Set Up or Slander: Did Pelosi Defame A Salon Owner?


Thirty years after the late D.C. Mayor Marion Barry’s famous statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared that a Salon owner set her up in an embarrassing incident where Pelosi was shown not just violating San Francisco’s pandemic laws in getting her hair done but not wearing a mask while doing it. Pelosi refused to take responsibility for the violation (including the failure to wear a mask) and, in the tape below, only took responsibility to “failing for a set up.” She added “I think that this salon owes me an apology, for setting me up.” The Salon owner, Erica Kious, has stated that she expects to close eSalon after receiving a torrent of death threats and hostile massages after Pelosi’s allegation. The question is whether she could actually sue for defamation.

Speaker Pelosi has previously used the eSalon, according to Kious, and was shown below on Monday getting her hair down despite a ban on salons for such appointments.

While not addressing her failure to wear a mask, Pelosi publicly attacked the Salon.

Pelosi’s lawyer Matthew Soleimanpour further made damaging statements about Kious: “The fact that Ms. Kious is now objecting to Speaker Pelosi’s presence at eSalon, and from a simple surface-level review of Ms. Kious’ political leanings, it appears Ms. Kious is furthering a set-up of Speaker Pelosi for her own vain aspirations.”

Carla Marinucci, a senior Politico reporter covering California, made her own veiled allegation in suggesting that the tape itself might be illegal: “Have to ask upon seeing this: Is it legal in CA — a ‘two party consent’ state — to videotape someone in a private home or business without their consent?” That reference to the politics of the owner further suggests an improper political hit job.

Marinucci’s question is not defamatory, though it is curious that the focus was on the legality of having the security camera footage as opposed to Pelosi’s conduct.

The incident was reminiscent of Chicago’s mayor, Lori Lightfoot, getting a haircut after warning Chicagoans that they cannot go to barbers or salons in a mocking tone.  For Pelosi, the incident was particularly embarrassing after just blasting President Donald Trump for setting a “bad example”in allowing people to gather for his nomination acceptance speech without masks or social distancing. Pelosi was also previously criticized when the pandemic was unfolding for calling people to Chinatown in San Francisco to demonstrate.

In this case, Pelosi is suggesting that she might have been defamed or shown in a false light by being set up while Kious could claim to have been defamed due to the allegation of a politically motivate set up.  In liberal San Francisco, such an allegation is particularly deadly for a business.  A hair cut is certainly not in the league of using crack with Marion Barry. Yet, in San Francisco it may be worse to be accused of enabling a Republican attack on Nancy Pelosi than enabling a crack session with her.

Kious is likely a public figure under  Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 352 (1974) and its progeny of cases.  The Supreme Court has held that public figure status applies when  someone “thrust[s] himself into the vortex of [the] public issue [and] engage[s] the public’s attention in an attempt to influence its outcome.” A limited-purpose public figure status applies if someone voluntarily “draw[s] attention to himself” or allows himself to become part of a controversy “as a fulcrum to create public discussion.” Wolston v. Reader’s Digest Association, 443 U.S. 157, 168 (1979).  Her status as a salon owner alone would not trigger this status but her releasing the video and doing an interview on Fox would make her a public figure of limited public figure.

Pelosi is obviously a public figure. Indeed, arguably the third highest public official in the United States as third in line for the presidency.

The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision decades ago in New York Times v. Sullivan. Ironically, this is precisely the environment in which the opinion was written and he is precisely the type of plaintiff that the opinion was meant to deter. The Supreme Court ruled that tort law could not be used to overcome First Amendment protections for free speech or the free press. The Court sought to create “breathing space” for the media by articulating that standard that now applies to both public officials and public figures. In order to prevail, West must show either actual knowledge of its falsity or a reckless disregard of the truth. The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision decades ago in New York Times v. Sullivan. The Supreme Court ruled that tort law could not be used to overcome First Amendment protections for free speech or the free press. The Court sought to create “breathing space” by articulating that standard that now applies to both public officials and public figures.

California recognizes categories of per se defamation including alleging (1) a criminal offense; (2) a loathsome disease; (3) matter incompatible with his or her business, trade, profession, or office; or (4) serious sexual misconduct. See Cal. Civ. Code § 45a; Yow v. National Enquirer, Inc. 550 F.Supp.2d 1179, 1183 (E.D. Cal. 2008).

In the very least, Kious has been accused of a matter “incompatible with business, trade, profession, or office. Pelosi has also been accused for such misconduct.  (I am going leave the suggestion of criminality in one-party taping as meritless since this is a business where security cameras are usually posted and obvious).

For Kious, “truth is a defense.” While Pelosi said she was set up, she was in violation of San Francisco’s law and did fail to wear a mask.

For Pelosi, it gets tougher.  Her comments allegedly triggered threats and contributed or caused the likely closure of the salon. The hair stylist Jonathan DeNardohas insisted that the owner knew about the appointment. Kious said that she learned about it after it was set up.

Truth again can be defense but, unlike the Pelosi allegation of violating local laws on getting an indoor haircut and not wearing a mark (which is clearly true), this would be a matter for a jury.  It is ultimately a question of motivation.

The fact is that it could be presented as a viable defamation claim but, because of her status as a public figure, it would be difficult under the higher standard.  Complication this more is the heavy layer of political opinion during an election season.  Thus, my view is that a defamation claim is viable but challenging.


893 thoughts on “Set Up or Slander: Did Pelosi Defame A Salon Owner?”

  1. Allan, “ The story has been debunked issue by issue along with a large number of people who were there including John Bolton who hates the President.”

    You’re gonna have to provide proof of that claim.

    CTHD has provided far more credibility on the story than you have on your own claims.

    1. That demonstrates how little you know. There were eye witnesses to the problem and they all agreed with Trump and most if not all have names.

      What are her sources? Anonymous. Did they check their facts with the WH? No. If they had they could have heard from multiple eye witnesses including John Bolton who hates Trump.

      All you have demonstrated is that your ability to evaluate the validity of information is near non-existant much like your buddy PaintChips.

      1. Allan, you still haven’t shown us any links or actual quotes backing your claim. Show us your sources or I claim you’re just full of $hit.

        1. I provided you with the press secretary’s video that included written documents, circumstances, names and quotes. You should already know that and more, however it is not surprising how ill informed you are.

          Come back after listening to the 3-5 minute portion of the video I provided.

        2. Allan is not obligated to do so. Though i beleive he provided links.

          Regardless, the facts he cites are commonly known.

          We know that the weather was such that Marine one was not going to fly the president to an event that was not manditory.
          We know that a US presidential motorcade through paris would have choked the city and the French asked that Trump not do so.

          These were all reported at the time.

      2. But in left wing nut world a named source that hates Trump and still defends him is less credible than unnamed sources – that could easily be made up that attack Trump.

        If you want to beleive the credibility of the sources is not important to the left.

        1. And John we are in a left wing nut world when we talk about mass media and the only tools that can correct them are the ones that liberterians abjure — such as but not limited to, aggressive antitrust prosecutions to break up the conglomerates that abuse us and take the economic giants like Bezos down to size.

          keep that in mind


          1. I am not concerned about NYT and WaPo they $h!t on their own credibility.
            Market checks and balances work.

            I am more concenred about google and FaceBook and the online sources.

            We impropertly gave them Section 230 protection from defamation claims in return for abiding by neutral public forum rules,
            which they fail to do.

            Torts are an option, Section 1983 civil rights violations are an option.
            Or just defamation and libel claims and let the court rule properly that either Section 230 is unconstitutional, or that if it is constitutional that it requires that Content providers conform to the same rules regarding infringing on speach as government.

            The problem is not that they are a monopoly.
            It is that they are acting as a government agent.

            When government conveys immunity in return for acting according to the constraints that government must follow – that must have meaning or it is not constitutional.

    2. Svelaz,

      Bolton didn’t “debunk” anything. Here’s some of what he said.

      “‘These comments are despicable. If he made them, they are despicable,’ Bolton said in a Bloomberg Radio interview on Friday. … Bolton, who published a book earlier this year that was heavily critical of his former boss, said the alleged remarks sounded accurate. ‘I have not heard anybody say, ‘Oh, that doesn’t sound like the Donald Trump I know,’’ Bolton said in the interview. Bolton said the remarks may have stemmed from Trump’s skepticism of U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. ‘He was prone to say from time to time: ‘What did they get out of it? What was the worth of the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan?’’ Bolton said. ‘That is a kind of insensitivity that Trump does have, there’s no doubt about it.’ Bolton was on the 2018 trip to Paris with Trump but said he didn’t hear the president disparage the dead Marines himself. ‘I didn’t hear him say those things,’ he said, adding later he probably would have included the remarks in his book if he had. ‘Now, did he say those things to other people later in the day? It’s certainly possible.'”

      And despite Allan’s claim that “There were eye witnesses to the problem and they all agreed with Trump” (emphasis added), there are notable eye witnesses who haven’t even said anything publicly, like Gen. Kelly. I haven’t seen anything from Dunford either, but maybe I missed it. I don’t even know all of the names that would be on a complete list of eye witnesses, and I doubt Allan does either.

      We also know that Trump has already lied about the trip, as when he falsely claimed “I called home, I spoke to my wife and I said ‘I hate this. I came here to go to that ceremony.’ And to the one that was the following day which I did go to. I said I feel terribly. And that was the end of it.” But Melania wasn’t “home,” and Trump didn’t call home to talk with her about it. She was with Trump in France, and her WH travel readout stated at the time that “Due to inclement weather, the First Lady and President were unable to visit the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery and Memorial in Belleau, France.” ( We also know that “inclement weather” didn’t prevent anyone from going, because lots of other world leaders went, and Gen. Kelly and Gen. Dunford went. They simply went by car, and Trump wasn’t willing to drive there.

      That Trump is willing to make such blatant lies — pretending that his own wife wasn’t with him and that he called home to tell her something — is awfully stupid on top of being dishonest.

      1. Lot of talk saying very little.

        Take this, “And despite Allan’s claim that “There were eye witnesses to the problem and they all agreed with Trump” (emphasis added), there are notable eye witnesses who haven’t even said anything publicly, like Gen. Kelly.”

        What does that mean? Nothing but an attempt to lie without lying by Needs to be Committed. She thinks she is smart and everyone else dumb. Unfortunately like btb she is a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect. My knowledge on this subject comes from numerous sources including some of the 10 witnesses and some of the documents. One place to hear some of the details is here. Start after 51 minutes.

        This video confirms that Needs to be Committed is an idiot. Don’t worry. This comment won’t upset her. Dunning-Kruger acts as her rose colored glasses.

        1. Allan, if you are having trouble understanding CTHD’s explanation it can only mean you really don’t have the capacity to think any deeper than a bowl of cereal. You either can’t think further or making the effort to do so is beyond your capabilities which would explain a lot.

          This is why CTHD is a lawyer and it’s clear why she’s very good at picking apart arguments and exposing others willful ignorance or just poor intellectual capacity. She’s asked the simplest of questions and none are answered because most posters here spend most of the time spewing BS after BS and moving the goalposts so many times in poor attempts at avoiding honest admissions or recognizing…BS.

          When an argument is slowly being narrowed down to its simplest points which CTHD does well. Posters revert to name calling and ranting BS diatribes on different subjects. It’s truly amazing to see in real time why this country has a reputation for having idiots who think they know things. SMH.

          1. “This is why CTHD is a lawyer ”

            You are a fool. She doesn’t claim to be a lawyer. Here is the video, but you don’t believe your eyes and ears. You only believe what you are told to believe by your left wing sources. Is it media matters or leftism for dummies?

   Start after 51 minutes.

            “This is why CTHD is a lawyer and it’s clear why she’s very good at picking apart arguments and exposing others willful ignorance or just poor intellectual capacity. ”

            She is terrible at picking apart arguments. To do that one requires on point credible facts which she seldom has. She has a lack of credibility based on prior performance where she has lied over and over again. My intellectual capacity is fine. It is your intellectual capacity that has been correctly questioned.

            I don’t even think you have the capacity to understand the details of the arguments you are commenting on.

          2. Hi Svelaz,

            I’m not a lawyer, only someone interested in some legal issues.

            As for the video that Allan provided, the email McEnany showed confirms that Gen. Kelly went by motorcade, which means that Trump also could have gone by motorcade. Trump *chose* not to. She claims that there were 8 eye-witnesses who “debunked” the claims, but she doesn’t quote any of them, and for all we know, she’s falsely claiming it — as with Allan’s false claim about Bolton having “debunked” the Atlantic article. She calls the unnamed sources “cowards,” but she knows that the WH itself often tells the press that they will only provide comments on background, so she’s a hypocrite.

            She goes on to quote 2 additional witnesses. One says that Trump “was extremely disappointed that arrangements could not be made to get him to the site,” but we know that that’s false: arrangements were made for Kelly and Dunford and lots of other world leaders, so of course they could have been made for Trump too, if Trump had actually wanted to go: he could have been driven, just like everyone else. The second person she quotes is also totally silent about why Trump didn’t drive there. The images behind her also pretend that there are only 4 unnamed sources who’ve made the claims about Trump, ignoring that the claims have now been confirmed by multiple other unnamed sources talking to multiple other news organizations, including Fox News.

            The bottom line: Trump could have gone by motorcade but didn’t. Trump lied about calling Melania at home to voice frustration about not being able to go, when Melania was in France with him and went with him to another cemetery. How stupid is he to lie about such an easily debunked claim?!? Trump lied and claimed “I never called John [McCain] a loser” (without qualifying it in any way, just an absolute statement that he’d never done it), when there’s video of Trump calling McCain a “loser.” Trump has pardoned a war criminal who’d served. Trump has denigrated service members with TBIs as just having “headaches.” Trump has refused to confront Putin about the bounties on American troops. … (There’s a long list of ways that Trump only pays lip service to our troops.) But Trump defenders cannot deal honestly with any of this.

            1. The POTUS motorcade did not go because of the logistical problems of protecting it on the small French roads. We can lose a few generals, we cannot afford to lose a President.

              1. No doubt Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel and Justin Trudeau just aren’t as important to their countries. /s

                1. No doubt Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel and Justin Trudeau just aren’t as important to their countries. /s

                  No, they probably aren’t.

                2. “No doubt Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel and Justin Trudeau just aren’t as important to their countries. /s”

                  That is correct. No one in the world travels with a fraction of the security of a US president.

                  Trump did not create that. Our laws did.

              2. I think the security afforded the US president is excessive – but that is not Trump’s doing.

                I doubt the small french country roads are the big issue.

                Paris is likely the big problem.

                First the presidential motorcade is enormous.
                Next buildings all along the route have to be checked – particularly for snipers.
                For an anounced trip – that extends 1/2 mile in all directions.

                Even that does not eliminate the risk of an assassin. There are a couple of hundred people in the world who can make a shot at 1Mile, and a handful who can make one at 2. I beleive the longest confirmed kill is 3.5KM.

            2. “confirms that Gen. Kelly went by motorcade, which means that Trump also could have gone by motorcade. Trump *chose* not to.”

              Despite the fact that the information has already been provided more than once Needs to be Committed needs to continue to make a fool of herself. The logistics of getting the President there without the preparation would cause havoc to Paris and everywhere he travelled. Do you believe that you are too stupid to understand that or are you just repeating your former secretarial notes that didn’t have this information?

              No need to go point by point for Needs to be Committed is distorting the Truth and isn’t dealing with the facts at hand loading her post up with other things including trying to change the meaning of a statement about McCain being the loser in an election.

              1. Security is actually lower for an unannounced presidential motorcade. But it is still enormous compared to anything that Kelly or another world leader would require, and the disruption orders of magnitude greater.

                There is a reason that the president rarely travels by car.

              2. Allan, that reveals a typically dishonest thing Commit often does. She said:

                “confirms that Gen. Kelly went by motorcade, which means that Trump also could have gone by motorcade. Trump *chose* not to.”

                Part of the statement is true but then Commit ‘chose’ to insert an element that is not true, that Trump ‘chose’ not to go by motorcade. In her long screeds she often salts them with false statements like that.

                It has been said that the DNC and others have teams that attack Trump relentlessly on the internet. It seems likely one or two of them would end up here. Taking everything into consideration, if one [or more] is here, who stands out as probably being that person(s)?

                1. Young, CTDHD and btb are both the most vociferous and both care little about the truth. Both have no shame. Those would be two desireable characteristics for the job. I can’t believe either to be candidates for it because both are so ignorant. However, if they were of normal intelligence they would probably upstage Joe Biden.

                  1. Allan Is vociferous and cares little about the truth. He is ignorant. If he were of normal intelligence, he would probably upstage Donald Trump.

                    1. “Here is one article on the subject ”

                      Young a good article that should be read. It was sent to Anonymous the Stupid which is a good idea because he never has anything to say except his insult copied from someone else. Unfortunately Anonymous the Stupid doesn’t have the capability of reading or understanding anything unless it has a lot of pictures and cartoon characters.

                    2. And yet he has a track record for accuracy and truth.

                      He never bought into the myriads of left wing nut conspiracy theories that have been discredited over time.

                      He knows that multiple named witnesses are more credible than unnamed sources.

                      BTW even the Intercept calls the atlantic peice journalistic garbage and the crap that is ruining journalism.

                    3. Anonymous the Stupid, you are not only Stupid but you are afraid of your own shadow. You use the generic alias and different icons. You are the type of person that loves to be pis-sed on. Apparently you get it physically in the real world and want more of it on the net.

                      You are even afraid of people knowing how many times you post and demonstrated that fear a long time back. Go hide.

                    4. Allan is Stupid. He is the type of person that loves to be pis-sed on. Apparently he gets it physically in the real world and wants more of it on the net.

                    5. Anonymous the Stupid, anyone that actually reads what you say notes that you are unable to create your own dialogue. No imagination, a Brainless Wonder. We all know you are Stupid and that has nothing to do with anyone else.

                    6. Allan, you have no imagination, a Brainless Wonder. We all know you are Stupid and that has nothing to do with anyone else.

                    7. “Allan, you have no imagination, a Brainless Wonder. We all know you are Stupid and that has nothing to do with anyone else.”

                      But, Anonymous the Stupid, I have a track record and so do you. One can see by our track records that I am reasonably intelligent and you are Stupid. Some people have already partly commented in that respect. Look at what you have written. Evaluate it for yourself. Absolutely nothing but trash.

                    8. Allan, all I’ve done is quote your own insults back to you, and your insults are absolutely nothing but trash.

                    9. “Allan, all I’ve done is quote your own insults back to you, and your insults are absolutely nothing but trash.”

                      Actually you haven’t. Instead you have demonstrated a stupidity seldom seen on any blog. You don’t have to enter discussions that you are not a part of but you are welcome to do so. What I don’t understand is how you have no ability to argue against what you find offensive and that your comments are so unimaginative while saying nothing.

                      Surely you have a little more intelligence than the zero intelligence you have demonstrated on the blog. Maybe not, but then why would you be on a blog of this nature?

                    10. Allan, you have demonstrated a stupidity seldom seen on any blog. Your comments are so unimaginative while saying nothing. Surely you have a little more intelligence than the zero intelligence you have demonstrated on the blog.

                    11. Anonymous the Stupid, you have demonstrated your stupidity on every post saying absolutely nothing. I have written a lot of things and quoted a lot of things so you have plenty of material to criticize and prove your case. That you don’t do so tells the world who and what you are. You can’t argue a point you can only parrot phrases other people have written.

                    12. Allan the Stupid, quoting your insults back to you efficiently illustrates your love of insults and your lack of control.

                      By continuing to insult, you have demonstrated your stupidity on every post.

                    13. As best as I can tell you jumped into the middle of something you were not part of an started lobbing insults – and you are angry that you were insulted back ?

                      Make an argument.

                      Little would satisfy me more than having to contend with an actual argument from the left wing nuts on this blog.

                      Btu all we get is fallacy and ad hominem.

                    14. John, I’ve only repeated Allan’s own insults back to him. You see ad hominem because Allan posts so much of it.

                    15. Anonymous the Stupid, along with being stupid you are a liar. I don’t comment to you intentionally except on rare occasion when someone is acting as stupidly as you. You comment to me when I post to others because you do not like my views or how I present them. That is fine. Insult the content or quotes of what I say and help the person you seem to favor. You can’t do that.It requires more intellect than you have.

                      What you do is make the same comments over and over again you leave little to reply to but your stupidity. Sometimes I reply because little cat and mouse games can occupy time and when the mouse is extraordinarily stupid one tries to see what leads the mouse in the right direction. The less brain, the less direction. That is why you are left copying my words for you next reply.

                    16. Allan is among the few here who regulatly make actual arguments.
                      A small amount of ad hominem mixed in is tolerable.

                      Regardless, are we all toddlers ?

                      “He did it first, is not much of an argument.

                    17. Okay, that settles it. Trumpy bear didn’t want to get his f^&king hair wet.

                    18. It does ?

                      Why ?

                      How does one have a rational discussion when you just declare what the facts are without any reference to reality.

                      What is known is that the trip was scheduled by helicopter.

                      That would have been the least disruptive means of transporting the US president.

                      Weather precluded that.

                      And the French asked Trump not to take a presidential motorcade through Paris.

                      Contra those ranting the event itself was not that significant. It was the anniversary of a specific battle.
                      That battles only special significance was that US Soldiers participated.
                      No one who was part of that battle is still alive.

                      Those are the known facts.

                      Everything else is speculation.

                    19. Sometimes I reply because little cat and mouse games can occupy time, and when the mouse is extraordinarily stupid one tries to see what leads the mouse in the right direction. The less brain, the less direction.

                      Allan the Stupid, along with being stupid you are a liar.

                    20. Anonymous the Stupid I think your timid actions and the mouse tail you carry around in your name says it all Anony mous.

                  2. Allan — I think truth makes little difference to them for effective propaganda. Just keep pushing the lies and defend them before pushing more. American Thinker had a good article showing how this Trump/Military thing seemed to have been set up. The Atlantic article comes out and then all of a sudden a slew of other outlets are on the bandwagon with the same vile slur. I hadn’t mentioned it before, but I noticed that Commit jumped in quickly with reams of material. This resembles the old Journolist that orchestrated stories by a number of linked outlets. The idea was to deluge the public with variations on the same story so it would look as if it must be true when, in fact, it was generally rubbish generated by a relatively small number of individuals. I expect a lot more of this in the weeks to come.

