Reading Anton’s article at American Greatness

Michael Ations American Greatness article Why Do the Election’s Defenders Require My Agreement?   is very effective, depressingly so,  at articulating the elements that insure that “the fix” (fraud) was in for 2020 and that without assertive measure will be for future “elections” as well. Before we comment on that, we have a critique of Anton suggesting he has doubts about the Dominion voting machine/software accusations.

Maybe he has reason to have doubts, but he does not even hint why, and we find it perplexing as to why he would throw that a=out there given the panoply of clearly organized frauds he lists.  Why wouldn’t manipulating data tabulation /reporting  be an avenue for the cause of stopping Trump and for the usual suspects to do and deny?  We understand that his main theme was to question the left – that is – if they are so sure of their virtue, why be concerned with inquiry. Nevertheless we find that hedge a bit irritating even if it is just a rhetorical device in conversation with the anything but conservative Andrew Sullivan.

Indeed in listing the election fraud and illegalities that are in evidence, in the record, sworn to, etc. the first thing Anton mentions requires a vehicle such as data manipulation to be worth mentioning. Data manipulation has been implicated by election statisticians and competent cyber experts have said Dominion software is vulnerable to hacking. That does not mean  the owners of the machines or software engaged in such activity themselves for the 2020 election. From the article: (bold our emphasis)

. . . The 2020 election came down to a narrower margin than the 2016 contest: fewer than 43,000 rather than 77,000 votes in just three states. In 2016, nothing fishy in Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin—the states on which 2016 turned—was detected. Certainly nothing like:

    • Counting shutdowns in five states, in which one candidate was ahead, only to lose after the counting resumed;
    • “Found” tranches of ballots going overwhelmingly—sometimes exclusively—to one candidate, the eventual “winner”;
    • Sworn affidavits alleging the backdating of ballots;
    • Historically low rejection rates—as in, orders of magnitude lower—of mail-in ballots, suggesting that many obviously invalid ballots were accepted as genuine;
    • Mail-in and absentee ballots appearing without creases, raising the question of how they got into the envelopes required for their being mailed in;
    • Thousands upon thousands of ballots all marked for one presidential candidate without a single choice marked for any down-ballot candidate.
    • The absolute refusal to conduct signature audits—indeed, the discarding of many envelopes which alone make such audits possible—i.e., of the kind of recounts which are performed not merely to get the math right but to evaluate the validity of ballots;
    • Other statistical and historical anomalies too numerous to mention here.

All of which, and much more, did occur in 2020. Any one of these things would have caused Hillary Clinton to march into court in 2016 with an army of lawyers larger than the force Hannibal brought to Cannae

Sullivan dismissed all of this because “Trump tried in court and lost.” End of story. He alleged with a straight face that Trump put on a serious effort run by serious election experts. To put it mildly, that’s not the way it looked to me. In any case, quick dismissals by partisan or even impartial courts do not amount to “proof” that nothing was amiss, much less do they constitute a thorough vetting of what really happened. They might be “evidence”—but only of the fact that those particular courts wanted nothing to do with the election. Judges’ dismissals are certainly not dispositive evidence that there was no fraud.    . . .

Follow-up commentary later

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

The left’s view of “not believing” in the legitimacy of the 2020 election reveals the cancer that eats at them

  • Some know it was illegit,
  • Some are worried it was illegit, 
  • Denial and lack of candor to prove accusation wrong

We ask readers to take the time to read and reflect on this Michael Anton article at American Greatness.

Why Do the Election’s Defenders Require My Agreement? 

The purpose of voting today is to give a democratic veneer to an undemocratic regime—not to give the people a say in the direction of their government. 

We will have some comments on it late, perhaps with some rays of hope.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Liz Cheney stepping up her audition tapings for CNN gig

Liz the people confusing people “not being clear” are beltway idiots like you.

Yes she said this.  Surely she knows she is as they say “political toast”

Representative Liz Cheney (R- WY), one of ten House Republicans who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump, said on Tuesday during a Reagan Institute event that the Republican party needs to “make clear that we aren’t the party of white supremacy” in the wake of the deadly Capitol riots.

