hacked materials because Plaintiff lawfully gained access to the computer, first with permission of its owner, Biden, and then, after Biden failed to retrieve the hard drive despite Plaintiff’s requests, in accordance with the Mac Shop’s abandoned property policy,” the 42-page lawsuit filed in federal court on Monday said, adding that because of Twitter’s policy, Mac Isaac “is now widely considered a hacker.”

Mac Isaac is demanding $500 million in punitive damages as well as unspecified compensatory damages and lawyers’ fees. He is also requesting an order that would force Twitter to “make a public retraction of all false statements.”

A Twitter spokesperson declined to comment on the matter to the Washington Examiner.

Biden’s campaign, along with many in the media, dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop story and related allegations as being part of a Russian disinformation operation, even though Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said that “there is no intelligence that supports that … Hunter Biden’s laptop is part of some Russian disinformation campaign.”

After the election, it was revealed that Hunter Biden has been under criminal investigation as federal authorities scrutinize his taxes and foreign business dealings, and while the full scope of the federal inquiries has not been made public, the younger Biden’s financial dealings with China are likely at the forefront. After being asked this month if he still thought reports about his son were Russian disinformation, Biden replied, “Yes, yes, yes. God love you, man — you’re a one-horse pony, I tell you.”

The day after Twitter blocked the New York Post’s mid-October stories on Hunter Biden, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey tweeted, “Straight blocking of URLs was wrong, and we updated our policy and enforcement to fix. Our goal is to attempt to add context, and now we have capabilities to do that.”

But the company continued to lock the New York Post’s Twitter account, insisting that the outlet delete its Hunter Biden story tweets, despite no longer apparently violating any Twitter policies. Two weeks later, the New York Post tweeted out a “Free Bird” newspaper headline, and the outlet celebrated, writing, “Twitter backed down Friday in its battle with The Post and unlocked its main account after a two-week stalemate over the Hunter Biden expose.”

Dorsey testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee about this saga in November, after Biden defeated Trump in the election.

(Read more at the )

Real scandals deserving real independent counsels will proliferate since Joe has so many proxies

If any liberal thinks that conservatives who have lived through vilification of George W. Bush and Trump as “illegitimate” will stand for a president who was installed due to spikes in voting between 3 – 4 a.m. in key Democrat cities — I have a word for them: “resistance.”

I will never submit. I will support every attempt to impeach and to resist the cheating and lying that have taken over our media and a portion of our politics.

Good and bad news for the Trump campaign

Featured

First the good news

Momentum on Congress builds to oppose electors January 6th

One America News Network explains on Rumble how momentum has built in Congress to oppose electors on 6 January 2021.

Speaker Testimony
OANN Trump supporters filed with the National Park Service to hold a rally in Washington DC. This application is the third and less than two months and aims to take place on January 6th, the day Congress counts the Electoral College votes and certifies a winner. President Trump took to Twitter, urging supporters to attend the rally and protest election results in various States. The park service has not yet granted the request; however, permits aren’t typically issued until the week of the event. In the mean time, One America News John Hines explains the importance of January 6th.
Hines The new Congress will be sworn in Sunday January 3rd, and it’s 1st order of business very likely will be to count the presidential electors on Wednesday, January 6th in a joint session of Congress similar in appearance to what we see during the State of the Union. Vice President Pence will preside in his role as president of the Senate. He will begin to open the sealed certificate submitted by each state alphabetically and hand them to tellers (appointed from among the House and Senate members) to read.

 

If any objections are to arise the key here is that both a House and a Senate member must lodge an objection in writing for it to be considered. Should there be objections, the Senate would adjourn to its chamber and the House and Senate separately would debate and then vote on the objection. At this point reports indicate soon-to-be Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama and Senator David Perdue of Georgia have both indicated that they would raise objections. Another handful of GOP Senators according to reports appear to be undecided as to whether or not they will object to the electors. These include Rand Paul of Kentucky, Ted Cruz of Texas, and Josh Hawley of Missouri.

Meanwhile in the House, Alabama GOP Congressmen Mo Brooks is heading up an effort to oppose electors that now includes more than a dozen House GOP lawmakers, including (among others) Brian Babin, Lance Gooden, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Matt Gaetz and Greg Steube of Florida, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Biggs of Arizona, and Madison Cawthorne and Ted Budd of North Carolina. Finally, each objection can be debated for up to two hours. So if objections are raised for each of the five or six states now in question, it could be a long day in Congress. It all starts at 1 p.m. when the House and Senate will gather for the Constitutionally-prescribed process to take place in the House chamber on January 6th: the first Wednesday after the first Tuesday of the New Year. John Hines, One America news, Washington.

SenatorsWhoMayObject

RepsWhoMayObject

Supporting Trump’s charges of fraud — $500 million directed from Mark Zuckerberg that compromised election standards

At American Thought Leaders on Rumble, former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline argues that hundreds of millions of dollars were donated by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg to nonprofits, which used them in ways that compromised election standards.

Speaker Testimony
Kline When these election officials, who are pledged to run transparent elections, start suddenly hiding things, shredding things, erasing things, that’s evidence, and that is concerning.
Jekielek Joining us today is Phill Kline, the former Attorney General of Kansas and director of the Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society. Klein argues that hundreds of millions of dollars were donated by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg to nonprofits, which use them in ways that compromised election standards. According to an Amistad Project report, election officials who received Zuckerberg’s money put their thumbs on the scale by trying to increase voter turnout in only Democratic strongholds. We discussed ongoing efforts to expose election fraud and we break down Amistad Project’s most recent lawsuit, which demands that legislatures in five states be allowed to certify electors prior to Congressional certification. This is American thought leaders and I’m Jan Jekielek.

 

Phill Kline, such a pleasure to have you on American Thought Leaders.

Kline Thank you. Great to be here.
Jekielek Phill, of course, you’re the director of the Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society basically looking at election integrity. You’re an election watchdog operation. Recently, you have an editorial in the Epoch Times (an op-ed: “We should follow the Constitution when electing our President.”) That seems obvious. I guess it seems like almost like a truism. Tell me why you chose to write this op-ed.
Kline Well. it’s remarkable. It’s absolutely what we should do, but it is not what we are doing. In fact, the only date in the Constitution that’s truly relevant to when we select our next president is Inauguration Day. All of the other dates are really statutes that have emanated through the years and if you go back enough in their history they’re based on how long it takes to ride a horse to Washington DC and also based on when the harvest was finished.

 

That’s when we first started election day on a specific Tuesday in November. When we’ve had this unprecedented election — and what I mean by that, Jan, is that we’ve had a shadow government operate; one billionaire put in more money to run the election than the federal government did — we have to pause and make sure that the election was conducted lawfully, which it was not, and also whether we can have faith in the result.

State legislatures under the Constitution have that responsibility and that authority. And they have not even met as a body since the election to look at whether the election was conducted in a lawful manner. That’s deeply concerning. And it should be deeply concerning to all Americans. That is what the Constitution calls for, and that’s what is not happening right now.

Jekielek So you just mentioned a whole number of things that I want to dig into a little bit here. The one that just really stuck out was the billionaire putting in more money than the federal government put in … into the election? Tell me about this.
Kline Well in March of 2020 the federal government passed the CARE’s act. That was the omnibus kind of COVID relief measure that went forward and it appropriated $400 million for the states to use in conducting the election during COVID. Mark Zuckerberg alone, in the money that we’ve tracked thus far, we’ve tracked $419 million that he put forth in dictating to cities how they’re going to conduct the election, as well as monies he put forward to a 501(c)(3) that manages our polling books, our electronic poll books. $50 million went to them. So Zuckerberg’s money greatly influenced how the election was operated and conducted in the urban core of the swing states. In fact, everywhere his money touched, there was illegality. It was Zuckerberg money that paid the election workers. He paid the election judges. He paid for the consolidated counting centers. He purchased the machines. It was people paid by Zuckerberg that boarded up the windows so that America was kicked out of the counting room, and the billionaire was invited in. And that’s deeply concerning, as it relates to election integrity in America.
Jekielek That’s a very serious set of charges, obviously. So how did you actually dig up the evidence around this?
Kline Well, we started getting involved in election integrity over 18 months ago, and we started to see as COVID here. We saw a couple of things come together. First of all particularly in blue states executive officials started shutting down in-person polling and making it more difficult to vote in person as they emphasized absentee ballots. Well this shutting down harms a particular demographic. Polling clearly indicates the Republicans prefer to vote in person on Election Day and Democrats prefer to vote in advance. Moving towards the absentee ballots raises concerns, in fact, bipartisan concerns, until this election. A report that was authored by James Baker and former President Jimmy Carter articulated the concern about absentee or mail-in ballots because they are more prone to fraud. The ballot is cast away from trained election workers that are present when you vote in person. So there’s no one to prevent intimidation or coercion or misleading the voter or even making sure it’s the voter who completed the ballot. So states have all kinds of protections added to absentee ballots — common sense things like requiring a witness or requiring a signature of comparison, in some instances, requiring the absentee ballot to be directly delivered to a clerk or an election official.

 

Then the Left, in March, started attacking all of these restrictions through litigation. We have filed litigation lately, but it was the Left that initiated scores of lawsuits in March and April, claiming the COVID, for example, made it to threatening to have a witness, or COVID didn’t allow a signature comparison, even suits that said COVID required the state to prepay the return envelope and postage because people would be afraid to go to the post office.

Now, this is a two-pronged attack: one eliminating absentee restrictions, and two shutting down and restricting in-person polling. And then Zuckerberg stepped into the breach here.

A man by the name of David Plouffe, who is President Obama’s campaign manager, was working for Mark Zuckerberg and he published a book in March of 2020 that is entitled, “The citizens guide to defeating Donald Trump.” On page 81 of that book, he mentions that the election will be decided by a block-by-block street fight to turn out the vote in the urban core and cities like Philadelphia and the Milwaukee and Minneapolis and Detroit. And then suddenly about that time a sleepy little 501(c) that’s operated by leftist activists — former Obama-ites who worked in the Obama Administration, Obama fellows and so forth; that were running about a million dollars a year — started reaching out to Democrat mayors saying, “Look, we’ve got some money on the way. We want to give you money to come up with your own elections plan. You need to turn out the vote. You need to focus on these demographics. You need to have money for drop boxes and mobile pick up units and all of this stuff and put together that play in and come back and ask us to fund it.”

Then on September 2nd, Mark Zuckerberg throws $250 million their way. He adds another $100 million just about a week later. He gives $50 million to the Center for Election Innovation and Research, $350 million to the Center for Tech and Civic Life, and those money start to pour out in the Democratic strongholds. They purchase local election offices. They tell them how to run the election. It was focused on turnout turning out the Democrat vote in Democratic strongholds for Biden.

That’s not a role government should play. Government should not have its thumb on the scale in managing the election.

Jekielek What do you mean exactly by “purchase election officials?”
Kline Well, they told them exactly what to do this election, in the grants and the agreements of the grants which we were able to obtain. Initially we couldn’t get this because see CTCL and Mark Zuckerberg are private. If it was government doing it, there’s transparency. There has to be a budget their has to be hearings. But instead, this was a private entity that refused to share information with us. So we got some documents pursuant to court order, and they show in the grant agreements. For example, [in] Philadelphia, it dictated how many satellite polling locations Philadelphia will have. Eight hundred is what it told them. “And if you don’t do it, we’re going to take back on money.” They actually dictated to them how much they were going to send, the number of polling places and what they would be used for, and how many funds, how much monies would be dedicated to that, and their title.

 

That’s significant. It’s just one example. Philadelphia, or Pennsylvania, as all states do, they require both parties to be present in the counting room. That’s common sense because in The counting room, the election inspectors (as they’re called in some states) or poll workers, are actually completing ballots or filling out ballots for people who aren’t there. There are many reasons why a ballot can be read by the machine and the law says that if it can’t be read (like it might be torn or the coffee stain or the paper crinkles or whatever) that these folks actually complete the ballot for that person (they’ll look at the ballot and say, “Well they voted for Biden here, so I’m going to put Biden and they voted on down,” and then they cast a new ballot and count it).

So the only way to prevent fraud is that have both parties there as such conduct is engaged in. So every state has that requirement. But in Pennsylvania, the satellite offices, the law requires a Republican in the polling place. The grant defines “satellite offices” as doing the same work as the polling place, but they are to be called “satellite offices.” That allowed the Democrats in Philadelphia to say, “This is not a polling place, so the law doesn’t require a Republican to be there.” And they kicked Republicans out.

In Michigan, it worked this way: Zuckerberg money consolidated the counting center. So instead of having a ward where five people get in the room and they do this process of checking the ballots and so forth, they put it into what’s called the TCF Center, which is an abandoned former ice hockey arena the size of two football fields. They had 134 counting tables there. They claim they had to do this because of COVID. So they’re creating a crowd because of COVID. Then they had a Republican … the Michigan laws it as a Republican must be in the place of the counting. They said, “Yeah, the Republicans can be in the place.” He or she is in the cheap seats, and they can’t see what’s going on, on these 134 counting tables. So Zuckerberg money went in there and dictated the manner in which they were going to do this. The manor allowed them to kick one party out of the counting facility. That’s wrong. That’s illegal.

Another thing it did: with consolidated counting centers, you suddenly had reasons to drop off hundreds of thousands of ballots in one location. And these drop boxes were put out. Now, just to give you an example of the impact of the dropbox, I go to Delaware County, Pennsylvania (a Democratic stronghold). There was one “Zuckerbox” (that’s what we call them) for every four square miles. That’s two miles by two mile square. In other words, you could take a stroll and vote. Plus they’re all these satellite locations.

In the 59 counties that President Trump won in 2016, there’s a drop box for every 1159 square miles. So in Republican counties, Pennsylvania told Republicans, “Go on a weekend vacation and find Waldo,” and in Democratic counties, “We’ll come by and pick up your ballot for you.” That’s wrong. Government should not be engaged in suppressing the vote of one demographic and trying to turn out another demographic. America tried that before in the Deep South. It was a Democratic strategy around the turn of the 20th century and it focused on suppressing the Black vote and turning out the White vote. This time, it was suppressing the Republican vote and turned out the Democratic vote. It’s wrong in either case.

Jekielek You know, this is really fascinating. Basically the mechanism is that the Zuckerberg Foundation founded these two nonprofits, which then used the strategy — am I reading this right — straight out of this book that came out in March 2020?
Kline That’s part of it. Now, Zuckerberg’s foundation didn’t found these 501(c)s. He just funded them to the tune of $350 million and the other one to $50 million. I think you have a right to call it your own charity if you give them $350 million. But no, they had pre-existed. And it operated for a while and generated about a million dollars of revenue before Zuckerberg came along.
Jekielek We reached out to Mark Zuckerberg in the Center for Tech and Civic Life about these allegations, but neither immediately responded.

 

So I understand that you just recently put out a lawsuit (actually, I think today as we’re filming). Can you tell me about it?

Kline Yes we’re suing about this. It’s again those artificial restrictions that are in the law regarding when the electors are to be seated, when they’re to be counted, and so forth. And it is happening at a time … the Constitution under Article I, Section 1, Clause 1, says the state legislatures determine how electors for their state are selected for the Electoral College. And so they oversee the elections. They have the responsibility of determining whether the election was conducted properly and whether you can have faith in the result.

 

But oddly enough, since Election Day, none of these legislatures have been able to meet as a body. They are only able to meet if a couple of things happen. It varies state to state. If they have a super majority — which shouldn’t be required for them to perform a constitution function. It shouldn’t be required to get two-thirds of the legislature to call a legislature into session asit relates to a Constitutional oblication. They should be able to meet. Or a governor calls a special session, which these blue state governors have refused to do.

