We are the drain the swamp people

• Texas has stood up.  God bless Texas
• Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina and South Dakota have stood up with Texas to be counted. 
• Being counted is what it is about, sufficient unconstitutional behavior and lawlessness in the presidential election in another state disenfranchises other states
• Iowa needs to stand up and be counted and insure Iowa’s votes mean something. Republican leadership here can make it happen

The article below this call to action explains the situation well.

We know that Iowa’s Attorney General will never support the Texas initiated effort to insure that a fair election has occurred nationwide. He is a Democrat hack who has joined many a liberal initiative with no mandate from the people of Iowa on matters not remotely connected to any guidance from the electoral process. His is the power of will covered by a PR department operating in the news rooms of the partisan press dominating this state.

On matters where the people have readily available alternative sources of news and debate is common, as in legislative elections just concluded where sentiment is clearly in support of Republican initiative — where President Trump received and receives grand support,  where Republicans increased their numbers in the legislature and flipped its congressional delegation largely on sentiments associated with President Trump, as in his coattails, WHY ON GOD’S GREEN EARTH WOULD REPUBLICANS BE IN ANYWAY RETICENT TO DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO HAVE IOWA JOIN WITH OTHER STATES IN SUPPORT OF ELECTION INTEGRITY AND THE CONSTITUTION!

An immediate special session of the legislature to pass a resolution in support of the Texas effort is called for. The reasons and obligations are manifest and sufficient reason is well stated in the article below. Anything else is half-measure. Do the powers that be intend to wait for AG Miller to join some counter effort “on behalf of Iowa”?

We know the Iowa legislature tried to hem in UNreflective political actions by the AG only to have the effort stymied by the Governor. But now the Governor with the legislative leadership need to do the right thing together and defend the votes of Iowans.  It has to be forthright, dramatic, avoiding half-measures. Saying there is no time only raises the issue why in the hell were our leaders not on this the first week after the election?  A press release from the RPI is hardly worthy given the stakes. Whatever it takes to have official Iowa sign on to the Texas case.

This link takes you to the Texas filing    STATE OF TEXAS v COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA   (now with many states signed on with Texas as plaintiffs)

Contact your legislator and these leaders – phone, email in person.

Find your state legislator:

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/contacts

Iowa Speaker of the House Pat Grassley
pat.grassley@legis.iowa.gov

Senate Majority Leader Jack Witver
jack.whitver@legis.iowa.gov

Governor Kim Reynolds
https://governor.iowa.gov/contact

Possible short message:

I urge you to protect my constitutional voting rights by joining the U.S. Supreme Court suit with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton against defendant states that violated the U.S. Constitution during the 2020 presidential election.

The actions of these states, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, have violated the election requirements of the Constitution.

Some urge contacting the Iowa Attorney General – we find no purpose but this portal provides a link.

The Texas Lawsuit Is On The Docket – The Supreme Court Will Determine The Fate Of The 2020 Election 

by Michael Snyder with permission

Very few of the lawsuits that Trump’s legal team has filed since Election Day have really worried the left, but when Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit directly with the Supreme Court on Monday night they immediately began freaking out. The reason why they are so alarmed is because they understand that this suit has the potential to flip the election. The suit alleges that the states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin conducted their elections in ways that violated the U.S. Constitution, and if the Supreme Court agrees that would almost certainly mean that the Supreme Court would force the state legislatures of those states “to appoint a new set of presidential electors in a manner that does not violate the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment”.

At this hour, we are being told that Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina and South Dakota have all joined the suit that Paxton has filed. The U.S. Constitution gives the Supreme Court original jurisdiction over controversies between states, and so this is why this case did not need to be filed in a lower court first. But the Supreme Court is not obligated to hear any particular case, and many on the left initially thought that the Court would never actually agree to hear it.

Well, it was put on the docket just 12 hours after it was filed, and so it will be heard.

And on Tuesday evening, the Supreme Court ordered the defending states to file their answers by Thursday at 3 PM eastern time.

So this is really happening.

The Supreme Court will determine the fate of the 2020 election after all.

In his complaint, Paxton argued that voters in his state were affected by the unconstitutional voting procedures in the other states because in “the shared enterprise of the entire nation electing the president and vice president, equal protection violations in one state can and do adversely affect and diminish the weight of votes cast in states that lawfully abide by the election structure set forth in the Constitution.”

And he is absolutely correct.  When one or more states violates the U.S. Constitution during a presidential election, that harms everyone that voted, because voters in every state are involved in electing the president.

According to the Electors Clause, state legislatures have the authority to establish how presidential electors will be chosen in their particular states, but Paxton alleges that government officials in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin made up their own rules and did not follow the election laws that had been passed by their own state legislatures…

“Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a justification, government officials in the defendant states of Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, usurped their legislatures’ authority and unconstitutionally revised their state’s election statutes,” Paxton wrote in his filing.

