We are the drain the swamp people

• No jail time for malfeasance of a monumental nature
• A slap on the wrist and on to a new job
• Makes importuning of FBI bureaucrats a political strategy
• Every lying FBI bureaucrat now has a get out of jail free precedent
• Respect for the integrity of the FBI and courts it answers to questioned
  
• More comment follows

From Emmy Award winner Dick Wolf and the team behind the Law & Order franchise, FBI is a fast-paced drama about the inner workings of the New York office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This elite unit brings to bear all their talents, intellect and technical expertise on major cases in order to keep New York and the country safe.”

That’s how CBS describes its “fast-paced” drama series about the FBI. There have been many television series over the years about the Federal Bureau of Investigation (who can forget Ephrem Zimbalist, Jr.?), its exploits and its hardworking, courageous, brilliant agents, field personnel and leadership as well.

But does any of the stuff about the Bureau aired by TV networks in fictional series reflect today’s FBI (or any day’s)?

What would Mr. Zimbalist feel about portraying the heroic exploits of ‘Andy’ McCabe or Peter Strzok?

For that matter, what do the real FBI veterans, those now retired, feel about their former ’employer’?

Would they say these portrayals of the Bureau they once served accurately reflect their work?

Or would they say, “Nah. We were more of a government bureaucracy devoted to the interests of leftwing political organizations and individuals. When rightwing politicians were in office, our main job was to do whatever it took to undermine their administration. If it were a leftist political administration, we were to do whatever it took to advance their agenda…if, in either case that meant spying on US citizens or using phony documents to get the help of friendly courts, that’s what we did!”

We doubt that any retired FBI administrator or operative would say that. And we are among those who believe that the FBI was not always that kind of operation. But, after observing the reality, and reading of of the Bureau’s activities over the past 4 years…and even a bit longer ago than that, we don’t believe TV shows like “FBI” are any longer accurate depictions of what the nation’s…the world’s…”premier law enforcement agency” is today.

The story below does not tend to encourage us to abandon those views…and doesn’t, in our opinion, reflect favorably on our courts either.

If there’s anyone out there who has first hand knowledge of the FBI operating philosophy now, or in the recent past, we’d welcome their comments and perspective (contributions to the reader commentary section can be anonymous).     dlh

Wall Street Journal: A Pass For Kevin Clinesmith 

How can the American people take the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court seriously when it doesn’t do so itself? That’s our view of Friday’s sentencing of former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted to falsifying evidence submitted to the court for a warrant to spy on onetime Trump foreign-policy adviser Carter Page.SUB

“Federal Judge James Boasberg spared Mr. Clinesmith prison in favor of 12 months probation and 400 hours of community service. The judge said the evidence persuaded him that “Mr. Clinesmith likely believed that what he said about Mr. Page was true.”

Wow, what a legal defense concept — Your honor my client believed it was not fraud, he just exercised substituted judgement of what he believed should have been the case.

Corporate Execs go to jail for lying on SEC forms, they don’t get a defense of ~~ well I thought the company was that fit

Restitution? The victim is less the FISA Court (which apparently doesn’t mind being bamboozled very much) rather, it is respect for the FBI and most significantly the American people and President Trump who were defrauded by this act of lying to the court, the extensive damages being from policies inflicted on us as a result of the burdening  of President Trump’s reelection.  R Mall

0

0

IF THE FBI ASKS FOR ME, TELL’EM I’M OUTA TOWN

In April last year we ran this picture of Her Highness, the ‘Lovely Michelle’.

VeritasPAC  Official Statement: At first we thought this was PhotoShopped or something. No one would wear this and everyone would know it and guffaw. Then we discovered it was for real and thought it was a seditious act of some fashion designer to put the first lady in this get up. Making a bafoonery of the office of First Lady should be dealt with as treason. Now we understand that the First Lady of her own volition was being fashionable and we apologize for our previous presumptions.

After events of the past couple of weeks, the all out assault by the Biden ‘army’ on Republicans and conservatives, the demand for “reeducation” of Trump supporters by DC and Hollywood elites, and the ‘cancel assault’ against everyone who worked in the previous administration by ‘big business’ and Democrats,, and especially the ‘incident’ of the past week…the FBI’s arrest and charging of ‘Rickey Vaughn’ (story below), we want to apologize for comments on these pages suggesting there might have been a teensy weensy bit of “irregularity” in the election, and, especially, forgive us  for running this picture of our former First Lady.