                    I agree with you that CTDHD and btb are very similar except that btb is a bit more crude and clumsy. I can’t know for certain, but I would not be surprised if both of them were on something like journolist.

                    1. Young, my understanding is that foreign interference in our elections includes setting up many phony periodicals that can gain traffic from the Google searches that take one from one site to another quoting each other and creating a mass of disinformation. These nuts can then post all sorts of articles that trace back to one another. In many circumstances there is no one article that created the source because the source is based on mistruths and wild speculation. This extends into the NYT, WP and certainly the Atlantic.

                      This provides to people like Needs to be Committed plenty of places to quote from and all of them will provide places to get quick information and hit pieces to post. There is no thought involved. You can frequently document the lack of thought in many of Ms. Secretary’s responses.

                      I am sure the Journolist model exists today in some fashoin though probably not an exclusive group but one created for convenient dummies. Needs to be Committed and btb both seem to be good candidates as convenient dummies.

                    2. Allan needs to be committed. He’s a nut and a convenient dummy. You can frequently document the lack of thought in many of Mr. Secretary’s responses. There is no thought involved.

            3. CTHD, well I stand corrected. Your decompiling of arguments certainly has a lawyerly approach to it. 👍

                1. Your fixated on precise analysis of differences in data sources that are not anywhere close tot he same standards.

                  Cases are not counted the same anywhere in the world. Tests are not done the same. The error in cases is enormous everywhere – even advanced countries and we know it.

                  Deaths are not counted the same anywhere – they are not even counted the same between states in the US.
                  The only good news is that the likely error inside the US or relative to developed countries is not large.
                  But try to coimpare the US to 2/3 of the countries in the world and all bets are off.

                  You say we are the 10th worst int he world – so do you really trust that Iran is reporting Deaths accurately ?
                  How about Myanmar ?

                  You keep telling me that the US is 10th worst int he world – but CNN says Sweden has just dropped below much of Europe.
                  That is not possible if the US is the 10th worst in the world – unless the differences between the US and Europe are miniscule.

                  You keep saying that policy matters – that good policies produced good results. Yet there is no evidence of that.

                  There are 5M people in all of New Zealand. – that is the same as the population of Alabama
                  The largest city has 1.2M people – and NZ is an island with strictly controlable access to the outside world.
                  Once C19 gets into NYC or LA or Chicago the rest of the country can not stop it.

                  You also fail to grasp that those places that have successfully kept C19 infections low – assuming there is reality to that
                  Are permanently susceptable until C19 is eradicated.

                  Sweden is pretty much DONE with C19. They have no fear that it is coming back.

                  The places you think have done well must hold their breath until C19 is gone from the world.

                  California reacted faster than much fo the country – they are STILL locked down. They now have the largest total number of cases, and the 3rd largest number of deaths – behind NJ and NJ

                  All of us would be ecstatic to find a policy that would work miracles – or some combination.

                  But the FACT is there is no such thing. The evidence is DAMNING – wishes are not success.

                  Trump has not specifically failed – Governments have failed. C19 does not give a $hit about policies.
                  California is the perfect case in point.

                  1. John, Needs to be Committed doesn’t care about the truth or normal people that are suffering under the illusion that we know what we are dong.

                    Needs to be Committed has only one goal, defeating Trump. If she has to scare the population to death so that families break apart , children commit suicide and other children die from drug overdoses that makes her joyous because she has been told that is a way to defeat Trump. We are not dealing with a normal individual. We are dealing with a sicko that needs to be committed.

                    1. Allan needs to be committed. He doesn’t care about the truth or normal people that are suffering. If he has to scare the population to death so that families break apart , children commit suicide and other children die from drug overdoses, that makes him joyous because he has been told that is a way to defeat Democrats. We are not dealing with a normal individual. We are dealing with a sicko that needs to be committed.

                    2. You do care about people who are suffering ?

                      What have YOU done for them ? If you have not personally helped those suffering – why should anyone beleive you know anything about those in need ?

                      Further, what merit is there is stealing from one person to help the unfortunate ?

                      When i see you out actually helping others YOURSELF I will place more credibility in what you say about helping others.

                      Christ did not ask when you lobbied government for policies you beleived would help others.
                      He asked when YOU helped those in need.
                      Matthew 25:31-46

                      Or to paraphrase Jordan Peterson – if you can not clean your desk – what makes you think you can fix the problems of the world.

                      “He can’t even run his own life
                      I’ll be damned if he’ll run mine,”

                  2. Please spell the first word of your post correctly. Otherwise it’s near impossible to take anything you say seriously.

                    1. “Please spell the first word of your post correctly.”
                      Not in elementary school, not getting graded or paid for writing here.

                      “Otherwise it’s near impossible to take anything you say seriously.”

                      If you wish to be the spelling police and disregard valid arguments and information over inconsequential issues – you are free to do so.
                      But you do not speak for everyone.

                      I know that you left wing nuts do not understand that. But the rest of us are actually free to make judgements and decisions on our own.

                    2. John, the cockroach’s claim to fame is he has a spell checker and his father worked for NASA. It is quite apparent that he is left to brag about dad because there is nothing else in his life to brag about.

                    3. I was not joking in my response to anonymous.

                      I am not being graded or paid for posting here.

                      Therefore my standards are my own.

                      Anonymous is free to have his.
                      But he can not force me to care.

                      I have actually been published many times.
                      And I am a professional in several professions that involve lots of writing – I get paid for that. And I do it well. Getting everything from the content to the spelling and grammar correct is what my clients pay for – and they get it.

                      Here not so much. Even Turley’s posts are constantly rife with grammar or spelling errors.

                      Don;t look a gift horse in the mouth.

                    4. Time to break out the coloring books for the honors students.

                      John, I think Allan wants to blow you in public as much as he does Trump. Have at it and enjoy!! Let it be your libertarian party. Don’t worry, no one’s watching.

                    5. “John, I think Allan wants to blow you in public as much as he does Trump.”

                      Cockroach, I guess in order to work at NASA in any position your dad had to have a modicum of class. I guess you failed in that regard as well.

                    6. I am impressed with the intelligence of comments like this. It should give one a good feeling that people like USofB also vote!

                    7. Are you capable of a substantive discussion ?

                      Allan and I have spent weeks articulately disagreeing.

                      Unlike you we do not have to agree on everything to agree on anything.

                      You divide the world into those who loath Trump and those you claim want to felate him.

                      Your incapable of a living in the real world were many of us like some of what Trump does and do not like other things.

                    8. Allan – On Class. You make a very good point. I too have noticed that people on the left have abandoned any sense of class or style. The level of crudity and self-degradation such as this Bug creature displays, is bizarre. Most have had privileged lives and yet I have known prostitutes and smelter workers whose conversation is much more genteel. I doubt that I could sit and visit with this Bug creature over a cup of coffee for more than a short while before leaving in disgust. I wonder what has happened to these people? Are they simply posturing?

                    9. “Allan – On Class. You make a very good point. I too have noticed that people on the left have abandoned any sense of class or style.”

                      If as you say you were having a cup of coffee and suddenly saw something scurry across the floor, you would be getting a view of Bug in his normal state of being.

                    10. Of course I did you f^&k trisquit. Just be thankful you get to deal with me here rather than in public.

                    11. This is not public ?

                      Or are you threatening to solve arguments with violence ?

                      Why not try something more effective – intellect.

                      Just get you facts right and do not make invalid or fallacious arguments and you will have no problems with me.

                    12. Young, you’d never get me to have coffee with you in the first place. So we’re both safe.

                    13. “Young, you’d never get me to have coffee with you in the first place. So we’re both safe.”

                      Who would want to have a cup of coffee with a cockroach?

                    14. You highlight the problem with the left.

                      You are unable to get along with those who do not share your beliefs.

            4. How big do you think General Kelley’s motorcade was ? How big do you think the president of the united states is ?

              Do you know what the Secret Service has to do to transport the president of the United States ANYWHERE ?

              For a planned trip everything within 1/2 mile in all directions all along the route must be cleared.
              Even unplanned trips to known destinations require massive prep.

              How much prep do you think SS makes for a US General ? NONE ?

              Are you clueless ?

              Or just pretending ?

              The Paris police do not give a $hit where Kelley goes. His mortocade is like 3 cars, and no route prep or security is needed.

              If the president of the United states moves ANYWHERE in the world the prep is enormous and the disruption incredible.

              No, Just because Kelley could do something does not mean Trump could.

              1. John – I happened to be on the shuttle from parking to Burbank airport when Obama arrived for another Hollywood fundraiser. Our shuttle and all traffic near the airport had to freeze in place. A few minutes later three massive military helicopters took off, passed over us, and headed for Obama’s dinner. Once they vanished our shuttle was allowed to move again. All that when he went from a plane to a military helicopter to a dinner a few miles away. One can only guess what would be done to try to get the President through the crowded and not always friendly streets of Paris in safety. Paris isn’t particularly safe in some areas these days. It feels like the Beirut of the West.

                From my limited personal experience I think your posts on this matter have been clear and entirely correct.

                1. I do not honestly care if Trump decided he just did not want to get his hair wet.

                  I do not think that is what happened.
                  I think those trying to prove he had no legitimate basis for staying away look ludicrously stupid.

                  There are myriads of events everyday for which the president could easily be argued must participate.

                  The US is relatively unique in that it does not separate the executive role from the cerimonial role in government.

                  If Trump just decided that the Marne celebration was too much – I am fine with that.
                  That does not inherently show a disrespect for the military.

                  I would also note that Trump has broad support within the military – from the solidiers – not from the brass.

                  Things like Bella Wood and the Marne areconsequential to the brass, not the soldiers.

                  Ending the wars in the mideast where they might have to kill or be killed, for reasons no one can be all that clear on – those are more significant to soliders.

          3. This is not a debate about analysis. It is a debate about FACTS.

            What actually happened, what was actually said.

            There is no thinking involved.

            Allan has cited facts and named sources.
            CTDHD has cited speculation and unnamed sources.

            Only in progressive world does the latter prevail over the former.

          4. The argument is not being narrowed down to its simplest points.

            It has always been facts vs. speculation.
            CTDHD thinks speculation that feeds her narative trumps facts.

        2. Most of these events are years old and old news.

          You did an excellent job of debunking the aisne-marne incident.

          But I do not care if Trump just decided not to go.

          the 100th aniversary of the 2nd battle of the Marne is NOT an event that requires the US president.

          The US president attends many events like these. But can not possibly attend all – no matter who they are.

          Contra the left it does not show disrespect for the military.

          Wasting their lives in unnecescary conflicts is the ultimate disrespect.
          Getting them out of unnecescary conflicts is the ultimate respect.

      2. CTHD, the matter of fact that trump has already made it clear privately that he sees the military as his own personal army and denigrates them because “they didn’t take the oil” in Syria or why they are getting caught and being losers for it shows that the claims are well within the realm of 100% possible.

        Trump’s constant lying and any lack of credibility and the points made by Kelly in his book clearly point out that this is very likely to be true than not.

        I wouldn’t be surprised if trump got caught spitting on the face of a veteran they would still be making excuses and defending him.

        1. What does ” well within the realm of 100% possible” even mean?

          Your zeal is outpacing your brain.

        2. “CTHD, the matter of fact that trump has already made it clear privately that he sees the military as his own personal army”

          He does ? Did Trump send them to Afghanistan ? Iraq ? Syria ? libya ?

          When has Trump sent “his private army” anywhere ?

          Kelly, Mattis, McMaster’s all failed to do what they promised Trump – to get us out of Afghanistan.
          They are all gone because of that failure.

          Their tell all books would be more credible if they had delivered what they were told to do and agreed to do.

          BTW your oppinion on what is likely is not evidence.
          And that you would cite it is proof that even you do not really beleive this.

          1. Trump doesn’t even make Marines hold his umbrella for him the way Obama did.

            No comparison.

          2. And then there is Old Man Biden, swimming naked in front of female Secret Service Agents and reportedly grabbing private parts of the wives of SS Agents at gatherings.

            Commit, you are such an ardent feminist. Doesn’t it upset you that Biden took such liberties with women?

            1. Of course it does. I wish Biden weren’t the nominee. I didn’t want him as Obama’s VP. I didn’t vote for him in the primary, and there are several other candidates I would have preferred. But Biden’s the nominee, and Trump is much worse. If you actually cared about sexual harassment, sexual abuse, rape, …, you’d have rejected Trump long ago. However, you don’t care.

              As for umbrellas, there are photos of many presidents — including Trump — with someone holding an umbrella for them. Obama also had a Marine hold an umbrella for a visiting head of state, horrors!

              1. ” But Biden’s the nominee, and Trump is much worse.”
                Because you say so ?
                ” If you actually cared about sexual harassment, sexual abuse, rape, …, you’d have rejected Trump long ago.”
                Really ? The credible allegations against Trump are mostly – not here or not now – and Trump took no for an answer.
                The credible allegations against Biden are RAPE.

                “However, you don’t care.”, I care a great deal – Trump’a record with Women is the single largest reason I could not vote for him in 2016.
                And may not in 2020. But Biden is worse. Biden has not appologized for any of his conduct – he denies everything.

                “As for umbrellas, there are photos of many presidents — including Trump — with someone holding an umbrella for them.”
                Again you are not credible – an assertion is insufficient – just because you say something does not make it true.

                “Obama also had a Marine hold an umbrella for a visiting head of state, horrors!”

                Honestly i do not give a damn about umbrella’s. I do not care if marines hold umbrella’s for the president.
                Though I should think we could find an intern to do that.

              2. Ah cut Joe some slack on the sexual harassment stuff. Back 47 years ago when he started in DC lots of the cads acted that way

                And every complaint about Biden pales in significance to one thing:

                He has dementia.

                the real contest is between Trump and Kamala. If you think she will make a better president than him, go ahead and vote for Biden. But Joe’s gonna go.

              1. Commit — Yes, it appears my supposition was wrong. It happens. I wonder how long Sullivan will take to come to a final decision once oral argument has been heard? In one instance I had to wait for nearly a year to get a decision after motion and hearing by which time the issue had been mooted. Sullivan is off the tracks and his train is running through the weeds. No telling where it will stop or what will stop it. Found your post only today.

                1. Speaking of mootness, I wonder how Sullivan is squeezing a “real case or controversy” out of this lemon of a case that the prosecutor has abandoned.

                  In spite of all we here about this and that, for a lawyer who works on real cases it all seems rather contrived.
                  But I get it; it’s all about “get trump”

                  They are shameless about this particular thing, really shameless.
                  the fact that the appeals court is on board with the after-the-fact attempt to dissect the government’s discretion, is really amazing


                  I remember one of my mentors, a lawyer who loved federal courts and judges and had done very well by them, once told me in private ‘They need their wings clipped.” I think this was all the way back into the Reagan era before I even entered law school. it seemed a funny remark from him at the time because I knew he always did very well in that venue and preferred it greatly to state courts. but now I get it, I really, really do.

                  we should reform article III and “CANCEL” lifetime tenure.

      3. Are you really this clueless ?

        Bolton says that the fake comments in Goldberg’s story are despicable.

        He also says that despite the fact that Goldberg’s timeline puts Bolton in the room for many of them – that Trump never said those specific things. That is called REFUTING.

        That means that either Bolton is lying or Goldberg’s source is lying or Goldberg is lying about having a source.

        Bolton does confirm that Trump thinks that the Vietnam war, and Gulf War II were stupid.
        Both positions that Bolton disagree’s with but for much of my life time were core positions of the LEFT.

        Donald Trump and John Lennon – “Give Peace a Chance”. “War is over if you want it”

        Yet YOU want to attack Trump for opposing stupid wars ?

        It is no secret that Trump is not a war monger, that he is NOT a neo conservative.

        That like Obama he promised to get us out of foreign conflicts and and that unlike Obama he is doing so.

        What you fail to grasp is that this shows RESPECT for the US military and our soldiers.

        Trump is not sending them to fight in a “stupid war” just because he can.

        We have an excellent military and they mostly deserve our respect.

        Sufficient respect not to waste them on conflicts that are not in our interests. That do not involve us.

        We should not have invaded Iraq. Yellow Cake or not, Whether Sadam was making a bomb or not.
        Iran is likely making a bomb, North Korea has made a bomb. We have not invaded either.
        It would be great if both chose to abandon their atomic bomb strategy. But failing to do so is not a justification for war.

        We should not have gotten involved in Libya, Syria.
        We should get out of Afghanistan.

        These were all mistakes – Trump did not make any of them.
        Bush did, Obama did. Trump did not.

        If Trump thinks these are stupid wars – I am right with him.

        And i am glad he is not demanding our soldiers to shed their blood or kill others in stupid wars.

      4. Imagine it as witness list for a pending trial. Supporting Trump are a number of people publicly identified who know the facts in varying degrees. On the Atlantic’s witness list we have–nothing, no one who will appear.

        It will be a very short trial. Not even past Summary Judgment.

    3. John Bolton says he didn’t hear Trump insult fallen soldiers ……
      Former White House national security adviser John Bolton said in comments published Friday that he never heard President Trump refer to slain American soldiers buried …

    4. “You’re gonna have to provide proof of that claim.”

      1), He has done exactly that.
      2). No he is not required to do so. Allan has a long record of providing accurate information.
      3). CTDHD has a long record of providing little of no informaton and buying into false conspiracy theories.

      4). Allan and many others here have provided on the record named sources that contradict this nonsense.
      5). CTDHD has provided an Atlantic article by a reporter with a reputation for lies and error, that uses only unnamed sources.
      There is no way to tell the difference between an unnamed source and something just made up.

      CTDHD is not credible – not on this – not on anything.

      She is clueless – pretty much about everything.

  2. “The Venn diagram of journos who bought and peddled the Iraq WMD hoax, the Rolling Stone UVA rape hoax, the Russian collusion hoax, the Covington hoax, the Kavanaugh hoax, the Ukraine hoax, and the latest Atlantic hoax is a single circle. Take note of who’s inside it.” Sean Davis

    hint: propagandists,organs of the DNC, political activists, etc, but in no way is the term “journalist” the appropriate word.

    1. Many of those so-called “hoaxes” are true.

      And in that Venn diagram, the circle for the Atlantic story includes independent confirmation from journalist Jen Griffin, Fox News’ National Security Correspondent. I posted a link to a video of her Fox News segment earlier, but here’s what she tweeted (
      “Two former sr Trump admin officials confirm .@JeffreyGoldberg reporting that President Trump disparaged veterans and did not want to drive to honor American war dead at Aisne-Marne Cemetery outside Paris. …
      “Re: trip to mark 100th anniversary of WW I
      “Source: ‘The President was not in a good mood. Macron had said something that made him mad about American reliability and the need perhaps for a European army. He questioned why he had to go to two cemeteries. ‘Why do I have to do two’?’
      “President Trump’s staff explained he could cancel (his visit to the cemetery), but he was warned, ‘They (the press) are going to kill you for this’. The President was mad as a hornet when they did.
      “When asked IF the President could have driven to the Aisne-Marne Cemetery, this former official said confidently: ‘The President drives a lot. The other world leaders drove to the cemeteries. He just didn’t want to go.'”

      On the same day that Trump refused to go to the Aisne-Marne American cemetery — even though he could have driven there — other world leaders did drive there, as did Gen. John Kelly and Gen. Joe Dunford. There are photos of Gen. Kelly’s and Gen. Dunford’s visit on the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery / American Battle Monuments Commission website:

      Trump didn’t drive there because he didn’t want to go. He’s not patriotic. And he’s continuing to lie about it.

      For example, on Thursday, as Trump was lying about it in an attempt to excuse his behavior, he said that he “called home, I spoke to my wife and I said ‘I hate this. I came here to go to that ceremony.’ And to the one that was the following day which I did go to. I said I feel terribly. And that was the end of it.” But Melania wasn’t “home,” and Trump didn’t call her about it. She was with Trump in France, and her WH travel readout stated at the time that “Due to inclement weather, the First Lady and President were unable to visit the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery and Memorial in Belleau, France.” (

      Trump lies all the time.

      In that same thread, Griffin also noted:
      “According to one former senior Trump administration official: ‘When the President spoke about the Vietnam War, he said, ‘It was a stupid war. Anyone who went was a sucker’.’
      “This former official heard the President say about American veterans: ‘What’s in it for them? They don’t make any money.’ Source: ‘It was a character flaw of the President. He could not understand why someone would die for their country, not worth it.’
      “I read the source a few quotes from The Atlantic article. This former Trump admin official said, ‘The President would say things like that. He doesn’t know why people join the military. He would muse, ‘Why do they do it’?’ …
      “Regarding Trump’s July 4th military parade, during a planning session at the White House after seeing the Bastille Day parade in 2017, the President said regarding the inclusion of ‘wounded guys’ ‘that’s not a good look’ ‘Americans don’t like that,’ source confirms.
      “Regarding McCain, ‘The President just hated John McCain. He always asked, ‘Why do you see him as a hero?’ Two sources confirmed the President did not want flags lowered but others in the White House ordered them at half mast. There was a stand off and then the President relented.”

      1. Last night, projected on the Trump Hotel in DC:
        “Trump disrespected our troops. Our troops deserve better than Trump.”

        1. Oh my god, some left wing nuts are capable of operating a projector – I am shocked!

      2. I won’t speak to the rest of your Gish Gallop, however, John “Songbird” McCain was not a hero.

        1. SMH that you attempt to change the topic to McCain, when the comment you’re responding to said nothing about McCain.

          Deal with the fact: Trump could have driven to the Aisne-Marne American cemetery, just like other world leaders did, and just like Gen. John Kelly and Gen. Joe Dunford. But Trump didn’t go — because he didn’t want to.

          Again, from Fox News’s Jen Griffin: “When asked IF the President could have driven to the Aisne-Marne Cemetery, this former official said confidently: ‘The President drives a lot. The other world leaders drove to the cemeteries. He just didn’t want to go.’”

          And Trump is calling for Griffin to be fired for her reporting!

          Is Trump part of … cancel culture?

