We have previously discussed the unhinged and unsupported claims of “My Pillow” CEO Mike Lindell. However, an interview on Newsmax shows just how out of control this debate has become as a host tried to stop Lindell from making unsupported claims. Eventually Anchor Bob Sellers walked off the set in what was a live meltdown on national television.
Anchor Bob Sellers quickly interrupted Lindell as he was getting into his claims that the voting machines in the election were rigged.
Within a few days of the election, most of us stated that there was not evidence of systemic fraud and became increasingly critical of the Trump team for failing to put forward evidence of such fraud with the use of these machines. As we covered the unfolding challenges, it was clear that irregularities cited in the use of the Dominion computers were attributed to human error and not the computers themselves. We have not seen compelling evidence to change that view.
I have been highly critical of Lindell and his statements since the election. Indeed, I would still like to see a commission to finally and conclusively put to rest all of these claims in the minds of many who still harbor doubts. There are clearly many like Lindell who hold such views and believe the evidence exists. Fine. I would be happy to review it just as we were happy to review such evidence in the post-election coverage. Why not let them present any such evidence in an open and transparent commission? Many will not accept any contrary conclusions on both sides but I believe the majority would do so. Otherwise, this conversation on Newsmax will be repeated endlessly for years. Moreover, a commission just might help us better prepare for the next election if we will be relying so heavily on mail-in voting in the future.
Newsmax was apparently seeking an interview on the free speech concerns raised by barring individuals or groups. As many on this blog know, I do not support censorship of such views or the banning of people like Lindell or his counterparts on the left. Sellers just showed how such statements can be addressed with counter statements. False statements can be rebutted by true statements. That is the beauty of free speech. As with the outrageous speech of some on the left, I believe that it is better to protect free speech for individuals like Lindell rather than slide down the slippery slope of censorship. We can all contest such statements through the use of free speech.
Lindell should have used the interview to defend his free speech, not make the case for tampered or rigged computers. That was the reason for the segment. The interview quickly went from bad to worst:
This is sobering.
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2021/02/01/gamestop-lets-you-see-the-matrix-n2583952?115
“They lie about what the president said and impeach him, again, this time like the last time for the real crime of not being an approved president”
His last speech rather looks like a lay-up for an ‘insurrection’ to justify getting some more tyranny passed. I am doubtful he wasn’t ‘approved’.
Hmm, Young, and then I read this:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-thirty-tyrants
More of the matrix?
Today is running uncharacteristically smoothly and quietly with homeschooling, so I could actually read something while the kids worked independently! 🙂 Not sure I ought to say ‘hurrah’, though, since this piece is also sobering.
That article has it backwards. There is nothing in the Democratic party that would allow them to be compared to Sparta, favorably or not. They are totally beneath Sparta.
I could also give reasons why Sparta was wise to take the money from Persia to fight Athens. That is too fine a detail for my point., But remember, it was Sparta that saved Greece from Persian conquest in the first place. 75 years before the wars between Athens and Sparta.
Secondly, it was Athens that was a thallasocracy, a sea based trading empire, versus Sparta, which held power over the central grain producing area of the Peloponnese
If anything it is the red states who more approximate the situation of Sparta
And understand this., I have said it many times. Our strategic situation is more like that of the CCP in the Chinese Civil war than the KMT which was a coastal regime full of Chinese compradors who had grown rich trading with foreigners. The KMT was far more like the Democrat party, a coastal elite, grown fat on trading with foreigners, compradors of our own country.
See also how Mao rallied his forces from the agricultural center of China, against that coastal elite, before he threw them off the continent and they ran away to Taiwan.
We should be studying Mao and the CCP for their methods of organization and victory against the rich traitors of China who were at the time almost entirely on the side of the coastal KMT
Being Republicans however, raised that way most of us, we are taught to hate communism as an ideology. That is fine but don’t make the mistake of failing to see that there are valid strategies which not only Mao used to win but also Ho Chi Minh for that matter.
And others in Asia who used the name communist, but in reality, were quite simply just nationalists rallying the masses of the people against rich traitorous elites…. look for lessons where we have not dared to look before.
Saloth Sar
I have only read part of the article leaving the rest for a later time. I thank Prairie for the article that I think was excellent and for those on the left that read it with understanding, that they might better recognize why today’s divide between the left and the right exists. It’s freedom vs totalitarian government. It’s American exceptionalism and a high standard of living vs mediocrity for the masses with a lower standard of living.
Sal, I think you read too much into the Greek comparison. I don’t think the author was doing a comparison rather the author used the Peloponnesian War and its players as a jumping off point. Of course remember I have yet to finish the article.
Mao was a vicious, manipulative, conniving person.
I don’t think it’s the Democrats being compared to Sparta–it’s China. And, this isn’t an R vs D issue; that’s a useful means of dividing and conquering. It’s the globalists, the statists who wish to retain power. There are such people in both parties to steer the ship–Gingrich on one hand and Clinton on the other, Biden on one hand and McCain on the other. It is liberty vs tyranny. Pol Pot, you are advocating some other tyranny.
Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer, the democrats and RINOs have egregiously violated and taken the law into their own hands. America is lawless in a society of laws. A former president may not be impeached, convicted and/or disqualified, which is manifest and irrefutable in fundamental law. Will they next, in Lincolnesque fashion, suspend Habeas Corpus? Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer, the democrats and RINOs are without the law, having abused and usurped power, which is not prescribed by fundamental law. The judicial branch and Supreme Court are derelict, negligent and complicit having failed to strike down these acts of nullification, war and treason against the United States.
Trump was impeached while he was still in office. If you’re going to discuss it, can’t you at least get basic facts right?
Anonymous:
The first part of the Impeachment was on January 13th 2021. However, it is an entire process. The House brings articles of impeachments, which are essentially charges. Their managers essentially prosecute the case before the Senate in the trial portion. The House has the power to bring an impeachment, while the Senate has the power to try it. Only the President, Vice President, and civil officers of the United States are subject to impeachment. Democrats in the House demand that a private citizen be subjected to an impeachment trial in the Senate, beginning in February, for his actions while in office.
The House will try to bring the case, against a private citizen, that calling for “peaceful protest” is a high crime and misdemeanor. What will likely be pointed out is the contrast to Democrats’ own behavior, openly calling for “uprisings”, insurrections, making a crowd, making sure Trump officials are not welcome anywhere anymore. Honestly, it took some iron gonads to make such a claim, given their own conduct. They must feel safe because a Democrat House will never hold its own behavior accountable. Otherwise, there would be a flood of impeachments. They would be hard pressed to find a Democrat who could replace their impeached brethren who did not make similar impeachable comments calling for uprisings. No justice no peace, eh?
The House of Representatives brought charges against a President in his last week of office. If it goes forward, the Senate would hear the case against a private citizen.
“In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office.”
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Senate_Impeachment_Role.htm
That’s a lot of words to tell the world you didn’t actually go to law school.
Another person insulted by Anonymous the Stupid and this person is always polite. What does Anonymous the Stupid add to the blog? Nothing unless someone is looking for Stupidity.
Allan S. Meyer continues to resort to his favorite trolling strategies:
Insults.
Attributing his own failings to others.
Anonymous the Stupid, let’s laugh at the fact that you think your insults are content. That way we can all be happy.
It is accurate whether he went to law school or not. Stupid lawyers are everywhere.
As I said, he was impeached while he was in office. Impeachment occurs in the House. The trial in the Senate is not the impeachment. The trial would be for a private citizen, but the impeachment that already occurred was not for a private citizen. The Senate has already tried a private citizen, as Turley has pointed out more than once. Trump is free to challenge that at the trial.
Every Senator and Congressman who votes in the impeachment and conviction of former President Donald J. Trump must be, himself, impeached for egregious nullification and violation of the U.S. Constitution.
How is it a violation of the Constitution?
“THE” president, however illegal and illegitimate, is Joe Biden.
If Congress impeaches and convicts the president as Article 2, Section 4, prescribes, Congress will impeach and convict Joe Biden.
The Constitution does not provide for the impeachment, conviction or disqualification of a “FORMER” president.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
The House already impeached Trump. He was President when he was impeached.
Most legal scholars say that it’s legal to carry out an impeachment trial after the person is out of office. That has already occurred in US history. I’ll take the consensus of people with expertise over yours.
There have been diverse legal theories presented on the topic. Reasonable men and women can disagree.
You and they will be criminals.
“Impeachment AND Conviction”
“AND” means together before the moment expires.
It reads “AND” not “OR.”
In this case, Impeachment and Conviction were never possible due to the time frame and all legislators were aware of their potential complicity in a criminal act of engaging in an illegal trial of a former,
not current, president.
The former president has been merely impeached.
The impeachment was a rush to judgement, a sham and a show trial, and proffered no credible evidence; no evidence with any quality of or potential for being trusted or believed in.
Article 2, Section 4 does not proffer any opportunity to act against a former president.
Impeachment was of “THE” president.
Conviction must, similarly, be of “THE” president.
The opportunity for each has lapsed.
The former President cannot be convicted and removed as he is not “THE” president and, as coherence and logic would have it, a former president is not in office and, therefore, cannot be removed
from an office he does not occupy.
The President…shall be removed…on Impeachment for, and Conviction of….
____________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and
Misdemeanors.
____________
I have no “expertise.”
I have the U.S. Constitution – Article 2, Section 4.
It references “THE” president and it makes no mention of a former president.
The Founders wrote the Constitution and they were fully capable of making it abundantly clear that a president could be impeached and convicted at any time after he leaves office and that any and
all former presidents are subject to impeachment and conviction at any time, were that their intent.
It wasn’t .
How could Trump’s team offer evidence of election fraud, when courts refused to hear his case?Supreme Court, which has original jurisdiction of problems between States, also refused to hear election fraud cas.