No…we did not, however, ‘photoshop’ the picture nor did we have any racist impulses in running the photo…Michelle allowed herself to be photographed looking that ridiculous (oops! more apologies, sorry, sorry).

At any rate, we hope that the ‘nation’s premier law enforcement agency’ will forgive and allow us to escape the fate of Mr. Vaughn (below) for our transgressions against Democrats, past and present, at the highest levels of power within our federal government and for the possibility that we may have given voters ‘disinformation’..

Sincerely, your V’pac editor

From The NY Post

FBI Nabs PUBLIC ENEMY #1, ( “Alt-Right Criminal Social Media Influencer”

Alt-right Twitter troll ‘Ricky Vaughn’ busted for voter disinformation
By Rebecca Rosenberg
January 27, 2021 | 2:42pm | Updated

The man behind pro-Trump Twitter troll account “Ricky Vaughn” was busted in Florida on Wednesday for spreading disinformation during the 2016 presidential election in a scheme to limit black turnout, officials said.

Douglass Mackey, 31, was arrested in West Palm Beach on one charge of conspiracy against rights, for which he faces up to 10 years in prison.

Between September and November 2016, Mackey allegedly conspired with others to use social media messaging to encourage blacks to cast their votes via text message so their ballots wouldn’t count, according to Brooklyn federal prosecutors.

On Nov. 1, one week before the presidential election that ushered in President Donald Trump’s term, Mackey allegedly tweeted an image of a black woman in front of an “African Americans for President Hillary” sign. Written on the photograph was the message, “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home. Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925. Vote for Hillary and be a part of history,” the complaint states.

More than 4,900 people, encouraged by the misinformation campaign, cast their vote via text, officials said.

“There is no place in public discourse for lies and misinformation to defraud citizens of their right to vote,” said Acting US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York Seth DuCharme.

Mackey’s Twitter account under the name Vaughn — Charlie Sheen’s character in “Major League” — had attracted more than 58,000 followers by early 2016.

That same year, the MIT Media Lab ranked him as the 107th most important social media influencer of the presidential election, coming in ahead of NBC News and the Drudge Report, officials said.

After it was revealed in 2018 that Mackey was the man behind Vaughn, the Huffington Post called him an “‘alt-right’ white nationalist” who used his alter ego to peddle racist and anti-Semitic views.

Mackey is expected to appear Wednesday afternoon before US Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart at the West Palm Beach federal courthouse.

Note to readers: The Washington Post had a related story with a chilling (to our way of thinking) reference to the charge “conspiracy against rights“.  We intend to dissect the implications of what has been reported and the underlying law Mackey is charged with violating.

0

0

• Third Party move now could destroy midterm hopes for conservatives
• Trolls will push it for that reason
• Instead, assume control where deficiencies and apostasies exist
  
• Trump does not support a Third Party move
• The mechanics of it are such only the politically naive would think it in any way timely
• THERE ARE BETTER THINGS TO DO

We understand and share the  frustration and anger at the Republican political establishment in many states.  There are a litany of valid complaints. The Republican establishment at all levels, national, state and local have handed Democrats tools to defeat Republicans, joined Democrats in promoting voting practices inimical to the integrity of the vote and good government.  They have been  pathetic at defending Republican conservative interests before and after the 2020 election. Some have been underhanded and disdainful of Trump supporters.

The anger and disgust with the Party leadership including legislators and the party apparat in various states is such that many registered Republicans are heard and seen to be advocating a third party.  Words to the effect that “I will never give a dime to the Republican Party” . . . “they can’t be trusted” . . .  “I am cancelling my Republican registration”  . . . “what’s the use, nothing changes” . . . and even “I will never vote Republican again” all feed the notion.

Here are some points that speak against stomping out of the Republican party and instead trying a more thorough, consistent and assertive grassroots involvement, installing messengers and representatives to change attitudes or supplant the apparat,working hard to support candidates in primaries that better reflect desired values and demeanor. In the next two years, take over, don’t walk out, if anything make the problem people take a walk, test the sincerity of their “Republicanism”.

Key point about new Third Parties: They are not on the ballot now but they need to be to win.