          Here’s a video of Griffin reporting on Fox News:

            1. Biden isn’t trying to defund the police, and at this point, more military are inclined to vote for him over Trump, who insults the military, dismisses TBIs as “headaches,” pardoned a war criminal, refuses to confront Putin about Russian bounties on our troops, ..

              “Trump’s popularity slips in latest Military Times poll — and more troops say they’ll vote for Biden”
              And that was 5 days ago, before the Atlantic article.

              1. Are you talking about that Atlantic article that was debunked? This makes you a liar since you are grabbing at truths that don’t exist or at best are not fully known. Trump’s actions demonstrate to the military his concerns. On the other hand Obama had problems with the flag, the military and all those things. He sent troops into harms way without adequate defensive armour forcing them into situations that got them killed but saved the enemies lives. Obama considered those enlisted men to be suckers. Hillary was no better and we all know how she let those lives in Benghazi die and then lied about it.

                You are duplicitous and hide your identities.

              2. Why does horserace news fascinate you so much ?

                People are going to vote as they choose.

                And thus far the trends are better for Trump than 2016.

          1. Among your many claims was Trump’s attacks on McCain – the comment was on point.

            Regardless, you do not control other posters.

            Grow up.

            I do not care about Aisne-Marne. You do. Though I doubt you would care if it was Obama.

        2. Sorry, but McCain was an actual hero.

          Poor Senator, vindictive person.

          But still a hero.

              1. Just bombing people (including your shipmates) does not make you a hero. Again, prove John McCain is an actual hero. Audie Murphy is an actual hero. John “Songbird” McCain, you are going to have to prove it.

                1. Some of us have more important things to do with our time. It’s all about priorities and proving anything to you isn’t one of them. It’s clear that your mind is closed.

      3. The story has been debunked issue by issue along with a large number of people who were there including John Bolton who hates the President.

        The visibility for the helicopter transport was too dangerous. The police in Paris asked the President not to go by car at the last minute because Paris would have to shut down. Paris roads didnt have to close down for General Kelly and others.

        There are loads of other good reasons why the President couldn’t and shouldn’t go by alternative transport.

        This is typical long winded rating by Needs to be Committed on a very unimportant issue especially since anyone can look at Trumps deeds regarding soldiers and veterans to know how supportitive the President is of them.

        Needs to be Committed swims in the sewer system and just getting near her makes one dirty.

        1. Thank you for the FACTS.

          I had forgotten that Trump’s hellicopter was grounded, and that Paris begged Trump not to travel by car.

          CTDHD does not grasp that there is a world of difference between Gen. Kelley traveling accross Paris and the president of the United States.

          I remember when Bush visited my city twice during the 2004 election. It F’d up the city for hours.

          Even Obama coming here in 2008 as a candidate was disasterous.

          I hope to he!! that neither Trump nor Biden visit during this campaign.

          I am capable of figuring out how to vote without having transportation in my city F’ud up for a day.

          But the bottom line is even if the story is true as written, And Trump just did not want to go to Aisne-Marne in the rain to celebrate a battle that happened 100 years earlier – I do not have a problem with that.

          Trump was not in Europe to visit WWI battledields. He was their to reshape NATO.

          He accomplished the latter. Europe has a US guarantee of Natural Gas, and in return they are increasing their own ability to defend themselves.

          Both of these piss of an disadvantage Russia – and yet the left continues to claim that Putin loves Trump.

          The left beats Trump up for not going to war with Putin over this unverified claim that Putin put bounties on US solidiers.

          Completely forgetting that the story if True means Putin hates Trump, and is looking to make trouble for him.

          But god forbid a left wing nut should look beyond the surface of any of the nonsense they spout.

      4. “Many of those so-called “hoaxes” are true.”

        “Jen Griffin, ”

        So has someone said Fox does not fall for left wing hoaxes ?

        The only positive thing that can be said for Fox is they are not as bad as CNN or MSNBC,

        Regardless, you seem to think that finding something to discredit a mostly center right source mitigates the fact that the media is worthless Biased and ignorant. It does not. Fox could be a flaming pile of dung – that does not change how bad the MSM is.

        Goldberg has been thoroughly discredited – not just on this story but others. Why are you bothering to use him ?

        Three people who were in the room at the time of the event Goldberg describes including Bolton have asserted the story is crap.

        Who are you going to beleive – people who are willing to speak the truth out loud as a named source – or unnamed sources people Jeffrey claims are real but we do not even know who they are ?

        As to the rest – so Trump did not want to go to Aisne-Marne in the rain.

        Who here is alive to remember the Marne ? Do you know anything about the battle of the Marne ?

        US forces did not participate in the First Battle of the Marne – which was a major turning point of WWI, British and French Forces STOPPED the German Blitzkrieg at the Marne.

        But you do not know that you just know that Trump did not go to the cemetary.

        I doubt Obama knows anything about the Battle of the Marne – or WWI. Was he at the 100th aniversary of the first Battle of the Marne ?

        Biden does not care to go out of his basement to face reporters or voters.

        If you care about this fine, but it does not prove what you claim.

        1. “I doubt Obama knows anything about the Battle of the Marne – or WWI. Was he at the 100th anniversary of the first Battle of the Marne ?”

          Probably Obama does not. His historical knowledge is razor thin. There have been few other presidents, if any, who was so ignorant on history and, for that matter, the Constitution.

          We are paying dearly for his failures.

          1. I imagine what Obama knew was journalists’ narratives about American history, which in turn were derived from half-remembered secondary school textbooks buttressed by reading books by Arthur Schlesinger and Jon Meacham.

            There’s a small subculture intensely interested in military history. Outside that, you’re not going to find many people from any walk of life who have a clue about the Battle of the Marne without looking it up. I’d say a working majority who are in that subculture invest in granular histories of the Civil War. George W Bush may have known something about the Battle of the Marne because he was mad for general history volumes. What he read seldom crept into public statements, however.

      5. Wow Trump does not like McCain – news at Five!!.

        You mean the Sen. John McCain that delivered the Steele Dossier to the FBI ?

        Why do you think Trump might not like McCain ?

        McCain was a true war hero.
        He was a poor Senator.

          1. McCain was a POW for 5 1/2 years. From the beginning he was offered early release. He refused – he was tortured – he refused.

            Could you do that ? I couldn’t.

            Sorry Anonymous – he is a hero.

            1. McCain was offered early release because he was the son of an admiral. If he had been the son of a sergeant, he wouldn’t have gotten the same deal. He was a bargaining chip. However, he had already been a songbird by then, so for McCain, an early release was not a good thing. He was looking at being tried as a traitor. Hence, sleazy John decides to stay. It just happens the war goes on longer than he thought it would.

              1. McCain was not merely the Son of an Admiral. He was the son of CINPAC – the overall commander of the entire Pacific including Vietnam.

                No he would not have been tried as a traitor. But he most certainly would not have been able to have a successful political career – atleast not as a republican. The First in First out code that the prisoners adhered to wa their own interpretation of the USMCJ – it is not official.
                Leaving early would not result in court martial. The Vietnamese did persuade some to leave early – not many.

                Regardless, given the choice between daily torture and instant release – what would you pick.

                And yes being the Son of CINPAC made it possible for him to be offered early release – though many others were too.
                At the same time it also subjected him to even more severe torture – because his compliance was much more valuable.

                And McCain was offered early release almost as soon as he reached Hanoi.
                McCain held out longer than most before recording a small amount of NVA propoganda – very very few of those in the Hanoi Hilton did not ultimately do so. McCain was one of those sending messages in his video’s by blinking his eyes in morse code.

                It also does not matter how long the war lasted – the offer of early release was always on the table for McCain.
                It was also on the table for a few others.

                1. John, I don’t like McCain for his political actions. Being a hero is a relative thing that is determined by our particular mindset. If we want to call him a hero for his service or for his imprisonment that is fine but then all the others that served are hero’s as well.

                  The question is whether or not he deserved special acclaim. I can’t figure out why he is special and someone else not. Can you?

                  1. I respect John McCain for his service – as anyone who has served honorably.

                    Being a prisoner in Vietnam does not automatically make you a hero – but there was almost no space between being a hero or a goat.

                    US prisoners – airmen in particular were tortured – extensively. Most held out for a very long time. Most ultimately broke.
                    Facing torture and resisting IS HEROISM.

                    I do not ever want to find out if I can live up to the standard McCain did. I doubt it. There are not many people who were tortured as much as McCain.

                    As to McCain’s congressional service – that is a mixed back. There are things to like, and alot to dislike.

                    But Goldwater did not trust him and that really bothers me.

                    1. OK, John, as I said I look at all who honorably served in the military as heros but give a special status to a few. If in those terms you say John McCain was a hero among tens of thousands of other hero’s, I’ll agree. There are a lot of hero’s that we meet every day and then there are a few HERO’S that are special. John McCain was a hero, not a HERO.

                    2. Sorry to butt in, but I do not accept there are multiple levels of HERO’s. A hero is defined as “a person who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities.” So a NYC fireman that ran into the burning towers, rescued individuals and was outside when they collapsed and survived is just as much a hero as one who did the same, but was back inside during the collapse and died.

                      The same goes for courage and exceptional achievements during war. Anyone captured and held for the lenght of time McCain was held and behaved as he did is a hero, not a HERO because there is no difference.

                      Now we can debate all the public figures and athletes that do some good work and they call that person a hero. The act should be debated and the title given if earned. McCain earned the title, unlike so many called a “hero” where society has diluted the title.

                    3. ” I do not accept there are multiple levels of HERO’s. ”

                      I think the military and the civilian leader believe there is more than one level. We see all types of commendations. Audie Murphy was a hero. I’d capitalize his Hero status. There were lots of heros at the Battle of the Bulge we don’t know about but they were hero’s none the less. Ron, I am not sure what you are trying to tell me.

                    4. Allen, maybe I misinterpreted your comments to JS when you said there were heros and then there are HEROS. it is next to impossible to follow comments after so many get posted so I am going by memory.

                      So I took this to mean that McCain was a hero, but not a HERO. And I was stating I did not think there were levels of being a hero. And you might accept that there is.

                      My point was anyone flying a fighter/attack plane into a combat zone is risking their life. If it goes bad and you die or are captured, you have achieved hero status. Audie Murphy achieved this status because his mission came under attack, he was wounded and he avoid capture by holding off Germans, then finally moving against those same Germans.

                      I find it hard to distinguish between someone like Murphy and someone like McCain given that McCain was injured in a way that avoiding capture was more difficult.

                      A hero to one may not be a hero to another. But to me, either are or are not.

                    5. McCain was the cause of his own injuries. He didn’t follow the directions on the ejection seat.

                    6. Ron, if you look back you will see that I consider all of our voluntary military in good standing to be heros. Some have been exceptional and I consider them more notable heros. These things are relative so each of us can judge for ourselves.

                      To me McCain wasn’t special and I am not sure about the history that surrounds him. The high level admiralty in his family can cause a lot of details to change. I did not like him as a politician and he demonstrated that vengence was more important to him than the nation he represented.

                    7. Allan, we can differ. But honestly – read about him. McCain was a HERO. there are a few from vietnam who were mores so but not many.

                      But I suspect we agree he was not that impressive as a Senator.

                    8. John, we can differ. It doesn’t matter. I consider his service like that of many Americans to be a heroic gesture. I can’t find out what made him a hero above other hero’s and some of the information about him is questionable on both sides. If you have evidence that couldn’t have been laundered let me know. If you don’t, no problem. On his death he was treated in a fashion that was over the top and I can’t figure out why.

                    9. McCain is not a hero about other hero’s. There are others in Vietnam who were greater hero’s – not many but definitely some.
                      Stockdale was definitely one.

                      But McCain was more than an ordinary naval airman, or even an ordinary POW.

                    10. McCain turned down early release, offered to him as an Admiral’s son, to stay in the Hanoi Hilton for 6 years. John McCain was a Hero, spell it however you want.

                    11. 5 1/2 years.

                      Regardless we agree.

                      Charlie Rangle fought at Chosen – NO ONE who fought on the east side of Chosen river was not a hero.

                      But that does not require me to agree with his politics or not think that he was crooked as a politician.

                    12. To me McCain wasn’t special and I am not sure about the history that surrounds him.

                      1. He was a Navy pilot

                      2. He was a POW

                      McCain was special.

            2. “From the beginning he was offered early release”

              Before or after providing the document?

              Why were they giving him early release? What did they benefit from the release? Could the early release have harmed the US?

              All soldiers that fulfil their duty are hero’s in my book and a lot of soldiers did a lot more than McCain while not being provided hero status above all other heros. What extraordinary service did he provide that many soldiers provided even more but no one even knows their names? A lot of Americans have run toward the enemy to wipe out a machine gun nest and got killed in the process.

              1. Many POW;s were offered early release.
                Always to score a propoganda victory for the north.

                a few accepted

                McCain was a really big target for the for the vietnamese – because his father was CINPAC and releasing a ranking american officers son early would be a significant propganda victory.

                Absolutely there were some who endured more as prisoners than McCain – but not many.

                Almost everyone – including McCain broke, and did atleast one propoganda video for the Vietnamese.

                Many tried to commit suicide – McCain did twice. Admiral Stockdale did once.

                1. John, How do you know how much McCain had to endure compared to a lot of other prisoners whose names you don’t know?

                  Before he was captured, what special services did McCain accomplish that other soldiers whose names are unknown didn’t do?

                  All soldiers in my mind are heros because they served their country. I’m looking for what makes a person stand out.

                  1. Allan, I am 62. I was very nearly accepted into the Naval Academy in 1976 – my vision was to bad for a waiver.

                    I lived through Vietnam. i am guessing you did too. I have forgotten more about Vietnam than most people know.

                    I am not going to try to prove to you that McCain was tortured more than most. But you can find out if you want to.

                    Before McCain was captured, he was an exemplary pilot – but so were many others. There is alot of information about McCain’s military carreer – his life. In fact that of his entire family. John was a screw up at the Naval Acadamy – very nearly washed out. John’s father was also a screw up at the naval academy – and became one of the highest ranging admiral’s since WWII. John’s grandfather was also a ranking admiral in WWII in the pacific – just below Nimitz and Halsey. He is famous for defying Halsey and turning his battle group arround to return to Leyette Gulf when Halsey got lured away to chase the last Japanese Carriers. McCain’s actions did NOT become pivital – because of the heroic actions of others who took on vastly superior japanese forces and scared them so much they retreated.
                    But had the Japanese Navy pressed the attack Leyette Gulf, Adm. McCain’s actions would have saved MacArthur.

                    McCain was also right in the center of the disaterous fire on the USS Forestall. McCain did not as someone else suggested nearly sink his own ship. There was a well known problem with Zuni rockets and one from a F4B on the other side of the deck went off and impacted McCain’s A4 While he was preparing to take off, This dumped fuel accross the deck and started a fire. McCain as well as several other pilots had to evactuate their planes and get accross the burning deck to safety before their aircraft were destroyed.

                    Forrestall ended up in a very precarious position – with a large fuel fire on deck with alot of variously armed aircraft.

                    There is news video of the event and McCain can be seen climbing out of his plane and walking along the wing to safety.

                    1. “I am not going to try to prove to you that McCain was tortured more than most. But you can find out if you want to. “

                      I don’t think you could.

                      I do note that you spend as much time on his family as you do on him. That makes me suspicious.

                    2. The family is impressive.

                      I am more into WW2. I knew more about adm John McCain before I had heard of Sen. John McCain.

                      The battle of Leytte Gulf is especially famous

                      Nimitiz’s infamous message to halsey


                      As well as the battle off Samar – one of the largest naval battles in history – where the Japanese Center force which Massively outnumbered US forces guading the Leytte landing because Halsey had taken the US main force to go chasing the last japanese carriers – which the Japanese had used as bait for that purpose. The Japanese caught a weak remnant force completely unprepared was chased away by the heroic efforts of Taffy 3 – a small group of escort carriers and destroyers that in the face of an vastly superior enemy – attacked.

                      The Yamato and her sister scored several direct hits on the jeep carriers – doing little damage because the massive amour peircing shells went right through without exploding – before the Japanese shifted to HE rounds. Several US destoryers attacked the Japanese force and amazingly inflicted severe damage – at tremendous cost, and the jeep carriers flew continuous sorties agains the japanse force with whatever they could find.

                      Anyway had the Japanese realized the actual weakness of the force they faced and not broken off, Adm McCains decision to break his battleship group from Halsey’s and return to Leytte would likely have arrived in time to save MacArthurs forces.

                      This is the only engagement in the entire pacific theater in which US forces were caught unaware.

                  2. Funny having a guy who didn’t serve being picky about who is a hero. Reminds me of a guy with a fancy hairdo and orange skin.

                    1. As a retired Navy Chief, my opinion of John McCain’s service to this country in uniform is measured by the honor, courage and commitment he displayed throughout his career. For that, he receives an A. As a citizen, my opinion of John McCain’s service to this country as an elected Senator is measured by his commitment to honor the people of his state and his fidelity to his oath of office. For that, he teeters on an F.

                    2. Who are you talking to? You are drawing conclusions without fact and converting those conclusions into fact. That is the basis of almost all your arguments, but since you always play the part of a fool it is expected.

                      Trump has shown his ability to take a stand and succeed. What have you done? Beat up a few nails and pounded sand while constructing a house?

                    3. Allan sounds like he’s regularly confronted with the ‘what have you actually done with your life’ talk.

                    4. “Allan sounds like he’s regularly confronted with the ‘what have you actually done with your life’ talk.”

                      Bug, who can understand what you say? The fact is I succeeded quite well in multiple areas and it sounds like you barely made it.

                    5. Do you have an argument ?

                      Does random speculation about the lives, minds, experiences of those you know nothing about accomplish anything ?

                      Is there any reason to accept it as having even the tiniest grain of truth ?

                      Given how bad you are at facts, why would you think you are better at mind reading or random speculation about others ?

              2. Just to be clear McCain was NOT the most heroic POW – he was also far from the least.

                He was still a hero.

                And as I noted Charlie Rangel was also a hero – he fought on the east side of the Chosen river in the battle of Chosin.
                Everyone who fought there and lived was a hero. Everyone was wounder – many multiple times, they still fought their way back to US lines,
                AND they brought the wounded who could not move themselves with them.

                Duke Cunningham was also a hero.

                All three of these men were war heros, and then politicians, and all three made serious mistakes as politicians – some criminal mistakes.

                You can be a hero and also a crook.

                1. I don’t think people have heard much about the aviator jailed in Hanoi at the Hỏa Lò Prison who commanded the greatest esteem from the comrades

                  Well, at least from the guy I know who pulled 6 years there, a little bit longer than McCain. He held the highest esteem for, Jeremiah Denton


                  read about Jeremiah Denton, folks, he’s the one who got out the word to the world that they were being tortured, and he took some very fierce beatings for it

  3. “How Fascism Works: Trump’s “Law & Order” Is Lawlessness, Fueling Racist Violence & Chaos”

      1. Why does anyone care what “democracy now” thinks about something we can decide on with our own eyes ?

        We see the current lawlessness.

        We grasp the cause. Coddled children, the product of a broken education system that conflates words with violence and therefore violence with words.

        These children are under the delusion they are saving the world from evil, as they engage in immorality.

        Again these moral delusions camne from a f’d up education.

        This is all simple. They got their way in Seattle/CHAZ – they are incapable of managing their own lives – why would anyone think they could manage a few city blocks without violence, rape and murder.

        This has nothing to do with Trump.

        Trump did not make the rioters and looters stupid.

        Again the delusions of the left.

        Life is dangerous – it does not come with free safe spaces.

  4. This is one top notch President. Recently a peace deal in the Middle East and now a new beginning with cooperation between Servia and Kosovo.

    Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize for nothing.

        1. Did you listen to the economic numbers? Fantastic.

          Add to that in the last 6 years of the Obama administration (giving him 2 years to settle things down) unemployment fell 5.1% to 4.7. In 4 months unemployment fell 6.3% under Trump. It is obvious what a putz Obama was and what a great President Trump is. Trump did this feat with a pandemic, Riots in the streets and the democrats trying to close down economic activity.

          Add to that no new wars despite democrat desires to get us into some, Mideast Peace Treaty, now agreements between Serbia and Kosovo along with a whole host of other good things.

          To our friends that like to see killing, looting and burning in the streets, wait a short time. Trump will end that with democrat support or without. Joe Biden can continue to support Antifa and BLM refusing to call them out as far as the damage they have done. Biden is a fraud but adequately represents inadequate people like btb, Needs to be Committed and the Bug along with a few others including the fancy one from the nail salon.

          1. I know. He seems to have found that wand Obama said was needed to set things right. I think no other man could have accomplished so much with the seditious schemes and opposition he faced from every direction and from within the core of government. It’s almost as if Lincoln had been elected only to discover the Confederacy already in control of the government.

          2. Allan, when you blow Trump in public like this it looks like…, a guy blowing Trump in public.

            1. Bug, likes attract. Trump is successful and you hate that but you love the failure Obama.

              Frankly Trump is looking pretty good today as you will eventually read.

            2. Do words have the slightest connection to their meaning for you ?

              If you use inflated language for Allan’s revitation of Facts – what will you have left should Allan actually say something consequentially wrong ?

              One of the problems you have with Trump is that you have called him Hitler so frequently – and people know that is a ridiculous and massive exageration, that when he does actually do something unusual – you have no words left, and no one beleives you.

      1. Obama hides behind and is protected by his racial suit of armour. How sad to measured primarily by the color of your skin and not the content of your character.

        1. How sad to measured primarily by the color of your skin and not the content of your character.


          Not if you have a miserable charactrr.

  5. Interesting how at the ‘press conference’ today, Biden made an error suggesting there was a TelePrompTer installed outside the camera’s range. And did you notice how superpacs associated with the Democratic Party had ads teed up to riff off of the article in The Atlantic?

  6. Good video and explanatory story demonstrating that today’s democrats do not believe in the democrat party of 15 years ago.

    Long before Trump, bipartisan group of elder statesmen flagged mail ballot fraud risks
    Forgotten 2005 report warned a small amount of fraud could swing close elections, urged voter ID requirements.

      1. Didn’t someone just say there was no voter fraud in NH ?

        This is another example of the lefts relgious zealotry riving them to untenable positions. ‘

        Of course there is voter fraud. The thought that we could conduct an election in which more than 100m people vote without any fraud at all is ludicrously stupid.