“To safeguard public legitimacy at this unprecedented moment and restore public trust in the presidential election, this Court should extend the December 14, 2020 deadline for Defendant States’ certification of presidential electors to allow these investigations to be completed,” he wrote. “Should one of the two leading candidates receive an absolute majority of the presidential electors’ votes to be cast on December 14, this would finalize the selection of our President. The only date that is mandated under the Constitution, however, is January 20, 2021.”

Unlike the allegations of election fraud that are floating around out there, these allegations are very easy to prove.

The following is a brief summary of some of the issues in each of the four states that comes from the Heritage Foundation…

• Pennsylvania: The complaint accuses Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar of, among other things, “without legislative approval, unilaterally abrogating” Pennsylvania statutes that require “signature verification for absentee or mail-in ballots.” These changes were “not ratified” by the Pennsylvania legislature.
• Georgia: Similarly, the complaint describes how Georgia’s Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, also “without legislative approval, unilaterally abrogated Georgia’s statute governing the signature verification process for absentee ballots.”
• Michigan: The complaint states that Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson “abrogated Michigan election statutes related to absentee ballot applications and signature verification.”
• Wisconsin: Lastly, the Wisconsin’s elections commission made similar changes in state laws without the permission of the legislature that “weakened, or did away with, established security procedures put in place by the Wisconsin legislature to ensure absentee ballot integrity.”

For these constitutional violations alone, the election results in all four states should be thrown out.

In addition, in his complaint Paxton alleges that voters in various parts of these states were treated very differently…

Second, the complaint describes how voters in different parts of these states were treated differently. For example, election officials in Philadelphia and Allegheny Counties in Pennsylvania set up a “cure process” for voters in those jurisdictions whose absentee ballots did not comply with state legal requirements. Those noncompliant ballots should have been rejected because state law does not allow such a procedure.

As a result of this behavior and similar behavior in other states, there was “more favorable treatment allotted to votes” in areas “administered by local government under Democrat control.”

Once again, this should be a slam dunk to prove based on the evidence that has already been publicly presented.

And without a doubt, differential treatment violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

On top of that, in Bush v. Gore the Supreme Court clearly prohibited “the use of differential standards in the treatment and tabulation of ballots within a state.”.

Since differential standards in the treatment of ballots occurred in all four states, that should mean that the election results in all four states should be thrown out.

Lastly, Paxton alleges that there were “voting irregularities” in each of the four states, and those allegations are going to be more difficult to prove.

But Paxton doesn’t need to prove them, because the violations of the Electors Clause and the violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment should both be slam dunks.

Assuming that is the case, what is the appropriate remedy?

Paxton is asking that the state legislatures of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin be forced “to appoint a new set of presidential electors in a manner that does not violate the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment, or to appoint no presidential electors at all.”

In each of those states, those legislatures could opt to hold new elections or alternatively they could decide to choose new slates of electors themselves.

And since all four of those state legislatures are controlled by Republicans, that would seem to favor President Trump.

Needless to say, if the current election results in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are overturned, the left will have a massive temper tantrum.  Cities all over the nation would burn and we would see endless civil unrest for the foreseeable future.

So that may make some members of the Court hesitant to overturn the current election results no matter what the Constitution actually says.

But if there are at least five justices that are willing to follow the Constitution no matter what the consequences are, we may soon see the most shocking decision in the entire history of the U.S. Supreme Court.

0

0

We hope we are not too extravagant with our choice of illustrations but the case seems so clear.  Thanks to SF for the timely forward.

Breitbart article by Kris Kobach

 Texas Case Challenges Election Directly at Supreme Court   

On Monday, just before midnight, the State of Texas filed a lawsuit that is far more important than all of the others surrounding the presidential election of November 3rd.

Texas brought a suit against four states that did something they cannot do: they violated the U.S. Constitution in their conduct of the presidential election. And this violation occurred regardless of the amount of election fraud that may have resulted. The four defendant states are Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Texas filed the suit directly in the Supreme Court. Article III of the Constitution lists a small number of categories of cases in which the Supreme Court has “original jurisdiction.” One of those categories concerns “Controversies between two or more states.” Texas’s suit is exactly that. The Supreme Court has opined in the past that it may decline to accept such cases, at its discretion. But it is incumbent upon the high court to take this case, especially when it presents a such a cut-and-dried question of constitutional law, and when it could indirectly decide who is sworn in as President on January 20, 2021.

The Texas suit is clear, and it presents a compelling case. The four offending states each violated the U.S. Constitution in two ways.

First, they violated the Electors Clause of Article II of the Constitution when executive or judicial officials in the states changed the rules of the election without going through the state legislatures. The Electors Clause requires that each State “shall appoint” its presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”

In the early years of the Republic, most state legislatures appointed their presidential electors directly, without holding a popular election for President. That would change during the early decades of the nineteenth century. But the constitutional principle remained the same. Regardless of whether a state appoints its electors by a vote in the legislature or by a vote of the people, it is the state legislature — and only the state legislature — that sets the rules.

