Wallace Manheimer
At the initial Republican debate on August 23, two incidents ought to be disturbing to readers of wattsupwiththat. First of all, when Vivek Ramaswamy suggested that the country use all of its energy resources, coal, oil, gas, nuclear and whatever else worked, someone shouted to him “What about the climate crisis”. He said: “The climate crisis is a hoax”, but was immediately shouted down, and this was by a group of conservative Republicans. Probably more readers of wattsupwiththat would use the word false, rather than hoax. Nobody thinks this is a big joke.
The evidence against a climate crisis is voluminous, and it is not appropriate to go into it here. Suffice it to say that in about 2000, Frederick Seitz, the former head of the National Academy of Sciences, spearheaded a petition, signed by over 30,000 scientists, over 9000 with Ph.D’s denying a climate crisis (http://www.petitionproject.org/). More recently the Clintel Foundation, centered in Holland put out a climate declaration signed by over 1600 top scientists from around the world (https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/) making the same point. Scientists are anything but united on the assertion of a rapidly approaching, CO2 generated climate crisis. For someone interested in a summary of the evidence against a climate crisis, this author has written one (Wallace Manheimer, While the climate always has, and always will change, There is no climate crisis, Vol. 15, No. 5, p. 116 (2022), Journal of Sustainable Development
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/0/47745)
The fact that so many believe in the false climate crisis makes Dick Lindzen, perhaps the leading authority on geophysical fluid dynamics, look more and more like a prophet:
“What historians will definitely wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that CO2 from human industry was a dangerous, planet-destroying toxin. It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world- that CO2, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.”
The next is Nikki Haley saying that she will scold the developing world and make them not use coal, oil, or gas. The BP corporation publishes its energy outlook. (BP Energy Outlook 2019, https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/energy-outlook/bp-energy-outlook-2019.pdf). It showed that in the more developed world, the so-called OECD countries of 1.2 billion people, the per capita use of energy use is about 5 kW per capita, or 6 terawatts (trillion Watts) total. Since the entire world uses ~ 14 terawatts, this leaves about 1 kW per capita for the rest of the world.
Let’s see what these power number means. Take a typical American family with two parents and two children in the household. Say both parents work in different places, so they have 2 cars and drive each one the average of 12,000 miles per year. If their cars get 30 miles per gallon (most cars average less), they use together 800 gallons of gas per year. A gallon of gas (or heating oil) has the energy equivalent of about 40 kW hours, and there are about 30 million seconds in a year, so the family’s cars use about 5 kW. Now say they use the average of 500 gallons of heating oil per year to heat their house; this is about 3 kW. Then say that their home electrical use is the average of about 1.3 kW. However, electricity is produced with an efficiency of, of about 1/3, so their electrical use claims another 4 kW total (of say coal, gas or nuclear fuel). Hence this family’s total power use is ~ 12 kW, or about 3 kW per person. However this is only the personal use, there are many common uses, office buildings, stores, factories, farms, public transportation, airlines, demolition and construction, the military…..
Now think of what life is like in the many countries that average 1 kW per person. These countries also have factories, airlines, a military, … so the average person probably uses less than ~0.5kW. These countries are no longer willing to just passively accept this. They are building up their energy infrastructure as quickly and as economically as possible. Mostly this means coal.
At a US Department of Energy meeting in Maryland in 2009, a high-ranking member of the Chinese Academy of science attended. In his talk, he announced that in 2000, the average Chinese used ~ 10% of the power as the average American, and at the time of the meeting was ~ 20%. He said they would not rest until their per capita energy use is about the same as ours. (Now is ~ 30-35% of ours)
Here is Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Novmber 2021: The colonial mindset hasn’t gone. We are seeing from developed nations that the path that made them developed is being closed to developing nations.
Here is Nigerian President Mohamed Bazoum (June 2022): Africa is being punished by decisions of western countries to end public financing for foreign fuel projects by the end of 2022. We are going to continue to fight, we have fossil fuel that should be exploited.
For Nicki Haley to think that she can wave her finger and demand that these countries switch to windmills is not only living in a dream world, but also is the height of hubris.
Wallace Manheimer has had a 50+ year career as a scientist at the US Naval Research Laboratory. He has published ~150 reviewed scientific publications and has recently published a book Mass Delusions, how they harm sustainable energy, fusion and fusion breeding, available on Amazon.
There are a lot of reasons to reject Ramaswamy as a serious candidate. But if he is going to be the only Republican with the cahones to state this truth, I’ll likely be behind him. Just look at Europe, where the supposed “conservatives” have joined the crisis chorus, and where it’s led them.
Ramaswamy’s weaknesses may not mater if we are permitted to fail under the climate fascism the left has queued up for us.
Same. His foreign policy is radical. But Ukraine seems to be holding its own against Russia. I want to see this end. I want to see Dessler and Mann cry in desperation on Twitter as their grant money disappears and actual science returns. This has gone on too long. Vivek could be our last shot. Trump would’ve been a good choice, but he shot himself in the foot with the January 6 insurrection.
“the January 6 insurrection.”
Talk about propaganda kool-aid.
Have a look at:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4532751
Trump is clearly debarred from standing for federal office again unless
2/3 of congress vote for him to do so.
BS!
Section 3 of amendment 14 can only apply IF the current administration is accepting of ALL the remaining amendments in toto. This includes the 1st…freedom of speech…which the Demon-crats do not allow Conservative Speech without attempting to label it “Hate Speech” and seek to have it limited or censored in public media.
2nd…Right to bear arms…which the Demon-crats want to erode and even take away to “Protect THEM from YOU”
The Biden administration has sold out to Chinese interests, spit on the constitution and actively seeks to nullify much of Our rights afforded by it.
So long as they won’t abide by all of it, they don’t have a right to use any of it.
Perhaps Congress should look at invoking the 25th amendment while the constitution is still enforceable… in the case of Biden AND Harris. Neither is mentally qualified to run a taco stand let alone the free world.
And precisely where in the US constitution does it say that one amendment is applicable only if all the current administration accepts all of the others? That arguement would get you laughed out of court.
As with Any Contract, and the Oath of Office IS an enforceable Verbal Contract in any court of law.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Biden has broken that oath by actively seeking to amend or reduce the protections afforded by the constitution and its various amendments.
He is certainly NOT trying to PRESERVE or PROTECT the Constitution and it’s amendments. He’s trying to ERODE and ELIMINATE our protections
From your link:
“Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids holding office by former office holders who then participate in insurrection or rebellion”
The problem for anti-Trumpers here is Trump has not been charged with insurrection or rebellion with regard to Jan 6, so the 14th Amendment does not apply.
The prosecutor mysteriously left those charges out.
But the talking heads keep repeating the insurrection lie knowing the sheep that watch them will believe it is true.
One of the Republican presidential hopefuls, Asa Huchinson, former governor of Arkansas, repeated the insurrection lie during the Republican debate, claiming Trump was not eligible to be president because of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Shows how much he knows.
Strange name Asa
The second “a” is apparently pronounced like “hole”?
I think Trump calls him “Ada”, for some reason.
Because he could not prove them
I believe you are correct. If he could have charged Trump with insurrection, he would have charged Trump with insurrection.
The exact words are ‘engaged in insurrection or rebellion. Then president Trump did not engage in insurrection. Nor did he incite one. Nor were the J6 events at the Capital an insurrection as meant when the 14th Amendment was passed just after the Civil War. An insurrection meant an armed rebellion. The folks who entered the capital were not armed.
Firstly the exact words are “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof”. Leaving out the “given aid or comfort” is dishonest.
Secondly some of the people involved were armed. And they were organised. It clearly qualifies as an “insurrection” as covered by the usual meaning of those terms. It was designed to stop Congress from doing their constitutional responsibility to count the votes. And Trump was involved from the beginning to the end. Not only did he tell people to show up and “fight like hell” but also has condoned their actions.
The Fed bois were armed, not the protesters.
Yeah, the Feds are the only ones who took a shot and took a life.
We still haven’t been told the circumstances surrounding unarmed Ashley Babbit’s killing. Her killer just got a promotion.
Where’s the investigation of this killing? This killer is celebrated by the Left.
Giving aid and comfort to the enemy is a legal term of art Izzy. I suspect that in your dishonesty you were aware of that. It doesn’t mean saying nice things about the bad guys. It means to provide material support or to conceal the enemy or help them recover from battle wounds, etc.
They were organized how? To find the one weak window? Why on Earth does the Capital has weak windows? Not enough money to buy strong ones?
Or the tunnels? Did they find secret tunnels on historical websites?
Which of these claims of organisation holds out in the face of scrutiny?
No claim of organization holds up to scutiny.
Izaak is seeing things that are not there.
He has been brainwashed by the media and being a leftist means he lack critical thinking skills as he falls on the ideology for his beliefs.
He’s seeing what he wants to see.
“It was designed to stop Congress from doing their constitutional responsibility to count the votes.”
Do you have any evidence for that?
It didn’t look very organized to me. Maybe the undercover FBI agents were organizing a few people. Other than that, it was a disorganized mob that we saw. Some of them being casually escorted around the Capitol Building by the Capitol police, and violence breaking out in other areas for reasons not yet known by the public.
The Democrats threw away a lot of the evidence concerning Jan 6. Why would they throw away evidence if it showed an insurrection underway?
And your complaint above about “aid and comfort” does not apply either, because Trump has not been charged with insurrection or rebellion.
Trump offered 10,000 National Guard to Nancy Pelosi, who was Speaker of the House, at the time, and she turned him down. Trump made the offer twice. Pelosi turned it down twice.
Trump gave a speech right before the march on the Capitol began and told the crowd to demonstrate peacefully.
I don’t see any “aid and comfort” here.