So the very body that is responsible for how these electors are selected can’t even meet after the election, up through January. So that’s unconstitutional, in that it’s a delegation of authority to a governor of a legislative function. That is not allowed. These governors have been hostile to meetings. An example is Michigan. In Michigan a couple of things have happened.

First of all, the attorney general, the chief law enforcement officer of the state — and I had that role in Kansas — threatened legislators who didn’t agree with her on the election result with criminal investigation and prosecution. That’s stunning to me. That type of intimidation and threats should never happen in America from the state or a chief law enforcement officer.

Secondly Governor Whitmer, actually [first] claiming COVID and then changing it, and saying there was a threat, which was denied by the state police who said there was no threat that they were aware of mobilised 200 state police officers to surround the Capitol building in Michigan on December 14th, and they disabled Republicans from entering. Now Democrats were able to enter the building. And they entered the building and certified their electors on that day. But Republicans, not a one was allowed in the people’s chamber. The governor shut down the legislature. That doesn’t happen. Kings and queens shut down parliament. governor’s don’t shut down legislatures. That is a significant problem, and we are bringing suit over those issues.

Jekielek Okay. Very interesting. So, a couple of questions here.

 

The first one is some of the rhetoric that I’m hearing talks about how, “Well, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no real reason to call a session of the legislature. It’s just all bluster and so forth.”

So that’s the reason they’re not being called.

Kline Well, what’s the harm? We have now seen nine months with these governors have declared the legislature to be irrelevant to lawmaking. In fact, some of our earliest involvement was challenging these governors declaring themselves no longer to be a part of the lawmaking process, but rather to be the law — that what they say when they wake up in the morning is the law. They no longer need to go to the legislature. They no longer need to have hearings so we can debate the science of these shutdowns.

 

Rather, they have forwarded the most massive wealth shift in American history (from small business to the big box stores and the big Internet conglomerates that are delivering products). They have shut down and killed small business and they’ve done it by proclaiming themselves to be the law.

Now they’re doing it with elections. I wonder, my question to them is: “When did they lose faith in democracy?” When did they believe that they have the right and the responsibility to say, “Legislature, you’re no longer relevant to lawmaking in this state. I’m going to do it on my own.”

That is an affront to the Constitution and it’s an affront to the American people. We see this arrogance on the left that they can’t share information with us because we’re not wise enough to discern the truth, so we have to have censorship.

We see them saying, “You’re not wise enough to have a legislative representative body to debate whether we should shut down our economy or close schools, because I know what’s best for you. If I don’t offer that and dictate it at the threat of putting you in jail, if you differ you’re probably going to hurt yourself.”

It’s stunning to me how we’ve lost faith in freedom in this nation over the past year.

Jekielek So Phill, irrespective of what you described happened in Michigan, a number of states I have sent completing slates of electors. There’s Democratic electors and there’s Republican electors and there’s some debate about the utility of this, or how this can actually meaningfully play out. I’m wondering if you could please speak to that, from your perspective?
Kline Well, it has happened before, where there are multiple slates of electors from the state. When that happens, Congress can declare that state’s election in dispute, and therefore, its electoral votes are not to be considered. If that happens, it reduces the potential of hitting what is required, and that is the 270 votes to be elected by the Electoral College.

 

If that doesn’t happen, then it goes to Congress to decide who the next president is. That is a vote in Congress where each state gets one vote and all the members of Congress from that state participate in determining how that vote is to be cast. The Constitution does provide steps on how we manage this in all these circumstances. The Founding Fathers and that generation foresaw these types of problems. And they have placed in there all way to handle it.

Jekielek So, you describe in your op-ed, this earlier election (is it 1876, I believe?) that you believe shares some commonalities with today. Tell me about that.
Kline Well, there were multiple states that some two sets of electors. And in fact in one part of our nation’s history and I can’t remember the state right now. There are actually three sets of electors that were sent by the state legislature. So when the when the popular vote or or the results of an election or in dispute the Constitution is very, very clear that the state legislature is the one with the authority to send multiple sets of electors and that Congress then has the responsibility, if the majority of 270 votes is now present in the Electoral College, to step in.

 

That’s why you see some congressmen now say, “Look we ought to take a look at this. We ought to take the time to understand what happened in this election. There are hundreds of thousands of ballots in dispute.”
I don’t know if you saw it but one of of the whistleblowers that we brought forward is a truck driver who transported 140 to 280,000 completed absentee ballots from Bethpage, New York (a postal facility that doesn’t even receive mail — they’re not supposed to have ballots) to Pennsylvania, where his trailer carrying those ballots disappeared. Just disappeared.

There’s no reason for a quarter of a million ballots to be transported over state lines into a state. Unless, I suppose — and I’ve heard somebody claim this — perhaps a quarter of a million Pennsylvanians happpened to be vacationing in Bethpage and decided to mail in their absentee ballots on the same day using a postal facility that doesn’t accept mail.

That alone should call into question these late-night ballot dumps that occurred in the urban core, with the work stoppages that have never happened before. You don’t stop counting. You only stop counting so one side can learn how many ballots they need to make up the difference. That’s the only reason to stop counting. All of these Urban core areas at certain times had ballot counting stoppages. Then loads of ballots came through the door. So there’s a lot of concern about the integrity of this election and Congress and state legislatures are to step up to the plate.

Jekielek So is it actually true that it has never happened before that the counting stops? I find that hard to believe.
Kline Well there was one time it stopped that I’m aware of. This was pre-machine, pre-everything, and it was the Senate Democrat primary in Texas with Lyndon Baines Johnson running against the popular former governor, Coke Stevenson. And suddenly, it stopped, and Johnson was behind by a handful of votes and they couldn’t find Ballot Box 13 in one small city along the southern border of Texas. When they finally found it, it had just enough votes in it for Lyndon Johnson to overtake Stevenson and when the primary. Coincidentally enough, all of those voters in that one precinct voted in alphabetical order. They all had the same penmanship, had the same pen, and all voted for Johnson.

 

So yes, we’ve had a ballot counting stop before and the result was Johnson stole the senate seat.

Jekielek Phill, let’s talk about the machines a little bit here. In Antrim County, Michigan, there was actually a forensic audit done of machines — I think it’s the only one that I’m aware of up to now — and it found this unusual rate of basically errors that would require the ballots to be adjudicated. This triggers the situation that you were describing earlier where someone will go in and basically redo the ballot and figure out what it was supposed to mean, right? That would be the normal process. How does the error rate that was found there — I’ve heard different stories — measure up to typical error rates?
Kline Well, it greatly exceeds Federal standards, in fact, over 2000% higher than the federal standard.

 

Federal Law requires the certification of the election system, and how it functions could not be certified in that instance with that error rate. Here’s what’s deeply concerning about the machines from my perspective.

First of all, you can’t count what you can’t see. The Machine is like the ballot box where the ballot goes in, but you can’t see how it’s counting. You can’t pull it back out unless you see the computer logs, unless you see how that machine was functioning. There’s something called the file integrity manager log. It will tell you whether there’s any type of intervention in the way that it’s functioning. Election officials will not release the logs. They won’t allow America to see the logs. The Secretary of State of Michigan is fighting the release of that forensic report. And in fact, there’s a memorandum she issued after the election requiring and ordering officials to start deleting information from the machines.

That is alarming. I’ve often had the press and the media say, “Where’s your proof?” “Where’s your evidence?” You don’t understand. I oversaw the Kansas Bureau of Investigation. You’re not understanding what evidence is. If I was investigating you for tax evasion and I had a search warrant for your home believing documents were there and I showed up on a summer day. It’s 98 degrees, sweltering hot, sun burning down, mid-afternoon and you bar the door and then I see smoke coming from your chimney. That’s evidence you’re burning the documents.

With these election officials, who are pledged to run transparent elections, start suddenly hiding things, shredding things, erasing things — that’s evidence and that is concerning. We see that in each of these areas. The stunning thing about it, it’s not that hard to do an audit of the performance of the machines. It doesn’t cost much. There are not allowing it.

It doesn’t cost too much to have a risk limiting audit, grabbing actual ballots and grabbing the envelopes and doing forensic analysis of the ballots. There’s a lot that can be determined, whether it was completed by a machine or a human hand, and so forth.

They’re not allowing it. They’re not allowing the simple steps to take place to ensure that this election was conducted with integrity.

Instead they’re saying, “Trust us. Even though we kicked you out of the counting room, even though we took private money, even though we sidestepped state laws and ignored other laws and we broke the chain of custody of the ballot, trust us. Our guy won and there’s no fraud going on here.”

I’m sorry. That’s evidence that needs to be investigated.

Jekielek So, of the range of evidence there that’s out there, that there were significant irregularities. I think Peter Navarro has a report that kind of summarizes a lot of that recently. What do you think is the most compelling? What do you think is the thing that really needs to be addressed first?
Kline Well, honestly, it’s the hiding of the evidence. There’s absolutely no reason for it. And that shows intentional conduct. When you’re destroying evidence, when you’re not releasing information, when you’re not being transparent, that is evidence of your intent and your fear. So I’ve never investigated a person who was innocent and controlled information of their innocence who didn’t want me to see it. And I’ve never investigated a person who was guilty who wanted me to see the evidence of their guilt that they control that’s pretty basic.
Jekielek So Phill, aside from this new lawsuit that you filed now, you actually have a number of other lawsuits in play. I’m just wondering if you could update us on the status of these.
Kline Well, we plan to pursue them to their completion and particularly the lawsuits involving CTCL and Mr. Zuckerberg’s money, because we cannot privitize elections. We can’t have elections brought to you by Coca-Cola, or the Koch brothers, or the National Rifle Association (which, I believe, if they were doing what Zuckerberg was doing, then you’d have mainstream media or left media going crazy).

 

We can’t afford to have a billionaire auction of election offices before the next election. So we’re going to we’re going to press that forward.

Through that, we will have the opportunity to engage in what is called in a civil litigation manner “discovery,” and to compel these groups to answer questions and to respond with documents so we can really know what went on inside those offices as they poured out this money.

So, we plan to pursue those. That will not impact the 2020 election. But hopefully, it will change things for the future.

Jekielek Phill, come January 6th, this is a date that is a on a lot of people’s minds. This is the point at which a number of these congressmen — for example, Congressman Gaetz is one of them — are basically saying they’re going to contest the election, right? How does that process actually work? And what could happen subsequently?
Kline Well, I can only tell you what I hope happens. And that is that if they are able to have a House member in the Senate member contest, then Congress will engage in a serious look at what happened this election and call witnesses and subpoena witnesses and do what state legislators should have done over the past several weeks, but we’re prohibited because governor’s refused and/or leadership refused to call them in.

 

So America deserves a look at this election. And Congress now is best positioned to do it. I would hope that they wouldn’t wait till January 6th, quite frankly. They ought to start now and in pulling together this information. It is vitally important. The only thing that’s preventing it is the politics of the moment and people concerned about appearances and people trying to wait out the clock. That’s the wrong thing to do when we’ve had election chock-full of lawlessness and the irregularities and an unprecedented expenditure private funds.

Jekielek Any final thoughts before we finish up, Phill?
Kline No. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to be with you. I appreciate what you guys are doing and your willingness to share the truth and share different perspectives. It’s appreciated.
Jekielek Phill Kline, such a pleasure to have you on. Thank you.

Survey: Majority of Republicans Want Trump to Fight Election Result

NewsMax reported in a 24 December 2020 article that a survey shows that majority of Republicans want Trump to fight the election result.

Perception of the presidential election results pretty much is divided along party lines.

A USA Today/Suffolk University poll released on Thursday showed 96% of Democrats, and only 20% of Republicans, believe Joe Biden was legitimately elected president.

As for thinking President-elect Biden was not elected fairly, 78% of Republicans and only 3% of Democrats fell into that category.

President Donald Trump and campaign officials have alleged widespread voter fraud in several battleground states.

The survey asked if Trump should concede the election. Ninety-five percent of Democrats said he should; only 37% of Republicans agreed.

A majority (57%) of Republicans said the president should continue to pursue overturning the election won by Biden.

The president’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, has been leading the election challenge. The former New York City mayor said he had at least 1,000 sworn affidavits from citizens alleging wrongdoing that was “enough to overturn any election.”

On Twitter Wednesday, President Trump suggested a special counsel was needed to investigate election fraud allegations.

(Read more at NewsMax)

More GOP lawmakers join effort to challenge Electoral College

NewsMax reported in a 22 December 2020 article that Republican lawmakers have been joining the effort to challenge the Electors selected.

A number of House Republicans now plan to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election when Congress meets to certify the Electoral College results Jan. 6.

Rep.-elect Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., who will be part of the House GOP membership when Congress convenes in early January, begged fellow Republicans to join him in the effort Tuesday.

Cawthorn said in a tweeted video:

Efforts by President Donald Trump and his allies to reverse the outcome of the election that gave President-elect Joe Biden the victory have not succeeded in the courts.

According to The Hill, the effort in the House will fail because it is not possible for supporters to secure a majority vote given Democrat’s control of the lower chamber.

The effort was first launched by Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala. Over a dozen lawmakers led by Brooks met with Trump on Monday to discuss objecting to the certification of Biden’s victory, The Hill reported.

They included Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga., who tweeted he would lead an objection to Georgia’s electors.

Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, said Monday he would object to the results if Congress does not investigate voter fraud by Jan. 6, and wrote a letter to Congressional leadership demanding action. Roughly 20 other Republicans signed Babin’s letter.

Meanwhile, Rep. Ted Budd, R-N.C., tweeted Tuesday he also plans to object to the results, saying “#WethePeople will keep fighting for @realDonaldTrump.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has asked Senators not to join the efforts, and Senate Majority Whip John Thune, R-S.D., warned it would “go down like a shot dog.”

(Read more at NewsMax)

The bad news

President Trump set the record for the most votes of a sitting president in US history

The Gateway Pundit said the following in a 26 December 2020 commentary on the timidity of RINO’s.

This is the greatest crime in US history.  President Trump set the record for the most votes of a sitting president in US history but the Democrats, most Republicans, Big Tech, Big Media, Big Pharma and China all continue to push for his removal and the Joe Biden steal.

Americans everywhere know who won the 2020 election for President.  President Trump set the record for the most votes in US history.  He accumulated over 74 million votes.  He broke Obama’s record of 69 million from 2008.  He broke Hillary’s vote total.  He set the record for the most votes by a Republican in history.  But the elites and Chinese and Democrats want us to believe senile Joe Biden beat President Trump with a preposterous 81 million votes?

Most honest people acknowledge that Biden probably didn’t reach Hillary’s vote total of 65.   Biden was old, senile, and nasty with a horrible record, horrible Anti-American policies, and a dysfunctional family.

Because we know voting machine switched millions of votes.  We knew this more than a month ago: Analysis of Election Night Data from All States Shows MILLIONS OF VOTES Either Switched from President Trump to Biden or Were Lost — Using Dominion and Other Systems

We also know that in Georgia alone, there are nearly half a million absentee ballots where there are no chain of custody records available which are required by the law. Georgia’s Corrupt Republican Leadership Gave Joe Biden Win By Less Than 12,000 Votes – Yet 460,000 Drop Box Ballots STILL MISSING Chain of Custody Documentation Required by Law

The one thing that we know for certain is that all the voter and election fraud reported to date benefited Joe Biden. 