Being on the ballot is critical to electoral success. Write-ins by and large do not win even with considerable name recognition. There are only rare occurrences when established major parties filed candidates and a write-in won. When it happens it is because of huge name recognition of the write-in and scandal or extreme low name ID of the party candidates, and low turnouts. The electoral machinery, the party machinery and automatic party voting from voters works against write-ins.

Under varying ballot access rules in states, write ins can propel establishing third party- appearance on the ballot after winning a minimum number of votes statewide, but that is a multi-election process.

Instead, claim the existing structure and make it work for your interests. The carcass is useful, give it a heart and a brain and some muscle.

There is no opportunity to get ballot placement for the most part in the next two years for up-start parties.

This article at TownHall by Mike LaChance provides SIX important things we heartily endorse for Trump Republicans to do NOW instead.  We say SIX,the first six, because his seventh offering is unfathomable and a could subvert the other six.  You will understand why when you read it.

7 Things the Republican Party Should Do Right Now

0

0

• – Dennis Prager’s erudite observations
• – So many anomalies indicate the presidency was won by ‘cheating’
• – But, you can’t blame Democratic voters
• – What they’ve been told, and believe, you’d cheat, too!

Reading his opening remarks we were a bit taken aback by his mention of being an  “agnostic” regarding Democrat operatives theft of the 2020 Presidential election.  But he goes on to very convincingly list many reasons which to our way of thinking lead one not to be “agnostic” at all, unless yours shtick is to practice the credulity of Democrats which he does get into.  So we suspect he is not really agnostic either. He does make a good point that Democrats by nature believe or have been conditioned to believe that cheating for the greater good is OK because Trump is so bad and therefore the “results” must be sustained.  We’ll let him explain it better:        V’PAC

The Most Important Question About the 2020 Election 

Would Democrats deem it morally obligatory to cheat on behalf of Joe Biden?

Since the day after the 2020 presidential election, I have said I am agnostic with regard to whether the election was honestly or dishonestly decided.
The primary reasons for my agnosticism are the usual ones:
The anomalies:
– In 132 years, no president has received more votes in his run for reelection and lost. Yet Donald Trump received 10 million more votes in 2020 than in 2016 — and lost.
– Trump won 18 of the 19 counties both Democrats and Republicans regard as the “bellwether” counties that virtually always go with the outcome of presidential elections. Yet he lost.
– He won four bellwether states — Florida, Ohio, Iowa and North Carolina. Yet he lost.
– Republicans held onto all the House seats they were defending and gained another 13 seats. Yet, Trump lost.
Add the following to the anomalies:
– Unprecedented efforts were made in some states to change election laws.
– Mostly Democratic states sent out tens of millions of ballots or applications for absentee ballots to people who never requested them.
– Voting began in some states six weeks before Election Day.
– People have submitted sworn affidavits at great personal cost and with possible perjury charges that they witnessed ballot tampering on election night.

But all these things would matter little if Democrats involved in ballot-counting felt morally compelled to count votes honestly.

So, then, there is one question I have never heard posed that trumps all other considerations: Would moral considerations prevent Democrats from cheating to oust Trump? Or, to put the question in the positive: Would Democrats deem it morally obligatory to cheat on behalf of Joe Biden?

The answer to the first question is no: Moral considerations would not prevent decent Democrats from cheating to prevent Trump’s reelection. The answer to the second question is yes: Decent Democrats would deem it morally obligatory to cheat on behalf of Biden.

For four years, the media and their party, the Democrats, told us every day that Trump is a fascist, a dictator, a racist and a white supremacist; that he was an agent of the Russian government — a real-life Manchurian candidate.

We were also repeatedly told by the lying media (Trump’s accurate description of the mainstream media) that in Charlottesville, Virginia, Trump said there are “very fine” Nazis (see the PragerU video, “The Charlottesville Lie”). Yes, the media told us with a straight face that a man with a Jewish daughter, Jewish son-in-law and Jewish grandchildren said there are fine Nazis. Biden said he decided to run for president because of this lie.

So, then, here is the question: Why would anyone who sincerely believed Trump is a white-supremacist fascist dictator not cheat if he or she could prevent such a person from becoming or remaining president of the United States?

Let me sharpen this question: Isn’t someone who could prevent a fascist, white-supremacist, Nazi-defending dictator morally obligated to cheat if he or she could prevent such a person from becoming president?

