CSNbbs

(03-02-2023 10:56 AM)BSWBRice Wrote: [ -> ]That’s a fair point, Ham. No doubt folks are more hardened than ever in terms of the party they support. I guess this is just the first time I’ve seen so many resort to “well they MUST’VE cheated” if their candidate didn’t win.

As a rice fan, maybe I’m just more used to losing than most lol

lol.... sadly true

In fairness, that was what Democrats did, resulting in the Steele Dossier etc... and that went on for years...

Republicans (as they often seem to be) are much less polished and organized in their political attacks... and democrats are much more adept at 'framing' republicans and republicans seem to be too stupid to not take the bait... but if you think about it... everything happening today is just a vastly more clumsy version of what happened 4 years ago.....

PERHAPS because by their very nature, democrats are built on forming coalitions of 'different' minorities to create a majority... while republicans were mostly built out of a majority.... so Democrats are vastly better at 'politics'. JMO

(03-02-2023 11:18 AM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-02-2023 10:56 AM)BSWBRice Wrote: [ -> ]That’s a fair point, Ham. No doubt folks are more hardened than ever in terms of the party they support. I guess this is just the first time I’ve seen so many resort to “well they MUST’VE cheated” if their candidate didn’t win.

As a rice fan, maybe I’m just more used to losing than most lol

lol.... sadly true

In fairness, that was what Democrats did, resulting in the Steele Dossier etc... and that went on for years...

2016 was one such year - how could Hillary lose, unless there was something nefarious afoot? So we get the Russian collusion stupidity.

Ironically, I am currently experiencing a weather event with rain and very high winds(up to 80 mph) - must be a hurricane.

(03-02-2023 11:18 AM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-02-2023 10:56 AM)BSWBRice Wrote: [ -> ]That’s a fair point, Ham. No doubt folks are more hardened than ever in terms of the party they support. I guess this is just the first time I’ve seen so many resort to “well they MUST’VE cheated” if their candidate didn’t win.

As a rice fan, maybe I’m just more used to losing than most lol

lol.... sadly true

In fairness, that was what Democrats did, resulting in the Steele Dossier etc... and that went on for years...

Republicans (as they often seem to be) are much less polished and organized in their political attacks... and democrats are much more adept at 'framing' republicans and republicans seem to be too stupid to not take the bait... but if you think about it... everything happening today is just a vastly more clumsy version of what happened 4 years ago.....

PERHAPS because by their very nature, democrats are built on forming coalitions of 'different' minorities to create a majority... while republicans were mostly built out of a majority.... so Democrats are vastly better at 'politics'. JMO

In terms of the Steele Dossier v. The Big Cheat

Steele Dossier stuff was utter crap. Pretty much a massive lie. Designed to hobble and attack an opponent.

The Big Cheat narrative was utter crap. Pretty much a massive lie. But it was designed and carried out to benefit a party opponent (i.e. get him the office), with the side effect of having to attack the process.

Both terribly horrific.

But, in the terms of the Steele Dossier, while it did *use* (abuse?) the levers of government to attack, the end result was a simple 'attack and hobble' (which has been done forever in the US political landscape)

The Big Cheat was, at the end and conclusion, an attack not on a the opposing party opponent, but effectively to both attempt abuse the function of government, and at the same time attack the function of government.

(03-02-2023 07:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-02-2023 11:18 AM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-02-2023 10:56 AM)BSWBRice Wrote: [ -> ]That’s a fair point, Ham. No doubt folks are more hardened than ever in terms of the party they support. I guess this is just the first time I’ve seen so many resort to “well they MUST’VE cheated” if their candidate didn’t win.

As a rice fan, maybe I’m just more used to losing than most lol

lol.... sadly true

In fairness, that was what Democrats did, resulting in the Steele Dossier etc... and that went on for years...

Republicans (as they often seem to be) are much less polished and organized in their political attacks... and democrats are much more adept at 'framing' republicans and republicans seem to be too stupid to not take the bait... but if you think about it... everything happening today is just a vastly more clumsy version of what happened 4 years ago.....