Thus, when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court extended by three days the deadline for receiving mail-in ballots, contrary to the law passed by the state legislature, the state court changed the rules in violation of the Electors Clause. Similarly, when Georgia’s Secretary of State responded to a lawsuit by entering into a Compromise Settlement Agreement and Release (i.e. a consent decree) with the Democratic Party of Georgia, and modified the signature verification requirements spelled out by Georgia law, that changing of the rules violated the Electors Clause.

The second constitutional violation occurred when individual counties in each of the four states changed the way that they would receive, evaluate, or treat the ballots. Twenty years ago, in the landmark case of Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court held that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when one Florida county treated ballots one way, and another Florida county treated ballots a different way. Voters had the constitutional right to have their ballots treated equally from county to county.

So when election officials in Wayne County, Michigan, ignored the requirements of Michigan law and denied poll watchers access to vote counting, while other counties in Michigan followed the law, that violated the Equal Protection Clause. Similarly, in Wisconsin, when the Administrator of the City of Milwaukee Elections Commission ignored the requirements of Wisconsin law and directed election workers to write in the addresses of witnesses on the envelopes containing mail-in ballots, while ballots without witness addresses were deemed invalid elsewhere, that resulted in the unequal treatment of ballots in the state.

Importantly, the Texas lawsuit presents a pure question of law. It is not dependent upon disputed facts. Although these unconstitutional changes to the election rules could have facilitated voter fraud, the State of Texas doesn’t need to prove a single case of fraud to win. It is enough that the four states violated the Constitution.

The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court to remand the appointment of electors in the four states back to the state legislatures. As the Supreme Court said in 1892 in the case of McPherson v. Blacker, “Whatever provisions may be made by statute, or by the state constitution, to choose electors by the people, there is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time…”.

If Texas prevails, the four state legislatures could follow any number of courses in appointing their presidential electors. They could assess the election results and try to exclude those ballots that were counted in violation of state law in order to determine a winner, or they could divide their Electoral College votes between the two candidates, or they could follow a different path. But they have to follow the Constitution in whatever they do.

In the rest of country, the states followed the constitutional rules in appointing presidential electors. The offending states cannot be allowed to violate those same rules. It’s not just a matter of constitutional law. It’s a matter of basic fairness.

Kris W. Kobach is an expert in immigration law and election fraud. He served as Kansas Secretary of State during 2011-2019. He was a professor of constitutional law and immigration law during 1996-2011 at the University of Missouri-KC.

0

0

• 2020 Election “Implausibility”
• The insanity of Wuhan accounting

This is a two -vid morning.  These presentations are succinct and won’t tax your early morning sleepiness, but they will wake you up.

First up forwarded by dlh, presentation by professional pollster appearing on Mark Levin show. then the COVID death number fraud via HP:

Next, Bill Wittle show presentation on COVID death number fraud.  Thanks to HP:

0

0

These aren’t vestments, they’re a cloak. Love the Navajo weave Rev.

Watched the debate between GOP Senator Kelly Loeffler and her opponent for her Senate seat, Reverend Raphael Warnock.I don’t think the debate was really very close. Though I was initially skeptical when Governor Kemp appointed her, wondering if her wealth and political connections were the governor’s overriding consideration, Senator Loeffler was quite impressive…Rev. Warnock was not…a leftist right down the line.

One thing that leapt out at me, however: Warnock clearly is all in on the socialist/communist agenda that has taken over the Democratic Party. In responding to Senator Loeffler’s citing his statements which make his radical leftist views clear, Warnock repeatedly cited the scripture…specifially “Matthew 25″…as his personal guidance which drives his political views:

Matthew 25:35-40; “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,[a] you did it to me.”

“31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

Very interesting to me is Rev. Warnock’s attitudes as to how his religious beliefs inform his agenda and will guide his actions as a US Senator…and presumably thereby ‘inflicting his religious beliefs upon his constituents and “unbelievers” among the American people’.

Especially interesting when one considers the “Cuomo doctrine”*, originated by the late N.Y. governor Mario Cuomo, and adopted by every “devout Catholic Democrat officeholder”, including Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, etc.

Each of them loudly announces their ‘religious commitment and devotion as Catholics”, which, of course, includes their “personal” abhorrence for abortion; however, they also honor their even stronger aversion, as “representative of all Americans” to” imposing their religious beliefs upon their constituents”. As Governor Cuomo said: “I felt I could not impose (my) religious beliefs on nonbelievers in clear violation of the constitutional principles he had sworn to uphold.”

That last part obviously doesn’t bother the Reverend Warnock, whom I don’t recall being asked about his feelings or religious beliefs about abortion, but as a Democrat seeking national office he could only be in favor of “choice”.

But then, the killing of babies isn’t covered in Matthew 25.                     dlh

**************************************************
*Cuomo’s 1984 Notre Dame speech was “the single most influential statement about abortion by any Catholic figure since Roe v. Wade,”

“With a reputation as a serious Catholic, Cuomo’s justification for abortion rights effectively ended the debate about abortion in the Democratic Party. His speech implied that no thinking Catholic concerned about the common good would object to unrestricted legal access to abortion.”