I certainly would. If I were in a position to cheat in order to prevent a fascist from becoming president, why would I not cheat? I think of the most relevant example: the Nazis in the 1932 elections, Germany’s last free election until after World War II. Though the Nazi Party did not receive a majority of votes, the Nazis held the most seats in the Reichstag, and the head of the party, Adolf Hitler, was named chancellor of Germany. If I were in a position to have prevented the Nazis from coming to power by cheating in the vote-count, wouldn’t I have been morally obligated to do so — and therefore done so? The answer is obvious.

To repeat, I have never said Biden did not win the election. And even if there was considerable fraud, that doesn’t mean the election result would have been different.

But there are consequences to beliefs. Unless Democrats knew they were lying for four years when they labeled Trump a fascist, racist, Nazi, dictator, etc., were they not duty-bound to cheat on Biden’s behalf?

So, then, when you have circumstantial evidence (not proof), combined with opportunity, desire, motive and, most important, no moral argument against cheating and a strong moral argument for cheating, it isn’t a “lie,” and it isn’t a crackpot conspiracy theory, to wonder about the integrity of America’s 2020 presidential election.

Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist.

0

0

I remembered this clip from a movie, “A Civil Action”. It’s part of my legal background.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=61&v=zuaLlyXv_Hk&feature=youtu.be

I’m what’s known in the vernacular as a “out-house lawyer”. High-school graduate, watched a lot of Judge Judy and once stayed at a Holiday Inn Express. No shingle, but never short of an opinion on all things judicial.

So I imagine myself as Eugene, attorney at law, just retained to defend President Trump. What’s my first move?

What’s the best strategy?

1. Try to have the case declared moot, avoiding a trial altogether? Base the appeal on grounds the Senate cannot try a president after his term ends? Ask for injunction?

2. Insist on a trial, tying up the Senate for weeks, disrupting the start of the new guy’s agenda?

If there is a trial, President Trump’s address to the rally on January 6th would no doubt be entered into evidence. During that speech, he mentioned voter fraud, big tech influence, and rigged elections, mail-in ballot security issues and several other points. Wouldn’t anything mentioned in that speech something that could be used by the defense?

Could State election officials be subpoenaed ? Imagine the ballot security questions one could ask the Postmaster General. I’m dreaming of Dominion’s lawyers playing defense against the President’s defense.

Get the Zuk on the hotseat. (am I dreaming?)

Would Trump himself attend the trial? Would he demand to testify? There has to be some hard e-mail/text message trails that would prove premeditation/coordination to riot, completely divorced of anything Trump.

The Defense and Justice departments’ offers of National Guardsman and FBI to bolster security are documented, as are the refusals by the Capitol police.

The FBI had advance warnings of trouble.How widely was that information disseminated? There has to be a chain showing who saw those reports, and who (intentionally?) ignored or suppressed them.

My meager legal mind cannot understand how democrats think another kangaroo-court show trial (another acquittal?) will play well with the public. Yet they press on.

Considering the pro/con arguments and evidence I’d predict House prosecutor(s) play the bumbling Mr. Berger as Republican’s Perry Mason dissects the impeachment article like a frog in a high-school biology class. Just like the last time.

Of course, I could be totally wrong. Go ahead, disbar me.

Eugene Mattecheck Jr.

0

0

• When Hollywood is so confusing can Washington be far behind?
•  Who do you trust?

Signals of the day

Parting on the left Parting on the right No part to play

Am I blonde, am I brunette; Am I Apple am I Android; Am I AC-AC or AC-DC

Hollywood first:

In order to be similarly confused readers need to ubnderstand that Eliot and Emma are two Hollywood type women who are married (two each other )

ELLIOT PORTER FILES FOR DIVORCE FROM EMMA PORTNER

Portner, 26, a professional dancer and choreographer, publicly supported Page’s coming out, saying she was “so proud.”

“Trans, queer and non-binary people are a gift to this world,” Portner said in an Instagram post from Dec. 1. “I also ask for patience & privacy but that you join me in the fervent support of trans life every single day. Elliot’s existence is a gift in and of itself. Shine on sweet E. Love you so much.”

The first names really got us confused as we were not familiar with either’s work. Confusing but not as mind boggling as the relationship, which sounds like something out of The Onion, but it is not.  Nevertheless ascribe our silliness to our pseudo-site “The Leek”

Women are so fickle

Heard in Divorce Court: Said the woman — “I wanted to be married to a woman not a man” . . .  “its like he rejected my very being by assuming a man’s role, which is why I married her (him) but only pretend not for “real” like when she now SAYS she’s a man.