Cheney said, “Certainly the potential of a 9/11-style commission, I think that is very important. I think there are many aspects of what happened on the 6th and in the days and weeks and months leading up to it that have to be investigated.”

She added, “It’s very important, especially for us as Republicans, to make clear that we aren’t the party of white supremacy. You certainly saw anti-Semitism. You saw the symbols of Holocaust denial, for example, at the Capitol that day. You saw a Confederate flag being carried through the Rotunda. And I think we as Republicans, in particular, have a duty and an obligation to stand against that, to stand against insurrection.”

One of those white supremacists at the rally — John Sullivan BLM activist at Trump rally and provocateur

Comments to the Breitbart article about Liz Cheney were scathing.  We will pick a few and post them later.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | 1 Comment

A day to remember real courage, “taking a knee”– not the Kaepernick clowns of the NFL

  • Iowa native recently identified as one of the flag raisers (comment and link below)

On Mount Suribachi during the battle of Iwo Jima, Marines “took a knee” to raise the American flag. Three of the Marines in the famous photo also took a Japanese bullet on the same island and died there.  Prior to the flag-raising, the Marines stood, they fought, they advanced, then they put their knees and backs into raising the flag for all it represented that day – freedom, sacrifice, courage, a rallying symbol. It was this day in history, 76 years ago . . . and reading the article linked below  we are reminded  what an ungrateful, ignorant a–hole Colin Kaepernick is . . . and that everyone who “admires” him desperately needs an education about “taking a knee”.

Article at American Thinker by William Campenni, February 23, 2021

It’s February. The star-spangled kneelers of the NFL have given way to their imitators in the NBA, and soon some millionaire dugout squatters of baseball will be adding their insults to the flag they hate.

Today is February 23, an otherwise unremarkable day in history. The first Gutenberg Bible was printed, the first Salk polio vaccine shot administered, and Mississippi was allowed back in the Union. But nothing worth a holiday or a greeting card.

Unless you are ninety-five years old and thinking back to that day of your youth when you were on hunkered behind some ugly volcanic rock stained red by the blood of the buddy beside you and looked up at the unvegetated hill to see others of your comrades raising a flag barely visible in the smoke and haze. If you squinted, you might have seen a couple of guys with cameras up there with them.

It was February 23, 1945, and you were looking at the American flag being raised on the summit of Mount Suribachi, on a godforsaken island called Iwo Jima. One of those photographers, Joe Rosenthal, took a picture that would soon become the most iconic of the American flag’s long history. Papers would be running with that picture in a few days, and it stirred the pride and hopes of people back on the home front, still not knowing the ultimate cost of that island struggle. Even a preschool kid like me would be awed by that image on pages we could not yet read yet would never forget for the rest of our lives.

Actual flag immortalize in the Rosenthal photo, at Marine Corps Museum, Quantico

It was a presumptuous act, that flag-raising. The island was far from being secured; that would take several more weeks. It would cost 7,000 Marines their lives. Twenty-seven of them were awarded the Medal of Honor. Three of the six flag-raisers would leave the island with another American flag, the one that covered their bodies.

That flag still exists. Much tattered back then by the whipping winds of the Iwo summit, it can be seen at the Marine Corps Museum in Quantico, Virginia.
Flash forward to today. Thanks to our failed schools and our woke culture, few under forty even know of Iwo Jima, or that there was a world war. Of those 27 Medal of Honor awardees, 22 were reservists, called to duty for that struggle. Today, the FBI and the War (Defense) Department would be doing an investigation into their character, the newspaper they read, the church they went to, the girls they dated, the organizations they belonged to, and the political party they voted for. They would be called domestic terrorists. In 1945, we called them Americans.
Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz later concisely summed up what transpired under that flag on those days at Iwo Jima: “Uncommon valor was a common virtue.” That citation, and an appropriately large sculpture of that flag-raising, borders the sacred ground of Arlington National Cemetery, where lie the remains of many who once stormed the beaches of Iwo Jima.