PERHAPS because by their very nature, democrats are built on forming coalitions of 'different' minorities to create a majority... while republicans were mostly built out of a majority.... so Democrats are vastly better at 'politics'. JMO

In terms of the Steele Dossier v. The Big Cheat

Steele Dossier stuff was utter crap. Pretty much a massive lie. Designed to hobble and attack an opponent.

The Big Cheat narrative was utter crap. Pretty much a massive lie. But it was designed and carried out to benefit a party opponent (i.e. get him the office), with the side effect of having to attack the process.

Both terribly horrific.

But, in the terms of the Steele Dossier, while it did *use* (abuse?) the levers of government to attack, the end result was a simple 'attack and hobble' (which has been done forever in the US political landscape)

The Big Cheat was, at the end and conclusion, an attack not on a the opposing party opponent, but effectively to both attempt abuse the function of government, and at the same time attack the function of government.

Some other differences.

Steele occurred before the election. A planned event. Supported by the media. And certain elements of the government. Folded into the three year Mueller probe.

Big cheat was after. A reactive event. Attacked by the media. Not supported by certain elements of the government.

(03-02-2023 07:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]The Big Cheat was, at the end and conclusion, an attack not on a the opposing party opponent, but effectively to both attempt abuse the function of government, and at the same time attack the function of government.

And perhaps you've hit the nail on the head....

Political parties might take advantage of people for their own purposes... encouraging certain protests etc... but mostly they use the power of government for their own purposes....

What do you do when the very people you're protesting ARE the political parties and the actions of the government that they control?

When the left wants to protest the police, they end up attacking private citizens and businesses. When the right wants to protest the government, they attack the government.

I'm basically okay with that. While I don't think this is remotely the equivalent time, LOTS of people (on both sides of the aisle I might add) do believe that we need another revolution. I'm actually a bit surprised that 'delaying a mostly procedural vote' is all they attempted.... and given that the government sort of knew they were coming and did almost nothing to stop them, I can't help but find this 'congressional investigation' to be a fox in the hen house.

(03-02-2023 07:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]But, in the terms of the Steele Dossier, while it did *use* (abuse?) the levers of government to attack, the end result was a simple 'attack and hobble' (which has been done forever in the US political landscape)
The Big Cheat was, at the end and conclusion, an attack not on a the opposing party opponent, but effectively to both attempt abuse the function of government, and at the same time attack the function of government.

But if the purpose of the Steele Dossier was to attack and hobble a political opponent for the purpose of paving the way to abuse the function of government, then that is a distinction without a difference.

And I believe that the function of the Steele Dossier and indeed all of the personal attacks against Donald Trump was for the purpose of protecting an administrative state that has grown far bigger and more powerful than it should be, and which regularly picks winners and losers and used the full weight of its power to screw over the anointed losers. Donald Trump was the focus of their attacks because he represented a real existential threat, in the sense that he was promising to hold their feet to the fire and make them obey the law. And they did not want to do that.

I practiced in the administrative law arena for the majority of my legal career, and based upon that experience it is my sincere belief that there is truly a Deep State and that it puts its own interests far, far ahead of doing the good that it was created to do.

To put it another way, I think there are some functions of government as presently constituted that need to be attacked, and attacked successfully.

(03-02-2023 07:23 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]While I don't think this is remotely the equivalent time, LOTS of people (on both sides of the aisle I might add) do believe that we need another revolution.

I don't want another revolution. But I would happily vote for Texas to secede.

(03-02-2023 06:53 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Ironically, I am currently experiencing a weather event with rain and very high winds(up to 80 mph) - must be a hurricane.

Damn hurricane took off my roof.

(02-28-2023 06:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-28-2023 06:08 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-28-2023 03:49 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-28-2023 01:06 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-28-2023 11:00 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Notwithstanding your zen foray into weather and the subtle vagaries therein, and zen metaphysics of language --- the gist of the accepted definition of 'riot' is (are, actually):

(Oxford)

(Merriam)

(Cambridge)

(MacMillan)

OK, Tanq, last time I will respond to this line of questioning.

