User Controls
THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty's
-
2021-09-14 at 12:11 PM UTC
Of course the help get muzzled, so none might have to gaze upon their unwashedness. -
2021-09-14 at 12:43 PM UTCget ready for the Maga party folks
-
2021-09-14 at 12:54 PM UTCThe whole cabal is falling apart at the seams. It's all come crashing down around their ears. This is when they get real desperate, folks.
-
2021-09-14 at 12:59 PM UTC
Full Hunger Games. -
2021-09-14 at 1:08 PM UTCPhantasy land
-
2021-09-14 at 1:46 PM UTC
-
2021-09-14 at 3:39 PM UTC
-
2021-09-14 at 4:23 PM UTC
-
2021-09-14 at 4:24 PM UTC
-
2021-09-14 at 5:42 PM UTCMake
Another
Goofy
Assertion
Intelligencer
Larry Elder Campaign Concedes Defeat and Claims Fraud – Before Election Day
Ed Kilgore
It was widely expected that if and when California Gavin Newsom survived a recall attempt after voting ends on September 14, Republicans would allege voter fraud on vague or non-existent grounds. Their lord and master Donald Trump has already, after all, “predicted” a “rigged” election. And since this is an election conducted by a Democratic-controlled state widely deploying mail ballots (which Trump and many other Republicans consider suspect unless it works to their benefit, in which case it is peachy keen), the Big Lie more or less requires them to contest the fairness or legality of any election they lose.
But California Republican Larry Elder, the talk-show host who is leading most polls of the replacement contest that will name the new governor if a majority of voters decide to remove Newsom in a separate ballot question, isn’t waiting for the actual results to concede defeat and then allege fraud, as NBC News reports:
Republican Larry Elder appealed on Monday to his supporters to use an online form to report fraud, which claimed it had “detected fraud” in the “results” of the California recall election “resulting in Governor Gavin Newsom being reinstated as governor.”
The only problem: On Monday when the link was live on Elder’s campaign site, the election hadn’t even happened yet. No results had been released. And Elder was still campaigning to replace Newsom as governor.
This series of rather bold if premature claims were made on a site called “Fight California Election Fraud” that was “Paid For By Larry Elder Ballot Measure Committee Recall Newsom Committee.” The site also avers that with respect to the fraud claims, its “primary analytical tool used was Benford’s Law.” This, as aficionados of the Big Lie probably know, is a statistical theorem involving the likelihood of certain numerals in random displays of numbers. Experts on Benford’s Law have repeatedly and heatedly and redundantly objected to its use to “prove” fraud in election returns. So Elder’s campaign is engaged in crank conspiracy theories to claim election returns it cannot possible know at this point reflect fraud for which it has no evidence. And it’s doing so when at the same time Elder’s allies are expressing confidence that voters are about to throw Newsom out of office. It’s a classic heads-I-win, tails-you-lose attitude similar to the kind of things Trump said before, during and after the 2020 elections.
We may know by the wee hours of September 15 that the recall has failed if “no” is leading by big margins, but legitimate ballots postmarked by election day will still be counted if they are received by election officials as late as September 21. Jumping the gun on the results right now is pretty remarkable. Evidence-free allegations of fraud are, well, pretty fraudulent. -
2021-09-14 at 7:28 PM UTCits cummin guys,, that darned ol TRUMP TRAIN IS CHUGGIN DOWN THE TRACK!!!!!!
fixin to blow you commies right off this earth with its Maga TRAIN HORN and AMERICAN FLAGS flying HIGH.
you think you bitches cried when Hillary lost to TRUMP,, just weight u aint never gonna dry up when this shit hits the fan -
2021-09-14 at 8:27 PM UTCDAN QUAYLE SAVED OUR DEMOCRACY???
The Washington Post
New details undermine Pence’s supposed ‘hero’ turn on Jan. 6
Aaron Blake
The narrative wrote itself. Then-Vice President Mike Pence, who had loyally and often obsequiously stuck by President Donald Trump through thick and thin, suddenly bucked him when his presidency was on the line. Trump wanted Pence to help overturn the results of the electoral college on Jan. 6, but Pence refused — even as rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol called for his hanging — all while professing to do so out of principle and loyalty to the Constitution.
