tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35768807781121237902024-03-06T00:39:52.812-05:00ExaeromanJesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11298986413269759484noreply@blogger.comBlogger207125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-28936201762294572692022-11-10T14:51:00.006-05:002022-11-10T15:56:34.673-05:00<h1 align="center" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
What's the Difference Between a Libertarian and a Librarian?</h1>
<p align="center" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<h2 align="center" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">Sounds
like the beginning of a riddle, but it's not.</h2>
<p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Just a few days ago,
my friend Bill, the state chairman of the Libertarian Party of
Delaware as it happens, approached one of the local libraries in
northern Delaware to propose a Liberty Story Hour. The program was to
be presented by him and perhaps a colleague or two. The program would
feature stories about the founding fathers, limited government,
responsible spending, etc. and would be tailored to children and be
presented in an age appropriate way.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Bill got a very
polite response from the library.</span></p><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgtCe_l3PqTwFEBXNHVJJGTtJHInzFrrb3ouWIpaQFi1wsGB559WuSw0LJouHS2WY9OgJmDOKjDS23VdTIaUvrbOLNxLMj8i7gQxgvPklCUOExQP_HQud43Zcyq-RZzE8iviZIAFur2R9isLZRzBVBDM84Lp6c968EvMpIDwhablfSocMSqXXbmnKtZMA/s372/Librarian%20Rejection%20of%20Liberty%20Story%20Hour%20Edited.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="372" data-original-width="309" height="296" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgtCe_l3PqTwFEBXNHVJJGTtJHInzFrrb3ouWIpaQFi1wsGB559WuSw0LJouHS2WY9OgJmDOKjDS23VdTIaUvrbOLNxLMj8i7gQxgvPklCUOExQP_HQud43Zcyq-RZzE8iviZIAFur2R9isLZRzBVBDM84Lp6c968EvMpIDwhablfSocMSqXXbmnKtZMA/w247-h296/Librarian%20Rejection%20of%20Liberty%20Story%20Hour%20Edited.jpg" width="247" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br />
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">
Thank you so much for the program description. I spoke to my manager
about the program and we are going to pass. While we appreciate the
literacy aspect of this, we just don't think this would be a good fit
for our public library. Again, thank you for considering us!</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">
Have a great evening.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">
Signed xxxxxxxx</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">
(she/her/hers)</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">
Her Title xxxxxxx</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.49in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">That
was a polite response, right? If the response had been written in
Ordinary English then I'd have said yes. It was a polite response.
But the response wasn't written in Ordinary English. That was
Bureaucrat English. When you translate from Bureaucrat English to
Ordinary English, what Bill really got was a big fat Fuck You! Yes, I
realize that this paragraph gets cut if published anywhere else but on my own blog, but I had to get
it out of my system!</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Not a good fit for
"our library?" What does that mean exactly? Not in keeping
with "our" community standards maybe? Not in keeping with
"our" politics perhaps? Back in 2019, another local library
held a Drag Queen Story Time. Oh, you thought those only happened in
places like San Francisco or Boston or New York City? Nope. This Drag
Queen Story Time was held right here in our own back yard at the Old
New Castle Library. I'll emphasize, it was not the same library my
friend Bill approached, but they're both right here in our community.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Now, let me just
say, it's not that I was a huge advocate of Liberty Story Hour, but I
didn't oppose it either. It seemed like a perfectly reasonable thing
to do, and a wise man once told me, "Don't criticize someone's
activism just because it isn't your particular brand of activism."
So I'm not writing this article to advocate for Liberty Story Hour in
our public libraries. I'm not even writing this article to oppose
Drag Queen Story Times in those libraries. There are plenty of others
who may be motivated to write those articles and God bless them. I'm
writing this article to ask just how relevant libraries are these
days. And maybe to talk a little bit about pronouns. Heaven forgive
me, but we have to take a little time to talk about those pronouns.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm a
traditionalist. I don't use pronouns. By the way, traditionalist is
not a dog whistle for bigot, homophobe, xenophobe or any other
"phobe." It's not even a dog whistle for conservative. I'm
a Libertarian. Tradition is not a dirty word, and it's not a dog
whistle for anything else. If you want to talk about a dog whistle,
let's talk about those pronouns! Would anybody have any difficulty
guessing on which end of the political spectrum or even the tradition
spectrum that librarian resides? Not once you realize what
information listing your pronouns really conveys. Now that's a dog
whistle. To be honest, I'm grateful for this dog whistle. The
message comes through loud and clear. I think we know who we're
dealing with here. Perhaps Bill should have offered to do Liberty
Story Hour in drag.
</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Oddly enough, on
reflection, I realized that despite having read that librarian's
email several times, I had never noticed what her pronouns were.
Don't misunderstand me. I recognized that she had listed her
pronouns, but the information those pronouns were meant to convey,
never registered with me. I don't mock this librarian for whatever
sexual orientation those pronouns reveal. I mock her for the
arrogance, the presumptuousness, the narcissism that posting them
reveals. I don't ridicule her based on any new awareness of who she
prefers to have sex with. I ridicule her for presuming that I care,
or even that I should care!
</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">So, enough about
pronouns. What about libraries?</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">There is a lot of
controversy surrounding what those of us with traditional values see
as an attempt to indoctrinate children in our public schools. Between
the 1619 Project, climate alarmism, Gay Pride, and all the other woke
agendas being pushed in our public schools, it's surprising they have
any time left to teach the ABC's. Judging by test scores, maybe they
don't. I think it's time to recognize that, generally speaking, the
same woke ideologues who control the education system in this
country, also control most of the libraries. It used to be the
responsible thing to do to promote and fund libraries in your
community. Is it still such a good idea? If libraries have become the
domain of propagandists and indoctrinators, maybe the answer is no.
</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Maybe that librarian
did my friend Bill a favor by rejecting his idea for a Liberty Story
Hour. Why would a traditionalist want to lure parents of
impressionable kids into a library to get habituated to a system that
may allow you your Liberty Story Hour this week, but next week might
be sponsoring a field trip for six year olds to the local drag bar.
They could use Liberty Story Hour as a gateway to introduce your kids
to all the other woke agendas to which they are so devoted. Parents
have a difficult enough time fending off that indoctrination in the
public schools. If you're one of those traditional parents, why would
you then willingly subject your children to the same propaganda at
the library? Especially if these programs are predominantly run by a
bunch of woke, pronoun sporting harpies more interested in recruiting
soldiers for "the cause" than in promoting the welfare of
your kids.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">I used to be a huge
fan of libraries. Once upon a time, I was also a big fan of Public
Radio, but they've managed to ruin that too. I spent a lot of time in
libraries. At one time, I looked forward to my retirement years when
I could spend even more time in libraries. Then a funny thing
happened. This new thing called the internet came along, and all of a
sudden, libraries just didn't seem that relevant any more. These days, that's
what the internet is for. Maybe its time to realize that even
though it was once a good idea to promote libraries to your children,
perhaps in today's climate, that's not so important. Is blind
devotion to the anachronistic idea of a physical library really such sound thinking? As far as public policy is concerned, perhaps less money
should be devoted to libraries and a bit more focus placed on
ensuring an internet free of viewpoint censorship.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;">There was a time
when criticizing libraries would have been considered almost
sacrilegious, and I'm sure there are hordes of angry, blue haired,
pierced, and tattooed, Bernie loving librarians organizing, even as we speak, preparing the campaign to
get me canceled for daring to speak against the institution. For
them, I offer this:</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKZdbIeQ8zUIvma-B1TIn3Sa_BjtVBAai0Ez1qx_I01tydhhU1mQdv-4P9IRIsdpQkRVHi27bf3nfnA0S56cqCqBh81aA6w6nhoOlqtNi9V3KQO2a8022C8TH3ytpyRmqi5572r76cd4P1sd895jH19zBK8jn3I9WfpEZg48_r-Yg8ZzNLikGpTutBrA/s290/Librarian%20Shushing.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="220" data-original-width="290" height="118" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKZdbIeQ8zUIvma-B1TIn3Sa_BjtVBAai0Ez1qx_I01tydhhU1mQdv-4P9IRIsdpQkRVHi27bf3nfnA0S56cqCqBh81aA6w6nhoOlqtNi9V3KQO2a8022C8TH3ytpyRmqi5572r76cd4P1sd895jH19zBK8jn3I9WfpEZg48_r-Yg8ZzNLikGpTutBrA/w155-h118/Librarian%20Shushing.jpg" width="155" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br />A Libertarian walks
into a library and asks the librarian for an ounce of legal cannabis.
The librarian replies indignantly, "Sir, this is a library." The Libertarian apologizes, leans in a
bit closer and <b>WHISPERS</b> back, "Sorry. I'd like an ounce of legal
cannabis."
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span>
</p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-40764781400394592522022-04-17T19:08:00.005-04:002022-04-17T19:16:35.941-04:00Just in Time for Easter, Marijuana Legislation is Resurrected in Delaware<p><br /></p><p> On March 10th of this year, <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=79083" target="_blank">House Bill 305</a>, a bill to legalize marijuana, <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/json/RollCallController/GenerateRollCallPdf?rollCallId=52886&chamberId=2" target="_blank">failed in the General Assembly.</a> Contrary to the conventional wisdom, many Libertarians were glad to see this legislation go down in flames (or if you prefer, up in smoke). Sure, it legalized recreational cannabis, but it also created a labyrinth of taxation, regulation, compliance obstacles and licensing carve outs for favored Democratic social justice constituencies. You could forget about the mom and pop pot businesses and a new cash crop for local farmers. The numbers of growers, manufacturers and retailers was to be strictly regulated. Licenses were to be limited and expensive. This bill was written with the Corporate Cannabis Industry in mind. It was a crony capitalist's wet dream. And it didn't allow for home grow either. The State's alcohol regulations allow home hobbyists to brew beer and make wine for personal consumption. Why no similar concessions to the casual cannabis enthusiast with some potted plants (pun intended) in his basement under a grow light? Good riddance to a bad bill. We want legalized weed, but not at any price. The next time, we'll get a better bill, and as it turns out, the next time might be now.<br /></p><p>Several days ago I saw that Delaware <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/AssemblyMember/151/Osienski" target="_blank">Representative Ed Osienski (D-Newark)</a>, the sponsor of the failed HB 305, had introduced two new bills to try again to legalize marijuana in the state. One bill, <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=99297" target="_blank">(HB 371)</a> is short and sweet; just over two pages. It legalizes possession for recreational use, in private, of under an ounce, by those 21 and over, if acquired without remuneration. I know there were an awful lot of clauses in that last sentence, but as laws go, what could be simpler than that? Don't ask how one is presumed to have obtained said marijuana if you can't buy it or grow it. It's like they're saying you can privately smoke all the free marijuana you can get your hands on as long as you get it in less than one ounce quantities. The new bill fails to address how to find those generous philanthropists who are presumably going to be giving away all that free marijuana. This minor omission reminds me of the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" target="_blank">South Park story of the underpants gnomes and their mystery plan for making profit</a>. </p><p>But there is more to the story. Accompanying HB 371, the legalization bill, is <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=99298" target="_blank">HB 372</a>, the taxation and regulation bill. And where <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/json/BillDetail/GeneratePdfDocument?legislationId=99297&legislationTypeId=1&docTypeId=2&legislationName=HB371" target="_blank">HB 371 is just over two pages</a> and relatively easy for a layperson to understand, <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/json/BillDetail/GeneratePdfDocument?legislationId=99298&legislationTypeId=1&docTypeId=2&legislationName=HB372" target="_blank">HB </a><a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/json/BillDetail/GeneratePdfDocument?legislationId=99298&legislationTypeId=1&docTypeId=2&legislationName=HB372" target="_blank">372 is almost 50 pages long</a> and will put even the average insomniac to sleep after the first few paragraphs. I'm sure there are no hidden surprises or corporate giveaways anywhere in those fifty or so pages of legislative legal jargon. In describing the new legislation, the <a href="https://mailchi.mp/a8b88da4c0e7/daybreak-delaware-house-bills-separate-two-marijuana-concerns" target="_blank">State News quoted Representative Osienski as follows:</a></p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">“I think the whole idea of breaking it up into two is allowing those
that have concerns about legalization to have the opportunity to vote no
on it, but then have the opportunity to vote yes on regulation,” </p><p>When I first read this, I was furious. I thought to myself, "How hypocritical can these politicians get? The original bill failed, and in its resurrected form they are more concerned with cementing in place the horrible taxation and the regulation parts and to hell with the personal liberty aspect of legalization." I was reminded of the Lily Tomlin quote. "No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up!" I was really pissed, but it turns out, I was wrong. And wrong in a good way.<br /></p><p> Every once in a while something happens to remind me that I'm not as smart as I think I am. This was one of those times. It turns out that tax related bills have a higher threshold for passage than other routine pieces of legislation. Regular bills require a simple majority, but tax bills require a 3/5 vote in order to pass. The original <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=79083" target="_blank">HB 305</a> which contained both legalization and taxation failed despite a vote of 23 in favor and 14 opposed because this bill required 25 votes in order to pass. No Republicans supported the bill, and four Representatives, two Republicans and two Democrats, did not vote. <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/json/RollCallController/GenerateRollCallPdf?rollCallId=52886&chamberId=2" target="_blank"> It missed passage by only two votes.</a> Close, but no cigar. </p><p>So what happens now? Well, legalization alone as defined in HB 371 only requires a simple majority to pass the House. There are already enough co-sponsors of the bill to insure that happens. Of course, we don't know how the bill will fare in the Senate, and the Governor has expressed opposition to marijuana legalization in the past. And overriding a veto would require a 3/5 vote of both chambers, so we would be right back where we started. Still, I wonder if the Representatives who did not vote last time could be persuaded to support the new legalization bill. Perhaps a few Republicans could even be persuaded to do the same if they could successfully amend HB 372 to reduce the taxation aspects of that legislation. <a href="https://legis.delaware.gov/AssemblyMember/151/MichaelSmith" target="_blank">Representative Michael Smith (R-Newark)</a> had suggested he might have supported the old bill had the Democrats been willing to agree to certain amendments that would have allowed past felony convictions for certain tax or drug related crimes to be considered when approving licenses. On the face of it, those sound like reasonable amendments. I'm not sure why Democrats in the House let HB 305 fail last March rather than adopt those changes. Maybe there is more to the story. I'd like to know what happened in the smoke filled room back then, because that drama is about to be replayed, and I'd like to see a different outcome this time, hopefully resulting in the passage of cannabis legalization.</p><p> So what should we advocate for going forward? Well, obviously we want to support legislators in the House who are already supporting HB 371 and encourage the others, both Republicans and Democrats, to join them to form a veto proof majority. And of course, we need to urge the members of the Senate to do likewise. If we could accomplish that, I'd be happy to see HB 372 simply fail. Wouldn't that be a delicious bit of irony. Legislators try to manipulate the parliamentary system to secure more tax revenue and service special interests and accidentally succeed in advancing personal liberty without scoring any of the graft. It's almost like a Libertarian fairy tale come true. But let's be honest. That's not going to happen. If HB 371 passed and HB 372 failed, the Governor would simply veto HB 371, and the General Assembly would find an excuse not to override. </p><p>It looks like we might be pretty close to a win in Delaware for cannabis legalization. How far can we push legislators to improve these bills without the whole enterprise failing again like it did last time? Well, the first thing to say is, if the bills aren't improved, then I for one would just as soon see them fail again. Now is not the time to be timid. Time is on our side. Legalization will eventually become a reality. There is no need to sell out to Corporate Cannabis when we are this close. Let them want legalization more than we do. We'll get a better bill with that mindset, even if it takes a little longer. </p><p>So, if we aren't likely to get HB 371 without HB 372, what do we want to change? First and foremost, I would say, add home grow. That has got to be top of the list from the individual freedom point of view. If it's good enough for alcohol, it's good enough for cannabis. I can't think of any excuse but a lame one for refusing to add that. I will never be convinced that such an omission wasn't the result of industry lobbying. Limit quantities if you must, but under no circumstances should we accept a bill that handcuffs aficionados of the noble herb to a product marketed by Phillip Morris or Pfizer Pharmaceuticals. After that, legislators should be pushed to increase the number of licenses issued to grow, manufacture and sell, and to lower the costs of those licenses along with the rate of taxation applied. How can the State expect to eliminate the black market for cannabis if their taxation and regulatory structure prices the legal stuff out of the market? And ditch the special carve outs for licensing Democrats' favored special interest constituencies. With an abundance of licenses, they shouldn't be needed anyway. These new laws should provide a windfall to Delaware farmers and entrepreneurs, not to the State and large corporate interests. If Republicans can't stop legalization, and they refuse to support it, let them at least apply a more capitalist friendly structure to the regulation. With a little bit of effort, maybe we can shame them into following those illusory free market principles they claim to believe in. Or is that another fairy tale? </p><p>Delaware legislators are giving Cannabis legalization a Mulligan this year. Let's hope they don't screw it up this time.<br /></p>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-62157610331458889472021-11-11T15:24:00.028-05:002021-11-11T19:52:40.800-05:00My Open Letter to the LNC <p>
<br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">10 November 2021 </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">From: Jess McVay </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">To: Susan Hogarth </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Dear Susan: </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> My name is Jess McVay. I don't think we have met before but I believe you are acquainted with my wife and son, Mary Pat and Will. I am not directly involved in this recent dispute over who rightfully controls the State Board of Delaware and its assets, but as you might imagine, sharing a last name with two of the principals and opposing their actions in the strongest possible terms, I feel compelled to write. A more conventional letter might start by lamenting how much it pains me to involve myself in this matter in light of the family relationships involved, but I must confess that at this moment, I do not feel any such pain. I am Will's dad. I love my son, but I hate what he did. As for the pain, I fully anticipate that some day in the not too distant future, I will feel the full weight of that burden. But as for now, there is an urgent problem in Delaware that must be addressed. There will be time for family considerations later. In the meantime, I am trying, though occasionally failing, to temper my actions, in anticipation of the difficulties my position may introduce into these relationships. Principles must be defended, often at great cost, and sometimes even when it involves conflict with family. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I wish to express my outrage at the travesty that is unfolding in Delaware and demand action from the Libertarian National Committee. Some bad actors in Delaware, led by my son, are perverting justice, robbing Delaware Libertarians of their rights, and embarrassing Libertarians all over the country, not just in Delaware. One of my earliest reactions upon learning of what was happening was that somewhere in America, James Weeks is dancing again. When our ideological adversaries want to argue how ridiculous we are as a political force, they will no longer invoke the name of James Weeks. From now on, Will McVay will be the poster child for their derision. Great news for Mr Weeks, and perhaps, contrary to what you might expect, great news for Will as well. Will likes attention. For those on the Libertarian National Committee who have a responsibility to preserve the reputation of the Libertarian Party, this incident poses both an obstacle and an opportunity. I think the reason it's an obstacle is obvious. It would take too much time and sidetrack the purpose of this letter to recount the myriad of injuries that Will has visited upon the party, its image, and its Delaware membership, a few specific members in particular. I'll leave it to the principals in this matter to make that case. They have been working diligently to assemble the evidence that will inform the jury, so to speak, and compel them to act in favor of Chairman Hinds and his Board. My goal with this letter is to persuade the Committee that it has an opportunity, and more importantly, an urgent responsibility to see justice done, restore integrity in Delaware, and not incidentally in the process, to protect the Party's image throughout the nation. In the process it must also censure those who have demonstrated such contempt for both justice and integrity and who, with a casual disregard for the optics of their actions, have seriously jeopardized the Party's reputation. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">So who the hell am I, and why should the LNC care? I am one of the nation's small L libertarians, and I am watching. To be honest, I am presently one of the nation's less committed libertarians, at least these days. I used to be more committed. I've been an active member of the Party in Delaware since roughly 2010. Over the years I've helped directly with campaigns, actively raised and contributed money, and held positions on the State Board. I've been a delegate to national conventions, helped plan state conventions, and I even represented the Party as a candidate for governor several years ago. But lately I have become disillusioned. I was uninspired by the Party's 2020 candidate and more recently, I was disappointed by the Party's tepid response to COVID policy and social media censorship. It would be no exaggeration to say that I felt as politically homeless inside the Libertarian Party as I had felt outside it prior to 2010. Currently, I am a registered Libertarian once again, but I am not confident that I will remain one indefinitely. I have many friends in the party, but I'm not convinced the Libertarian Party is the answer to promoting liberty in America. Delaware is the bluest of blue states, and the LPD's success in Delaware consists of little else beyond showing the flag. The National LP seems distant, impotent, and more and more irrelevant to me with every passing day. And yet, despite all this, I came back. I'm back, but I'm not sure how long I'll be staying. I'm just like thousands and thousands of other big L Libertarians and small L libertarians across the nation, and we are watching. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> In making any future decisions whether to stay or go, I do know how I will judge the Party going forward. A clue resides in the Pinned Tweet that I placed on my Twitter feed way back in February 2021, long before all this business happened. It's a brief reflection. Not borrowed from anyone else, but my own composition. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Not Victory </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Not Wealth </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Not Love </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Not Peace </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Oddly enough, not even Liberty </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>#Justice </b></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Justice was important to me then. Justice is important to me now. The search for Justice is the only reason I am bothering to write this letter. I'm writing because there are victims of injustice, not because those victims happen to belong to the Mises Caucus. Most victims of injustice are far removed from the world I live in. I am often helpless to assist them. But these Delaware victims are close to home, and they are friends of mine. The fact that my family members are responsible for their victimization imposes an even greater duty on me to support them. My reasons have very little to do with the Libertarian Party of Delaware. Despite a long association with the LPD, I'm not enthusiastic about their prospects for political success. And my reasons are certainly not about the National LP. They are just a means to an end. They are the one institution that has it in their power to see justice done if they're up to the task that is. If they're even willing to try. I'm not sure I'll be sticking around the Libertarian Party after this go round. At this point, it's kind of up to the party to prove they're worthy of my support. If this was a job interview, I'd be the one asking the questions to see if we're a good fit, not the other way around. I can tell you one thing with certainty. I say this dispassionately and with no anger and no malice. If the LP can't fix this, the Party is dead to me. As I said before, I am watching. Big L and small L libertarians just like me all over the country are watching. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> I am not a member of the Mises Caucus, but I have many friends within that group, some old, and some new. My son will state in public and occasionally for the podcast cameras that the coup he initiated, though he won't call it a coup, has nothing to do with the Mises Caucus. He'll claim it has to do with obstruction and gridlock on the Board, with misunderstandings about Board members' affiliations, and about protecting the social media image of the Delaware Party. But he'll insist it has nothing to do with the Mises Caucus. That's simply not true. I am Williams father. I am greatly saddened and a bit perplexed by his recent actions, but I can tell you one thing with certainty. This as absolutely about the Mises Caucus. I don't think that factionalism within a state board is a bad thing, and even if it is, it's a normal thing. For the past decade or so, the Delaware Board did not know factionalism. They were a close knit group of like minded friends with the common goal of more Liberty. In 2021, that changed. It became more factional, just like hundreds of other political party boards all over the country. The goal was still Liberty, but now there were different views on how best to pursue it. Normal boards develop ways to deal with factionalism. Indeed, why would boards resort to formats like Robert's Rules if not as an acknowledgment that factionalism exists, and it can be dealt with reasonably. There are ways to coexist with fellow Libertarians who may not agree with you on everything. You approach them with good faith and an open mind. You don't murder them while they sleep. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">A week or so after all this started I called Will. I figured that despite my anger over what he'd done, I owed him a rational conversation on the subject. I tried to talk him off this ledge he was on. I focused on things like ethics and integrity, and most of all on Justice. He listened patiently to my arguments. I hoped I was getting through to him. I began to speculate on possible outcomes and whether any of the party leadership would permit him to continue an active role after what he'd done. I doubted it, and I told him so. When I was done he responded. He wasn't going to quit. He asked me why I ever thought he would. He said he thought he could win. Naturally, his response disappointed me. It reminded me of the story of Stalin's response to a French diplomat who suggested that Stalin stop his persecution of Russian Catholics. Stalin asked the diplomat how many divisions the Pope had. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVtlKS7zgp_YE0O793Pk3n3_-QsxbeG-RFj_AGicsLzss7mMTR8zoQ2pJRlm66sJ8ijzKMV9WcZuG_J6MgVXccPaVQGB3bBZGr0YgppJK-wrZSJNApoXkbrQSB1W3ZMULEwhlbGZ7-iq8i/s500/Joseph-Stalin.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="388" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVtlKS7zgp_YE0O793Pk3n3_-QsxbeG-RFj_AGicsLzss7mMTR8zoQ2pJRlm66sJ8ijzKMV9WcZuG_J6MgVXccPaVQGB3bBZGr0YgppJK-wrZSJNApoXkbrQSB1W3ZMULEwhlbGZ7-iq8i/w496-h640/Joseph-Stalin.jpg" width="496" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">This wasn't about ethics to Will. This was about power. At that point the phone conversation ended. In the days that followed, Will seems to have become even more determined to persist. Two nights ago, gloating and surrounded by a few of his supporters and co-conspirators, he declared to me, confidently, assertively, and arrogantly, that it was already over. He had already won. I hope he is wrong. Delaware needs the LNC's help to make it so. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">As normal and reasonable as factionalism is on a State Board, there is no place for politics in the adjudication of this dispute. I worry that the LNC will deal with this as a political matter rather than a judicial one. I'm afraid that the factional affiliations of the Committee members will override whatever commitment they may have to defending our reputation as the Party of Principle. But my concerns notwithstanding, this is the venue in which this portion of the dispute must be resolved. I feel I must emphasize that any and all decisions and judgments that are made must be made on the basis of ethical and procedural considerations, and those decisions must be seen to have been made free of political or factional influences or interventions. I have expressed concerns on my social media pages about the ability of the LNC to take the politics out of this issue and resolve it on its merits. The Committee's recent performance in New Hampshire does not exactly inspire confidence, and as I've already stated, (Cue broken record) Libertarians will be watching. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">High minded values like Justice aside for a moment, there are some other more mundane, more pedestrian, more political, reasons to fix this problem quickly. Many in the media don't care about Libertarians, but what if the media chose to tell this story. What if, for instance, comedian and popular podcaster Dave Smith chose to highlight it? What if that brought it to the attention of outlets like Reason Magazine or Kennedy Nation? What if on some slow news day in the future, Tucker Carlson or Lester Holt ran the story to ridicule the Party and fill a five minute news segment or two? How does the LNC want that story to end? “This crazy stuff happened, and the LP did nothing except let it fester”, or “The LP acted swiftly and fixed the problem.” If this burlesque show performance in Delaware is allowed to succeed, we will see repeats of these destructive and distracting sideshows. Indeed, some would suggest that this episode is not the first, but is itself the repeat. The circumstances strangely resemble those in New Hampshire several months ago. This is a pretty good example of “History does not repeat, but it rhymes.” It's almost as if there was some larger organized plan afoot that is bigger than just Will McVay. If anyone is concerned about the Party's image or even the Party's survival, that should be terrifying. Libertarians are watching. Soon, the whole nation could be watching. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> I have always been told that if you're trying to persuade someone to do something, don't neglect at some point to directly ask them to do it. Candidates might spend twenty minutes on a stump speech giving the voters all the reasons in the world why they put their trust in that candidate and then never actually ask them for their vote.