Every term in all those definitions is subject to a range of interpretation. Protest, violence, even crowd. Or have you never heard that three's a crowd.

Yet you allow for no range of interpretation.

I agree there is a range of interpretation.

Kind of hard to ignore there was a crowd, a protest, and significant violence. No matter where that range is placed.

The issue here is that from most rational points of view, there really is no debate on 'crowd', 'protest', 'disturbance', and 'violence' being present.

Except for those that might choose to avoid the very common ideas embedded within each of those words.

Much like the avoidance of the right in general to recognize that a riot occurred, and the riot was aimed at stopping the process of the transfer of power.

It is amazing how much most in the right go to to avoid that.

Quote:

Quote:Doesnt seem that hard overall.

Please do tell how 1/6 was not a 'riot'? (third time asked).

Have I said it was not a riot? Or is that just something you have assumed I am saying? I have been castigated for saying it lesser than the BLM riots. It is a riot in the same way that thunderstorms and hurricanes are "weather events".

You *have* gone to great lengths to marginalize it. Pretty great lengths.

Quote:

Quote:And I am still looking for why the proceedings of Congress on 1/6 were 'unlawful'. The issue I brought forth was a 'lawful transition' of power. Your foray was into the possibility that the rioters thought it unlawful -- not how it was unlawful.

Your predicate for your excuse is that the proceeding on Jan 6 was not lawful, based upon your foray into the feelings of the crowd and the previous evasive comment and question from my question of 'why is it not unlawful'.

Lawful proceedings can and have been used in ways to reach illegitimate results. I think that was what the protesters thought would happen - that once votes were certified the stolen election would become a fait accompli.

*The* stolen election. You mean *the* stolen election that has practically zero substantive objective evidence behind it, right?

I find it kind of hard to give substantiation to an object of belief that has literally close to zero backing.

Might as well blame their riot on 'Santa Claus told us to.' Or 'ancient space aliens said we should.' Not such a great justification for a riot to stop the outcome, and each of the above three has about as much objective evidence in support.

I find that fallback to trying to question the issue of 'lawful' based on that somewhat specious.

Quote:Yes I give some deference to what the protesters thought, just as I would give deference to a person who shot a person he thought was a burglar but who was not.

You mean more like 'shot a guy who he thought was a burglar, but there was zero objective evidence of that person even having been in the house'. That is the more apropos comparison.

I wouldnt give that shooter much deference mind you.

----------

I shot the guy.

Why?

I thought he was a burglar.

Why did you think that?

Orange haired Donny told me that. Orange haired Donny told me the dude was in my house -- Orange haired Donny called the cops, but the cops cleared the dude. The cops couldnt find any evidence the dude was even in the house. Orange haired Donny kept telling me the dude robbed my house, and he would help me clear it up. So I shot the dude.

Did they ever find any of your stuff with the guy? Was he a burglar?

Donny says so. But they hadnt found any of the stuff that was stolen with him, or in his house. No proof to back up him being the person that burgled my house. But its still okay that I shot him. Orange haired Donny said there was a robbery.

---------------

Does that sound something that you should give great amount of deference to?

You are just getting ridiculous now.

I am injecting the exact level of evidence into the situation. Zero evidence. No, I would give little to no deference to someone who thinks he shot a burglar, when he has zero evidence of that. That is the point.

Quote:I was thinking more of the guy who shot his 15 year son who was sneaking back into the house after having sneaked out. I see a difference there from just a generic "a man shooting a child". But with your way of defining things, they are the same.

The guy shooting someone climbing into their house window has *some* amount of objective evidence to surmise them being a robber.

There is *no* objective evidence that I have seen brought forth to believe the 2020 election was stolen. Neither then, nor, more importantly, even now. Maybe I missed a law case or so that actually came forth with credible evidence. If I did miss one that was more than a mishmash of hither and yonder that got soundly dismissed, send them around -- I think a decent number got attorneys disbarred based on the paucity of facts and evidence issue.