He was hailed even by some of the administration’s critics as an unlikely hero, the savior of the republic and more.
The reality, we’re now finding out, is far from so neat and tidy. It appears less as though Pence said “enough is enough,” and more as though he really entertained doing Trump’s bidding but found that he had no actual authority to make it happen.
Tuesday brought the first big drop from an upcoming book by The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward and Robert Costa called “Peril.” The big headline is that Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark A. Milley so feared that Trump would spark a military confrontation with China that Milley made secret calls to his counterpart in Beijing to assure them that the United States would not strike.
But perhaps Headline 1(a) involves new details about Pence’s fateful decision not to heed Trump’s calls to unilaterally help him stay in office. And it involves a cameo appearance from a man you might not have thought about for some time: Dan Quayle.
From today’s story by Isaac Stanley-Becker:
So intent was Pence on being Trump’s loyal second-in-command — and potential successor — that he asked confidants if there were ways he could accede to Trump’s demands and avoid certifying the results of the election on Jan. 6. In late December, the authors reveal, Pence called Dan Quayle, a former vice president and fellow Indiana Republican, for advice.
Quayle was adamant, according to the authors. “Mike, you have no flexibility on this. None. Zero. Forget it. Put it away,” he said.
But Pence pressed him, the authors write, asking if there were any grounds to pause the certification because of ongoing legal challenges. Quayle was unmoved, and Pence ultimately agreed, according to the book.
Further details from the book reveal that, in the course of their conversations, Pence also echoed Trump’s false claims that the election results in Arizona were faulty.
There is no question this was a tough call for Pence, and the decision he made came with obvious political pain — including for his hopes of ever becoming president in a party dominated by Trumpism. But there’s a difference between doing it because it was the right thing to do, and doing it because he literally had no other choice.
The official narrative from Team Pence suggested that it was at least in part the former — that he was a constitutional conservative who believed that, whatever the letter of the law, this kind of thing was not what the founders intended.
“As a student of history who loves the Constitution and reveres its Framers, I do not believe that the Founders of our country intended to invest the Vice President with unilateral authority to decide which electoral votes should be counted during the Joint Session Congress, and no Vice President in American history has ever asserted such authority,” Pence said in a letter the morning of Jan. 6.
He added: “It is my considered judgment that my oath to support and defend the Constitution constrains me from claiming unilateral authority to determine which electoral votes should be counted and which should not.”
There are some fine lines here, including just what Pence’s end game was. Perhaps he didn’t really want to be the guy who actually overturned an election for his own running mate, but just wanted to buy time to satiate Trump.
It’s also possible he was asking such skeptical questions not necessarily because he truly wanted to do what Trump told him to, but because he wanted to explore every counter-argument — for which he could perhaps be forgiven, given the circumstances. But CNN reports the book also quotes Pence telling Quayle, after Quayle pushed back on him, “You don’t know the position I’m in.” That suggests that Pence was indeed looking hard for a way out of his political bind.
And as we saw over and over during the Trump presidency, entertaining Trump’s whims can also come with consequences. There’s no better example of that than the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. High-profile Republicans didn’t necessarily echo Trump’s wild claims about voter fraud, but they also declined to repudiate them and offered watered-down justifications for questioning the results. The result is that lots of people came to believe Trump’s claims, specifically, and resorted to drastic measures. Much of the party believes them to this day in ways that continue to baselessly undermine democracy.
There was also really no doubt, from the beginning, that Pence lacked the authority to do what Trump wanted him to do. It wasn’t even a gray area, as numerous experts made clear well before Jan. 6. But Pence apparently searched pretty hard for some kind of potential justification to do it, even though it would be based upon nothing and could have plunged the country further into chaos.
Perhaps the fact that he didn’t ultimately even attempt it and that the likes of Quayle were able to prevail upon him is a credit. Others might have at least given it the old college try, as we saw repeatedly over four years.