This is consistent no matter what method or location, the fraud was to assist senile and corrupt Joe Biden to steal the election.

Every American demands a legitimate election free from fraudulent results.  Our politicians should too.  They should demand a forensic audit of ballots cast and of the voting machines used or they should be calling for another election where fraud is prevented across the board.

(Read more at the Gateway Pundit)

Under McConnell, Senate GOP has “no fight”

NewsMax points out in a 26 December 2020 article the tongue lashing provided by Trump; however, they deserved it.

President Donald Trump has kept the pressure on Senate Republicans amid his campaign election challenges and a push for $2,000 stimulus checks that would be a tough order for the party’s fiscal hawks.

Trump tweeted Saturday:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has proved to be less a supporter of the president this fall, saying he considered the White House off limits during coronavirus outbreaks, willfully jumping to defend Joe Biden as president-elect amid election challenges, and telling Republicans in the Senate to not jump on the effort to contest the Electoral College on Jan 6.

(Read more at NewsMax)

Could this be how Kim Ogg got re-elected despite her releasing 68 (now 79) felons to murder on bail?

Featured

Houston ballots all have the same signature and shared addresses

With a hat tip to the Nwo Report, the Gateway Pundit reports that a large set of Houston ballots showing the same handwriting, the same city, and a small set of addresses.

fakeballots-houston

The voter fraud in this year’s presidential election was widespread and extensive.

Instead of asking where was the fraud? The real question is where was there NO fraud? Democrats used every trick in their book to steal votes and manufacture ballots.

Here is the latest proof of voter fraud in Texas.

Democrats manufactured votes — in the same city, in the same handwriting and at the same address.

This is what Democrats do.

And they will continue to do this until people are sent to jail.
This needs to stop.

WHERE IS THE DOJ? WHERE IS THE FBI?
WHAT HORRIBLE PEOPLE!

(Read related posts at the Gateway Pundit)

This might have been chalked up to garden variety down-ballot voting, but the additional information spelled out in tweets pointed to fraud

When you see the evidence @shot_gangster spelled out on Twitter, it looks like Democrat fraud.




Before the election, 68 felons had been released to murder while on bail

On 25 October 2020, CrimeStopper’s Victims’ Advocate Andy Kahan pointed out that 66 felons had been released due to “bond reform.”

Now the count is 79 innocent citizens murdered by felons set out on bond by Kim Ogg and her social justice judges.

Signs of what a Biden administration would be like

Featured

Hopefully, we will be spared a Biden presidency; however, if we were not, the following might give you an idea of what could happen:

Broken promises

Biden’s broken promises continue before Congress votes on electors: Biden pulls back on student-loan-forgiveness plan

Yahoo Finance reports that Biden has already broken another campaign promise: forgiving $50K per student of loan debt.

HunterEmailsPresident-elect Joe Biden cast doubt on a popular Democratic idea involving executive action that would cancel up to $50,000 in federally-held student loan debt for roughly 43 million American borrowers.

“I’m going to get in trouble for saying this,” Biden told a meeting of news columnists on Wednesday, raising the Democratic argument that “the president may have the executive power to forgive up to $50,000 in student debt. Well, I think that’s pretty questionable. I’m unsure of that. I’d be unlikely to do that.”

Earlier this week, while introducing his nominee for Education Secretary, Miguel Cardona, Biden declared support for forgiving $10,000 in student debt across the board — through legislation passed by Congress.

“It’s a balancing act, but I’m optimistic that we can get a lot of the things that I’d like to do done,” Biden said on Wednesday. “I’ve spent most of my career arguing against the imperial presidency. We got three equal branches of government. I’m confident that there are a number of areas that are of such consequence that they go beyond the partisan boundaries.”

‘Cancel existing student loan debt under a distinct statutory authority’
Consumer advocates and several Democrats — including Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) in addition to Representatives Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) — have repeatedly called for Biden to take executive action on student debt cancellation.

“President Biden can undo this debt — can forgive $50,000 of [student] debt — the first day he becomes president,” Schumer said. “You don’t need Congress. All you need is the flick of a pen.”

A new member of the incoming Biden administration’s National Economic Council, longtime Warren aide Bharat Ramamurti, also previously argued in support of the president’s authority to cancel debt.

The basic argument, as detailed by the Legal Services Center of Harvard Law School to Senator Warren, is that the Education Secretary has the power “to cancel existing student loan debt under a distinct statutory authority—the authority to modify existing loans found in 20 U.S.C. § 1082(a)(4).”

(Read more at Yahoo Finance)

Those who thought Biden would really pick up this Sanders policy also believe that Communism works (it just has not been applied correctly)

Despite Joe’s words before the election, now Joe is pulling back on the promise to forgive $50K of debt for each student.

Continuous real scandal

FBI finds emails that tell how Hunter Biden landed Ukrainian gas gig in 2014

JustTheNews digs back to Hunter’s start with Burisma in 2014 by looking at the emails the FBI recently released in its Hunter Biden investigation.

In the weeks before he landed a deal with a Ukrainian gas company in 2014, Hunter Biden strategized with his business partner on how to leverage an upcoming official trip to Kiev by his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden, to clinch the lucrative arrangement, according to emails obtained a year ago by the FBI.

The communications reviewed by Just the News show that the younger Biden referred to his father as “my guy” and took credit for “adding value” because the vice president made comments to Ukrainian leaders about natural gas production that might benefit his new client.

The memos also show how Hunter Biden pressed to get Burisma Holdings to sign some sort of consulting deal with him and his business partner Devon Archer before the U.S. vice president visited Ukraine on April 21-22, 2014.

“The contract should begin now — not after the upcoming visit of my guy,” Hunter Biden wrote Archer in a detailed strategy email on April 13, 2014, a week before his father’s high-profile visit.

The memo shows Hunter Biden already knew he was going to be appointed to Burisma’s board along with Archer in mid-April 2014 — a month before it was announced — and that he also wanted Burisma to pay an additional consulting fee to him or his law firm Boies Schiller Flexner, referred to in the emails as “BSF.”

The deal with Burisma “should include a retainer in the range of 25k p/m w/ additional fees where appropriate for more in depth work to go to BSF for our protection,” Hunter Biden wrote. “Complete separate from our respective deals re board participation.”

(Read more at JustTheNews)

The news that could have come out of Thomas Jefferson’s paper (the New York Post) will now be a daily fixture

Unlike the lies generated from Hillary’s opposition research and funneled to Obama’s FBI to perform spurious spying on the Trump administration, there will be real investigations (unless, of course, Joe abuses the presidential pardon by pardoning a crime in which he has participated).

To prevent that, there must be an impeachment started the moment he is sworn in.

The Reason for the Season in His own Word

Featured

He who has ears to hear, let him hear. (Matthew 11:15 NASB)

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. (John 3:16 NASB)

He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” (John 3:36 NASB)

For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40 NASB)

Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” (John 6:29 NASB)

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8 NASB)

But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. (Ephesians 2:4‭-‬9 NASB)

By this the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. (1 John 4:9‭-‬10 NASB)

Democrats show themselves to be poor stewards of the COVID-19 crisis

Featured

Pelosi and Schumer sound off with support of half of Trump rejection of relief bill

Townhall comments on Pelosi’s and Schumer’s reaction to a Trump rejection of the COVID relief bill.

Pelosi And Schumer Offer Prebuttal To Trump's Address To CongressPresident Donald Trump on Tuesday evening said he would not sign the $900 billion COVID relief package that passed both chambers of Congress on Monday. Instead, he wants them to up the direct cash payment amount that Americans will receive and to cut out the unnecessary spending.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) late Tuesday night said she agreed with President Trump, that the American people should receive more than $600 in direct cash payments.

“Republicans repeatedly refused to say what amount the President wanted for direct checks,” Pelosi said in a tweet on Twitter. “At last, the President has agreed to $2,000 — Democrats are ready to bring this to the Floor this week by unanimous consent. Let’s do it!”

(Read more at Townhall)

Oddly, neither the Democrats nor Townhall mentions the Trump opposition to pork-level foreign aid

In fact none of the main stream media sources mentioned Trump’s objection to all of the foreign aid. However, it did appear in a hand full of tweets.





I can understand why lying Democrats would just recognize half of President Trump’s statement, but why the “conservative” press?

Just as the formerly conservative Fox, there have been instances where NewsMax claimed that Trump’s claims of fraud were baseless due to the appeals being thrown out of courts (however, the news outlet did not consider that the 60 court cases were thrown out on procedural bases — not on the basis of fact).

AOC claims “national security policy” is why she got vaccine before more vulnerable people

Breitbart reports from the slimy lies on COVID-19 department. It seems that Ms. Cortez has guzzled the COVID Kool-Aid to the point that she wants to protect herself from a disease survived by 99.985% of those in her age bracket.

Alexandria Ocasio-CortezRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) explained over the weekend why she received her first dose of the Pfizer vaccine before more vulnerable populations, attributing it to a national security policy that aims to “ensure the continuity of governance during national emergencies.”

“I was actually surprised by this too,” Ocasio-Cortez said during a Q&A posted to her Instagram over the weekend, taking questions after sharing a video of herself receiving the vaccine:

“I was expecting we’re going to get it a lot later,” the 31-year-old congresswoman continued. “But– and healthcare workers for the record, health care workers have started to receive it.”

“Not everybody obviously yet has been vaccinated but when it comes to Congress’s access, it’s due to something [called] continuity of governance planning, which is essentially national security planning,” she continued.

“So this actually came from a national security policy and directive to ensure continuity of governance during national emergencies,” she added:


(Read more at Breitbart)

Rather than worrying about the most vulnerable that Democrats harp on, this “Representative” worries about herself

In years past, we could call certain politicians “public servants” because they served the public first (George Washington, John Adams, and Abraham Lincoln come to mind). Recently, the term was tarnished when it was applied to Joe Biden by Mitch McConnell. Therefore, maybe this is why AOC seems so emboldened to snatch the award that really is due to healthcare workers and those with the gray crown of age.

COVID_symptoms

Covid_Liberty_Eclypse

Will Democrats get off from crimes without punishment?

Featured

Barr announces he has no plans to appoint special counsel in Hunter Biden investigations

One America News Network reports that Attorney General Barr has announced that he has no plans to appoint special counsels into the Hunter Biden investigations or the matter of election fraud. Therefore, if Joe Biden is sworn in, then Joe Biden will have the power to dismiss all investigations into Hunter and election fraud.

Just days before he is set to leave his post, Attorney General William Barr said in a press conference on Monday that he will not be appointing a special counsel in the Hunter Biden investigation.

barrBarr explained that he has not seen a reason to appoint a special counsel, adding that he has no plans to do so before he leaves office on Wednesday.

The attorney general also stated that he will not name a special counsel to investigate allegations of voter fraud, explaining that he would have done so if he thought it was the right step at this time.

(Read more at the One America News Network)

How many crimes being investigated regarding Hunter Biden?

According to a 9 December 2020 Washington Post article, Hunter is under investigation for tax evasion and money laundering. By a 23 December 2019 New York Post article, Hunter is under investigation for “fraud, money laundering and a counterfeiting scheme.”

If we throw a kink in the Democrat plans by acting Constitutionally

But, of course, if the main stream media Democrat’s narrative does not go through and if conservatives act so that Congress takes actions in response to this fraud by using the Constitution to select new electors, Biden may not be going into the White House. Likewise, investigations into the administration that weaponized the CIA, FBI, and IRS will likely get new life.

Caroline Biden gets no jail time after DUI guilty plea

The New York Post points out that Caroline Biden was released without having to spend time in jail after having plead guilty to Driving While Intoxicated.

caroline-bidenAnother Biden walks free.

Joe Biden’s niece Caroline Biden pleaded guilty to DUI on Dec. 3 — and was sentenced to 20 days to six months of “confinement,” Pennsylvania court records said.

But the small print shows Biden, 33, won’t see a day behind bars after she negotiated a plea deal with the Montgomery County district attorney.

Instead of jail, she got five-plus months of probation, with 20 days of rehab in January counted toward her sentence.

The walk-free plea continues a long Biden family tradition of avoiding jail time. A Post investigation in July found at least eight other busts of Bidens resulted in wrist slaps.

“She will be on probation … Should she then violate or break the law at any time, then she will be on the hook for the rest of the sentence,” Kate Delano, a DA spokeswoman, told The Post.

(Read more at the New York Post)

We need to end this two-tiered justice system

We need to put an end to a “justice” system that allows the connected to go free (like Democrats Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton or their relatives) after they commit crimes while the rest of us have to abide by the rules. In the past, “equality before the law” meant something. Now, it doesn’t have the heft it once had.

Since Joe Biden suggested using the Logan Act against General Flynn

Peter Strzok’s handwritten notes of White House meetings point to Joe Biden as the one who suggested using the Logan Act against General Flynn. Therefore, in the interest of reciprocity, it would seem that someone should charge Joe Biden with a Logan Act violation.

It only seems right.

My calls and emails to my senators and my Representative

Featured

My calls and email to Senator Cruz’s offices

CruzOn 22 December 2020, I attempted to make the following call to (713) 718-3057 and (202) 224-5922. After getting busy tones on ten attempts at the 713 number and a message that the “mailbox was full” for talking to the office staff, I left a modified version of the following on his suggested legislation message box. I also used his email form to send the following message and let him know that I had left a phone message.

Hello. I am Mark Armstrong from Spring, Texas. I want Senator Cruz to know that I feel like Mitch McConnell has abandoned me to a fraudulent election. I expect Senator Cruz to second the objection to the Congressional certification of this mishandled Electoral College. Then, I will be expecting three things. First, before the New Year, I will be looking for a press release from Senator Cruz on his stand against a stolen election. Second, I want him to help build a coalition of senators who will support a Constitutional solution to this. Finally, Senator Cruz should prepare to debate on the floor of the Senate on 6 January 2021. If I do not feel represented, I will stop voting for incumbents. I need you to do this and vote for the alternate slate of electors. Otherwise, I will not support incumbents or (necessarily) Republicans.

My calls and email to Senator Cornyn’s offices

On 22 December 2020, I attempted to make the following call to (202) 224-2934. After getting a message that the “mailbox was full” for talking to the office staff, I called the Houston office [(713) 572-3337] and left my name, my zip, and the first four sentences of the message. I followed that by using his email form to send the message and let him know that I had left a message at his Houston office.

Hello. I am Mark Armstrong from Spring, Texas. I want you to know that I feel like Mitch McConnell has abandoned me to a fraudulent election. I expect you to second the objection to the Congressional certification of this mishandled Electoral College. Then, I will be expecting three things. First, before the New Year, I will be looking for a press release from you on his stand against a stolen election. Second, I want you to help build a coalition of senators who will support a Constitutional solution to this. Finally, you should prepare to debate on the floor of the Senate on 6 January 2021. If I do not feel represented, I will stop voting for incumbents. I need you to do this and vote for the alternate slate of electors. Otherwise, I will not support incumbents or (necessarily) Republicans.

My calls and email to Representative Dan Crenshaw

CrenshawOn 22 December 2020, I attempted calling (281) 640-7720. The call went to a voicemail overflow message.  Then I called (202) 225-6565 and left a message consisting of my name, zip, and the first four sentences of this message. I also sent this message via email.