        There is no question that there is voter fraud.

        The questions regard the scale and the most common means.

        I honestly do not care much about individual in person voter fraud. It is unlikely to top any but the closest elections.

        The most dangerous forms of voter fraud are those that are to some extent organized.

        The absence of voter ID makes both individual and organized fraud easier.

        But mail in ballots are a gigantic invitation to large scale voter fraud.

        But even the actual fraud is NOT the biggest problem – if we do not secure elections, if we do not know that the actual fraud is quite low, we undermine the entire election.

        I thought Trump’s request of GOP voters to vote twice was brilliant.

        The answer the left SHOULD have been able to give was “go ahead and try, the system is secure”.

        Instead they ranted that Trump was encouraging people to commit crimes, openly acknowleging that people could easily do exactly what Trump asked.

        In other words Trump forced the left to confront that mail in voter fraud is not merely possible but easy.

        Further that it is not actual fraud that matters but the perception that fraud is easy and could be large enough to decide an election.

        The left has little concern about fraud – because they beleive they benefit from it.

        Trump made them confront the posibility that republicans could benefit.

        1. “I thought Trump’s request of GOP voters to vote twice was brilliant.

          The answer the left SHOULD have been able to give was “go ahead and try, the system is secure”.

          That demonstrates the lack of clarity the left holds with regard to its positions. I’m not saying that all on the left are stupid or don’t have some good ideas, but when I listen to our frequent posters from the left on this blog they all act as if their heads are empty.

          1. Please god for a lefty to debate that actually had a brain!

            I bumped into a few a long time ago on a now defunct site. That limited your comment size based on the number of likes you got.
            Unfortunately you could also get banned by pissing off lefties.

            I got to unlimited comment sizes within 3 months. got banned shortly there after, Got to unlimted comments on another ID in 1 month got banned again, and got to unlimited comments in 3 days before getting banned again and giving up.

            But there were a FEW lefties with brains there.

            So far I have not spotted one here.

            Frankly I have not found own who could make an argument.

        2. John you previously claimed that busloads of college kids were brought into NH to vote illegally and I posted a similar article to the one below disproving this Trump talking point (see end of quote below) you have mindlessly parroted. Do you not have Google so you check the partisan crap you spew here?

          “CONCORD, N.H. —
          An exhaustive review by state election officials, including a first-time comparison of voter information shared with 27 other states, has turned up virtually no evidence of possible voter fraud in New Hampshire, those officials said Tuesday.

          Secretary of State William Gardner, other officials from his office and a top election law attorney from the attorney general’s office made a more than two-hour presentation to the state Ballot Law Commission, which is charged with resolving disputes related to election laws. The review consumed 817 work hours by members of the attorney general’s office with help from the Department of Safety.

          The key results were:

          — Out of more than 94,000 names of people with the same first and last names and dates of birth who voted in New Hampshire and at least one of the other 27 states in the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck program, all but 142 were accounted for as being different voters in each state

          — In New Hampshire, out of 86,952 people who registered to vote on state primary or general election day in 2016, a total 6,033 did not present photo IDs and as a result signed affidavits swearing that a New Hampshire community was their domicile.

          — The secretary of state’s office verified that all but 458 cases were legitimate New Hampshire voters, and referred those 458 cases to the attorney general’s office. The attorney general’s office was able to verify that 392 of those voters were in fact domiciled in New Hampshire and registered and voted properly.

          — The attorney general’s office was unable to verify the domiciles of the remaining 66 after exhausting all investigative resources, but a top attorney in the office said it does not mean an unlawful vote was cast in any of those 66 cases.

          …At college campuses, the political parties will rent buses to move the college students around to the polling places so that they can vote. And the buses are usually from out-of-state,” Edwards said. “So, we received calls on Vermont buses, Massachusetts buses and Maine buses.”

          “Each time we have sent an investigator out to the polling place, they have been able to determine that the bus company is from Maine or Vermont or Massachusetts, but not the voters on the bus.”

          She also said that in 2016, her office sent investigators to Salem to follow up on reports from the town that the voting place parking lot was “full of” vehicles with Massachusetts license plates.

          “The report was correct,” she said. “What it turned out was that it was individuals from Massachusetts who were coming up and were holding campaign signs. It wasn’t an exciting election in Massachusetts, so they came up to hold signs in New Hampshire. But they weren’t trying to vote.”…”

          1. Did they find the Democrat ballot inspector who voted more than once or did someone else have to point him out?

          2. Small numbers are the tip of icebergs. This is NY. When I get to the other states or NH maybe I’ll post them when I see them.

            Local N.Y. election official warns of people requesting mail-in ballots using dead voters’ names
            “Our local district attorneys should take this very seriously, and I would suggest they should endeavor to prosecute those who are behind this,” says Nick LaLota, Suffolk County elections commissioner, who received an application dated Sept. 4 from a person who died in June.

            A local election official in New York state is warning that some people are trying to request mail-in ballots for the November election using the personal information of deceased people. Continued below.


            1. There are neighborhoods in any core city with high turnover. I canvassed neighborhoods like this 30-odd years ago. You find hardly anyone home. They’ve moved away or they spend their free time out with friends or pursuing hobbies. It was not hard to identify those who’ve moved away so long as a building had labeled mailboxes. It takes a few years for them to be purged from the rolls. Until then, you have a file of names for bogus absentee ballot applications. It’s rather cumbersome for little benefit (as a rule). New York used to purge every four years, so you didn’t have many relict entries. Other states don’t bother. You got a purple state where some contests are decided by small margins, the incentive is there. The son of Rep. James Moran of Virginia was caught on tape discussing methods of vote fraud. Virginia’s a purple state that’s had some close contests in recent years (hence Terry McAuliffe’s attempt at mass enfranchisement of felons).

              Again, everyone should be on board with ballot security. That the Democrats play the race card tells you what they’re up to. That Common Cause and the League of Women Voters are allies of the Democratic Party on this issue tell you what phonies soi-disant ‘non-partisan’ groups are.

              1. Democrats are up to stopping the GOP admitted attempts at disenfranchising groups of voters who don’t vote for them. It’s no secret and a proven fact.

                The houses with no one home during the day are usually those who work, apparently another unknown fact to our site idiot.

                1. Democrats are up to stopping the GOP admitted attempts at disenfranchising groups of voters who don’t vote for them. It’s no secret and a proven fact.

                  The ‘disfranchised groups’ who don’t vote for them would be convicted felons, illegal aliens, dead people, and people who’ve moved away.

                  1. DSS, maybe btb is worried because he doesn’t want to lose his vote. Proper voting would stop dead people from voting and he thinks that would include his class of brain dead as well.

                  2. The disenfranchised groups are the poor, poor elderly, blacks, and students. The GOP knows what it’s doing.

                    1. Most of them would laugh at you for thinking they don’t have the ability to produce ID and vote. You demonstrate the core of racism thinking certain minorities and disadvantaged people are inferior and don’t have the ability or intelligence to show ID or obtain an absentee ballot when needed

                    2. One of the jobs I have is doing PCA’s – Property Condition Assessments for banks that are writing loans – either purchases or refinances.

                      These are exploding right now. i have done more than a dozen PCA for Fannie/Freddie for “affordable housing”.

                      These are the supposed poor are living in very nice apartments for very affordable rents.

                      These places are much nicer than My parents while I was a kind or my wife and I before and immediately after I got married.

                      Being Poor in the US is the 1% of the world.

                    3. The disenfranchised groups are the poor, poor elderly, blacks, and students. The GOP knows what it’s doing.

                      1. Students, who somehow have the wherewithal to apply for admission, apply for financial aid, register for classes, obtain a student ID, but somehow cannot produce that ID at a polling station.

                      2. Poor elderly, who spent 30-odd years getting to work every day, who get their Social Security via direct deposit every month, but somehow do not have any ID.

                      3. Blacks, who have spend decades of their life working, get their paycheck via direct deposit, who drive to and from work, but somehow have no identification.

                      4. Poor, ditto. Well, if they’re not working, they managed to apply for benefits, but they somehow do not have to produce verification of their identity in so doing and are somehow unable to apply for an ID card.

                      I see you’ve thought this through.

                    4. BTB and the left is constantly insulting the people they purportedly care for.

                      Not only CAN all these groups handle Voter ID – but they DO.

                      In all states where voter ID laws were implimented the participation of these voters increased.

                    5. TIA knows the routines or he’s stupider then he acts.

                      Yes, many people do not have picture IDs or have the right one as required by the GOPs well targeted new laws. You don’t have to block everyone in a demographic group to win an election, just enough of them. We have the tapes of GOP leaders admitting the strategy and the studies of the effects of these laws. Given that we also have studies showing that voter fraud at the booth is exceedingly rare, this is a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist – gee why wouldn’t people try to cheat at the voting precinct? The rewards (?) is so great and the $10,000 and five years in prison so inconsequential. Somehow the thought that one in a million voter will cheat is used to justify disenfranchising a million legitimate voters because, hey, white people have to win.


                    6. “studies showing that voter fraud at the booth is exceedingly rare, this is a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist ”

                      BTB tells the Captain of the Titanic, ‘it’s just a tiny piece of ice’.

                    7. “many people do not have picture IDs or have the right one as required by the GOPs well targeted new laws.”

                      They don’t ?

                      All Voter ID laws follow a model law.
                      The Model Law requires that the state issue an ID that meets the requirements as a RIGHT to anyone asking for it.
                      Whether that is a Drivers License or a State ID. The State is required to provide ID at low cost – or no cost to those that can not afford it.

                      The Polling places are REQUIRED to allow those without ID to vote – so long as they sign an affidavit asserting that they are legally permitted to vote. So you do not even have to get photo ID. You just have to swear that you are who you say you are.

                      It is actually democrats that are as usual spreading misinformation – and scaring people into not voting.

                      “You don’t have to block everyone in a demographic group to win an election, just enough of them.”
                      Can we block morons who think that Blacks are too stupid to get ID ?

                      This is typical leftist BS – You claim to be doing so group “favors” – but you are really just treating them like children.

                      You are racist, sexist, …. By singling people out by Race, or sex or … and then declaring that they are inferior and need special treatment you litterally are the racists you pretend to oppose.

                      I expect the same of anyone who wishes to vote – black white, brown, male, female, straight, gay.

                      You do not. You treat them like helpless children.

                      Guess what – they are not.

                      “We have the tapes of GOP leaders admitting the strategy and the studies of the effects of these laws.”
                      Then you should be able to produce them.

                      I can give you tons of PV video’s of democratic leaders admitting to voter fraud.

                      “Given that we also have studies showing that voter fraud at the booth is exceedingly rare”
                      Actually you do not – voter fraud at the booth is not presently detectable.

                      You say they are studies – yet there is no public records of who voted. Ballots are cast anonymously, and in states without voter ID laws, very little is done to confirm that any voter is who they say they are, and again no records are kept.

                      Short of an admission it is impossible to prosecute in person fraud in most states,
                      Further even when it can be proven it is rarely prosecuted. Most of the few prosecutions are for those who organize in person fraud.

                      I would further note that PV and other groups have sent in undercover reporters to attempt to vote illegally in numerous places – like NYC and Boston – and they have had no trouble doing so.

                      As noted before if you have something like an election – even a local election where a large amount of money and jobs rests on the outcome myriads of people and groups have the incentive to commit fraud – as long as it is not likely they will get caught.

                      Where the means exists and the motive exists you can be certain – whether you have identified the actors – that the act occurs – alot.

                      Regardless, the fact that you have a door wide enought to run an interstate through means that you can not trust the results
                      And that is the big issue.

                      You wigged out over counting hanging chad in FL. So you can not pretend you do not know how important trust in the voting system is.

                      If people do not trust the outcome – you do not have a government.

                      “this is a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist”
                      False and False.
                      So long as there are people who beleive that in person voter fraud is possible, there is a problem.

                      “gee why wouldn’t people try to cheat at the voting precinct?”
                      Really ? We know that Homeless people were persuaded to vote for cigarettes – and you think it will be hard to find people to cheat ?

                      “The rewards (?) is so great and the $10,000 and five years in prison so inconsequential.”
                      No one – not even people who organize in person fraud with 100’s of people voting illegally sees that.
                      Individual inperson fraud is unprosecutable without a confession. Why is it so hard for you to see that ?

                      If I tell you that Joe Doe voted illegally how are you going to investigate and prosecute ? What is going to be the evidence ?

                      Camera’s are not allowed near voting places. There are no records – and even if there were how do you prove that Joe Doe was the person who voted illegally ?

                      “Somehow the thought that one in a million voter will cheat”

                      “is used to justify disenfranchising a million legitimate voters because, hey, white people have to win.”

                      Who has disenfranchised anyone ? There are 330M people in the US. if we exclude children and non-citizens there are 224M people who are eligable to vote. Many of those never register. Of those who register – many do not vote. ”

                      White – black the proportions are all the same.

                      In fact the proportion of blacks that vote is HIGHER than whites, and has risen with Voter ID laws.
                      As has voting overall.

                      If Voter ID laws were intended to disenfranchise voters – they FAILED.

                      But they do increase the trustworthyness of our elections.

                    8. Produce a single actual person who was unable to vote because of voter ID laws ?

                      Produce a single state where Voter ID laws resulted in fewer minorities voting ?

                      You claim millions are disenfranchised – and yet the evidence is no one is.

                    9. BTW this is exactly what Trump said about voting twice.

                      “Let them send it in and let them go vote, and if their system’s as good as they say it is, then obviously they won’t be able to vote,” Trump said. “If it isn’t tabulated, they’ll be able to vote. And that’s what they should do.”

                    10. Yes, many people do not have picture IDs or have the right one as required by the GOPs well targeted new laws. You don’t have to block everyone in a demographic group to win an election, just enough of them. We have the tapes of GOP leaders admitting the strategy and the studies of the effects of these laws. Given that we also have studies showing that voter fraud at the booth is exceedingly rare, this is a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist – gee why wouldn’t people try to cheat at the voting precinct? The rewards (?) is so great and the $10,000 and five years in prison so inconsequential. Somehow the thought that one in a million voter will cheat is used to justify disenfranchising a million legitimate voters because, hey, white people have to win.

                      You will block no one who is of minimal social competence. You pretend for effect you don’t understand this, but what you’re pretending to not understand is laid out in explicit detail above. People of minimal social competence are quite unlikely to be giving any thought to voting. Go ahead and pretend that you’re actually concerned with good citizenship on behalf of the 500,000 people in asylums and group homes and the 500,000 vagrants in this country.

                      we also have studies showing that voter fraud

                      You always remind us that you’re cribbing from a talking-point mill.

                    11. TIA gives away his well off white person bias with the “person of minimal social competence”. I think the Constitution uses that term and counts them as 3/5s a person.

                      “Social competence” which apparently can mean to poor to own a car or credit card, too old to travel 70 miles to get a picture ID, or not having a birth certificate or one with the name spelling not matching exactly that on their rent receipt, is now something TIA thinks should cause Americans to lose their voting rights. How convenient.


                    12. “TIA gives away his well off white person bias with the “person of minimal social competence””.
                      How so ? You think there are not LOTS of white people who are incompetent socially ?
                      I have 5 apartments. I get a mix of races. With few exceptions the Whites have been by far the least competent in pretty much all ways.
                      Generally the hispanics have been the most competent.

                      Regardless it is OBVIOUS that YOU are racist – you falsely interpreted a statement that was clearly NOT racist as having racial undercurrents.

                      ““Social competence” which apparently can mean to poor to own a car or credit card, too old to travel 70 miles to get a picture ID, or not having a birth certificate or one with the name spelling not matching exactly that on their rent receipt, is now something TIA thinks should cause Americans to lose their voting rights. How convenient.”

                      Where in this country are there poor minorities 70M away from a DMV ?

                      I think you can find DMV’s closer than that in Montana ?
                      Why is either a car or a credit card needed to get Photo ID ?

                      Very few of my tenants have bank accounts, cars, or credit cards. Many are on SSI. All have photo-id’s.

                      As to Birth Certificates – how many people do you know who actually do not have a birth certificate – regardless you can get them at the County Courthouse – and in many instances you can get one online or over the phone.

                      You are also clueless about Photo-ID – you do not need a Rent Receipt to get a Photo-ID. The requirements are dictated by the Real ID act passed as a result of the recomendations of the 9/11 commission and based on Clinton’s national ID proposal.
                      Any government issued ID or a Birth Certificate is all that is needed.

                      And there are provisions to get a Photo-ID using an affidavit if you do not have any of the above – basically you swear that you are who you say you are.

                      Like most of the left – you are clueless about what you are arguing about.

                      The claims of the left regarding the burdens of getting an ID are bogus – the Voter ID laws address that.
                      Whatever your special circumstances – such as you are 95 were born in Selma without a doctor and have no birth certificate – That is addressed. And it is not difficult.

                      Grow up, and learn the facts before you spray everyone with uninformed nonsense.

                      Here is a link to information and text on the “model voter ID law” – this is the basis for all Voter ID laws in the US.
                      I beleive every single one conforms to the requirements of the model.

                      I would suggest reading the objectives and then reading the actual model law.

                      And if you wish to claim that there is some state that deviats negatively from that model – then reference that state and the specific law that deviats.

                      Otherwise you are just coming accross as an uninformed idiot


                    13. Do you think everyone here is clueless ? Do you think you can just make $h!t up and expect others to beleive it is true ?

                      Actually read either the model voter ID law I linked – or some specific states voter ID laws – before continuing these ludicrously stupid left wing nut Talking Points that address laws that do not exist.

                    14. John, this is not the first time that btb has been proven wrong and was proven to make sh1t up. He has done that continuously throughout his career on this blog. The best you will do is make him change his alias again or add another one which is what he has been doing since he was known as Jan F. He might even create an alias to pat himself on the back.

                    15. “The disenfranchised groups are the poor, poor elderly, blacks, and students. The GOP knows what it’s doing.”

                      How so ? There is no law that says poor people can not vote.
                      Federal and state funding for election is by district – essentially per capita. There is exactly the same funds per person being spent for voting in every district in the US. Of course there is more graft and fraud in the areas controlled by Democrats so less of that money actually goes to providing facsilities to vote.

                      Urban poor, elderly and minority voters – should in theory be the most advantaged voters.

                      They have to travel the shortest distance to a polling place – usually they can walk.

                      Yet Voters in sparse rural states like Wisconsin are somehow better able to vote ?

                      Does not sound like a republican conspiracy to me – sounds like Democrats screwing their own voters.

                      How are students being disenfranchised ? They like everyone else may legally vote where they reside.
                      Most states provide incentives to students to reside int he state they go to college – lower instate tuition as an example.

                      Regardless, if you are not going to go to the trouble to become a resident of a state, then you should not vote in that state.

                      Why should people who live in Massachusetts get to vote in New Hampshire because they go to college in New Hampshire but choose not to establishe NH residence ?

                      Myriads of people live in NH and go to work in Boston – should they be allowed to vote in NH and MA ?

                      There are lots of things I will happily support.

                      No state should give special treatment to any political party. Primaries should be run by political parties – not states, using whateer rules they want.

                      But actual state elections – general elections should have exactly the same ballot requirements requardless of party – or no party.

                      If i wish to run for president in my state on the Bull Moose Goose party – I should be free to do so – with the same requirements for ballot access as republicans or democrats.

                      I do not beleive states should be recording party affiliation – that is not the states business.

                      Parties can have whatever rules they want for their own primaries. But states should not favor parties.

                      Absolutely you should be required to produce ID to vote – as well as proof of citizenship.

                      Conversely you should NOT have to produce either to the government to fly.

                      It is extremely wierd that we live in a country where you have less freedom to travel from place to place than to vote.

                      I have no problem making mail in voting illegal.

                      Even absentee ballots require you to go to a courthouse or some simmilar official and present yourself in person to cast your vote.

                      I would have the polls open for exactly 24hrs. From 9am EST to 9am EST. The polls would then close accross country at exactly the same time.

                    16. I am in favor of restricting the franchise. We should add a “user tax” to voting and also a literacy test

                      Yes yes i know we used to have those good ideas and then they were struck down by courts because blacks whatever

                      here’s the thing. blacks are not an excuse for democracy to be restrained by the judiciary indefinitely especially now 160 some years after the slaves were freed and another 55 or so years since the Voting Rights act was passed. They are less than 1/5 of the population which provide federal judges any sort of excuse they want for invaliding state democratic procedures that the article III tyrants don’t like

                      don’t give me all this GOP GOP GOP stuff. native born Americans of both parties have little problem with making people come up with valid driver’s licenses to prove voting rights. It is a small inconvenience and we have to do more just to use our reward points as the grocery store.

                      we should also maintain the line on disenfranchisement of convicted felons. Yes, this has a disparate impact on black men. Guess what? they can avoid the problem by committing less crimes. Crazy idea, I know? I must be racist to say so, you will add! WHATEVER!

                    17. Kurtz, you have a solution for no problem. Not only do repeated studies show this, Trump’s own commission which was loaded with the guys selling the idea there was a problem disbanded without finding a problem, and common sense tells you that fraud at the polls is a low reward – there is no f..king reward! – activity with serious penalties. Do the math!

                    18. And yet even the NYT has repeatedly grasped that there is a problem.

                      You have spent 4 years ranting about “the collusion delusion” – which is just a false claim of election fraud.

                      I find the left quite odd.
                      In the view of the left men – and particularly businessmen are not virtuous enough to choose their own insurance or not murder their customers, But way too virtuous to engage in election fraud ?


                      19 foreign nationals charged for voting in 2016 election

                      tip of the iceberg book. prosecutors and police have guidance on what crimes to investigate and how to look the other way.

                      the urban major metros are where a lot of the fraud occurs and they are under almost complete Democrat party control and the agenda has been clear for a long time. you’re doing your part for the party here by denying the existence of the problem I know. I wish Republicans had more team players like you!

                    20. I would further note that quite often the Voter Fraud is not about presidential elections, but is as common over dog catchers and town counsel seats.

                    21. Kurtz, the 19 represent .0008% of the 4 million voters in NC.

                      “PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The now-disbanded voting integrity commission launched by the Trump administration uncovered no evidence to support claims of widespread voter fraud, according to an analysis of administration documents released Friday….”