But to set the bar at “didn’t seek to overturn democracy based upon lies” is to set it pretty low — especially when it sounds like there was a real effort to seek an unprecedented mechanism for participating in just that. -
2021-09-14 at 8:41 PM UTCThe Washington Post
All of this to keep Trump from getting upset
Philip Bump
My kids have these little books that reveal different images when you brush them with water. There will be an ocean scene, say, an outline of a diver on a white page. As you dab at it, color emerges as well as details: a small fish, a starfish on a rock or even a big shark that was in the background the whole time.
By now, we’ve revealed most of the details surrounding former president Donald Trump’s last few months in office. We know the broad themes of that period but keep learning new anecdotes that fill in the white spaces. We learn, for example, that Trump’s chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley, was so concerned about Trump’s stability after last year’s election that he proactively soothed the concerns of his counterpart in China and worked to insulate the military against the president’s vagaries. That’s a big shark that was floating there, undiscovered.
But that story and others from a new book by The Washington Post’s Robert Costa and Bob Woodward are still just part of the overall picture, one that we recognized even before we’d added any detail at all. It’s an image of a person terrified of being seen as a loser who yanked every available lever of power to keep that perception from taking root. Nothing we’ve learned since Nov. 3, 2020, has shaken that fundamental image. It’s all been detail that presents a fuller, more complete picture, not revelations that shift what we’re seeing.
The small detail that jumped out at me from the new reporting is how Trump tried to cajole Vice President Mike Pence into pretending that he could reject the will of voters and halt the final counting of electoral votes. Pence told Trump, correctly, that he couldn’t do that.
“I don’t want to be your friend anymore if you don’t do this,” Trump reportedly told Pence in response.
There are just so many ways in which to interpret that. There’s the image of the most powerful man in the country sitting in the Oval Office, the seat of American executive power, threatening to withhold his friendship to get his way — a threat that, again, brings to mind my young children. Then there’s the idea that Pence would in January 2021 be under any illusion that Trump was his friend in the first place. He endured months of speculation about being replaced on the ticket for 2020 and Trump, only days prior, attacked him during a rally speech in Georgia. Pence had been around Trump long enough to know the value of friendship to Trump, he’d seen more than enough examples of people loyal to Trump being quickly sliced clean when they became inconvenient, to understand that Trump wasn’t going to be loyal to him.
But amazingly, Pence tried anyway! That’s in the new reporting, too, Pence’s outreach to others, including former vice president Dan Quayle, seeking a way to keep Trump happy. There was no evidence anywhere that Pence had the ability to do what Trump wanted him to do — which, again, was to simply ignore the results of the 2020 election and trigger some unprecedented reconsideration of what occurred — but he went along with it anyway.
“You don’t know the position I’m in,” he reportedly told Quayle, a premise Quayle rejected. And with good reason: Everyone knew the position Pence was in. Trump was trying to get him to do something he couldn’t do to reinforce the idea that something questionable had happened in the 2020 election. Everyone’s been in a situation akin to that, though rarely when the stakes are so high. Eventually Pence succumbed to the impossible position and its inevitable consequence.
We’ve spent so long coloring in the details of Trump’s response to the election that we can lose sight of just how utterly bereft of validity it is. There was never anything suspect about the election results beyond a few dozen individual cases of illegally cast ballots, and there has never been any evidence of significant fraud presented. Trump tried to undermine the results of the 2016 election before it happened, and then tried to undermine the results in states that voted against him that year because he lost the popular vote, and then tried to undermine the 2020 election all that year, and then quickly tried to claim he won in the hours after it concluded.
Trump has consistently lied and misled and deflected about the election results not because they threaten his power but because they threaten his esteem. You don’t claim that California had millions of illegal votes in 2016 while you’re sitting in the Oval Office because you’re worried about power. You do it because you’ve built a brand on success and you consider that brand to be the most valuable thing about you.
That’s the outlined image on the white paper, the thing you can see clearly without any other detail available. It’s the thing around which everything else is centered, Trump’s claims about the election and the fury of those supporters who believed him and his unhinged scramble to use whatever he could in the U.S. government to keep the reality at bay. It’s what pushed away once-loyal allies such as Attorney General William P. Barr and left him with cronies more interested in the little scraps of power and attention that Trump was shedding than in what actually happened. It’s why he welcomed back his former adviser Stephen K. Bannon, someone once pushed away with the pejorative nickname “Sloppy Steve” but who now was willing to help Trump rail against the world.