I won't make that mistake. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Here's what I'm asking for: </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm asking the Committee to recognize that Bill Hinds is the rightful Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Delaware. He was duly elected to that position by a majority of those present at the State Convention in June 2021. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> I'm asking the Committee to recognize that Amy LePore is the rightful Vice Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Delaware. She was duly elected to that position by a majority of those present at the State Convention in June 2021. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm asking the Committee to recognize that Dave Casey may be an asshole, but he's our asshole, and he is also a rightful Representative to the State Board from Newcastle County. He was duly elected by the members of the Newcastle County Libertarian Party to represent them on the State Board. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm asking the Committee to recognize that Dylan Griffith is a rightful Representative to the State Board from Newcastle County. He was duly elected by the members of the Newcastle County Libertarian Party to represent them on the State Board. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm asking the Committee to declare that none of the actions undertaken by Will McVay or any of his proxies from 1 October 2021 to the present are recognized by the National LP because they did not have proper recognized authority to perform those actions. This includes but is not limited to the Discord meeting held on 1 October and the Zoom call held on 31 October. Their actions are all declared invalid. This includes, but is not limited to all changes to By-laws or Articles of Association, all member and officer expulsions, all Board appointments made during this time period, all County Party disaffiliations, the de-credentialling of all 2161 (as of 1 November 2021) Delaware Libertarians as eligible voting party members, all the selective member re-credentialling, especially those of Will's co-conspirators and allies, all appointments of County level officers and State Board Representatives, the assignment of administrator privileges of all State and County level electronic assets, to Will McVay, and the vetoing of any county level resolutions by the illegitimate State Board, in particular those passed in Kent County where Will is County Chair where Will was rebuked and an investigation of his actions called for. Further, the Committee should state publicly and unequivocally that the basis for these decisions is judicial and procedural. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> I'm asking the Committee to censure Will McVay for his recent actions. Further, the Committee should state publicly and unequivocally that the basis for this censure is the Committee's determination that his actions were grotesquely unethical and that they showed utter disregard of the Party's reputation and its commitment to remaining the Party of Principle. Further, that Will McVay, as part of this censure, shall not be credentialed as a delegate to the 2022 LP convention from Delaware or any other state. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm asking the Committee to give serious consideration to expanding that censure to other members of Mr. McVay's cabal whose behavior you determine warrants such censure. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm asking the Committee to declare that should any dispute arise in regard to credentialing delegates to the LP National Convention in 2022, the Committee commits to recognizing the delegates endorsed by the duly elected State Board of the LPD as constituted in accordance with the above requested Committee actions and currently Chaired by Mr. Hinds. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm asking the Committee to commit to assisting the duly elected State Board in their efforts to recover their ballot access in Delaware. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm asking the Committee to commit to assisting the duly elected State Board in their efforts to recover access to their social media accounts to include, at the very least, directing all traffic initiated through the National Libertarian Party site to the appropriate sites of the duly elected State Board of Delaware. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>In conclusion: </b></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">They say there are two sides to every story. That's true here too.
One side is pursuing justice. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">That side has right on their side, and they can show you all the receipts </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">That side has acted ethically and with integrity </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The other side just wants to win. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Thank you Susan. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Feel free to contact me if there are any questions via any of the various venues listed above.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Please help us Obiwan...</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Yours in Liberty, </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"> Jess McVay
</span></p>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-25870803973095053392021-01-12T11:52:00.003-05:002021-01-12T12:26:59.098-05:00Is Q Anon an Elaborate Psy Op?<p> </p><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS4q9rp3RUk&t=2430s" target="_blank">This video is cued to start at 40 minutes 30 seconds.</a></div><div><br /></div><div>Robert Barnes has a theory that Q Anon is a psy-op. A psychological operation developed by somebody to defeat Trump. They promoted a series of false narratives designed to reassure Trump supporters that they were winning, and that all they needed to do was "trust the plan". Every time a prediction failed to come true, they'd come up with a new narrative to explain how it was all still a part of some grand strategy. Like the series of trenches during WW I into which you could retreat when the first one was overrun. Trump would declassify documents, and we'd all live happily ever after. Then the declassified stuff was filled with redactions so you were no wiser than you were before the release. Then Bill Barr got appointed Attorney General and John Durham was on the case. Everyone was waiting for a blockbuster release of information just before the election. We know how that turned out. Thanks for nothing Messrs. Barr and Durham. Trump is luring them into a false sense of security so he can draw out the culprits, some said. He's about to drop the hammer. Every failure was explained by a new promise of victory to come if you just trusted the plan. Like James Lileks over at Ricochet said, it's just like those doomsday cultists who revise the date that the world will end each time a deadline comes and goes and the birds are still singing. If we'd known Durham would turn out to be a dud, would we have expended as little more effort in get out the vote, or countering some of the Democratic lawfare that contributed to gutting mail in ballot security?</div><div><br /></div><div>Eventually those who were the most committed to trust in the plan put the final nail in the coffin of Trump's struggle to expose the problems with this election. They committed violence at the Capitol. Nobody, and I mean nobody, will listen to the evidence of election irregularities now. The MSM got just what they needed to finally vanquish Donald Trump. So now we get a 24/7 campaign by Democrats, big tech and the press to demonize anybody who supported the president, and they'll push it as far as they can. Winning isn't enough. They want us defeated, demoralized, and silent. Silent by disappointment , silent due to fear of labeling, or silent by force if necessary. Hence the attack on social media. If the masters of psychological operations wrote books about their craft, this one would be a best seller. Trump supporters were lulled into a false sense of security and then tricked into becoming the agents of their own destruction. My guess is that 99% of Q folks probably aren't even in on the con. They're just dupes. The journalists and bloggers who claimed that Trump was playing 3-D chess probably believed it. They weren't stupid. They were naive. Sidney Powell isn't stupid. She was powned (Urban Dictionary: Purely Owned). General McInerney with his stories about Hammer and Scorecard? Probably the same.</div><div><br /></div><div>So what happens now? Well for starters, anybody with any sense has to disown Q Anon. It's like Buckley purging the John Birchers from the conservative movement in the 50's. I'm sympathetic to the Q folks because I think most of them meant well, but they acted stupidly, and they tainted everything that the populist conservative movement led by Donald Trump really stands for. We all need political allies in order for our ideas to prevail, but there is a limit to how far I will stretch the range of acceptability just to build a bigger coalition. There's no room for bigots and there is no room for Q. And I'm not implying the two are synonymous, but there might be some overlap.</div><div><br /></div><div>What do these conspirators, whoever they are, do now. Well ideally, they just disappear and cover their tracks. The win would be less decisive if people discovered the truth. No one is in quite as much awe of the magician once they see how the illusion was performed. But the cat is out of the bag. Folks are already whispering about psy-ops. Well, the playbook says discredit those people. Paint them as crazy. Paint them as fringe. If that fails, frame them for sexual misconduct <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter" target="_blank">(Scott Ritter)</a>. If that fails maybe even kill them <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist)" target="_blank">(Michael Hastings)</a>. Robert Barnes: I love you man. Please behave yourself, and please, please "Be careful out there!" (First TV reference--Hill Street Blues)</div><p> </p>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-89130009172221064922021-01-09T12:47:00.002-05:002021-01-09T12:52:19.299-05:00I'M RE-POSTING THIS EVERY DAY UNTIL I LEAVE FACEBOOK AND TWITTER<p> <br /></p><p> <br /></p><p> The previously clandestine and now quite overt censoring of conservative voices on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Platforms has now reached dangerous levels. This is not just about Trump. Social media is critical to modern political discourse. The censorship must be resisted. That means targeting profitability, and that means boycotts. But I won't cut off my nose to spite my face.
I will continue to use these platforms in the short term while taking the following measures to abandon them as soon as it is practical. </p><p> </p><p>1. To the greatest extent possible, I will try to post nearly exclusively on Parler and MeWe </p><p>2. I will post on Twitter and Facebook only links to those Parler and MeWe posts </p><p>3. You are not forced to join those sites to view my posts, but I hope once you are on the sites reading my stuff, you will take the opportunity to join those communities. Please join/follow/friend me when you get there. </p><p>4. Eventually, once those alternative communities have reached the critical mass needed to function as effectively as Twitter and Facebook once did, I will abandon those legacy services entirely. Ironically, with their recent actions, those legacy companies may have accelerated the realization of that network effect functionality. </p><p> </p><p>In the mean time, here is what else I am doing: </p><p>To the extent possible, I am viewing my favorite video podcasts on Rumble instead of YouTube. They don't censor political speech and their terms are financially much more appealing for content creators. Also, they have plans to incorporate live streaming in the new year. </p><p>I have abandoned Google as my search engine on all platforms. I use Duck Duck Go </p><p>I am researching my options for switching email providers to jettison G-Mail. Looking at Protonmail which offers end to end encryption. They don't mine your emails for data about you to sell. Even if privacy isn't your primary concern, you'll be incrementally robbing Google of a source of revenue. </p><p> </p><p>I'm <a href="https://parler.com/profile/Exaeroman/posts" target="_blank">@Exaeroman</a> at Parler </p><p>I'm <a href="https://mewe.com/i/jessemcvay" target="_blank">Jesse McVay</a> at MeWe </p><p><a href="https://Rumble.com">https://Rumble.com</a><a href="https://Rumble.com " target="_blank"> </a><br /></p><p><a href="https://DuckDuckGo.com" target="_blank">https://DuckDuckGo.com</a> <br /></p><p><a href="https://Protonmail.com" target="_blank">https://Protonmail.com</a></p><p> </p><p>Feel free to visit me on Parler or MeWe and comment if you have other suggestions for alternative social media platforms. </p><p>If you agree with this approach to taking back Social Media Freedom, please share and ReTweet (Echo) this post.</p>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-7244431784018174122021-01-07T09:57:00.001-05:002021-01-07T09:57:10.669-05:00It's a Two Front War Now and the Republican Party Must Be Defeated First<p> </p><div data-contents="true"><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="3bbr9-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3bbr9-0-0"><span><span data-offset-key="3bbr9-0-0"><span data-text="true">What</span></span></span><span data-offset-key="3bbr9-1-0"><span data-text="true"> happened at the Capitol yesterday was a spontaneous act of civil disobedience by a group of exuberant and frankly reckless Trump supporters. Nothing more. The MSM has seized upon the event to perpetuate their false narrative that Trump is an existential threat.</span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="aseu4-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="aseu4-0-0"><span data-offset-key="aseu4-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="2remm-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2remm-0-0"><span data-offset-key="2remm-0-0"><span data-text="true">Some are buying that story including many Republican lawmakers. Jan 6 never had a very good chance of flipping a result. It was meant to (1)provide a forum to present evidence and (2)force Republicans to declare a position: Accept the fraud or fight the fraud.</span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="2hr9c-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2hr9c-0-0"><span data-offset-key="2hr9c-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="8m1j4-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8m1j4-0-0"><span data-offset-key="8m1j4-0-0"><span data-text="true">Many fair weather Republicans are showing their true colors now and abandoning Trump. If the populist anti administrative state movement that Trump started is to survive, every one of those "summer soldier" Republicans needs to be primaried and defeated next time. </span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="7ldmd-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7ldmd-0-0"><span data-offset-key="7ldmd-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="eglo5-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="eglo5-0-0"><span data-offset-key="eglo5-0-0"><span data-text="true">That needs to happen whether Trump continues to lead the movement or not. The Catch 22 is that even though Trump is a lightening rod for all the disinformation the MSM will spread about him, he's probably the only one with the charisma to keep the movement intact. That means the struggle will be costly. Republicans will lose elections to Democrats initially because of the divisiveness it will entail. The old Republican Party won't quit without a fight, and they'll resort to the same goto move they use against third parties: Vote for us. You may not like us but the other choice is too risky and it's us or the evil Democrats. And that could work. If Trump populism is to take over the Republican Party, that party will need to be chipped away at piece by piece. That party needs to be battered to within inches of its life before it will concede, and that likely means some elections won by Democrats in the interim. </span></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="7veb6-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7veb6-0-0"><span data-offset-key="7veb6-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div></div><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1vl20" data-offset-key="12sso-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="12sso-0-0"><span data-offset-key="12sso-0-0"><span data-text="true">Are you up for that kind of fight? If not, then you might as well crawl back to Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham right now and beg for forgiveness and plead with them to take you back. Donald Trump, for all his flaws, started something very important for our country. The Republican Party, as it is presently constituted, wants to see Trumpism vanish from American politics. I hope we don't let that happen.</span></span></div></div></div><p> </p>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-90992409162272289962020-12-01T22:49:00.002-05:002020-12-01T22:55:42.044-05:00Trump Should Threaten to Support Loeffler and Dump Perdue<p> </p><p>Trump may yet win this election. Or he may not. I believe that if he
loses, there is solid evidence it will be as the result of fraud. But
that’s not directly relevant to what I want to discuss in this post.
Regardless of the outcome for Trump, I think it can be generally agreed
that Trump grew the Republican coalition over the last four years. It
can be further agreed that the massive turnout for Republicans this year
was a direct result of Trump bringing out huge numbers of voters, many
of whom wouldn’t have bothered if Trump had not been on the ballot. As a
result of that enthusiasm directly attributable to Donald Trump, the
Republicans gained seats in the House that they were expecting to lose,
they held the Senate (so far), and they improved their standing in
Governorships and State Houses across the country. The Republican Party
owes Trump a huge debt of gratitude. But are they bothering to actually
express any of that gratitude? I would argue that they are publicly
paying lip service to Trump while privately expressing relief that he
may soon be out of their hair. And that’s why they are barely bothering
to lift a finger to help “stop the steal.” I’d like to see Trump dish
out some punishment to these Republican swamp types along the lines of
what he’s done to Democrats over the past four years. It’s time for
Trump to play hardball, and I think he should throw his first pitch in
Georgia.</p>
<div data-contents="true">
<div data-block="true" data-editor="buja7" data-offset-key="6ue48-0-0">
<div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="6ue48-0-0"><span data-offset-key="6ue48-0-0">I
guess I should warn you that I’m speaking from the perspective of a
conservative who is disgusted with the Republican Party and who wants
Trump to be the agent of change that the Party needs. Trump is the guy
who is transforming the Republicans (gutting them would be a more
descriptive term) from just another party of the swamp into an Americ</span><span data-offset-key="6ue48-0-1">a
first, economic/nationalist populist party of the middle class. He’s
created a new coalition with working class voters, conservative minority
voters, voters wanting less foreign intervention, and socially more
liberal voters who previously thought their only option was to vote for
Team Blue, but who are now disillusioned with the progressive,
intersectional elements that are pushing the Democratic Party off of a
cliff. </span></div>
</div>
<div data-block="true" data-editor="buja7" data-offset-key="5sgj5-0-0">
<div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="5sgj5-0-0"><span data-offset-key="5sgj5-0-0"> </span></div>
</div>
<div data-block="true" data-editor="buja7" data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">
<div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"><span data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">The
Senate is now 50 to 48. The two Georgia Senate seats are critical for
Republicans if they want to keep the Senate out of Democratic hands. A
50/50 Senate with Kamala Harris as a tie breaker is a horrible vision of
our dystopian future if Republicans lose those two seats. The prospect
of a Democratic House, an (essentially) Democratic Senate, and a
Democratic president is just too terrible to contemplate, though, to be
honest, we need to start contemplating it pretty soon, because it is
certainly possible if not likely. So Republicans really need to do all
they can to support wins for David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler. But for
people like me, the prospect of supporting the likes of Perdue and
Loeffler is unappetizing to say the least. They are both swamp
Republicans and they, along with most of the Republican elites, are
offering Trump no help in turning back the steal in Georgia. In an ideal
world, they would both lose as a result, and under ordinary
circumstances, I’d be quite happy to see them go. But not now. Not this
year. There’s too much at stake. Just like FDR had to ally with Stalin
to beat Hitler, we must now hold our noses and ally with Purdue and
Loeffler to defeat the prospect of a Democratic majority in the Senate. </span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"><span data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"><span data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">Or maybe we don’t. </span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"><span data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </span></div><div class="public-DraftStyleDefault-block public-DraftStyleDefault-ltr" data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"><span data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">Maybe we don’t have to completely capitulate to the
swamp. Trump still has some cards to play. Whether conventional
Republicans like it or not, Donald Trump has leverage. Win or lose,
Donald Trump IS the Republican Party, and he can demand conditions. And
if Republicans don’t accommodate him, Trump is in a position to
demonstrate just what a powerful force he can be going forward, and he
can start in Georgia.<br /></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">Look at the current situation in Georgia. More specifically look at the numbers from the November Senate races: (Click to Enlarge)<br /></div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9GHzSPkQcLbsRcSwN7PIUGNb8ML8fqc9G2TpN28knkceaBZGR91TISzfOlD3fczvk2o5WXGlAfCqkg5ov_FrLPCJ6DNcvoNjCU08mUS7NB1FqhI18s1Lsz2PIsknmvYH1jABi58NAvuN9/s1339/Georgia+Senate+Races.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="582" data-original-width="1339" height="174" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9GHzSPkQcLbsRcSwN7PIUGNb8ML8fqc9G2TpN28knkceaBZGR91TISzfOlD3fczvk2o5WXGlAfCqkg5ov_FrLPCJ6DNcvoNjCU08mUS7NB1FqhI18s1Lsz2PIsknmvYH1jABi58NAvuN9/w400-h174/Georgia+Senate+Races.png" width="400" /></a></div><br /></div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">If I was a Republican candidate for the
US Senate in Georgia, I don’t think I would feel too confident about
the January election based on these numbers. Especially if my name was
David Perdue. Perdue led Jon Ossoff by only 1.8% or a mere 88,098 votes.
The Libertarian candidate got 2.2% of the vote or 106,767 votes. The
Libertarian covered the spread between the two majority candidates. That
almost never happens. The disposition of his votes in the runoff will
determine who wins in January. I spent 10 years as a Libertarian, and
believe me when I tell you, if you’re a Republican and your political
future rests on the electoral decisions of a bunch of Libertarians, you
are in big trouble. And if your Republican vote turnout depends on the
coattails of the most popular Republican presidential candidate since
Ronald Reagan, and that candidate isn’t on the ballot in January, YOU’RE
SCREWED!!</div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">Loeffler’s prospects aren’t much
better. Even if you add all of Doug Collins’ votes to hers, that only
puts her at 45.9%, and a lot of the also rans in that race were
Democrats whose votes can be presumed to go to Loeffler’s Democratic
challenger in the runoff. I’m sure Loeffler and Perdue will both be the
beneficiaries of huge amounts of campaign money, but so will the
Democratic candidates. And Democratic enthusiasm will be off the charts
at the prospect of taking back the Senate. Republican enthusiasm? Well
that depends. With the support of Donald Trump, the Republicans might
have a chance. Without that support, Republicans are toast; especially
if they have not taken any measures to eliminate the factors that
contributed to the voter fraud that lost Trump the race in November.
Factors such as huge numbers of mail in ballots most of which were
processed without signature checks. Factors such as large numbers of
those mail in registrants having P.O Boxes or mail drops listed as their
physical address which directly contradicts the law. If large numbers
of those illegally registered voters had voted in person, one might
presume that they were innocent mistakes. The fact that they
overwhelmingly voted by mail means the chances are pretty good that most
of those ballots were fraudulent. I’m going to take the liberty of
putting those votes in the Democratic column in January if the voter
rolls are not purged beforehand, and that means goodby Republican
Senate. </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">So what can be done? What does Trump
want? What should he demand? Well first of all, he must demand that the
purging of illegal registrations from the voter rolls be done sooner
rather than later, and the data confirmed from that purge be used to
argue that the November race was tainted. That should be used as grounds
to compel Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State Raffensburger to not
certify the election results. Failing that, it should be used as grounds
for a lawsuit contesting the consent decree entered into by
Raffensburger that established the practice of foregoing signature
checks. He had no authority to do that without the state legislature
prescribing that in law. And failing that, the Republican state
legislature in Georgia should put forward an alternate slate of electors
to the Electoral College and let Congress sort it out.</div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">For the life of me, I can’t understand
why the officials in Georgia are not willing to do this without being
threatened. One suggestion is that if a remedial signature match was to
be performed properly, the Governor and Secretary of State would be
exposed as having been incompetent or worse, complicit in fraud.
Regardless, the prospect of winning or losing two Senate seats rests in
the balance. Does the swamp hate Trump so much that they are willing to
pay that price?</div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">If Trump gets cooperation, he should do
everything in his power to campaign in favor of the two Republican
Senate candidates. If not, he should instruct his followers to stay
home. Let’s see how the Republican Party will fare in two years with
Trump every bit as adversarial to the Republican Party as it has been to
him. I suspect that Trump won’t have to do this. The threat of his
withdrawing his support should be enough.</div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">Or how about this? Trump threatens the
Republican Party with picking one Senator to support and one Senator to
abandon? If the Senator he supports wins, that preserves the Senate
majority for the Republicans (just barely) while still sending a
powerful message to the party hierarchy. Don’t take Trump for granted. I
suggest Trump supports Loeffler and abandons Perdue. Loeffler’s
candidacy is to complete the term of Senator Johnny Isaakson who retired
prematurely for medical reasons at the end of 2019. Loeffler was
appointed to the seat and is now running to complete the rest of
Isaakson’s term which will expire in 2022, just two years from now. If
Trump is forced out due to Republicans’ unwillingness to fight for him,
there’s a good chance he will spend the next two years building his
political movement, and the #1 item on his agenda should be to primary
Loeffler, say by supporting another run by Trump loyalist Doug Collins.