So no, I dont give people who get whipped up into an emotional frenzy with zero evidence behind that emotional frenzy much deference at all. Let alone deference to commit a violent act.

Quote:I compare these relatively mild happenings to the relatively unmild happenings on the West coast. I don't have to minimize anything - an objective comparison displays the differences. Speeding is speeding, says Tanq. I see a difference between 75 in a 70 and 120 in a school zone. That is not to say I minimize the 75 in a 70.

I see the summer riots as more destructive, longer lasting, and more violent in total. The aim of the riots (the racial angst) doesnt add or subtract to the seriousness.

I see the riot of 1/6 as less destructive, shorter in scope, and less violent. But the aim was to impede the mechanism of transition of power. Based on shrill lies from a fing cesspool of a President. So while the destruction, the scope, and the violence of 1/6 are all lesser in scope, the aim of the riot chills me to the bone.

By the way, did I mention I actually was in the midst of coup earlier in my life? I didnt think I would ever see a riot again in my life that was aimed specifically at the transition of power, and with zero substantive evidence to back it. Let alone in this country. Especially in this country.

That portion, the aim, and the causation, tend to 'add' a bit to the import of the 1/6 riot. I guess you dont give the import that I do about that background of the riot *at* the Capitol. *For* a political purpose of actively impeding a transition of power. And, *without* a fing iota of proof behind the charge that instigated them. I see problems in not just all of the three being wound up and related to the riot of 1/6, but I think that any one of them adds to the seriousness of 1/6. All even without mentioning the actions undertaken by that President to stem the violence on his behalf (I guess, if one can use that word 'action' for the process of throwing ketchup at the wall) .....

In short -- summer 2020 wins on the counts of larger, greater in breadth, greater in number, greater in smashed Walgreens, more blocked cars, greater in damage, greater in looting, and greater in the sum of the violence. All in all, probably more selfies as well, since that seems to rear its head up in descriptions of the 'level of an act' for some reason.

1/6 makes up ground and wins with a greater---- 'gravitas factor' (for lack of a more precise word or phrase) --- in the issues intertwined with what instigated the riot of 1/6.

But, hey, its a free country. You can freely choose to count, or for that matter freely choose to discount, whatever factors your heart desires.

The time, place, and aim of 1/6 chill me to the bone. Kind of creepily 3rd world-ish. Maybe thats not a bad thing. I hear motorvating around in tuktuks is pretty fun.

100% aligned with this post/position.

(03-03-2023 07:43 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-02-2023 06:53 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Ironically, I am currently experiencing a weather event with rain and very high winds(up to 80 mph) - must be a hurricane.

Damn hurricane took off my roof.

seriously? if so, dang... im sorry

Quote:The Parliamentary Motive Behind the J6 Fedsurrection--An “emergency” was required on Jan 6 to prevent the 2020 election coup from being uncovered.

The Ring of Truth – “I am too well accustomed to the taking of evidence not to detect the ring of truth.” 1908, Edith Wharton

Much has been made of the events of January 6, 2021, and with the latest broadcast of CCTV video from inside the Capitol Hill complex, more questions have been raised.

Within the questions: the FBI and government apparatus had advanced knowledge of the scale of the J6 mall assembly yet doing nothing? Why were the Capitol Hill police never informed of the FBI concerns? Why didn’t House Speaker Nancy Pelosi secure the Capitol Hill complex, and why did she deny the request by President Trump to call up the national guard for security support? Why did the FBI have agent provocateurs in the crowd, seemingly stimulating rage within a peaceful crowd to enter the Capitol building? There have always been these nagging questions around ‘why’?

Regitiger has spent a great deal of time reviewing the entire process, looking at the granular timeline and then overlaying the bigger picture of the constitutional and parliamentary process itself. What follows below is a brilliant analysis of the federal government motive to create a J6 crisis that permitted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to trigger an emergency session and avoid the 2020 election certification challenges.

Those congressional floor challenges, known and anticipated well in advance of the morning of January 6, 2021, would have formed a legal and constitutional basis for ‘standing’ in judicial challenges that would have eventually reached the Supreme Court. The certification during “emergency session” eliminated the problem for Washington DC.