He’s still doing it. He’s still holding rallies and saying false things about the election and feeling the warmth of the applause of his fans. He’s still giving interviews to thoroughly uncritical media outlets in which he tells everyone that, no, he didn’t lose, it was all fraud and the proof is always just a few weeks away. He’s still out there reinforcing this idea that he’ll become president again somehow, with people who are not savvy enough to understand that he’s being dishonest about election fraud being similarly incapable of understanding that this simply can’t happen. He’s helped build this whole world centered on rejecting a central tenet of democracy, a rejection that other people find useful for other purposes: raising money, say, or hurting their political opponents.
All because he’s mad he lost. As everyone who’s being honest about things recognizes. In “I Alone Can Fix It,” the recent book from The Post’s Philip Rucker and Carol D. Leonnig, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) recognized the impulse driving Trump’s effort to undercut the election results.
“When I heard him say, ‘If I lose to Joe Biden, the worst candidate in the history of the earth, it will be because the election is “rigged,” ’ I just presumed that’s in the category of something he’s going to say to himself and a few other people will believe him,” Romney said last September, “and he’ll therefore be comfortable at Mar-a Lago with himself and with his ego in the event he loses.”
If only. -
2021-09-14 at 8:48 PM UTCTrump secret memo ordering withdrawal from Afghanistan blindsided national security team: New Woodward/Costa book
By Jamie Gangel, Jeremy Herb and Elizabeth Stuart, CNN
Just eight days after the 2020 election, then-President Donald Trump was so determined to end the war in Afghanistan during his presidency that he secretly signed a memo to withdraw all troops by January 15, 2021, according to a new book, "Peril," from journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa.
The November 11 memo, according to the authors, had been secretly drafted by two Trump loyalists and never went through the normal process for a military directive -- the secretary of defense, national security adviser and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs had all never seen it. Unpredictable, impulsive, Trump had done an end run around his whole national security team.
In a remarkable scene, the authors write, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley, newly appointed acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller and his new chief of staff Kash Patel were all blindsided when the memo arrived at the Pentagon.
Woodward and Costa reproduced the memo in "Peril." The directive was titled, "Memorandum for the Acting Secretary of Defense: Withdrawal from Somalia and Afghanistan," and the memo read: "I hereby direct you to withdraw all US forces from the Federal Republic of Somalia no later than 31 December 2020 and from the Islamic Republican of Afghanistan no later than 15 January 2021. Inform all allied and partner forces of the directives. Please confirm receipt of this order."
Donald Trump standing in front of a building: President Donald J. Trump talks with others in the Oval Office at the White House on Friday, November 13, 2020.© Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post/Getty Images President Donald J. Trump talks with others in the Oval Office at the White House on Friday, November 13, 2020.
Milley studied the memo and announced he was heading to the White House to confront Trump.
"This is really fucked up and I'm going to see the President. I'm heading over. You guys can come or not," Milley told Miller and Patel, who joined him on the trip across the Potomac, according to the book.
At the White House, the three men paid a surprise visit to national security adviser Robert O'Brien and showed him the signed memo.
"How did this happen?" Milley asked O'Brien, according to the book. "Was there any process here at all? How does a president do this?"
O'Brien looked at the memo and said, "I have no idea," according to the authors.
"What do you mean you have no idea? You're the national security adviser to the President?" Milley responded. "And the secretary of defense didn't know about this? And the chief of staff to the secretary of defense didn't know about this? The chairman didn't know. How the hell does this happen?"
O'Brien took the memo and left. While the officials had briefly debated whether the memo could be a forgery, Trump confirmed to O'Brien that he had signed it.
"Mr. President, you've got to have a meeting with the principals," O'Brien told Trump, according to the book, which Trump agreed to do and the directive was withdrawn.
It was "effectively a rogue memo and had no standing," Woodward and Costa write. "All right," O'Brien said when he returned to his office. "We've already taken care of this. It was a mistake. The memo was nullified."