The Democrats have created a false narrative around Jan 6. Some people believe them and some people do not. Put me in the “do not” category because there is no evidence establishing that Trump gave aid and comfort to anyone to overthrow the U.S. government.
BS!
https://youtu.be/3_JxN9CwIMU
LOL, Persecutor Smith didn’t charge Trump for Insurrection at all.
The FBI long ago stated there was no organized government take over actions and that the few stupid people carrying firearms had no plan to overthrow and maintain control.
The Few videos allowed to be viewed shows large number of unarmed peaceful people milling around inside the Capital building and the police standing around watching it.
You should stop convincing people how dumb you are……..
He was soothing that crowd from the stage? Trying to make them feel better about losing. Of course he was inciting them to riot. That should be the charge. The fact that he did not participate speaks more to his own cowardice than anything. Go on up the hill now. I’ll be right behind you. Where’s my limo? Was he eating popcorn and watching the news coverage on the big screen as the angry crowd tore apart our nation’s capital?
Why didn’t he stop them?
The fact that Trump issued some pleasing policies by executive order did nothing for the country long term but give dems easy targets using the same tools. One president overruling the previous, and on and on. Bring him back if what you want is governance by vendetta. He didn’t quite ruin the country first time around.
“He was soothing that crowd from the stage? Trying to make them feel better about losing. Of course he was inciting them to riot. That should be the charge.”
You should read Trump’s speech. If you did, you would see that you are completely wrong in your assessment. Trump did not incite anyone to do anything violent.
Protesting is a time-honored tradition in the United States. Protesting is not synonymous with rioting. Sometimes protests turn into riots, but that is not the goal when you see protests from those on the Right.
Violent riots *are* the goal of the radical Left when they protest. They set out to cause trouble, like the BLM/Antifa riots recently.
But the Right is different.
How is telling people to make their protests known, but do so peacefully, an incitement to do anything?
YOu are seeing what you want to see.
You don’t understand, MarkW, it’s a secret code. One that only leftists can decipher…
Izzy,
I know you’re an ignorant woke socialist who doesn’t have the intellectual integrity to stop occupying indigenous lands, but even you should know that merely accusing someone of a crime doesn’t disqualify a person of anything.
You don’t understand the mind of the socialist. They firmly believe that those who oppose them are evil. To them, the act of opposing them proves your guilt. Figuring out the charge is just paper work.
This is why the left is pushing the insurrection hoax.
Claiming insurrection or rebellion even existed on Jan6 is a stretch. Demanding the surrender of a government fort, and shelling it when refused was the previous criteria, as well as assembling and marching troops on Washington.
Nancy Pelosi is a drama queen to characterize J6 as a rebellion.
Well you gotta admit it’s a bit nerve-racking for old Nancy. She’s seen this all before. She was visiting her second husband at Fort Sumter last time rebellion broke out.
So, are you saying that upon declaring their independence from Britain, i.e., seceding, the colonies should have just sat around passively when the British failed to withdraw their forces?
No, I am saying that the Boston Massacre was a riot, not a rebellion.
‘…the Boston Massacre was a riot, not a rebellion.’
True enough, since it preceded the Declaration of Independence by more than six years.
So when does a riot become an insurrection? When raiding a Federal arsenal? Burning down cities? Wandering around the Rotunda? It all seems very squishy and politically driven.
What I believe, however, and the basis for my question, is that neither the American Colonies, going to war with Britain, nor SC, firing on Fort Sumter, qualify as insurrectionists, since they were justly exercising their rights as independent and sovereign entities.
The issue at Ft Sumter was that Lincoln did not recognize Jefferson Davis’ claim that states were independently sovereign, and had a right to secession. Andrew Jackson nearly fought South Carolina over that same issue, so that position was not new with Lincoln and the Republicans.
Back on the main point, Lexington/Concord was a rebellion, with the rebels denying the right of the Crown to disarm them. Force in a political disagreement is rebellion, with at least one side denying the legitimacy of the others actions. The British government was in violation of The Act of Settlement of 1688, that Protestants could not be disarmed. The British position was that the colonists had no rights they were obliged to respect.
And as we all know, Lincoln’s belief in absolute Federal supremacy ‘prevailed’ under force of arms. If we’re ok with that, we deserve to get rolled on climate change, or any other issue our ‘democracy’ holds dear.
I have no sympathy with Lost Cause advocates. Ironically, the Southerners made it a matter of force by secession. There was never a sufficient majority to ratify a constitutional amendment to ban slavery, which was what the Civil War was about, Southern protestations aside.
‘I have no sympathy with Lost Cause advocates.’
Nor do I. In a similar vein, I don’t have any truck with the Lincoln Cult, either. My guess is that people on both sides realized in 1865 that they had created a disaster that needed to be hidden behind their respective ‘myths’.
‘There was never a sufficient majority to ratify a constitutional amendment to ban slavery…’
True.
‘…, which was what the Civil War was about,..’
Partly. There were many other drivers behind secession, particularly the issue of tariffs that had festered long before Andrew Jackson’s administration.
To make a long story short, both sides blew it, and we’re still paying the price today.
Yes, that was the first time Nancy experienced rebellion, back in 1776.
G’Day Tom,
“The Act of Settlement of 1688, that Protestants could not be disarmed.”
The relevant article from the English Bill of Rights reads:
That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;
The ‘kicker’ is the last four words. Compare those words to “… shall not be infringed.”
Rather like the “notwithstanding” clause in the Canadian constitution. The Brits were still in violation, though, as no actual law had been passed by Parliament disarming the colonists, only Crown orders.
G’Day Tom
I must admit I’m not familiar with the Canadian Constitution. More research.
The second item: I don’t know just what the ‘law making’ powers of colony governors were, if any. Even more research.
I just ran “Crown orders” through DuckDuckGo – no joy. After supper I’ll check Blackstone, see if there’s anything there. Thanks for giving me something to do.
History is fun…..
It is a paraphrase, but much of the bill of offenses in the Declaration of Independence blamed King George, not Parliament.
G’Day again Tom,
Yup, George was something of a problem.
The bit about the local governor’s powers? Oglethorpe, the first governor of the Georgia colony, declared ‘prohibition’ in the colony in the 1730’s. The usual (as was repeated in the 1920’s) boats coming down the coast, horseback from South Carolina, and home brewing. The entire governing ‘company’ said “No drinking”. That didn’t work. The English parliament passed a law. Ignored. After that ‘management’ gave up trying. As I typed that, it hit me. The colonies were ‘for-profit’ businesses, with shareholders. The King got his share as well. The colony leaders were not a form of ‘government’.
So yes, the English actions at Concord and Lexington were illegal per the English Bill of Rights.
Thanks for the replies. Forced me to stop and think for a bit.
If it feels a bit squishy and politically driven then you are pretty much correct – it is. Generally the ‘winners’ get to determine the status of events, mostly to give themselves political legitimacy, of course.
Frank,
As Americans we ought not look too closely at the justifications given for the American Revolution, for we must ultimately recognize in that an implied claim that any group of people should be able to break away from our Constitution whenever in their sole opinion, government has become destructive to the ends of securing the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Clearly that was a poetic fig leaf adorning a raw act of force.
That would clearly justify the secession of the southern states, regardless of whether they are or were sovereign states, for the colonies clearly were not sovereign yet did break away. They asserted that it [became] necessary… to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station…
Even if we assert that the southern states freely consented to a perpetual union in 1781, how can an unborn generation be justly bound eighty or two hundred fort-two years later?
The “more perfect union” formed by the Constitution of 1787 can make no more of a special claim on future generations than Magna Carta held over Englishmen from 1215 until 1776. True enough, the Articles of Confederation referred to a perpetual Union, which only purportedly became more perfect in 1787. So southern state secession in 1861, while consistent with the Declaration’s principles was clearly unconstitutional. All officers who swore solemn oaths to protect and defend the Constitution but did not do so, violated the law and broke their word, and thus dishonored themselves.
We do not need to argue about the nature of the states’ sovereignty under the Constitution or Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union if we understand that to be a moot point given that there is no distinction to be made between the Revolution and Secession.
Ultimately the only question that remains is whether we have the will to live under the Constitution or not. Well, I do.
—-
Reference: Declaration of Independence
…When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…
Rich,
A very thoughtful (and thought provoking) comment.
I think what makes America ‘exceptional’, relative to any nation that had existed up to the time of its founding, is the Declaration. As you note, it clearly states that governments are only justified to the extent that they ‘secure’ inalienable rights and should be abolished if they become ‘destructive’ of these rights. I don’t consider this a ‘poetic fig leaf’, but a logical culmination of the Enlightenment. The Declaration, then, is our first foundational document, so if we decide that it is no longer binding, we’re lost.
Regardless of the status of the colonies before the Revolution, they certainly became individual, independent and sovereign states upon executing separate peace treaties with Britain. And they remained sovereign under the Articles of Confederation, notwithstanding the use of the term ‘perpetual’, which simply meant that the Articles would remain in effect until voluntarily terminated.
So this brings us to the creation and adoption of the Constitution, our second foundational document. The debate since its adoption has always been whether it represents a voluntary association of sovereign states or if these somehow lost their sovereignty upon ratification. My opinion, based on the debates that took place at the Constitutional Convention and during the individual state ratification conventions, is that the states retained their sovereignty and their right to reclaim any of the limited powers they delegated to the Federal government.
You ask an excellent question re. how people born decades or centuries after the adoption of these documents can remain bound by them. Many anarchists, which I am not, would point out that there is, in fact, an insurmountable problem with the assumption of ‘political authority’. My belief is that we are going to be ‘governed’ by some political entity whether we like it of not, so it is in our own best interest to actively defend a form of government that best conforms to the Enlightenment ideals delineated in the Declaration.