So now we have a “man” who maybe likes women?  Will wonders never cease!

By the way — Would they appear more normal if they stayed married?

And further by the way Portner masquerades as choreographer — looking at the Portner dance clip (see link) we have seen more elegant martial art routines

WITH “DEMOCRAT PATH TO NUCLEAR OPTION ON FILIBUSTER CLOSED”, SENATE LEADERS PROCEED ON POWER SHARING AGREEMENT

On Monday, Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) both signaled they would not support abolishing the filibuster.

Yeah, sure. If you believe that, I’ve got a nice piece of property in Wuhan, China that I’ll sell to you cheap.

Also, if you have confidence in the word of the Arizona “openly” and the West Virginia “more moderate than thou” senator, by all means, comment on Veritaspac. The ‘progressives’ at the local media who monitor this site will appreciate you.     dlh

0

0

A Third Party ? Good idea?

If it’s not too much trouble, readers, give us a ‘yes’ or ‘no’…our progressive ‘monitors’ are curious!

Is it time for a third party…not to compete with the GOP…but to replace it ?

A lot of talk these days about a third Party…the “Patriot Party” maybe… to offer an alternative to the Republican Party, which many conservatives believe has become little more than an adjunct of the Democratic, Washington “Uni-Party”.

Like myself, many conservatives ask, ‘is Liz Cheney a Republican?’ ‘Or “Mittens” Romney?’ ‘Or Susan Collins?’
and, ‘how about that Mitch’?

The answer most of us would give is, “we don’t think so, but if they are, that sure isn’t ‘my party’, deserving of whatever level of support I give it.”

So, is it time to start a “Patriot Party”?, that better reflects the values and goals of people who currently vote “Republican”?

I don’t know. But, I do know I will no longer vote for someone who says they are Republican, but upon arriving in Washington, walks like a Democrat, talks like Democrat, quacks like a Democrat, and often votes like a Democrat !

Maybe a third party is a bad idea. but, in most instances, I can’t vote for either of today’s “two ‘major’ parties”!
dlh

0

0

• Does banning Trump from office make fraud cases moot?

No wonder Big Journo and Big Brother Comm-Tech have shafted The Gateway Pundit –  fear of actual journalism and truth telling. Joe Hoft at TGP posted a court case table and summary status of 2020 election fraud cases regarding especially the presidential race (excerpted below).  dlh and DK forwarded the links.

By the way a reader DH has suggested to us that one of the reasons the Dems are eager to push a Trump impeachment trial, hoping for conviction and or a separate insurrection finding disqualifying him from office (or a deal that he will not run again) is with regard to these pending court cases. We know that Dems believe they believe they can control the narrative no matter what, even as the effort gels opposition but it is worth it in their reptilian brains also on the theory that perhaps the court cases referred to in this post would be made moot and the fraud cases will not be brought to trail and their illegal activities not exposed.  If Trump can’t serve some of those judges would dismiss the cases on one or another theory just not to have to deal with it or because they like the result of not dealing with it.  If Trump can’t serve, they could invoke the idea of mootness including that exceptions to “mootness” do not apply.

At The Gateway Pundit  (bold our emphasis)

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Accurate List of 2020 Election Fraud Cases Shows 81 Cases Total, 30 Still Active – And NOT ONE SINGLE COURT Has Allowed Evidence to be Argued

The 2020 election will go down as arguably the greatest fraud in world history.  The tremendously popular incumbent candidate, President Trump, was easily winning the race on election night in a landslide and then suddenly multiple states took a break, quit counting, and by the end of the week the election was flipped to Joe Biden.

Then, as the President and his team attempted to address the fraud and alleged abnormalities, the courts refused in any case evidence to be brought before a court of law.

We’ve heard over and over from Big Media that President Trump and his team lost numerous court cases linked to the 2020 election.  But this is not accurate.