                      Trying to catch an infinitismal number of stupid or misguided people who would risk serious jail and $10k fines for zero reward with laws which cost millions of citizens to lose their right to vote is either very stupid or very cynical, and you know it’s the latter. We have the tapes of GOP politicians discussing their strategy.

                    22. Again – the 2000 election was decided by 180 votes.

                      I would note that Georgia is prosecuting over 1000 for voting twice.
                      4500 voters who were not likely NH residents voted in the 2016 election in NH.

                      Regardless, we do not have the tools to find voter fraud. What we find is very nearly by accident.

                      I have no idea what your idea of “widespread” is.

                      I am not concerned with “widespread” – what ever you mean.

                      I am concerned with sufficient to throw into doubt the outcome of SOME elections.

                      We are way past that.

                    23. “Black, Latino, and elderly voters are disproportionally negatively affected by Voter ID laws”

                      We hear this claim from the left constantly – but it is not based on facts, it is based on speculation.

                      It is also based on a legal theory that is garbage.

                      Murderers are disproportionately negatively effected by the death penalty.

                      Disparate impact of a neutral law is not unconstitutional. All laws have disparate impact.

                      As to the specualtion – you do not seem to grasp there is a gigantic gulf between fewer blacks have acceptable ID today (which itself is speculation) and fewer will vote if Voter ID laws are implimented.

                      The greatest proof that inperson voter fraud is rare is that voter ID laws do not appear to have noticably alter the outcome of election.

                      The greatest proof that voter ID laws do not disproportionately effect minorities is that minority voting has increased in states that passed voter ID laws.

                      538 BTW i the source that still had Hillary winning the election by 95% probability – AFTER OH and PA were called for Trump.

                      Nate is a great baseball statistician. Not so hot on political statistics.

                    24. This is not the first time that Allan has been proven wrong and was proven to make sh1t up. He has done that continuously throughout his career on this blog.

                  3. Why exactly did Democrats fight all the way to the Supreme court the Citizenship question on the Census ?

                    It has been on the Long Form census forever.
                    It has been on the short form census probably 80% of our history.

                    Whether for voting or myriads of other reasons, it is critical to know the number of citizens.

                    And we do not know the number of people in the US who are citizens.

                    Harvard thought that the Republican estimates were way high, so they conducted their own surveyh and found that the GOP was underestimating the non-citizens in the US – probably by a factor of 3-10.

                2. There is no disenfranchisement or almost none. If someone wants to vote, they register, produce Id and vote.

                  People need such ID to get on a plane, to charge something at Walmart, to drive a car,, to do almost anything. What btb is saying is that some people are too stupid to have an ID something laughed at by most people. It’s also disingenuous because btb is a leftist and leftists will cheat when they are told to do so. It is part of their DNA.

                  1. Allan apparently does not know that there are people who have never flown on a plane and don’t own a credit card or a car, and surprisingly -to him apparently – the Constitution says nothing about voting being only available to smug white a..holes like him.

                    The fact remains – for other reading this, Allan is dysfunctional – voter fraud at the booth is as close to non-existent as it could be. There is no measurable benefit to someone risking those penalties. Disenfranchising millions of voters to keep 1 in a million from voting illegally at the polls makes no sense except to the GOP which is motivated by corruption, not principle.

                    1. Let me put it to you this way. Your pitiful intellect demonstrates that virtually anyone is able to register and vote. You are registered, right?

                      Take all those people that haven’t flown on a plane and remove those that drive a car. Then remove those that shop at Walmart with a credit card. Then remove all those on Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, social security , disability etc. and you have precious few that haven’t at one time or another had some type of ID. What’s left is a population that might not even know what voting is.

                      You are drowning intellectually just like the captain of the Titanic did.

                    2. Book– Visit a Caribbean country that is mostly black. They have photo ID for voting. I heard it mentioned on the radio when I was taking a cab. I asked the driver if it were true. Despite my protests and some weaving on a narrow road the cabbie pulled out his wallet and handed me his voter ID with his photograph.

                      If black people in a poor, Third World country can navigate getting and using voter’s photo ID there is no excuse for anybody in this country not being able to do it.

                      It’s kind of racist of you to look down on American blacks to such a degree. They aren’t as stupid as you appear to assume.

                    3. Btb demonstrates a false belief. He believes his race has an inherent superiority over another race thinking that only people like him are able to vote but those of the other race don’t have that inherent ability. That is the definition of racism.

                    4. “Allan apparently does not know that there are people who have never flown on a plane and don’t own a credit card or a car”

                      I do not know anyone who has no photo ID – even though i have had dozens of Tenants (and some friends) – white and minorities who are at the bottom of working class – or less, have very low IQ’s have never had a credit card or a Car.

                      BTW there is absolutely NOTHING about credit cards, cars, or bank accounts in Voter ID laws. And nothing about flying on a plane.

                      If you do not have a birth certificate ? The Census bureau will get one for you.


                      “and surprisingly -to him apparently – the Constitution says nothing about voting being only available to smug white a..holes like him.”

                      The constitution also allowed poll taxes and other head taxes and barred Income taxes.

                      “The fact remains – for other reading this, Allan is dysfunctional”
                      Because you say so ? IF something is fact you should be able to demonstrate it.

                      ” – voter fraud at the booth is as close to non-existent as it could be.”
                      I have provided numerous links proving that claim to be wrong.
                      And Voter Fraud prosecutions are like failure to use seat belt prosecutions – the tip of an iceberg.
                      We know that there are 10-100 times as many actual violations as there are prosecutions.

                      “There is no measurable benefit to someone risking those penalties.”
                      Of course there are. The value of the outcome of elections reallocates trillions of dollars.

                      “Disenfranchising millions of voters to keep 1 in a million from voting illegally at the polls makes no sense except to the GOP which is motivated by corruption, not principle.”

                      Again NO ONE is disenfranchised. The id requirements are minimal and far less intrusive than you have claimed.

                      Read the acutal laws – before spray this ill informed garbage. The most stringent voter ID laws are 1000 times easier to get acceptable ID – or vote without ID than you claim. The least restrictive merely request ID and let you vote anyway.

                      You are utterly clueless – and you are just making things up.

                      Get actually informed before spraying this ludicrous and racist BS.

                      According to Gallup
                      95% of republicans.
                      83% of independents
                      65% of Democrats
                      81% of whites
                      77% of nonwhites.
                      support Voter ID laws

                      More people are concerned about ineligable people voting than in eligable voters being turned away.

                      While legitimate law is not inherently based on oppinion polls.

                      It is clear you are both ignorant of the actual law, its effects and of the views of americans regardling voting.

                      And you are ignorant of actual voter fraud in its myriads of forms.

                      YOU note that 4 states in 2016 were decided by less than 75,000 votes.

                      NH was decided by by 2500 votes.

                      In 2000 Teh Presidential election was decided by about 180 votes in FL.

                      Do you honestly belive there were not 180 fraudulent votes cast by voters of each party in FL in 2000 ?

                      Innumerable elections today are decided by less than 1% of the vote.

                      If we go below Federal elections myriads of elections are decided by less than 1000 votes, some by less than 100 votes.

                      And you do not think it is important to be SURE that those who voted were eligable ?

                      There are myriads of examples in every election where a precinct has 1000’s more votes in an election than it has registered voters.

                      A you think there is n o possibility for Fraud ?

                    5. Ah, yes, – motivations again – back to mind reading.
                      get a clue BTB – you suck at mind reading.

                      Further – something is legal or illegal REGARDLESS of your motive.
                      There is no good reason for sharing classified information with foreign powers – not even allies.

                      There is no motive that bars a police officer from arresting a murderer.

                      Juries like to know the motive for those who are accused of a crime. IT is hard for a jury to understand why someone would murder someone without a motive. But motive is not an element of a single crime.

                      Intent is an element of many crimes. Intent means that whatever you did, you did deliberately.
                      It does not automatically mean you did so with bad motives.

                      A legal act is legal – regardless of your claims about the motives of the person who did it.

                      AS i have noted before – even Christ does not judge people based on their motives – and an omniscient god should know are motives.
                      Christ judges our ACTS.

                      Voter ID laws are on their face constitutional.

                      If you actually find instances of some precinct using them to discriminate – file a VRA lawsuit.
                      Challenge the discriminatory ACT, not the law.

                      That is how the law is supposed to work.

                    6. In 2014 a proposal was made by Democrat Andrew Young to add photos to Social Security cards. To make them acceptable as Voter ID
                      But Democrats tanked it

                      The fact is that people like you WANT voter Fraud.
                      You oppose anything that might reduce it.

                      This problem will continue until the left beleives that Fraud of some kind might cost them an election.

                  2. The democratic party opposition to Voter ID is ludicrously stupid.

                    80% of people beleive you should have ID to vote.

                    Even 80% of minorities beleive you should have id to vote.

                    The democrats claim that minorities do not have ID is insulting to black people.

                    There are myriads of Youtube videos of people querying blacks and minorities to see if they have ID.
                    Blacks are insulted by the presumption that they do not.

                3. “Democrats are up to stopping the GOP admitted attempts at disenfranchising groups of voters who don’t vote for them. It’s no secret and a proven fact.”

                  Not only is it not a proven fact – it is not even a clear allegation.

                  Both parties engage in efforts to persuade their voters to vote, and to persuade those of the other party to stay home.

                  That is a legitimate part of the election process.

                  Purging voter rolls is a requirement of federal law – though it generally requires a court order to force a state or municiplality to do so.

                  We have numerous places where there are more voters than residents. And far more were there are more registered voters than citizens.

                  Mickey Mouse, Superman and Ronald Reagan are on the registered voter list most everywhere in the country – often many many times.

                  There are people over 120 years old on most registered voter lists – because getting rid of the dead is near impossible, and has been my entire life. We know that actually dead people still vote in every single election – and probably in every single district.

                  We also have problems because some states and municipalities allow non residents and non-citizens to vote in local elections – but they may not vote in federal elections, and no one verifies that a non-citizen does not vote for offices they are not allowed to.

                  We have myriads of people with legal residence in multiple states who can legally vote in both states – but not for federal offices.
                  And nothing at all id done to track that – in fact today there is pretty much no way to track that.

                  The only check on this is entirely private as voter rolls are often made available to various organizations and THEY can compare between states.

                  All the above are means to commit in person fraud. Mail in Fraud is 100 times easier and even harder to catch.

                  “The houses with no one home during the day are usually those who work, apparently another unknown fact to our site idiot.”

                  And this is meaningful in what way ? Do you think that residence verification is done by visiting someone’s house ?

                  When someone claims to be a resident but fails to provide proof of residence – an instate license with an address or a utility bill,
                  They are typically still allowed to vote – even in strict voter ID states with no ID at al you may fill out an affavidivt that you are elegible to vote, and you will be allowed to vote.

                  AFTER THE FACT, counties send out mail notices to the address they provided – usually at 30, 90, 180 days asking for a response from the person allowed to vote seeking to verify that they live where they said they did.
                  About 1/4 of these were returned in NH proving that the voter likely resided where they say they did.
                  About 3/4 were never returned.

                  There is nothing that can be done in these instances – as with MOST in person voter fraud. While it is possible to prove that fraud likely occured, it is not possible to identify the person who committed the fraud catch them and prosecute them.

                  In those states that require ID – copies of the ID are NOT kept. Should you EVER find the person who voted illegally – you would have to prove it – and the only evidence you will have is some poll worker who saw thousands of voters that day – and at every other election and is highly unlikely to remember the person who voted fraudulently.

                  In person voter fraud is commonplace and easy. But it is not large scale – and it is rarely organized, and when it is it is easier to catch.

                  Finding an individual who quietly votes illegally is damn nearly impossible.

                  Nearly all voter fraud prosecutions Are NOT for voters who voted illegally – but people who paid them or fascilitated their doing so.
                  I beleive there were 25 such prosecutions in TX in 2016 – that is 25 people who arranged to have MANY people vote illegally – and managed to get caught. It is generally easier to catch a conspiracy.

                  But mail fraud makes it much easier to have one person vote MANY times, or to have a conspiracy that is near impossible to catch.

                  Consipiracies are generally rolled up because someone near the bottom either says something stupid or gets caught and rolls on everyone.

                  Mail in voter fraud can be done with a very small number of people and even when you can prove it occured you can not identify those who committed the fraud.

                  There are numerous other ways that voter fraud occurs. The above is just a few.

                4. Do you think that anything that you have said actually makes sense ?

                  The GOP has not “admitted” to doing anything illegal.

                  And what has hones where no one is home got to do with anything ?

                5. You make a legitimate point when you point to the small number.

                  And yet, it negates your assertion that no proof of voter fraud exists

                  Moreover when you talk about tapes, there are tapes from Project Veritas which show that in certain states activists and officials are complicit in systemic rules which facilitate undocumented aliens voting, by, essentially, making them documented. but essentially still not qualified voters


                  you might be correct to say that the problem is small, it is not correct to say that it is nonexistent.

                  1. Kurtz, I have always said it is small – very, very, very small. There are other kinds of voter fraud which IDs have nothing to do with.

                    1. I do not care what you have “said”.
                      I care about the facts.

                      I specifically cited over 1000 people who voted twice in Georgia. That is 5 times the number needed to tip the 2000 presidential election.

                      Your claims of how small it is are more wishful thinking than anything else.

                      But regardless of the size – eventually it is biting us in the ass.

                      I would further note that the problems with mail in elections are many orders of magnitude larger.

                      Are those problems Fraud – some of them. But it really does not matter.

                      In relatively small elections 10’s of thousands of mail in ballots have been disputed and rejected.

                      Scale that to a national election and you have a guarantee of disaster.

                      Regardless, When Trump wins and you are screaming election fraud – there will be plenty to remind you how miniscule you claim the problem is.

                      BTB you are a hypocrit – and not just over this issue – and that means that nothing you say is trustworthy.

                  2. BTB might be correct to say the problem is small.

                    But he is incorrect to say it is inconsequential.

                    We already know that very small numbers of voters would have changed thousands of elections in the past 2 decades.

                    Worse from recent experience – Fraud/not – we still know that in numerous primaries in 2020 thus far mail in voting has been disasterous – with error rates in the tens of thousands. Are these fraud ? I do not know. But they are a problem – a VERY LARGE PROBLEM.

                    As to the actual size of the problem of voter Fraud – while I think it is less than most republicans tend to beleive – provable fraud is much greater than democrats accept.

                    What is not disputable is that it is large enough to tip elections and eventually if we do not address it, it is going to bite us in the ass in a very nasty way.

                    Failed elections are incredibly dangerous.

                    This is not something to mess arround with.

                    BTW even oregon – the first state to do all mail in voting – failed to provide 820K registered voters ballots in 2016.
                    That is not fraud – probably. But it is a huge problem.

                    1. The consequences of voter suppression are much larger – exponentially – than by fraud at the voting both, which is the reason the GOP practices it (we have the tapes). This includes the 2000 Florida election where thousands of legitimate voters were disqualified because they might have the same name as a past felon and given the target demographic, the GOP run Fl State Dept didn’t care. I posted the information on this above.

                    2. “The consequences of voter suppression are much larger”

                      Has someone used force to prevent you from voting or change you vote ?
                      If not then I am not interested in your voter supression nonsense.

                      100% of eligable voters NEVER vote.

                      Absolutely that produces a differnet result that if they were FORCED to vote.

                      Your entire “voter supression” argument presumes that anything that changes the outcome of a vote (particularly in a way that impacts your power) is bad.

                      That is FALSE.

                      The requirement for legitimate government is that government “secures liberty” – THAT is the legitimate end of government.
                      NOT some impossible to define concept of the collective will of the people.

                      The declaration of independence makes clear that it is the right of the people to end and replace government that destructive of the ends of securing INDIVDUAL rights.

                      Your whole voter supression argument rests on TWO false premises.
                      The first is that the desired outcome of the majority is the proper end of government.
                      The second is that there is a knowable and objectively identifiable best outcome representing the will of the people.

                      You claim that your nonsensical concept of “voter supression” is significant because it changes outcomes.

                      Of course it does. Myriads of factors change the outcome of an election.

                      The ability of each candidate to persuade voters effects the outcome of the election. The weather in different states effects the outcome of the election. No one doubts that allowing or not allowing fellons to vote effects the outcome of the election.

                      Bloomberg is paying to enable minority fellons in Florida to vote – by onely paying the fines of minority fellons is he “supressing the vote of white fellons” ? By paying the for the votes of minority fellons isn’t he deluting the votes of everyone else ?

                      Put simply EVERYTHING effects the outcome of an election.

                      An action is not legitimate or illegitmate because of its effect on the outcome of the election.

                      The legitimacy of the election ultimately rests on the trust of all – voters and non-voters alike that government is securing their actual rights – not the manufactured nonsense of the left.

                      You do not seem to be able to comprehend the difference between a value and a principle.

                      You also do not seem to be able to comprehend that you are NOT allowed to use FORCE to acheive your values.

                      You may not do so as an individual, and you may not do so collectively.

                      Unless you can point me to an example of another using FORCE to alter votes or whether someone votes, I have absolutely zero interest in what you call “voter supression” – it is a phrase that has no single meaning. Pick 10 people and you will get 12 different oppinions as to what it is.

                      I do not care what it is you think the GOP practices – the FACT is that Both parties go to a great deal of effort to disuade the voters for the other party from voting. That is a NORMAL part of all elections.

                      Republicans seek to get democratic voters – minorities, etc to vote republican. If they can not accomplish that, they seek to get them to not vote. Democrats do EXACTLY the same thing. Mitt Romney lost in 2012 because the Obama campaign successfully persuaded 2.5M normally republican voters to stay home. That is “voter supression” and it is perfectly legal.

                      We have wasted 4 years arguing over Russian “influence” in 2016.
                      The fact is that it was inconsequential, and that if anything it favored Clinton.

                      Regardless, if the Russians (or Swedes or English or Chinese) wish to make efforts covertly or overtly to PERSUADE americans to vote in one way or the other that is both legitimate and outside of our ability to do anything about.

                      The only institution forbidden from engaging in persuasion in a US election is the US government.

                      “This includes the 2000 Florida election where thousands of legitimate voters were disqualified because they might have the same name as a past felon and given the target demographic,”

                      How many people were barred from actually voting ?

                      You continue to conflate removing names from voter registration roles a task that is MANDATED by federal law – though rarely done, with depriving someone the right to vote.

                      If your registration to vote is purged, in every state I am aware of you will still be allowed to vote.
                      This is also true in voter ID states if you attempt to vote without proper ID.

                      Purging names from voting roles does not take away ones voting rights.
                      Pretty universally all that any of these “heinous” things you think Republicans have done, accomplish ONE thing.
                      They make it so that those who ARE actually trying to cheat have a high probability of getting caught AND there will be evidence to prove they voted fraudulently. If you are eligable and you did register at some time in the past, you not only have nothing to fear, you also will be allowed to vote and your vote will count.

                      “the GOP run Fl State Dept didn’t care”
                      There is no difference between FL’s rules regarding fellon’s voting and CA’s and atleast 36 other states.

                      The only difference is that Republicans are NOT going to pay the fines of CA fellons on parole so that they can vote because there is zero chance that will turn CA red.

                      Just to be clear – If Bloomberg wants to pay off the fines of fellons so they can vote – it is his money, he can spend it as he pleases.
                      I think he is very close to running affoul of the FL law – but I think the FL law is unconstitutional.

                      I do not give a damn if Mike pays Voters to vote for Biden – so long as voting remains by secret ballot so that Mike is gambling that people are not just taking his money.

                      Though I suspect that FL felons on parole might be upset in April when they discover they owe taxes on the money they received from Mike.

            2. We already know that if Trump wins in 2020, there will be rioting by the left, and massive claims of voter fraud made by democrats against republicans. Democrats always make this idiotic “voter supression” claim. This despite the fact that minorities actually have been voting in higher percentages than whites.

              1. True.

                However, there are many reasons to believe that it could be a landslide win by Trump. The more of a Trump landslide the less of an effect the violent left will have. That means everyone that might vote for Trump, vote. The larger the victory the less of a chance for democrat complaints that lead to violence. We have had enough violence, looting and burning from them already. Today there is a question if some of the fires out west are democrat arson by Antifa.

                1. You might be right – but honestly the left is so completely insane today that Trump could pull off a several million popular vote victory and a near sweep of the electoral college and the left will Still riot and claim the results are fraud.

                  We are still dealing with the collusion delusion nonsense.

                  We STILL have idiots selling Trump as a russian favorite – despite the total illogic and idiocy of that.

                  Have we had any Uranium 1 deals under Trump ? Didn’t Trump give the Ukraine actual military weapons – rather than blankets to fight Russia with ? Didn;t Trump unleash the Fraken and tank the Russian economy ?
                  Didn;t Trump guarantee EU Energy in return for the EU taking responsibility for more of its own defense – pissing off Russia.

                  Did Trump tower moscow actually get built ?

                  There is no sane reason to beleive that Russia wanted Trump to beat Clinton.

                  Yet the left has persuaded many americans of that nonsense.

                  Why do you expect sanity from the left if Trump scores a decisive victory in November ?

                  The only good news is the left is their own worst enemy.

                  1. Based on the discussion one can look at things in various ways. Rioting post election I believe will be relative to how strongly Trump wins. The stronger the win the less violence.

                    There are underlying factions of discontent, democrats and democrat anarchists. If the loss is big I don’t think the democrats will be quite so anxious to see their neighborhoods burned and destroyed. The anarchists will lose soft support of numbers and will be easier to manage. Democrats might even be willing to support Trump to quiet things down. We have seen this before.

                    A democrat win means democrats have the tail of the tiger. Most of our leaders are such cowards that they might cower in front of the tiger and the nation will radically change until strong men and women step up.

                    Liars like BTB will have little to say and the Stupid like Anonymous the Stupid will go on with their jerky lives until being stepped on like an insignificant cockroach that was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

                    1. Liars and Stupid people like Allan will go on with their jerky lives until being stepped on like an insignificant cockroach that was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

                    2. I expect fairly bad rioting post election.

                      I honestly think we are watching the meltdown of the democratic party. Nothing is forever. We will not devolve to a 1 party system.
                      But I beleive we are watching an epic disaster for the DNC and that it will take a long time to recover.