Hello. I am Mark Armstrong from Spring, Texas. I want you to join Representative Mo Brooks to stand against a fraudulent election. I expect you to second the objection to the Congressional certification of this mishandled Electoral College. Then, I will be expecting three things. First, before the New Year, I will be looking for a press release from you on his stand against a stolen election. Second, I want you to help build a coalition of representatives who will support a Constitutional solution to this. Finally, you should prepare to debate on the floor of the House on 6 January 2021. If I do not feel represented, I will stop voting for incumbents. I need you to do this and vote for the alternate slate of electors for the contested states. Otherwise, I will not support incumbents or (necessarily) Republicans.

No wonder the main stream media hid these statements #2 – Hawley & Johnson

Featured

Considering the bolstering effect of the words of the following senators, it is no wonder that the main stream media has hidden the research, suggestions, and leadership contained herein.

Senator Hawley on 2020 election integrity, Big Tech, and ballot harvesting

Hawley

Speaker Testimony
Hawley I just want to say how important it is that we’re having today’s hearing. Let me just give you an example why. Yesterday I was talking. I’m from the state Missouri. Yesterday with some of the constituents back at home group of about 30 people, every single one of them … every one of them told me that they felt they had been disenfranchised, that their votes didn’t matter, that the election had been rigged. These are All reasonable people. These are not crazy people.

These are reasonable people and who, by the way, have been involved in politics. They have won. They’ve lost. That — they’ve seen it all. These are normal folks, living normal lives who firmly believe that they have been disenfranchised and to listen to the mainstream press and quite a few voices in this building tell them after four years of non-stop Russia hoax it was a hoax. It was based on the whole Russian nonsense was based on we now know lies from a Russian spy. The Steele dossier was based on a Russian spy.

After four years of that — being told that this that the last election was fake in thand that Donald Trump wasn’t really and that Russia intervened. After four years of that. Now these same people are told “You to sit down and shut up. If you have any concerns about election integrity, you’re a nutcase. You should shut up.”

Well, I tell you what 74 million Americans are not going to shut up. And telling them that their views don’t matter and if their concerns don’t matter and they should just be quiet is not a recipe for success in this country. It’s not a recipe for the unity that I hear (now, the other side is suddenly so interested in after years years of trying to delegitimize President Donald Trump). So suffice it to say I’m not too keen on lectures about how Missourians and others who voted for President Trump and now have some concerns about fraud, about integrity, about compliance with the law should just be quiet and that they are somehow not patriotic if they raise these questions. I’m … It’s absolutely unbelievable. Let me talk about the First Amendment.

Judge Starr, I want to begin with you because I know that you have spent much of your life as a litigator, defending the First Amendment. Have you ever seen anything like we saw in the closing days of the election when you had the biggest corporations in the history of this country, the most powerful corporations in the world (Facebook/Twitter) working with the Democratic campaign to suppress legitimate reporting on Hunter Biden who we now know is under federal investigation for criminal wire fraud, tax evasion, and other things? Have you ever seen anything in your career like that, Judge Starr where we have these giant corporate conglomerates censoring and suppressing news directly bearing on an election weeks beforehand and doing it apparently in conjunction with one of the major political parties? Have you ever seen him like that?

Starr You know, I think we live in a new age and we need to go back to great lessons from Constitutional law. As you well know, Senator Hawley, Justice William Brennan, an icon of the Warren Court, saying that “Our democracy is based upon robust and uninhibited debate.” And just as Oliver Wendell Holmes saying, “Let’s test things in the marketplace of ideas.” You can’t test ideas and theories unless you allow the marketplace of information/communication to flourish.
Hawley Well said. I agree with that a hundred percent. You know, it’s an extraordinary thing not to be able to get … I’ve had Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg under oath. We’ve asked them, “Did you coordinate with the Democratic campaign?” How was it that that within minutes of this story breaking that both of those major corporate giants decided that they would suppress this story? Exactly what the Biden campaign wanted them to do. They won’t answer questions.

I’d ask the FEC to determine whether or not this was an illegal campaign contribution on the part of these corporate entities. I can’t I just can’t fathom why anybody who cares about free speech in this country would be fine with these Mega corporations controlling what people can and cannot say and trying to intervene in a presidential election. Let me ask you, Judge Starr about about something else.

Let’s talk a little bit about mail-in balloting. In your written testimony, you discuss the findings of the Carter Baker commission. You’ve mentioned that again here today that commission commented on the use of mail-in ballots after the 2000 election. Can you tell us a little bit about that commission’s finding a mail-in ballots as you recall it and talk about some of the warnings that that commission put into place.

Starr Yes, the commission was referring to absentee ballots. But of course, in light of what has happened in this presidential election, we’re now talking about the unprecedented use of mail-in ballots. Their concern … the warning of former President Carter and Secretary of State Baker is that this is a mechanism or a platform for fraud and abuse. Be careful about it. Have safeguards in place. And I think that, at the bottom, is what some of these concerns are. How did dead people vote (accepting that allegation from Nevada)? It is because of inadequate safeguards. Something … The dead person didn’t walk into the ballot … into the voting booth and vote. Someone voted for him or her. We have to have those safeguards in place. And that’s what the commission was saying and issuing that fervent warning that it may get worse in a deeply divided country.
Hawley In 26 States, as I understand that when it comes to mail-in voting, Judge, 26 States in this country allow third-party ballot harvesting mail-in votes. That’s where you can pay a third party to go distribute the ballots. You can’t do this at my home state of Missouri. Because we have control similar to those in Ohio (that this report was talking about) but in other states (26 States), you can pay a third party to go distribute the ballots. You can pay a third party to pick up the ballots. There’s no chain of custody there. There’s no verification. This seems to me an invitation to fraud and abuse. I’ve introduced legislation to end third-party ballot harvesting nationwide to make it illegal nationwide. Would you would you agree, Judge Starr, that looking at something like putting an end to third-party ballot harvesting is a common-sense approach (by the way, some House Democrats even have endorsed this approach) … would you agree with me that that’s a common sense place to start when we think about preventing fraud and addressing it in our elections?
Starr Yes, because the opportunity for fraud and abuse is so rife and omnipresent with that kind of (if I may now call it that) worst practice. So so many states have best practices. We heard from Senator Portman from Ohio. Other states have these safeguards in place. Let’s put safeguards in place. But one of them is let’s eliminate practices that are so prone to fraud and abuse.
Hawley I think that’s just the very beginning of what we should do. We should also make sure the poll watchers from both parties can be present at all times. That there are eyes on ballots, cameras on ballots at all times. That signature verification requirements that are mandatory. That there’s mandatory reporting requirements about where we are in the count where the states are. Some states can’t go dark for days at a time all of this stuff ought to be common sense. There is no reason we should just shrug our shoulders and say, “Well, fraud happens all the time, you know, no big deal.” It is a very big deal and for millions and millions of Americans in this election. It’s a very very big deal indeed.

Senator Ron Johnson on the Democrats’ Russian disinformation

Speaker Testimony
Johnson I just had to talk about Russian disinformation, because people pedaling it are not on my side of the aisle. Senior Democrat leaders, including Ranking Member Peters, you know, were involved in a process of creating a false intelligence product was supposedly classified they leaked to the media (that accused Senator Grassley, the President Pro Tem of the Senate, and myself of accepting in disseminating Russian disinformation from Andre Kirk Durkash).

I’d never heard of the person until they brought it up. Senator Peters introduced that direct, that false, information (Russian disinformation) into our investigation record. Fifty people associated with the intelligence community during the … after our Hunter Biden investigation and the revelations of the Hunter Biden computer said, “Oh this is this is Russian disinformation.”

Now we find out what’s real investigation by the Justice Department. So it’s just galling and I just have to point out that the purveyors of Russian disinformation –Hillary Clinton’s campaign, The DNC, the Steele dossier, the Ranking Member Peters accusing Senator Grassley and I of disseminating Russian disinformation.

That’s where the disinformation is coming. That’s where the false information the lies this false allegations. I can’t sit by here and listen to this. And say that this this is not this information this hearing today. This is getting information.

We have to take a look at to restore confidence in our election integrity. We’re not going to be able to just move on without bringing up these irregularities examining them. And providing an explanation and see where they’re really our problem so we can correct it moving forward. Senator Paul.

No wonder the main stream media hid these statements – Senators Lankford & Paul

Featured

Considering the bolstering effect of the words of the following senators, it is no wonder that the main stream media has hidden the research, suggestions, and leadership contained herein.

From the establishment wing of the GOP, Senator Lankford lays out the numbers on Nevada’s election fraud

SenLankford
Speaker Testimony
Lankford In December 2016, there was a poll that was done on if the American people believe that the Russians interfered in and changed our elections. At that time, 32% of the people believed that the Russians had influenced the outcome of the election in December of 2016. Based on that belief and what was going on, there was launched a whole series of hearings. Certainly the Russians were trying to interfere in our elections, but we spent millions and millions of dollars investigating it, going through it, ramping up entities like CISA (and others) to be able to go engage to be able to make sure we protect our next election. Senator Klobuchar and I worked for years on election security legislation and worked to be able to get that implemented. We did six different public hearings on Russian interference (just on that one topic) to make sure that we were paying attention to it — when it all started with 32% of Americans in December of 2016 believing the Russians at interfere in our election. A few days ago another poll asked the question: “Do you believe that was election voter fraud in a presidential election between Joe Biden and Donald Trump?” This December, 46% of the voters in America have said “Yes” and 45% said “No.” Interestingly enough, Trump voters say there was fraud 80%. Biden voters also said 16% that they believed that there was voter fraud. The reason I bring that up is we watched what happened in 2016 and what the American people thought and saw and so we engaged with hearings. We looked at the issues and determined to do things need to change. Much of the work that’s gone on the last several years to be able to get paper ballots into states happened because this Congress engaged on this issue where we saw an obvious problem. And so we distributed federal dollars, assistance, and a constant drumbeat to say these states have got to fix the areas where they don’t have paper ballots and we have the potential for problems. That is the question: is there a potential for a problem. The answer was “Yes, there’s a potential and we ought to fix that.” Now, amazingly, after this election, all kinds of issues have come up and said there are potentials for problem and everyone seems to be saying “move on.” The only reason I can think that that would be different was because the election outcomes seem to be different. And one side is now saying “let’s just move on and ignore this.” In my state on election night, like 27 other states in the country, by that evening, we were counting votes and all absentee ballots had been received. There was much less opportunity for accusations of fraud because all of our ballots were in. Amazingly enough, a week after the election was completed this November Oklahomans were listening to other states saying things like “We don’t know how many more ballots there are left to count.” We had been done for a week — we and 27 other states had been completed for a week. That gives opportunities for fraud and questions and problems. That’s a reasonable question to ask. It’s reasonable to be able to ask “If people can drift around and gather ballots from other people, and do ballot harvesting (and in some states that’s legal), does that provide an opportunity for fraud? I think the obvious answer is “yes.” If you mail a ballot to everyone in the state, even if they didn’t ask for it, does it provide an opportunity for fraud? Especially when the state did not first purge or verify those addresses and they sent thousands of ballots to people that no longer live there. I’ve talked to Nevada residents that received multiple ballots at their home for people that no longer live there. That’s a problem and we should at least admit that’s a problem. And for some reason, the other side was very focused on “We’ve got to fix the potential for problem from 2016,” but in 2020 when there’s potential for problem and things that they’ve been shown everyone seems to say “move along, let’s not discuss this.” There’s a system called the Eric system that’s in place that 30 States cooperate with. It helps them verify people have moved and they’re registered in two different states or if they’ve moved into your state in their registered somewhere else. It helps you then determine if they’re voting in two different states. Only 30 States use that. Other states are not. Even of the 30 states that use it, not all of them are actually using it. They literally are on the system, but they’re not actually purging their roles when they know there are people that have moved out of their states and have been informed of that. Just this last year in the Eric system, they identified 91,000 people that are registered voters that are dead. 91,000 that that one system had recognized. There are problems in the system and in this conversation that I’ve had with so many people and I’ve said “Is that a problem that people are voting in two states?” “Is it a problem that people are voting at their dead?” And this is what I hear over and over again: “This has been going on for years.” “So why don’t we fix it?” should be the next statement instead. The statement seems to be “Well, let’s just move along.” Mr. Bernal,
  • 42,000 people in Nevada voted more than once
  • 1,500 people voted in Nevada that were dead
  • 19,000 people voted though they did not live in Nevada and they weren’t a college student
  • 8,000 people voted from a non-existent address
  • 15,000 people voted though they were registered to a commercial address or a vacant address
  • 4,000 people voted in Nevada that are non-citizens
My question to you is in my state when someone votes twice (and we do have that occasionally [about 50 times a year that that actually occurs in our state]), we prosecute individuals that vote twice. This 130,000 instances that you have identified from the 2020 election in Nevada. do you know of any prosecutions currently going on in Nevada for a new voter fraud?
Bernal Not yet Senator, and that’s extremely important. This has to be … these laws have to be enforced. We, of course … I represent the Trump campaign and the campaign’s electors. I don’t represent the government. We can’t bring prosecutions. But if we are going to enforce voter integrity laws, they must be enforced. And we are confident that although it often takes a long time to put together a fraud case, … Although it takes prosecutors months, sometimes even years, to go through subpoenas and warrants and using the the FBI to go investigate these things. Once a good hard look at these cases is examined and honest look, if we do that, there should be charges brought because (as the ranking member brought up in his remarks) that when you lose the the principle of one person one vote — the end result is as authoritarianism.
Lankford Judge Star you’ve raised twice this issue about Pennsylvania and if the laws of Pennsylvania were changed. In Oklahoma, we did State bill 210 and state Bill 1779 because we saw with the pandemic there were going to be problems. So our legislature came into session, made a change to be able to adjust for how we were going to do early ballots in early voting. So because we knew that was the law that need to be followed was that done? Was that done in Pennsylvania and does it matter who sets the rules for elections?
Starr No, it was not done. Unfortunately in Pennsylvania, the governor sought to change the law the general assembly Pennsylvania had met were reviewed and made very specific changes. And then the Pennsylvania Supreme Court building what the governor had done made additional changes and those in my judgment will complete violations of the United States Constitution and flagged as such Touch on the narrowly by Justice Samuel Alito. So of the Oklahoma Legislature did it the right way to store. Thank you very much senator