However, as these are just documents, the governing ideals therein have to be defended against those who would seek to diminish our inalienable rights. Obviously, the main line of defense is an electorate that only elects or appoints representatives and officers, including judges, that will defend our rights.
But what happens if all three (four?) branches of the Federal government act to curtail our rights? At that point, only the people of a state would have the wherewithal to act. This could either be via ‘nullification’ of unconstitutional laws, which Jefferson called the ‘rightful remedy’ to Federal overreach, or ultimately via secession, which obviously would be a ‘last resort’.
Are these remedies ‘legal’? I suppose that will depend on circumstances, which we can only hope don’t evolve to the point where we actually need to find out.
Frank,
As I said before, the logic of the Declaration of Independence renders moot any question of whether states retain and/or voluntarily delegate sovereignty. Nothing in the Declaration provides a limiting principle other than the consent of the governed. If a county or a town or a precinct or a household were to pronounce itself aggrieved and declare its independence, provided such declaration were made after a democratic vote, what do you point to as a valid impediment?
Now obviously Lincoln and the Republicans did not subscribe to your interpretation of the term ‘perpetual Union’ as something akin to a Las Vegas marriage. While I doubt the validity of binding future generations without recourse, the Constitution of 1787 did not in fact bind without recourse. It did not explicitly envision secession but through the amendment process, it was implicitly possible. Just not unilaterally. A constitutional amendment allowing for secession could have been passed. Indeed could be passed even now.
I don’t think that breaking up the Union is a course of action that should have been contemplated nor ever should be contemplated. Nor should we minimize the authority of the Constitution. It does trouble me greatly that if the majority ceases to revere the wisdom of the founding fathers, the great American experiment may come to an end.
Rich,
I’m not an anarchist. There are nearly infinite benefits to political ‘union’ in terms of economics, security, etc., hence, nearly infinite incentives to work through grievances. The issue is what recourse, short of violent conflict, do people have if those in authority abrogate their fundamental rights? Neither nullification nor secession involve violence, unless the abrogating authority responds by sending in the troops.
The sovereignty of the people and the states didn’t disappear in 1787. The Constitution would never have been ratified if it hadn’t been understood that the vast majority of governing powers would be retained within our homes, communities and states. As an aside, I would also mention that several states explicitly included the right to secede in their ratification documents.
One last point. It would have been strange to enumerate the powers of the Federal government within AND append a Bill of Rights to the Constitution if the Founders had intended to create a ‘national’ government of unlimited powers.
Attacking the WH maiming dozens of SS agents is no insurrection.
Some randoes moving stuff around and putting their feet on a desk, is one.
/s
Nancy Pelosi is an evil, conniving partisan radical Leftist.
She is/was one of the Democrats most responsible for the destruction of the United States as we know it.
What are your ConLaw credentials?
As a leftist, he believes himself to be an expert in everything.
Of course, silly me.
I don’t have any. Which is why I pointed to an article written by those that do. Can you point to a similar article that argues against their case?
Yet you swallow all the leftist-marxist propaganda hook, line, and sinker.
Since Trump hasn’t done what he is charged with doing, your claims are as meaningless as everything else you have written.
But they voted to impeach him on that affair so now the issue is settled. He was judged end of story.
No do over.
Yea I guess it was all made up huh Pat? Another hoax perpetuated by the government?
A bunch of unarmed yokels taking selfies in the rotunda is hardly what any reasonable person would call an “insurrection”. The U.S. isn’t so fragile that a small angry mob can take it over. If you think they could then you expose yourself as an irrational person.
The Capitol police opened the doors for them in some instances.
The Capitol police escorted the fellow wearing the horns all over the place. The Media made this guy out to be an insurrectionist.
And we still don’t know how the FBI was involved. Were they there to observe, or to agitate?
Why did the Democrats destroy the evidence they collected about Jan 6, after they lost the majority in the House of Representatives? Thousands of hours of video and testimoney apparently gone. Why would Democrats do that if they had a strong case against Trump?
Do not forget that the committee had made any inquiry about Pelosi off limits. No one was even allowed to mention her name. Now that Trump has been charged about that incident, he has the right to subpoena those docs and Pelosi herself. Democrats will not let that happen.
The Committee destroyed the docs
As the old saying goes: The best laid plans of mice and men, sometimes go awry.
Yes, so they could not be given to the defense even if they were ordered to by a judge.
Yes, an actual trial would be very interesting. Many cans of worms would be opened.
I’ll be surprised if it goes to trial.
“The Capitol police opened the doors for them in some instances. The Capitol police escorted the fellow wearing the horns all over the place.”
Do you have any evidence of this? I mean that is quite a bizarre situation if that is true?
The surveillance videos Tucker Carlson ran, shortly before Fox fired him.
Well where is it? Surely it’s on you tube? Got a link?
Is it this one?
No, that’s not the one, Simon.
Of course, you knew that, didn’t you.
No actually, I didn’t. It’s the only one I could find. I genuinely want to see what you are talkng about.
I don’t have the evidence, but I’ve seen the evidence on tv. I believe it was aired on the Tucker Carlson show when he was still employed by Fox News. They showed about five minutes of video where several Capitol police were escoting the “horns” guy around the Capitol Building and even opening doors for him and showing him around some of the rooms.
It *was* a bizarre situation, made even more bizarre by the “horns” Guy (I think he was the leader of QAnon) being charged later with insurrection. All he did was wander around the Capitol Building with Capitol police escorting him. That doesn’t look like insurrection to me.
Well if you can find that movie I would love to see it.
Do this search on google:
Tucker Carlson and Capitol Building video and QAnon
There is a whole page of references to this video.
I’ll let you choose which one you want to look at.
Tom. How can you watch this and not come to the conclusion that this was a violent insurrection?
Simon, there was some violence that day. I call it a riot, not an insurrection.
A riot can happen any time emotional people get together. It doesn’t have to be planned, it happens spontaneously. Somebody starts a shoving match and then others get involved, and pretty soon you have a riot on your hands.
People can get caught up in riots, in the emotion of it all, and will do things under those circumstances that they wouldn’t normally do. I have personally experience the mob mentality and the suprisingly strong hold it gets on you. It really is easy to get caught up in the emotion.
That’s what happened Jan. 6. Not insurrection, just human emotions out of control in some areas around the Capitol Building.
At the same time, the Capitol police are giving a guided tour of the Capitol Building to the guy wearing the horns on his head.
The ones who were violent were Antifa, BLM, FBI CHSs dressed in MAGA disguises. This has been shown over and over (except in the Fake News of course)
“The ones who were violent were Antifa, BLM, FBI CHSs dressed in MAGA disguises.”
Complete and utter grade “A”, first class bullshit. What a clown.
Go choke on your Little Red Book, Maoist.
Yes, that needs lots more investigation. Especially the role the FBI played.
It takes months of preparation to put Confidential Human Sources into position…
You cannot be so obtuse as to think otherwise.
We were watching that show from here in Africa, on RT (who still looks at CNN?). We saw the ANTIFAs changing into “yokel costume” and MAGA hats. We saw Epps riling up the crowd, we saw his military squad using military tactics to “lead the charge”. Oh, and how every thinking person laughed at those cartoon pipe bombs!
We could see it from the other side of the world, You Dupliciousness, we could SEE, in real time, the final fall of American Democracy to a fake uprising.
Why don’t you write us a nice 500-word essay on Soros’ 2014/15 statement: “2016 will be the last democratic elections in America”. I knew Trump was instated to make us hate democracy, but I admit not seeing that fake uprising to take the form of elderly folk strolling around the tourist part of a public building.
Did you climax when they shot Ashley, Walt?
The Capitol policeman who killed Ashley Babbit, just got a promotion.
If he was white and she black it would have been given the George Floyd treatment. But nope… no charges, no investigation, no protests.
Do you not read the news? There was an investigation..
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/capitol-police-officer-who-shot-ashli-babbitt-exonerated-internal-probe-n1277336
Yeah, and my internal investigation has cleared Trump of all charges.
He was also exonerated in an internal probe, so why shouldn’t he be able to progress his career like every other officer doing their best for the nation. I mean either you support law and order or you don’t?
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/capitol-police-officer-who-shot-ashli-babbitt-exonerated-internal-probe-n1277336
“Yea I guess it was all made up huh Pat? Another hoax perpetuated by the government?”
Well, I’m not Pat, but, yes, it was all made up. Everything Trump is charged with is bogus. Trumped-up, if you will.
The radical Democrats and their mouthpiece, the Leftwing Media, figure is they throw enough lies against the wall, that some people will believe them, and they are correct.
Based on the law and the facts I’m aware of, Trump is not guilty of anything, and I believe eventually this will be shown to be the case.
Why would Trump offer to send 10,000 National Guard to protect the U.S. Capitol Building twice, if he were planning on overthrowing the government? Nancy Pelosi, turned the troop offer down twice.
Every bad thing you know about Trump is a distortion of reality. Think about it. You have been horribly misled. Deliberately. And, unfortunately, you are not alone.
“Well, I’m not Pat, but, yes, it was all made up. Everything Trump is charged with is bogus. Trumped-up, if you will.”
Then how do you explain the truck loads of evidence? And the statements from people?
“Then how do you explain the truck loads of evidence? And the statements from people?”
Being rather vague, aren’t you, Simon?
I know evidence when I see it, Simon. I haven’t seen any evidence of Trump doing anything illegal.
I see a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions and assertions about Trump, but no actual evidence of anything.
Just like in climate science. Lots of people are convinced that CO2 is a dangerous gas even though there is not one shred of evidence establishing that it is dangerous, just a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions and assertions.