Regitiger explains below, only edited by me for clarity and context:

I think most, not all, but a large number of people, are totally missing what happened; and why this happened on Jan 6th. I am going to try my best to outline the events that day, blast past the commonly held assumptions and get right down to the core corruption.

I will present this as a series of questions and answers.

♦ Q1: How do you prevent congress from delaying the certification of state electoral votes?

A: It requires a crisis. A crisis that creates an “emergency” …An “emergency” that invokes special house rules.

FACTS: Remember carefully, focus please. Just moments, literally 3 minutes before two representatives issued a vote for motions to suspend the certification, the House members were “informed” by capitol police and other “agents” that a protest was about to breach the chambers. It was at this time that key people: Pence, Pelosi, Schumer, Mcconnell can be seen being walked out and escorted from the chamber. This effectively halted the Entire Chamber Process.

♦ Q2: Why was it necessary to halt the chamber process?

A: The crisis was created to eliminate the motion challenges to halt the certification and to begin voting to look into voting irregularities and fraud

FACTS: The two motions were completely legal and constitutional under at least two constitutionally recognized procedures… procedures that would REQUIRE the house to pause the certification and then vote to determine whether the motions of suspend could move forward.

♦ Q3: What was so important to refuse this motion and the subsequent votes to suspend the electoral certification?

A: It was important to remove that process entirely and continue the fraud and certify the fraud with no detractors on record. This effectively gives no standing for a SCOTUS ruling appeal! Understand this. If those two motions, even just one had successfully been voted EVEN IF THE MOTIONS were DENIED IN VOTE, this gives those who presented them with STANDING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL LEGAL ARGUMENT BEFORE SCOTUS.

♦ Q4: Could this have been done some other way other than creating a crisis/protest?

A: Unlikely. In order to prevent those two motions, requires that speaker of the house, minority leaders, and the president of the congress (vice president of the United States: Pence), to NOT BE PRESENT IN THE CHAMBERS.

Once the capitol police and other “law enforcements agents” informed the speaker and these three other individuals, Pelosi UNILATERALLY UNDER EMERGENCY RULES, suspended the business of the congress. This protest was necessary. The crisis was created because there is no other way to suspend the business of certification UNILATERALLY. By creating a crisis invokes emergency procedures. No other circumstances other than war or mass simultaneous explosive diarrhea can create such unilateral speaker delivered suspension of the certification.

♦ Q5: Why did the motions, once that the speaker RECONVENED congress, move forward back again to the floor for votes? Why were members disallowed to even consider putting forward ANY motions to the floor in when the chamber business was reopened?

A: The Speaker initiated the NEW sessions under special emergency rules. These rules abandon and make it clear that the ONLY purpose of the new session was to EXPEDITE the certification and dismiss all prior regular session procedural rules. This is why those two motions to table votes to consider a debate and pause to the certifications of state vote electors never happened later that evening when the house business was reconvened!

♦ Q6: Other than new rules, emergency rules, what other peculiar things occurred when the speaker reconvened?

A: Members were allowed to “vote” in proxy, remotely, not being present. You can use your imagination about what conditions were placed on ALL members during this time to prevent anyone from “getting out of line”.

Also clearly, it was at THIS NEW SESSION that VP Pence, President of Congress, would also have no ability to even consider pausing the electoral certification, because there were no motions of disagreements on the matter. So, in a technical legal claim, he is correct that he had no constitutional authority to address any issues of fraud or doubts about electoral irregularities. But this completely dismisses the FACT that congress created rules in this crisis/emergency that never allowed them to be floored!

Understand what happened in Jan 6, 2021. Don’t get hung up on Viking impostors, stolen Pelosi computers, podium heists, and complicit capitol police. Understand the process and what happened and what WAS NOT ALLOWED TO HAPPEN.

This was a coup….it was a very organized and carefully planned coup. VP Pence without a doubt as well as most members of the house were quite aware of how the certification was going to be MANAGED. It would require new rules to prevent the debate clause from occurring! New rules that ONLY AN EMERGENCY CRISIS COULD CREATE! So, they created an emergency.