Senator Paul questions Judge Starr on irregularities in Pennsylvania

Speaker Testimony
Paul Judge Starr, it’s been alleged that 60 courts have refused to hear these cases; therefore, there was no fraud in the election. I guess another way of looking at this is that the court cases have been refused for procedural and technical reasons. When you see the 60 court cases rejected, do you think that’s a conclusion by our court system that there is no fraud or do you think that the court cases were primarily rejected for procedural reasons?
Starr Senator Paul, it is my understanding that the vast majority of these cases were rejected for (rightly stated) procedural reasons (as opposed to a merits-based or substantive-based evaluations). And of course, we saw that very recently and I think most dramatically by the Supreme Court’s unanimous rejection of the bill of complaint filed by the Texas Attorney General on my home state here. And the entirety of the decision was based upon the legal concept of standing. You just don’t (Texas) have standing to object to what happened in Wisconsin or Pennsylvania or whatever and that is a reasonable ruling. There are those who would quarrel with it and that we are a United States of America. And if something bad happens in one state that ends up having an effect on another state, we have such respect for our state’s as sovereign entities within our Union. That is the argument is I think quite reasonable and I think others think it’s quite reasonable that at least matters should have been heard under the original jurisdiction. I think that’s a key example.
Paul Yeah, and I think it’s important though that we look at this and understand what courts are saying and not saying.The courts have not said there wasn’t fraud the courts just simply didn’t rule on or hear from the fraud. I do think there’s an important issue here though. The fraud is one aspect of this and I think courts have historically been reticent to get involved in elections and to look at fraud, But moving forward, we’ve got to change the rules or re-evaluate our state rules in order that this doesn’t happen again. We can’t just sit by and say we’re going to let it happen again. There is another important aspect to this though. That is a legal aspect that I think does need to be heard by the courts. And I don’t know if it can be heard beyond the election, but I think should. This is the question of whether or not people who are non-legislators can change the election law. This happened in many, many states. Probably two dozen states decided to accept ballots after the election. Two dozen states decided they could accept mail-in applications or mail out ballots all without the will of the legislature. Do you think there’s any hope for any of this being heard, Judge Starr, outside of the concept of changing the election? Is there any possibility any course going to ever hear this and say that it was wrong that secretaries of State change the law in the middle of this pandemic without the approval of the legislature or do you think there’s no hope because it’s mixed up in electoral politics, Judge Starr?
Starr I think there is a possibility, because this issue may return in light of the use this unprecedented use of mail and balance and the concern that is a bipartisan concern. Again, the Carter Baker commission, that we need to look at these issues. And so I think there is a doctrine, Senator Paul, to essentially say this issue may recur again, so it should not be washed out as being moot, because there’s a very important principle here as I made in my opening statement and my written statement. The Constitution is very clear that it is the prerogative of state legislatures to determine what these rules and laws are. And that was I must say flagrantly violated in Pennsylvania and perhaps elsewhere as well.
Paul Yes. I think the legal question there is a very easy one to decide I think even as a physician I can figure out that the Secretary of State cannot create law. I do think though that many of us who wanted this to be heard by the Supreme Court and are disappointed. Actually also might be disappointed by the precedent of Bush versus Gore and the sense that I think Bush versus Gore is precedent is shutting down elections that have been certified. They weren’t going to continue to count the hanging chads. The Secretary of State and certified and so I actually think that the Bush versus Gore precedent actually argues against the Supreme Court overturning certified elections. Do you have an opinion on that?
Starr I don’t have an opinion on that specifically. I think that Bush V Gore stands for this basic proposition: You cannot have changes in election laws after the fact. You must in fact be faithful to what the state legislature has done. That’s also what Justice Alito said in his opinion. I think essentially condemning but certainly identifying as a huge issue what had happened in Pennsylvania. So I think all in all Bush V Gore is just a reiteration of our constitutional structure.
Paul Thank you. Mr. Chairman as we go on with this. I think it’s important that we not stop here. A lot of the laws that have to be confirmed and I think reaffirmed our state laws. So it’s not in our purview but the state laws are set and then we have Federal elections. So what we’ve heard about what happened in Wisconsin, what happened in Nevada, I think is absolutely true. We have to prevent it from happening again. I think state legislatures legislators will need to reaffirm that election law can only be changed by a state legislature. So I think there’s a lot of work to be done while we will not dictate it to the states. I think we should have hearings going into the next year hearing from state legislatures. And what they’re going to do to make sure election law is upheld not changed by people who are not legislators and I we do have an interest in that I don’t want it to be federalized many on the other side of the aisle would just send federalize it and mail everybody a ballot will have this Universal corruption throughout the land. But what I think we need to do is keep it at the state level but we can’t just say it didn’t happen. We can’t just say oh four thousand people voted in Nevada that were non-citizens and we’re just going to ignore it. We’re going to sweep it under the rug. So the courts have decided the facts?? The Courts have not decided to facts. The courts never looked at the facts. Courts don’t like elections. They stayed out of it by finding an excuse standing or otherwise to stay out of it, but the fraud happened. The election, in many ways, was stolen and the only way it’ll be fixed is by in the future, reinforcing the laws. The only last comment I would say (on what Mr. Krebs said) he can speak for himself, but I think his job was keeping the foreigners out of the election. It was the most secure election based on security of the internet and Technology, but he never has voiced an opinion on that. He’s welcome to today on whether or not dead people voted. I don’t think he examined that. Did he examine on citizens voting? So to say it was the safest election sure, I agree with your statement if you’re referring to foreign intervention). But if you’re saying it’s the safest elecion based on no dead people voted, no non-citizens voted, no people broke the absentee rules — I think that’s false. And I think that’s what’s upsetting a lot of people on our side is that they’re taking your statement to mean: “Oh, well, there were no problem in the elections.” I don’t think you examined any of the problems that we have heard here. So really you’re just referring to something differently is what I the way I look at it. Thank you. Mr. Chairman

Do we have a republic? Are we indivisible?

Featured

John Roberts purportedly shouts at the other justices over the Texas case

The Epoch Times chronicles the back-and-forth accusations and denials surrounding a purported event where John Roberts shouted at other justices regarding their need to deny the case due to possible riots.

RobertsA spokesperson for the U.S. Supreme Court disputed a report that claimed Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts shouted at the eight other justices in a room in the high court, urging them not to take up the Texas election lawsuit against four other key states.

As guidance, the court “has been conducting its conferences remotely by phone since March when the building closed due to the pandemic,” a Supreme Court spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email on Friday in response to a question about the claim.

The statement contradicts what a GOP Texas elector, Matt Patrick, said earlier this week, claiming that an anonymous person said that “the Justices went into a closed room” to determine whether to take the Texas lawsuit that was eventually dismissed. Then, according to the elector, “When the Texas case was brought up he said he heard screaming through the walls as Justice Roberts and the other liberal Justices were insisting … afraid of what would happen if they did the right thing.”

The claim also appeared on Hal Turner’s website, sourcing an alleged “clerk for one of the [Supreme Court] justices.” It is unclear where Patrick obtained his information.

“The Justices met in a closed and sealed room, as is standard,” Turner’s website said, citing the alleged Supreme Court whistleblower. “Usually it is very calm, however today we could hear screaming all the way down the hall. They met in person, because they didn’t trust telephonic meeting as secure. Chief Justice Roberts was screaming, ‘Are you going to be responsible for the rioting if we hear this case?’”

(Read more at the Epoch Times)

Do the words of the Pledge of Allegiance still apply?

Since obviously no court exists where one state can openly debate and resolve differences with other states, do we have the United States? Even if the high court used the excuse of violence in the streets  to avoid hearing the Texas case, it seems only to show a continued slide from this nation’s sterling origins.

So I ask then — do the central documents of our republic really mean anything? For that matter, does the commonly-recited pledge mean anything, if you take it phrase-by-phrase:

  1. “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America”
    (Do we have this symbol to unite us, or have we allowed the liberals to name this flag a banner of hate and a point of division?)
  2. “and to the Republic for which it stands”
    (Do we have a republic when fraudulent elections — changing laws in unConstitutional ways, ignoring laws, ignoring testimony before legislators, and not listening in courts — become accepted by the media class and leftist political class?)
  3. “one nation”
    (Are we one nation or have the Democrats balkanized us to only accepting our own flavor of communitariamism — one bowing to BLM, another scraping to La Raza, and yet another kneeling to Antifa.)
  4. “under God, ”
    (Are we under God, considering how the anti-religious left has insisted on chiseling every reference to the Bible or God from public monuments and senators have made public reference to God a disqualifying hurdle.
  5. “indivisible, ”
    (Really? This one died during that administration where someone said “The Cambridge police acted stupidly.” That was followed closely by the statement made during the riots preceding his re-election and then the Ferguson and Baltimore riots in 2014. Then don’t get me going on the unequal treatment “deplorables” and our leader have gotten over the past four years with Democrats in the press and in politics.)
  6. “with liberty “
    (How can we figure that liberals who want to put Trump followers in re-education camps might be dedicated to liberty?)
  7. “and justice”
    (How can we think that people who would make plans to persecute their political rivals might support justice? Additionally, what about this past election?)
  8. “for all.”
    (Unlike conservatives — who are accused of Nazism — liberals practice the violence, political oppression, and reprisals associated with the Nazi movement.)

In case these important tweets get buried or deleted

TexasElectoralCollege


AntifaRiots

Reasons for special counsels investigating Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, …

Featured

Is Joe Biden connected to the federal investigation of Hunter Biden’s deals in Ukraine and China?

The Christian Broadcasting Network delves into the connection between Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and the various deals between Ukraine, China, and the Bidens.

bidens cash 1bAs Joe Biden is preparing to assume the presidency on January 20, an ongoing federal investigation into his family’s business dealings will follow him. Although it’s his son, Hunter, under investigation, there are new questions about what the elder Biden knew and when he knew it.

The investigation of Hunter Biden was first initiated in 2018 as a money-laundering probe but has now morphed into much more including business dealings in China and potential violations of tax laws from earnings in Ukraine. It’s also expanded to include his uncle James Biden.

Last week, Hunter Biden announced that he is under investigation for possible tax fraud. Reports indicate the allegation stems chiefly from $400,000 in unreported income he received in 2017 while sitting on the board of Ukraine natural gas company Burisma. It was a year Biden reportedly netted $1.2 million in income.

“I take this matter very seriously,” Hunter Biden said in a statement issued by the Biden Transition Team. “But I am confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately, including with the benefit of professional tax advisors.”

Biden was given the position at Burisma while his father was vice president and in charge of Ukraine-US affairs. Back in October, the New York Post first reported emails emerging on a laptop in Delaware suggesting Joe Biden had met with a Burisma executive at his son’s behest.

“Did you and your father ever discuss Ukraine?” asked ABC News. “No,” Biden said.

“If your last name wasn’t Biden would you have been asked to be on the board of Burisma?” ABC News pressed. “I don’t know, probably not,” Biden responded.

Former Hunter Biden business associate, Tony Bobulinski, told Fox News that Hunter and his uncle James used their name to also help broker deals with a Chinese company, another subject of the investigation.

“The only qualification they had was the Biden name,” Bobulinski told Fox News.

ABC News reports investigators honing in on the China aspect of the probe are specifically focusing on a 2.8-carat diamond Hunter received in 2017 from Chinese business associate, Ye Jianming, the former head of CEFC China Energy, as well as several multimillion-dollar wire transfers between the two.

Bobulinski says Hunter set up a meeting between him and then Vice President Biden to solicit his help in brokering deals in China.

“There was no other reason for me to be in that bar meeting with Joe Biden than to discuss what I was doing with his family name and then Chinese CEFC,” Bobulinski said.

“Jim Biden sat and Hunter Biden participated in it. They knew exactly what they were doing – they were dealing with a Chinese-owned enterprise run by Chairman Ye, CEFC, that had strong ties to the Chinese Communist Party,” Bobulinski said.

A recently emerged email also coming from that Delaware laptop indicates that in 2017 Hunter asked for extra keys to his Washington, DC office for his “new office mates” including his father and a representative of that same Chinese-owned enterprise.

Again, Joe Biden maintains he had no involvement in his son’s business dealings with China.

“That’s a blatant lie when he states that, that is a blatant lie,” Bobulinski insists.

And there’s another focus of the investigation – Joe Biden’s younger brother James and his role in a bankrupt hospital business in Pennsylvania.

Senate Homeland Security Chairman Ron Johnson has been investigating the Biden family for more than a year.

“We are finding more and more about how involved not only Hunter Biden was, but James and Joe Biden as well,” Johnson told Fox News. “And he has not been truthful with the American public and it’s about time the press start asking him questions.”

(Read more at the Christian Broadcasting Network)

How could Joe Biden not be connected if he needed office space with Hunter and a Chinese emissary?

Then again, this is the press that has forgotten that Joe Biden bragged to the Council on Foreign Relations that he got the prosecutor who was investigating Hunter fired. The press cannot remember this.

Email reveals Hunter asked for key for “office mate” Joe in a space he planned to share with a Chinese emissary

In a 12 December 2020 article in The Sun, we find that Hunter requested that a key be made for Joe Biden at a work space he would share with a Chinese emissary.

OfficeMatesA series of emails sent in 2017 between Hunter Biden and the general manager of a Washington, D.C. building of multiple office suites and embassies, raises questions about the extent of Joe Biden’s knowledge of his family’s Chinese business dealings.

In an email obtained by Daily Caller and dated September 21, 2017, Biden asks House of Sweden property manager Cecilia Browning if he could “please have keys made available for new office mates.”

Those listed include father Joe Biden, step mother Jill Biden, uncle Jim Biden and Gongweng Dong – a man whom Hunter Biden identifies as the “emissary” for Ye Jianming, the chairman of the now-bankrupt Chinese energy conglomerate CEFC.

“[P]lease have keys made available for new office mates: Joe Biden, Jill Biden, Jim Biden, Gongwen Dong (Chairman Ye CEFC emissary),” the email reads.

In the same email, Hunter Biden also requested that a sign be made for his office door reading ‘The Biden Foundation’ and ‘Hudson West (CEFC US).’

Hunter also provided the personal cell phone numbers for his father and uncle, and suggested that Browning’s associate call them “if she insists.”

It is not known whether Joe Biden ever visited his son’s D.C. office.

Hunter Biden also refers to Ye as “my partner”, unaware that just five months the chairman would be detained in China in March of 2018 and accused of bribery.

Ye’s company was declared bankrupt earlier this year amid accusations that it used a complex web of shell companies to facilitate fake transactions.

At the time of the email, Hunter Biden’s company Rosemont Seneca was leasing office space from House of Sweden.

House of Sweden confirmed that Hunter Biden’s company had rented space in the building at the time of the 2017 email, but declined to offer further details.

“House of Sweden is owned and managed by National Property Board Sweden,” general manager Cecilia Browning said in a statement to Fox News.

“We have tenants who rent office space, and it is correct that Rosemont Seneca LLC rented an office at House of Sweden between February 2017 – February 2018.”

Browning added: “However, please note that we do not share information about current and previous tenants.”

(Read more at The Sun)

The problem is that the American main-stream press wants to either ignore these stories or paint them as “Russian disinformation” until it benefits a Democrat to tell the truth

It seems there are two investigations into Hunter Biden in our own FBI, but Barr hid this from the press so as not to affect the election (shades of Comey).

Do you remember how the opposition research from Christopher Steele, paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign, was used by Obama/Biden administration to target Carter Page and the Trump campaign and administration? If I remember correctly, even after Mueller disproved the Steele dossier, the Democrats used the Steele dossier against Trump.

They better not hold their breaths if they expect different treatment from the Right.

Hunter Biden asks in an email for $10 million from a Chinese Chairman

The Western Journal reports in a 16 December 2020 article how Hunter Biden corresponded with Zhou Runlong of CEFC China Energy, asking for $10 million.

In correspondence in which Hunter Biden sought $10 million for a business venture in China, he included the entire Biden family sending best wishes to the Chinese tycoon from whom he was seeking funding, according to a new report.

Fox News reportedly obtained an email Hunter Biden sent on June 18, 2017, to Zhao Runlong at CEFC China Energy. The email asks Zhao to “translate my letter to Chairman Ye, please extend my warmest best wishes and that I hope to see the Chairman soon.”

Ye Jianming was the founder and chairman of CEFC. According to a September report released by the Senate Homeland Security Committee and Senate Finance Committee, “Ye’s connections to the Communist government are extensive and … has been previous affiliations with the People’s Liberation Army.”

“Based on the information received by the Committees, Ye was also financially connected to Vice President [Joe] Biden’s brother, James Biden. Thus, there exists a vast web of corporate connections and financial transactions between and among the Biden family and Chinese nationals,” the report said.

“I hope my letter finds you well,” Hunter Biden reportedly wrote to Ye. “I regret missing you on your last visit to the United States. Please accept the best wishes from the entire Biden family as well as my partners.”

“We are all hoping to see you here again soon, or in Shanghai,” he wrote.