But the signed rogue memo undercuts the argument that Trump and some of his allies, including Miller, have recently made that Trump never really planned to get out or would have planned the withdrawal better than President Joe Biden.
"If I were now President, the world would find that our withdrawal from Afghanistan would be a conditions-based withdrawal," Trump said in a statement last month as the Taliban closed in on Kabul. "I personally had discussions with top Taliban leaders whereby they understood what they are doing now would not have been acceptable."
Axios' Jonathan Swan and Zachary Basu reported in May that the memo had been drafted by two Trump loyalists who should not have been involved in the process -- Johnny McEntee, the former body man who Trump had named head of White House personnel, and controversial retired Lt. Col. Douglas Macgregor, who had just been appointed as an adviser to Miller.
Woodward and Costa write in "Peril" that the memo was also one of the reasons Milley was concerned Trump could go rogue after the November election, and prompted Milley after the January 6 insurrection to take steps to try to limit Trump from launching military strikes or nuclear weapons unless he was consulted.
Eventually, Milley, Miller and Patel left the White House. They never saw the President that day, but after the January 6 assault on the Capitol, Woodward and Costa write that Milley "felt no absolute certainty that the military could control or trust Trump." Milley "believed it was his job as the senior military officer to think the unthinkable, take any and all necessary precautions." -
2021-09-14 at 8:56 PM UTC,______________________
______________________
To: ___________________
______________________
______________________
From: ____________________
____________________
____________________
Notice of Maladministration, Trespass, and Attack on The Medical Freedom of the People
I, ________________________, one of the People (as seen in the
___________________ State Constitution ____________________ of Rights), am giving you this notice that you and your agents may provide due care and carefully act
to cease and desist all interference with the rights of the People;
Please take notice that no government, Republican in form, has any arbitrary or
absolute power over the life, liberty and property of freemen (please see evidence
below):
Kentucky Constitution Bill of Rights Section 2
Text of Section 2:
Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.
Please take further notice that any attempts to act as if you have absolute or arbitrary
power of the actions of freemen is a direct attack on all 50 State and Federal Constitutions and as Federal Employees, you guarantee a Republican form of government to all the People in the 50 Republican States (Please see evidence below):
United States Constitution Article 4 Section 4
Section 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.
Please take further notice that elected and unelected federal employees and servants are without authority to make laws and rules dictating to the People what rights you may
wish to remove;
Please take notice that the People have a right to secure their safety and happiness and when any Public Servant decides to interfere in private medical choices, relationships
with doctors, or contracts between healthcare professionals and one or more of the People you are acting outside of the Trust Indenture/Constitution that you swore to
uphold and are acting in Maladministration;
Please take further notice that as servants of the People and Trustees, you are without authority to limit People from making the choice to use Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, if the People and their privately contracted doctors believe this will be a beneficial health product for the benefit of one of the People, as it is the duty of the People in the Private to choose what health care procedures may be used for their benefit. Furthermore, any Federal or State worker that has any connections with Covid’s creation, studies on Covid or connected to any patents or vaccines have a conflict of interest that I demand be acknowledged immediately by letter returned to the above name and address (Please see Right to be left alone in Private Affairs below);
Arizona Constitution Section 8: Right to Privacy
“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.”
Please take further notice that you are not even allowed to make a law or rule attacking
the rights secured in the constitution (see evidence below)
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)
Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rulemaking or legislation which would abrogate them.
Please take further notice that it is my wish that you provide Constitutional Authority to the People where you have the power to control the lives of the free people. If you don’t
respond within five (5) days by Affidavit, sworn under the penalty of perjury, you agree that you have never been granted the power to control the People and that any further
actions or a failure to Cease and Desist as directed above is a Trespass against the People, done in malice, Maladministration and an attack on the People’s medical freedom and the Federal and State Constitutions.
___________________________
Autograph
_________
Date -
2021-09-14 at 8:57 PM UTCScrolled right past all three of those posts
-
2021-09-14 at 8:57 PM UTCtl/dr
lol -
2021-09-14 at 8:58 PM UTC
-
2021-09-14 at 8:59 PM UTC
-
2021-09-14 at 9:01 PM UTCtl/dr