Today, for many “Americans,” that flag is a symbol for what they ignorantly and libelously claim is every evil in the world. For the dwindling heroes who looked up at it in places like Iwo Jima, or Anzio, or Bastogne, or the smoldering ruins of 9/11, it is a symbol of what is right in America, of what is worth struggling for, even dying for. For too many, and too often in our government leadership roles, it is no longer the indisputable symbol of “the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible” — but on this day, seventy-six years ago, there was no doubt.

Take a moment today between cute kitty videos and white privilege diatribes to get on your cell phone or iPad and call up that image of the flag-raising on Iwo Jima. Just meditate on it for a while. It’s a Grand Old Flag.

The pictures posted herein were not part of the original article. In verifying the pictures we came across this article about recent corrections to the named individuals who were originally said to be in the iconic , immortalized photo by Rosenthal.

Brooklyn Iowa native Harold Keller was recently identified by the Marine Corps as one of the Marines actually in the famous photo. No one who was previously identified was undeserving of recognition as part of that days events, including raising the flag, but they were not in the famous photo.  It is an interesting story and knitted within is a sentiment we find keenly unselfish and patriotic, sentiments that Colin Kaepernick would not understand.

That sentiment is the suggestion that it would have been better not to have identified any of the raisers, first flag, second flag, whatever. They represented the best traditions of American fighting men, stretched out on the beach, and the trenches, and offshore — gazing up briefly from the fight to the top of Suribachi.

Iowa native Keller never pursued recognition.  To him it was just a photo of some Marines at a time when Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, commander of Pacific Fleet noted of the Americans on Iwo, “uncommon valor was a common virtue.”

Related article about another a Marine in the photo previously not identified

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | 2 Comments

SCOTUS atrocity – election cheating and illegalities can be sustained as “moot”

  • “Moot? In murder, the victim is already dead, but we try the killer anyway.”*
  • “the court has enabled crooks”*
  • No conservative 6-3 Court
  • More like 3-6 on monumental matters
  • Or maybe on a good day 3-3-3  (3 conservative, 3 cowards and 3 activist liberals.)

Terrell picto-meme portrays members of SCOTUS appropriately

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Pennsylvania Election Dispute Cases

The first case was filed by both the Trump Campaign and the Republican Party of Pennsylvania, challenging the decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that made changes to the election laws in Pennsylvania.  The most controversial change allowed the counting of mailed-in ballots received up to three days after election day — the election statute has a cut-off of 8:00 pm on election night — so long as the ballot envelope was postmarked on election day.  Ballot envelopes with no postmark, or with an illegible postmark, were deemed to have been received after election day.

“Kavanaugh and Barrett”…what was this ‘bullsh-t’ we heard and read everywhere about after Barret’s confirmation there is now a 6-3 “conservative” Court?!

This lineup means that Chief Justice Roberts, along with Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett, were among the six justices voting to deny review.  It would have only taken the vote of one of those three to have accepted the case.

Here are two commentaries from Epoch Times we have annotated or excerpted including some choice comments of their readers

Sobering analysis from Michael Walsh: (LOOK FOR OUR ANNOTATIONS LATER TODAY)

With Supreme Court’s Non-Decision, Citizens Must Reform Electoral System 

The U.S. Supreme Court’s appalling decision not to hear a Republican challenge to Pennsylvania’s extra-legal changing of election laws shortly before the 2020 vote—which likely delivered the state to Joe Biden in the wee hours of Election Night—is just the latest disgrace of the John Roberts court, and a clear signal of future trouble for the Republic.

Pusillanimity has marked the chief justice and the institution he leads since his volte-face regarding the 2012 Obamacare decision, in which he saved the misbegotten, intrusive, and blatantly unconstitutional law at the last minute by choosing to call the “individual mandate” a tax—that is to say, a hitherto unprecedented ukase by the federal government that once-free citizens had to buy a health-care policy under threat of IRS penalty.

A human weathervane, Roberts has gone on from that low point to plumb ever-new depths of moral cowardice as, increasingly, he sides with court’s dwindling liberal bloc to become, in effect, the new Anthony Kennedy—the regal one-man swing vote on matters of urgent national importance. For as long as he is on the court, which is to say for life, Roberts will be the lasting unfortunate legacy of the George W. Bush administration: even more damaging than Daddy’s Revenge (Iraq, 2001), the Forever War in Afghanistan, now in its 20th year, and 9/11 itself.