The letter said Hunter Biden had “concluded the establishment of SinoHawk Holdings” — a Biden-CEFC joint venture — and that a request had been made to “Dong Gongwen [Gongwen Dong] and Director Zang for the funding of the $10 MM USD wire.”

(Read more at the Western Journal)

How can Joe Biden be independent of China when his family receives so much from that nation?

How can we expect Joe Biden to make decisions that benefit Americans over Chinese oligarchs?

Hunter Biden didn’t report $400K in 2014 Ukrainian income

NewsMax discusses in a 17 December 2020 article how Hunter Biden was told in an email that he did not disclose $400,000 in Burisma income.

Hunter Biden failed to disclose $400,000 in income on his 2014 tax returns from the Ukrainian natural gas company he sat on the board of, according to a 2017 email from his former business partner, reports NBC News.

“In 2014 you joined the Burisma board and we still need to amend your 2014 returns to reflect the unreported Burisma income,” wrote Eric Schwerin.

“That is approximately $400,000 extra so your income in 2014 was closer to $1,247,328.”

NBC obtained the email from Robert Costello, an attorney for Rudy Giuliani, and noted that it “could not independently verify whether the email is authentic and unaltered.”

Giuliani, President Donald Trump’s lawyer, hired legal representation last November as federal prosecutors probed his interactions with two men charged with campaign finance violations. The former New York City mayor also gave Hunter Biden’s laptop to authorities.

Hunter Biden last week said his taxes are under federal investigation. The U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware opened the probe in late 2018, before his father Joe Biden became a presidential candidate. It includes inquiries into potential violations of money laundering and tax laws.

“I learned yesterday for the first time that the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware advised my legal counsel, also yesterday, that they are investigating my tax affairs,” Hunter Biden said in a statement last week. “I take this matter very seriously but I am confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately, including with the benefit of professional tax advisors.”

(Read more at NewsMax)

Things you need to know about Hunter Biden’s Chinese dealings

The New York Post provides six facts about Hunter Biden’s Chinese dealings. Here are the first two:

The furor over Trump’s call for Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden’s business has brought the spotlight back to the former second family’s international dealings.

While his Ukrainian business is currently receiving most of the attention, Hunter’s dealings in China deserve at least as much scrutiny.

Trained as a lawyer at Yale, Hunter had primarily worked as a lobbyist and consultant. His previous foray into financial services, Paradigm Global Advisors, was linked to Stanford Financial, a multibillion dollar Ponzi scheme.

In 2009, Hunter co-founded a new venture, Rosemont Seneca Partners. Rosemont and Hunter were given extraordinary opportunities in China while his father was vice president. Here are some key facts:

1. Joe Biden met with Hunter’s Chinese partners days before they established a new investment firm.

In December 2013, Hunter landed in Beijing aboard Air Force Two, accompanying his father on an official visit to China. Less than two weeks later, Hunter’s company, Rosemont Seneca, became a partner in a new investment company backed by the state-owned Bank of China.

Christening the new firm Bohai Harvest RST (BHR), the partners set out to raise $1 billion for the new fund.

Representatives of the Biden family have denied any connection between the vice president’s visit and Hunter’s business. However, a BHR representative told The New Yorker earlier this year that Hunter used the opportunity to introduce his father to Chinese private equity executive Jonathan Li, who became CEO of BHR after the deal’s conclusion.

2. BHR is a multibillion-dollar enterprise.

Exceeding their initial fundraising goal, the partners at BHR raised their target to $1.5 billion for the new fund. The company’s website now brags that it manages “over RMB 15 billion” in assets — the equivalent of about $2.1 billion in today’s dollars.

Under the terms of the deal, BHR, in which Hunter’s firm held an equity stake, would be a lead investor in the fund. Other investors include China Development Bank and China’s social security fund.

(Read about all six points at the New York Post)

Just the New York Post‘s first point blows most liberal arguments out of the water

I encourage you to consider all of their points.

2020 Election Investigation:Who is Stealing America?

This video brings up key points that must be addressed:

  1. Why did four swing states (Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia) suspend their counting at once during the early morning hours of the day after Election Day?
  2. How did only Biden benefit from sudden spikes of votes (for example, 141,258 in Michigan at about 4 a.m. on 4 November or 143,386 in Wisconsin at about the same time)?
  3. Why, in all of the swing states in question, was Trump in the lead before the sudden spike of votes?
  4. How is it that Biden received just enough in the spikes of votes to put him about 20,000 votes?
  5. Why did Biden have no coattails for the Senate candidates? Since voters have indicated that they would not vote for a President of one party and a Senator or House member of another, why did most House and Senate states in play go to the Republicans?
  6. Why have whistle blowers that came out telling of ballot tampering been persecuted? Why have USPS employees who testified about being told to back-date ballots fired?
  7. Why were ballot counters kept from doing their jobs? Why were they kicked out? Why were they kept too far back to see the ballots?
  8. How many sworn testimonials are enough? How many affidavits are enough?
  9. Since the officials at the TCF Center placed cardboard over the windows during counting and would not allow poll watchers in, why not throw out all ballots processed at that facility? Obviously, the officials were ignoring election law.
  10. Why not follow the Matt Brainard report on election irregularities?
  11. Once the video on the Georgia ballot counting center came to light, why didn’t that cause a re-evaluation of the vote count? Why not throw out the obviously fraudulent vote?
  12. Once the problems with the Dominion Voting Systems being connected to the Internet were found (along with the other problems, such as procedures known on how to hack DVS machines), why hasn’t that caused the invalidation of those votes (since that violates state and federal laws)?
  13. If (in 2016) Dominion Voting Systems were very easy to hack (according to
    reports on the New York Times and many other main stream outlets), you would think that they still would be easy to hack now (since most systems were purchased before 2010).
  14. And many more points (since I will not steal all of the Epoch Times‘ points of argumentation).

Democrats call for everyone to “come together” in some odd ways

Featured

I would rather accept a criticism from a patriot than an insult from a Democrat

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom–go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!
(Samuel Adams, 1 August 1776)

Cynthia Johnson edition of coming together

If you have been reading this blog, you may recognize Michigan Representative Cynthia Johnson as the Representative who called naturalized citizen “Hema” a liar.

Now, in the following Facebook video, Cynthia Johnson threatens all Trump supporters. Why doesn’t this get Cynthia Johnson blocked from Facebook like conservative politicians have been?
https://www.facebook.com/525652944123710/videos/1044781265996358/?__cft__%5B0%5D=AZVIt1polnLpu0gAa_vkOJCalnqoeyJ0DjBltVBcBOwg8HquJlSHMuaQDjym_pvxHlAbZLs5GEFdSy6RP00gm68iC2FKaLMiXmlj36-vWTpVuP5y9Y4gm8nmwJdo_FWkeCI50o3So3mLdWCA8smZB1vP

In case the video does disappear from Facebook, here it is:
https://rumble.com/embed/v93h0l/?pub=7uejp

So it seems that Democrats think that Americans will unite under their banner when they threaten violence on them. They think that sending their “soldiers” to “do it right” will bring Americans to their side.

Biden’s phlegmatic, divisive speech burns bridges to Trump’s America

Breitbart points to Biden’s hacking, factious words to his followers.

Joe-Biden-Electoral-College-speechPresident-elect Joe Biden delivered an angry, partisan speech Monday evening upon being voted the winner of the 2020 election by the Electoral College.

Biden did not just acknowledge victory; he taunted his defeated opponent, President Donald Trump. Rather than celebrate the result and reach out to Trump and his supporters, Biden — coughing up phlegm throughout his speech — attempted to rub salt in the wound, continuing to argue the case after he had already won it.

Biden seemed annoyed that Trump had contested the results at all. He has no right to be offended.

Biden was one of the Obama administration officials who “unmasked” Michael Flynn, as part of an effort undermine the incoming administration. On the campaign trail in 2019, Biden agreed eagerly with a voter who called Trump an “illegitimate president.” He called Trump a Nazi sympathizer and compared him to Joseph Goebbels and Adolf Hitler. Biden has never apologized for that.

In his speech, Biden declared that the election was “free and fair” — a dubious claim, which I have disputed elsewhere. He  expects Americans to overlook a year of political violence, almost entirely by the left; unprecedented censorship by the mainstream media and Big Tech to cover up stories damaging to Biden’s political prospects; a debate commission stacked against Trump; and — most of all — a shift to vote-by-mail that was often pushed by Democrats over Republican objections.

Biden defended the election officials who, he said, had withstood “political pressure, verbal abuse, and threats of physical violence.”

Notably, Biden has yet to denounce the violence carried out against Trump supporters since the election, or the threats against the Trump campaign’s lawyers. During the election, he falsely claimed that left-wing rioters in Washington, DC, and Portland were “peaceful protesters.” It took him three days before he condemned riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

Coughing and spluttering, Biden went on an extended rant against Trump’s effort to challenge the election results in court. There was no need to do that. The fact that the Electoral College voted the way it had was evidence enough that Trump’s legal efforts had failed.

If Biden’s goal had been to convince Trump supporters, he would have done better to reach out to them in friendship — not to “sell past the close.” If he is so certain that his victory is legitimate, why argue after the fact?

Biden continued in that vein for several minutes, reminding Americans that Trump had fired cybersecurity chief Chris Krebs after he had claimed publicly that the 2020 elections were the most secure in history. But Krebs looks decidedly less credible on a day when Google and other networks crashed, and after a weekend when the U.S. discovered a massive security breach at the Treasury and Commerce departments. The breach began earlier this year and lasted for months. Most secure ever?

(Read more at Breitbart)

I remember seeing aspiring salespeople with copies of Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People

When I had first graduated from college, I remember a salesman who always had his finger in his copy of How to Win Friends and Influence People and an Inside Sales clerk who memorized the points provided by Dale Carnegie. Likewise, I have known hundreds of Christians over the years who tried to live by the words of the Word: to live by the Golden rule and to live lives that would attract positive questions about Christ.

None of these would have done what Joe Biden, a supposed “faithful Catholic” just did by demonizing half of the nation. Not one of the sales personnel who merely wanted to learn to influence people in a way that might result in better sales — none of them would have insulted the opposition in this way. None of the Christians I have known would have wandered into this odd position. Maybe Joe assumes that his opposition will not listen to him.

The resistance remains

Featured

Attorney Jenna Ellis on Trump Team Legal Options, Supreme Court Decision & Starting Recall Petitions

Here, Attorney Jenna Ellis explains the ongoing actions within the Trump legal team.

Speaker Testimony
Ellis In at least four of the six states that are in question, I have recall petitions that are available and citizens in those states can start those petitions and say, “You know what, if there is a member of any party who is an elected official, who’s in the state legislature, or who’s the governor, who’s not willing to take this seriously and genuinely uphold and protect the law and the rule of law and the Constitution, we can recall them.”

We can say, “No, we are going to alter the people who are in our government because, clearly, they have failed us.”

Jekielek Today, we sit down with Constitutional law attorney Jenna Ellis, a member of the Trump campaign legal team, to get an update on their legal efforts and to hear what she expects the future holds.

This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek.

Jekielek Jenna Ellis, such a pleasure to have you back on American Thought Leaders.
Ellis Thank you very much for having me.
Jekielek So, Jenna, why don’t I just pick your brain to start with? From the campaign perspective, where are we at right now?
Ellis Yeah. Absolutely. It’s an important question and since November 3, the mainstream media has tried to say at every step of the way, “This is hopeless for Donald Trump. He should just concede.” They’ve been trying to push Joe Biden through to the finish line, but this fight is not over yet — and not by a long shot.We’re following the process that’s laid out in the US Constitution (designed specifically by our Founding Fathers to make sure that corrupted elections don’t prevail). And so, although we have December 14, just this past Monday, where the different slates of delegates came in those six states that we’re challenging, the GOP delegates also showed up and cast their votes.

That’s happened before in US history, where there have been two slates of delegates, and there’s been contraversy over the outcome of a particular state’s election and how they sent their delegates right up into the day where they go to Congress. And so the date of ultimate significance, as the Supreme Court recognized, is January 6, when Congress actually receives and counts and certifies the Electoral College.

At this point, what the campaign is doing and the legal team for the President, we are still pushing for election integrity to make sure every legal vote is counted and counted fairly. There is still plenty of time for the state legislatures to do their constitutionally mandated job by making sure that the delegates that they send and they certify are the correct slate.

Jekielek Well, so, exactly. There are these competing slates of delegates for a number of states. But how does that actually work? Let’s say on the 6th [of January] or even before that, what scenarios are you imagining here?
Ellis So, for example, what can and should happen is that when you have a state like, say, Pennsylvania, one of the most interesting things that came out of the Texas v. Pennsylvania filing in the Supreme Court — even though in my view and a lot of constitutional experts’ view, that was wrongfully dismissed out of hand without hearing out of the Supreme Court — but what that case, one of the great things that came out of that case is theat the Pennsylvania State Legislature, their leadership in both the House and the Senate filed an amicus brief admitting to the Supreme Court and telling the Supreme Court that they agreed with Texas. That their state’s laws in the administration of the 2020 election were not followed.

That gives them the basis through their investigations, their findings, all of the testimony and evidence presented by the mayor and myself at that hearing for Pennsylvania to reclaim, under Article II, Section 1.2 of the US Constitution, they can reclaim their authority to select the slate of delegates. And so they have every opportunity to call themselves back into an electoral session for the purpose of voting on which slate of delegates they’re going to send.

So that is what should happen in each of these six states prior to January 6

Jekielek So is this something that you forsee, this type of scenario that you’re describing, forsee happening in more states than just Pennsylvania?
Ellis Well, I know that Georgia is looking at this very closely. Also Michigan with the Antrim County report that came out with all of those, not just irregularities, but sheer percentages of discrepancies and all of the violations of law that occurred in Michigan. So in Michigan, as well as Arizona and also in Wisconsin.

So, I think that once one state actually calls an electoral session and is willing to run that resolution to vote by simple majority and say, “We are not going to allow corrupted, false certifications to prevail in terms of how we select our delegates,” if one state is willing to do this, I think others will follow.

Jekielek So lets talk about the findings in Antrim County. It’s absolutely fascinating. Is this creating an interest in looking at more of these machines beyond Antrim County?
Ellis Absolutely, and it should because, of course, with these 22 machines and seeing all of what’s come out in this report, when we know that Dominion Voting Systems and their machines are in at least 29 states, then it’s incumbent upon those states to do their own audits. I testified in my home state of Colorado yesterday on an election integrity hearing that my state has been using Dominion voting machines. And my request to them, to the state legislature, is to do your own election integrity check. It’s incumbent on the state legislatures to make sure that we’re not removing safeguards from election integrity. Do their own audit, look into these machines, look at the mail-in voting system in Colorado, look at ballot harvesting, look at the laws, look at the administration.

The pushback, of course, from Democrats is, “We’re fine. We’re fine. Nothing to see here.”

And I said, “Well, if you’re so concerned about transparency and honesty, and if that conslusory statement is correct, then you’ll have no problem investigating this and making sure that the American people, and particularly Colorado voters, are assured that everything is free and fair in Colorado.”

I think that evey other state in the Union really needs to take a hard look at their own election laws and the election administration to make sure that what’s happened in these six states never happens again in America.

Jekielek Are you hearing any further rumbling around these machines actually being looked at in these other states? And, furthermore, if there are more of these extensive errors, so to speak, found on the machines, what are the remedies for that?
Ellis That’s a great question. And of course, I think that certainly the American people and those of us who love our country, we value free and fair elections, we want to preserve and protect the Constitution. There are at least 74 million Americans that voted for President Trump because they want to protect America.