•NOTED: I understand why many people have great interest in debunking the j6 event. I get that. I think it is important to dissect and examine the events of that day but please, step back and understand WHY these things happened. Examine the chain of events in congress. Why those two motions that would have at least paused the certification THAT WOULD GIVE VP PENCE THE CONSTITUTIONALLY RECOGNIZED POWER TO MOVE TO SUSPEND THE ELECTORAL CERTIFICATION AND THEN EXAMINE THE IRREGULARITIES AND CLAIMS OF FRAUD!

At the very center of this coup stands Mike Pence, the same individual who also spoiled President Trump’s first opportunities in the earlies hours of his Presidency just 4 years prior, when he created and facilitated the removal of Lt General Michael Flynn. I will not spend much time on this thread explaining why Lt Gen Flynn was so important to President Trump and why the IC was so afraid he would have advisory power to the President. That I will leave for another day, another time. But understand this clearly: MIKE PENCE WAS AND IS WORKING FOR THE MOST CORRUPT CRIMINAL TREASONOUS PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT.

•PRO TIP: If you really want to get a true understanding of this matter videos of protesters walking in the capitol is not going to address them. Actual video and timeline records of events and the specific actions taken by the speaker just moments before TWO MAJOR ELECTORAL ALTERING MOTIONS WERE ABOUT TO BE FLOORED.

This crisis was developed just in time with a precise coordination to prevent those two motions to be entered into the chamber record. The two motions do not exist. The emergency powers established in the new session made sure they never could be entered. The emergency powers could never happen without a crisis.

God Bless America!”

Note from Author: “I started this effort years ago. To date, no one and I mean no one has replied. It’s as if everyone that can expose it that has a larger platform is either disinterested, or suspiciously withdrawn from the issue. I made several comments about this over the years on article threads that are relevant to the topic.

I was watching the certification live that day. I recorded it ALL on every channel. I was doing this because no matter what happened that day, I KNEW IT WOULD BE A PROFOUND AND SIGNIFICANT EVENT TO REMEMBER. I never in my wildest imagination (and I have a pretty vivid imagination, always have), expected to see the unmistakable perfectly timed “coincidences” that occurred.

One member raises a motion (with another in waiting for his turn) those two motions were well known and advertised. These were motions to vote for a pause in the certification to examine electoral vote fraud and irregularities. I can’t speak to the veracity and substance of those motions. They were never allowed to even be floored. it was at that exact moment that the house chambers were suspended and 4 of the key members, Pence, Pelosi, Schumer and McConnell were escorted OUT right after initiating the end of the session.

Effectively, this resulted in that motion never being floored at all. Then, when reconvened under special emergency rules, inexplicably those two motions (and perhaps more – we will never know – or will we?) were not even attempted to be motioned. That was not just peculiar to me.

It all started to make more sense when I did some study on constitutional law AND THE HISTORY of specific special authorities given to president of the congress, Pence in this case. Not only did he have the authority and power to suspend the certification, but the duty to address the motion in the same sense that it becomes vital to the debate clause.

There really is no higher significance of weight given to the debate clause than the certification of the votes. This was more than odd to me the way that the media and pence framed their narrative: Pence would not have the constitutional power to suspend certification. Then it hit me, like the obvious clue that was there all the time. He was right. But the reason he is right, is because there WAS NO MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO CAUSE HIM TO SUSPEND!

Understanding this, happened for me about 4 or 5 months after this Jan 6 day. I took me this long to examine the facts, look at the video again, compare it to the arguments made by several leading constitutional academics, and again, inexplicably even some that I respect seemed to dodge that central reality. The motions were never allowed to be floored in the re-convened house rules later that evening. Most would not even venture to address the exotically coincidence that the moment those two members would stand to place the motion before the house, that the House Speaker Pelosi AND Pence ended the session, effectively blocking the motions from being heard in normal house rules.