It was also also suggested that Cuomo’s argument “empowered abortion-rights advocates to silence what remained of Catholic dissent in the Democratic Party. Bob Casey could be prohibited from speaking to the 1992 Democratic convention in large part because Cuomo had provided the ‘official’ Catholic Democratic pro-abortion position.”

Cuomo defended his tolerance for legal abortion, in part, by arguing that Roe v. Wade secured a new consensus, and, consequently, he felt could not impose his religious beliefs on nonbelievers in clear violation of the constitutional principles he had sworn to uphold.

0

0

In sum, the COVID virus is essentially like most other flu viruses

• Vaccine no medical panacea
• If you are symptomatic sequester yourself and let the world go on

The media is making much of the salvation to be provided by COVID 19 flu vaccines.

In our extrapolation from the following memo, there may be salvation but not a whole lot more than the placebo effect.  On the one hand, we grudgingly nod to anything that safely gets us around shutdowns and a masked society as long as it is voluntary ethical and safe.

Received from a physician friend of ours.  Due your own medical due diligence.

The following is a link to a Cochrane report which examined the scientific literature concerning flu vaccines. Cochrane is a highly respected research source which prides itself and is regarded as independent and free from commercial bias.

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001269.pub6/epdf/abstract

The finding of this study was that influenza is probably reduced from 2.3% in healthy adults to .9 with vaccination. 71 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent 1 case of influenza. However there does not appear to be any change in hospitalizations and sick days from work. Studies are not available to assess safety.
On the whole not real impressive results.

And there is this from the Epoch Times

Study Finds Asymptomatic Spread Not a Significant Source of the CCP Virus Pandemic
By Meiling Lee

The most recent study from China on the prevalence of infection after a lockdown found no transmission of the CCP virus among people who were in close contact with asymptomatic patients, contradicting the current narrative that asymptomatic transmission plays a major role in the pandemic.

An asymptomatic carrier is someone who has not displayed symptoms after being infected, but may spread the virus to others. This is different from someone who is presymptomatic, meaning the person doesn’t feel or look sick, but eventually shows symptoms later, and does transmit the virus during that presymptomatic phase.

The study, published in Nature, identified 300 asymptomatic positive cases through a massive screening program of more than nine million Chinese citizens post-lockdown in Wuhan—where the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus originated—from May 4 to June 1, using PCR tests.

Samples of all the asymptomatic cases were also cultured in the lab and “no viable virus” was found, meaning it cannot transmit a virus. The authors also found that 190 of the 300 asymptomatic samples tested positive for antibodies (IgG and/or IgM), indicating a possible recent COVID-19 infection or the PCR test resulted in a false positive.

The scientists identified and followed 1,174 close contacts of the asymptomatic cases and found that none of the contacts tested positive for COVID-19. They noted, “Compared with symptomatic patients, asymptomatic infected persons generally have low quantity of viral loads and a short duration of viral shedding, which decrease the transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2.”

“This study confirms what physicians have known and non-scientists have suspected for millennia: namely, that asymptomatic transmission has never been the primary cause of outbreaks,” Dr. Simone Gold, MD, and founder of America’s Frontline Doctors told The Epoch Times in an email.

Prior to the CCP virus pandemic, guidance for treatment and diagnosis of a respiratory viral outbreak—including the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak and the 2012 Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) outbreak—predominantly focused on symptomatic cases to stop the transmission of the disease.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America’s most updated guidance on diagnosing, treating, and managing outbreaks during flu season recommends only people with symptoms get tested for influenza.

Sweden, which has not resorted to lockdowns, universal testing of its citizens, or mandated mask-wearing since the pandemic began, doesn’t believe that asymptomatic spread is common. “Based on the experience of COVID-19 and other similar diseases, the assessment is that the spread of infection from people without symptoms accounts for a small proportion,” according to the Swedish Public Health Agency.

To avoid infection, Swedes are encouraged to not touch their face, physically distance in public places, practice hand hygiene, sneeze or cough into the arm fold, and stay home when feeling sick.

Other Studies

There is evidence that indicates asymptomatic spread is not as prevalent as earlier studies claimed it to be, as high as 81 percent, and that the risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients is low.

In a systematic review and meta-analysis that included 79 studies, scientists found that asymptomatic carriers “demonstrated faster viral clearance” that suggests a “shorter infectious period.”

In a different meta-analysis study published online on October 9, researchers found that their “estimates of the prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases and asymptomatic transmission rates are lower than many highly publicized studies.”

The overall rate of asymptomatic cases was 17 percent, and asymptomatic carriers were 42 percent less likely to spread the CCP virus compared to symptomatic individuals.

The study involved 21,708 people from 13 studies that followed patients for “at least 7 days to distinguish asymptomatic cases from pre-symptomatic cases.”

Several highly publicized studies like the Diamond Princess cruise ship, the Iceland study, and the homeless shelter in Boston, cited by many governments and public health officials to justify some of their policies were excluded from this study for their lack of follow-up on the patients to determine if they were truly asymptomatic or presymptomatic.