                      The democratic party is close to fracturing – the far left – whether Sanders, Warren, …. and the BLM/Antifa crowd can not win a national election. At the same time they are unable and unwilling to give an inch. And democrats can not win an election without the far left.
                      Conversely the far left is increasingly alienating the rest of the party.

                      Republicans starting in 2016 gave taken ownership of blue collar workers. Biden is an effort to woo them back – but he is failing at that.
                      He is too much of a typical pol, and Trump has made blue collar workers Trust him.

                      The “Trump is a liar” crowd does not grasp that Trump has kept the vast majority of his campaign promises as far as those he made them too are concerned. And that is HUGE. and the left does not understand – all the ranting about Trump lying etc – has little effect on people who see Trump doing what he promised them he would do.

                      I do not agree with Trump on several things – but the left does not grasp that integrity, trust are not rooted in agreement. They are rooted in doing what you say you will do.

                  2. John, there was nothing but ad hominem in my comment because I want to highlight how often Allan insults people, so I take his ad hominem and direct it back at him.

                    If you don’t want me to repeat Allan’s insults, convince Allan to stop insulting people.

                    1. “John, there was nothing but ad hominem in my comment because I want to highlight how often Allan insults people, so I take his ad hominem and direct it back at him.

                      If you don’t want me to repeat Allan’s insults, convince Allan to stop insulting people.”

                      Unfortunately all of us lob insults on occasion. But some of us also make arguments – rarely those on the left.
                      I have not noticed Allan being particularly prone to ad hominem.

                      I have noticed that those on the left think that an argument using reason logic and facts that demonstrates they are wrong is an insult.

                      Sometimes the actual facts and truth are insulting.

                      As an example we have a political fixation on fascists and Nazi’s and have had for several decades – though it is much worse today.

                      But it is those that are calling others Fascists who are actual fascists and those calling others Nazi’s who most closely resemble Nazi’s.

                      Calling most of those on the left fascist is both an insult and most of the time true.

                      Calling Trump or Republicans fascists is a hilarious example of how completely uneducated the left is.

                2. All I’ve been doing is repeating Allan’s ad hominem back to him, John, replacing his name for me with his name.
                  Do you object to his ad hominem?

                  1. Anonymous the Stupid ad hominems are not a good way to communicate but there are all sorts of people on this blog that are here and are unwilling to have honest dialogue. You are one of them though all you do is act silly with no points based on fact.

                    Others prefer to use a broad brush and label everyone as “deplorables” in their own fashion. When their responses are broad brush such as deplorables then all bets are off. That is a clear indication that real discussion is off the table. Of course that is only part of the problem. We have those that deny the violence behind what we are seeing today and others that lie on a continuous basis. They even change their alises over and over again sometimes having more than one alias at a time so they can pat themselves on the back. They shouldn’t even be on a discussion blog but this site is almost totallyl free speech which is OK by me. I’m used to dealing with people face to face and those that act like you or the others would be thrown out on their faces.

                    I don’t like the use of ad hominems any more than John, but I will use them. The nation is spiraling in a bad direction where one side weaponized the intelligence communities and the media has been lying on a continuous basis. Those good democrats and republicans mostly remain silent afraid they will lose their jobs or offend the groups that fund them or later provide them with cushy jobs. They need to wake up and think about the people and the nation. That sometimes requires things that aren’t nice.

                    As far as you go our only interactions occur because you wish to be Stupid and interject your Stupid comments where they don’t belong. You could garner a bit of respect if fact were interjected in those comments for then there would be something worth writing but you prefer act Stupid and live up to your name Anonymous the Stupid.

                    I am fairly sure it was with you wheret we had a dicussion about the Richardson skiing accident. I was happy to oblige your discussion until you posted things that were inaccurate or out of context and until you started to act Stupid. You were offended that someone knew a lot more about the subject than you. In fact part of the reason for pointing out that accident were to highlight the differences between Canadian and American care in the delivery systems, centralized vs decentralized. That went far over your head as did the medical implications. I think we might have had some other prior discussions because you quote things that you either haven’t read completely or you don’t understand. I can’t be sure, but it doesn’t matter to me because when you pick up the alias of Anonymous you are picking up the waste of other posters.

                    You can remain Anonymous the Stupid or you can improve your station in life. No matter to me for I have no problem toying with you or ignoring you. The choice is yours.

                    1. You can remain Allan the Stupid or you can improve your station in life. No matter to me for I have no problem toying with you or ignoring you. The choice is yours.

                    2. Anonymous the Stupid, why is it my bet was on you continuing to be Stupid? I thought you had a slight chance of learning to be normal but Stupid it is. Continue onward.

                    3. Allan the Stupid, ad hominems are not a good way to communicate but there are all sorts of people on this blog that are here and are unwilling to have honest dialogue. You are one of them

                    4. Allan the Stupid, why is it my bet was on you continuing to be Stupid? I thought you had a slight chance of learning to be normal but Stupid it is. Continue onward.

                  2. If I say “Hitler is a fascist” – that is a statement of fact.

                    If I “change the names” and say “mother Theresa is a fascist” that is both false and ad hominem.

              2. Anonymous, we have “lost” 2 presidential elections to losers and there has been no rioting. Your party has won only one presidential vote out of the last 6 elections, and in response to 2 of those elections broke all records for filibusters in our 250 year history and in another one stole a SC seat. One only imagines it’s reaction to winning the popular vote but not the EC. Further, whites vote in higher %s than blacks and Latinos.

                Your post is therefore, mostly, if not all BS.

                1. Outrage was expressed all over by leftists with signs that said “Kill Bush” The left is violently inclined.

                  But this time the loss was to an outsider, Trump, not an insider. Trump threatens the perks and contributions to all insiders so the left is showing its ugliest features and some of the established right is happy to see them do so.

                  1. No, signs that said “Kill Bush” were not “all over”. I get around and follow the news and I never saw or heard about these signs. Did some idiots make them? Probably. There are f..king idiots of all types.

                    Did Al Gore suck it up and give a gracious and even humorous concession speech offering his help and friendship to Bush and saying we need to unite? F..k yes you mental pygmy. Here it is.

                    1. PS We all look forward to Trump stepping up to the plate and being a man when he loses.

                      Wanna’ bet?

                    2. “PS We all look forward to Trump stepping up to the plate and being a man when he loses. Wanna’ bet?”

                      We don’t have to bet. We already know from the day Trump won Clinton and the left refused to accept it. They did all sorts of things and instead of responding in kind Trump responded in a completely legal fashion a fashion quite unknown to democrats.

                    3. Who cares, He will leave, and we will prepare for the left to Fup as usual and to get tossed out.

                      What will not happen is Trump using DOJ and FBI and CIA to plant landmines in government to sabatoge his successor.

                    4. Btb, that you didn’t see enough of the Kill Bush signs is a sign of your ignorance.

                      You say: “Did Al Gore suck it up”

                      Apparently you can’t read very well so I will repeat what I said.

                      But this time the loss was to an outsider, Trump, not an insider. Trump threatens the perks and contributions to all insiders so the left is showing its ugliest features and some of the established right is happy to see them do so.

                    5. I take it you read that idiot manifesto signed by a mess of permanent government types and a scatter of Republican pols (Wm. Webster among them). Read through it, then try to figure out what the 10th planet is. It’s impossible to believe that anyone of baseline sophistication would subscribe to such tripe. They’re either people who were never appropriate for the positions they had or they’re manufacturing a look squirrel diversion. What is it?

                    6. Did Al Gore suck it up ?

                      After spending weeks putting the country through hell – i would not call that gracious or sucking it up.

                      Regardless, you will not be losing to Bush. And this is not 2000,
                      This is 2020.

                      You spent the past 4 years selling yourself the collusion dellusion.

                      It is still beyond your grasp that what occured in 2016 was WORSE THAN WATERGATE.

                      It has taken you months to condemn the violence – tepidly.

                      In your world it is OK to blind people with lasers, to shoot pellet guns at them to throw rocks and bricks at them. To burn things down, to kick people in the head – gay people no less, but it is not OK to use tear gas against rioters.

                      Though aparently it is OK to use Tear Gas against Branch Davidians.

                  1. And who shoved a loaded pistol into the stomach of a pregnant woman to rob her.

                    Not quite a model citizen since then. Should have been dead or in prison long ago.

          3. “John you previously claimed that busloads of college kids were brought into NH to vote illegally ”

            Given that you start by misrepresenting what I have said, the rest of what you say is useless.

            What I posted was that 6500 voters in the 2016 NH election claimed to be NH residents on election day. That 90 days (and 6 months) later 4500 of those voters still had not established proof of NH residence.

            I was careful about specifically what I wrote – those numbers come from NH elections data.

            I SPECULATED that many of these were College students – students going to college in NH, but NOT NH residents.

            I NEVER said anyone was BUSSED IN, I did not even say that the 4500 non-resident voters were college students – though it is likely most were.

            And no you have NEVER posted an article “disproving” that or any claim about election fraud.

            I have been arguing for securing our elections since before the 2000 election.

            I am very knowledgeable with respect to the election process and the opportunities for Fraud, and the means to prevent those.

            The OPINIONS of those claiming that election fraud is not a problem are NONSENSE.

            Election Fraud is a problem so long as any significant portion of people are suspicious that fraud occurs.

            If you construct a means to conduct an election that is a gigantic black box – that no one knows what is occurring on the inside,

            and you claim that nothing fraudulent goes on in the black box, and numerous experts affirm that nothing fraudulent goes on.

            You still have a massive problem so long as lots of people do not trust the results.

            Further the problem with election fraud is becoming more serious.

            More and more elections are closer. In the past where nail biters were uncommon and most victories were indesputable fraud did not matter.

            It is only a matter of time until we have an election that hinges are decided the scale of fraud on either side.

            You also presume that the fraud must be by the campaign. There are so many large groups with a serious interest in the outcome of many elections – that you can be certain that if fraud is possible, and you can not be caught it will occur.

            Further as we saw in 2016 – there are potentialy powerful players whose interest is disruption. Who do not care if they get caught.

            What will you do if in 2020 either the chinese or the Russians or both print up 10,000 forged ballots and mail them out ?

            That alone would thoroighly disrupt the election.

            1. Btb formerly Jan F., Anon with numerous other aliases some posting at the same time is a putz, plain and simple. Example:

              What follows is a small portion of a long article which demonstrates why we must better secure the voting process. 28 million mail-in-ballots went mising.

              Between 2012 and 2018, 28.3 million mail-in ballots remain unaccounted for, according to data from the federal Election Assistance Commission. The missing ballots amount to nearly one in five of all absentee ballots and ballots mailed to voters residing in states that do elections exclusively by mail. …

              A significant increase in mail-in voting this fall could greatly incentivize “ballot harvesting,” where third parties collect mail-in ballots on behalf of voters and deliver them to election officials. There’s long been a consensus that such a practice incentivizes fraud, and ballot harvesting is illegal in most of the country. …

              There’s little doubt that as the number of mail-in ballots increases, so does fraud. A 2012 report in The New York Times noted that voter fraud involving mail-in ballots “is vastly more prevalent than the in-person voting fraud that has attracted far more attention, election administrators say. …

              ” Poor, elderly, and minority communities are most likely to be preyed upon by so-called ballot “brokers.” …

              But PILF obtained voter data from Oregon, the first state to adopt voting by mail exclusively, for the 2012 and 2018 elections and checked it against census data. Of the 7 million ballots the state sent out in those two elections, some 871,000 ballots are totally unaccounted for. …

              Losing only one of eight ballots, as opposed to the national average of one in five, may be the result of Oregon having a more accurate listing of voters’ addresses than many other states, but that’s still a very high percentage of missing ballots…


            2. Already known as a crackpot Libertarian gas bag, John Say here demonstrates he also lacks any integrity. He has said twice now that NH was rife with voter fraud in 2016 and in that first post parroted his hero Trump on supposed bus loads of out of state college students voting there. I have now twice posted results of NH’s investigations of these charges, which clearly refute both the Liar in Chief – big surprise there! – and his acolyte John. John is too small to correct his earlier misstatements , a sure sign that he is not worth anyone’s time and confirms that he should not be taken seriously.

              1. “Already known as a crackpot Libertarian gas bag, John Say here demonstrates he also lacks any integrity.”

                Btb, the mentally ill often accuse the doctors and nursing staff of being crazy precisely because they are mentally ill. That is your problem.

                You can’t think past your nose so you lie and libel to get your point across. You disagree with John Say and on occasion I have as well. However, even where I disagree with John I have to say he is a man of integrity who so happens to be extremely knowledgeable. Agree or disagree, one needs to listen to what he is saying and why.

                1. Allan, the mentally ill often accuse the doctors and nursing staff of being crazy precisely because they are mentally ill. That is your problem. You can’t think past your nose so you lie and libel to get your point across.

                  1. One might think you are Stupid or mentally ill based on your replies. I think it is more of an obsessive compulsive disorder mixed in with low intelligence. What do you think Anonymous the Stupid?

                    1. One might think you are Stupid or mentally ill based on your replies, Allan. I think it is more of an obsessive compulsive disorder mixed in with low intelligence.

                    2. Allan cites facts. You substitute oppinions for facts and are unable to tell the difference.

                      It is your intelligence that is suspect.

                    3. John, I simply quoted Allan and added his name.

                      That you criticize my comment without understanding that you’re actually criticizing what Allan wrote is quite amusing.

                    4. “John, I simply quoted Allan”

                      Anonymous the Stupid, the words you quoted were already said but with the comment were facts and reason. Your problem is not what I say to another but that you are unable to provide any facts relevant to what you wish to do. That is why you carry the name Anonymous the Stupid empty comment after empty comment.

                    5. I do not care.

                      If your comment is nothing but ad hominem – that reflects badly on you.

                      If as you say your comment is merely a reflection of Allan’s – and Allan’s is false,
                      Then the same criticism applies to you.

                      But as an example BTB is constantly claiming that I said college students were bussed to NH in 2016.

                      That is FALSE – I did not say that – I also did not say that did NOT occur.

                      What I said was that 6500 people were allowed to vote in 2016 who did not confirm eligibility – i.e. NH residence at the time of the election.
                      Of those aprox. 2000 were determined to be residents within the next 9 months.

                      The remaining 4500 were never confirmed as residents.

                      This does not PROVE 4500 cases of fraud – though it absolutely confirms atleast some fraud.

                      But it absolutely proves that our elections are subject to the possibility of fraud on a scale large enough to change outcomes.

                      Regardless, my point is that BTB is doubly lying.

                      First he is calling me a liar – and the facts demonstrate that is false.
                      Second he is lying about what I have said.

                      Should BTB decide to change the names and post the same claim, BTB would be lying a third time.

                      What onje person can truthfully say about another is not autmatically true when said in reverse.

                      If you say I am scotch-Irish descent – that is true.
                      If I say that of you – it may be false.

                  2. I have provided numerous examples of the real inperson Fraud you and BTB claim does not happen.

                    I have provided proof that there is good reason to beleive there was sufficient fraud in NH in 2016 to alter the outcome of the election.

                    And you still insist on denying the facts and calling me a liar.

                    If i am lying – then the data from the NH department of state is a lie.
                    If i am a liar than numerous media outlets including Wapo and NYT have lied about voter fraud.

                    If i am a liar – then numerous people caught on video admitting to voter fraud are actually lying.

                    I would suggest contemplating Occams razor.

                    The most likely explanation is that I am not lying, that the numerous sources I have cited are telling the truth, that the data is what it is,
                    and that those claiming that Voter Fraud is nothing to be concerned about are clueless.

                2. Allan,

                  I beleive that Voter Fraud is committed more frequently by democrats than republicans.

                  But that is a beleif – it really does not matter which party commits more voter fraud.

                  I also beleive that the majority of inperson fraud is individuals acting on their own. It is double voting, or voting using the identify of someone who is dead or does not exist.

                  The data from Georgia – involving 1000 cases of double voting was 58% democrats.

                  But that still means 420 Republicans committed election fraud.

                  I do not beleive that most voter Fraud is directed by either party – it is the acts of individuals outside of their party.

                  But that does NOT mean that NO fraud is done by people affiliated with parties.

                  I was terrified in 2000 that Bush Gore would turn into a fight over which party committed the most fraud.
                  With an election that was decided by 180 votes there can be little doubt that there was more than 180 fraudulent votes cast by each party in 2000 in FL. An election dispute worse than 2000 would tear the country apart right now.

                  And we appear to be deliberately headed in that direction.

                  While inperson fraud is mostly individual – primarily because the danger of getting caught though low is much higher than mail fraud.
                  And because catching fraud that was conducted by a party aparatiche – regardless of the party would be a monumentally destructive scandle for that party.

                  Most mail in Fraud is actually conducted by the parties – or atleast party operatives.

                  And none of this touches whether a small number of less than scrupulous businesses might engage in voter fraud if they knew they could not get caught. as a means to secure lucrative contracts – or unions might do the same. It is not like unions are unfamiliar with voting fraud having honed their skills in union elections.

                  Finally there is the real possibility that either China or Russia or Iran could forge ballots and get 10,000 into our elections.

                  It would not matter whether those ballots ever counted. If we found even a small number of clearly forged ballots from a foreign source the whole election would come into question.

                  And if too many people doubt the outcome – we have no legitimate government.

                  The tools exist to eliminate election fraud. Most are not even all that hard. Voter ID is an important one of those.

                  We need to do this because we are playing russian roulette and one day soon we are going to pull the trigger on a loaded cylinder.
                  And we will have a crisis that dwarfs any we have had before.

                  BTB and most democrats are hiding from this.
                  But it is coming regardless.

                  Eventually we are going to have a very close election and compelling evidence of fraud that likely would change the outcome.

                  Overall i hated the Bush V. Gore SCOTUS decision. There was no real basis in the constitution for the decision – but there was no basis for what was occuring in FL.

                  One of the problems is that elections are extra constitutional. Tbhe authority of government, the authority of the constitution itself comes FROM elections. There is a major problem with Government arbitrating the results of an election. That is why the rules must be clear,
                  and the process has to be as bullet proof as possible and has to involve government as little as possible.

                  Courts and election boards can not decide out elections. Legitimate Voters must.

                  1. “Allan,

                    I beleive that Voter Fraud is committed more frequently by democrats than republicans.”

                    I have no doubt that what you have said is true. I agree and beleive voting is a priviledge that need not have all effort removed. In person ballots that contain on paper proof are needed along with strong penalities to disuade anyone or any group from election fraud.

                    Awhile back DSS provided a detailed way of managing our elections that I thought was quite well done.

                    1. Not only should elections not have all effort removed – voting should be hard.

                      People should not vote unless it is important, and government should be so limited that it really does not matter who is elected.

                      I think the constitution is wonderful as written. I do not think it is perfect.
                      But it must be followed as written – or changed.

                      If the federal government were actually limited to the powers enumerated in the constitution the left would be unable to do much of anything absent ammendments to the constitution.

                      PPACA as an example violates the contracts clause.

                      This is one major problem I have with SCOTUS.

                      SCOTUS does not seem to grasp that the actions of government can not offend ANY part of the constitution.

                      It is NOT sufficient that in one place the constitution does not prohibit something – if in another it does.

                      The contracts clause prohibits both the federal government and the states from interfering in the voluntary agreements between people.
                      As with all parts of the constitution there MIGHT be some rare exceptions – such as one can not voluntarily agree to become a slave.
                      But those exceptions are limited.

                      Regardless, if the constitution was followed there would be little reason to vote.

                    2. I wish it were possible to arrange that election day everywhere in the US had torrential rain all day throughout the country and that all voting had to be in person on election day and therefore only those most perceverant would vote.

                    3. Do you have a link to these voting recomendations ?

                      It is not actually all that hard to improve elections.

                      There are a small number of important criteria:

                      1). it is less important to prevent misconduct, than to assure that those doing it are caught.
                      2). The most critical part of voting is the protection of the actual ballots. So long as those are secure, all counting and reporting malfeasance can be caught. But it is important that the cast ballots are preserved and secured, that the can not be modified, added to or subtracted from.

                      3). When in doubt – find a solution that does not involve government. To the largest extent possible, election commissioners, courts, etc should NOT be making determinations that effect election outcomes. As an example rather than endless recounts, if there is no victor with a margin greater than the error rate for the particular election method – do not recount, do not ask the courts to decide which ballots are valid – just have a runnoff – let the voters resolve the issue.

                      4). Protect the courts FROM elections. Wherever possible do NOT have courts making decisions about elections. Our courts are important and elections are incredibly corrupting. As an example I think all court decisions regarding Gerry mandering should be null and void.
                      The constitution specifically delegated control of federal elections to the state LEGISLATORS. Not the States, not the governors, not the State courts. Keep political corruption within the legislature. There is no objectively correct way to determine congressional districts. The process is highly political arbitrary and caprecious. If the voters of a state do not like their congressional districts – vote the legislature out.
                      Independent commissions, courts, algorithms, etc do NOTHING to make the process better – they just substitute one set of political values for another. ;We see an example of this whenever the left fixates on the electoral college and popular vote. Just as there is not a right way to select a congressional district, there is not a right way to select a president. The electoral college has specific effects – I like most of those. If you do not and you wish for elections by popular vote – then change the constitution.

                      5). as a broad generalization – beyond even elections the left has this idiotic view that laws are magical. That if you pass one everyone magically conforms. That is BS. All laws must be enforce to get broad compliance. Enforce means FORCE, men with guns. As Mao said all power comes from the barrel of a gun. More laws ALWAYS mean one of two things – more law enforcement, or more discretion in law enforcement. BOTH are inherently evil. The left is ranting about “defunding the police” – well rationalize our traffic laws, and get rid of most victimless crimes – like drugs, and prostitution, and you will be able to reduce the scale of police by 1/3 to 1/2,

                  2. Elections should not be difficult to partake in, and especially if that difficulty affects more those of less means, or particular demographic groups.

                    1. John describes a process which penalizes the elderly, those with limited transportation, kids, and with jobs they cannot leave without penalty.