Buildings can be rebuilt. Troops can and ought be called home, especially when they are dying for nothing. But the Constitution, once shredded, is not so easily repaired.


Monday’s non-decision to turn away a case involving “absentee” ballots that arrived up to three days after the November election as “moot,” was in fact a decision in itself, indeed the Catch-22 of Robertsian jurisprudence.

The Court had shunted aside the case (in a 4-4 decision with Roberts siding with the liberals and Amy Coney Barrett not yet confirmed) back in October, in effect inviting the plaintiffs to come back after the voting to show injury, if any. Heads, Democrats win, tails, Republicans lose. After all, Trump finally conceded, didn’t he, so what’s the problem? Case closed.

Heading into the election following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, conservatives liked to think that with the appointment of Barrett, the ideological split would be 6-3. And in fact, in this case they were right. All three dissenters were conservative: Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch. The other six, including Roberts, were silent.

“The Pennsylvania Legislature established an unambiguous deadline for receiving mail-in ballots: 8 p.m. on election day,” wrote Thomas in his dissent. “Dissatisfied, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court extended that deadline by three days. The court also ordered officials to count ballots received by the new deadline even if there was no evidence—such as a postmark—that the ballots were mailed by election day… These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”

Maybe not. What we’ve learned from Roberts is that he’s susceptible to pressure and hates conflict. In one of the most disgraceful episodes in the court’s history, Sen. Chuck Schumer, losing his cool over abortion “rights” on the steps of the Supreme Court, directly threatened Roberts’ colleagues Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” he said last March. “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Roberts’ milquetoast reaction? “Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.”

Still, Schumer’s message came through loud a clear: vote our way or face the packing of the Court with a fistful of new justices. With the election of Joe Biden last fall, that prospect is now within reach. Elections really do have consequences.

And now here they are: two of the three judges Trump appointed to the Supreme Court have stood idly by while the Constitution’s directives for election law just got shredded. Perhaps not surprising: Kavanaugh’s tearing up during his nasty confirmation was embarrassing, and nothing he’s done since has indicated any desire for quiet payback. And so far Barrett has been a cipher.

Restoration of Traditional Voting

To be clear, accepting this case would not have meant overturning the election. At this point, the vote challenges wouldn’t make any difference to the outcome. But it’s the principle of thing: if six Justices are utterly uninterested in discovering whether our electoral system has now been corrupted beyond repair, we are in more trouble than we thought.

So let’s cut to the chase: there was no Kraken, no Plan, no deus ex machina. Former vice president Mike Pence could not have voided the certified results of the election, however hinkily obtained. Republican senators were perfectly within their rights to question the results, and Pence might have sought to broker a compromise on Jan. 6 in which serious allegations of fraud might have been examined. But Pence had neither the political talent nor the temperament for such a task—even with the precedent-setting example of 1876 right in front of his nose.

And in any case, handing the likes of Schumer and his cronies in the media the propaganda victory of the breach of Capitol Hill by hundreds of protesters—a blunder of epic proportions—put paid to any further maneuvering.

So now the Court sits in a Washington ringed by razor wire and occupied by armed troops while a bumbling old man plays video games with his granddaughter at Camp David and a woman raised in Canada of two foreign-born parents makes international phone calls to heads of state in Europe and elsewhere.

Let’s face facts: what got us here was not theft and media malfeasance; those were just the symptoms of a Democrat-induced malignancy that leveraged the absurd panic over Covid-19 into a free-for-all election in which you could vote without ID, vote months ahead of the election, vote days after the election, “cure” your ballot if you made a “mistake,” allow a complete stranger to “harvest” your vote, and never have to prove provenance. One more election under these rules and the Republic is dead.

Cut to the chase: the only way this can be rectified is by a restoration of our traditional system of voting: one man, one vote, one time, on one day, certified by positive identification at a designated polling place, within an ironclad time period. Ignore the bleating about disparate impact on minorities, bogus civil rights issues, or the racist allegations that blacks and Hispanics are often incapable of using common technology to be fully informed citizens.