Here’s what we identified from our research of an accurate and updated list of court cases:

TRENDING: President Trump Is Drafting ‘Enemies List’ of Dirtbag Republicans to Primary — Is Moving Forward with Plans to Create “Patriot Party” for the People

There are 81 court cases to date based on the 2020 election

In 45 cases President Trump was the plaintiff

In 34 cases President Trump is not the plaintiff

In 2 cases President Trump is the defendant

In 72 cases illegal voting is alleged

In ZERO of the 72 cases where illegal voting is alleged has evidence been allowed to be presented

30 cases remain active

http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm

In the 2020 election:

Thousands of instances of fraud were alleged

Multiple states changed laws to provide for absentee ballots and the remedy is alleged to be not legal

The FBI to date has done nothing to review the alleged fraud

The DOJ denied any alleged material instances of fraud

The Democrats are accused of the alleged election fraud

The state legislatures certified their results with millions of ballots in question

The US Congress accepted these certified results which ignored the thousands of instances of election fraud

VP Mike Pence accepted the results despite state legislatures asking him to examine the results

And now we know the courts didn’t allow a single instance of evidence of fraud to be presented to date.

Americans are livid with the actions that took place in the 2020 election and believe the election was stolen. There are numerous reasons for this.

0

0

On Jan. 6th, the biggest cow in the country broke out of the most prominent barn in America.

The next day an order was placed for a new, massive padlock. Directives were issued. Across all fifty states, 25,000 phones rang. “Get your gear, you’re heading for D.C. to provide security for the inauguration.”

Those 25,000 phone calls spawned a million more, as guardsmen notified employers, arranged child-care (pet-care?) and tied up countless other loose-ends. (a deployment causes ripples)

The troops gather at their armories, load up, and upon arrival in their nation’s Capital, they’re greeted by: “We know half of you guys likely voted for Trump, and we need reassurances that one of you psychos won’t do ‘something’ contrary to orders.”

Really?

So you have 25,000 men and women put on an actual show of force against some imagined threat, just two weeks after there was insufficient force available to repel a real, pre-planned riot.

The party’s over, time for the after-action report. What did we learn? 1. It appears that National guardsmen are not traitors (who knew?). 2. Threats to the inauguration were overblown for political purposes.

Hundreds of these troops have now come down with COVID-19. (not unexpected with typical close-quarters military life and an occasional, cold parking garage) It won’t be “reported” as such but realistically, the Biden inauguration is likely the biggest coronavirus “super-spreader” event since the pandemic’s origin.

So here we are, the cow’s running free in some unknown pasture … but look at the new “security system” the barn-owners are enacting.

Watch out, they’re just getting started.

Eugene Mattecheck Jr.

0

0

• In life, unlike chess the game continues after checkmate – Isaac Asimov
• Chess holds its master in its own bonds, shackling the mind and brain so that the inner freedom of the very strongest must suffer – Albert Einstein
• Chess devotees are really full of themselves – V’PAC

Maybe he spent too much time in the Soviet Union. As the big “expert”on “socialism, Garry Kasparov seems not to see the dishonesty in labeling the clear socialist/communist impulses and drivers of today’s Democratic Party as “moderate”.

In his Wall Street Journal op-ed Friday, Kasparov says that, a) “radicals” have ‘taken over the GOP (?!)’ and that apparently “tried’ to take over the Democratic Party but, b) “Joe Biden defeated them at the ballot box”!!!!

Oh, and “Mr. Trump lost and fairly so. There was no widespread election fraud, or it would have been presented in court.”

Kasparov is either very cynical or he is …daft?           dlh

————————————————————————-

“There is no time for feeble “whataboutism.” Endorsing Trumpist lies and violence in the name of fighting leftist lies and violence is a road to ruin. The left has its share of radicals, but Joe Biden defeated them at the ballot box. They didn’t take over the Democratic Party, as they did the GOP. And you aren’t going to lecture me about the dangers of socialism when I’ve spent my life warning of its failures and terrors.” (Kasparov)

WSJ:

The GOP Hit Rock Bottom. Can Conservatives Recover? 

If reasonable Republicans want to hold off the far left, they will have to stop the rise of the far right.

By Garry Kasparov

“Accepting reality is the most important step back from the brink. Mr. Trump lost, and fairly so. There was no widespread election fraud, or it would have been presented in court. It is anything but patriotic to attack the integrity of U.S. elections and democracy with rumors, anecdotes and pseudostatistics.

“Over the chessboard, I’m a famously sore loser. But I learned that if you don’t accept that you lost, and understand why, you’ll keep on losing.
Trumpism came to Washington promising to burn everything down, and it came close. There is now a chance to build something new and better: a political center

*Evan Esar

0

0