It really worries me Tom that you don’t read more widely. Trump is in perilous territory now and really is staring at jail time. When it happens his followers are going to claim it is all nonsense, but that will only be because they haven’t read the full evidence. These trials are going to be covered from start to finish in all the media. I for one want to get an honest handle on the evidence, so I will watch a variety of channels including Fox. I would urge you to do the same or you may be in for a big surprise when the verdicts roll in.
“It really worries me Tom that you don’t read more widely. Trump is in perilous territory now and really is staring at jail time.”
This is wishful thinking, Simon. I think you are going to be disappointed.
It’s the American people who are in perilous territory because it is the radical Democrats who are trying to steal their Republic out from under them by falsely accusing the leader of the oppostion party of crimes.
It’s Election Interference. It’s a Trampling of the U.S. Constitution.
I think we should just wait and see how all this unfolds and we can discuss the particulars. Right now, all we have are charges from political partisans, including those in the federal government. At some point they are going to have to prove their claims. That’s what I’m looking for, the proof they claim they have.
And then there is the argument about whether any of these charges are even appropriate for a president.
The radical Democrats are abusing the American Justice System and Americans are starting to take notice. I saw a black man on tv last night (some kind of influencer) calling on his fellows to vote for Trump because “the Man” was persecuting Trump just like “the Man” persecutes blacks.
Wouldn’t that be a kick in the head.
As a true-blue marxist, Simon is OK with using any means to reach his goal of “getting Trump”.
His hate will destroy him.
You have IGNORED the evidence presented for several years now and the early videos does show that some doors were opened by the police but in other places some rioters would break their way in but even them most people in a few thousands just walked around peacefully with the police standing by.
It is just a tiny number of people who acted riotously that garners most of the trespassing and Vandalism charges most people just walked out went home peacefully.
Walter I’m surprised and disappointed in you. As “mostly peaceful protests” go, it seems that that one had deadly force used only AGAINST it.
Hardly an insurrection when it used no weapons. Only death being one of the protesters? Where are the burnt shops and murdered bystanders as in the BLM/Antifa “Summer of Love”?
If the bar is set so low on insurrection then isn’t Kamala Harris an accessory to insurrection by raising money to bail out the Antifa thugs? Start the impeachment hearings!
Is civil disobedience a right reserved to redressing only some injustices and not others? If contesting an election is an attack on “Democracy!”, how do you assess Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Stacy Abrams? What happened to equal protection under the law? Donald Trump doesn’t deserve that?
For the record, I am very much a reluctant and unenthusiastic supporter of Donald Trump.
Walter, people did go into the Capitol building, but it was not an insurrection.
As a matter of fact, it was all made up. There is already a long list of hoaxes perpetuated by government.
You’re quite delusional.
If there is a long list then MarkW would be able to list them. But Mark makes things up.
Would you ask for proof that water was wet?
Typical subject changing by MarkW. I want to see our “long list of hoaxes perpetuated by government.”
People will believe messages that line up with what they want to believe.
The planet is PROVEN to be greening up from the role of a beneficial gas in the indisputable law of photosynthesis and people want to believe in messages that tell them how to think if we have any chance to save the planet.
Who could be against saving the planet?
For 2 months, Trump tried to overturn the most PROVEN secure presidential election in history, including the use of diabolical, illegal schemes.
A clear violation of the Constitution and treasonous by all objective standards. Regardless of whether they can get a conviction, anybody that denies the blatantly clear evidence is just denying it because of what they “want to believe”.
I supported most of Trump’s agenda, especially with regards to energy/climate.
However, sincerely applying the scientific method in ALL realms, means letting the objective facts determine conclusions. Not the ones that tell us what we want to be true.
It means NOT being part of a tribe or ideology that has a belief system based on politics.
It means using critical thinking ALL the time, not just vetting and scrutinizing news items that we DON’T want to believe and giving a free pass to items that we want to believe or that define our tribe’s ideology.
It means having the humility to see flaws in information that tells us what we want to believe and enough honestly to adjust our thinking so that it lines up with authentic truths.
ALL the time, not just when it serves a purpose!
Um, no. Quit reading the Fake News, it warps your mind.
Good advice.
Speaking of believing only what you want to believe.
Instead of dealing with all the facts that have been presented, Mike just declares that there were no problems with the election. Why, because that’s what his leaders have told him to believe.
What’s your evidence there were any significant problems with the election?
Falsely ceasing counting, sending pole watchers home, then Ruby Freeman and daughter pulling big suitcases filled with “ballots” without provenance, then scanning them over and over and over. These two people could have easily “voted” 50,000 times.
You have no evidence of that. Start citing sources please.
Shuttup.
Request DENIED.
karlomonte is a hard line Trumpeteer. He will believe anything the Mango Mussolini says. Anything, including the absolutely false and frankly disgusting accusations about Ruby Freeman even though thoe accusations have had a terrible impact on her life. Beyond vile…..
https://www.npr.org/2023/07/26/1190173929/rudy-giuliani-georgia-election-workers
NPR! This is your “source”?
The Fascists are your buds the marxo-democrats trying institute a one-party dictatorship in America.
Clown.
It doesn’t matter what the source is, you can verify this in any number of places. The fact in Rudi Giuliani has admitted he lied. That would be good enough for most people given he’s the one who bought the accusation. But not for karlomonte and his truth filter. Nope… still believe Trump like a good minion….
Pretty much everything you type is a lie, so just like the bad old days in the Soviet Union, I can go with the opposite and be on solid ground.
If the Jan. 6 persecution goes forward for Trump, this will give Trump the opportunity to show the problems with the 2020 election that the radical Left wants to gloss over and pretend didn’t happen.
92% nationwide turnout is not hinky? Or 105% registration in Georgia? Or a six standard deviation increase in turnout in Wisconsin?
What flavor was the KoolAid?
All of those claims have explanations that don’t require the need to claim election fraud. Besides that, do you have any sources I could view each of those claims?
Mike I endorse your point about using critical thinking and not conforming our statements to what our political tribe expects us to say. I like to think that I do just that. But what on earth are you talking about with PROVEN secure?
My father used to live with me for several years and then moved to stay with my brother about 8 years ago. He’s still registered to vote in my town. He died in 2018. Each time I voted, I let the polling people know that my dad’s name should be removed. I wonder how many times he voted after his funeral.
There’s video evidence of mules depositing multiple ballots into drop boxes. Thousands of mules whose geolocation metadata shows them repeatedly visiting multiple dropbox locations in the middle of the night. Trucks delivering ballots into Pennsylvania from New Jersey. Hundreds of ballots where the only vote cast was for Biden.
Is it provable that any of those actions constituted election fraud? No, it was allowed for a family member to drop off mail-in ballots. Maybe some Pennsylvania mail was processed in New Jersey. Maybe a couple of thousand people have odd habits driving around in the middle of the night.
Is it believable that none of that was fraud? Please! Where is your critical thinking?
Critical thinking shows that there was no significant fraud for either Biden or Trump. 2,000 Mules is a joke.
Critical thinking is not evidence. It results in a thought out opinion. Your opinion may differ, but there is certainly evidence that fraud could have occurred. Likely we will never know. But we have to be more vigilant than we have been.
What is your evidence for this claim?
The burden of proof is on you, not me. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I busted the science fiction video of 2,000 Mules at the links below from my forum, as well as including my findings about real election fraud:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/94482/
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/87219/
Many more fact checks like this below busting Dinesh’s complete nonsense:
https://www.jan-6.com/2000-mules?gclid=Cj0KCQjw6KunBhDxARIsAKFUGs9T9R9MI9hetmrWz2Ho5agsZeHl1Rb8k9KrV3uZa-2EGXCm7sSzC7kaAsxAEALw_wcB
You know it must be bad when Fox and Newsmax wouldn’t even cover it!
https://www.newsweek.com/dsouza-targets-fox-news-says-network-banning-mention-2000-mules-1706047
Dinesh made some nice money selling his book 2,000 Mules to Rs that bought it to read things they want to believe in.
Mike
I have always maintained that once Republicans failed to block the use of dropboxes and ballots automatically mailed out to all registered voters, it was TOO LATE to prevent or prove fraud.
I happily grant you that it isn’t possible to PROVE fraud from the 2000 Mules geolocation data in a court of law to a criminal trial standard of evidence. (Beyond a shadow of a doubt)
However the geolocation data is NOT meaningless. It establishes at the very least extremely unusual patterns of behavior. Suppose that the unsubs were NOT stuffing dropboxes. Why were they driving around circuits within at most a few hundred feet of many different dropboxes in the middle of the night? On more than one night?
Have you EVER done anything similar to that?
Do you know ANYONE who has ever done something like that?
Can you provide any conceivable innocent explanation for that behavior?
No defendant has to offer any such explanation. But to make a claim that the election was PROVEN secure, you at least have to provide a credible explanation for how that behavior is not circumstantial evidence of fraud.
So sure, 2000 Mules can only supply circumstantial evidence that isn’t admissible in a court of law. So you establish that to my satisfaction, but that is by no means sufficient to say that the 2020 election was the most PROVEN secure election. That’s absurd.
I figured that post would not be well received.
With respect to the facts, unlike using ONLY those that you get from tuning into the sources that tell you the news that you WANT to hear/read, I did my own objective, comprehensive, INDEPENDENT search, using many hundreds of hours of time and communicated at these 3 dozen threads(just a partial list) at my forum. This compilation doesn’t even include much on his most diabolical scheme to use fake electors.
Election night fraud
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/87530/#87549
Despite wanting Trump to win and be innocent, every authentic fact shows otherwise.