The first report to suggest asymptomatic spread outside China was also excluded. The report made national headlines before it was found to be flawed. The authors relied only on the accounts of the four German patients without speaking to the “asymptomatic” businesswoman from Shanghai, who had developed symptoms while in Germany.

The authors addressed the mistake by submitting a supplementary appendix (pdf) attached to the bottom of the paper, instead of making a correction to the paper itself.

Testing of Healthy People

Several countries are universally testing and masking healthy people as an effort to mitigate asymptomatic spread, despite inconclusive evidence to support asymptomatic infections being a driver of the pandemic.

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in its updated guidance for why cloth masks should be worn in the community claim there is a 50 percent transmission rate of asymptomatic people, without differentiating between asymptomatic and presymptomatic individuals.

“Masks are primarily intended to reduce the emission of virus-laden droplets (“source control”), which is especially relevant for asymptomatic or presymptomatic infected wearers … who are estimated to account for more than 50 [percent] of transmissions.”

Universities across the United States, Canada, and the UK have propped up makeshift testing sites to test students and staff, while Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser has implemented an asymptomatic testing protocol for students and staff participating in the state’s public schools in-person learning program.

“We are proud of the very robust testing system we have built in [the District of Columbia], and now we can use that infrastructure to support this program,” Bowser said in a press release on Dec. 2.

Students whose parent or guardian have signed a consent form will be able to receive a “PCR nasal-swab test” about every 10 days at school, while staff is offered a mailed testing kit once a week, all at no cost.

0

0

Thanks to TN for obtaining these

So we donned our MAGA apparel  and      fa-la-la-la-la we were off to Des Moines to meet the “Trump Train”  Election Integrity bus tour sponsored by Women for America First, announced in a previous post herein.

A typical chilly December day, cloud cover most of the way but thankfully no snow. On the way we listened to podcasts from Charlie Kirk who hosted Rudy Giullani and also recent podcasts from Dan Bongino and Mark Levin. That got us up to speed on the latest developments in “stop the steal”, especially as it pertains to Georgia.

Thanks to Donald Trump at Dubuque rally 5 weeks ago

Charlie Kirk is a very effective host/ interviewer  and Giuliani  provided engaging imagery of fraud mechanisms in several of the states.  He had a lot to say about Georgia, the clarity of evidence of lawlessness (including suitcases with ballots we have all seen on tape being drug in for counting) and the official lawlessness in Pennsylvania all sufficient to effect a fraudulent election and require overturning results in those states and we hope the fraudulent election of Biden.

Every fair-minded citizen should be outraged about what has gone on and patriots need to hammer on Republican leadership everywhere including Iowa to support the effort to stop the steal.  Giuliani called for letters to Republican leadership everywhere to demand that they demand fairness. Giuliani emphasized that the election is constitutionally largely in the hands of Republican state legislatures in these states to stop the steal. He decried the inaction of sum and praised the actions of others poised to protect the republic.

The bus and other support vehicles arrived  on time. The speakers included organizers of the November stop the steal march on Washington DC and of the upcoming December 12 follow-up demonstration.   Mike Lindel the Minnesota pillow entrepreneur who generously helps sponsor the tour gave a rousing pep talk as did others. But the others were not as reticent as Giuliani in talking about Republican “leadership” in Georgia. Giulini was respectful.  While it was made absolutely clear today that Republicans must elect Loeffler and Purdue in the special Senate election there but Governor Kemp needs a fire lit under his ass and RINO SOS (POS fits as well) Raffensperger needs to be gone around.

Riveting times, trying times, time for all good citizens to come to insist on a fair election outcome this past election and cleanse the system of mechanisms allowing a playground for fraud.

Pictures below are from the event.  Attendance was well into the hundreds. Our vehicle by chance was second in line after the official entourage vehicles for the trip to the capitol.  Great inspiring event.

And a PS to Newt Gingrich:

You are a Georgia boy Newt. You had time to castigate lawyers over a little unofficial excess in rhetoric at a rally of citizens in support of Trump earlier in the week, people who are trying to stop the steal there. How much have you personally done to light a fire under Kemp and Raffensperger and rally every legislator there to do what needs to be done. If you have not tried to talk to everyone personally, using your estimable persuasive powers  to explain their powers, what needs to be addressed and redressed , then we don’t need your tweets or appeals for money and subscriptions.

Bus arrives on time

This support vehicle sported a locomotive horn that would shake your chassis

crowd huddled together, refusing social distancing

My Pillow entrepreneur put no one to sleep at this event

By chance we were early in line with the caravan

0

0

• Election integrity champions Lin Wood and Sidney Powell were  not primarily advocating not voting in the Georgia election at a recent rally there
  
• Republican bigwigs in Georgia and elsewhere need to be called to task
• Where is the Georgia GOP bigwigs’ teamsmanship, their leadership!?