I’d be willing to bet that two years of Trump railing against the Party
for having betrayed him would do wonders for Collins’ chances the second
time around. And I bet that Trump would be more successful in reshaping
the Republican Party while out of office than he would be if elected
now for four more years. </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0"> </div>
<div data-offset-key="c0egt-0-0">I may be wrong about Trump’s influence,
and I may be underestimating the risks of such a strategy, but if the
prize is a reconstituted and realigned Party instead of just the same
old Lesser of Two Evils Republicans, then I’d sure like to see Trump
attempt it. <br /></div><p> </p><br />Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-45731384491741654392020-11-28T15:14:00.000-05:002020-12-02T19:35:21.123-05:00Corporate Logos Answers<p> </p><p>1. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGcuc1fA_KLUPAwpyr_wTI-OwmvrCj00EK3-GIx1Zb7Wgufkah4Stcc7pYNZO1tVJBhOpg4FVIx1vd7f8lf7lHUCg2G7rBqHugHY4seCj-oLru6gAluS_oSbeyBzIIxj28CZl7pceSSCFw/s177/hardees-carlsjr.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="136" data-original-width="177" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGcuc1fA_KLUPAwpyr_wTI-OwmvrCj00EK3-GIx1Zb7Wgufkah4Stcc7pYNZO1tVJBhOpg4FVIx1vd7f8lf7lHUCg2G7rBqHugHY4seCj-oLru6gAluS_oSbeyBzIIxj28CZl7pceSSCFw/s0/hardees-carlsjr.jpg" /></a></div><br /> 2. <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiqF3Fq6ZONIRTZPKTd8ZQHeliVLP6HnKcW4watjHC74FHyceh7pLiYh785Nk9LkXawPY3myuZooQsj5VGt7OpwMywUjiSmkwf0v_6FxcV6l34ryF8Zkp2y6NDM0VbmnKnIYXWwvydTXVW/s1872/World+Wildlife+Fund+2+Logo.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="845" data-original-width="1872" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiqF3Fq6ZONIRTZPKTd8ZQHeliVLP6HnKcW4watjHC74FHyceh7pLiYh785Nk9LkXawPY3myuZooQsj5VGt7OpwMywUjiSmkwf0v_6FxcV6l34ryF8Zkp2y6NDM0VbmnKnIYXWwvydTXVW/s320/World+Wildlife+Fund+2+Logo.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div><br />3. <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBQaO7dIqxNxnuXh2bmBmh3mcTA4-dBsvCAylcQFeRs2D3itP_irzAuMvKm6GFKsOdEDstMMj-QYI6E6-fvN9I6poMvRPGFrnJJIdBNtltdmnOfx8iyM9EgTqyzPad_RRjWjN8jFjmh30s/s1749/YouTube+Logo+3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="836" data-original-width="1749" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBQaO7dIqxNxnuXh2bmBmh3mcTA4-dBsvCAylcQFeRs2D3itP_irzAuMvKm6GFKsOdEDstMMj-QYI6E6-fvN9I6poMvRPGFrnJJIdBNtltdmnOfx8iyM9EgTqyzPad_RRjWjN8jFjmh30s/s320/YouTube+Logo+3.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />4. <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisfYFae2KwxjRpDWJ58k0JcOg86tEjtK43XatAUJBbka5mifAurk-jclsawfljCMhOZ6TVy-7F9sh3mLZa1-Wzlxk9xhoRCFSPk0WHp-94ClgZEWW64Trr8wVs54TlTkWr2IipxH7pTvlt/s888/Ollies-Logo+4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="200" data-original-width="888" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisfYFae2KwxjRpDWJ58k0JcOg86tEjtK43XatAUJBbka5mifAurk-jclsawfljCMhOZ6TVy-7F9sh3mLZa1-Wzlxk9xhoRCFSPk0WHp-94ClgZEWW64Trr8wVs54TlTkWr2IipxH7pTvlt/s320/Ollies-Logo+4.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />5. <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDL2AdhiGwfx-TdukNQO1aoglmE9ylVh-ppuVx-I888BaLwuxCn__K8isaIv9SYmnq0ncoy8J2nHyWS03EihU0cKviGF4nUWYnbGhcyG_kOFNr8asfO-hqZIzv4pMYqY_uU6o1IKfVNM2w/s1920/Emblem-Tesla+Logo+5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDL2AdhiGwfx-TdukNQO1aoglmE9ylVh-ppuVx-I888BaLwuxCn__K8isaIv9SYmnq0ncoy8J2nHyWS03EihU0cKviGF4nUWYnbGhcyG_kOFNr8asfO-hqZIzv4pMYqY_uU6o1IKfVNM2w/s320/Emblem-Tesla+Logo+5.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><br /><p></p>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-14710685459379706442020-11-13T23:09:00.002-05:002020-11-14T00:11:46.168-05:00Bibliography Voting Machine Vulnerability/Fraud<p> </p><header class="entry-header"><h1 class="entry-title"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ficae6x1Q5A&t=226s" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: small;">Post election Video Presentation by Russell Ramsland of Allied Security Operations Group explaining how voting machines are not air gapped and how vote switching can occur. Never mentions Hammer and Scorecard, but if they were real, this might be what they would look like in real time. </span></a></h1><h1 class="entry-title"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></h1><h1 class="entry-title"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bep1PA-FcJU" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: small;">More Russell Ramsland this time with Debbie Georgatos on 28 October, 2020</span></a></h1><h1 class="entry-title"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></h1><h1 class="entry-title"><br /><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://nordicinnovationlabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/everest.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: serif; left: 229.113px; top: 372.922px; transform: scaleX(0.998659);">EVEREST: Evaluation and Validation of</span><span style="font-family: serif; left: 141.833px; top: 414.433px; transform: scaleX(1.00023);"> Election-Related Equipment, Standards and Testing</span><span style="font-family: sans-serif; left: 853.925px; top: 410.115px; transform: scaleX(0.869815);">∗†</span><span style="font-family: serif; left: 437.868px; top: 558.452px; transform: scaleX(0.99999);">Final Report </span></a><span style="font-family: serif; left: 404.428px; top: 594.982px; transform: scaleX(0.999904);"><a href="https://nordicinnovationlabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/everest.pdf" target="_blank">December 7, 2007 This one is older, but from what I gather kind of the gold standard in vulnerability analysis. It's long though. 334 pages</a><br /></span></span></h1><h1 class="entry-title"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 28.6923px; left: 404.428px; top: 594.982px; transform: scaleX(0.999904);"> <br /></span></span></h1><h1 class="title">
<a href="https://harpers.org/archive/2012/11/how-to-rig-an-election/?single=1" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: small;">How to Rig an Election The G.O.P. aims to paint the country r<span>ed</span></span></a></h1><h1 class="title"><span style="font-size: small;"><span>By</span>
<a href="https://harpers.org/author/victoriacollier/" rel="author"><b>Victoria Collier</b></a> Nov 2012<br /></span></h1></header><header class="entry-header"> </header><header class="entry-header"> </header><header class="entry-header"><a href="https://counterinformation.wordpress.com/2015/06/26/how-trustworthy-are-electronic-voting-systems-in-the-us/" target="_blank">How Trustworthy Are Electronic Voting Systems in the US?</a>
By <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/beth-clarkson" title="Posts by Beth Clarkson">Beth Clarkson June 26,2015<br /></a><h1 class="entry-title"> </h1><h1 class="entry-title"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://codered2014.com/vote-counts-polls-insidious-feedback-loop/" target="_blank">Vote Counts and Polls: An Insidious Feedback Loop</a></span></h1>
<p class="entry-meta"><time class="entry-time">November 12, 2014</time> By <span class="entry-author"><a class="entry-author-link" href="https://codered2014.com/author/jon/" rel="author"><span class="entry-author-name">Jonathan Simon</span></a></span></p><p class="entry-meta"><span class="entry-author"><span class="entry-author-name"> </span></span></p><h1 class="firstHeading" id="firstHeading" lang="en"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box_voting" target="_blank">Black box voting (Wikipedia)<br /></a></span></h1><h1 class="firstHeading" id="firstHeading" lang="en"> </h1><h1 class="page-info-header__title"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/post-election-audits-restoring-trust-elections" target="_blank"><span class="page-info-header__title-inside">Post-Election Audits: Restoring Trust in Elections</span></a></span></h1><h1 class="page-info-header__title"><span style="font-size: small;"><span class="page-info-header__title-inside">Aug 1, 2007 Lawrence Norden 90 Pg Downloadable Report <br /></span></span></h1><h1 class="firstHeading" id="firstHeading" lang="en"><a href="https://codered2014.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/primaryElectionResultsAmazingStatisticalAnomalies_V2.1.pdf" target="_blank"> <span style="font-size: small;"><span face="sans-serif" style="left: 120px; top: 91.8537px; transform: scaleX(0.9644);">Republican Primary Election 2012 Results</span><span face="sans-serif" style="left: 795.399px; top: 101.296px; transform: scaleX(0.895635);">: </span><span face="sans-serif" style="left: 120px; top: 143.054px; transform: scaleX(0.952387);">Amazing Statistical Anomalies</span></span></a><span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 20px; left: 303.6px; top: 208.8px; transform: scaleX(1.07661);">Francois Choquette, James Johnson </span><span face="sans-serif" style="font-size: 20.8px; left: 389px; top: 254.687px; transform: scaleX(0.899261);">August 13, 2012 </span></h1><h1 class="firstHeading" id="firstHeading" lang="en"><span face="sans-serif" style="font-size: 20.8px; left: 389px; top: 254.687px; transform: scaleX(0.899261);"> </span></h1><h1 class="firstHeading" id="firstHeading" lang="en"><span face="sans-serif" style="font-size: 20.8px; left: 389px; top: 254.687px; transform: scaleX(0.899261);"><a href="https://www.occupy.com/article/retired-nsa-analyst-proves-gop-stealing-elections#sthash.tXTDmiPW.dpbs" target="_blank"><span class="h1-highlight">A Retired NSA Analyst Proves the GOP Is Stealing Elections</span></a></span></h1><h1 class="firstHeading" id="firstHeading" lang="en"><span face="sans-serif" style="font-size: 20.8px; left: 389px; top: 254.687px; transform: scaleX(0.899261);"><span class="h1-highlight"> </span></span></h1><h1 class="entry-title">
<span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.thepostemail.com/2012/11/24/was-election-fraud-predicted-for-2012/" target="_blank">Was Election Fraud Predicted for 2012?</a></span></h1><h1 class="entry-title"> </h1><h1 class="entry-title"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://web.mit.edu/supportthevoter/www/files/2014/01/Amer-Voting-Exper-final-draft-01-09-14-508.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: serif; left: 377.578px; top: 1084.55px; transform: scaleX(0.984515);">January 2014</span><span style="font-family: serif; left: 171.03px; top: 150.633px; transform: scaleX(0.991759);">The American Voting Experience:</span><span style="font-family: serif; left: 198.955px; top: 230.633px; transform: scaleX(1.02619);">Report and Recommendations </span><span style="font-family: serif; left: 451.076px; top: 280.633px; transform: scaleX(1.01657);">of the </span><span style="font-family: serif; left: 254.154px; top: 330.633px; transform: scaleX(1.01924);">Presidential Commission </span><span style="font-family: serif; left: 230.63px; top: 380.633px; transform: scaleX(1.02652);">on Election Administration</span> </a></span></h1><a href="http://web.mit.edu/supportthevoter/www/files/2014/01/Amer-Voting-Exper-final-draft-01-09-14-508.pdf" target="_blank">
<span class="posted-on"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00">Saturday, November 24, 2012</time></span></a></header><header class="entry-header"><span class="posted-on"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"> </time></span></header><header class="entry-header"><span class="posted-on"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"> </time></span></header><header class="entry-header"><span class="posted-on"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"> </time></span></header><header class="entry-header"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"></time><h1 class="a-spacing-none a-text-normal" id="title"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/What-Went-Wrong-Ohio-Presidential/dp/089733535X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1430958114&sr=1-2&keywords=election+2004" target="_blank"><span class="a-size-extra-large" id="productTitle">What Went Wrong In Ohio: The Conyers Report on the 2004 Presidential Election
</span>
<span class="a-size-large a-color-secondary" id="productSubtitle">
Paperback – August 30, 2005
</span></a></span></h1><span class="posted-on"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"> </time></span></header><header class="entry-header"><span class="posted-on"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRiB6pO1G9s&feature=emb_logo" target="_blank">Sidney Powell on Lou Dobbs Accuses Dominion of fixing Venezuelan Election</a></span></time></span></header><header class="entry-header"><span class="posted-on"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></time></span></header><header class="entry-header"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"></time><div class="wrapper clearfix full pb-feature pb-layout-item pb-f-article-header" id="f0XfqFJ704Ajfs"> <div class="card card-article full-width"> <div class="align-left card-content"> <h1 class="lede bold detail-content"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></h1><h1 class="lede bold detail-content"><a href="https://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/philadelphia-election-trump-equipment-stolen-usb-laptop-20200930.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: small;">Memory sticks used to program Philly’s voting machines were stolen from elections warehouse</span></a></h1> </div> </div> </div> <div class="wrapper clearfix full pb-feature pb-layout-item pb-f-article-author" id="fDzwbd2704Ajfs"> <div class="card"> <div class="card-content card-content-half-vertical"> <div class="byline"> <a class="hover-underlined" href="https://www.inquirer.com/author/roebuck_jeremy/"> <span class="font-bold color-blue">by Jeremy Roebuck</span></a> and <a class="hover-underlined" href="https://www.inquirer.com/author/lai_jonathan/"> <span class="font-bold color-blue">Jonathan Lai</span></a><span class="font-light">,</span> <span class="timestamp font-light"> <span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"> Updated: September 30, 2020 </span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"> </span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"> </span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"><a href="https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/eac_assets/1/6/Electionsecurity_voter_pamphlet.pdf" target="_blank">Election Security Pamphlet eac.gov </a> </span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"> </span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"><a href="https://www.eac.gov/" target="_blank">US Election Assistance Commission</a> Information and Best Practices for conducting Elections/Security</span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"></span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"><br /></span></span><a href="https://www.eac.gov/election-officials/election-security" target="_blank">Cheesy Video from eac.gove with false assurances re voting security</a></div><div class="byline"><h1 class="title"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></h1><h1 class="title"><a href="https://www.newsweek.com/hackers-breach-usvoting-machines-90-minutes-def-con-competition-643858" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: small;">Hackers Breach U.S.Voting Machines in 90 Minutes in DEF CON Competition</span></a></h1><div class="byline">
By <span class="author"> <span>
<a class="author-name" href="https://www.newsweek.com/authors/tom-porter" rel="author"> <span>Tom Porter</span></a>
</span> </span>
<time data-timestamp="1501415236" datetime="2017-07-30T07:47:16-04:00"> On 7/30/17 Newsweek</time></div><div class="byline"><time data-timestamp="1501415236" datetime="2017-07-30T07:47:16-04:00"> </time></div><div class="byline"><time data-timestamp="1501415236" datetime="2017-07-30T07:47:16-04:00"> </time></div><div class="byline"><h1 class="title" id="page-title"><a href="https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/376998-wyden-presses-leading-us-voting-machine-manufacturer-on-potential" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: small;">Wyden presses leading US voting machine manufacturer on potential hacking vulnerabilities</span></a></h1>
<span class="submitted-by">
By Olivia Beavers - <span class="submitted-date">03/06/18 </span></span><time data-timestamp="1501415236" datetime="2017-07-30T07:47:16-04:00">The Hill</time></div><div class="byline"><time data-timestamp="1501415236" datetime="2017-07-30T07:47:16-04:00"><br /></time></div><div class="byline"><time data-timestamp="1501415236" datetime="2017-07-30T07:47:16-04:00"><br /></time></div><div class="byline"><h1 class="title"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="Election Hacking: Voting-Machine Supplier Admits It Used Hackable Software Despite Past Denials By Ramsey Touchberry On 7/17/18" target="_blank">Election Hacking: Voting-Machine Supplier Admits It Used Hackable Software Despite Past Denials</a></span></h1>
By <span class="author"> <span>
<a class="author-name" href="https://www.newsweek.com/authors/ramsey-touchberry" rel="author"> <span>Ramsey Touchberry</span></a>
</span> </span>
On 7/17/18 Newsweek</div><div class="byline"> </div><div class="byline"> </div><div class="byline"> <a href="https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1327329411805421570" target="_blank">Tweet c video Georgia 1 week before 3 Nov 2020 election Mess</a></div><div class="byline"> </div><div class="byline"> </div><div class="byline"><h1 itemprop="headline"><a href="https://www.csoonline.com/article/3267625/want-to-hack-a-voting-machine-hack-the-voting-machine-vendor-first.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: small;">Want to hack a voting machine? Hack the voting machine vendor first: </span></a><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.csoonline.com/article/3267625/want-to-hack-a-voting-machine-hack-the-voting-machine-vendor-first.html" target="_blank">How password reuse and third-party breaches leave voting machine vendors vulnerable to attack. Mar 30, 2018 JM Porrup INCLUDES VIDEO</a><br /></span></h1><section class="deck viewability">
</section> </div><div class="byline"></div><div class="byline"></div><div class="byline"><time data-timestamp="1501415236" datetime="2017-07-30T07:47:16-04:00"></time></div> <br /><div class="css-1dbjc4n"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-zl2h9q"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-k4xj1c r-18u37iz r-1wtj0ep"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs"><a class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs r-1ny4l3l" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/exaeroman" role="link"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1awozwy r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs r-1ny4l3l" id="tweet-user-name"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1awozwy r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs"><div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-b88u0q r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Jesse McVay</span></span></div></div><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd"><div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@exaeroman</span></div></div></div></a></div><div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div></div></div></div></div><div class="css-1dbjc4n"><div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Elections Systems and Software, referred to in the press as ES&S, is the largest vendor of electronic voting systems in the country. Check out associated controversies, ownership and mergers </span><a class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao css-16my406 r-1n1174f r-1loqt21 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="ltr" href="https://t.co/YRtDbUf1TT?amp=1" rel="noopener noreferrer" role="link" target="_blank" title="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_Systems_%26_Software"><span aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-hiw28u r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">https://</span>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_<span aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-hiw28u r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Systems_%26_Software</span></a></div></div><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">
Check out their address:
11208 John Galt Blvd, Omaha Nebraska</span></div><div class="byline"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span></div><div class="byline"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span></div><div class="byline"><h1 class="entry-title"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.votesleuth.org/the-myth-of-the-voting-machine-air-gap-a-case-study/" target="_blank">The Myth of the Voting Machine Air Gap by VoteSleuth @saill on Twitter</a><br /></span></h1><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span></div><div class="byline"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span> <h1 class="css-ifmu1a e1h9rw200" data-test-id="headline" id="link-66433d47" itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/21/magazine/the-myth-of-the-hacker-proof-voting-machine.html" target="_blank">The Myth of the Hacker-Proof Voting Machine Kim Zetter NY Times Feb 21, 2018</a></span></h1><h1 class="css-ifmu1a e1h9rw200" data-test-id="headline" id="link-66433d47" itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></h1><h1 class="css-ifmu1a e1h9rw200" data-test-id="headline" id="link-66433d47" itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://twitter.com/saill/status/1288154788325023744" target="_blank">Twitter Thread by @saill on what constitutes sound practice for elections </a></span></h1><h1 class="css-ifmu1a e1h9rw200" data-test-id="headline" id="link-66433d47" itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></h1><h1 class="css-ifmu1a e1h9rw200" data-test-id="headline" id="link-66433d47" itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.votesleuth.org/" target="_blank">VoteSleuth description of Beth Clarkson work on statistical analysis of how percentage of vote significantly increasing or decreasing with size of precinct might indicate fraud, esp machine introduced fraud. </a><br /></span></h1></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"> </span></span></div><div class="byline"><span class="timestamp font-light"><span class="spaced spaced-bottom spaced-sm timestamp-recent color-gray-dark" data-keep-date-time="" data-timestamp-caption="Updated: " data-timestamp-loaded="true" data-timestamp="2020-10-01T00:22:34.316Z"> </span> </span> </div> </div> </div> </div><span class="posted-on"><time class="entry-date published" datetime="2012-11-24T23:17:17-05:00"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></time></span><p class="entry-meta"><span class="entry-author"><span class="entry-author-name"> </span></span> </p></header><p> </p>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-16403175370687196102020-11-12T15:28:00.002-05:002020-11-12T15:44:29.199-05:00Wish Biden and Trump Could Both Lose? They Can! It's Not Too Late to Save the Republic.<p> </p><div dir="auto"><div class="ecm0bbzt hv4rvrfc ihqw7lf3 dati1w0a" data-ad-comet-preview="message" data-ad-preview="message" id="jsc_c_c9"><div class="j83agx80 cbu4d94t ew0dbk1b irj2b8pg"><div class="qzhwtbm6 knvmm38d"><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql rrkovp55 a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb iv3no6db jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v knj5qynh oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto"><div class="kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> Consider this scenario to settle the election in accordance with the law while also resolving, to some small extent, the severe partisanship bordering on hatred that we are seeing in the country today.</div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">When Congress meets on 6 January to tally Electoral College votes, they reject enough state's vote tallies to bring every candidate's vote tally below 270. Then by law (12th Amendment) the House chooses the President by a vote of delegations and the Senate chooses the Vice President. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">To see how this resolves the partisan issue, you need to pay attention to the mechanics of the process. And it requires at least one "faithless elector" to cast a presidential ballot for someone who is not a divisive figure. Someone who neither party might be happy with, but both parties could live with. If I had to choose that person, I'd choose former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates or former Democratic presidential candidate Jim Webb. To satisfy my Libertarian friends, we could even make that choice Libertarian presidential candidate Jo Jorgensen. Here's how it could happen:</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Not all states allow by law for an elector in that state to cast a vote for someone who was not the winner of the popular vote in that state. But some do. <a href="https://www.fairvote.org/faithless_elector_state_laws" target="_blank">This website</a> details the law in various states. </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> <span><br /></span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Let's go to the top of the list, Alabama, because the law there 1) applies no penalty for a faithless vote, 2) allows the vote to stand, that is it doesn't automatically replace the faithless elector with someone who would vote in accordance with the popular vote, and 3) Alabama voted for Trump, so if Trump is on track to lose in a conventional Electoral College vote, an Alabama elector is more likely to be willing to stray from the norm to prevent a Biden presidency. In my opinion, this faithless elector, though certain to garner scorn from some uber partisans, would probably be praised as the savior of the Republic by the rest of us. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">OK. So now we go to the House chamber on 6 January 2021 and a joint session of Congress. The session is chaired by the president of the Senate, the current Vice President Mike Pence. As each state's electoral ballots are counted there is an opportunity for objection to the acceptance of said ballots. By law, that requires at least one House member and one Senate member to file a written objection. That should be a pretty low bar. I'd bet Senators Romney, Collins or Murkowski could be persuaded. When this happens, the Senate retires to it's own chamber and both Houses have two hours of debate followed by a vote. Significantly, the vote in the House is conducted by state delegation, not by individual House members. Currently the <a href="https://www.270towin.com/.../consensus-2020-house-forecast" target="_blank">Republicans have majorities in 26 of the 50 state delegations</a> and that is not anticipated to change after the new Congress is sworn in on 3 January 2021. So presumably, the House will vote to reject those electoral votes. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Now we examine the Senate, and even if the runoff elections for Senator in Georgia BOTH go to the Democrats, that only gives the Democrats 50 Senators. Now with a Biden presidency, the Senate would be in Democratic hands because the Vice President, Kamala Harris, tips the majority to the Democrats as the tie breaking vote. But this event all takes place on 6 January of next year. Mike Pence is still that tie breaking vote, and presumably the electoral votes get refused.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">This same scenario needs to play out in several states in order to accomplish the goal of reducing any one candidate's total of electoral votes to below 270. I'm not sure how the law is written, but the number might need to be reduced to below half the ballots accepted, not simply below the number 270 which is half the ballots cast. I'll let the legal scholars in the Congress figure that out. My suggestion would be to disqualify votes from the states where there are credible allegations of fraud. All the more justification to refuse to accept those votes. Political cover of a sort. </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">So now we have an Electoral College in which no candidate has the required number of ballots for election to the presidency. Under those circumstances, the <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-12/" target="_blank">Constitution's 12th Amendment</a> is quite clear on how to proceed from here.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span><br /></span></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">The House of Representatives votes to choose from among the top three vote getters, in this case Trump, Biden, and Jorgensen (or substitute another candidate of your choice). Once again, the vote in the House is conducted by delegation. Presumably the candidate introduced by the faithless elector would win the vote if this enterprise goes according to plan. There would be nothing to stop the delegations from voting for Trump at this point, but that would defeat the goal of reducing partisan rancor. Indeed, it would almost certainly be seen as outright theft of the presidency, although it would still be perfectly legal. And since all the actors needed for this scenario to play out are Republicans, it would certainly be possible for this to be used to steal a win for Trump when most would acknowledge it was not deserved. Still, I think few of the Republican participants would be willing to put their careers on the line, not to mention the future of the country, just to save Trump. Most of them will probably be glad to see the back of him, and though some Republicans might blame them for denying Trump four more years, I'll bet there will be plenty of reluctant Biden voters who will forgive them denying those four years to Biden in the name of saving the country.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">So next we move on to the selection of the Vice President. That happens in the Senate where each Senator gets one vote, but unlike the House where the choice is between the top three vote getters, the Senate's choice for Vice President is made only from among the top two. Harris or Pence. For my money, Harris is simply an unacceptable choice. Especially among Republicans, and all the key players in this scenario are Republicans. To name Mike Pence the Vice President would be particularly appealing to Republicans if the presidency was to go to one of the prominent Democrats I mentioned, and that would be especially true if the Senate were to end up 50-50, and a Republican Senate could only be narrowly assured with a Republican Vice President at the helm as a tie breaker. Another reason for choosing Pence is his cooperation as President of the Senate during the counting of electoral votes might be necessary, and if the Georgia Senate seats both go to Democrats, his tie breaking vote will determine the Vice Presidency. There's little chance he's choosing Harris over himself. This could work. Who knows. We might even approach bi partisan governance going forward as we seek to heal the partisan wounds of the past.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">You might be surprised to learn that I don't see this scenario as a particular long shot. If Trump can prove election fraud of a significant enough magnitude to rightfully claim the presidency, then I would support him. I believe that fraud likely occurred. But if that can't be proven to the satisfaction of most reasonable people, then the divisions created in this country as a consequence of half the population believing the election was stolen no matter who wins is an unacceptable alternative. I hope lawmakers in Congress see the choices their same way I do.</div></div></span></div></div></div></div>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-35283430405453762832020-06-08T16:45:00.002-04:002020-06-08T18:12:45.901-04:00Black Lives Matter: Shibboleth for 2020<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Imagine this scenario. You're sitting at home with your wife or husband on the couch next to you, and she/he turns to you and asks, "What do you think about Black Lives Matter?" How do you respond? If you're like me, your response is, "All lives matter." Now what if you were in a group of friends? One of your friends asks the same question. My response would be the same. Would yours? What if it were in a mixed group composed of some friends and some strangers? What if it was a group of mostly strangers or all strangers? What if the strangers were mostly black? What if they were on the sidewalk holding signs that read Black Lives Matter and chanting "I can't breathe?" Do you see where I'm going with this? Am I making you a little uncomfortable?</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">For some people, how you respond to the question, "Do Black Lives Matter" will define how they think about you. Some people will know by your response whether they like you or not. Some people will know by your response whether they hate you or not. And these days, if you're in the wrong place and among the wrong people, the videos suggest that some people will decide based on your response whether they want to beat you up or not, either verbally or in some cases physically.</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZ41WAIDGCRSbYJjiuA0GXfCezzdPf4En0rJC6ZthXh4CVLSgrumQlMweybIu1v3Za8gLyuYeSgSM8lhmfIAjBMkKL4Gk41iLwUg5ctkcwSfYEQhnnYDyIO-sju9KXmsqc7g7o2wxgW6Mr/s1600/Shibboleth+Definition.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="132" data-original-width="295" height="140" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZ41WAIDGCRSbYJjiuA0GXfCezzdPf4En0rJC6ZthXh4CVLSgrumQlMweybIu1v3Za8gLyuYeSgSM8lhmfIAjBMkKL4Gk41iLwUg5ctkcwSfYEQhnnYDyIO-sju9KXmsqc7g7o2wxgW6Mr/s320/Shibboleth+Definition.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">I hate that circumstances now demand that I declare that I'm not a racist. I'll further explain that I'm a 67 year old white guy, BUT I'm not a racist. Now there was a time when I could have said I'm a 67 year old white guy AND I'm not a racist. But these days there are some people who are trying to create the common assumption that somebody like me MUST be a racist simply by virtue of my age and my skin color. I'd like to be able to say that I'm 67 years old, AND oh by the way, I'm not a racist, but these days I feel compelled to say, I'm 67 years old, BUT contrary to what we're all meant to presume, I'm not a racist. I will assume that the difference in the language here is not too nuanced to understand. I'm more than just a little bit sick of this!</span><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmmBSMkCab_g_Z_jDS-RhbwOKmA6ivyP5fTxvNBZzV9Cb_mhkTDHPSR-jpfsGUDM1He9AIAylrsToExGANMvq1NiSvOx3bgDzS5s3J79qcv77GeKJ0MSdJ4Hui1HNGbsDwmHsWCUbgO6b9/s1600/Shibboleth.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="230" data-original-width="350" height="209" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmmBSMkCab_g_Z_jDS-RhbwOKmA6ivyP5fTxvNBZzV9Cb_mhkTDHPSR-jpfsGUDM1He9AIAylrsToExGANMvq1NiSvOx3bgDzS5s3J79qcv77GeKJ0MSdJ4Hui1HNGbsDwmHsWCUbgO6b9/s320/Shibboleth.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Christian villagers of Ungheni, Bessarabia Governorate, displaying icons on their homes in order to defend themselves from a pogrom, 1905</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">For me, the response "All Lives Matter" is a no brainer. Does that mean I think black lives DON'T matter? Of course not. But being "invited" or in reality being compelled, or shamed, or in some cases almost threatened to say Black Lives Matter, as if it were some sort of catechism, stirs more than just a little bit of rage inside of me. It's as if my interrogator is trying to force me to accept his implied premise that in fact black lives matter MORE than any other lives. They don't. They ALL matter. No amount of coercion will make me feel any differently, though I suppose an adequate amount of coercion might compel me to SAY I feel differently. </span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"> I'm hoping I won't ever have to take part in the experiment to answer that question. </span>I suspect that what the mob really wants though, prefers actually, is to conduct that research independently, on each and every one of us. They're not looking for a true transformation, but a conversion by intimidation, a conversion by inquisition. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">So I reject the incantation "Black Lives Matter" while recognizing that it has become a shibboleth for our time. Your chosen three word response to a question about the value of human life will determine if you are a good person or a bad one; if you are friend or foe. A member of the tribe or the enemy "other". I'm happy to utter the words black lives matter in the absence of duress, but while you may think you're hearing Black Lives Matter, if I were to transcribe my utterance onto the written page, they would contain no capital letters. And don't be surprised if I follow it up with, "but then actually, all lives matter." I see Black Lives Matter (with capital letters) as a conspiracy by some to intimidate a political opponent. It may not have started out that way, (then again, maybe it did. I have no way to know), and it certainly isn't that for all concerned. Lots of people marching under the banner of Black Lives Matter are decent, sincere, and well meaning people. But I'm certain there are some for whom the slogan is nothing more than a cudgel with which to intimidate their enemies.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">There is a lengthy debate to be had about policing and the black community which should be conducted based on facts not feelings. But today, with calls to defund the police, it is sadly not the time to introduce facts into the discussion. I'm also concerned about who will be taking part in that discussion when it ultimately does take place. Unfortunately, I suspect that the debate will be dominated by callow, pandering politicians and the </span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">intersectionality peddling purveyors of race grievance, more commonly known as </span></span>race hustlers. Neither of these groups will be reluctant to advance the country right up to the precipice of a race war if there was a buck to be made and power to be gained. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">Shibboleth. That's a peculiar word, shibboleth. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibboleth" target="_blank">The Wikipedia definition above</a> explains adequately enough what about the phrase "Black Lives Matter" prompted me to write this article. But I prefer the explanation offered the very first time I ever encountered the word in an episode of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqkaBEWPH18" target="_blank">The West Wing about twenty years ago</a>. There was something so sophisticated and scholarly about Jed Bartlett quoting the Bible from memory. Progressives were so much easier to get along with back then. And occasionally, they could even teach you something. </span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">Those were the good old days, huh? </span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<br />
<br />Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-53261438466125685882020-05-05T12:01:00.002-04:002020-05-05T12:05:12.528-04:00Government Is Not Done Screwing This Up<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Members of Congress, especially on the Republican side, are making
noises about instituting some sort of legislative fix to prevent a flood
of lawsuits against business owners once virus restrictions are finally
relaxed. They’re worried about ambulance chasing lawyers crippling
already weakened enterprises with thousands of lawsuits by both
customers and employees for failing to take proper measures to ensure
the safety of all concerned in the aftermath of the pandemic. They want
to both reduce the number of frivolous lawsuits and standardize the
criteria across all the states.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiq8O3cmYKy2yEVGAGI0Qb1oEGOOi6MLeNZh8JW5eZ6WgxvHQBbHVTZ59JXDCwiB170niUJ_IRyJ99my4VvR0QDBiVczOGtUD2Z70bcixcssruqsb7HlD_DT6ubTK6KXOmDRmEe9jFhQjS6/s1600/Screw+Up.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="384" data-original-width="512" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiq8O3cmYKy2yEVGAGI0Qb1oEGOOi6MLeNZh8JW5eZ6WgxvHQBbHVTZ59JXDCwiB170niUJ_IRyJ99my4VvR0QDBiVczOGtUD2Z70bcixcssruqsb7HlD_DT6ubTK6KXOmDRmEe9jFhQjS6/s200/Screw+Up.jpg" width="200" /></a></span></div>
<span style="font-size: large;"> I sympathize with the motives here, but you know they’re going to
screw this up. The goal will be to protect business owners from the most
timid and fearful among us who will be driven by panic to second guess
whether protective measures at any particular business are adequate to
their standards. Of course, Congress won’t want to be accused of not
taking the issue seriously enough, so they will take it upon themselves
to set their own guidelines for what constitutes proper precautions.
That’s where they’ll bollox this all up. They just won’t be able to help
themselves.</span>
<span style="font-size: large;"></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;">Some committee of politicians will have to come to a consensus on
what constitutes proper precautions. Every petty bureaucrat on the
committee will have ideas of their own, and everyone’s ideas must be
accommodated to reach consensus. What could possibly go wrong? I’m sure
this is how we ended up with TSA guidelines and OSHA rules. Businesses
will be forced to comply because either government will compel them to
comply, or the newly devised “voluntary” guidelines will become the de
facto standard based on what will be labelled “consensus”. Defy the
“recommendations” and be prepared to defend yourself in court for
decisions that don’t align in some way with the “sound principles”
blessed by government bureaucrats in all their wisdom. Instead of a
return to normalcy, Congress will end up enshrining some of the
stupidest, most cumbersome regulations into a new standard of business
practice with which we will be burdened forever. You know I’m right.</span>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-13700517471015430902020-02-17T23:45:00.000-05:002020-02-17T23:53:23.209-05:00It's a Funny Old World: Bloomberg Edition<br />
<br />
I’m one of those reluctant Trump supporters who are more or less
pleased with his policies, but just wish he’d STFU once in a while.
I’d like a better Republican choice, like Nikki Haley perhaps, but
that’s not in the cards for this year. On balance then, I’d like to see
four more years and a couple more Supreme Court picks for Donald Trump.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgw_fo10k9QUN8I_w-VWanTrzmZGdx6gvaswnz3yDU9NkBc13KR2G-K9s7bX1BbhAOhHerirO5RI0q0eycFBDKmFzpXqimWM5XpjmpX6HvgM6KQv8tZEzXkYkVzNoihARg2wS1ZDcC0d1Po/s1600/Bloomberg+with+Halo+and+Wings.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="414" data-original-width="621" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgw_fo10k9QUN8I_w-VWanTrzmZGdx6gvaswnz3yDU9NkBc13KR2G-K9s7bX1BbhAOhHerirO5RI0q0eycFBDKmFzpXqimWM5XpjmpX6HvgM6KQv8tZEzXkYkVzNoihARg2wS1ZDcC0d1Po/s400/Bloomberg+with+Halo+and+Wings.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">St, Michael of the Blessed Democratic Party</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
None of the Democrats running for president, all 24 of them at one
point, struck me as having anything particularly appealing to offer the
voting public. Mostly a bunch of puffed-up Senators and second-rate
posers/opportunists, but I repeat myself. Biden concerned me for a
little while, but once he appeared on the campaign stage, it was
painfully obvious that he was well past his sell-by date. The first two
contests in Iowa and New Hampshire suggest that the rest of the
Democratic electorate see that too. Trump could have saved himself the
four months of impeachment headaches from that Zelensky phone call. It
turns out Biden was destined to blow himself up without any help from
Hunter or the Ukrainians! Hah! Who knew?<br />
<br />
But for the past several months I’ve been concerned … really
concerned, that Mike Bloomberg just might have what it takes to beat
Donald Trump. Bloomberg is a guy with some gravitas. He built a
multibillion-dollar technology company from the ground up. He was, by
most accounts, a successful mayor of America’s largest city where he
regularly dealt with big issues of real significance. Oh … and the
money. Don’t forget the money. He’s got billions and billions of
dollars, and he’s apparently decided he’s willing to spend whatever it
takes to defeat Donald Trump. Judging by what I read, Bloomberg’s
advertising buys are apparently an order of magnitude greater than
anything ever seen before in modern politics.<br />
<br />
And I see the appeal of Mike Bloomberg. I kind of like some of the
things he stands for. Despite being currently registered as a
Libertarian, I’m not particularly offended by his support of the
stop-and-frisk policy. It may have been politically incorrect, but
Bloomberg, following in Rudy’s footsteps, recognized that the gun
violence in New York City was largely a problem within one particular
demographic. And that demographic didn’t just describe the perpetrators
of the violence, but the victims as well. Bloomberg supported a
controversial policy that may not have sat well with the ACLU, but it
worked. I guess I’m one of those pragmatic Libertarians. Profiling does
not send me looking for the smelling salts. And today I saw an old video
of Bloomberg talking about how meaningful healthcare reform will
require saying no to some people. Well, duh! What true Libertarian will
disagree with that?<br />
<br />
Oddly enough, you know what this card-carrying Libertarian objects to
the most about Michael Bloomberg? His soda ban! While mayor of New York
City, he instituted a limit on the size of your soda cup because he
thought he should decide for you how large a soda to purchase. For your
own good, of course! You were too stupid to make that decision for
yourself. Mike Bloomberg, clothed in the robes of the All-Powerful Nanny
State would make that decision on your behalf.<br />
<br />
So I kind of like Policy Mike Bloomberg, but I hate Nanny-State Mike
Bloomberg. How petty is that? Well, as it turns out, not really so petty
after all. Mike Bloomberg is also a gun control freak and a climate
alarmist. So, this Libertarian can comfortably oppose him on solid
policy grounds without having to look like a petulant child throwing a
tantrum because my Mountain Dew portion is too small.<br />
<br />
So, back to my previous concern. What if this guy wins? It could
happen. I kind of like him. Some Republicans and plenty of independents
will like him. And the Donald is such a blowhard. He pisses off a lot of
people. So many voters viscerally hate him. Plus, Donald inherited his
fortune and squandered a lot of it. Bloomberg earned every penny of his.
Bloomberg may not be the showman Trump is, but does anybody really
doubt that Bloomberg is probably a lot smarter and way more capable than
Donald Trump?<br />
<br />
And the money. All that money! And despite Bloomberg’s nominally
Republican past, he would be a disaster for conservatism in this
country. And he could win. Did I mention that? Abortion-on-demand
judges, trillions frittered away on the Green New Deal, and the Second
Amendment facing the most significant threat in my lifetime. That’s what
a Bloomberg presidency could mean.<br />
<br />
Here’s where we stand today: It’s still a crowded Democratic field.
There’s a progressive lane dominated by Bernie Sanders and a so-called
moderate lane still cluttered with a slew of possibly viable contenders,
none of whom can emerge because the others won’t get out of the way.
And to the horror of the Democratic establishment, it’s starting to look
like Bernie Sanders could win with an anemic plurality. Bernie emerges
victorious, by some reckoning, because he is the cleanest dirty shirt.
And swooping in to take advantage of this lack of clarity in the
Democratic race is the seemingly invincible Mike Bloomberg. It’s a
plausible scenario. I was starting to get worried. I was almost
convinced.<br />
<br />
But then, something happened. Something changed. I’m still not
complacent, but I see a few green shoots of hope blossoming from the
election results of the past few weeks. It turns out, this Libertarian
isn’t the only one who is worried about Mike Bloomberg. It turns out
there are a lot of Democrats who are worried about him too. I’m starting
to see news stories and anti-Bloomberg ads paid for by other Democrats.
Every other Democrat in the moderate lane opposes him because he’s
their competition. They resent his Johnny-come-lately entry into the
race while they’ve been slogging away for months. They resent his
bottomless well of money that will be spent against them before any of
it is spent on Trump. And they resent that he is climbing up in the
polls based on advertising while never having had to face the scrutiny
of the debate stage.<br />
<br />
If the moderates resent him, the Bernie Bros absolutely despise him.
He represents everything they hate in politics. Bloomberg is a
billionaire former Republican who is buying the election, and who, no
matter what he says now, has had impure thoughts in the past on some of
the most sacred tenets of progressive orthodoxy. The moderates, if
defeated, will fall in line behind Bloomberg. But Bernie would probably
cut off his left testicle before he would endorse Mike Bloomberg for
president. Some of the Bernie Bros will swallow hard and vote for Bloomberg.
Many will stay home or vote Green. Oddly enough, the Donald will likely
convince some to vote Trump in 2020. Either way, the edifice that is
Mike Bloomberg seems to be slightly less imposing now that his
Democratic opponents have seen fit to focus more attention on him. And
the irony is that if Bloomberg is defeated, it will not be at the hands
of Donald Trump, but at the hands of his fellow Democrats. The same
fellow Democrats for whom he represents, even if they don’t realize it,
the only real possibility of beating Donald Trump. Trump should lay off
of Mini-Mike for the time being. Let the Democrats beat up on Bloomberg
for him. It’s time for the Donald to channel his inner Napoleon. Don’t
interrupt your enemies while they are destroying themselves.<br />
<br />
The irony of this situation is difficult to ignore. If Bloomberg wins
the Democratic nomination, he alienates, perhaps permanently, a
sizeable portion of the Democratic coalition. If he loses, he cedes the
stage to a much more beatable alternative, no matter who that is.
Republicans, who have the most to fear from Mike Bloomberg, needn’t lift
a finger to oppose him, at least not yet. Democrats are rushing forward
to take up the banner against him. After months of campaigning by a
lackluster group of Democratic presidential candidates, one late arrival
starts to emerge as someone who actually has the capacity to beat
Donald Trump. A star has appeared in the eastern sky. A potential savior
has been born unto the Democrats to wash away the sins of months of
clumsy, ineffectual, and at times viciously adversarial campaigning, and
the response of the rest of the Democrats is to try and smother the new
arrival in his crib. Mike Bloomberg, the brightest hope the Democratic
Party has for rescuing them from four more years of Donald Trump might
just end up being defeated by the very people he is trying to rescue.