++++++++++++++++
I did the same thing to determine authentic science about the COVID vaccination (being a scientist was helpful):
COVID vaxx DISinformation/information compilation
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/87451/
++++++++
In case you think I affiliate with 1 political side and am biased, I did the same thing to bust the blatantly corrupt Mueller investigation which was truly a “Witch Hunt” exactly as President Trump claimed which included collusion by the DOJ, MSM and Dems to destroy the legitimacy of Trump’s 2016 election win and to destroy Donald Trump.
Re: Re: Durham’s final report
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/95210/#95212
++++++++++++
On all of those topics above as well as most others, people have already decided what they want to believe and only go to sources that interpret the world to line up with our confirmation bias.
This is actually my FAVORITE site because it represents more authentic truth/science on the fake climate crisis than any other X 10.
However, it’s not always easy for me to intentionally go to numerous other sites/sources that state things that disagree with me (as a meteorologist for over 4 decades) to try to understand where they are coming from.
But you have to do it to:
Mike I appreciate your effort to be objective and seek truth convenient or otherwise. I didn’t downvote you. I believe that you’re sincere.
I’m not clear on how you imagine that voter fraud can be detected after mail-in ballots have been separated from their mailers. It’s my understanding that in many instances the mailers have been “lost” as well. How do you know that there were not batches of fake ballots introduced without any mailers, or bogus replacement ballots introduced after separating?
I sincerely do not know if the information I have received is accurate. It’s my contention that certain things are unknowable. Even if some of the people eventually confess to their crimes we won’t actually know with certainty that they are telling the truth.
It’s easy to call someone a conspiracy theorist if they posit these scenarios and to say that it couldn’t happen at a scale sufficient to change the outcome. But the outcome could have been changed in key states with only a small margin.
What remains in my mind is the implausibility that Biden received more votes than Obama while Trump received more votes than he received in 2016.
Thanks Rich,
Thanks for a respectful response and I have not doubt that you are convinced too.
I’m very familiar with the argument of it being implausible for Biden to receive more votes than Obama.
After all, Obama was a MUCH more popular candidate.
What you are missing is that Biden wasn’t running against Obama(he would have been crushed) and since 2012, the winner of presidential elections is NOT based on having favor-ability ratings greater than unfavorable which determined most past elections.
Starting in 2016, the candidates running had higher UNfavorable numbers than favorable numbers.
When people voted in 2016, Donald Trump pulled the upset because so many Ds were NOT Clinton and millions stayed home rather than vote for either candidate.Clinton didn’t win, because there were less NOT Donald Trump votes.
In 2020, we took it to another level applying the exact same principle……to motivate Ds!
I’m sure you acknowledge the millions of people with TDS during his presidency. During those 4 years, especially during the Mueller Witch Hunt, Trump’s opponents devoted enormous time, money and energy getting people to hate him even more than the poor behavior that made everything worse.
NOT Donald Trump was the battle cry that united Ds like never before ahead of an election. As bad as Biden was (really bad with an UNfavorable rating greater than favorable but wasn’t quite as bad as Trumps) people saw him as the lesser of 2 evils in a huge way.
Many millions of Ds and others that often don’t vote came out in droves in 2020 to vote NOT Donald Trump.
In other words, this is what happened.
Joe Biden + NOT Donald Trump was much greater than Donald Trump + NOT Joe Biden, where the NOT’s generated tens of millions of votes in 2020 and a record smashing amount,
Believe what you want but that’s exactly what happened, not a theory.
Here’s more on that specific dynamic, which I discussed several times on my forum.:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: President Biden says he will run again in 2024, NBC reports
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/94482/
“Many millions of Ds and others that often don’t vote came out in droves in 2020 to vote NOT Donald Trump.”
That’s generally my thinking as well. That isn’t to say there weren’t shenanigans, there almost certainly were, there always are. The question is whether they changed the outcome.
Obama is a marxist who tried to ruin America.
Treasonous rat.
Barack didn’t have much love for America. His wife said that the first time she had ever been proud of America was when they elected her husband as president. So Mitchell didn’t have much love for America, either.
Barack said he wanted to make fundamental changes to America. I think that’s what we are seeing now with the weaponization of the Executive Branch against the People, which started under Obama, and continues under his puppets.
All very true.
Mike,
1) I’m NOT convinced of anything. I think it’s conceivable that your TDS scenario does in fact explain the higher turnout.
2) High turnout certainly doesn’t preclude fraud, including fraud sufficient to change the result. I am only highly suspicious (close to convinced) that there was a large opportunity for undetectable fraud, given unmonitored/poorly monitored dropboxes. Maybe it made a difference or maybe not.
3) You have not justified your claim that it was “ …the most PROVEN secure presidential election in history”. What does “PROVEN secure” even mean? How do you prove that something did NOT happen?
The real question I would like to ask is whether you would agree that it is in every honest citizen’s interest to see all opportunities for undetectable fraud to be eliminated?
“For 2 months, Trump tried to overturn the most PROVEN secure presidential election in history, including the use of diabolical, illegal schemes.
A clear violation of the Constitution and treasonous by all objective standards. Regardless of whether they can get a conviction, anybody that denies the blatantly clear evidence is just denying it because of what they “want to believe”.”
I would say you are wrong on this, Mike.
First of all, I don’t know where you get the “most PROVEN secure presidential election in history”.
It looks like the most insecure election in history to me.
It is not a violation of the U.S. Constitution to protest an election. There is a time-honored tradition of protesting election results in American history.
As far as I can see, Trump did nothing illegal regarding the vote. He was given legal advice on everything he did.
Questioning the validity of State electors is not a violation of the U.S. Constitution. They have been questioned in the past. The recent past. But none of the Democrats who contested recent elections are being charged with crimes.
This will all work itself out in court. I’m sure we will have a lot to argue about. Unfortunately, this is all taking place in the middle of a presidential election campaign. Just like Biden and the radical Democrats planned it.
Election Interference. Democracy Interference.
And now lawyers who advised him have been charged with felonies as part of this insanely absurd “RICO” case.
This is America?
Show trials?
To quote Dan Bongino: if the last election was: “the most PROVEN secure presidential election in history,” what was the second most proven election? Your statement is just nonsense. No one knows which election is the most secure. You’re quoting Democrat talking points.
Ukraine soldiers and many thousands of mercenaries are using almost 100% NATO weapons and ammunition to fight Russia
Ukraine&Co is losing about 800, sometimes 1000, people per day.
How long can that go on?
Russia has vastly more people available for fighting, and is producing 24/7 to keep them armed, fueled and fed.
Stay tuned during the next few months
The Ukrainians have just made breakthroughs in Putin’s defense lines.
Stay tuned.
And btw, General Jack Keane, a military man I have great respect for, was highly critical of the Pentagon over their criticism of the Ukrainian tactics.
As General Keane pointed out, none of the generals in the Pentagon has ever fought a battle similar to the one the Ukrainians are fighting, so they don’t know what they are talking about when they criticize the Ukrainians.
And now these Ukrainians that these geniuses in the Pentagon have been criticizing are making breakthroughs, even without the necessary equipment they need for these operations.
American generals wouldn’t think of carrying out an operation like that the Ukrainians face without all the equipment necessary, but the Ukrainians are doing it without all the bells and whistles. So American generals should shut up and watch the show and they might learn something.
The Pentagon is going to need a thorough cleaning when Trump gets back in office. I think Trump should hire General Jack Keane for that reform job.
‘So American generals should shut up and watch the show and they might learn something.’
Tom,
Why the desire to throw American troops into a meat grinder, particularly one that has all the hallmarks of a cover up for Biden family corruption?
Nobody is calling for American troops to be thrown into a “meat grinder”.
Not yet, at least. But back to the point -exactly what lesson(s) are our generals supposed to be learning from their Ukrainian counterparts?
Well, I think General Keane was talking about the defensive lines the Russians have established in Ukraine, the likes of which haven’t been seen since World War II, so these Pentagon generals who are carping at the Ukrainians, have no experience with this type of warfare, other than what they read in a book.
General Keane is calling the Pentagon generals “armchair quarterbacks”.
What makes you think I desire to throw American troops into the war? I have a grandson that just joined the U.S. Marines. I prefer he help the people of Maui, as he is doing now, rather than have him go to Ukraine.
But I don’t have to worry about him going to Ukraine. The Ukrainians don’t need his help. All they need is the right equipment to fight this war.
The Ukrainians are willing to fight for their freedom, and they do a pretty damn good job of it, considering the handicaps they are dealing with, and we should be supporting them 100 percent.
Putin is on the defense, and that’s where we should keep him. Don’t give him a victory in Ukraine, or he will be looking for more, and then maybe my grandson might get involved. That doesn’t have to happen if we are smart.
Unfortunately, we have an Appeaser as a president, and we are not being smart about the Ukraine war. Biden is dragging his feet every step of the way, and prolonging the agony.
Biden’s surrender in Afghanistan probably inspired Putin to start his latest invasion of Ukraine.
All appeasers manage to do is encourage bloodthirsty dictators to go on killing sprees.
Putin and China are using BRISC PLUS to turn the table, level the playing field
In a few years, it will have more of the world population, have more of the world GWP, because they are growing faster, produce more of the fossil fuels and other materials, and will mostly use their own SWIFT system, and mostly use their own currencies, instead of the dollar/euro
“Putin and China are using BRISC PLUS to turn the table, level the playing field”
I think that’s what they are trying to do. I don’t know that they will be successful at it.
I think a major impetus for some of these nations to join BRISC is because of the harrassment they are receiving from Western governments over fossil fuels. They are going where fossil fuels are accepted, and they know they need fossil fuels for a good future.
Western Climate Change Alarmists are driving a bunch of neutral nations into the Enemy’s camp, imo.