It’s incumbent, though, upon every American, regardless of who you voted for, whether or not you like the outcome of this election, to stop any cheating, to stop any lawlessness, to stop anything that runs afoul of the US Constitution to make sure to protect free and fair elections. I think there is a movement among the American people who really want to get to the bottom of these questions. And so, like I said to the Colorado State Legislature yesterday, “If your investigation of the Colorado machines, for example, doesn’t yield any anomalies or problems, then great. Then we rest assured in that investigation and in the results of that investigation.”

But I think that what’s come out in Michigan definitely gives rise to the necessity of these investigations in these other states. And what’s happened in the administration of the 2020 election, every state legislature should be looking at their own laws and their own administration. So I think that state legislatures like Colorado and others who aren’t part of the six states, but they’re starting to have their own election integrity hearings. They’re taking this very seriously, and I applaud them for that.

Jekielek To your point, we hear from our readers all the time, and there’s a deep, deep concern about election integrity among them. One of the things that’s coming out actually is that some of them are feeling a bit powerless, I guess. That they’re not sure that they’re — I’ll read from one, actually, not that I have here: “How can we actually ensure that there’s proper accountability and transparency?” Someone is asking us, right, and we frankly don’t know the answer to that question. What are your thoughts?
Ellis Well, I think that’s where all need to recognize that we are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And so, we the people hav eht ultimate say and we must hold our elected leaders responsible. We can do that through not only contacting them and through putting pressure on them to continue this fight, not only in the media, but also to make sure that our elected officials know that that’s what we expect of them — to take election integrity seriously.

But there’s also in at least four of the six states that are in question, I have recall petitions that are available.

Citizens in those states can start those petitions and say, “You know what, if there is a member of any party who is an elected official, who’s in the state legislature, or who’s the governor, who’s not willing to take this seriously and genuinely uphold and protect the law and the rule of law and the Constitution, we can recall them.”


We can say, “No, we are going to alter the people who are in our government because, clearly, they have failed us.”

I think that over the last month, it’s been a failure, not only of the executive branch in the administration between the governor, these elected officials, all the way down — or these election officials, rather — all the way down through the administration of the election, but it’s ben a failure of the judicial branch particularly the Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution in the Texas case, among others.

And so now, when we’re looking at the state legislators, if that branch fails, then it’s up to we the people to make sure that we go through the constitutional processes that we can then change those who are in authority because no person in the United States is entitled to government authority. It’s only upon consent of we the people and consent of the governed.

Jekielek So there’s been talk That this Texas case is actually being retooled as we speak. Do you have any intel on that?
Ellis Yeah, so we’re certainly looking at that. The President is looking at that and in terms of how we might be able to refile it. Of course, it’s it’s really shocking, and I think completely outrageous, that the Supreme Court dismissed what is clearly a case of original jurisdiction, meaning that you can file directly in the Supreme Court when it was a state suing other states and ultimately it was you 18 states against 4 states that case should have been heard.

It’s not discretionary of the Supreme Court to be able to do that. And so I think that was very disappointing to a lot of Americans to see that. So of course, as the Trump legal team, we’re looking at all legal options.

We’ll continue to have at the other cases that we’ve already filed. They’re making their way up through the system. And of course, ultimately the state legislatures have the authority already to be able to reclaim their delegates, to protect their constituent base. They don’t need a court order for that.

Jekielek So Jenna there have been reports that the DNI Radcliffe that he actually intends to postpone this report on potential foreign interference in the election (that is, I think it’s due on December 18th) because of new intelligence about how the Chinese Communist party has. They have interfered in the election. I don’t know if you’ve read this. What are your thoughts on this?
Ellis Well, you know John Radcliffe is someone who I know personally and I have great respect for him. And so, you know, I haven’t talked to him, of course, about this. I don’t know any more than you do in terms of the reports coming out. But I think comparatively with some of the other people that we’ve seen in the swamp and doing things for you know, various reasons, I have the utmost trust and respect for DNI Radcliffe and I think that whatever his decision is with the information he has will be one that’s for the good of the American people.
Jekielek And I guess you know speaking of media a little bit. You’ve been I guess I could say extremely critical in past days of how of corporate media in general. I just wanted you to kind of talk about this a little bit. What are your concerns?
Ellis Corporate media is telling a narrative. They’re not truth-seeking. They’re not fact-finding. They’re not willing to follow the election integrity path where it leads. And so just like how there may be certain partisan political operatives that have an agenda. Journalism and reporting should not have an agenda.

Certainly opinion pieces — opinions are very different. But when the mainstream media is reporting factually-false information or they’re unwilling to report things like, you know, Hunter Biden’s laptop. Let’s just not talk about that or let’s push this false narrative of Russia collusion for three and a half years.

I mean, all of these things are designed to try to I to minimize the legitimacy of what President Trump is doing by trying to protect election integrity. That’s irresponsible and morally outrageous for so-called journalists who are really activists to be perpetuating this sort of false narrative.

They’ve also done personal attacks against myself and my colleagues and outright allied with false narratives to try to break down our credibility just for the purpose of trying to say, “See, President Trump doesn’t have a credible legal team and doesn’t have a credible effort here.”

They have tried for the last four plus years with President Trump to take down him and his associates because ultimately they don’t like the fact that he is willing to stand firm and uphold the rule of law in this country. And I think that’s absolutely ridiculous.

I know for myself and the mayor and those on our team (certainly President Trump has proved this) — we’re not intimidated. We don’t care about the lies. We’ll of course call them out for lying and we will always put forward the truth, but we will continue the fact-finding mission. We will be genuine Patriots with courage.

We will protect the Constitution, because at every critical moment in America’s history, we have had Patriots that have stood up and said, “We are willing to carry the torch for liberty.”

It’s our turn right now and we’re up to the challenge.

Jekielek Any final thoughts before we finish up?
Ellis Well, I really appreciate this time so much and I would just say to the American people take heart. This is not over yet. And we absolutely have every intention of continuing to fight for election integrity. We need to do this through January 6 and also beyond. This is something that should never ever happen again in America’s history and it’s up to us to be the leaders and to stand with courage and to go forward and always seek truth.

I would also just say Merry Christmas to everyone. We’re saying that and I’m so grateful to President Trump for all of the promises that he has kept to the American people. It’s been such a privilege and honor to be on his team and to know that we’re fighting for truth and the American way.

And now Merry Christmas.

Michigan’s Antrim County voting machines show Dominion “intentionally designed” to “create systemic fraud”

The Tennessee Star reports the Antrim County voting machines showed an error rate of over 68%.

The cyber-security firm that conducted a forensic examination of 22 Dominion Voting tabulators in Michigan has determined that “Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed” to “create systemic fraud,” and that election results of Antrim County should not have been certified. Allied Security Operations Group (ASOG) said in a report published Monday morning that it observed an error rate of 68.05 percent in the fatally flawed machines.

(continued)

Last week, Judge Elensheimer issued a protective order allowing Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson to temporarily block the results of the audit.

During a hearing conducted by ZOOM and streamed live on YouTube, Elensheimer this morning  removed that order, clearing the way for the results to go public with some redactions.

Elensheimer issued an order on Dec. 6 granting a local man, William Baily, permission to have the county’s 22 Dominion tabulators examined. A team of seven forensic investigators from Allied Security Operations Group examined the voting machines for about eight hours on Dec. 6.  ASOG is a cyber security firm from Texas.

Baily’s attorney Matthew DePerno posted ASOG’s conclusions online.

We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election
results.

The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors. The electronic ballots are then transferred for adjudication. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail. This leads to voter or election fraud. Based on our study, we conclude that The Dominion Voting System should not be used in Michigan. We further conclude that the results of Antrim County should not have been certified.

The Antrim County Clerk and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson have stated that the election night error (detailed above by the vote “flip” from Trump to Biden, was the result of human error caused by the failure to update the Mancelona Township tabulator prior to election night for a down ballot race. We disagree and conclude that the vote flip occurred because of machine error built into the voting software designed to create error.

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s statement on November 6, 2020 that “the correct results always were and continue to be reflected on the tabulator totals tape . . . .” was false.

The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008%). We observed an error rate of 68.05%. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity.

The results of the Antrim County 2020 election are not certifiable. This is a result of machine and/or software error, not human error. The tabulation log for the forensic examination of the server for Antrim County from December 6, 2020 consists of 15,676 individual events, of which 10,667 or 68.05% of the events were recorded errors. These errors resulted in overall tabulation errors or ballots being sent to adjudication. This high error rates proves the Dominion Voting System is flawed and does not meet state or federal election laws.

These errors occurred after The Antrim County Clerk provided a re-provisioned CF card with uploaded software for the Central Lake Precinct on November 6, 2020. This means the statement by Secretary Benson was false. The Dominion Voting System produced systemic errors and high error rates both prior to the update and after the update; meaning the update (or lack of update) is not the cause of errors.

Read the entire report here.

Bailey had filed a complaint on Nov. 23, arguing that there was election fraud in the Republican-leaning Antrim County.

In his lawsuit, Bailey said he was one of the first people to notice a vote reporting error that incorrectly gave 6,000 votes to Biden in the Republican-leaning county.

The Sec. of State’s office claimed the snafu in Antrim County was the the result of human error.

“The issue with Antrim County’s presidential results occurred after county Clerk Sheryl Guy failed to update Election Source software on all tabulators after performing an update to two of them,” the Detroit News reported. “The failure caused the machines to transpose results as they were sent to the county’s main software.”

Guy, however, reportedly told DePerno in the days following the election that there was “no way for human error to occur with what she did with the voting machines, Dominion software or the results of the election.”

She allegedly changed her story due to “tremendous pressure from others in the county and at the state level as well.”

The case will now move to the discovery phase and could go to trial by April of 2021.

(Read the entire article at the Tennessee Star)

If this had been one machine or if the error rate was less than 1%, then the Democrat narrative might stand

Just as the Georgia surveillance videos showed that ballots were being processed without the required election observers, the tests on these voting machines shows the systemic nature of the issue. Now we know why the Michigan Board of Elections ordered the County Clerks to delete vote data.

Representative to Arizona House: “This election is far from over”

Although this One America News Network video begins with references to the Texas lawsuit which was rejected by the Supreme Court and an Arizona action that RINOs were able to block, it points out a number of other arrows in the quiver of Trump. Thus, Arizona Representative Mark Fenchem says, “This election is far from over.”

Now, we must practice civil disobedience and learn to defend

Featured

If you value freedom, the world must see civil disobedience

In the face of obvious election fraud, we must seek justice

We have all seen the videos of Georgia Democrats illegally processing ballots after the poll watchers were told to go home. Without poll watchers present, these Democrats are violating Georgia law. For those who don’t remember the first post on the illegal Georgia shenanigans, here is a re-post.

Obvious fraud evidenced in suitcases of ballots

Here, a witness testifies how suitcases full of ballots can be seen on surveillance video in the ballot counting area. At 8:00 a.m., a Democrat takes a suitcase full of ballots from under a table. The same person who closed down the Atlanta ballot counting center at 11:30 p.m. installed the table and removes at least one of the four suitcases full of ballots from under the table.

A false ally’s (Mitch McConnell’s) response to this evidence

Believe it or not, the response of Mitch McConnell (aka the Head RINO) was to congratulate Joe Biden.

Our required response to betrayal by false allies

Ok. I know that practicing our right to vote in any way (or even withholding that vote) does not qualify as civil disobedience. However, action with the political class must take place on the level that they will feel the most. Therefore, the first thing we must do involves responding in kind to their betrayal with a pledge and act of never voting for incumbents.

We need to act judiciously — not allowing ourselves to be duped by promises of future action. As long as Mr. McConnell and the other swamp RINOs can stab Trump by not acting on Article I, Article II, Amendment XII of the United States Constitution and the associated federal statutes that govern this issue – it seems we have no recourse but to vow to never vote for incumbents. Of course, if McConnell can demonstrate that he will support implementing Amendment XII, then maybe we can work once he has proven himself trustworthy.

Beyond voting, real civil disobedience might be in order

Organized sit-ins of local congressional offices might be in order for those of us on the right. In the past, this was reserved for those on the left. However, until the swamp dwellers get the message, drastic means need to come to the fore.

Mind you, as Christians, I cannot advocate starting the violence

Another national stay-at-home order? No.

Fortune has pulled together a poll of partisan respondents to the question: “Would you agree to another national stay-at-home order?”

As hospitalizations and deaths continue to rise, some public health officials are calling for a national lockdown to help control the pandemic. That includes Michael Osterholm, a member of President-elect Joe Biden’s COVID-19 advisory board, who is calling for a six- to eight-week nationwide shutdown.

The short-term consequences would be staggering: Just look at March and April, when the jobless rate soared from 4.4% to 14.7%. Is that something Americans could stomach again? To find out, Fortune and SurveyMonkey polled 2,247 U.S. adults between Nov. 30 and Dec. 1.

We found that among U.S. adults, 58% support a national “stay at home” order, in which everyone in the country is required to remain in their home except for essential services. Meanwhile, 40% of the public opposes such an order.

That support is striking considering the economic damage caused by state-issued shutdowns in the spring. It also speaks to how concerned Americans remain about the pandemic. However, that support level is down from 65% in a Fortune-SurveyMonkey poll in September.

Perhaps not surprisingly, we found a massive political divide. The majority of Democrats (87%) and Independents (67%) support a national stay-at-home order. Meanwhile, only 24% of Republicans would support such an action.

And there is a split among different income groups: While 70% of Americans earning $15,000 to $29,999 would support such a measure, only 50% of U.S. adults earning over $150,000 would back it.

There’s no clear reason for the divide, but some of it could come down to higher-income earners remembering how quickly stocks crashed in March at the onset of the spring lockdowns. And lower-paid workers might be more cautious given the fact that their jobs often involve face-to-face contact with the general public.

(Read more at Fortune)

In defense of a tired nation — no more lockdowns

The problem with lock-downs can be split into these subcategories:

  1. Democrats selectively apply their lock-downs, keeping campaign celebrations and riots going while shutting down churches, synagogues, and schools.
  2. Too many people have died from the increase in suicide.
  3. Too many have died from the increased violence from Democrats’ bail reform efforts (hello, Kim Ogg).
  4. Too many businesses have been forced from operation (especially local shops, restaurants, cafes, bars, tool shops, and similar small enterprises).

When “mostly peaceful protests” come again, we need to defend ourselves and the defenseless

We remember how Antifa and BLM showed their collective courage by attacking women, old people, and children

Breitbart reported on 14 November 2020 regarding the beatings that Antifa and BLM rioters had inflicted on the elderly, women, and children who had stopped in D.C.-area restaurants after a Trump march.

Antifa and BLM wasted no time in accosting women, children, families, and the elderly as they walked down Washington, DC, streets after the Million MAGA March on Saturday. Protesters threw large fireworks and projectiles at restaurant-goers eating outside and flashed laser lights into hotel rooms.

DC Metropolitan Police blocked off BLM Plaza so Million MAGA March attendees could not go through. Trump supporters had to walk through a gauntlet of BLM, Antifa, and black bloc assailants in order to leave the area.

A black woman hauled off and sucker-punched a man carrying a Trump flag.

Rioters walked down the street and harassed an elderly couple while trying to rip a Trump flag out of their hands.

They threatened and harassed an elderly man walking down the street with a scooter. They pushed the scooter down and threw unidentified liquids at him.