Much pearl clutching by elements of conservative media and certain conservative personages (some of them genuine) has gone on regarding accusations that election integrity champions Lin Wood and Sidney Powell  at a “stop the steal” rally in Georgia earlier this week told attendees ~~ don’t vote in the Senate special election ~~.  The message, in context was an admonition to the “Republican” Governor to call a special session of the legislature, which he has refused to do, to at least enable the legislature’s constitutional prerogative of investigating and correcting the award of  Georgia’s delegates to the electoral college. The presidential vote in Georgia was fraught with criminal fraud and unfairness of the highest order.  It is OK to get a little carried away at a rally decrying it and certain pathetic Republicans.

Roll tape and judge for yourself in context . . .  whether the overheated rhetoric was understandable. There are two one minute clips in case one does not load well.  By the way where were  candidates /Republican Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler?

Hearing these remarks (more likely hearing about them) Texas Senator Ted Cruz referred to Lin Wood as a clown. Well Ted as someone who supported you vociferously in the Iowa caucuses and afterwords  right up to the GOP convention, I am thinking it rather chickenshit of you to in essence castigate the rally attendees who cheered the rhetoric, as that is all it was.  The attendees are people who Cruz should have no doubt regarding them knowing how to vote and who to vote for. They were jeering the Georgia governor and the Republican establishment and the system.

Senator if  you find it necessary to rebuke an excess how about finding words a little more measured than “clown” to sum up someone who is fighting the fight. And by the way where is your substantial legal talent in service to this cause, filling suit, writing briefs  —  nothing prevents it.  Twitter comments are rather light duty.

Senator Cruz, given the evidence Powell and Wood have collected, from people —  whistleblowers and various analysts –who came forward to them early on, not to Trump’s lawyers, because of their reputations for successfully helping underdogs when establishment nambypambyists prefer to capitulate  — is there nothing about Powell’s and Wood’s efforts for you to applaud rather than sum them up as “clowns.” ?

The evidence they have championed is chilling and the pathetic foot-dragging and half-measures by Governor Kemp et all needed to be admonished.  The establishment needs to be told to join the pro-America team, that there is no presumptive support for the establishment team.

Any excess in rhetoric in that regard pales before what is at stake, which is beyond the Senate which is iffy with Republicans, however important the Senate is. All the two candidate/ Senators needed to do was to be there and call for integrity of the vote, or be enthusiastic elsewhere for the effort. Have they not figured out that that is a large part of what is motivating the base right now? That is sound politics is it not Senator Cruz?  How pathetically clownish is not doing so?

And then there was “conservative?” Ann Coulter who got in on the act to castigate Powell and Wood for supposedly risking the Senate or something,  and to wail against circular firing squads. This is the deep conservative strategist never of excessive rhetoric who has called President Trump a “moron,” “retard” and “lout,” who was incapable of “pretending to be” a “decent, compassionate human being” and who threatened to not vote for him in 2020., and who is even said to have uttered after what was essentially a binary choice for President, in obtuse  disregard for what Democrats are capable of,  (and the weakness of Senate Republicans) ‘I’m glad he lost’ ‘a second term of Trump would have killed us’

Some conservatives that reported the comments of these two also referred to Wood’s history of voting Democrat and giving money to Democrats, without mentioning his more recent history.  Without current information such reports become hatchet jobs, as pointed out by Woods in response. He reports that he  has given far more to Republicans recently and supported President Trump.  How reliable are “conservatives” that report one aspect and not the other? We also should mention that Republicans and conservatism take converts. Trump is one.  Ronald Reagan was one.

Here are some excerpted responses to Cruz at Townhall to the article which highlighted Cruz’s clown comment:

Just Another American

If you are talking about Lin Wood, you are incorrect. His original comment was inartfully stated at best, but he later expanded on what he was trying to say. GA citizens must force their Gov. and S of S to clean up the voting fiasco so they can be sure of a fair and clean election in Jan. He said don’t vote in a fraudulent election using the same fraudulent voting process. Ted ,my Senator, should have done a bit more homework on the subject before he spouted off. Newt Gingrich as well.

queenOFhearts :

. . . I’m from Texas and I’m a huge supporter of Senator Cruz, but he does a terrible disservice to Mr. Wood and Sidney Powell by calling them clowns. I believe they are definite supporters of President Trump and true Patriots who want FAIR elections. They are right to call Perdue and Loeffler out and demand that they call for “cleaned up” systems before another election is held in Georgia!

Winston Mitchell :

It seems that anyone who is actually fighting for us is automatically deemed a “clown”.

Just Another American :

These two have been working tirelessly to uncover this fraud and get it stopped and Repubs. throw them under the bus. All for cheap political points. If the R’s in Washington DC actually gave a rip about election integrity, they would have given Kemp and Raffensperger a piece of their minds and called them to heel.

SethWatt :

. . . There is no way that Ms. Powell wants a Democrat Senate.

Just Another American :

Their statements are being taken out of context which is unfortunate. They both have been working desperately to get the fraud out in the open and stopped. I don’t know what is possessing the R’s to attack them. Newt, Ted, and John Cornyn should slow their roll.