It’s a funny old world.Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-16107445966658512422019-10-08T16:53:00.000-04:002019-10-08T17:05:22.996-04:00Owens Machine<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WX64FElTFZc" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Video of the Owens Bottle Machine in operation</b></span></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;"> <a href="https://www.asme.org/about-asme/engineering-history/landmarks/86-owens-ar-bottle-machine" target="_blank">Close up of the Owens Machine </a></span></b><br />
<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><b><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ifa0U9vF6ds&t=7s" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: large;">Extended video history of Owens Bottle Company</span></a></b></span></b><br />
<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI-dO7RI3lE" target="_blank"><b><span style="font-size: large;">Mega Haboob July 2018 Southern Arizona </span></b></a> </span></b>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-45607189163697627432019-10-02T20:24:00.003-04:002019-10-02T20:29:59.407-04:00Pictures<h4>
<span style="font-size: large;">6. </span> </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTYpXEknZgjjYZMZTwYROVa9pqVa2z-MEXAs6HXgLV_V5I9y9YHuSRQoMUZYfHowaD_eSUBcKMIfXeVm4rf6dB3XgykCP8V_F6cPEgYLzTf1zpCJFjH2kjG7BzdejGhoX8L8cDWTb0-Jw4/s1600/American+Gothic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="247" data-original-width="204" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTYpXEknZgjjYZMZTwYROVa9pqVa2z-MEXAs6HXgLV_V5I9y9YHuSRQoMUZYfHowaD_eSUBcKMIfXeVm4rf6dB3XgykCP8V_F6cPEgYLzTf1zpCJFjH2kjG7BzdejGhoX8L8cDWTb0-Jw4/s400/American+Gothic.jpg" width="330" /> </a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<h4 class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>7.</b> </span> </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFP7N1uGmsgPPvaWD-gU2OXJZWLZDVrcaX3FNK7aeXwvIlAmA5KIU3jxSFvlZQ7UIZiQaVMNvq6dWUCqOHIl7XPOJr8hD7fECz9dpETaI-nTmM2REQRoq5Rrt_g1Qlq0c5epOMFr7e3kf2/s1600/Mona+Lisa.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="1200" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFP7N1uGmsgPPvaWD-gU2OXJZWLZDVrcaX3FNK7aeXwvIlAmA5KIU3jxSFvlZQ7UIZiQaVMNvq6dWUCqOHIl7XPOJr8hD7fECz9dpETaI-nTmM2REQRoq5Rrt_g1Qlq0c5epOMFr7e3kf2/s400/Mona+Lisa.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>8. </b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS6w6suU49rgY7tKfu6FJ-A-E8hmRcQu_cs_aQDzhSb9yVoHgRiGEFEly__xhnxkWy2z9oX5yM01KUrWRO0Xg3GLdXxF7GXzWOj4TOL3QNagjsbOxutAnX5kBWlYYGwyoTwW4kc2FRhqdW/s1600/Marilyn.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1594" data-original-width="1600" height="397" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS6w6suU49rgY7tKfu6FJ-A-E8hmRcQu_cs_aQDzhSb9yVoHgRiGEFEly__xhnxkWy2z9oX5yM01KUrWRO0Xg3GLdXxF7GXzWOj4TOL3QNagjsbOxutAnX5kBWlYYGwyoTwW4kc2FRhqdW/s400/Marilyn.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>9.</b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVcgfsRWmnovUgEtaRYBIN9t8CEy2jQ788rr2_qBZqy7uIGzAlP-xPElFEAHHGE7ccY4cuINnICfQWiHdPFMJT-KrzX5VJt7s8sEQoL5N-DPG-eyAYA-oX6ICdSR5NXuXwc3jDdDNUfCEG/s1600/Sunflowers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="685" data-original-width="510" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVcgfsRWmnovUgEtaRYBIN9t8CEy2jQ788rr2_qBZqy7uIGzAlP-xPElFEAHHGE7ccY4cuINnICfQWiHdPFMJT-KrzX5VJt7s8sEQoL5N-DPG-eyAYA-oX6ICdSR5NXuXwc3jDdDNUfCEG/s640/Sunflowers.jpg" width="476" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>10.</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9hqtwxCWzyjKAMVSGVC-8voeFefzxrrT8zPsHywgEqGYX_2LcZWOhuWQlRc3pttHFX3XXhMRF_BWNPW81wk7-iXdpmowSFFdHI5um0-xSB2qqYHQ5jrq1fPay9WqK8ay83SjA-0RQsnoD/s1600/Guernica.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="150" data-original-width="336" height="177" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9hqtwxCWzyjKAMVSGVC-8voeFefzxrrT8zPsHywgEqGYX_2LcZWOhuWQlRc3pttHFX3XXhMRF_BWNPW81wk7-iXdpmowSFFdHI5um0-xSB2qqYHQ5jrq1fPay9WqK8ay83SjA-0RQsnoD/s400/Guernica.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<br />Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-81951339357608449102019-09-29T16:31:00.002-04:002019-09-29T17:00:15.552-04:00Don't Deny Coercion. Defend It.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiblJBXwuwGuQZezQhDk-4raludXHD9wzAMgsx_OTdlMTnABtaZcDOVws9alrV31earLfNK5lNq49gFqeu39tbzkLNA4hbJK8wTnVRdm-9BDNXIkoFTmDZL9DG8Qf5PQj3-yo7Qx8ZhjbLV/s1600/trump-zelensky.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="773" data-original-width="1160" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiblJBXwuwGuQZezQhDk-4raludXHD9wzAMgsx_OTdlMTnABtaZcDOVws9alrV31earLfNK5lNq49gFqeu39tbzkLNA4hbJK8wTnVRdm-9BDNXIkoFTmDZL9DG8Qf5PQj3-yo7Qx8ZhjbLV/s400/trump-zelensky.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Sunday was a good day for the Democrats. Let's concede that. Every major television network devotes an hour of their Sunday morning programming to their political shows, and today, all anybody was talking about was the Ukraine conversation. The Democratic Party sent a message today through their MSM allies that the president is corrupt, and he should be impeached. If the only political news you ever got came from Sunday morning TV, you probably think so too. There were a few token voices of reason like Hugh Hewitt and Rich Lowry, but for the most part, the opposing side of the debate did not get an invitation to the party. And don't get me started on Rudy Giuliani! </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">It is axiomatic in military strategy terms that if you are going to engage in warfare, you should do what you can to choose the ground upon which you will do battle. The Republicans have failed to heed that advice. There are too many poor souls in the Republican Party who are trying to deny that Trump offered Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky a quid pro quo. It's true that it was not explicitly stated in the conversation, but it can be reasonably argued that it was implied. As the Democrats are quick to point out, when you are a helpless supplicant like Ukraine and your potential protector asks you for a favor, you would be foolish indeed to ignore the wider implications of that request. The existence of that quid pro quo is deniable I suppose; maybe even legitimately so. But why pitch your tent on such shaky ground? President Trump was engaged in diplomacy, and nothing in diplomacy is free. Everything is a quid pro quo. President Trump was engaged in some arm twisting. It was gentle and polite arm twisting perhaps, but arm twisting nevertheless. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">President Trump wanted some favors. In diplomacy, favors are defined as things I want you to do for me for which I will do something in return. President Trump asked for two favors in particular, and you could argue about the relative importance of each favor. In order of precedence, the first favor, and perhaps therefore the most important, was help in the investigation into the origins of the Russia collusion scandal. The Obama Justice Department and Intelligence Community spied on the Trump campaign in 2016. There are credible allegations that some of the Steele Dossier material upon which that spying was predicated came from Ukrainian sources. President Trump believes that the Dossier was a hoax; a political dirty trick. The president wants an investigation, and he has a right to expect Ukraine to assist Attorney General Barr in completing that investigation. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">The second favor is a bit more problematic. (Thank you Captain Obvious!) The president asked Ukraine to look into the Bidens. Again, choose your ground for battle. The optics of that request are terrible. Don't deny that. Defend it! Yes, it is bad optics for the president to request a foreign country to investigate a political rival. You know what else has terrible optics? Hunter Biden accepting $600,000 a year from a foreign company to perform a job for which his only qualification is his last name. How about them optics? I've heard critics of the president point out that if it was really corruption that concerned Mr. Trump, then Ukraine is apparently the only place on earth where the president is bothered by corruption. That may be true, but the fact of the matter is that sometimes this president does the right thing by accident. American politics are conducted as a form of Kabuki theater in which an elected Republican defender of the president can't say that the president did the right thing by accident, but I can say it. Devin Nunes or Jim Jordan may have to pretend that the president's motivations were saintly and insightful, but I don't have to pretend that. And to claim that the actions of Joe and Hunter Biden in Ukraine are beyond scrutiny because of Joe's presidential candidacy is like giving a Get Out of Jail Free Card to any politician under suspicion of corruption. Just run for office and you're untouchable. The president did the right thing for the wrong reasons. There! That wasn't so hard, was it? Trump was looking for a little extra help in the 2020 race. He wasn't looking for money. He wasn't looking for Facebook ads. And there is absolutely no indication that he was looking for investigators in Ukraine to lie, no matter what kind of parody Adam Schiff can conjure up as he beclowns himself. Trump was looking for information. Information does not have a nationality. There is no such thing as American information or Ukrainian information. Since 2016, Democrats have attempted to stigmatize foreign sourced information as somehow tainted or illegitimate. Personally, I think that as long as it is the truth, information is always welcome no matter where it comes from. I felt the same way about the now infamous Trump Tower meeting, the Democrats' squawking about campaign finance and “thing of value” not withstanding. Information is like speech. To stifle information is to stifle free speech. At the end of the day, the president was pursuing information. Were the optics bad? Yes. But did that situation cry out for an investigation? Oh hell yes! The president may have done the crime, metaphorically speaking, but he shouldn't do the time. The proposed punishment is pure politics. If the voters disagree, well that's what we have elections for. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"> But what about Trump's withholding of aid? Surely that cannot be defended. Of course it can. We do not know, and we should not presume, that the president intended to withhold that military aid indefinitely. I don't think I am naïve to believe it was merely a bargaining position; quickly abandoned once the president got what he wanted, and never intended to be kept in place even if the president's requests had been refused. And who are the Democrats to bemoan a slight delay in the release of this lethal aid? The Obama administration flat out denied lethal aid to Ukraine all together. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Well what about the attempt to cover up the conversation? What were they trying to hide? As is clear from the Democrats' reaction to this conversation, it is obvious that due to the optics of President Trump's request, this conversation had the potential to be spun to the president's disadvantage. White House staff apparently recognized that, even if the president did not. And a little extra context is important here. This is the same White House which may still employ the author of that September 5, 2018 NY Times op-ed <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/trump-white-house-anonymous-resistance.html" target="_blank">“I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration.”</a> Remember that several other conversations between President Trump and other heads of state have been leaked to the press with the purpose of embarrassing the president. Under the circumstances, the fact that the record of this conversation was placed on a highly classified server is of little concern to me. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"> Finally, a word about the Democrats' desperate attempt to subvert the results of the 2016 election. There is mounting evidence that this latest “scandal” was a coordinated effort between “resistance' elements inside the White House, inside the Intelligence Community, and in the Congress, to sabotage this president. At the risk of inviting accusations of being a conspiracy theorist, I'd go so far as to suggest that the pending release of DOJ IG Michael Horowitz' report and the ongoing Barr/Durham “investigation of the investigators” may have played a role in the timing of this whistleblower's complaint. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Today was a bad day for the president. The Dems scored some unanswered points this morning. But tomorrow is another day. I'm hopeful that Team Trump still has a few special plays up its sleeve.</span>Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-32095963012884206452019-07-19T12:09:00.001-04:002019-07-19T12:21:38.447-04:00The Trial of Bijan Rafiekian<br />
<br />
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;">The following is a compilation of articles about the trial of Flynn business partner Bijan Rafiekian. It was due to Flynn's anticipated testimony/cooperation at this trial that his sentencing in his own matter of lying to the FBI has been repeatedly delayed.</span></span></h1>
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></h1>
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;">Recently, the government suddenly changed course and announced they would not be calling Flynn as a witness following his refusal to state that he knowingly filed a false FARA document. </span></span></h1>
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></h1>
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;">Subsequent to that refusal, the government also reversed course on their position that Flynn was not a co conspirator in the Rafiekian trial, now maintaining that he wss a co conspirator. If they could support this claim in court, it would allow them to present hearsay evidence from Flynn against Rafiekian that they otherwise not be able to present.</span></span></h1>
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></h1>
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"><span style="font-size: small;">My focus on this case has more to do with what effect it will have on sentencing in the lying to the FBI case. Flynn wa still willing to cooperate/testify, but not willing to admit knowingly falsifying the FARA. </span></span></h1>
<h2 class="entry-title">
<a href="https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/26/michael-flynn-attorney-suggests-special-counsel-withheld-key-information-defense/" target="_blank">Michael Flynn Attorney Suggests Special Counsel Withheld Key Information From His Defense</a>
</h2>
<div class="subtitle">
Michael Flynn’s new attorney Sidney Powell
suggested the special counsel may not have produced classified
information relevant to Flynn’s case. Powell intends to obtain it.</div>
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"> </span><span style="font-size: small;">By <a href="https://thefederalist.com/author/margotcleveland/" rel="author" title="Posts by Margot Cleveland">Margot Cleveland</a></span> </h1>
<div class="alpha-byline" style="margin-top: 5px;">
<span class="byline-month">June</span> 26, 2019</div>
<div class="alpha-byline" style="margin-top: 5px;">
</div>
<h1 class=" ">
<span itemprop="headline"> </span></h1>
<h1 class=" ">
<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/15/flynn-business-partner-trial-mueller-1415856" target="_blank"><span itemprop="headline">Defense straddles strategies as trial opens for Flynn business partner</span></a>
</h1>
<div itemprop="author" itemscope="" itemtype="https://schema.org/Person">
</div>
<div class="byline">
By JOSH GERSTEIN</div>
<div class="timestamp">
<time datetime="2019-07-15 08:35:50" itemprop="datePublished">07/15/2019 08:35 AM EDT</time></div>
<div class="updated">
Updated <time datetime="2019-07-16 00:16:19">07/16/2019 12:16 AM EDT</time></div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Josh Gerstein</span></span></a></div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" id="tweet-user">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@joshgerstein</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link">
</a></div>
<div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div>
<a aria-label="Jul 15" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1loqt21 r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="auto" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1150966131794092032" id="tweet-timestamp" role="link" title="11:11 PM · Jul 15, 2019"><time datetime="2019-07-16T03:11:24.000Z">Jul 15</time></a></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">LAWYERSPOTTING: Among the onlookers at opening statements in Flynn business partner Kian's trial today: Flynn attorney Powell, Flynn prosecutor Van Grack, and US Atty for EDVA Terwilliger</span></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<h1 class=" ">
<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/16/michael-flynn-trial-turkey-1417977" target="_blank"><span itemprop="headline">Flynn’s ex-lawyer takes witness stand for the prosecution</span></a>
</h1>
<div itemprop="author" itemscope="" itemtype="https://schema.org/Person">
</div>
<div class="byline">
By JOSH GERSTEIN</div>
<div class="timestamp">
<time datetime="2019-07-16 20:31:37" itemprop="datePublished">07/16/2019 08:31 PM EDT</time></div>
<div class="updated">
Updated <time datetime="2019-07-16 23:41:14">07/16/2019 11:41 PM EDT</time></div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
<div class="updated">
<time datetime="2019-07-16 23:41:14"><a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a></time></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Josh Gerstein</span></span></a></div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" id="tweet-user">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@joshgerstein</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link">
</a></div>
<div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div>
<a aria-label="Jul 16" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1loqt21 r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="auto" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1151316928981536769" id="tweet-timestamp" role="link" title="10:25 PM · Jul 16, 2019"><time datetime="2019-07-17T02:25:20.000Z">Jul 16</time></a></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">It's not every day a defense attorney gets called to testify for the prosecution, but it happened today to Gen. Mike Flynn's ex-lawyer, Rob Kelner. The cross-examination produced some friction. More here:</span></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<h1 class=" ">
<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/17/michael-flynn-trump-campaign-foreign-lobbying-1418837" target="_blank"><span itemprop="headline">Flynn juggled Trump campaign role with foreign lobbying, jurors told</span></a>
</h1>
<div class="subhead">
His foreign lobbying role has been central to
the case against Bijan Rafiekian, a former business partner.</div>
<div itemprop="author" itemscope="" itemtype="https://schema.org/Person">
</div>
<div class="byline">
By JOSH GERSTEIN</div>
<div class="timestamp">
<time datetime="2019-07-17 15:10:30" itemprop="datePublished">07/17/2019 03:10 PM EDT</time></div>
<div class="updated">
Updated <time datetime="2019-07-17 20:35:14">07/17/2019 08:35 PM EDT</time></div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
<div class="updated">
<time datetime="2019-07-17 20:35:14"><a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a></time></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Josh Gerstein</span></span></a></div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" id="tweet-user">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@joshgerstein</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link">
</a></div>
<div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div>
<a aria-label="Jul 17" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1loqt21 r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="auto" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1151653223259869184" id="tweet-timestamp" role="link" title="8:41 PM · Jul 17, 2019"><time datetime="2019-07-18T00:41:39.000Z">Jul 17</time></a></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">At trial today of Gen. Mike Flynn's business partner, a retired FBI agent recalled this blunt response to the defendant's plan to avoid registering as a foreign agent: 'I wouldn't f--- around with that.'</span></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Josh Gerstein</span></span></a></div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link">
</a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" id="tweet-user">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@joshgerstein</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link">
</a></div>
<div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div>
<a aria-label="Jul 17" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1loqt21 r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="auto" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1151699381671866369" id="tweet-timestamp" role="link" title="11:45 PM · Jul 17, 2019"><time datetime="2019-07-18T03:45:04.000Z">Jul 17</time></a></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">PAY TO PLAY? We knew that while sending over $500,000 to Flynn during the campaign, his Turkish client was complaining to a Flynn aide that Trump wasn't being supportive enough. In court today, we found out Flynn heard those pleas directly</span></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<h1 class=" ">
<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/18/bijan-rafiekian-case-1421607" target="_blank"><span itemprop="headline">Judge withholds ruling on acquitting Flynn partner</span></a>
</h1>
<div class="subhead">
Bijan Rafiekian is on trial for acting as an
unregistered agent for Turkey during his work for Flynn Intel Group, a
consulting firm. </div>
<div itemprop="author" itemscope="" itemtype="https://schema.org/Person">
</div>
<div class="byline">
By JOSH GERSTEIN</div>
<div class="timestamp">
<time datetime="2019-07-18 14:37:11" itemprop="datePublished">07/18/2019 02:37 PM EDT</time></div>
<div class="updated">
Updated <time datetime="2019-07-18 17:15:38">07/18/2019 05:15 PM EDT</time></div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
<div class="updated">
<time datetime="2019-07-18 17:15:38"><a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a></time></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Josh Gerstein</span></span></a></div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" id="tweet-user">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@joshgerstein</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link">
</a></div>
<div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div>
<a aria-label="17 hours ago" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1loqt21 r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="auto" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1151980440569483264" id="tweet-timestamp" role="link" title="6:21 PM · Jul 18, 2019"><time datetime="2019-07-18T22:21:54.000Z">17h</time></a></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">NEW: Prosecutors narrowly escaped a judge-ordered acquittal today for Flynn business partner charged with foreign-agent crimes following Mueller probe. Looks like judge will let jury deliberate in case, while not ruling out tossing it--or part of it--later</span></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a></span><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Josh Gerstein</span></span></a></span></div>
</div>
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link">
</a></span><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" id="tweet-user">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@joshgerstein</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein" role="link">
</a></div>
<div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div>
<a aria-label="12 hours ago" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1loqt21 r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="auto" href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1152044347808014342" id="tweet-timestamp" role="link" title="10:35 PM · Jul 18, 2019"><time datetime="2019-07-19T02:35:51.000Z">12h</time></a></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">After completing his testimony at trial of Flynn biz partner Bijan Kian on foreign-agent charges, lobbyist </span><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-xoduu5">
<span class="r-18u37iz"><a class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao css-16my406 r-1n1174f r-1loqt21 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="ltr" href="https://twitter.com/JimCourtovich" role="link">@JimCourtovich</a></span></div>
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> did something unusual for a prosecution witness: gave the defendant a firm, enthusiastic handshake in front of the jury</span></div>
</div>
<div class="updated">
<br />
<h1 data-pb-field="custom.topperDisplayName" itemprop="headline">
<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/without-testimony-from-michael-flynn-judge-is-skeptical-of-case-against-ex-business-partner/2019/07/18/eaaec884-a998-11e9-86dd-d7f0e60391e9_story.html?utm_term=.7fd8892d5a45" target="_blank">Without testimony from Michael Flynn, judge is skeptical of case against ex-business partner</a></h1>
<h1 data-pb-field="custom.topperDisplayName" itemprop="headline">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span class="by-lbl">By </span> <a class="author-name" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/rachel-weiner/"> Rachel Weiner</a></span></h1>
<div class="author-sig-line-wrapper">
<div class="author-sig-line">
<div class="author-byline ">
<div class="author-wrapper" data-authorname="Rachel Weiner">
<div class="author-info">
Washington Post </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<span class="author-timestamp" content="2019-07-18T05:56-500" itemprop="datePublished">July 18 at 5:56 PM</span> </div>
<h1 data-pb-field="custom.topperDisplayName" itemprop="headline">
</h1>
</div>
<h2 class="entry-title">
<a href="https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/19/latest-development-flynn-case-proves-special-counsel-cover-operation-taking-trump/" target="_blank">Latest Development In Flynn Case Proves Special Counsel Was A Cover For Taking Down Trump</a></h2>
<h2 class="entry-title">
<span style="font-size: small;">By <a href="https://thefederalist.com/author/margotcleveland/" rel="author" title="Posts by Margot Cleveland">Margot Cleveland</a></span> </h2>
<div class="alpha-byline" style="margin-top: 5px;">
<span class="byline-month">July</span> 19, 2019</div>
<h2 class="entry-title">
</h2>
<div class="subtitle">
His former lawyer’s latest testimony
establishes two facts, both of which benefit Michael Flynn and both of
which the media has missed.</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><a href="https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1152211157094215680" target="_blank"> Margot Cleveland Twitter thread summarizing above article</a></span></div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
<div class="updated">
<br /></div>
Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-67434219595540683692019-07-16T18:17:00.001-04:002019-07-16T18:54:15.748-04:00Trump vs "The Squad": We're at an Inflection Point<br />
<br />
We're watching realignments taking place on both sides of the political spectrum. For several months now, the Democrats have been engaged in a food fight between Speaker Pelosi, and an outspoken "squad" of freshman Congresswomen who are determined to transform their party overnight into an openly socialist, no borders, anti-semitic, and pro al Qaida party.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_ybJQ1GOiySqPb_HBsqpZ6Lxt0tdNnpvwUZV5dhhO84cOqBqi_jHXXAWDcVHWx8NGCeQqlzb8ihs4OnpcWEZBtMgvv0zkKspekJF0dug8Vo9IMzlbk_5Gfkhg7EDRA3DdGXhBn28l5A7m/s1600/nancy-pelosi.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="460" data-original-width="789" height="186" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_ybJQ1GOiySqPb_HBsqpZ6Lxt0tdNnpvwUZV5dhhO84cOqBqi_jHXXAWDcVHWx8NGCeQqlzb8ihs4OnpcWEZBtMgvv0zkKspekJF0dug8Vo9IMzlbk_5Gfkhg7EDRA3DdGXhBn28l5A7m/s320/nancy-pelosi.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
And judging by statements from the Democratic presidential candidates, the so called "squad" is meeting with some success. The rhetoric has gotten so heated that Pelosi was accused by those same members of being biased against women of color. That epithet, the dreaded race card, is usually reserved for Republican opponents. Remember the good old days when we used to think that Nancy was the radical face of her party?. Yeah...good times! Anyway...<br />
<br />
The Republicans have been doing some realignment of their own, thanks largely to the overwhelming persona of one Donald J Trump. In contrast to the volatility of Democratic politics in recent days, most of the fireworks on the Republican side took place in the run-up to the 2016 election. That's not to say that things in Republican circles have gone completely dark since Trump's election, but the fight for the heart and soul of the Republican party has been taking place on a more intellectual plane, largely unnoticed by the mainstream press. Most conservative thinkers have grudgingly acquiesced to Trump's ownership of the party, but a compact nucleus of staunch Never Trumpers still persist in their opposition to the president. Unlike the Democrat's recent conflagration, the Republican's debates have been more restrained.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgROV920xlYpeyEVl49AsvoVgzCagskK8AJEJC7vrZXFaDRWOuc66MY5bjCkvvLeuwWC-OR4axw_jrf4FmQqhpfyDkY8X_XOwTN3W0RYarq5LwJ3nBTlptvYhtLb2x4i_xrokToV-2Ahwy3/s1600/Sohrab+Ahmari.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1600" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgROV920xlYpeyEVl49AsvoVgzCagskK8AJEJC7vrZXFaDRWOuc66MY5bjCkvvLeuwWC-OR4axw_jrf4FmQqhpfyDkY8X_XOwTN3W0RYarq5LwJ3nBTlptvYhtLb2x4i_xrokToV-2Ahwy3/s320/Sohrab+Ahmari.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Sohrab Ahmari used to write for conservative Commentary Magazine. As a regular listener to the Commentary Podcast, I am familiar with his thinking. He is not blind to Trump's manifest flaws, but he has come to terms with the man, and like many conservatives, he accepts Trump on a transactional basis. He's the president. We'll support him when he's working towards shared goals. He has recently moved on to become the Opinion Editor for the New York Post.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMh0alPEDAT-ZMYpxpWRAhzIFsLR7Szemd29q4BQC2Pg99qyXGRRv8BB-BcIovfVQt-ERsU3gcIAbWgVA09MRaod3fAhYNCJnJTAMkj05_k6QXYWchUu6CmGa0Pu7s1FPB5r_QFvKP3jet/s1600/david-french-not-running-for-president-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="460" data-original-width="788" height="186" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMh0alPEDAT-ZMYpxpWRAhzIFsLR7Szemd29q4BQC2Pg99qyXGRRv8BB-BcIovfVQt-ERsU3gcIAbWgVA09MRaod3fAhYNCJnJTAMkj05_k6QXYWchUu6CmGa0Pu7s1FPB5r_QFvKP3jet/s320/david-french-not-running-for-president-2.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
David French writes for the National Review, another of my go to publications. He's a principled conservative and remains solidly Never Trump to this day. Sohrab is a Catholic. David is an evangelical Christian. Both men's politics are strongly influenced by their faith. At the end of May, Sohrab published an essay on the First Things website entitled <a href="https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/05/against-david-french-ism" target="_blank">Against David Frenchism</a> where he makes the case for full throated support for Trump despite his flaws. To do any less is just ceding territory to a relentless opposition who will exploit any advantage to mercilessly pursue their cultural agendas. A couple of excerpts from Ahmari's piece illustrate his thinking. <br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
With a kind of animal instinct, Trump understood what was missing from mainstream (more or less French-ian) conservatism....<br />
<br />
French’s response to these developments on the right has been predictable: He has <a href="https://twitter.com/davidafrench/status/1088933070261104640?lang=en" target="_blank">spent</a> <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/jerome-corsi-roger-stone-and-the-austin-powers-theory-of-russian-collusion/">two years</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1022688872227069952">promoting</a> <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/robert-mueller-trump-investigation-coullusion-questions/">the now-discredited</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1086107941550338053">Russian “collusion” theory</a>;
moralizing and pretending we don’t face enemies who seek our personal
destruction (just ask Justice Kavanaugh); and haranguing his fellow
evangelical Protestants for supporting Trump, as if they were the only
American voting bloc ever forced to compromise. As an activist, French
has benefited from the Trump GOP’s ascendance, but he has kept his hands
clean, his soul untainted.</blockquote>
<br />
Then there is this:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Progressives understand that culture war means discrediting their
opponents and weakening or destroying their institutions. Conservatives
should approach the culture war with a similar realism. Civility and
decency are secondary values. They regulate compliance with an
established order and orthodoxy. We should seek to use these values to
enforce our order and our orthodoxy, not pretend that they could ever be
neutral. To recognize that enmity is real is its own kind of moral
duty. </blockquote>
<br />
<br />
Ahmari has clearly staked out his position. We're at war. We can't afford to play by the enemies rules. Rules which they have no intention of observing themselves. If any nation should recognize the hazards of rules of engagement that are too circumscribed, it is the United States. As you can imagine, there has been pushback from French and his supporters. This back and forth has continued over the past six or seven weeks. It's largely a Twitter phenomenon and has remained under the radar of the mainstream press. But it is the rare politically active conservative who isn't familiar with the debate and who doesn't have an opinion on the matter.<br />
<br />
If the vigor of this dialogue was on the ebb, recent events are likely to re-ignite the debate. The president recently posted a <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1150381394234941448" target="_blank">series of Tweets</a> where he challenged the aforementioned squad of Congresswomen. If they didn't like America, they should leave .<br />