If you want to do something about the election of 2020, do something about the elections of 2022 and 2024—right now.

Also at Epoch Times this from Roger Simon (excerpt)

Opinion: Lies the Supreme Court Told Me 

In a fashion we must now regard as entirely predictable the Supreme Court of the United States has dismissed (i.e., thrown out) the various state challenges to the 2020 presidential election.

Any decisions on these challenges were determined by the majority to be “moot” because the election had already been decided, and Donald Trump has conceded to Joe Biden. (Associate Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch objected in varying degrees.)

In other words, a stolen presidential election—if it happens, we don’t really know in this case—has an almost immediate statute of limitations, although the results of that election can affect hundreds of millions, if not, as in the case of the United States, nearly the entirety of humanity.

This is true, apparently for a majority of the Supremes, although all sorts of crimes, some not particularly onerous, have statutes of limitations that can go on for years.

Go figure.

The Supremes also cited the issue of “standing,” a term of legal “art” that has always struck me, despite all the precedents on which it is supposedly based, as wide open for biased interpretation of the most self-serving sort. One person’s “standing” can be another’s closed door, almost at will and certainly by vote of a “majority.”

If I sound cynical about the Supreme Court, I have to admit I am. It’s even true of the law in general, which I want to believe in and admire, but increasingly no longer do.

In the real world, legal results tend to mirror A.J. Liebling’s 1960 comment in The New Yorker about the press: “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.”

The law belongs to those who have the deepest control of a society at the time.

We want lady justice to be blind but in actuality she’s a cyborg with all-seeing, rotating night vision similar to the kind you might find on many urban street corners today from Beijing to Chicago, using the latest algorithms to isolate presumed enemies of the state.

. . .

The Supreme Court is the apotheosis of this system—an organization that puts its finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing (assuming that’s even necessary) and then writes its opinions based on pre-conceived notions designed to offend the lowest number.

Sadly, it is the last place to look for justice in a Presidential election—or anything, really, that tilts against that prevailing wind.

They wouldn’t even, as Clarence Thomas requested, explore the blatantly unconstitutional malfeasances in various states where unelected officials clearly and unlawfully superseded the legislatures in changing election law by fiat, something we would think would only happen in totalitarian countries.

But it happened here, my friends, several times. We could cite the Supreme Court for dereliction of duty … or we could look elsewhere for justice.

* comments by readers of the Epoch Times articles above

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | 2 Comments

Moreon “Smilin’ Joe Biden

Its not just current cops and military he is willing or programmed to shaft

Biden Says Military Veterans, Ex-Cops Spurred Growth Of White Supremacy

“These (men and women), military veterans, ex-cops, these are ‘dangerous people.”

Smilin’ joe is the definition of

“Smile in your face and stab you in the back”

When someone pretends or portrays themselves as your friend, or that they have your interests, your welfare at heart but instead they are involved in treacherous actions/words against you. Theses actions/words are used to benefit them by discrediting you. They might figuratively be patting you on the back with one hand, and knifing you with the other. You think they are doing good for you and find out that their personal priorities are unscrupulous (corrupt).

Biden’s instincts are personal/family aggrandizement. Unfortunately he is now almost an empty vessel for others to write their own grand megalomaniacal designs.


Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

‘Smilin’ Joe Biden — everyone is told he is Mr Nice Guy. He is not

“I LIKE ‘JOE’…HE’S A NICE GUY”… “Joe Biden is impossible not to like.”

How often do you hear this…from Republican senators, political opponents, former ‘colleagues’?

The answer, of course, is “often”.
“Although I don’t agree with Joe on a lot of issues…”
This is the kind of “malarkey” American voters hear from politicians all the time…and that is precisely what it is…”malarkey” (Joe likes to use that term publicly).

The more precise term for this “politics-speak” is “Bullsh-t!”

Joe Biden is NOT a ‘nice guy’ and never was…even when he had all his faculties:

ask Judge Bork: “As head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he presided over the infamous Robert Bork hearings. His smearing of Bork for his original-intent judicial philosophy transformed hearings for Supreme Court nominees into bloody ideological battles. Henceforth, all conservative nominees were subjected to “Borking.”