Just Another American :

How many times do we have to go over this. He wasn’t telling people not to vote at all, but to get the d@mn election system cleaned up before the vote in January to insure a fair election. The word is integrity. People on both sides of the political fence should want and expect it in our elections. If we can’t trust them; we are done as a Republic.

Tay Gee :

. . .  Lin Wood is focusing on INTEGRITY. Only when that is restored can we talk about politics and politicians. Georgia’s Governor and Secretary of State are acting exactly like Stacey Abrams would be acting right now if she was in their position. NO DIFFERENCE. We want an election rooted in integrity and we want elected officials to act with integrity. That is the heart. The political affiliation whether Democrat or Republican is just the outer layer.

Secondly, I think Ted Cruz went over the line calling Lin Wood a “clown”. That was an unnecessary attack and slander on someone doing his best to uncover massive fraud in the state of Georgia. Lin Wood deserves more respect than to be called a clown by a sitting Senator!

Just Another American:

He spoke a little artlessly, but explained what he meant. He wants Geogians to insist this election fraud gets cleaned up so they can be assured of a fair election in January.

Just Another American:

He isn’t now or ever was part of the campaign. As a matter of fact, President Trump in his past was a Dem and both donated to and voted for Dem politicians.
−

CC :

I believe what Wood is saying is, Loffler and Perdue have a responsibility to get their SOS and Legislators to clean up the runoff election. For example, I don’t see anyone in GA pursuing potential voter fraud against Abrams, who claims to already have over 700,000 mail in ballots for the upcoming runoff. All Dems are trying to do is divide us further. Could Wood have said it better, yes. But at this point, we all have to keep a skeptical eye open. Georgians should demand that the runoff be clean.

Just Another American

Just stop it. They were not saying don’t vote in Jan. They were saying that Georgia should clean this fraud up so they can HAVE a fair and free election.

0

0

IF YOU DIDN’T VOTE FOR ‘JOE’ YOU AIN’T A CATHOLIC!

Having learned a lesson from his absurd comment that “if you don’t vote for me, you ain’t Black”, the Sleepy One probably wouldn’t put it this way…nor would the wily Mario Bergoglio of Argentina (Pope Francis). Clearly though, the Pope is’ all in’, in favor of the ‘Great Reset’…a short explanation of what that is we’ve referred to in a previous Veritaspac piece: It amounts to the United States of America surrendering its sovereignty and turning its resources (its wealth, its democratic constitutional freedoms, and economic system) over to the leadership of the United Nations.

The article below (Breitbart) reports on Pope Francis’s position on all this; no surprise…Francis is a Marxist and an enemy of capitalism and the U.S.; and certainly no fan of President Trump or anyone who may have voted for him.

The second article ( link provides the full article) notes that Biden’s “Climate Change envoy nominee, John Kerry, guarantees that with the Sleepy One, the US will buy in completely to the globalist’s “Great Reset”!

So there you have it, the “THREE EVIL* STOOGES”, all on the same page: “President” Biden, Pope Francis, the United Nations!        dlh

(*”Evil” aptly describes, even if their (assume ‘well-intentioned’) motives derive out of abject ignorance, the effect of their desires on the world and its people IS evil.)

Pope Francis Adopts Joe Biden’s Slogan ‘Build Back Better’     (excerpt)

ROME — Pope Francis has chosen Joe Biden’s slogan “build back better” to describe his vision for the great reset after the coronavirus pandemic, saying he finds the expression “quite striking.”

“The theme of this year’s celebration is ‘Building Back Better: Toward a Disability-inclusive, Accessible and Sustainable post-COVID-19 World,” the pope wrote in his message… for the International Day of Persons with Disabilities, while adding, “I find the expression ‘building back better’ quite striking.”    . . .

“God asks us to dare to create something new,” he declared. “We cannot return to the false securities of the political and economic systems we had before the crisis. We need economies that give to all access to the fruits of creation, to the basic needs of life: to land, lodging and labor.”

“We need to slow down, take stock and design better ways of living together on this earth,” he proposed.

The WEF at Davos welcomed what it sees as the pontiff’s endorsement of its “Great Reset” program, highlighting the similarities between their visions.

In an article titled “Here’s the pope’s prescription for resetting the global economy in response to COVID-19,” the WEF declared that Francis had “put his stamp on efforts to shape what’s been termed a Great Reset of the global economy in response to the devastation of COVID-19.”

“Pope Francis has issued a scathing indictment of neoliberalism,” the WEF notes, “a philosophy espousing austerity, privatization, deregulation, unbridled markets, and relatively weak labour laws.”

Moreover, the pope “blames the ‘dogma’ of neoliberal economics for making us more vulnerable to COVID-19,” it states, while calling for “greater multilateral cooperation and a focus on human dignity.”

“Neoliberalism’s free-market orthodoxy has been blamed for making health care systems and livelihoods especially vulnerable to the pandemic, and has drawn a clearer line under the need for active government intervention,” the article asserts.

Via  StoppingSocialism.com

JOHN KERRY: “With Joe Biden, the ‘Great Reset’ Will Happen”   (excerpt)

Kerry makes it clear that Biden himself supports the Great Reset and that under a Biden administration, the reset “will happen with greater speed and with greater intensity than a lot of people might imagine.”