<div aria-label="33549 replies, 36627 Retweets, 183521 likes" class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wtj0ep r-156q2ks r-1mdbhws" role="group" style="margin-left: 40px;">
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<li class="css-4rbku5 css-1dbjc4n r-19yat4t r-mk0yit r-wk8lta r-9qu9m4" data-testid="UserCell" role="listitem"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-thb0q2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1iusvr4 r-16y2uox r-1h0z5md r-5f2r5o r-1gmbmnb r-bcqeeo">
<a aria-hidden="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" tabindex="-1"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-sdzlij r-1adg3ll r-1udh08x r-13qz1uu">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1adg3ll r-1udh08x">
<div class="r-1p0dtai r-1pi2tsx r-1d2f490 r-u8s1d r-ipm5af r-13qz1uu">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-sdzlij r-1p0dtai r-1mlwlqe r-1d2f490 r-1udh08x r-u8s1d r-zchlnj r-ipm5af r-417010">
<a aria-hidden="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" tabindex="-1"><img alt="" class="css-9pa8cd" draggable="false" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/874276197357596672/kUuht00m_normal.jpg" /></a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-hidden="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" tabindex="-1">
</a></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1iusvr4 r-46vdb2 r-1777fci r-5f2r5o r-bcqeeo">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1awozwy r-18u37iz r-1wtj0ep">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Donald J. Trump</span></span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link">
</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</li>
<br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@realDonaldTrump</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link">
</a></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-1blvdjr r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-19yat4t r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly......</span></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1awozwy r-18u37iz r-1wtj0ep r-ku1wi2">
<div class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-zso239 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1re7ezh r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">8:27 AM · Jul 14, 2019</span></span> · </div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1adg3ll">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-o7ynqc r-1j63xyz">
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<article aria-haspopup="false" class="css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1udh08x r-utggzx r-1k3wbuw r-rjfia" data-focusable="true" role="article" tabindex="0"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-thb0q2" data-testid="tweet">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1awozwy r-1iusvr4 r-16y2uox r-5f2r5o r-1gmbmnb r-bcqeeo">
<a aria-haspopup="false" aria-hidden="true" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1adg3ll r-18kxxzh r-1wbh5a2 r-13qz1uu" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link" tabindex="-1"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-sdzlij r-1udh08x r-13qz1uu">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1adg3ll r-1udh08x">
<div class="r-1p0dtai r-1pi2tsx r-1d2f490 r-u8s1d r-ipm5af r-13qz1uu">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-sdzlij r-1p0dtai r-1mlwlqe r-1d2f490 r-1udh08x r-u8s1d r-zchlnj r-ipm5af r-417010">
<a aria-haspopup="false" aria-hidden="true" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1adg3ll r-18kxxzh r-1wbh5a2 r-13qz1uu" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link" tabindex="-1"><img alt="" class="css-9pa8cd" draggable="false" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/874276197357596672/kUuht00m_bigger.jpg" /></a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" aria-hidden="true" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1adg3ll r-18kxxzh r-1wbh5a2 r-13qz1uu" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link" tabindex="-1">
</a></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1iusvr4 r-46vdb2 r-5f2r5o r-bcqeeo r-l4ido4">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-19i43ro">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wtj0ep r-zl2h9q">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Donald J. Trump</span></span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link">
</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</article></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@realDonaldTrump</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link">
</a></div>
<div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div>
<a aria-label="Jul 14" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1loqt21 r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="auto" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1150381395078000643" role="link" title="8:27 AM · Jul 14, 2019"><time datetime="2019-07-14T12:27:52.000Z">Jul 14</time></a></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-19i43ro">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-4qtqp9 r-18u37iz r-1wtj0ep r-zl2h9q">
<div class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
Replying to <br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-xoduu5">
<a class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao css-16my406 r-1n1174f r-1loqt21 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@realDonaldTrump</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">....and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how....</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-my5ep6 r-qklmqi r-1adg3ll">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1u4rsef r-1loqt21 r-o7ynqc r-1j63xyz">
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<article aria-haspopup="false" class="css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1udh08x r-l4ido4 r-utggzx r-rjfia" data-focusable="true" role="article" tabindex="0"><div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-thb0q2" data-testid="tweet">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1awozwy r-1iusvr4 r-16y2uox r-5f2r5o r-1gmbmnb r-bcqeeo">
<a aria-haspopup="false" aria-hidden="true" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1adg3ll r-18kxxzh r-1wbh5a2 r-13qz1uu" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link" tabindex="-1"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-sdzlij r-1udh08x r-13qz1uu">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1adg3ll r-1udh08x">
<div class="r-1p0dtai r-1pi2tsx r-1d2f490 r-u8s1d r-ipm5af r-13qz1uu">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-sdzlij r-1p0dtai r-1mlwlqe r-1d2f490 r-1udh08x r-u8s1d r-zchlnj r-ipm5af r-417010">
<a aria-haspopup="false" aria-hidden="true" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1adg3ll r-18kxxzh r-1wbh5a2 r-13qz1uu" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link" tabindex="-1"><img alt="" class="css-9pa8cd" draggable="false" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/874276197357596672/kUuht00m_bigger.jpg" /></a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" aria-hidden="true" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1adg3ll r-18kxxzh r-1wbh5a2 r-13qz1uu" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link" tabindex="-1">
</a></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1iusvr4 r-46vdb2 r-5f2r5o r-bcqeeo r-1k3wbuw">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-19i43ro">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wtj0ep r-zl2h9q">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-vw2c0b r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Donald J. Trump</span></span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link">
</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</article></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1d09ksm r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"></a><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18u37iz r-1wbh5a2 r-1f6r7vd">
<div class="css-901oao css-bfa6kz r-1re7ezh r-18u37iz r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" dir="ltr">
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">@realDonaldTrump</span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<a aria-haspopup="false" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-1dbjc4n r-1loqt21 r-1wbh5a2 r-dnmrzs" data-focusable="true" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump" role="link">
</a></div>
<div aria-hidden="true" class="css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-ou255f r-qvutc0" dir="auto">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">·</span></div>
<a aria-label="Jul 14" class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao r-1re7ezh r-1loqt21 r-1q142lx r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-3s2u2q r-qvutc0" data-focusable="true" dir="auto" href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1150381396994723841" role="link" title="8:27 AM · Jul 14, 2019"><time datetime="2019-07-14T12:27:52.000Z">Jul 14</time></a></div>
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-19i43ro">
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">....it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<br />
<br />
Democrats and the press were howling about the so called racist Tweets. Trump was criticized for apparently not realizing that three of the four women in question were in fact born in the United States. Republicans were criticized for being too slow and not enthusiastic enough in their condemnation of the president. Trump, for his part doubled down in a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQakM3tfq2k&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR15AKwb-a2y-mCcLB0RmQGivAQA6luzZxJRHpiuWvi9TrRV4RRJYVWj3uw" target="_blank">Rose Garden press conference two days later.</a><br />
<br />
The squad responded that same evening with a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2A4KndU-g" target="_blank">press conference</a> of their own where notably, Rep. Ilhan Omar refused to disavow al Qaida.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4qEeYahx6RJfB6Ev9env39ASSsmSN3u7NR029cNqrKweODWkuF6qxIuRuqPst8ZwJTw9SIWy6pXWaMZRI4NjfDVMd6lJsTxhZMqSvmPJqS4duZwpOuZ5SgNQR9weN6jHiCdh3BFeBCBFe/s1600/Gessen-TheSquad.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="232" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4qEeYahx6RJfB6Ev9env39ASSsmSN3u7NR029cNqrKweODWkuF6qxIuRuqPst8ZwJTw9SIWy6pXWaMZRI4NjfDVMd6lJsTxhZMqSvmPJqS4duZwpOuZ5SgNQR9weN6jHiCdh3BFeBCBFe/s320/Gessen-TheSquad.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
I think we witnessed a watershed moment with those dueling press conferences. An inflection point. The president has never been shy about what he believes. It's kind of his trademark. But yesterday was a significant departure from the norm; even for him. The president declared war yesterday, and "the Squad" answered back in kind. Clausewitz famously said, "War is the continuation of politics by other means." And make no mistake. We're at war. That's why the Sohrab Ahmari-David French debate is so timely now. It's time for conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, and independents to make a choice. The Democratic agenda as put forward by these Congresswomen and the Democratic presidential candidates (who's leading who?) represents an existential threat to the America that was. I don't know anybody who doesn't have a few ideas about how to make America better, but do we really want "the Squad" driving that bus? Venezuela of the North is what they want because, as they'll likely tell you, socialism has only failed everywhere it's ever been tried because there wasn't enough of it. They have an agenda, and there doesn't seem to be any lack of commitment on their part. Trump has gone all in on the presumption that voters will despise what the Democrats have become more than they despise him. I'm not so sure he's right. Trump never asked me if I was willing to bet it all and roll the dice, but that's where we stand. No turning back now. Will we support him or will we insist, as Ahmari suggests David French does, "on keeping our hands
clean, and our souls untainted?" It's time to choose. I feel like a passenger in a car where the driver has decided to engage in a high speed game of chicken. No one asked me if I wanted to play, but I'm stuck in the passenger seat, and it's too late to get out. It's high risk, and we're all in this together. There's no turning back.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjg4R1wIfChkK7WpI0-Zi-3eG101SbH6j_9mVsSKTXEIOLKPReNmILU4lfbM4c9qRvE1FoWO6TSOaWmcDj3LlK5hpfcs0R071vN3Fz1_q4aRS0_qlyVfmKX8OBkJ5EWgrr4FAN4R_YVpMb6/s1600/Fred+Thompson.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjg4R1wIfChkK7WpI0-Zi-3eG101SbH6j_9mVsSKTXEIOLKPReNmILU4lfbM4c9qRvE1FoWO6TSOaWmcDj3LlK5hpfcs0R071vN3Fz1_q4aRS0_qlyVfmKX8OBkJ5EWgrr4FAN4R_YVpMb6/s320/Fred+Thompson.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
I'm reminded of a scene from <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZuMe5RvxPQ" target="_blank">The Hunt for Red October</a>
when Fred Thompson's character says, "This business will get out of
control. It'll get out of control, and we'll be lucky to live through
it!" It's time to buckle up. Trump just told the more timid members of his party to step up or step out! It's no time for faintheartedness. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f7ln_al3qo" target="_blank">He needs a wartime consigliere. </a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisyG9r3qphm713vViEz5VpkBYKtUkxztmJIg90wVazjUqpq8Ctn9yb1tqx-hIY1yixvrPcTIVqlReJeJ1qwn6R_44XMmaGjDNRYJvNuj7k8-pukZfw8hL831HqZrU1pXgDShq5yNhyphenhyphenJ3M1/s1600/Tom+Hagen.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="700" data-original-width="700" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisyG9r3qphm713vViEz5VpkBYKtUkxztmJIg90wVazjUqpq8Ctn9yb1tqx-hIY1yixvrPcTIVqlReJeJ1qwn6R_44XMmaGjDNRYJvNuj7k8-pukZfw8hL831HqZrU1pXgDShq5yNhyphenhyphenJ3M1/s320/Tom+Hagen.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-56390096865325145192019-07-08T16:43:00.001-04:002019-07-15T13:27:29.501-04:00Jeffrey Epstein: Some links<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtiV0VJsc9c" target="_blank">7 July 2019 YouTube Mike Cernovich and Stefan Molyneux discuss new indictment</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/03/06/ann-coulter-media-magic-how-a-democrat-pedophile-became-a-trump-scandal/" target="_blank">6 March 2019 Ann Coulter Summary at Breitbart Includes audio </a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html" target="_blank">Part I Miami Herald Story from 28 November, 2018 by Julie Brown </a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article214210674.html" target="_blank">Part II </a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article219494920.html" target="_blank">Part III</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article221897990.html" target="_blank">Epsteins Connections</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article221404845.html" target="_blank">Timeline </a><br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Palm Beach County’s Democratic prosecutor Barry Krischer</b> abetted Epstein<br />
<br />
<b>Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter</b> blew the whistle<br />
<br />
The [Palm Beach County] sheriff, <b>Ric Bradshaw</b>, would not answer
questions, submitted by the Miami Herald, about Epstein’s work release.<br />
<div style="color: black; font: 10pt sans-serif; height: 1px; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-transform: none; width: 1px;">
<br />
Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html#storylink=cpy</div>
<br />
<br />
Acosta made a deal with Washington, D.C. attorney <b>Jay Lefkowitz</b>, his
former colleague, at a breakfast meeting in October 2007, according to
the Miami Herald.<br />
<br />
“How in the world, do you, the U.S. attorney, engage in a negotiation
with a criminal defendant, basically allowing that criminal defendant to
write up the agreement?” Bradley Edwards, a former state prosecutor who
represents victims of Epstein, told the Miami Herald.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-converted-space">Acosta, in 2011, would explain that he was unduly pressured by Epstein’s
heavy-hitting lawyers — <b>[Jay] Lefkowitz, Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz,
Jack Goldberger, Roy Black, former U.S. Attorney Guy Lewis, Gerald
Lefcourt, and Kenneth Starr,</b> the former Whitewater special prosecutor
who investigated Bill Clinton’s sexual liaisons with Monica Lewinsky.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-converted-space">In email after email, <b>Acosta</b> and the lead federal prosecutor, <b>A. Marie
Villafaña</b>, acquiesced to Epstein’s legal team’s demands, which often
focused on ways to limit the scandal by shutting out his victims and the
media, including suggesting that the charges be filed in Miami, instead
of Palm Beach, where Epstein’s victims lived. </span><br />
<div style="color: black; font: 10pt sans-serif; height: 1px; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-transform: none; width: 1px;">
<br />
Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html#storylink=cpy</div>
<br />
<div style="color: black; font: 10pt sans-serif; height: 1px; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-transform: none; width: 1px;">
<br />
Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html#storylink=cpy<span class="Apple-converted-space"></span> </div>
In 2014, the brilliant conservative lawyer <b>Paul Cassell and Bradley
Edwards</b> brought suit against the federal prosecutors for violating the
Crime Victims’ Rights Act in the Epstein case.<br />
<br />
A prosecutor under New York County District Attorney<b> Cyrus Vance</b> argued
on Epstein’s behalf, telling New York Supreme Court Judge Ruth Pickholtz
that the Florida case never led to an indictment and that his underage
victims failed to cooperate in the case. <b>Pickholtz</b>, however, denied the
petition, expressing astonishment that a New York prosecutor would make
such a request on behalf of a serial sex offender accused of molesting
so many girls.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.cernovich.com/epstein-arrested/" target="_blank">Mike Cernovich claims</a> he initiated the lawsuit (as intervenor) later joined by the Miami Herald that led to judgement to release thousands of pages of documents to the public. Those documents, not yet released will expose the details of the Epstein case and are the reason the new charges are being filed. Had these documents remained secret, the Epstein case would never have been revisited. The case has to do with a civil suit from 21 Sep 2015 by alleged Epstein victim <b><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: serif; left: 122.75px; top: 229.35px; transform: scalex(1.12423);">VIRGINIA </span></span></b><span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.8333px; left: 231.017px; top: 229.35px; transform: scalex(1.03947);"><span style="font-size: small;"><b>GIUFFRE</b> against Epstein</span></span><b><span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.8333px; left: 231.017px; top: 229.35px; transform: scalex(1.03947);"> </span></b><span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.8333px; left: 231.017px; top: 229.35px; transform: scalex(1.03947);"><span style="font-size: small;">girlfriend and procurer</span> </span><span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.8333px; left: 231.017px; top: 229.35px; transform: scalex(1.03947);"><span style="font-size: small;"><b>Ghislaine Maxwell </b>for defamation. Maxwell had called Giuffre a liar for accusations related to procurement.</span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="https://s9503.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Epstein-case-unseal-cernovich.pdf#page=8" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.8333px; left: 231.017px; top: 229.35px; transform: scalex(1.03947);"><span style="font-size: small;">3 Jul 2019 US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruling in favor of intervenors Mike Cernovich, Miami Herald (Julie Brown), and Alan Dershowitz to unseal docket in Maxwell v Giuffre Request for Summary mJudgement filing.</span></span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.8333px; left: 231.017px; top: 229.35px; transform: scalex(1.03947);"><span style="font-size: small;">This pending release of documents is said to be the reason why new charges were being filed against Epstein. May show others involved.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.8333px; left: 231.017px; top: 229.35px; transform: scalex(1.03947);"><span style="font-size: small;"> <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4539434/Jeffrey-Epstein-sex-slave-Virginia-Roberts-settles-suit.html" target="_blank">Guardian story about settlement of <b>Virginia Roberts Giuffre'</b>s defamation lawsuit against <b>Ghislaine Maxwell</b> 24 May 2017</a></span></span><br />
<br />
<div data-contents="true">
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="4emvf" data-offset-key="3vea7-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3vea7-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="3vea7-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="4emvf" data-offset-key="6542g-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6542g-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="6542g-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="4emvf" data-offset-key="ag5e0-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ag5e0-0-0">
<a href="https://soundcloud.com/breitbart/breitbart-news-tonight-ann-coulter-june-9-2019?in=breitbart/sets/breitbart-news-tonight-july" target="_blank"><span data-offset-key="ag5e0-0-0"><span data-text="true">Half hour audio interview with Ann Coulter. Lots of detail on the Epstein case. Very informative. Credits Palm Beach Police Department and the Chief of Police <b>Michael Reiter</b> for pursuing the investigation. Exposes Florida State Attorney <b>Barry Krischer</b> for dropping the ball and covering for Epstein.</span></span></a></div>
</div>
</div>
<br />
<div style="color: black; font: 10pt sans-serif; height: 1px; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-transform: none; width: 1px;">
<br />
Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html#storylink=cpy</div>
<a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2003/03/jeffrey-epstein-200303" target="_blank">Vicky Ward Vanity Fair profile of Jeffrey Epstein from March 2003</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/i-tried-to-warn-you-about-sleazy-billionaire-jeffrey-epstein-in-2003" target="_blank">Jan 6, 2015 Vicky Ward story from The Daily Beast (updated July 8, 2019) distills the lengthier March 2003 Vanity Fair story, but includes the references to the two sister whom Epstein allegedly abused (cut from the Vanity Fair article by editor <b>Graydon Carter</b> after pressure from Epstein)</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/08/acosta-epstein-plea-deal-resign/" target="_blank">8 July, 2019 Daily Caller on then U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Now Sec Labor <b>Alex Acosta </b></a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/The%20Miami%20Herald%20and%20two%20other%20parties%20(Dershowitz%20and%20Cernovich)%20petitioned%20for%20release%20of%20documents%20under%20seal.%20%20They%20lost%20in%20district%20court,%20but%20won%20on%20appeal.%20%20Now%20two%20unknown%20parties%20are%20petitioning%20the%20lower%20court%20NOT%20to%20release%20the%20docs%20the%20appeals%20court%20said%20should%20be%20released.%20%20I%20suspect%20the%20imminent%20release%20of%20these%20documents%20was%20all%20that%20spurred%20the%20current%20DOJ%20officials%20into%20finally%20arresting%20Epstein%20on%20federal%20charges.%20%20I%20suspect%20they%20know%20they're%20going%20to%20look%20even%20worse%20than%20they%20already%20do%20having%20covered%20for%20Epstein%20in%202008.%20%20This%20will%20be%20a%20travesty%20if%20these%20docs%20remain%20sealed.%20%20https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/20/jeffrey-epstein-related-lawsuit-1229908" target="_blank"><b>Two </b>unidentified John Doe parties petitioning lower court NOT to release sealed docs that Appeals Court said should be unsealed<b>. </b></a> <br />
My guess is that the impending release of these docs was all that prompted the Feds to indict Epstein. They knew that once public, they'd look even worse that they already do for having given Epstein the sweetheart deal in 2008.<br />
<br />
<div data-contents="true">
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1o2if" data-offset-key="5rt3o-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5rt3o-0-0">
<a href="https://www.hughhewitt.com/wp-content/uploads/07-11hhs-patterson.mp3"><span data-offset-key="5rt3o-0-0"><span data-text="true">https://www.hughhewitt.com/wp-content/uploads/07-11hhs-patterson.mp3</span></span></a></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1o2if" data-offset-key="6kr66-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="h1t0-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="h1t0-0-0"><span data-text="true">Hugh Hewitt interviews thriller writer James Patterson who, in 2016, departed from his usual genre to write the non fiction book Filthy Rich about Jeffrey Epstein.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1o2if" data-offset-key="cdq6m-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cdq6m-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="cdq6m-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="1o2if" data-offset-key="fvfg4-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="fvfg4-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="fvfg4-0-0"><span data-text="true">He says he was shocked he couldn't get the media interested, perhaps because, rightly or wrongly, they were concerned too vigorous an exploration of the subject might lead to Bill Clinton.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span data-offset-key="fvfg4-0-0"><span data-text="true"><a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Epstein-bail.pdf" target="_blank">Epstein argument for bail INCLUDES NON PROSECUTION AGREEMENT FROM 2007. </a></span></span><br />
<span data-offset-key="fvfg4-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="fvfg4-0-0"><span data-text="true"><a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/epstein-bail.pdf" target="_blank">Government argues against bail</a></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-49873799673661396152019-07-07T13:59:00.001-04:002019-07-07T14:11:07.959-04:00Breaking News: Dog Bites Man<br />
<br />
<b>**Snowflake Alert**</b> I use the term illegal aliens. I don't use terms like undocumented worker or other euphemisms that try to normalize their status. If that bothers you, stop reading now.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, I understand and sympathize with their reasons for coming here. I don't hate them. But we can't take them all. It's our country. We have a right to make the rules on who we accept and we have the right to enforce those rules. <br />
<br />
<br />
President Trump said something stupid the other day. Yeah, I know. What's so unusual about that? That's hardly a man bites dog story. The president is always saying something stupid. The difference is that this time, I didn't recognize how stupid it was until I consulted my handy Pocket Constitution.<br />
<br />
The president was giving one of his impromptu news conferences as he walked out to Marine One on the way to somewhere or other, and someone asked him about the citizenship question on the Census. <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/News/video/trump-executive-order-census-question-64163336" target="_blank">Here was the stupid part of his reply starting at the 45 second mark:</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"But you need it for many reasons. Number one, you need it for Congress, you need it for Congress, for districting, you need it for appropriations."</blockquote>
<br />
Fair enough I thought. It certainly doesn't make sense to allocate Congressional seats to a constituency that can't vote, right? But wait a minute. What are the actual rules for allocating those seats, I wondered. If I recall correctly, it's spelled out quite specifically in the Constitution. Why not go to the source and see what it says?<br />
<br />
I encourage you to keep reading, but<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>**MOOD SPOILER ALERT**:</b><br />
<br />
If you're like me, you're not gonna like the answer. The original description of how House seats are allocated was spelled out in Article I of the <a href="https://constitutionus.com/" target="_blank">Constitution</a>, but it was changed by Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment. (Remember that whole 3/5 person kerfuffle in Article I, Section 2? Yeah it's that part!) Anyway, here's how the rules stand now:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>"Amendment 14, Section 2.</b> Representatives shall be apportioned among the several
States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number
of <b>persons</b> in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the
right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President
and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress,
the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the
Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such
State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States,
or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other
crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the
proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the
whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."</blockquote>
So you don't need to be a citizen to count toward Congressional representation. You only have to be a person. Nothing says you need to be a citizen or even a legal non citizen to count toward a Congressional seat. Illegal aliens count toward House representation. It's in the Constitution! Yeah, I know. It sucks right? But it's the law.<br />
<br />
So if you were like me, and you thought it was totally reasonable to ask about citizenship as a means to prevent a misallocation of Congressional seats, I've got some bad news for you. Citizenship doesn't enter into it. And neither does illegal status. All persons count. Who knew? Not me, and apparently not Trump.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7_twwqGSlbTxwSaC51-xjSBBI454HzzFzmFU5jdgRgoKNOAHxADOl1J21Ial8q1AHn9SpxgpXqXaZfp3l7llpMc8cIW3A0eU328eNePpMg4geCIRyb0iLNqidwxjFiHviDSf5o-KoPFVz/s1600/sanctuary-city-road-sign-sized.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="675" data-original-width="1200" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7_twwqGSlbTxwSaC51-xjSBBI454HzzFzmFU5jdgRgoKNOAHxADOl1J21Ial8q1AHn9SpxgpXqXaZfp3l7llpMc8cIW3A0eU328eNePpMg4geCIRyb0iLNqidwxjFiHviDSf5o-KoPFVz/s320/sanctuary-city-road-sign-sized.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Now I know why liberal politicians are promoting sanctuary cities and sanctuary states. Those illegals can't vote, not directly and not legally at least. But they do count toward how many Congressmen those sanctuary cities and states can elect to Congress to represent THEIR interests as opposed to YOUR interests.<br />
<br />
I used to think that these liberal politicians promoting sanctuary cities were just pandering to their minority constituents who favored more lenient policies toward illegals. Now I realize that their motives are much more nefarious. They've discovered a back door means of getting more clout in Congress. Even if illegals aren't directly voting in our elections, the Constitution creates an incentive for unscrupulous pols to offer them this back door voting franchise via greater Congressional representation. Welcoming more illegals garners your city or state more votes in Congress than they would otherwise be entitled to.<br />
<br />
By the way, when you consider the game being played here, it puts Trump's threat to send the thousands of illegals intercepted at the border to sanctuary cities in a whole new light. Rather than burdening those sanctuary cities with the responsibility of caring for the thousands they would welcome into their midst, the policy would only serve to empower those sanctuary cities by enhancing their influence in Congress. In fact, the best thing Trump could do with these thousands of newcomers would be to move them all to Red States. At least until after the Census is complete. How's that for irony? <br />
<br />
I've always opposed open borders because I thought they were not compatible with our welfare state. I also vehemently oppose a path to citizenship for any illegals already here who, for practical reasons having to do with the sheer numbers, we choose not to expel. They should count themselves lucky they are just left alone, and that includes the DACA folks. But to the extent that I now view this whole sanctuary city situation as nothing more than a cynical ploy to gain more representation in Congress for policies I oppose, I find myself even less sympathetic to the status of illegal aliens in this country than I was before. Even if illegal aliens are not voting in any appreciable numbers, a concession I make ONLY for the sake of argument, they still represent a potential distortion in make-up of the House of Representatives. That is no small thing.<br />
<br />
<br />
(BTW, there's nothing in the Constitution that says you need to be a
citizen to vote either. The second paragraphs of both Articles I and II say the individual States get to decide who
qualifies to vote. But that's a discussion for another day)Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-10544747926662257222019-07-04T16:24:00.000-04:002019-07-04T17:45:45.504-04:00Howard Zinn's America is Not My America<div class="a-spacing-small a-color-base sims-lpo-header">
<br /></div>
<div class="a-spacing-small a-color-base sims-lpo-header">
I have a message for Nike and Colin Kaepernick:<br />
<br />
Just Blow Me!<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="a-spacing-small a-color-base sims-lpo-header">
I've been pondering something for a few weeks now, and this Fourth of July seems to offer the perfect opportunity to commit my thoughts to (digital) paper. I have more than a few friends, some in "meat space", but mostly on social media, who seem to be adherents of the Howard Zinn school of American history. In 1980, Zinn first published his <b><span class="sims-lpo-header-title">A People's History of the United States. </span></b><span class="sims-lpo-header-title"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_People%27s_History_of_the_United_States" target="_blank">To quote Wikipedia</a>, Zinn c</span><span class="sims-lpo-header-title">onsidered it to be: </span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="a-spacing-small a-color-base sims-lpo-header">
<span class="sims-lpo-header-title">"a different side of
history from the more traditional fundamental nationalist
glorification of country.