– ask Robert Gates (former Sec Def under Obama)…
“Joe Biden is impossible not to like. He’s a man of integrity, incapable of hiding what he really thinks, and one of those rare people you know you could turn to for help in a personal crisis.” (after those usual ‘kind words’,)
“Still, I think he’s been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

-ask the family of Curtis Dunn: In a 2007 speech at the University of Iowa, Biden said: “Let me tell you a little story. I got elected when I was 29, and I got elected November the 7th. And on Dec. 18 of that year, my wife and three kids were Christmas shopping for a Christmas tree. A tractor-trailer, a guy who allegedly — and I never pursued it — drank his lunch instead of eating his lunch, broadsided my family and killed my wife instantly, and killed my daughter instantly, and hospitalized my two sons, with what were thought to be at the time permanent, fundamental injuries.” But the then-Delaware prosecutor, now a judge, who investigated the accident says, “The rumor about alcohol being involved by either party, especially the truck driver [Dunn], is incorrect.” Furthermore, the tractor-trailer driver had the right of way, and Dunn immediately got out of his truck and tried to render assistance. He was no drunk driver.

Joe’s calling card is decency, an affable man without a malicious bone in his body. Yet he allowed Dunn, who died in 1999, to go to his grave having been falsely shamed by Biden as a drunk driver responsible for the death of Biden’s wife and newborn daughter. What “decent” man does that?     dlh

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Celebrate Easter, Celebrate Culture the Democrat Way

Mindless Joe and Mindless marketing


‘Extremely Sadistic’: Guards Gang Rape Religious Minorities In China’s Concentration Camps, Former Detainees Allege

“It’s a cultural thing…I can’t be “judgmental” :J. Biden

“And so the idea that I’m not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uighur in western mountains of China, and Taiwan, trying to end the One China Policy by making it forceful, I say – and by the, he says he gets it — culturally there are different norms in each country that their leaders are expected to follow.”

When political hackery is likely to hurt sales


New Cadbury Egg Commercial features A Same Sex Kiss

“Not That There’s Anything Wrong With That”  (??? dlh)

The promotion is part of the confectioners annual Easter lineup campaign’s the money shot at the end of the video that has viewers clutching their pearls, depicting two men passing the sweet treat to one another in their lips before bursting the egg and its creamy contents.

The commercial for Cadbury includes two men passing the egg with their lips.

THE Comment:

(Cadbury, which is owned by Mondelez International, says they’re a progressive company that promotes what they call inclusion, through their products and their advertising.)

“Are you sure this will help us sell more candy?”


Also heard at a Cadbury marketing meeting . . .

As part of our End Discrimination Campaign . . . let’s  have this cute little pig or maybe a puppy serving our packaged kunafey treats at a Rhamadan feast!!!

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

WSJ’s Trump “blame” editorial as trite in content as the title

  • Let us be as insightful: No candidate is perfect
  • Let us be more insightful: If Trump had been treated fairly by media, including the WSJ,  or with the kid gloves applied to “Joe”, he would have received a lot more votes, arguably won key states by even more.
  • Let us be as polemic: If widespread cheating and illegalities had not occurred . . .

WSJ: “Mr. Trump didn’t lose to Joe Biden. He lost to himself”

What we would expect (but not hope for) from the Wall Street Journal editorial board:

“Mr. Trump didn’t lose to Joe Biden. He lost to himself”

– “Mr. Fabrizio looked at data from exit polls and AP’s VoteCast in 10 highly competitive states that Mr. Trump won in 2016. Mr. Trump lost five of them in 2020—Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin—while winning Iowa, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas a second time. “

– “Donald Trump launched a personal attack on Mitch McConnell this week after the Senate GOP leader called the former President “practically and morally responsible” for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Mr. McConnell doesn’t need our defense, but we hope GOP voters aren’t buying Mr. Trump’s attempt to rewrite the history of the 2020 election.”

The Wall Street Journal ed board has never been a ‘Trump fan’ . With a couple exceptions, Kim Strassell most prominently, the editors at the Journal have been as much a part of the “conspiracy” to defeat Trump in the 2020 election as any exposed by the Molly Ball TIME magazine piece.