It’s been a journey for me. A journey that was initiated because I am just a simple but curious person. Perhaps even to a point where I get obsessive in those efforts. Many days and nights combing over the details. praying and trying to make sense of what makes little sense. With over 6 states having serious well known and obvious defects in the voting process, some more credible to believe – some less, but one would not expect the house would be so deliberate in marching past the motions that were definitely going to be present to slow this process down and take the time to get it right. Even IF the claims never reached an intersection that would change the outcome.

There are two possibilities: Millions of people, against all the odds, hitting all-time records even past Obama and Clinton, voted for a naval gazing ambulatory pathological racist moron. And chose Joe Malarkey as their leader. OR: this WAS a coup, a conspiracy, and a treasonous manipulation regime change because President Trump could not be controlled by the deep state and globalists who OWN AND OPERATE WASHINGTON DC.

BOTH POSSIBILITIES ARE TERRIFYING.

The only way for THE PEOPLE to gain power in this country is to force the transfer of it. If truth isn’t the fuel and vehicle, we will just be replacing deck chairs and hitting the next series of expected ice bergs.

Knowing the truth is not enough; however, it is truth that makes it a righteous cause.

God Bless America!”

Quote: Good Morning !

Coming This AM: A majority of all voters now think Trump’s 2020 campaign was sabotaged by D.C. politicians. https://t.co/Wwkx1D9YqJ

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) [url=https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1636336944513703936]March 16, 2023[url]

yeah, this was all completely legit; nothing to investigate or bother about, just accept the "results"...if you belive that nothing fraudlent happened you're among the biggest nidiots...

Quote:O’Keefe Media Group @OKeefeMedia

BREAKING: O’Keefe Media Group Uncovers Potential MASSIVE Money Laundering into Political Campaigns #FollowTheMoney

{VIDEO of FRAUD}

From R.C. Maxwell
10:22 PM · Mar 28, 2023

(03-29-2023 11:38 AM)GoodOwl Wrote: [ -> ]yeah, this was all completely legit; nothing to investigate or bother about, just accept the "results"...if you belive that nothing fraudlent happened you're among the biggest nidiots...

Quote:O’Keefe Media Group @OKeefeMedia

BREAKING: O’Keefe Media Group Uncovers Potential MASSIVE Money Laundering into Political Campaigns #FollowTheMoney

{VIDEO of FRAUD}

From R.C. Maxwell
10:22 PM · Mar 28, 2023

The owl who cried wolf.

(03-29-2023 11:39 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-29-2023 11:38 AM)GoodOwl Wrote: [ -> ]yeah, this was all completely legit; nothing to investigate or bother about, just accept the "results"...if you belive that nothing fraudlent happened you're among the biggest nidiots...

Quote:O’Keefe Media Group @OKeefeMedia

BREAKING: O’Keefe Media Group Uncovers Potential MASSIVE Money Laundering into Political Campaigns #FollowTheMoney

{VIDEO of FRAUD}

From R.C. Maxwell
10:22 PM · Mar 28, 2023

The owl who cried wolf.

Did you view the video, 93?

In all honesty, it was pretty interesting. There is a huge discrepancy in the donations recorded by the FEC and at least two individuals there.

Seriously.

The FEC records for one house apparently show an average tens of donations a day for a period of years, and totaling in the hundreds of thousands.

When OKeefe asks the people listed, and at the obviously very middle class house(s), the responses are 'I give once in while and no more in sum total than a few hundred dolalrs (maybe a thousand).

I found it intriguing.

I would love to see your reaction to the video. In honesty, I regard much of what GO posts with giant skepticism -- but this is really intriguing.

(03-29-2023 12:43 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-29-2023 11:39 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-29-2023 11:38 AM)GoodOwl Wrote: [ -> ]yeah, this was all completely legit; nothing to investigate or bother about, just accept the "results"...if you belive that nothing fraudlent happened you're among the biggest nidiots...