Let’s just leave it at the point that we both agree that Biden is a mendacious and corrupt fool, who is doing exactly what his deep state handlers tell him to do.
I’ll agree with that.
I see where about 5,400 emails under a fake name Biden used, have been uncovered. The contents of those ought to be interesting.
“Unearthed Email Reveals Hunter Biden Was Notified of Official Government Call Between Poroshenko and Joe Biden in Message Sent to “Robert L. Peters” – Proves Bidens Were Secretly Working Family Business Deals Together While Joe was VP”
But this is being reported by The Gateway Pundit, so according to Simon it must be false on this basis alone.
Saying that American generals should watch so that they can learn something, is not a call for American soldiers to start participating.
The Ukrainian Army lost up to 4,855 servicemen last week, TASS reports, as its counter-offensive inches forward in Southern Ukraine.
Last week, the Ukrainian forces lost 1,490 fighters in the Donetsk area, 1,180 servicemen in the South Donetsk area, 820 in the Zaporozhye area (Robodyne), 665 in the Kupyansk area, 485 in the Krasny Liman area and 215 in the Kherson area, TASS reports, based on the figures of the Russian Defense Ministry.
“based on the figures of the Russian Defense Ministry.”
We have to take that with a grain of salt, don’t we?
False as pointed out HERE
Okay comrade. How many rubles from the IRA are you given to post this? Or are you just another western useful idiot?
None of your claims are true anyway.
Those “mercenaries” are foreign volunteers. Provide evidence of being ACTUAL mercenaries.
Umm. Large amounts of the weapons and ammo Ukraine is using comes from a combination of its own arms industry, Soviet stockpiles, and large amounts of captured Russian equipment and ammunition. Regardless, so what is they have large amounts of NATO equipment and gear? It’s working well considering how devasting it has been towards the Russian military.
Ukraine is not losing 800 or 1000 men a day. I’ve seen plenty of reliable reports Russia often loses 1,000 or more men a day as casualties though. Especially among the Storm-Z units. Formations made up of mass blobs of prison convicts that are used as cannon fodder as Russia is running out of experienced military personnel and many of its best units have been decimated. They’re definitely not producing anything “24/7”. Their supply chains are in shambles due to rampant corruption and sanctions and many units are using older Soviet equipment such as T-55 tanks. Their cannibalizing their own economy while relying on China, Iran, North Korea and others to fill in the gaps.
“Stay tuned” Yawn. I’ve heard this before. “Just wait a few months! Ukraine will crack!” Weird how that never happens. You know Russia continues to lose ground right? Try getting out into the real world for once…
Walter, an insurrection? LOL! He shot himself in the foot with his response to the covid plandemic and continued insistance that it was the “best response ever”… it torpedoed his presidency. Don’t get me wrong, if it’s him or dimensia Joe next year, the Trumpster has my vote.
What was Trump’s response to the covid pandemic?
What I recall is Trump turned handling the pandemic over to the individual States, giving them the responsibility of imposing mask and vaccine mandates, or not. Trump focused on getting a vaccine developed and producing enough medical equipment to handle the problem.
My particular State did not impose any vaccine or mask mandates on anyone living here. Trump’s response was just what I wanted: Let the States decide. That’s one reason, among many, for why I voted for him.
Claiming his handling of the pandemic was his downfall is ridiculous. Everybody has their own pet idea about why Trump lost the election. My pet idea for that has nothing to do with policy or past performance.
Trump response? Installing Fauci as the grand pubah of the response, which led to masking, lockdowns, poison jabs…. but, with rrspect to elections, unprecedented mail-in voting and ballot harvesting that led to massive election “irregularities” in key states/counties that led to a stolen election. As for states doing what they wanted, they took the lead from the white house, Fauci, NIH, CDC, FDA and saidniver and over that they were simply implementing federal guidance, which Trump did have much control over but decided to let Fauci and company rule the roost. Ask members of the national guard, nurses, doctors, teachers, private employers, hollywood, etc that fired many employees for not taking the jab… all state jobs but following Trump’s 3-letter agency “guidance”. It was 100% on Trump’s watch we got this crap. He still thinks “warp speed” and the jabs are awesome. He still has no plan to prevent same shenanigans (mail in voting and bsllot harvesting) that happened in November 2020 so he will lose again (they’re setting it up again with new covid variant talk). His performance post March 2020 has been horrible and overshadows his very good performance pre-march 2020.
Telling his supports to make themselves heard, but do it peacefully, is insurrection?
Americans are described in Europe as gun nuts, trigger happy… now Americans will be forever known as ultimately distracted, so much so, they insurrect without firing a shot (or bringing more than a handful of weapons).
Yet you will vote for him? You philosopher, you!
It is true, people deserve the government they get.
Anyone that did not just fall off the turnip truck knows that elections are most often about picking the least of the evils.
…and that’s why They get away with presenting you with kaka to choose from…
Nonsense cilo. It’s the nature of any first-past-the-post system.
Proportional representation is not really much different. Although you get to vote for the party platform that comes closest to your views on everything, you know that you’re still ending up with a coalition with parties that oppose your views and will not support everything you support. (‘kaka’)
F-p-t-p is just a system of forming the coalition before the election, pr is a system forming the coalition after the election. Show me a country where the outcome isn’t some degree of ‘kaka’.
Exactly right rah! The only time in my lifetime that I didn’t feel that way was 1984.
I’m starting to think that people just want to be lied to so, they vote for the candidate that tells them what they want to hear, knowing it is all lies anyway. May the best illusionist win.
Low information voters. Not enough people actually take the time and make the effort to learn the issues and the candidates.
Lots of millennials are wearing a ring in their nose these days. When I see them I think of Bulls and swine where the ring is there for control. Bulls have them because it is method of control and protection of their handlers and in swine to prevent them from rooting up the ground.
I await the day when stock brokers, bankers, financial advisors, etc have clown hair, tats all over, and rings in their noses and/or studs all over the place.
It’s not just millennials. It’s anyone, millennials, gen Z’ers, even retirees, most anyone that gets their news from personal media sites or the MSM (MSN, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC… but those appear to be few and far between). Heck, my sister has been in assisted living for the last 5 or 6 years. She and her roommate have both been totally brain washed… by Apple News in their case.
The lying leftwing Media is the most dangerous thing in the world when it comes to our personal freedoms and our ability to govern ourselves.
We can’t govern ourselves properly if all we get are lies and distortions from the Media.
Electing authoritarians is not governing ourselves properly. It’s just the opposite of that.
Democrats are authoritarians. They want to run your life for you, but they won’t take your personal preferences into consideration. They will run your life they way *they* want to run it. Don’t vote for these madmen!
Life of Linda. Cradle to Grave government “assistance”.
All those things are also narcissism on display.
In your opinion, one should only vote for candidates that are perfect?
“Don’t vote, it only encourages the bastards.”
‘sfar’s I can see, all political parties are mafia gangs, and the character of the candidate has absolutely zero relevance; once the thing is in office, it is legally bound to execute Party Policy, i.e. mafia gangsterism.
I’ll vote for any candidate that signs the following agreement:
https://greenpets.co.za/index.php/en/2-greenpets-natural-happiness/316-social-contract
We have two candidates. One bad, one a total disaster. Your solution is that since neither is perfect it doesn’t matter which one wins.
No sir! The reality is that it matters not who wins, the solution I offered in the hyperlink you obviously did not see? (I suppress my feelings of disappointment in your attention span) 😉
I reiterate, Mark: All political parties are mafia gangs, and the character of the candidate has no bearing, as soon as it is in office, it is legally bound to execute Party police, in other words, Mafia gangster protocol.
But here’s a thought: Just like the dems are going to pretend Obiden is their candidate until the last moment, when they will substitute Big Mike, so I pray Trump will keep all the fools on a line, until it is too late, and then he stands independently.
Now THAT would be fun!
If Trump had been in the debate he would have spoken the same truth.
Trump has made many statements about climate change, and they do put him in the mainstream of sceptical opinion. He has not denied the reality of climate change but he has said it is natural, or mostly natural. Most people here would agree with that.
Ramaswamy has said he would not contemplate running with Trump, but all candidates would say that for obvious reasons while still in the running. If – as seems almost certain – Trump wins the nomination then I think it very likely that Ramaswamy would be his running mate. Trump and Ramaswamy at the White House could be a powerful force, and mostly a force for good.
If I was an American I would certainly vote for Trump, who, despite some flaws, is several million times better than Biden. My one big concern is support for Ukraine. I hope that, as president, Trump will continue military support for Ukraine (the majority of Republicans do support Ukraine).
I look forward to seeing two powerful climate sceptics in the White House!
Chris
I do not think Trump is as naive as last time. By now he knows about Vivek’s rather misanthrope social paradigms.
“If – as seems almost certain – Trump wins the nomination then I think it very likely that Ramaswamy would be his running mate. Trump and Ramaswamy at the White House could be a powerful force, and mostly a force for good.”
I think Vivek’s foreign policy stances are going to prevent him from being vice president, and I’m not too sure how well two Alpha males like Trump and Vivek would get along. I don’t think Vivek would like playing second fiddle.
The best combination for Republican president and vice president is Trump and Senator Tim Scott, imo. Scott is a very smart, conservative guy, with a story every American should hear, and he will pull in enough black votes to beat the Democrats.
It only takes a few percent of black votes to switch to Trump for him to win, and he is already reportedly picking up black and hispanic voters, so if Tim Scott is his running mate, only good things can happen.
And Trump and Scott get along very well. They have worked successfully together in the past with Scott heading up an effort to bring jobs to poor communities around the country.