                    2. Every law in existance has disparate impact – your argument is garbage.

                      BTW I specifically said that I would hold all elections in person over a single 24 hour period that started and ended at the same time everwhere in the country. Unless your job requires you to work 24hrs straight – you would be able to vote.

                      Further I have zero problems with you or others “bussing” legitimate voters to the polls. Contra your rants.

                      I do not care whether you are a student, whether you have transportation, or how you get to the polls.

                      I care whether you are eligable to vote in the location you are voting, and whether you are doing so freely.

                      How you get to the polls is your problem.

                      As to your claims that the elderly and those without Transportation – the most disadvantaged would be rural republicans.

                      If voters in urban areas are not in easy walking distance of the polls that is a catastrophic failure of democratic government.

                    3. If you call them up, both the Republican and the Democrats will supply transpo to the polls for you. In my state, your job must give 2 hours off to vote if you require it.

                    4. “Elections should not be difficult”

                      Let’s hear a couple of comments about democracy from Thomas Jefferson.

                      The cornerstone of democracy rests on the foundation of an educated electorate. ___Thomas Jefferson

                      A properly functioning democracy depends on an informed electorate.
                      ___Thomas Jefferson

                      Being educated and informed is not easy. Do you believe democracy survives with an uneducated and uniformed public?

                    5. Allan,

                      I agree with your point. I was only going to provide the link to the following, but these paragraphs really get to the heart of the election process. I think of it this way; think of all the ways we have established laws and regulations, licensing requirements, continuing education requirements, minimum standards requirements for nearly everything imaginable. All of which it is argued is necessary for what, the public good? To protect consumers, citizens, etc? But when it comes to the right to vote, when it comes to electing the very people that create the laws, that administer the laws, that create the regulations, that look out for the public good, those who have the duty to secure our rights; those people expect an election process that has the lowest bar possible to enter the franchise. That makes no sense.

                      Who Shall Judge?
                      The followers of Rousseau’s school of thought — who consider themselves far advanced, but whom I consider twenty centuries behind the times — will not agree with me on this. But universal suffrage — using the word in its strictest sense — is not one of those sacred dogmas which it is a crime to examine or doubt. In fact, serious objections may be made to universal suffrage.

                      In the first place the word universal conceals a gross fallacy. For example, there are 36 million people in France. Thus, to make the right of suffrage universal, there should be 36 million voters. But the most extended system permits only 9 million people to vote. Three persons out of four are excluded. And more than this, they are excluded by the fourth. This fourth person advances the principle of incapacity as his reason for excluding the others.

                      Universal suffrage means, then, universal suffrage for those who are capable. But there remains this question of fact: Who is capable? Are minors, females, insane persons, and persons who have committed certain major crimes the only ones to be determined incapable?

                      The Reason Why Voting Is Restricted
                      A closer examination of the subject shows us the motive which causes the right of suffrage to be based upon the supposition of incapacity. The motive is that the elector or voter does not exercise this right for himself alone, but for everybody. The most extended elective system and the most restricted elective system are alike in this respect. They differ only in respect to what constitutes incapacity. It is not a difference of principle, but merely a difference of degree. If, as the republicans of our present-day Greek and Roman schools of thought pretend, the right of suffrage arrives with one’s birth, it would be an injustice for adults to prevent women and children from voting. Why are they prevented? Because they are presumed to be incapable. And why is incapacity a motive for exclusion? Because it is not the voter alone who suffers the consequences of his vote; because each vote touches and affects everyone in the entire community; because the people in the community have a right to demand some safeguards concerning the acts upon which their welfare and existence depend.

                      The Answer Is to Restrict the Law
                      I know what might be said in answer to this; what the objections might be. But this is not the place to exhaust a controversy of this nature. I wish merely to observe here that this controversy over universal suffrage (as well as most other political questions) which agitates, excites, and overthrows nations, would lose nearly all of its importance if the law had always been what it ought to be. In fact, if law were restricted to protecting all persons, all liberties, and all properties; if law were nothing more than the organized combination of the individual’s right to self defense; if law were the obstacle, the check, the punisher of all oppression and plunder — is it likely that we citizens would then argue much about the extent of the franchise?

                      Under these circumstances, is it likely that the extent of the right to vote would endanger that supreme good, the public peace? Is it likely that the excluded classes would refuse to peaceably await the coming of their right to vote? Is it likely that those who had the right to vote would jealously defend their privilege? If the law were confined to its proper functions, everyone’s interest in the law would be the same. Is it not clear that, under these circumstances, those who voted could not inconvenience those who did not vote?

                      The Fatal Idea of Legal Plunder
                      But on the other hand, imagine that this fatal principle has been introduced: Under the pretense of organization, regulation, protection, or encouragement, the law takes property from one person and gives it to another; the law takes the wealth of all and gives it to a few — whether farmers, manufacturers, ship owners, artists, or comedians. Under these circumstances, then certainly every class will aspire to grasp the law, and logically so.

                      The excluded classes will furiously demand their right to vote — and will overthrow society rather than not to obtain it. Even beggars and vagabonds will then prove to you that they also have an incontestable title to vote.

                    6. “Elections should not be difficult to partake in, and especially if that difficulty affects more those of less means, or particular demographic groups.”

                      Why ? There is no constitutional or other requirement that elections be easy.

                      The 14th amendment prevents laws that single people out based on race.
                      It does not preclude generally applicable laws that have disparate demographic intent.

                      Progressive income taxes disparately effect wealthy white people, and yet SCOTUS has found them constitutional.

                      At this moment in time most felons are minorities. But laws restricting felons from voting are constitutional regardless.
                      In 4 decades most felons may be white.

                      Your thinking is incredibly shallow. The constraints you wish to create would ultimately produce a mess that could not work.

                      All criminal laws as an example disparately effect a single demographic group – criminals.

                    7. John, I apologize for not being up on your comprehensive plan for election reform – by the way, a sure winner, along Olly’s, if the GOP get’s it into whenever they decide to have a platform again (an unnecessary encumbrance for a personality cult) – but if you don’t get it in your first 2 paragraphs, I’m not reading it and I doubt anyone else is either. Why would they?

                    8. but if you don’t get it in your first 2 paragraphs, I’m not reading it and I doubt anyone else is either. Why would they?

                      It seems as though you need an EASY button for more than just voting. Admitting you limit your intake of information was not necessary. It’s obvious. You’ve demonstrated a willful ignorance for years.

                    9. Btb, John mostly posts facts throughout his responses but it seems you are allergic to facts. These are not lies and one knows that because at random you can pick out a fact and dispute it. John will have evidence behind what he says that is factual and not based on a circle of opinions based on one another. He also won’t repeat disproven facts something that you do over and over again.

                    10. Allan,
                      Book described more than two paragraphs as problem. This of course is easily resolved by eliminating the use of separate paragraphs.

                    11. “John, I apologize for not being up on your comprehensive plan for election reform”
                      I have no such thing.

                      The most fundimental issue is grasping that the actual integrity of elections is important.

                      Those on the left like yourself address elections purely from the perspective of what empowers your leaders.
                      Does anyone doubt that if immigrants favored republicans the left would be anti-immigrant ?

                      If minorities swing to support republicans – democrats will oppose minority voting.

                      If Fellons favored republicans – democrats would oppose fellons voting.

                      All election related arguments made by the left are entirely about what benefits my side.
                      Not what is right or right for the country.

                      I do not have a “plan for election reform” – I have goals – elections that can be trusted.

                      There are many ways to improve that. Some are better than others. But most anything that results in improvement is a good thing.

                      One of the things you fail to grasp is that government gains its power and legitimacy from elections.

                      If you wish to act proactively – to expand government power, you must:
                      Not merely win,
                      but do so by super majorities,
                      deliver on what you promise
                      Win the election that has results that can be trusted.

                      With few exceptions Trump’s actions are to contract government power rather than expand it.
                      You do not need the same mandate to do that.

                    12. “by the way, a sure winner, along Olly’s, if the GOP get’s it into whenever they decide to have a platform again (an unnecessary encumbrance for a personality cult) ”

                      Are you unclear about the Republican platform ?
                      Nearly the entire country grasps that – something that is not clear regarding democrats.

                      More of the same as the past 4 years.
                      More deregulation.
                      More limits to government.
                      Shifting foreign policy from Russian and the mideast to Asia and China.
                      More foreign policy that is focused on the interests of the US.
                      More cheaper energy,
                      More jobs – especially for those near the bottom.
                      More growth.

                      Trump is running on the same policy that got him elected in 2016.

                      You keep claiming Trump is a personality cult ? Very odd claim.
                      Trump won in 2016 despite misgivings about him and whether he would do as he claimed because Hillary was such a rotten scoundrel.
                      And because democrats had alienated significant parts of their own base.

                      In 2020 Trump has a record of delivering on most of his promises.

                      While Biden has lots of problems including substantial corruption. Biden is not the rotten scoundrel that Clinton is.
                      At the same time, in 2020 Trump is someone whose promises you can take to the bank.

                      People are voting for Trump in 2020 because they support most of his platform and he has a track record of delivering on promises.

                      How about Biden ? Does anyone know what he stands for ? Democrats have a gigantic fault line between the far left and democratic moderates. Purportedly Biden is a moderate. But watching this election can you tell ?

                      Biden is trying to dance on a tightrope – keeping both the far left and moderate democrats behind him. Because he can not afford even small defections from either.

                      He must convince each half of his voters that he is really going to do as they want, and not as the other half wants.

                      To such an extent that no one knows where he stands on anything.

                    13. “but if you don’t get it in your first 2 paragraphs, I’m not reading it and I doubt anyone else is either.?”

                      Read as much or little as you wish

                      But do not expect sympathy when 4 paragraphs in to the democratic platform you are cast into slavery but you choose not to read that far before voting.

              2. “Already known as a crackpot Libertarian gas bag, John Say here demonstrates he also lacks any integrity. He has said twice now that NH was rife with voter fraud in 2016”

                No BTB that AGAIN is NOT what I said – in my prior response – I was polite and said you misrepresented my remarks – no more polite.
                This is called LYING.

                I do not think I said anything about bussing voters – though there is PV video of democratic campaign operatives admitting to Bussing voters accross state lines. Regardless, I explicitly never said ANYTHING about bussing students into New Hampshire to vote.

                Maybe that happened – maybe it did not. But what I EXPLICTLY refered to is that on election day NH had about 6500 ballots from people who CLAIMED to be NH residents that election officials were not able to verify as residents at the time. These voters provided NH addresses, but they did not match their ID or they did not have NH drivers licenses or for other reasons NH election officials identified them for further verification of residence. Of the 6500 over the next 6 months NH was able to identify that 2000 of them were actually NH residents. These were issues where someone failed to update the address on their drivers license or failed to get an NH license after moving to NH.

                But 4500 of those with questionable NH residence 4500 were never verified as NH resident by NH – they did not respond to inquiries maile in their name to the address they provided as their residence.

                This does NOT prove 4500 unstances of fraud – it is near certain there are innocent explanations for SOME of these.
                But it is also likely that a substantial portion are some kind of Fraud.

                Could they be Students bussed across state lines to vote illegally – possibly – though I never claimed that and your assertion that I did is a LIE.

                The most likely explantion – which I clearly Identified as SPECULATION, i.e, possible even likely but not proven was that these were out of state students attending Colleges in NH. And thus not entitled to vote in NH, but fully entitled to vote in the state that is their actual home.

                Anyone of them could have done what was necescary to become an actual NH resident – and NH provided significant financial incentives for them to do that. But they chose not to. And by choosing not to they also chose not the be able to vote in NH and doing so is FRAUD.

                And there are no busses involved.

                This would be no different from people who live in NH and work in Boston voting in MA.

                “and in that first post parroted his hero Trump on supposed bus loads of out of state college students voting there.”
                Trump is not my hero.
                Students being bussed into NH is speculation on YOUR part – not something I have ever said.

                When you make moral accusations of another – when you accuse them of misrepresentation, lying, false statements or other moral failure – the burden of proof is on you.

                Everyone here can read my posts. In no comment did I assert as a fact what you claim I said.

                Though my speculation regarding NH out of state students is likely true, I never asserted it as a fact – we do not know the facts about the 4500 people who voted in 2016 in NH whose residence was never verified.

                There are many possible explanations – some fraud, some not. And each one of those 4500 may be slightly different than the next.

                Regardless, it is certain that a large portion of the 4500 are actual fraud of some kind.

                Nor does anyone know for certain who those 4500 voted for. They could have mostly voted for Trump, they could have mostly voted for Clinton. What we do know is that the NH presidential election turned on half that number of votes, and the NH Senate election turned on half that again.

                What is certain is that the actual outcome of several 2016 NH elections is legitimately questionable and you are unable to admit that.

                Further you do not understand that it is NOT provable Fraud that matters – it is doubt about the legitimacy of the result.

                The ultimate purpose of election laws is not explicity to prevent Fraud. It is to significantly enhance the trust in the election process.
                Without Trust – government does not have the consent of the governed, and the government is not legitimate.

                You should understand this – as you waste alot of time trying to persuade people to distrust the outcome in 2016.

                You rant that by criteria that are not the constitutional criteria governing our elections that the result was different.
                You rant that faux Russian interference tipped the election – do you know a single person whose vote was changed because of any foreign influence ?

                You understand the basics of the fact that Trust in the outcome is critical to governing, but you fail to grasp that is a two way street.

                Following the rules matters – if you do not like the rules persuade people to change them. Those rules include not voting if you are not eligable to vote, not voting twice, not voting as a different person, and not voting in a state you are not a resident of.

                “I have now twice posted results of NH’s investigations of these charges”
                No you have not. You have posted dubious claims that there was inconsequential actual fraud in NH.

                The FACT is that 4500 people voted in NH and NH has no idea whether those people were residents of not.
                In fact it knows very little about them.
                You refuted nothing.

                “which clearly refute both the Liar in Chief – big surprise there! – and his acolyte John.”
                Nope, and nope.

                “John is too small to correct his earlier misstatements”
                I have stated clear facts.

                You have repeatedly misrepresented those statements of fact – transformed them into claims with little resmblance to what I actually said, and then used the absence of NH fraud prosecutions as some stupid proof that what PLAINLY happened did not.

                People drive without wearing seat belts all the time. We do not presume that they are arrested, charged and convicted every single time they do.

                Possibly the most serious crime you can commit in the US – murder only results in a prosecution and conviction 60% of the time.
                40% of the time we no a murder occured but there is no prosecution.
                In Chicago that is 78% of the time – there is no prosecution.

                And you actually think that In Person voter Fraud – a crime that short of a confession is nearly impossible to prove is limited to the number of actual convictions that have occurred ? The vast majority of convictions for Voter Fraud are of people who orchestrate large groups of inperson fraud. Very rarely are individuals charged with voter fraud if they are lone instances.

                These are facts.

                Here is more on voter Fraud and specifically voter Fraud in New Hampshire.

                1. Johnj wrote in an earlier post that students were bussed across state lines to illegally vote in NH. I posted then a refutation of this talking point passed on by the always unreliable and lying President.

                  1. “Johnj wrote in an earlier post that students were bussed across state lines to illegally vote in NH.”
                    Your lying, never said that.

                    “I posted then a refutation of this talking point passed on by the always unreliable and lying President.”
                    You have not refuted anything.
                    In fact you have produced little of any value on the issue of elections.

              3. More on the Same – I would note the data came from FOIA requests from the NH department of state.
                The facts I am alleging are actual Data kept by the State of NH.

                more than 6500 people voted in 2016 in NH using out of state drivers licenses, while claiming NH residence based on an alleged NH address. Ultimately a bit more than 1000 of these got NH licenses within the next 9 months.
                A further 300+ registered vehicles in NH in that time.
                It is likely that some portion of the remainder just never moved their license. it is highly unlikely that the majority of them did.
                It is certain that some portion of these people committed in person voter fraud.

                It is near certain that SOME of them voted twice.


              4. I have given you numerous links addressing actual fraud both accross the country and in NH in 2016.

                We know that the fraud we actually catch is a tiny portion of what is actually occuring.

                We already have one presidential election that turned on 180 votes – and you are still unwilling to admit there is a serious problem ?

                BTB – you live in a bubble of self delusion.

                1. John demonstrates again how he ends up parroting BS like college students were bused into NH to vote illegally. All his sources are right wing reporting on incidents of exceedingly insignifcant cases compared to the millions disenfranchised by the GOP on purpose. Of course he avoids the complete failure of Trump’s own commission on this “problem” to come up with proof or the balanced view available from respected sources like the 538 column I posted above.

                  As to Florida, the GOP Sec of State engaged in successful voter suppression aimed at AA’s prior to the election, keeping the result close enough for the GOP SC majority to give it to their boy, while adding a line that the decision was to never be considered a precedent, given how it was a complete flip-flop on previously pretend high-mindedness.

                  “Another problem disclosed in the 2000 election was the purge of voters, disproportionately black, based on faulty data. The Legislature contracted with Data Based Technologies to purge ineligible voters.

                  Since felons cannot vote in Florida unless they have their political rights restored by the governor and Cabinet, the state sought to remove any felons who should not be on the voter rolls. The data used was worthless and generated “false positives.”

                  The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights investigation into the 2000 presidential election in Florida concluded that blacks were disproportionately purged from the voter rolls. In Miami-Dade, blacks were 65 percent of those purged even though they made up only 20.4 percent of the population….”


                  180 votes my ass.

                  1. BTB

                    You continue to repeat the claim that I have said College students were Bussed to NH.

                    That is a bald faced lie.

                    I have no idea whether College Students were bussed to NH – it is possible they were.
                    But I have never said they were.

                    I have never explicitly said as a fact that the non-residents who voted in NH were college students.

                    What I have said is that on election day 6500 people who could not provide proof of NH residence were allowed to vote and their votes counted.

                    That over the next 9 months about 2000 of those were confirmed to be NH residents. The remaining 4500 have never been confirmed as NH residents and most were likely not.

                    That number is more than sufficient to tip both the Senate and presidential elections in NH

                  2. The data on NH is not from RW sources – it is from FOIA requests of the NH dept of state.

                    Are you claiming the NH dept State lied in response to an FOIA request ?

                    Regardless, you do understand that if Hitler says the sun will rise tomorow – the sun will STILL rise tomorow ?

                    The source does not matter if the FACTS are correct.

                    When the NYT provides actual facts, or information from confirmable sources they can usually be trusted.

                    Project Veritas claims to be non-partisan and has on occasion targeted conservative groups.

                    But more important than claims of their bias is that the do undercover video.

                    PV is NOT the source for its reporting. AACORN, or PP, or Democratic campaigns are.

                    When you have a person on an undercover video admitting to voter fraud – who recorded them is irrelevant.

                  3. With respect to purging voter registration. I will be happy to discuss the standards for doing so.

                    But I am not interested in wild ass claims such as yours or idiotic disparate impact claims.

                    If the actual purging was done with demonstrable bias – fine lets prove that and prosecute those who did so.

                    But that is actually unlikely – there is FEDERAL LAW regarding purging voter registration – though few states follow it.

                    That law defines a process that requires purging a voter if they have not voted in 3 consecutive elections AND not responded to mailed request to verify their registration.

                    With respect to your specific claim that there is some racial bias – voter registration does not list race. Those purging the voter rolls have no means of knowing the race of the records being purged.

                    What they know is they have not voted, and they have not responded to requests to confirm their registration.

                    With respect to felons – if you do not like the fact that fellons can not vote – change the law.
                    Most states restrict the right of Felon’s to vote.
                    Most States – including FL allow felon’s to vote once they have completed their sentence – that includes all requirements of parole including paying restitution, fines and costs. SCOTUS has long upheld all restrictions on the voting rights of felons.

                    Voter Registration records – as with nearly all government records are poor in quality – of course their are false positives (and false negatives). Every state has provisions for those who have been improperly had their voter registration purged to provisionally vote.

                    This is a straw man you are beating to death.

                    Do you have real people who were unable to vote because voter registration databases were purged ?
                    Nope – because that just does not happen.
                    If you share the same name and date of birth with a felon, you will still be allowed to vote provisionally on election day if you wish.
                    And your vote will be counted if you subsequently provide sufficient proof you are not a convicted felon. That is not hard to do.

                    But as I mentioned before – this problem just does not happen.

                    I would further note that voter registration purges are NOT permanent blackballs.
                    All you need to do is register again.
                    Which today in most states happens automatically when you renew your drivers license, car registration or any of a large number of other government interactions.

                    You are making a mountain out of something that is not even a molehill.

                    I would further note that for most of US history we have PERMANENTLY barred felons from voting.

                    While I personally think a permanent ban is overkill. I have no problem with barring a felon from voting until they have completed all the requirements of their sentence – including probation and parole requirements.

                    And the people of nearly every state of the country have agreed with that.

                  4. How is it that you or anyone else knows that blacks were disproportionaltedly purged ?

                    Voter registration rolls DO NOT list race ?

                    Further do you understand how voter registration roll purges work ?

                    Names are not picked at random.

                    People are removed because:

                    They died.
                    They have not voted in 3 elections, and they failed to respond to 3 mailed requests to confirm they wish to continue to vote.
                    The most common reason to meet this criteria is that the voter has MOVED.

                    If you meet those criteria – I do not care what race you are.

  7. Commit.

    How much are they paying you per word?

    It is becoming increasingly obvious that this is your job.

    Are you also a Trustafarian?

    Every single time I completely own you, you just drift away. Which is classic Buttercup behavior.

    1. “How much are they paying you per word?”

      Commit / buy da book / sock puppets ad infinitum gets paid by the character.

    2. “Every single time I completely own you, you just drift away. Which is classic Buttercup behavior.”

      In your dreams, “Rhodes.” But, hey, keep dreamin’.

    3. Don’t confuse your beliefs with knowledge, Rhodes.

      I’ll assume that all of your insults are projection.

      1. Okay, now I am beginning to suspect you are assisted by a dimwitted AI. You have a repertoire:

        ‘projection’ comes up a lot.

        ‘insults’ is another

        Then there is your eagerness to grab and slaver over anything you perceive as anti-Trump.

        ‘Don’t confuse’ another.

  8. America discovers the truth.

    Nancy Pelosi is not worried about “The China Flu, 2020.”

    Nancy Pelosi is determined to shut down the economy and keep it shut down.