Zinn portrays a side of American history that can largely be seen as
the exploitation and manipulation of the majority by rigged systems that
hugely favor a small aggregate of elite rulers from across the orthodox
political parties."</span></div>
</blockquote>
<br />
Apparently, when it comes to America at least, Professor Zinn is a really tough grader. Too tough in my opinion.<br />
<br />
I'd be the first to admit that the simplified and sanitized version of American History that we all learned in elementary school and even high school was probably a little heavy on patriotism and a little light on critical analysis. Nevertheless, "<span class="sims-lpo-header-title">exploitation and manipulation of the majority by rigged systems..." is a little too much of a swing of the pendulum to an alternate reality. </span><br />
<span class="sims-lpo-header-title"><br /></span>
<span class="sims-lpo-header-title">I think a lot of the people who believe and promote Zinn's version of America only do so because of the perceived cachet attached to the new and more radical interpretation. Kind of like the early adopter who brags about his new 85" 4K TV even though it's way too big for his tiny apartment, and we're years away from any significant amount of 4K programming. </span><br />
<span class="sims-lpo-header-title"><br /></span>
<span class="sims-lpo-header-title">Take away all the Zinn acolytes who are just trying to be the "wokest" kids on the block, and a lot of those who are left (pun intended), just hate America. </span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUEIn1-6zMu0Hr9PdaPktAacS-799qXgLsBKOEKmTBWjDj5px0-ZfgNSV1vZxT3WOIKx_-rI88_ZBFcZIzfIdZAzxZwlBWgTZ76CgRghWDwgv_iYOvnrgwSyd5Dr2QRhXiflN10cftRm-9/s1600/190702072548-01-nike-air-max-1-quick-flag-exlarge-169.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="438" data-original-width="780" height="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUEIn1-6zMu0Hr9PdaPktAacS-799qXgLsBKOEKmTBWjDj5px0-ZfgNSV1vZxT3WOIKx_-rI88_ZBFcZIzfIdZAzxZwlBWgTZ76CgRghWDwgv_iYOvnrgwSyd5Dr2QRhXiflN10cftRm-9/s320/190702072548-01-nike-air-max-1-quick-flag-exlarge-169.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<span class="sims-lpo-header-title"><br /></span>
<span class="sims-lpo-header-title">So this Independence Day, I'm celebrating America. Not just the America of myth that I learned about in high school, but also the real America that I've learned about since. American exceptionalism is still the real deal. Even with all her flaws, I can't think of anyplace in the world I'd rather live. We're flying the flag on the front porch today, and if Nike and Colin Kaepernick don't like it, I have a message for them.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="sims-lpo-header-title">Just blow me!</span><br />
<br />Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-59537766348729378032019-05-14T17:23:00.000-04:002019-05-14T17:34:45.771-04:00Congressional Republicans to Robert Mueller: Thanks for Coming to Testify Before Us. We've Got a Few Questions of Our Own!<br />
<br />
<br />
<!--DOCTY-->
<b>Everyone is anticipating the stir that will be created if Robert Mueller ever comes to testify before Congressional Democrats. Think of all the bad press for Donald Trump as they dredge up every one of the ten or eleven potential obstruction of justice charges alluded to in the Mueller Report. Quite a gold mine right? But isn't that old news by now? What about the opportunity Mueller's testimony will provide to Congressional Republicans? That's where the real bonanza is. </b><br />
<br />
<b>I hope the president is smart enough to allow Mueller to testify despite the potential for a bad news cycle. I think he's got a lot more to gain than to lose. I wonder if he knows that and is perhaps goading Democrats into demanding Mueller appear. I've made a list of some of the questions I'd like the Republicans in Congress to ask Robert Mueller. </b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhneSp6aTpBkU2PgTH3RR1jd4OiWe2v2DCZOSOaNNFNVYLfaUfYW_hvKjQjxz1-do7tbRE2BB3RDDbjiix0moxJoInG6OmfyIj6C-BJgLiYeAbK_TQJS3I3CbnedMGNVpWZETriesJshyPF/s1600/Mueller+being+Questioned.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" height="223" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhneSp6aTpBkU2PgTH3RR1jd4OiWe2v2DCZOSOaNNFNVYLfaUfYW_hvKjQjxz1-do7tbRE2BB3RDDbjiix0moxJoInG6OmfyIj6C-BJgLiYeAbK_TQJS3I3CbnedMGNVpWZETriesJshyPF/s400/Mueller+being+Questioned.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Are you aware of an FBI investigation code named "<a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/spy-operation-on-trump-campaign-started-as-early-as-december-2015-new-texts-suggest_2551831.html" target="_blank">special</a>?"<br />
<br />
If yes, can you tell us the subject of that investigation?<br />
<br />
When was that investigation initiated?<br />
<br />
Was it a criminal investigation or a counter intelligence investigation?<br />
<br />
Was Peter Strzok associated with that investigation?<br />
<br />
Director Mueller, your mandate was to investigate Russian influence in our 2016 presidential election. Is that correct?<br />
<br />
When in your investigation did you determine that there was no coordination or conspiracy on the part of Donald Trump or any members of his Campaign to assist the Russians in that effort?<br />
<br />
You had no problem releasing other partial results of your investigation. I'm referring to the plea agreements of George Papadopoulos and General Flynn. Why was there no preliminary report to disclose the absence of any findings of so called "collusion?"<br />
<br />
While you were investigating Russian influence in the 2016 election, did the possibility ever occur to you that the Russians might have fed misinformation about candidate Trump to the FBI and the Intelligence Community via another candidate's opposition research efforts?<br />
<br />
If that had happened, would that constitute a form of Russian interference?<br />
<br />
If that had occurred, would it have been included in your mandate to investigate Russian election interference?<br />
<br />
Did you in fact investigate that possibility?<br />
<br />
If not, why not?<br />
<br />
If so, where is that portion of your report?<br />
<br />
How about if instead of being duped by the Russians into pursuing such an investigation, certain elements in the upper leadership of the DOJ, the FBI, and the Intelligence Community actually promoted such an investigation themselves? If they knew the story to lack merit, would that be a reasonable thing for you to have investigated?<br />
<br />
Did you investigate that possibility?<br />
<br />
If not, why not?<br />
<br />
If so, where is that portion of your report?<br />
<br />
In your report you stated that from the beginning you determined not to recommend an indictment of the president since the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) ruling wouldn't allow prosecution of a sitting president. You said that to recommend indictment without the possibility of a trial would rob the president of his due process rights. If that is the case, why did you lay out all the potential evidence of obstruction of justice? Aren't you guilty of doing what James Comey was accused of doing; besmirching a person's reputation, but then not indicting?<br />
<br />
If not for the OLC guidance, do you think there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the president committed obstruction of justice?<br />
<br />
Is the evidence such that you think the government would prevail if it went to court?<br />
<br />
If no, shouldn't you have said as much in your report?<br />
<br />
If you do think the government would prevail in court, do you believe your difference of opinion with Attorney General Barr on this matter is due to an honest disagreement on the law, or is Bill Barr acting as the president's lawyer instead of the people's lawyer?<br />
<br />
If you do think the government would prevail in court, why not a sealed indictment to be unsealed after the president leaves office. By failing to do that, aren't you contradicting the premise that the government has a winnable case?<br />
<br />
Director Mueller, do you recognize the name <a href="https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/404275-what-professor-really-told-fbi-about-trump-russia-and-papadopoulos" target="_blank">Joseph Mifsud</a>?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/404275-what-professor-really-told-fbi-about-trump-russia-and-papadopoulos" target="_blank">Olga Polanskaya</a>?<br />
<br />
Is the last name<a href="https://al-bab.com/blog/2018/03/saudis-russians-and-italians-murky-world-joseph-mifsud" target="_blank"> Obaid</a> familiar at all? <br />
<br />
Do you recognize the name <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/19/trump-papadopoulos-page-halper/" target="_blank">Stefan Halper</a>?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/19/trump-papadopoulos-page-halper/" target="_blank">Asra Turk</a>?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://medium.com/@Brian_Whit/the-trump-russia-affair-and-an-odd-company-in-london-9437e0343db2" target="_blank">Arvinder Sambei</a> <br />
<br />
<a href="https://twitter.com/RealSLokhova" target="_blank">Svetlana Lokhova</a>? <br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/russian-who-offered-clinton-dirt-to-trump-campaign-outed-himself-as-former-fbi-informant_2567077.html" target="_blank">Henry Oknyansky</a>?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/russian-who-offered-clinton-dirt-to-trump-campaign-outed-himself-as-former-fbi-informant_2567077.html" target="_blank">Alexei Rasin</a>?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/30911/watch-former-trump-adviser-claims-second-informant-ryan-saavedra" target="_blank">Do you recognize the last name Claggett</a>?
Someone who may have been implicated in offering information to Trump
Campaign official Michael Caputo about missing Hillary Clinton emails?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><b>On the subject of Mike Flynn:</b></span><br />
<br />
It has been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/31/michael-flynn-new-evidence-spy-chiefs-had-concerns-about-russian-ties" target="_blank">reported in the media</a> that there were concerns about certain contacts General Flynn had had with Russians as early as February 2014. Are you familiar with those media reports?<br />
<br />
Prior to the FBI investigation into General Flynn's conversation with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, was General Flynn under investigation by any agencies of the Federal Government based on the concerns described by those media reports?<br />
<br />
I asked earlier about Stefan Halper and Svetlana Lokhova. Ms Lokhova is a Russian born British citizen who is a historian in Cambridge with a research interest in Soviet era espionage. <a href="https://twitter.com/RealSLokhova/status/1123346946351984640" target="_blank">She claims</a> that in February 2014, she was invited by Stefan Halper to a dinner sponsored by the Cambridge Security Initiative where General Flynn was a guest. She believes the purpose of her being invited was so that her host Stefan Halper could later start and spread a rumor that General Flynn had had an illicit and unreported contact with a woman of Russian origin. Based on your investigation into General Flynn's having lied to the FBI regarding his discussions with Ambassador Kislyak, were you aware of these other allegations?<br />
<br />
If so, do you believe there is any truth to those other allegations against General Flynn?<br />
<br />
General Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about a conversation he had with Russian Ambassador Kislyak. How did the FBI become aware of the true nature of General Flynn's conversation?<br />
<br />
Did that information flow directly to the FBI through authorized channels?<br />
<br />
Was there any point in the flow of that information from its source to the FBI that the information could be said to have been leaked in an unauthorized fashion?<br />
<br />
If yes, is that leak being investigated? <br />
<br />
At any point in the discovery of the true nature of this conversation was an unmasking request made to formally identify General Flynn, and if so, by whom?<br />
<br />
It's been reported in the media that the FBI agent who interviewed General Flynn came away with the impression that General Flynn had been truthful in his interview, yet you had him plead guilty to making false statements. Can you clear up that discrepancy?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Returning to the subject of Stefan Halper:</b><br />
<br />
I searched the Report for the name of Stefan Halper, but it wasn't there. <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-campaign-vet-sam-clovis-says-informant-used-him-to-get-to-papadopoulos" target="_blank">Quite a few people whose names do appear in your report have met Stefan Halper</a>. <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/19/trump-papadopoulos-page-halper/" target="_blank">Stefan Halper met with Carter Page at a symposium in Cambridge July 11-12, and several other times later in Halper's home in Virginia.</a> Stefan Halper met with Sam Clovis, then National Co-chairman of the Trump Campaign, and offered to help him with the Campaign. Stefan Halper flew George Papadopoulos to London, put him up in a hotel, and paid him $3000 to write a research paper. Oh, and he introduced him to his research assistant, Asra Turk, who the press seems to think may not be who she claims to be. Is there a reason why someone who has had contacts with so many people of interest in your report didn't themselves warrant a mention in the report?<br />
<br />
Is it possible that the name Stefan Halper may come up in Michael Horowitz pending IG Report, or is this a sources and methods issue?<br />
<br />
The FBI claims that Crossfire Hurricane, the investigation into Russian interference into the 2016 election, and possible involvement by members of the Trump campaign, began on July 31, 2016. Is it possible that Stefan Halper was working for somebody other than the FBI when he started contacting members of the Trump campaign in the middle of July? Perhaps one of the intelligence services, either ours or the Brits?<br />
<br />
Alternatively, is it possible that the FBI was being less than forthcoming when they stated their investigation didn't begin until the end of July?<br />
<br />
We know that you were aware of the potential conflict of interest present when the Peter Strzok and Lisa Page text messages were discovered. You dismissed them from your team. <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/spy-operation-on-trump-campaign-started-as-early-as-december-2015-new-texts-suggest_2551831.html" target="_blank">One of those texts from Strzok to Page from Dec 28, 2015 states "You get all our oconus lures approved?</a>" Do you have any idea what that text might have referred to?<br />
<br />
Could Stefan Halper, Asra Turk, Olga Polanskaya, and perhaps Joseph Mifsud be among the lures he was referring to?<br />
<br />
How about Alexander Downer or <a href="https://medium.com/@Brian_Whit/the-trump-russia-affair-and-an-odd-company-in-london-9437e0343db2" target="_blank">Arvinder Sambei</a>? <br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/russian-who-offered-clinton-dirt-to-trump-campaign-outed-himself-as-former-fbi-informant_2567077.html" target="_blank"><b>On the subject of Henry Oknyansky aka Henry Greenberg aka Gennadiy Vasilievich Vostretsov:</b></a><br />
<br />
On page 69 of the Mueller Report you describe the efforts of a man named Henry Oknyansky who contacted Michael Caputo from the Trump campaign in late May, to provide him with derogatory information about Hillary Clinton. You describe a meeting which took place in which Oknyansky and a Ukrainian man named Alexei Rasin met with Roger Stone. Your report suggests Oknyansky says Caputo was present at the meeting, but Caputo says he was not. Caputo claims he sent Stone. Caputo says you should know Caputo was not present as you apparently have text messages and emails from Caputo to support his version of events. Yet, you leave the narrative in your report to suggest that it is an unresolved he said he said situation. Do you have evidence to dispute Caputo's claim that he was not present at the meeting?<br />
<br />
Caputo has expressed the opinion that Oknyansky was likely an FBI asset directed at Caputo in an attempt to link Caputo and the Trump campaign with efforts to gather derogatory information about Hillary Clinton from Russian sources. Caputo states he has evidence of a <a href="https://democratdossier.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Download-PDF-Sources.pdf" target="_blank">2015 court filing (Pg 19 Greenberg Dossier)</a> where Oknyansky claims to have worked on behalf of the FBI for the past 17 years. Caputo also claims to have evidence of multiple FBI related visa waivers for Osnyansky despite a lengthy violent criminal background in both the U.S. and his native Russia.<br />
<br />
Was Henry Oknyansky working for the FBI?<br />
<br />
Was Rasin?<br />
<br />
Do you have any information suggesting Oknyansky or Rasin were FBI or other government assets directed at Caputo and the Trump campaign?<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Speaking of Michael Caputo:</b><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/30911/watch-former-trump-adviser-claims-second-informant-ryan-saavedra" target="_blank">Caputo also claims that on May 9, 2016 he was approached through an intermediary by a man named Claggett claiming he was a former NSA contractor with knowledge that the NSA had missing Hillary Clinton emails.</a> Caputo now believes this was also an attempt to entrap him into accepting stolen documents on behalf of the Trump campaign, some of which might contain classified material. Do you know of any such operation by any agency of the US government to contact Mr. Caputo or any other official or former official of the Trump campaign?<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>On the subject of George Papadopoulos:</b><br />
<br />
The “overseas professor” referred to on Page 2 of the<a href="https://www.justice.gov/file/1007346/download" target="_blank"> 5 October 2017 Statement of the Offense against George Papadopoulos</a> was subsequently identified in the press and more recently in the Mueller Report as Joseph Mifsud. You refer to this professor as someone whom Mr. Papadopoulos
<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“understood to have substantial connections to Russian government officials.” </blockquote>
<br />
I'm impressed by your turn of phrase here. He understood it to be the case. That's interesting. Some in the press have implied that Joseph Mifsud is an agent of the Russian government. Were you implying that Professor Mifsud actually was a Russian agent?<br />
<br />
Do you believe Professor Mifsud is or was an agent for the Russian government?<br />
<br />
Professor Mifsud has been labeled by other members of the press as an intelligence asset of a Western government. Do you believe Professor Mifsud is or was an intelligence agent or asset of a Western government?<br />
<br />
Also on Page 2 of the charging document, you refer to a “Female Russian National” whom Mr Papadopoulos met on or about 24 March, 2016. In your Report, you identify her as Olga Polanskaya, whom Mifsud introduced as a former student of his who had connections to Vladimir Putin. Papadopoulos told the FBI, he had been led to believe she was in fact Putin's niece. Do you believe Olga Polanskaya is her real name?<br />
<br />
Do you believe Olga Polanskaya is an agent or asset of the Russian government either by that name or any other name?<br />
<br />
Do you believe Olga Polanskaya is an agent or asset of Western intelligence or law enforcement, either by that name or any other name?<br />
<br />
Two of the three lies Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to related to whether he met Mifsud and the “Female Russian National” before or after he joined the Trump campaign. Papadopoulos agreed to join the campaign in early March 2016, but the announcement wasn't made until March 21, 2016. Papadopoulos met Mifsud on March 14, 2016; after accepting the position with the Campaign, but before it was publicly announced. He met Polanskaya, the Female Russian National on March 24, 2016; three days after the announcement. Contrary to what Papadopoulos told FBI investigators, both meetings were after he had accepted the position. One meeting took place before the announcement and the other after the announcement. Is that correct?<br />
<br />
The date of the interview when Papadopoulos told these lies was January 27, 2017, roughly 10 months later, is that correct?<br />
<br />
Did it occur to your investigators that after 10 months had passed, Papadopoulos might have simply misremembered the exact dates when he met Mifsud and Polanskaya relative to the date he accepted a position on the campaign, these dates all being clustered in March of 2016?<br />
<br />
The third and final lie that Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to was that he claimed that Professor Mifsud was “a nothing” and “just a guy talk[ing] up connections or something” when in fact Papadopoulos “understood that the professor had substantial connections to Russian government officials”. There's that very carefully worded phrase again, “understood that the professor had substantial connections to Russian government officials.” Papadopoulos may have understood that in March of 2016 when he first met Mifsud, but did Papadopoulos still understand that to be the case ten months later in January 2017, when his FBI questioning took place? By then, as your charging document makes clear, no arrangements had been made for any meetings between Trump and the Russian government. Your charging document makes clear that was why Papadopoulos was pursuing the connections to Mifsud and Polanskaya. By January 2017, it would have been obvious to Mr. Papadopoulos that he'd been scammed by these two. They never could deliver a meeting as they'd promised. Furthermore, Papadopoulos had by then discovered that Putin didn't have a niece. Might George Ppapdopoulos have been telling the truth when he referred to Mifsud as “a nothing” and “just a guy talk[ing] up connections or something?”<br />
<br />
On Page 201 of the Mueller Report, you state that Joseph Mifsud was questioned on February 10, 2017 in the lobby of a Washington, DC hotel. Unlike many of the other interviews mentioned in your report, there is no footnoted 302 reference for that interview. Why was that?<br />
<br />
Is it customary practice for an interview of this sort to be conducted in a hotel lobby?<br />
<br />
Who actually conducted this interview? Was it members of the FBI, members of your staff? Who?<br />
<br />
In your Report, you state,<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“During that interview, Mifsud admitted to knowing Papadopoulos and to having introduced him to Polonskaya and Timofeev [an official from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs]. But Mifsud denied that he had advance knowledge that Russia was in possession of emails damaging to candidate Clinton, stating that he and Papadopoulos had discussed cybersecurity and hacking as a larger issue and that Papadopoulos must have misunderstood their conversation. Mifsud also falsely stated that he had not seen Papadopoulos since the meeting at which Mifsud introduced him to Polonskaya, even though emails, text messages, and other information show that Mifsud met with Papadopoulos on at least two other occasions - April 12 and April 26, 2016. In addition, Mifsud omitted that he had drafted (or edited) the follow-up message that Polonskaya sent to Papadopoulos following the initial meeting and that, as reflected in the language of that email chain ("Baby, thank you!"), Mifsud may have been involved in a personal relationship with Polonskaya at the time. The false information and omissions in Papadopoulos's January 2017 interview undermined investigators' ability to challenge Mifsud when he made these inaccurate statements."