After four years, Tim Scott will make a very good President of the United States in 2028
I think Scott will get the Clarence Thomas treatment from left wingers. He will be labeled an uncle tom, a traitor to his race and all other insults you can imagine. The cows on the View will echo that and liberal sheep will believe it all.
That may be true, Tom, but as the other Tom said, it only takes a few percent.
They already are giving Scott the “treatment”. That’s what every black conservative gets from the radical Left. They think they own black people and go after any black person who doesn’t go along with them.
Or like Larry Elder who ran for California Governor, he will get labeled, “the black face of white supremacy.” I couldn’t believe it when the left went that racist and their base ate it up.
I found it not only believable but quite in character, Hoyt
Me, too. Sadly.
Of course their base ate it up. Their base is also that racist.
The left wingers attack vigorously anyone who opposes them.
If we want a candidate that the leftists will not attack, we will be forced to choose a leftist.
“The left wingers attack vigorously anyone who opposes them.
If we want a candidate that the leftists will not attack, we will be forced to choose a leftist.”
You are such a snowflake. It’s called politics Mark. You don’t say nice things about your opposition. It’s nothing personal…. until it does get personal, and Trumps attacks on Chris Christies weight are a good example of that.
I heard Trump telling an audience member at one of his rallies recently to “stop calling Christie a fat pig! Trump said it a couple of times.
So see, Trump was trying to be nice. 🙂
Well if that is true that is great.
More hypocrisy from MaoBoi.
I know that you aren’t bright Simon, but in your eagerness to insult me you forgot to actually understand what I said.
Then again, you ability to understand anything never has been impressive.
If you will read my post again, you will see that I am arguing against the position that we should seek a candidate that the left will not attack.
It’s nonsense like this post that demonstrates why nobody here is impressed by you.
Which democrats do loudly all the time while republicans do little of it the other way.
One quibble that Vikek doesn’t strike me as particularly alpha. But Trump/Scott does seem like a better option than Trump/Ramaswamy.
I’m not a Nikki Haley fanboi but she is factually correct that Trump has the highest negatives among presidential candidates. Adding Vivek to that isn’t going to improve the situation. Tim Scott just might.
Effective propaganda can drive up one’s negatives. It’s not Trump’s fault.
It might be effective in neutralizing Trump. Only time will tell if all the lies and distortions were enough to derail him.
I don’t know about anyone else, but the more they attack Trump, the more determined I am to vote for him, if given the chance.
I think he has been wronged for political purposes, and if his persecutors are successful, we may have lost the Republic, so I’ll vote for Trump because I like his policies and because I want to send a message to the radical Democrats that what they have done and are doing will not in the end succeed and is not acceptable in this country.
Electing Tump again will be the greatest repudication of the radical Left in history. And it needs to happen if we value our personal freedoms because they are definitely on the line. If the radical Democrats can do this to Trump successfully, then they can do it to any one of us, if we get out of line.
Your personal freedoms do not lie with the radical Democrats. Their intention is to take them away from you.
Don’t give them another opportunity. Vote them out of office at the next election.
“It’s not Trump’s fault”. Yes and no. Trump absolutely has had slander and calumny heaped upon him like no other (even Nixon). But Trump seems to revel in cranking them up.
I love red meat, too. It would be awesome fun if 51% agreed with us. The problem is, that 30% agree with us, 45% will never agree with us, and so we need to persuade the independents at better than a 4:1 ratio in order to eke out 50% plus one vote. That’s too tall of an order when most of those 25% pay little attention and are especially susceptible to emotional appeals and propaganda.
That’s the math that proves the American experiment in self governance has failed. I love this country with all my heart but, the people, not so much.
The people are inundated with radical leftwing propaganda. Those that are paying attention.
Are there enough critical thinkers in America to govern ourselves properly? We will know soon.
I think we ought to allow things to work themselves out and then we will get a better reading on who will vote for who.
Let’s see what the polls say after Trump becomes the nominee.
WTH is wrong with conservatives? You have an actual candidate that has walked the walk – Desantis. He won in a landslide victory (@20 points) not too long ago in a state that’s basicly 50/50, so he convinced a bunch of democrats, or at least left of center, to vote for him. You all want a show, not substance.
Because frauds like Trump and Vivek have them under a spell of delusion. A cult, so to speak.
Well, 75 million voters voted for Trump.
The good economy under Trump was not a delusion.
Just think how different the economy is today under the command of an idiot.
We see the strings and once you see them you can’t unsee them.
No more Trump.
A new TDS clown shows up out of nowhere. So predictable.
At least I’m not a delusional Trump cultist like you.
WordPress so needs a /ignore feature.
No, you are just a KoolAid drinking Democrat.
I am a Free-Thinking INDEPENDENT not beholden to either party’s bullshit they have been promoting for many years now.
I plan to vote for a Trump a true outsider.
You will vote for Biden even if he collapsed and be in bed for the next year because you are a leftist moron.
Maybe it’s Hillary.
ewwwww!
Another TDS who can’t drop their infatuation of Trump.
The best, out of many reasons, to vote for Trump is to watch the heads of all the Trump haters explode on election night.
That will be a sight to see!
Hillary’s defeat was such a pleasure! I recall the guy down on his knees, with his hands stretched to the skies, screaming “Why!?” at the sky, after Hillary lost. He was so distraught. It was pitiful.
Let’s hope to see a whole lot more of that in the near future.
Tom,
I think you’re right. Knowing Trump’s nature, the ability to get on well with Trump would be crucial. Tim Scott sounds good, but I hope he is at least a potential climate sceptic.
Also, shortly after posting I saw an interview with Ramaswamy. I thought his comments about Ukraine were terrible, so I have lost nearly all respect for him. As opinion polls show that most Republicans support Ukraine, this could be a problem for him.
Chris
I’m not sure where Tim Scott stands on human-caused climate change. The debate the other night did not get to him answering anything about climate change.
Yes, most Republicans and most Americans support helping Ukraine. They know who the good guys and who the bad guys are in this struggle.
Vivek thinks a Russia/China alliance poses the greatest danger to the U.S. and Europe, and he thinks he can do a deal with Russia that will split the two up.
I think this is totally unrealistic. Russia and China have been coordinating with each other since after World War II, and that’s not going to stop.
But, as long as the United States is strong enough militarily to take on both of them.
The United States should build up its conventional forces to the point that Russia and China won’t think about taking the United States on.
I hear the United States is making big strides in laser weapons lately.
Of course, we need to be sure we don’t let the Chicoms steal the technology.
If it wasn’t for theft, they wouldn’t have anything. How robust is a country that has to steal others technology?
cwright, maybe this time Trump will actually drain the swamp instead of surrounding himself with it? If Trump actually wins, expect nothing less than scorched-earth all-out revenge as his agenda.
I agree. He is much smarter politically this time around.
How do you reform the civil service or abolish the four or five (or ten?) cabinet-level departments that ought to be abolished?
Unless we hold the House and get 60 votes in the Senate, that can never happen. (More like 63. We could not count on Romney, Murkowski, or Collins in a cloture vote). How do you expect to pick up 13 seats in the Senate?
Trump might fire some people in some departments if they demonstrably acted inappropriately but he’s not going to be able to root out the thousands upon thousands of swamp critters who undermine his policies through delay and incompetence.
If we avoid a Harris or Newsom administration, the best we can hope for is scaling back on the climate crisis spending and regulation, fought tooth and nail in the courts. (If Dementia Joe makes it to the election, then Cackles will take over by March. If Brandon drops out, Newsom would likely be the nominee).
Rich davis, that’s my point. He had his chance to drain the swamp and didn’t. It won’t be any different this time… in fact, it will be worse since he would be term limited and only care about going after those that tried to jail him, which they should go to jail for (because what he’s going through is total BS) but that’s all we’d get from him this time around – payback.
As for holding the house and/or senate, it’s the same lie over and over – the rubes vote in the same rhinos over and over and then expect a different result. Most conservatives only want memes that they can text and post to their facebook accounts to show their friends “look how stupid those democrats are”. That’s all the conservative movement has become – memes and grandstanding… a big circus show with very little substance. Most conservatives are anything but.. they’re merely democrat-lite as the boat keeps listing towards the left. Pathetic.
“Rich davis, that’s my point. He had his chance to drain the swamp and didn’t.”
Trump was fought every step of the way by the radical Democrats for his entire four years as president. Everything he did was challenged by every available means the Democrats could come up with. Absolutely no cooperation. And this is Trump’s fault? Only if you think it is a fault to be a Republican.
Trump said he was unfamiliar with the Washington DC scene, and appointed people based on recommendations. Like Chris Christie recommending he appoint Christopher Wray as FBI Director.
Trump had to depend on other’s recommendations for the people he hired. The good thing about Trump is he recognized very quickly whether a person he hired was doing the job and if he was not, Trump fired them immediately.
Trump says now he knows who the good guys are and who the bad guys are in Washington DC.
I imagine if given the chance, Trump is going to go after the Bad Guys in Washington DC. It’s crucial to our nation’s survival.
Abbott, trump may never have been preaident, but he spent much of his adult life dealing and hanging around with them. First rule about management is “everything is your fault”. He made the decision, not chris christie. If that was his only crappy appointment or one that stabbed him in the back, that’s a different story. But he consistently picked bad picks – this from a guy promoting himself as “the art of the deal” grant master. There was much put of his control so i won’t fault him for that and he did many good things prior to jan 2020 – i would vote for him again in a heartbeat if it’s him vs anyone from 98% of the complete dumpster fire that is the democrat party. However, we have better to choose from so I’d rather try new blood – eapecially one with a rexord like Desantis that has walked the walk in Florida and defies the odds there. I don’t need perfection, but I’d rather nit want to be forced to vote for a guy who enabled the covid insanity in the USA and thinks that continued boasting of “warp speed” is something to write home about. I he can’t open his eyes on that, i have little faith he’ll “drin the swamp” this time around. If he wins, he’s out for blood and revenge and no one should expect anything more from his 4 year term.