Quote:O’Keefe Media Group @OKeefeMedia

BREAKING: O’Keefe Media Group Uncovers Potential MASSIVE Money Laundering into Political Campaigns #FollowTheMoney

{VIDEO of FRAUD}

From R.C. Maxwell
10:22 PM · Mar 28, 2023

The owl who cried wolf.

Did you view the video, 93?

In all honesty, it was pretty interesting. There is a huge discrepancy in the donations recorded by the FEC and at least two individuals there.

Seriously.

The FEC records for one house apparently show an average tens of donations a day for a period of years, and totaling in the hundreds of thousands.

When OKeefe asks the people listed, and at the obviously very middle class house(s), the responses are 'I give once in while and no more in sum total than a few hundred dolalrs (maybe a thousand).

I found it intriguing.

I would love to see your reaction to the video. In honesty, I regard much of what GO posts with giant skepticism -- but this is really intriguing.

No... it's funny you asked.

I didn't read much of his post and I didn't watch the video. As I decided not to watch the video I thought to myself... "Surely some of these conspiracies that GO posts will end up having some legs to them. That's going to happen if you post enough of them. Unfortunately his information is likely to be ignored or discounted because of... well... GoodOwl." That's what made me post what I did in response. I'll watch the video if I have time.

*edit* what made me think this is that I can absolutely believe this type of behavior when it comes to campaign finances.

(03-29-2023 01:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-29-2023 12:43 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-29-2023 11:39 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-29-2023 11:38 AM)GoodOwl Wrote: [ -> ]yeah, this was all completely legit; nothing to investigate or bother about, just accept the "results"...if you belive that nothing fraudlent happened you're among the biggest nidiots...

Quote:O’Keefe Media Group @OKeefeMedia

BREAKING: O’Keefe Media Group Uncovers Potential MASSIVE Money Laundering into Political Campaigns #FollowTheMoney

{VIDEO of FRAUD}

From R.C. Maxwell
10:22 PM · Mar 28, 2023

The owl who cried wolf.

Did you view the video, 93?

In all honesty, it was pretty interesting. There is a huge discrepancy in the donations recorded by the FEC and at least two individuals there.

Seriously.

The FEC records for one house apparently show an average tens of donations a day for a period of years, and totaling in the hundreds of thousands.

When OKeefe asks the people listed, and at the obviously very middle class house(s), the responses are 'I give once in while and no more in sum total than a few hundred dolalrs (maybe a thousand).

I found it intriguing.

I would love to see your reaction to the video. In honesty, I regard much of what GO posts with giant skepticism -- but this is really intriguing.

No... it's funny you asked.

I didn't read much of his post and I didn't watch the video. As I decided not to watch the video I thought to myself... "Surely some of these conspiracies that GO posts will end up having some legs to them. That's going to happen if you post enough of them. Unfortunately his information is likely to be ignored or discounted because of... well... GoodOwl." That's what made me post what I did in response. I'll watch the video if I have time.

*edit* what made me think this is that I can absolutely believe this type of behavior when it comes to campaign finances.

By the way, did *you* happen to get the new number of our corporate overlords? I have something to say and I got left off the list on the change.

Lol

Quote: My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell has been ordered to shell out $5 million to an expert who debunked his data related to the 2020 election, according to a decision by the arbitration panel obtained by CNN.

Lindell, a purveyor of election conspiracies, vowed to award the multimillion-dollar sum to any cyber security expert who could disprove his data. An arbitration panel awarded Robert Zeidman, who has decades in software development experience, a $5 million payout on Wednesday after he sued Lindell over the sum.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/20/politics/...index.html

They said there was no evidence of fraud. Then they said there was little evidence of fraud. They said the fraud happened too long ago to matter. They said just forget it. Yet new stuff keeps coming out showing that there was fraud and still is fraud today. Until this is properly addressed, it will not stop.

Quote: It actually LOOKS like @realDonaldTrump won here in Maricopa County 2020. 18,000 illegal ballots were injected the day after the polls had closed on November 4th, 2020. https://t.co/Q7PKyFLTeX pic.twitter.com/wBLu3TdSKG

— Bryan Blehm (@BlehmLawAZ) June 13, 2023