Excerpts: “Kerry then talks about the Paris Climate Agreement briefly and discussions he had with signatories after the agreement was made. He then says this:

“The best that we’ve [the signatories] done [by signing the Paris Agreement] is send a message to the marketplace that 190 countries plus are all going to move in the same direction to try to deal with the climate crisis. And that means that people who allocate capital have an opportunity to look at the largest market the world has ever had—196 countries all doing the same thing, all trying to move to change their energy policy and deal with the climate crisis. And that’s the biggest market the world has ever known, folks. …
“And the private sector now is beginning to really see this. Borge, yours was the stage where the letter from Larry Fink of Black Rock came out, and it put squarely in front of a lot of these CEOs the issue of stakeholder versus shareholder—which is really at the bottom of what I was talking about, about the dysfunctionality of government and the reaction of citizens. It’s shareholder versus stakeholder. And the issue is whether or not we’re going to move fast enough to provide for what people need at this moment. I think the greatest opportunity we have to do that is in dealing with the climate crisis.    . . .

“Now, all the effects we’re seeing today of glaciers melting and fires raging and floods inundating and so forth … so any of you involved in risk analysis know exactly where we’re heading here. And, therefore, we have to move faster. That’s what has to happen. And the entities that can move the fastest, I believe, is the private sector.

“ESG [environment, social, and governance standards] is now in every discussion in every board room. Many, many more financial institutions are looking for what was fashionably called ‘impact investing,’ but everybody is now considering how do we have an impact that’s positive and meet ESGs. The global development standards, the SDGs [U.N. Sustainable Development Goals] are being talked about more.”

Kerry finishes by talking about Joe Biden’s commitment to rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement and Biden’s plans to impose carbon-dioxide restrictions.

0

0

• STOP THE STEAL!!
• IOWA VOTERS ARE BEING DISENFRANCHISED BY APPARENT CORRUPTION IN SWING STATES
• CORRUPTION IN OTHER STATES AFFECTS THE EFFICACY OF VOTES FOR PRESIDENT HERE.
• STAND UP AND BE COUNTED

Demonstration event sponsored by Women for America First, Iowa Federation of Republican Women and others. Flyer below.  Active links:

TrumpMarch.com

  Des Moines on Sunday, December 6

Click Here to RSVP

0

0

A PERFECT TIME FOR BIDEN AS USA PRESIDENT AND FRANCIS AS POPE

SOUNDS TO ME LIKE HE’S CALLING FOR US TO DISSOLVE US SOVEREIGNTY AND HAND OVER ALL ITS RESOURCES (AND FATE) TO THE UN. (gender inequality???) dlh
——————————
As appeared at Breitbart:

U.N. Chief Guterres Demands the World Reset to Forestall a Climate Apocalypse 

Nature is determined to destroy humanity through flood, famine, fire, and pestilence, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres declared Wednesday, prophesizing the time has come for us to repent and mend our ways through a great climate and economic reset.

In an address at Columbia University in New York City, Guterres said the global climate has long been “reacting” to man-made changes, but emphasized there’s still time to prevent a total biodiversity collapse if we fall in behind the U.N. and its multiple agencies.

“Humanity is waging war on nature,” the Portugese socialist said. “This is suicidal. Nature always strikes back — and it is already doing so with growing force and fury.”
Guterres’ remarks begin a month of U.N.-led climate actions and came 10 days before its climate summit on Dec. 12, which is the fifth anniversary of the Paris Climate Accords.

He declared companies must adjust their business models for a green economy, and that means making carbon-free investments and follow the plans for recovery as laid out by the globalist organization.

“Biodiversity is collapsing. One million species are at risk of extinction. Ecosystems are disappearing before our eyes. Deserts are spreading. Wetlands are being lost. Every year, we lose 10 million hectares of forests,” he said.

“Oceans are overfished — and choking with plastic waste. The carbon dioxide they absorb is acidifying the seas. Coral reefs are bleached and dying. Air and water pollution are killing nine million people annually — more than six times the current toll of the [coronavirus] pandemic.”

Guterres said instead of looking to a return to “normal,” the world should take advantage of the “pandemic reset” to create “a more equitable and just world.”

Here’s what Guterres demanded the nations of the world do:

• • Put a price on carbon
  • Phase out fossil fuel finance and end fossil fuel subsidies
  • Shift the tax burden from income to carbon, and from tax payers to polluters
  • Integrate the goal of carbon neutrality (a similar concept to net zero) into all economic and fiscal policies and decisions
  • Help those around the world who are already facing the dire impacts of climate change

If we don’t, he said, we’re living on borrowed time, repeating a warning he made earlier this year in demanding changes to the way the world is run.

“This is a moment of truth for people and planet alike. COVID and climate have brought us to a threshold. We cannot go back to the old normal of inequality, injustice and heedless dominion over the Earth. Instead we must step towards a safer, more sustainable and equitable path.”

0

0