They yelled, “Get the f**k out of here! You better run motherf**ker! You better run motherf**ker!”


Protesters attacked a middle-aged woman walking with other women and some Trump supporters. A black woman hit the woman in the back of the head.


A black mother with her young children wearing a Blue Lives matter hat and a Trump jacket frantically told police officers she wanted to press charges against her assailants. The assailants cornered her and asked her why she had her children there. She was pushing a child in a stroller and shielding her pre-teen daughter when she was attacked, reported Breitbart News.

Children walking down the street with their family were frightened by the mob and were crying.

(Read more and see many more tweets at Breitbart)

From this, we know that we must defend ourselves and the defenseless

Shortly before Christ went to the cross and as He reviewed the prospect of being rejected by the world, Jesus had the following advice to all of us who identify with him:

And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. (Luke 22:36 NASB)

From this, we know that we are expected to protect ourselves since we (like Christ) can expect nothing but the opposition of the world.

Again, we must protect children

For Christians, we must remember the commands of God to protect children (which include):

You shall not afflict any widow or orphan. (Exodus 22:22 NASB)

You have seen it, for You have beheld mischief and vexation to take it into Your hand. The unfortunate commits himself to You; You have been the helper of the orphan. (Psalm 10:14 NASB)

A father of the fatherless and a judge for the widows, Is God in His holy habitation. (Psalm 68:5 NASB)

Vindicate the weak and fatherless; Do justice to the afflicted and destitute. (Psalm 82:3 NASB)

The Lord protects the strangers; He supports the fatherless and the widow, But He thwarts the way of the wicked. (Psalm 146:9 NASB)

Learn to do good; Seek justice, Reprove the ruthless, Defend the orphan, Plead for the widow. (Isaiah 1:17 NASB)

In everything I showed you that by working hard in this manner you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ (Acts 20:35 NASB)

Six stories on the Jericho Marches and Stop the Steal march

Featured

  1. Protests erupt In D.C. following the “Stop The Steal” rally

One America News Network reported in a 13 December 2020 article how Antifa and Trump supporters clashed after “Stop the Steal” marches in D.C.

TrumpMarch1Antifa protestors once again made headlines for attacking attendees of a ‘Stop the-Steal Rally.’

Chaos flooded the streets of Washington as Antifa set their sights on supporters of the President once again.

Following multiple ‘Stop the Steal’ rallies in Washington D.C. on Saturday, police reported at least 23 arrests related to protesting and riots. Among those arrested, 10 were charged with misdemeanor assault, six with assaulting a police officer and four with rioting.

One suspect was caught carrying an illegal stun gun.

Footage of the event shows demonstrators going toe-to-toe with one another and skirmishing with fireworks while police attempted to intervene.

At least four people were stabbed in the ensuing chaos and by the end of the night, eight people in total were taken to the hospital.

Two of the victims were police officers, who were injured while protecting supporters of the President from Antifa rioters.

Meanwhile, attendees of the rallies said they were simply there to support the President.

“Well, we’re from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and the reason we drove here to D.C. was to support our President, Donald J. Trump,” an attendee stated. “And in our hearts, we know, in our minds, we know that this election was stolen.”

(Read more at One America News Network)

I support the individual’s right to protect himself or herself and to protect the defenseless

As has been demonstrated in a number of these left-wing, defund-the-police cities, the police are tasked with NOT providing protection to certain people (Trump supporters in particular); therefore, protecting oneself is tantamount.

Nonetheless, when a policeman or woman gets injured, you can bet it was by an Antifa thug.

  1. Americans holding ‘Jericho Marches’ to pray for Trump at every state capitol every day until Dec. 14

LifeSiteNews tells us that Americans are holding “Jericho Marches” in state capitals every day until 14 December 2020.

lansing_MI
Jericho March in Lansing, Michigan

The Jericho marches are a ‘[p]eaceful protest, prayer march, and fasting in support of President Trump, as well as election integrity and reform.’ They reflect a call issued by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, who on the day after the election warned of ‘the most colossal electoral fraud in history,’ and beseeched people to pray.

In light of the presidential election, huge prayer rallies are taking place daily outside state capitols, as people pray in support of President Donald Trump and election integrity and reform. While the mainstream media have called the race for Joe Biden, the official results have not yet been certified and there are many reports of voter fraud and irregularities that must still be investigated.

The Jericho March was born of a vision that an Evangelical and Catholic received independently of each other, of people of faith coming together to pray, be unified, and rise up for the cause of truth and justice.

Jericho Marches are peaceful, prayerful rallies, where those gathered walk around a certain place seven times. The idea is drawn directly from the Bible, for the book of Joshua records how God called Joshua to gather the Israelites together and march round the city of Jericho for seven days, and on the seventh day, to circle the city seven times in order to obtain the victory.

“So all the people making a shout, and the trumpets sounding, when the voice and the sound thundered in the ears of the multitude, the walls forthwith fell down: and every man went up by the place that was over against him: and they took the city,” Scripture says.

The current Jericho Marches started on November 5 as a prayerful protest urging elected officials to provide transparency in each state’s election results after many reports of voter fraud, irregularities, and questionable activity that has occurred in this election. As people of faith, the participants are marching and praying for truth to come to light. The participants are praying for  state hand-counted audits and recounts of all legal ballots to be done, fraudulent and illegal activities to be identified, and final votes to be rectified to reveal the true will of the American people in this election.

The official Facebook page for the nation-wide events calls all patriots and people of faith to a “[p]eaceful protest, prayer march, and fasting in support of President Trump, as well as election integrity and reform.” Participants believe that what is at stake is not only the result of this election, but whether America will have an election free from fraud and interference ever again. The group seeks the truth not only about this election, but also true election reform to protect American freedoms and the integrity of the election process.

Members of the Jericho Marches comprise of Judeo-Christians who pray, sing hymns, carry banners or flags, do rosaries and Eucharistic processions, and blow shofars, all in peaceful demonstration and according to their particular expression of their Judeo-Christian faith. While the marches are particularly focused on the battleground states, which have been the subject of numerous ballot irregularities, they are occurring daily at noon local time in state capitols in every state across the nation, including at the U.S. Capitol. Individuals and groups are self-led.

(Read more at LifeSiteNews)

There is nothing that will not benefit by being covered in prayer

Here is a sampling of the information allowed by the cyber overlords regarding the march.









  1. Lefties attack MAGA marchers in DC — and the media shrug

The New York Post demonstrates the bias of the main stream media as it notes how Antifa attacked Trump supporters during “Stop the Steal” and “Jericho March” gatherings, but the press yawned.

maga-march-2If counter-protesters had triggered fighting across Washington, DC, in the wake of the January 2017 Women’s March, the media would have erupted in fury. Yet the morning after Antifa types went after MAGA marchers in the nation’s capital, the press obsessed about . . . Kayleigh McEnany’s estimate of the crowd size.

The difference, plainly, is that no one felt the need to confront the anti-Trump marchers. But a significant element of the left seized the opportunity to harass and even assault the pro-Trump crowd.

Ample video and photo evidence shows the extremists blaring “Get the f–k out” over bullhorns, tossing eggs and water bottles at the MAGAers, seizing and burning Trump hats and flags — and even throwing fireworks at Trump supporters just dining outdoors.

They physically attacked some Trump supporters, even beating one over the head with a flagpole and pummeling another to the ground. Police had to form barricades outside Capitol Hilton hotel to stop the goons from following the Trumpies taking refuge inside.

Why can’t the left just let people vent their feelings peacefully? Why the insistence on confronting them — on denying their right to even speak?

Sadly, this is what’s taught in America’s top universities these days — that speech that lefties dislike is itself violence, while violence directed against those speakers is somehow merely free expression. And that absurd logic increasingly is embraced by supposed moderates.

The thugs are encouraged by leading Democratic politicians who insist that reports of violence is “fake news,” and by media outlets that label left-wing riots “peaceful protests” — sometimes with a “mostly” tacked in front.

Liberal America will blame the MAGA marchers, and President Trump himself, for Saturday night’s violence. But it’s plainly the left that triggered the chaos — and will keep doing so even after Trump leaves the scene.

We fear that Democrats will keep enabling these thugs until the public sends a clear message, by rejecting not only the goons but also their apologists.

(Read this at the New York Post)

This is a recurring theme of “mostly peaceful” tripe from Democrats

Since the “summer of love” in Seattle, conservatives have been too aware of the violence-permissive liberals in the Democrats.

  1. Antifa and Proud Boys brawled in DC. Here’s what the outcome was.

Townhall discusses the DC brawl between the Proud Boys and Antifa that lead to multiple arrests.

Trump supporters flocked to Freedom Plaza on Saturday for the “Stop the Steal” march to show their opposition to the results of the 2020 election. Throughout the day and into the evening, fights broke out between the Proud Boys, a far right extremist group, and Antifa/Black Lives Matter.

The Proud Boys originally showed up and talked with fellow Trump supporters. Eventually it became evident that they were looking for people on the “other side” – whether it be Black Lives Matter or Antifa counter protestors – to clash with. The leftist groups were identified by their typical regalia of helmets, face shields, face masks and all black clothing. They too had showed up ready for a bawl.

Both sides were angry and ready for a fight. As police did their best to keep the two sides from coming into contact with one another, the angrier both sides got. The Proud Boys and the Antifa/BLM counter protestors had one thing in common: they weren’t happy police were keeping them from attacking their opponents.

Townhall’s own Julio Rosas was on the scene, where he captured numerous instances of fights taking place between the two groups and police moving in to arrest people:



Police did their best to keep the two groups from making contact. Both the Proud Boys and Antifa/BLM did their best to circumvent police blockades to no avail.



Some of the Proud Boys took issues with the police also pushing them back:

According to Rosas and the Daily Caller’s Shelby Talcott, a fight broke out where multiple people, including a police officer went down. A member of the Proud Boys was allegedly stabbed.

The Proud Boys allegedly stole a BLM banner from a nearby church. They took the flag, set it on fire and cheered as it burned, the Daily Caller reported.




Adam Gray, a photographer for a British news group, captured the moment one of the Proud Boys was stabbed:

Independent Media PDX also reports the shooting and tweeted a video showing a man they claim fired the shot.

One Antifa “militant” is reported to be down, Independent Media PDX tweeted. It is not clear from the videos who actually fired the shot.

Sowersby reported that Olympia police secured the area and found one spent shell casing, a live round and “some sort of IED.”

(Read more at Breitbart)

While I don’t like to admit it, I do support our right to defend ourselves

The right to defend ourselves does not include the ability to make threats and intimidate. However, since the Democrats seem willing to ignore misdeeds by Antifa, there will be a temptation to give in to the temper. We need to avoid that.

  1. ‘March for Trump’ took place in Washington, D.C. — OAN crew was on the ground

One America News Network had this to say about the March for Trump on 13 December 2020.

Tens of thousands of President Trump’s supporters descended on Washington, D.C. to demand transparency and protect election integrity. A One America News crew was on the ground to provide live coverage throughout the event.

On Saturday, supporters of the President rallied all over the city, including at the National Mall, Freedom Plaza, and the Supreme Court.

Rally-goers of all ages could be seen waving American flags and wearing patriotic attire as they defended President Trump’s legal efforts against election fraud.

The electoral college is set to vote on Monday, despite concerns about voter fraud brought forward by the President and his legal team.

One America’s Jack Posobiec spoke with an organizer for the ‘March for Trump’ tour and has more on what to expect.

(Watch the report at One America News Network)

The power of prayer

Featured

This lesson comes from the work of Mark Ramsey of Crossroads Baptist Church.

I. Prayer

What is prayer? Simply put, it is our intimate communication with the Lord God Almighty.

Prayer should be primary in our lives as Christ followers. When we pray, we have access to God’s grace.

Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need. (Hebrews 4:16 NASB)

A lightbulb without electricity is like a Christian without prayer who fails to shine in a dark and desperate world.

James was known as “old camel knees.” His knees were calloused like a camel because of his continual kneeling in intercession before the Lord. He was a man of prayer and action.

What nickname would you use to describe your prayer life? What is your approach to prayer? When do you pray? How do you pray? How often do you pray? Why do you pray? Do you believe in the power of prayer?

II. Instructions from James

In James 4:2, we are told that “we do not have because we do not ask.” Over and over again, we see that God wants us to ask because He wants us to have.

“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man is there among you who, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, he will not give him a snake, will he? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him! (Matthew 7:7‭-‬11 NASB)

Have you ever been troubled by something and you talked to everyone but the Lord about it? Why does it sometimes seem easier to ask people to solve our problems before we ask God to solve them?

Are there issues in your life which concern you right now? We need to ask the Lord to help us with those issues.

Prayer is mentioned seven times in these six verses and James gives us four practical areas where prayer is essential.

III. Prayer is essential

  1. When in trouble (suffering) — pray (James 5:13a)
    What is your expectation from God when you pray when you are in trouble and suffering?
  2. When sick — pray (James 5:14)
    We should notify the spiritual leaders of our church of our sickness and we should seek medical advice and ask for prayer. The spiritual leaders should be sure we are receiving medical care and should pray for us. Prayer should be done “in the name of the Lord,” which leaves the results in the hands of the Lord.
  3. When corrupted by sin — pray (James 5:16a)
    “Therefore” is used by James to make the point of changing from the third person to the first person — “you.” Now, it is personal. To keep sin from making us ill, we need to confess our sins to one another regularly and pray continuously. There is a tone of privacy in the “one another” or “each other” counsel. There are certain matters in which we should not suffer alone and should be shared and prayed about with a close brother or sister in Christ.

    Do you have brothers of sisters in Christ with whom you can confess and pray with?

    Do yo think it is important to have accountability partners?

  4. When specific needs occur — pray (James 5:16b)
    The Greek term for “prayer” used here (δέησις) means “a petition” or “specific prayer for a specific need.” It is the only time that James uses the term in his letter. The root of the word for “effective” is “energy.” What does “effective” mean here, but knowing and praying in accordance with the scripture. This includes being specific.
    Twelve things for which believers are structed to pray:

    1. For those who persecute them (Matt 5:44)
    2. For the kingdom of God (Matt 6:10)
    3. For daily provision (Matt 6:11)
    4. For overcoming temptation (Matt 6:13)
    5. For forgiveness (Luke 11:4)
    6. For all the saints (Eph 6:18)
    7. For the gospel’s advancement (2 Thes 3:1)
    8. For earthly leaders (1 Tim 2:2)
    9. For wisdom (James 1:5)
    10. For perseverance through suffering (James 5:13)
    11. For one another (James 5:16)
    12. For wayward believers (1 John 5:16)

    Effective prayer means an absolute and unshakable faith that God hears and answers our prayers. Do you have an absolute and unshakable faith in the Lord?
    If the Lord doesn’t answer your prayer in the way in which you expected, dies that impair your faith?

  1. a. The effective prayer is powerful and accomplishs much (James 5:17-18)
    Are you specific or general in your prayers?

IV. Practical advice

  1. Prayer is to be continuous (1 Thes 5:17)
  2. Prayers is designed to be an integral part of our life
  3. Prayer is not a substitute for responsible action
    If you are sick, contact the leaders and seek medical care. If you need to confess your sins and seek forgiveness, take the appropriate action.
  4. Prayer is available to everyone
    You don’t need to be a prophet, an apostle, a preacher, or a Bible scholar to pray. You don’t need to wait for the perfect time. You don’t need to be sinless. If that were true, nobody would be able to pray for anything. So, pray continuously.
    Remember: God is waiting and listening. Will you pray?