“However, we have better to choose from so I’d rather try new blood”
I have to disagree. Trump has a proven, good record. If he gets in office, I know what he is going to do. He is going to do what he did before and get the United States back on track.
I like Desantis, but he is not a proven quantity on a national level, and he is a little unsure of himself about the Ukraine war.
He’s feeling around for a good Ukriane position, which means he doesn’t have a solid position in his mind now. He’s looking for the best political posture.
He’s a little gun-shy after listening to Laura Ingraham’s diatribes picturing the Ukraine war in the worst light possible. So Desantis is trying to figure out how to get the isolationists like Laura to love him, while not going against the majority opinion of most Americans, who support the Ukraine war.
I think several of the candidates would make good presidents, but none of them is the proven quantity that is Trump.
Abbott, u say “Desantis, but he is not a proven quantity on a nationa Go back to 2016. Replace Desantis with Trump. Sound familiar? The only difference is one had a very successful record as governor of a very large state going in that u could weigh and measure before deciding. Like i said, you all want a show, not substance. I love off-the-cuff Trump – that’s when he’s at his best but, like hillary, he needs to move on.
Tom I agree with most of that. My only point is I guess, that Trump’s choices about when to be aggressive and when to be diplomatic (almost always vs almost never, respectively), are demonstrably not effective. That it’s unfair is irrelevant to that observation except that I’ll grant you that maybe it was hopeless, so why not go down swinging?
You can’t drain the swamp unless you control the House and have a filibuster proof margin in the Senate. Trump never had that, so the best he could do was whittle away at the edges.
Most swamp dwellers are civil service and can’t be fired, unless the department they are working for is gotten rid off. It takes congressional action to get rid departments.
Teump had house and senate first 2 yrs of his presidency… i understand that rhinos euled the roost and trump was limited in what he could do. However, his appointments that backfired are all on him, as was his covid response (that he still claims was the best response ever – he’s completely lost it regarding covid).
How do you reform the civil service or abolish the four or five (or ten?) cabinet-level departments that ought to be abolished?
You mention congress, but how many were created by acts of congress and how many by executive order? Any created by EO can be eliminated by EO.
(Honest, question, I haven’t looked into it)
All cabinet-level departments are established by statute as far as I’m aware.
Civil service employees are shielded against being replaced by an incoming administration except in cases of termination for cause which doesn’t even always include being convicted of crimes, let alone incompetence.
Trump could not effectively shut down a department by laying off most of its staff because of civil service statutes and also because the authorization bills (usually a monster omnibus spending bill) has the force of law. The refusal to spend the money could subject Trump to charges of failing to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.
Since legislation would be required to repeal the statutes that established the various departments, that means that the Senate must approve the bill. However, Senate rules require a supermajority vote to cut off debate. (Called a motion for cloture or the filibuster rule). 60 senators must concur. Otherwise the bill cannot be brought to the floor for a vote. It’s therefore possible to block any new legislation with just 41% of the senators opposed.
So without 60 Republican senators, or Democrat support, no bill can pass the Senate. (Unless the majority changes Senate rules, which is not impossible).
Republicans currently hold 50 seats in the Senate. There are 33 seats up for election in 2024, with 10 currently held by Republicans. So it isn’t mathematically impossible that Republicans could take 20/33 where they currently hold 10/33, but it would be very unlikely.
The most aggressive path to eliminating cabinet-level departments would be to change Senate rules to eliminate the filibuster, then pass civil service reform laws and eliminate certain departments.
That could be done in theory even if the Republicans still had only 50 senators and the current 222 representatives. The Republican Vice President would break any tie in the Senate.
Reality is that most senators oppose eliminating the fillibuster. There’s broad bipartisan agreement on that. Also there are many RINO (Republican In Name Only) senators such as Romney, Murkowski, Collins, who would oppose eliminating any departments as well as opposing the elimination of the filibuster.
So it’s politically impossible to achieve the draining of The Swamp without a tsunami class wave election providing say a 63-37 split in the Senate. And that’s just not realistically in the cards.
There’s always Section-F….
https://brownstone.org/articles/the-astonishing-implications-of-schedule-f/
Ron DeSantis said exactly what needed to be said and no more or less. He said it is foolish to clamp down on American emissions and energy production that only aids the Chinese who make the solar cells and batteries that the Dems’ energy policies demand. It does nothing to solve whatever problem one may believe, only aids the bad guys.
Republicans win with that argument. Ramaswamy’s demogoguery about a “hoax” only turns voters off. The point is, you can’t set policy when you lose elections. It is far more important to be able to persuade voters to let you run the show than it is to fire up the base voters of a minority party (both “major” parties are minority parties, less than 30% of the electorate each). You win when you persuade the persuadable independent and swing voters.
Duane… persuade the persuadable independents… that’s exactly what Desantis did in Florida last year… we have the winnning formula right in front of us and thw majority of so-called conservatives still putting their hopesbon Trump, who believes the 2020 election was stolen (which it was) but has absolutely ZERO plan to makenthe election less rigged this time… they’re setting it up again with this new BS covid variant and masks and lockups, which will enable insane ammounts if mail-in balloting again, which was a prime source of most election rigging in 2020 (which we’ll never find out about because most of that evidence is now destroyed)… election rigging happens on both sides – both repubs and dems – because they’re actually 2bsides of the same coin that pretend to hate eachother and, in actuality, both hate you.
Ramaswamy is not a real candidate for President, as he is entirely unelectable. He is Trump’s stalking horse, running as Trump’s surrogate to suck primary votes away from Ron DeSantis who is Trump’s biggest competitor. If he is running for anything, it is Trump’s VP nominee. The pair of them will go down to defeat, and then where are we and the Republicans and the conservatives and moderates of America? The point is to win, only the winners get to make policy. And if we do win, then it is incumbent that the winner actually do something to make policy, unlike Trump who mostly played golf, protected Putin, and insulted his detractors.
Where is that wall? How much did Mexico pay for it?
Firing up the base wins nothing.
“unlike Trump who mostly played golf, protected Putin, and insulted his detractors.”
Ridiculous.
Seriously?? On the basis of one soundbite from a novice politician? What, you will actually trust the words of any politician with no track record and vote accordingly. Blimey, I thought naivety was the province of the democraps.
Vivek is a fraud. He just wants your money while being a dark horse for Trump.
And you know this, how?
Look it up. Pump and dump. Deceiving investors about a supposed treatment for Alzheimer’s. He’s not serious.
Hypocrite, this after you demanded I give citations.
Just another run-of-mill marxist clown in new socks.
Yes, I agree!
Climate stupidity is a number one priority for me. Western efforts to deal with the ‘climate crisis’ are ruinous in a multitude of critical ways. These efforts totally undermine our ability to deal with literally every other genuinely serious issue. They effectively cripple Western civilisation.
We are presently staring down the very real possibility of a full-scale war with China. Without cheap, reliable power the West can’t even survive, let alone defend itself.
CAGW is like a preaching religion. It may not have a God, but it does have devils, fossil fuels and capitalism. So Exxon is equivalent to The Church of Satan.
I’m thinking of changing my name to Tom. All the best comments come from Toms.
Can I change my name to starztom?
Go for it
If you want to self identify as tom, it is your right.
You’ve come a long way Mark. But I hope you now understand that if THEY transition to starztom then they ARE a Tom. You don’t need testicles to BE a Tom. It’s not just a matter of “self identifying”, ok? 😜
I’ve never been against people self-identifying as anything they want.
I just reserve the right to ridicule the more ridiculous of these claims.
I’m in favor of reality and not enabling psychological disorders.
On second thought, no. Tigger the tom was Starz’s best friend, and now they are both gone, so I will content myself with being mom. (Starz was a horse, and Tigger was a cat. Best friends anyway.)
Maybe we are al the same Tom using different handles.
sneaky
CAGW is one of the Left’s weapons. Their god is the absolute power of the State.
Not all leftists are Greens. A significant number regard the Greens as useful idiots. The CCP seems to regard Greens as just baizuo.
True. But so-called Greens in the Western ‘democracies’ have a strong tendency to vote for Leftists governments, who they perceive will compel activity that ‘favors’ the environment. Ironically, actual Leftist governments that rule without opposition could not care less about environmental degradation – if the oil pipeline with a 500 TBD quota leaks at a rate of 500 BD, they just stuff in another 500 BD to make up the shortfall.
I think that the majority of Developed World citizens believe in climate change to some extent but also feel that it’s mainly from natural causes—as in the past—with some of it caused by fossil fuel consumption. The problem is that science can’t put a number on the fossil fuel causes, so it goes to the extreme of claiming that is entirely due to human activity and as a result loses much of its credibility. So as long as governments and environmental groups use this extreme to promote alarmism and the demand that we abandon coal, oil and natural gas, they will continue to lack support, particularly when all the numbers prove that renewables can’t make up any shortfalls from the abandonment of fossil fuels. Ironically the Developing World is fully aware of this, while the leading economies can’t face this reality.
They aren’t all that bothered about “support”.
They want power.
Thanks to the Climate scam, the Covid scam and the Globalist scam, everything is looking pretty good for them at present.
And very bad for everyone who realises what’s going on.
Eventually, of course, the truth will out. But not much of what we hold most dear will survive.
I would call it a Climate Crisis SCAM since that is how the governments and the few rotten scientists treat it with their continual politically based socialistic proposals to fix a non-existing crisis via the propaganda channels and the growing threats against open debate on those who have a different position on the topic.
It is a SCAM!