    The American economy was shut down by democrats, not to defend against “The China Flu, 2020,” but to degrade President Trump’s phenomenal economic performance and his success in his effort to Make America Great Again.

    The core issue, which ultimately must be revealed, is which elements of the democrat party contacted the Chinese Communist Party to request that China deliberately release “The China Flu, 2020″as a political act and election tactic against President Trump, who was on an inexorable course to an historic landslide victory in November.

    Of course, the world knows that coronavirus in Wuhan, China, was contained in a fail-safe virology lab with multiple redundant security systems definitively precluding egress by the coronavirus.

    Nothing can possibly exceed that lab except by deliberate act, certainly not, just by coincidence, in an election year.

    Perhaps, the DOJ should subpoena Hillary’s server and e-mails.

  9. The mayor of San Francisco is now saying it is Trump’s fault that Pelosi broke the law by going to that salon.

    I won’t even try to make sense of that but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear the mayor was running around town naked while cops tried to put a plastic bag over her head.

  10. There is an important take away in this. If Pelosi really believed Covid 19 was a kind of virus, where, if one does not wear a mask, one will get the virus and drop dead, she would wear her mask at all public accommodations. She must not believe this.

    Pay attention to this and the numbers of times one sees many powerful people not wearing a mask. They are telling you the truth in their actions while lying with their words.

    1. No one who understands how masks work suggests that if you do not wear a mask for 2 minutes, you “will get the virus and drop dead.” In fact, everyone who has attended to how they work recognizes that they do more to protect others than to protect the wearer, and the effects accumulate (e.g., over time, across people) and vary with the circumstances (e.g., are you yelling? near an air conditioner vent that’s blowing? in close proximity to someone?).

      1. Masks reduce projectile speeds and decrease their number.
        Masks reduce somewhat the amount of virus that will reach the person.

        Masks can spread disease.

        The whole idea behind masks is not to totally insulate the person from his environmental dangers but in the case of a virus to reduce the R0.

        1. There is evidence that by reducing the amount of virus a person is exposed to, if they get the illness, a lower amount will often lead to a lesser infection

          I forget the fancy word for this, the dose of virus at first exposure.

          this is typical of many other diseases too. so masks may help in that way too

          1. Yes, but the key is ventilation with clean air. If you are doing mouth to mouth breathing there is no clean air. The further away the cleaner the air. Airflow and direction count. That is why in restaurants the table with Covid infects other tables but not symetrically.

        2. If you do not reduce R0 below 1.0 all you do is make the epidemic last longer – creating higher risk for the most vulnerable.

          There is an interesting YouTube Video by 3Blue1Brown simulating epidemics. Whole he does not deal with Masks specifically, he demonstrates over and over that anything that you do that does not reduce R0 below 1.0 has no effect except on the duration.

          You can reduce R0 by combinations of measures.

          But we are dealing with a virus with a R0 of 2.4-3.8

          It is going to be very hard to get R0 below 1.0 Masks alone will not do it – even if masks had laboratory effectiveness – in the real world we will be lucky if masks do not make things worse.

          If a person wears a mask, and that mask captures C19 and the person handles the mask and touches their face they could actually increase the spread of C19.

          We need real world testing of masks before making claims about them without testing.

          1. “If you do not reduce R0 below 1.0 all you do is make the epidemic last longer – creating higher risk for the most vulnerable.”

            As a generality, yes. We agree that voluntary isolation of the elderly and sick was the way to go.

            1. And yet almost no country did that.

              Sweden actually did, but they reacted too late and it was already in their elder care fascilities.

              But once they got control of it there – that is one of FEW actual poilices Sweden enacted – visiting elder care facilities was strictly controlled.

              1. We may have to rethink how we group large, sick, and elderly populations together. Society’s methods of using technology and our wealth has created increased pandemic risks.

                1. The major difference between Sweden’s outcome and Norways was that Swedish elder care facilities are much larger than those of Norway. When C19 got into a fascility in Norway there were only a small number of people it could infect.

                  Regardless, whether we restructure elder care or not. Our lacadascical attitude toward the vulnerable – with policies focused on everyone – requardless of risk was a huge mistake.

                  1. In my daily affairs all my life I never focused on everything equally. Most successful people don’t. The fact that the government equally focused on everyone demonstrates that they are out of touch with the way humans are supposed to think.

  11. I never thought Pelosi was that stupid.
    BTW has she said what what atonement she would do/say after “taking the responsibility”?

  12. If you can be tricked by a hairstylist, you shouldn’t be in a position of leadership in a large nation.

    If, after being tricked by your hairstylist, you tell the world, “I was tricked by my hairstylist,” you really should just resign.

  13. Didn’t Madam Speaker State “I was getting my hair done at home, but my normal stylist was not available”, again underground marketing. Regardless what Madam Speaker did was against local regulations.

  14. Oh, look, such a patriotic President:
    “Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’
    “The president has repeatedly disparaged the intelligence of service members, and asked that wounded veterans be kept out of military parades, multiple sources tell The Atlantic.”

    “Alyssa Farah, a White House spokesperson, emailed [the author] this statement shortly after this story was posted: ‘This report is false. President Trump holds the military in the highest regard. …'” Yeah, I definitely believe her. No one (cough) ever lies on behalf of Trump. He holds the military in such high regard that he castigated Putin for offering the Taliban bounties for killing U.S. troops and demanded an end to that. Oops, no, he said nothing to Putin about this, despite his “high regard.” Trump disgusts me.

      1. I’d love for Trump to file a defamation suit and have to testify about it under oath.

        The author claims that the contents of the article were confirmed by multiple sources, and other journalists have now responded to the article with comments like the following:

        James LaPorta:
        “A senior Defense Department official I just spoke with confirmed this story by @JeffreyGoldberg in its entirety. Especially the grafs about the late Sen. John McCain and former Marine Gen. John Kelly, President @realDonaldTrump former chief of staff.”

        And we know that Trump has publicly said things like the following: “He’s [John McCain] not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured” and complained about “losers” hundreds of times. You think he doesn’t say worse in private?

        Yes, it’s been denied. But as you asked me earlier today: “Why trust people paid to lie?”

        1. So what has been confirmed is what we already know – the rest is unsubstantiated speculation.

          The Animosity between McCain and Trump is famous – though The FBI already had the Steele Dossier unbeknownst to McCain – he had his staff provide a copy to the FBI.

          Many things Trump has said about McCain are offensive. Many of the things McCain has said and done are also deeply troubling.

          Both are great men with serious flaws and a hatred of each other.

          But none of this is news.

          The conflict between Kelley and Trump has been less personal and lower key.

          Kelley is among the numerous military leaders that Trump has been disappointed by as president.

          A sentiment shared by much of the country.

          Trump was elected to get us out of the endless conflict in the mideast.
          He has almost completely accomplished that – fighting “the generals” every step of the way.

          Regardless this is a far cry from “proof” of the claims you have made.

          A super majority of enlisted men and non-coms support Trump. He has lived up to his promises to them.
          The numerous images stories and links I have provided attest tot the fact that Trump has a good relationship with ordinary soldiers, fallen soldiers, disabled veterans.

          Conversely Trump’s support within the officers core is as bad as his support among enlisted men is good.

          Numerous officers have let Trump and the american people down.

          If Trump is upset about that – so am I.

          We should have been out of afghanistan almost 20 years ago.
          There is nowhere else in the mideast that we should have gone at all.

          The politicians and military leaders responsible for that deserve our derision.

          Obama promised the same thing as Trump regarding the mideast.
          He did not have the balls to go up against the “deep start”‘ to keep his promises.
          Had he done so – he too would likely have been impeached.

          And we know that electing Biden will retun us to the status quo – with neocons left and right calling the shots – and Biden looking for ways that his family and freinds can profit.

          1. “Kelley is among the numerous military leaders that Trump has been disappointed by as president.
            A sentiment shared by much of the country. Trump was elected to get us out of the endless conflict in the mideast. He has almost completely accomplished that – fighting “the generals” every step of the way.”

            I have tremendous respect and love for almost all our generals and soldiers but when they go astray I always want to present the question, ‘What war did you win?’. Admittedly they did a great job in fighting but did that leave John Smith, taxpayer, better off or worse off? Did that leave the lobbyists for war and the companies, better off or worse off?

            1. “I have tremendous respect and love for almost all our generals and soldiers”

              I agree – I even respect Kelley, Mattis, McMasters, and even John Bolton.

              But I do not agree with there policies.

              REGARDLESS, Trump was elected on specific policies – if he chooses to persue them it is the job of “the generals” to impliment them.

              A wise president will give them the oportunity to disagree and present their case – and Trump did, giving them 2 years to accomplish without withdrawl what presidents have been promising for 2 decades. They failed.

              When Trump decided to go forward with his campaign promises – the same one Obama made – “the generals” were obligated to support those policies of resign.

              Trying to undermine them from within is immoral , cowardly.

              In leaving Mattis wrote a book arguing his particular view of the US use of military power throughout the world.
              I have not read it but I am told that it is well written and well argued.

              I do not think so – but it is possible Mattis is right.

              But we did not elect Mattis, and Mattis has not successfully been elected or persuaded a candidate to follow his policies.

              “I always want to present the question, ‘What war did you win?’. Admittedly they did a great job in fighting”

              There are very very few current military brass with real experience in war. This is a common problem in the military.
              The leaders we need in wartime are NOT those who thrive in the brass in peace time.

              In peace time you want to have some cryo storage where you have warriors like Patton in cold storage.
              Because we need them to win wars, but they piss people off in peace time.

              The US military has evolved interestingly since Korea.

              Overtime we have become incredibly adept at winning conflicts. We can unleash incredible violence on the scale necescary for short periods and win most any conflict we commit to.

              But we suck at winning the peace.

              1. Patton once said something like, ‘In war America calls on its s.o.b.s’. [not quite what he said but the actual quote goes to moderation]

                We seem to have an officer corps that has become more adept at winning bureaucratic battles in Washington than actual wars on the battlefield.

                One ugly example is the way the United States Navy keeps its ships colliding or catching fire in port. I bet the officers are au fait with critical race/sex theory though.

                1. There is a different kind of officer needed to win a war.

                  Though I would note that the US military record is not merely because when we needed we had some of the best as general’s.

                  After normandy the life expectancy of a US army captain was measured in days. We sacrificed some of our best to win WWII.

                  But one of the differences between the US military and that of other nations is the responsibility we give to captains, and lieutenants, and Sargents and corporals.

        2. And I’d love for you to, somehow, become a rational, thinking human.

          Looks like we’ll both just have to live in disappointment.

          1. Biden says ‘if it’s true’ and then continues on with a diatribe. Needs to be Committed doesn’t seem to understand that before attacking another for a statement made one needs to know the statement is true and was in context. Biden has been gotten many times before for lying so now he uses if a fall back.

            That is one of her own techniques of pushing lies.

            Donald Trump has sincere love and respect for members of out military so any comment similar to that has to do with how people treat the military.or other unrelated things. One can see that by looking at the failed VA bills of prior administrations including Obama’s that Trump corrected.

            As an example of how the word sucker could be used if ever used: Needs to be Committed is a sucker because she believes things that aren’t true as long as those things agree with what she wishes to say.

            1. What would be new ? CTDHD constantly assumes as true things that are false much less not proven.

        3. Trump, tweeting last night: “…I never called John [McCain] a loser and swear on whatever, or whoever, I was asked to swear on, that I never called our great fallen soldiers anything other than HEROES. …”

          Kaitlan Collins (CNN): “Trump rarely speaks to press upon returning to DC. Can’t recall when he ever has. But he did tonight in the dark to vigorously deny the Atlantic story. ‘I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes…What animal would say such a thing?’”

          @nycsouthpaw, in response: “The idea is to swear on something specific that everyone knows you consider sacred—a holy book, the memory of a saint, the graves of your ancestors, etc. There’s nothing that fits the bill for Trump, so you get absurd constructions like ‘I would … swear on anything.’”

          I think Biden should challenge Trump to be questioned about it under oath.

          We know that Trump was lying last night, because there’s video of him calling McCain a “loser” and saying “He’s not a war hero”:

          Trump says whatever he finds convenient in the moment. He lies all the time. He’s lied about McCain and the Veterans Choice Act. A few examples:
          — “McCain didn’t get the job done for our great vets and the VA, and they knew it … The vets were on my side because I got the job done. I got Choice and I got accountability. … And Choice — for years and years, decades, they wanted to get Choice. … For many decades, they couldn’t get it done. It was never done. I got it five months ago.” (3/21/19)
          — “I disagree with John McCain on the way he handled the vets, because I said you got get to Choice. He was never able to get Choice. I got Choice.” (5/30/19)
          — “And, by the way, for the veterans, 45 years they’ve been trying to get it. As you know, just recently, I signed Veterans Choice” (4/24/19)

          He’s said some version of this particular lie over 150 times. Not only was the Veterans Choice Act signed by Obama (not Trump), McCain was a co-sponsor of the bill. Trump did sign the VA MISSION Act of 2018, which extends Choice, but he continues to lie that he was the one who got Choice passed (he wasn’t), that he signed the Choice Act (he didn’t), that others had tried and failed to pass the Choice Act (not true: it was passed under Obama with McCain as a cosponsor).

          Trump pardoned a war criminal, he mistreated Lt. Col. Vindman, he’s called TBIs “not serious” and compared them to “headaches,” … He is not a patriot.

          1. What a pig. Listen to the tape. He was talking about McCain losing an election not his military service and said he doesn’t like loser’s…of elections. Most of us don’t because loser’s frequently lose again.

            Joe Biden is one of those losers. That has nothing to do with any military service he may or may not have had. It has to do with losing an election and most people that lose elections do so for reasons that may be repeated.

            Needs to be Committed is too much of a liar to be on a list where normal people discuss things. She can never be trusted.

            1. The story is already falling apart. Election day smear with no truth.

              Meanwhile Old Man Biden says a black man invented the light bulb, not some guy named Edison.

              Biden’s brain is truly zapping out like one of those electric bug killers on a warm, humid summer night.

              Funny that he went to Kenosha to phone somebody in Kenosha. He could have done that from his basement with his trapdoor closed and locked.

              I bet Commit prays they keep that door locked a little longer.

              1. it’s a far gone conclusion we are in (not headed) in a Civil War. Question is: have you purchased your ammo yet?
                We had 600 rounds delivered yesterday via UPS of green tip 5.56 NATO 62 GR, and we are looking for more.


                Twitter Locks Account of Kyle Rittenhouse’s Attorney, John Pierce

                Twitter has locked the account of another member of the legal team of Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year old who is facing murder charges after killing two members of a mob of rioters that attacked him in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

                Pierce, who as Rittenhouse’s attorney, is expected to defend the reputation of his client, said on Twitter that “Kyle Rittenhouse will go down in history alongside that brave unknown patriot at Lexington Green who fired ‘The Shot Heard Around The World’ on April 19. 1775.”

                Twitter promptly locked his account, requiring that he delete the tweet before being allowed back on the platform.

            2. Is the standard now that criticism of those who once served in the military is equivalent to disparaging the military ?

              What of the attacks on Dan Krenshaw and Kolfage ? Scott ?

          2. Back in 2015, Trump even bragged about calling McCain a “loser” in one of his tweets:

            Donald J. Trump: “Via @fitsnews: ‘Donald Trump: John McCain Is ‘A Loser’’”

            I hope one of the WH correspondents asks Trump about his false claim “I never called John [McCain] a loser.”
            He generally responds poorly to being called out on his lies.

            1. After telling us more than once that you didn’t necessarily believe the material you cited why should we believe any of this crap?

              1. He doesn’t. Again, he is paid by the character.

                Everything CommitToHolisticDipsh!tism posts on here is an opportunity to justify to his masters he is working 4 da cause

            2. In an election where only one of two (seriously competing) people win the other loses or is a loser.

              “I don’t like losers,” Trump said at an Iowa GOP event, referring to McCain’s disastrous 2008 campaign against then-U.S. Senator Obama.

              That is perfectly agreeable when referring to one that lost who isn’t the nicest fellow.

              Needs to be Committed originally originally tried to tie the loser reference to a person who was incarcerated by the enemy. Needs to be Committed is a liar. Context is everything.

              1. Context is important.

                But also important – CTDHD constantly calls people liars over minor discrepancies in details and does not bother to get the details correct herself.

                I do not really care about her errors in details.

                I do care about her hypocracy.

            3. Follow your own source once again

              “I don’t like losers,” Trump said at an Iowa GOP event, referring to McCain’s disastrous 2008 campaign against then-U.S. Senator Obama.

            4. Since you care about details the fitnews article you claim sites a tweet, actually cites Trump remarks made at Iowa.

              By the standards of normal people mistaking a tweet for a remark at Iowa is inconsequential.

              But by CTDHD standards it makes the entire comment a LIE ?

              Are you a liar CTDHD ?

              Are all inaccuracies lies ?

              Or are they often inconsequential errors ?

        4. “Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffin [their National Security Correspondent] said Friday she spoke with two top officials who confirmed ‘key details’ of the stunning report in The Atlantic about alleged comments of President Donald Trump’s about dead soldiers. Griffin said Friday, ‘I’ve spoken with two U.S. senior officials who were on the trip to France who confirmed to me key details in the Atlantic article and the quotes attributed to the president.’
          “One of those sources — a former Trump administration official — apparently told Griffin that Trump said of Vietnam, ‘It was a stupid war. Anyone that went was a sucker.’ Griffin continued: …”

          The link includes video of Griffin’s reporting about this on Fox News.

          Hopefully someone will be willing to speak about it publicly, though I assume that even then, Trump sycophants will reject it unless it comes from the Trump himself or ____ (who else would a Trump sycophant listen to?).

          1. And yet those actually at the meeting have all denied them.

            I do not know that Trump said “It was a stupid war. Anyone that went was a sucker.’”

            I know that Vietnam was a stupid war.

            Regardless, with few exceptions you have reporters with unnamed sources who do not provide for the most part what was actually said, and who are contradicted by those actually in this meeting.

            This is your idea of a story ?

    1. Trump has disparaged the Intelligence community.

      They deserve it.

      Not merely for the garbage they have produced regarding Trump – but for constant failure dating back to the creation of the CIA.

      We have a long long history of failure by the Intelligence community.

      It is long past time for someone to give them their comeuppance.

      The left was livid when they found out the Nigerian Yellow Cake was a lie. But the left has short memories.,558&ssl=1

  15. I am disgusted by Pelosi’s behavior. In what way was she set up? Was she forced to go to a hair salon that her policies had ordered closed? Was the mask torn from her face?

    The salon owner’s complaint is in regards to one way for thee, another for me.

    Hair stylists have gone underground. There is a black market cash business in which stylists are coming to people’s homes, or sneaking in clients, in order to pay the bills. EDD does not take anyone’s calls. Checks are being mailed by the thousands to wrong or fraudulent addresses. Meanwhile, hair stylists have kids, bills, and need to buy food.

    Nancy Pelosi has slammed others for not wearing masks, and she’s ordered salons to close. If the government forcibly closes a business, I believe it owes that business recompense. Instead, the PPP loans dry up quickly. With the state quickly chasing out taxpayers, revenue is drying up as need keeps rising.

    The owner’s complaint boils down to this: Nancy Pelosi et al commanded her to close, and not work. She still has bills. Nancy Pelosi then contacted one of Kious’ stylists, as proven in text messages, and arranged to have the salon opened for an appointment just for her. Then she did not wear a mask.

    Pelosi should just admit that she participated in the black market hair industry. You can tell if a woman is still getting her hair done. Luckily, I have long hair, so I can get away with trimming it myself. (Crea Clip works great for hair like mine. Shark Tank was prophetic.) So while I use an inexpensive plastic tool for a basic trim, elites like Pelosi destroyed people’s livelihoods, while ignoring the law themselves.

    Pelosi comes across like an elitist Marie Antoinette. She’s outraged and affronted to have her own behavior questioned.

    Californians won’t care, however. Democrats will rubber stamp her in every time she runs.

    1. “a hair salon that her policies had ordered closed … she’s ordered salons to close … Nancy Pelosi et al commanded her to close …”

      Karen, how about you cite a news story about these Pelosi “orders” you’re referring to? Unless Congress passes a law (which involves voting with other members of Congress), how can any member of Congress order people to do anything? I think you’re making this up.

      1. Was it ordered to be closed or not? Once again you attempt to divert to nonessential details.

        The salon was closed. Service could not be provided inside legally.

        Pelosi is so special she wanted treatment despite the local law.

        1. Karen claimed 3 times that **Pelosi** ordered it. If you think that it’s a “non-essential detail” whether **Pelosi** ordered it, you’re not paying attention to *Karen’s* argument.

          1. Yes, it is a non-essential detail.

            If you are going to hold Karen to that degree of precision – then you must live up to that level yourself – you have failed at that repeatedly.

            You fail to grasp that every single misstatement is not a deliberate lie.

            This defense of pelosi is quite odd from someone who beleives that Trump can and will order all kinds of totalitarian things.

            Pelosi did not order anything – but she did break the law – laws that she claims to beleive in and support. Laws that she has shamed others who do not beleive for violating.

            Pelosi is the most egregious form of hypocrit.
            Show the mobs she incites ever come to power her head will be one of the first offered to the guilotine.

      2. Commit, your question is an example of one huge problem in this country today. No one knows the authority the president has nor congress has. Biden says he would insist everyone wire a mask and it become “Biden’will require everyone to wear a mask”. Karen says Pelosi ordered salons to close and if she post that on social kedia, many will believe it.

        They have no idea that most of the power lies with states and governor, not the feds.

  16. Jonny, as always a shill for Trumpty. Using the veil of “is there case/suit”, get the plug in to perpetuate a obvious politically motivated situation. Never mind that Pelosi has been a paragon of responsibility compared with Trump, who not only almost always appears in public without a mask but holds public events, such as his acceptance speech on the White House lawn, that are likely to spread the novel coronavirus. The Turley does not care about consistency. He simply wants to play a game of “gotcha!” Pelosi walked right into their trap. How brown is your nose, Jonny?

    1. Were you one who left a threatening message for the salon owner? More than one? Even Don Lemon said Pelosi should have apologized for HER transgression. I mean, she instigated the appointment.

Comments are closed.