</blockquote>
<br />
Papadopoulos told the FBI that Mifsud told him about the Russians having "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. Mifsud claims otherwise. Papadopoulos says it happened. Mifsud says it didn't. Somebody must be lying. In charging Papadopoulos, you say it did happen, and in fact, the FBI is claiming that Papadopoulos's informing a representative of a foreign government of this fact formed the basis of the entire Russia investigation. Is it reasonable, therefore, to presume that Joseph Mifsud lied to investigators in that DC hotel lobby? And not just about emails, but about further meetings with Papadopoulos and his relationship with Polanskaya?<br />
<br />
If Joseph Mifsud lied to investigators, why have we not heard of an indictment against Joseph Mifsud?<br />
<br />
Is there a sealed indictment somewhere with his name on it?<br />
<br />
Back to the hotel lobby for a moment. This interview took place on February 10, 2017. Do you know why Joseph Mifsud was in Washington, DC on the 10th of February?<br />
<br />
Mifsud was in Washington to speak at the large annual conference for<a href="https://www.globaltiesus.org/storage/unity-2017-program-print%20file%20reduced.pdf" target="_blank"> Global Ties U.S</a>., an organization that has been a partner of the U.S. State Department for over 50 years. Several State Department officials also spoke at the conference. Mifsud sure has a lot of western affiliations for somebody who some in the press are portraying as a Russian spy. Does that concern you?<br />
<br />
In the Statement of the Offense, page one is an introduction of sorts. Page two describes the actual offense, lying to the FBI. Then pages 3-9 list a timeline of extraneous information about Mr. Papadopoulos's contacts with Mifsud, Polanskaya, and one Ivan Timofeev an official with the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The timeline includes details of Papadopoulos's efforts on behalf of the campaign, all quite legal, to arrange a meeting between Candidate Trump and the Russian government. One page for the offense. Seven pages for the extraneous and quite legal actions of Mr. Papadopoulos. Is it possible that Page 2 was for the court, and pages 3-9 were for the press?<br />
<br />
On page 97 of the Mueller report, we learn about the meeting where Professor Mifsud tells George Papadopoulos about the damaging information the Russians have about Hillary Clinton. I'm curious about the phrasing of the narrative.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“During that meeting, Mifsud told Papadopoulos that he had met with high-level Russian government officials during his recent trip to Moscow. Mifsud also said that, on the trip, he learned that the Russians had obtained "dirt" on candidate Hillary Clinton.” </blockquote>
<br />
I noticed that you never say here that Mifsud says they have emails. Just “dirt”, and you put that in quotes. You never claim in your narrative that Mifsud actually said anything about emails. Is it your position that Mifsud mentioned emails, or just dirt?<br />
<br />
Then you go on to say,<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“As Papadopoulos later stated to the FBI, Mifsud said that the "dirt" was in the form of "emails of Clinton," and that they "have thousands of emails." </blockquote>
<br />
So Papadopoulos told the FBI that the dirt was in the form of emails. But as far as I can tell, nobody else ever mentions emails. Not Mifsud, and not the representative of a foreign government to whom Papadopoulos later spoke.<br />
<br />
For instance, later:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“On May 6, 2016, 10 days after that meeting with Mifsud, Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton”</blockquote>
<br />
Once again, there is no mention of emails. This informant, this "representative of a former government", doesn't appear to have mentioned emails either. Is it your position that the representative of the foreign government who later reported his conversation with Papadopoulos to the FBI said they discussed emails or only an anonymous release of information that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton?<br />
<br />
We now know that this representative of a foreign government was Alexander Downer, an Australian diplomat. He has stated publicly that no mention was made in their conversation of emails.<br />
<br />
So we are informed that Papadopoulos told the FBI that Mifsud said the Russians had emails, but we're told the representative of a foreign government only represented the conversation as "an anonymous release of information damaging to Hillary Clinton." <br />
<br />
Nowhere in your narrative do you claim that anybody but Papadopoulos in his January 2017 interview says anything about emails.<br />
<br />
So my question is this: Without all the deceptive shrouding of the facts, can you tell me if it is your position that Professor Mifsud ever mentioned anything about emails, or did he only say “dirt”?<br />
<br />
And furthermore, is it your position that the representative of the foreign government claims to have been told about emails, or only that the Campaign “had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton?”<br />
<br />
Director Mueller, we are told that the FBI initiated this investigation on 31 July, 2016 following a communication from Alexander Downer who, after learning of hacked DNC emails, informed the FBI that Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had told him about an April 2016 discussion about stolen emails. And the way the narrative in your report reads, it sounds like the report supports that position. But once you parse out what was really testified to, another picture emerges. It looks to me as if your narrative was constructed in such a way as to imply that it corroborates the FBI's position, but in fact it does not. I believe your report was written in such a way as to deliberately mislead the public on this critical point. We now know that Mifsud never mentioned emails, and Downer never claimed Papadopoulos told him anything about emails. I'm confused, and I'm inclined to doubt the story put out by the FBI and deceptively supported by the narrative in your report that Papadopoulos was the reason we got the Russia investigation? Can you resolve this for me please? Can you clear up my confusion? Can you dispel my doubts?<br />
<br />
Director Mueller, can you understand why many of us don't believe the FBI's story about how and particularly when this investigation began and on what it was predicated? On the one hand, there is evidence of Confidential Human Sources (Mifsud and Polanskaya) already probing the Trump campaign as early as the middle of March 2016. Then there were several other suspicious contacts in May and early July (Oknyanksy, Rasin, Halper, and Turk.) Furthermore, based on what we actually know about various conversations with George Papadopoulos, it seems implausible that he was really the spark that lit that fire. In fact, what emerges is a scenario where it seems much more likely that an intentional distortion of the facts surrounding George Papadopoulos was used as an excuse after the fact to falsely claim a justification for the Obama Justice Department, the FBI, and the Intelligence Community to start an investigation into a rival political campaign; an investigation that <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/spy-operation-on-trump-campaign-started-as-early-as-december-2015-new-texts-suggest_2551831.html" target="_blank">may have started as early as December 2015</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>A note on the FBI's tactics here, if in fact it was the FBI orchestrating all of this:</b><br />
<br />
It's worth pointing out that there has been a remarkable amount of consistency here in the tactics used to try and entrap the various members of the Trump Campaign. In April of 2016, we have Mifsud dangling the so called "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. In early May, it's the NSA contractor Claggett dangling the elusive promise of Clinton emails to Michael Caputo. In late May it's Henry Oknyansky dangling derogatory Clinton information to Michael Caputo and Roger Stone. And of course, we all know about the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower where the Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya was dangling derogatory Clinton information about the unsavory sources of one of Hillary's campaign contributors. Everybody has been obsessing about how the folks in that meeting in Trump Tower would have been willing to accept derogatory information if only it had proven more useful. I'm not shocked or surprised that Don Jr took the meeting. I'll be honest with you. I'm surprised more of the parties being coaxed with this information did not take the bait. The offers were coming in fast and furious in the first half of 2016. Now one might argue that the Trump Tower lawyer was a Russian. Nothing to do with the FBI. True, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-dossier-firm-also-supplied-info-used-meeting-russians-trump-n819526" target="_blank">but this Russian lawyer was also working with Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS.</a> And do we know how the details and purpose of that meeting were first revealed to the public? We first became aware of this meeting more than a year after it took place. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/08/us/politics/trump-russia-kushner-manafort.html" target="_blank">On 8 July, 2017, the New York Times published the story that revealed this meeting</a>. Here is the first paragraph of the story:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Two weeks after Donald J. Trump clinched the Republican presidential nomination last year, his eldest son arranged a meeting at Trump Tower in Manhattan with a Russian lawyer who has connections to the Kremlin, according to confidential government records described to The New York Times."</blockquote>
<br />
"According to confidential government records described to The New York Times." Well isn't that special. I wonder how that information came into the possession of the New York Times. Good journalism? Or maybe somebody in a position of power with an agenda to execute? We don't have time in this hearing to even begin delving into what sorts of convoluted relationships are implied by the connections between the Deep State, Fusion GPS, and the Russian lawyer, but someday soon, somebody should probably look into that. By the way Director Mueller, did you ever interview Ms Veselnitskaya or Glenn Simpson?<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Back to Joseph Mifsud and the Link Campus in Rome: </b> <br />
<br />
Footnote 454 on Pg 96 of the Mueller Report refers to an email from Mifsud to Papadopoulos and Obaid. A quick Google search and I come up with <a href="https://al-bab.com/blog/2018/03/saudis-russians-and-italians-murky-world-joseph-mifsud" target="_blank">a Saudi family named Obaid who are affiliated with the Link Campus in Rome</a>. I'll come back to the Link Campus in a moment, but first:<br />
<br />
Apparently, there is a Saudi charity called the Essam & Dalal Obaid Foundation (EDOF), and it is run by four members of the Obaid family. Tarek Obaid, the founder; Dalal Obaid, the Chairwoman; Dr. Nawaf Obaid, the CEO; and Karim Obaid, the Executive Vice President. This charity joined forces in May of 2017 with the Link Campus in Rome to form The Centre for War and Peace Studies. The first Director of this Centre was, coincidentally, the mysterious Joseph Mifsud. I'm not quite sure what if anything all this means, but if for no other reason than that there appears to be an intersection here between Joseph Mifsud, the Link Campus, the Obaids, and George Papadopoulos, I thought it might be worthwhile to ask, which Obaid was referred to in the Mifsud email to Papadopoulos?<br />
<br />
Why was this Obaid person included in the discussion. Would this committee find anything of interest in that email beyond what we already know about Professor Mifsud and George Papadopoulos?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/05/26/the_maltese_phantom_of_russiagate_.html" target="_blank">The Link Campus is a private (for-profit) university with accreditation from Italy's education ministry.</a> There are six Italian politicians on its governing body – two of them former foreign ministers – and it is also reputed to have links with Italian intelligence services. One of the university's courses is an MA degree in Intelligence and Security. It was on a trip to the Link Campus on the insistance of London Centre for International Law Practice colleague <a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3576880778112123790#allposts/postNum=0" target="_blank">Arvinder Sambei</a>, that George Papadopoulos first met fellow LCILP colleague Joseph Mifsud. Oddly, the LCILP urged Papadopoulos to make this trip after he announced that he was leaving to join the Trump Campaign. The Link Campus has been discussed in the press quite a bit of late. It is comprised of quite a prominent faculty of diplomats, politicians, intelligence personnel and law enforcement officials. Many of the references I've read portray the place as some sort of an international spy school. If all this is true, shouldn't we be worried that the nefarious Joseph Mifsud has so many connections to this place? As Lee Smith wrote in a <a href="https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/05/26/the_maltese_phantom_of_russiagate_.html" target="_blank">May 30, 2018 story for Real Clear Investigations</a>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"If Mifsud truly is a Russian agent – which is key to the collusion narrative – he could prove to be one of the most promiscuous spies in modern history. Western intelligence agencies and European politicians would have to spend the next few decades repairing the damage he did to global security by infiltrating key institutions and personnel. As of yet, however, there is no indication that any intelligence service has begun the embarrassing, but highly important, assessment of how it was penetrated and how it can re-fortify the vulnerabilities that Mifsud may have exposed. There has been no public effort to arrest him." </blockquote>
<br />
Director Mueller, you are in a position to know whether Joseph Mifsud poses a risk to Western Intelligence. Is he a Russian spy, or is he one of us? Should we be concerned?<br />
<br />
If we should be concerned, have you informed the relevant agencies of the nature of the threat?<br />
<br />
If he is a spy, don't many western intelligence agencies have a lot to answer for?<br />
<br />
If not, then should we be skeptical of the FBI's claim to have initiated the Trump/Russia collusion investigation on the basis of Mifsud's conversation with George Popadopoulos? Isn't it more likely that Mifsud was really a Confidential Human Source directed at the Trump Campaign by the FBI or one of the western Intelligence agencies, either ours or one of our allies?<br />
<br />
One final series of questions Director Mueller. Once more for the record, just so I am clear on your position here. You've spent 22 months on this investigation, at an estimated cost of somewhere between $25 million and $35 million, depending on who you believe. According to Attorney General William Barr's letter to Congress dated 24 March, 2019, you employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence forensic accountants, and other professional staff. You issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses. Is that more or less accurate?<br />
<br />
Did your investigation establish that the Russians interfered with the 2016 presidential election?<br />
<br />
Did your investigation establish that the Russian interference changed the results of that election?<br />
<br />
Did your investigation establish that any Americans, including any members of the Trump Campaign, knowingly participated, coordinated, or conspired in those Russian efforts to influence the election?<br />
<br />
Keeping in mind that your task was never to exonerate, but only to recommend or decline to recommend indictments, did your investigation establish that the President obstructed justice?<br />
<br />
Did your investigation establish that Joseph Mifsud was an agent of the Russian government, an agent of a friendly government, or would you rather not say?<br />
<br />
Did your investigation establish that Olga Polanskaya was an agent of the Russian government, an agent of a friendly government, or would you rather not say?<br />
<br />
Did your investigation establish that Henry Greenberg, either by that name or any of his aliases, was an agent of the Russian government, an agent of a friendly government, or would you rather not say?<br />
<br />
Did your investigation establish that Alexei Rasin was an agent of the Russian government, an agent of a friendly government, or would you rather not say?<br />
<br />
Did your investigation establish that Svetlana Lokhova was an agent of the Russian government, an innocent bystander, or would you rather not say?<br />
<br />
Based on the results of your investigation, is there anything you can tell us about the actions of Stephan Halper, Asra Turk, and a certain Mr. Claggett who approached Michael Caputo, or would you rather not say?<br />
<br />
In the instances above where you would rather not say, would that be due to concerns about disclosing sources and methods, or would you rather not say?<br />
<br />
Thank you Director Mueller. I have no further questions at this time. Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-21385213860296564832019-04-22T13:17:00.000-04:002019-04-22T13:18:10.455-04:00Trump Should Insulate Himself from Accusations of Hypocrisy in 2020 by Admitting the Russians Were Trying to Help Him in 2016<div data-contents="true">
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="483lq" data-offset-key="4imki-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4imki-0-0">
<br />
<br />
<span data-offset-key="4imki-0-0"><span data-text="true">Still reading the Mueller Report. Now on Volume II. Mueller repeatedly documents, by means of testimony from multiple Trump aides, that Trump was unwilling to acknowledge that the actions of the Russians had a goal of favoring Trump. He saw it as a means of his opposition trying to delegitimize his win. For what it's worth, the DNC hack and the release of those emails was to help Bernie against Hillary. Nothing to do with Trump.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="483lq" data-offset-key="crnkl-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="crnkl-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="crnkl-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="483lq" data-offset-key="4f3l0-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4f3l0-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4f3l0-0-0"><span data-text="true">I think Trump's narcissism will come back to bite him in 2020. As Marco Rubio predicted, the next time the Russians interfere, it might not be to favor a candidate you like. </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="483lq" data-offset-key="ellok-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ellok-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="ellok-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="483lq" data-offset-key="mk37-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="mk37-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="mk37-0-0"><span data-text="true">In 2016, the Russians preferred a Russia friendly Trump compared to a hard line Hillary. What if in 2020, the Russians have grown tired of Trump as he has followed a fairly hardline toward Russia and their interests despite his rhetoric against NATO and our own Intel Community. What if the Russians now prefer a Russia friendly Tulsi Gabbard or any of the uber progressive Democrats who can be counted on to favor domestic spending at the expense of defense spending? Who do you think the Russians will be rooting for then?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="483lq" data-offset-key="brhvs-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="brhvs-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="brhvs-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="483lq" data-offset-key="3jpns-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3jpns-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="3jpns-0-0"><span data-text="true">Trump and Trump supporters would be well advised to acknowledge that the Russians had a favorite in 2016 even if it hurts Trumps pride to say so. It might insulate Trump from some calls of hypocrisy in 2020 when he has to call out Russian support for his Democratic opponent.</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-65874153683381562052019-04-20T14:13:00.001-04:002019-04-20T14:13:33.750-04:00WaPo Offers an Olive Branch in One Hand and a Big FU in the Other<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">So a friend of mine emailed me <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/impeachment-would-be-a-terrible-thing-for-our-country-we-have-another-option/2019/04/19/b75c1e24-62c0-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html" target="_blank">a link to a Washington Post editorial by Karen Tumulty.</a>
The Post is suggesting that in lieu of the Congress undertaking an
impeachment proceeding against President Trump, they should move to
censure him instead, and then move on, and let the voters decide his
fate in 2020. </span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLexZ-83a_W5Zgut_vqHF1q4JQmW0CCBOgrVB-MO6euODw6TDpefVYZhdJuLlt_hS1C7VHuvgIPvl2DiLag4xHBUXk1UNbLDC7Hs7ky5UDIRDnS6GGJItNz5MBA3SqhZCPqyP2ALULOIYw/s1600/Dove+Olive+Branch.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1300" data-original-width="1300" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLexZ-83a_W5Zgut_vqHF1q4JQmW0CCBOgrVB-MO6euODw6TDpefVYZhdJuLlt_hS1C7VHuvgIPvl2DiLag4xHBUXk1UNbLDC7Hs7ky5UDIRDnS6GGJItNz5MBA3SqhZCPqyP2ALULOIYw/s200/Dove+Olive+Branch.jpg" width="200" /></a></span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;">
That's not a bad idea as far as it goes. Perhaps a way to end this mini
civil war that's gone on in our country for the past three years, and
allow for some measure of healing. But the WaPo editorial started off
with a line that was so off putting to me that I could barely bring
myself to read the rest of their opinion. Here's how I responded to my
friend's email:</span><br />
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;">I agree with its basic sentiment. But it's a
good thing the headline hinted at the subject matter of the oped,
or I would have stopped reading at this:</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;">"
More than two years of admirably accurate investigative reporting on the
part of the media — the same accounts that the president so often
labeled “fake news” — gave the country a basic outline of how this
presidency operates."</span></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;">What
a disgustingly self serving and deceitful statement. It totally memory
holes the fact that the majority of that reporting centered on
collusion, coordination, and conspiracy. Their reporting promised us
with absolute certainty, that the president was a knowing agent of the
Russians. It smeared the reputations of, and then bankrupted total
innocents like Carter Page, near total innocents like George
Papadopoulos, and national heroes like Mike Flynn. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Only after two years
of effort, as it was becoming clear that the story was false, did the
MSM pivot with an obvious moving of the goal posts from collusion to
obstruction. From the very start, this story was a total fabrication
based on the most successful and nefarious "political dirty trick" ever
perpetrated on the voting public. The Clinton Campaign with the
willing assistance of the MSM,
elements of the FBI,
and the Intelligence Community, both foreign and domestic, took a
fabricated story about pee tapes, legitimate business trips to Moscow,
and clandestine meetings in Prague that never happened, and spun it into
a three year obsession for the Media Industrial Complex in this country
to feed off of. The entire business models of CNN and MSNBC have relied
on this hoax to keep those networks from having to resort to screening
infomercials to pay the bills. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Oh, and the Russians. I forgot the
Russians. They participated in this dirty trick as well. There
actually WAS a political candidate who conspired with the Russians in
2016 to try and influence the course of the election. It was Hillary
Clinton. And that's not a rhetorical statement. I'm serious. Is there
ANY part of the Dossier you're still willing to defend after reading
the Mueller Report? Any part that matters? This three year nightmare
was all based on a lie. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">And the only real beneficiaries are the
Russians. And maybe the Democrats. We'll see. If they prevail in
2020, then I guess we'll have to admit that they played the long game
and won. But at what cost? What was/is the Democratic Party willing
to put this country through to get some sort of sick revenge against
Donald Trump because he defeated the anointed one Ms. Hillary Rodham
Clinton? Trump may go down in history as the worst president the nation
has ever had, but he denied the presidency to Hillary. And for that
service to his country, I will be forever grateful! </span></div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;">Now
that the president's poor behavior in response to the lie has
apparently been exposed, as I gather is well documented in Volume II of
the Mueller Report, the left is quite happy to shift gears, dwell on
that response and ignore their complicity in the fabricated story
without which the response would never have happened. It's like you
spent three years kicking Trump in the balls, and then you criticize him
because now he walks funny! Well Trump may be a flawed man and an
imperfect president, and I'll be the first one to admit that. But as it
stands today, you can count me among his defenders. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Thanks to the
Mueller report, we now know what Trump did, and some of it apparently
borders on obstruction of justice. It's time now to lay out the story
of what his opponents did. To me, the fact that Mueller spent over four
hundred pages and never mentioned the name Glenn Simpson, or Perkins
Coie, or Stephan Halper, and never addressed the real conspiracy with
the Russians, is all the evidence I need that the fix was in. Mueller
threw everything he had into proving collusion and utterly failed.
Democrats are salivating over the fact that Mueller gave them a roadmap
to pursue obstruction accusations, but I'd counter with this: Can the
president be held liable for attempting to obstruct an investigation
into a crime that he knew he didn't commit? A crime which a subsequent
investigation has failed to show ever even took place? And this despite
all the time and resources that even a true obsessive could have ever
considered necessary for the task? Democrats think he can be held
liable. I think, good luck selling that one to the American people. I
think this<a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.mediaite.com/tv/screaming-mark-levin-leaves-fox-friends-speechless-with-8-am-mueller-rant-ed-you-have-no-idea/?fbclid%3DIwAR0XCVNYm4154KsUOg5mAxF9fKpfXmTJz5fx8_rok7yyCncBEaU22nOG1Uw&source=gmail&ust=1555867860059000&usg=AFQjCNG-3Ugcw-d-c-ThVvXU0mQmJ58LXg" href="https://www.mediaite.com/tv/screaming-mark-levin-leaves-fox-friends-speechless-with-8-am-mueller-rant-ed-you-have-no-idea/?fbclid=IwAR0XCVNYm4154KsUOg5mAxF9fKpfXmTJz5fx8_rok7yyCncBEaU22nOG1Uw" target="_blank"> Mark Levin take will sell a lot better</a>.</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;">Having
gotten that out of my system, the idea of a censure in lieu of
impeachment has appeal to me as well. It may well be a way for bitter
Democrats to express their rage at the president without making the rest
of the country suffer any further simply in order to appease their
spitefulness. A consideration they should have afforded the rest of us
over the past 2-1/2 years, but oh well...Better late than never.</span><br />
</div>
<div class="gmail_default">
<span style="font-size: small;">Jess </span></div>
Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3576880778112123790.post-55099799906306800852019-03-31T19:22:00.000-04:002019-03-31T21:12:02.169-04:00Deep State to Trump: Take the Win and Move On<h4>
Trump says people need to be held accountable for the collusion hoax. Some are worried that he means it. I'm worried that he doesn't.</h4>
President Trump has people of all stripes telling him to take the win on the Mueller investigation and just move on. Focus on the people's business. Pivot to infrastructure. Everybody agrees on infrastructure. All of this while the worst perpetrators of the hoax are still promoting the lie despite Mueller's report. But President Trump has made some noises recently on Twitter and at his recent rally in Michigan implying he is not ready to move on just yet. He says we need a fuller accounting of how this miscarriage of justice came about in the first place. I hope he means that. I'm afraid he might not. <br />
<br />
There are both Republicans and Democrats urging the president not to be vindictive; not to seek revenge for the three year long investigation mounted against him based on a hoax that started with some opposition research promoted by Hillary Clinton. Just forget about it, and open a new chapter of your presidency. All of this while the efforts of notorious liars like Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler and Eric Swalwell to hamstring his administration continue unabated. The folks who maneuvered behind the scenes to create the hoax, to promote the hoax, and finally to investigate the president based on the hoax have failed in their efforts to overturn the results of a valid election. And now, as they recognize the danger they face in the exposure of their scheme, some of them are promoting a "let bygones be bygones" approach to the issue. Others, like the aforementioned Congress critters have chosen to double down hoping to bluff their way out of the discovery of their subterfuge. Their political futures are on the line. For others, their freedom may be at stake. I understand what motivates them; both the ones who are begging the president to move on and the ones who have chosen to double down. This is it in a nutshell: "We tried to frame you for treason, but we failed. Oh well. No hard feelings." Are they serious? Who would fall for that? <br />
<br />
But plenty will fall for it. Some who have no idea what happened, and many who know exactly what happened but don't want their partisan champions exposed. The question is has the president fallen for it. I am not convinced he really intends to pursue the issue further. I'm worried he is just trying to mollify members of his base and people like me who may not care for Trump all that much, but have a problem with the way they tried to oust him.<br />
<br />
Maybe Trump really does think it's time to move on. Or maybe it's a quid pro quo of some sort. Maybe Trump refrains from pursuing the treasonous cabal who tried to nullify the results of his election, and in return, they decline to vigorously investigate the stuff he may really be guilty of like the tax issues, the shady past business practices, the campaign finance minutia or the alleged emoluments infractions. There are reasons to wonder. For months, Trump urged the Justice Department to release documents to Devin Nunes' House Intel Committee. He urged them to remove the redactions that presumably concealed important information. He urged these actions, but he never compelled them. He promised to declassify and release documents relating to Nunes' investigation including the disputed FISA applications, then failed to do so after appeals from foreign governments. How much will we never learn in the name of preserving relationships with foreign governments that may have been as complicit in this attempt at a soft coup as were elements of our own government? How committed is Trump to exposing this entire sordid business. There are reasons to question his sincerity. I hope I'm wrong. I hope the fix isn't in. But I'm cynical enough to wonder.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBb9YfyOpsfCmFePRFO3RQLkNjtr6WvsNZZWenv17FPnVRwVatRmOJNX-k7QlcFKSRPub3l0A9XOdSxA5BRPdCy8avGsxFAYDM7lZMnhjDxgnA-IJk7kZGt9Y23pizOq0rb7NpNyKs088g/s1600/deep+state.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="640" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBb9YfyOpsfCmFePRFO3RQLkNjtr6WvsNZZWenv17FPnVRwVatRmOJNX-k7QlcFKSRPub3l0A9XOdSxA5BRPdCy8avGsxFAYDM7lZMnhjDxgnA-IJk7kZGt9Y23pizOq0rb7NpNyKs088g/s320/deep+state.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
So what purpose would be served by a thorough investigation? I believe that upper leadership in the Justice Department, State Department, FBI and Intelligence Community conspired to, at best entrap, and at worst to frame the president for actions that never occurred. I believe some foreign governments were complicit. I would not be surprised to learn that Hillary Clinton and maybe even Barack Obama knew about all of it. I can't prove all of this, but I think there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that this is what happened. I believe that the evidence is compelling enough that the American people have a right to demand both a thorough investigation and full disclosure of what transpired<br />
<br />
Some of the actors may have acted in good faith when the investigation of Trump was first initiated. They may very well have had some justification for their suspicions. But some knew, or should have known from the very beginning that the allegations were false. Many of those whose initial efforts were based on a sincere belief that the facts merited further investigation, nevertheless went on to break the law in pursuit of their suspicions. They did so because of political bias. Some of these people probably should go to jail. Some others, maybe not. But what they did needs to be uncovered, and everyone who participated in it needs to be exposed for whatever part they played in the whole affair.<br />
<br />
For those of you who think we should just move on, and especially for those of you who urge that course of action out of partisan fear that your political allies will be exposed and your political interests harmed, consider this. The man that you so despise; the man in whom you invested months and months of investigations in order to undermine and resist; the man whom you consider to be the ultimate danger to both our own country and indeed the entire free world; that man is now in charge of the exact same apparatus that your political heroes used in their almost successful attempt to illegally overturn an election. Nothing short of a full and complete accounting of this conspiracy can inoculate us from the possibility that some future administration, who knows, maybe even the administration of that very same Donald J. Trump, might attempt a similar soft coup against the next administration. Are you comfortable with the fact that Donald Trump now has the capacity to do to you exactly what your would be allies tried to do to him?<br />
<br />
I'm quite exhausted from listening to those who express concern over the so called reputations of the FBI and the Justice Department. I know that most of the folks in those agencies perform their jobs with integrity. But some were corrupt. I trust the worst elements have now been purged. The more exposure we give to the corruption that existed, the longer we can expect to go before the next episode of corruption occurs. Let's not give anybody the false sense of security that they can get away with something like this again by relying on a reputation that only exists because we were too afraid to look very hard for the truth. <br />
<br />
Call it a conspiracy theory if you like, but this is what I suspect. A not insignificant number of partisan government personnel attempted to overthrow, albeit in a non violent way, the elected government of the United States. If keeping the deeds of this cabal a secret is your primary concern, then by all means press to abandon any further investigation, and just move on. If you're as concerned as I am that this should never be allowed to happen again, then I hope you will join me in urging the president to resist whatever self serving inclination he may have to broker a deal that offers sanctuary to the plotters. Even if that means rejecting some sort of promise of diminished scrutiny of his other alleged indiscretions. This has to be about America, not about Donald Trump. The preservation of our Constitutional form of elected government is dependent on the president stepping up now and being presidential.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Jesse McVayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11563223890147862763noreply@blogger.com0