The Journal, always tending to promote the desires of the US Chamber of Commerce, especially its opposition to Trump’s trade and immigration policies and the tariffs on countries who aggressively labored against America’s workers, and Trump’s overall attitude toward the D C ‘Swamp’. The Journal seldom missed an opportunity to criticize.

We won’t go into all of the reasons we are critical of Friday’s Journal editorial, but one point that especially rankles and will always be to us a point of great disappointment. That is the great extent to which the Journal has denied that the election was stolen from Donald Trump.

When President Trump tries to make his case that the 2020 election was fraught with “irregularities”, illegalities, and fraud, the Journal calls it his “attempt to rewrite history”.

When Trump notes he got more votes than any incumbent president in history, 75 million, the Journal notes that Biden beat him by more than 7 million votes, in the “official tally”.

It also notes that “in 10 highly competitive states that Mr. Trump won in 2016. Mr. Trump lost five of them in 2020—Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin—while winning Iowa, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas a second time. ”

What is seldom mentioned, and not at all in this piece, is the fact that voting irregularities abounded in those very states Trump lost…the key states, the “swing states”! Incident after incident of serious such irregularities have been documented, accompanied by photographic evidence…yes! “Evidence”! And hundreds of Americans, poll workers and “watchers” on the spot, have come forward, made sworn affidavits, attesting to so-called ‘irregularities” at polling places which they observed first hand.

Actual, unchallenged instances of violations of legislated voting law in most of those states have been ignored by the courts…not investigated…simply ignored!

Was the election “stolen”?

We don’t know…but neither does the Wall Street Journal, or the anti-Trump establishment, or the courts, or the social and “news” media, entertainment and education “conspiracy” that Time magazine’s Molly Ball wrote about…and they don’t want to ‘know’!

But we, and many millions of others, do believe the 2020 election was stolen from President Trump.

And, we will reject the terms like “baseless” and “attempts to rewrite history”, and “without evidence” to belittle our beliefs.

Those terms were not thrown around so carelessly and pervasively when the Left was demanding investigation of the “Russia Collusion” or when a “quid pro quo” over a phone call was grounds for the impeachment of a president.

The evidence of a stolen election… sworn statements and affidavits, and photographic verification, proven violations of states’ voting laws…however, far outweighs the completely baseless allegations that the left, the Democrats, the media pushed to result in investigations which turned up NO evidence of ‘collusion’, or criminal ‘quid pro quo’!

And yet…NO Investigation!

And until there is one…a legitimate and serious one, the dismissal of our concerns with “baseless”, or “without evidence” remains to millions of Americans an indictment of the Wall Street Journal, and every other left-leaning “news” organization in America…an indictment of their dishonesty, incompetence, and anti-America ideology!     dlh

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | 2 Comments

Cuomo’s motives –“Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?”

Cuomo’s “Deaths from Nowhere”

Cuomo’s expendables

When assessing a politician’s motives for making policy choices, I usually try to give them the benefit of the doubt. (actually, that’s untrue)

Let’s consider Governor Cuomo’s directive funneling COVID-19 patients into nursing homes. Was his decision based on a legitimate concern that NY’s hospital system would be overwhelmed, and beds would be needed?

Cuomo’s people would love for that to be the narrative.

I’m stepping back to the pandemic’s emergence. Franklin Graham’s organization, Samaritan’s Purse, had set up a field hospital in NYC’s Central Park. President Trump deployed the hospital ship USNS Comfort to NY harbor, and directed the Army Corps of Engineers to convert the Javits Center to a fully-capable hospital.

These facilities sat basically unused. Covid-positive patients could have been sent there instead of nursing homes, or could have remained hospitalized, with any overflow directed to one of these vacant assets.

Cynical Gene sees the influence of politics: NYC’s mayor De Blasio didn’t like the religious background of the Samaritans. Governor Cuomo was in a TV competition with President Trump, and might be loath to give him a success story.

The sad reality is: The conspiracy theory of high-ranking elected officials sentencing thousands to dismal, solitary deaths for political gain is actually Occam’s Razor.

Just like hydroxychloroquine.

Eugene Mattecheck Jr.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | 1 Comment