Some courts refused to hear some cases because the plaintiffs lacked standing. Other courts did NOT refuse to hear other cases and ruled against the plaintiffs on merits.
Texas didn’t have standing for the suit it filed.
Conspiracy.
No “court” allowed any proceedings.
No “court” considered any evidence.
Just a coincidence.
You betcha! Synergies!
What’s good for the American Communist Deep Deep State is good for the judicial branch.
The judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court, has been the singular American failure since 1860 – just coincidentally 12 years after Marx published the Communist Manifesto in London
(1848) and his comrades escaped justice in Germany and Europe; seeking refuge from prosecution and absconding to New York and Illinois.
Your claim is false. You can read all of the court documents here (click on each state) –
https://www.democracydocket.com/case_type/post-election/
After you watch Absolute PROOF by Mike Lindel, you can no longer say he has NO EVIDENCE. You can disagree with what you see however ,you are free to rebut his evidence . However there will be a lot of terrified media and Democrat party corrupted leadership people losing sleep tonight! If it so fake, then WHY are you so scared of watching it?
Where can we watch it?
It was on You Tube but they removed it saying it violated their ‘terms of service.’
It might be at https://thenewamerican.com/watch-today-my-pillow-ceo-mike-lindell-releases-documentary-on-election-steal/
“Wow. Space Force. It’s the plane of today.”
– Jen Psaki
_________
The Space Force is above critical.
America will have no “eyes,” no command and control, and no defense without the Space Force.
Comrade Psaki must be severely censured for manifest treason (“…adhering to their enemies [China/Russia], giving them aid and comfort…,” and resign.
I don’t think she was mocking Space Force. That’s a cover excuse.
I think she doesn’t even know what it is and took a stab at its being a plane.
I wonder how many of the press corps hyenas are secretly wishing Trump and his staff were back. How long can they slobber praise on these idiots without barfing in shame?
Which “plane,” a space [air] plane or a new physical plane of existence in space?
Whatever she meant, she was and is incoherent.
I can’t wait for the hysteria.
None. They trump’s team did no press conferences and hurled the term ‘fake news’ at everyone in the press not on fox, oann, or newsmax. And Psaki was calling back to a previous conference when someone asked if Biden was going to change the colors of Air Force 1. Random question. As was the Space Force question from a day or two later.
Call back humor is always tough to pull off. Psaki learned her lesson. Now it’s up to trumpers to take it out of context like you guys are doing.
Elvis Bug
Let me get this straight. Newsmax interviewed My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell, because his social media was banned because of his public opinion on election fraud, and then the interviewer ended the interview because Lindell made those claims on camera?
Do I have that right?
It would be like interviewing someone who was silenced for claiming Trump worked for the Russians, shortly after he took office, and then cutting him off for making the same claim on camera. How would that have gone over? Lucky for Democrats, Republicans cannot and do not censor them across all communication channels. That must be nice.
Since there was not a commission to look into election integrity and alleged fraud in 2020, pundits are essentially dismissing the claims without a thorough investigation. How about if crime investigations were conducted in the same manner?
Democrats had years of investigations into their allegations that Trump was working for the Russians. It turned out to be a total fabrication paid for by Hillary Clinton. Millions of taxpayer dollars were spent on addressing their concerns about the election.
In 2020, Democrats dismiss concerns about election integrity as sedition or tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.
I have no idea what evidence Lindell has seen. What I do know is that Democrats have steamrollered over concerns about the election and branded it sedition or dangerous misinformation. All this does is give fuel to the fire. Imagine if the Russian collusion story was never investigated.
It is possible that Lindell was referring, at least in part, to this video of a Georgia Senate Hearing, that purported to submit evidence of live hacking the voting machines. It has been stated that Mr Pulitzer has a checkered history that casts doubt upon the veracity of his claim and submission, but I have not found an investigation available online of that specific submission. This video has been shared all over the internet. All I know is that Pulitzer provided what he had found, and that the GA SOS deemed it improbable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPmw0PnrvBM
Lindell is entitled to his opinion. If you don’t want to hear his opinion, then do not interview him. Do not censor him on social media, just scroll on past. Choose to read or view something else, rather than censor a man you disagree with.
Exactly right….just like I do here daily when I see the usual suspects banging on about everything under the Sun that does not agree with their own views.
We all know who they are….and were some other folks less inclined to fall for the shiny lure trolled before their nose we would have a much better dialogue where content got debated and mere barb trading did not.
I is many of the articles related to 11/3/20 Election fraud:
Evidence of Widespread Election Fraud
Compliation of videos showing evidence of widespread voter fraud.
https://banned.video/channel/evidence-of-widespread-election-fraud
lol; I is… oops, Here is
No, you don’t have that right. Here’s some basic information: Lindell has been banned for repeatedly LYING about Dominion Voting Systems. This is not a matter of “public opinion”. He is slandering the reputation of a company based on nothing. You cannot make up lies about a foreign government manipulating data on Dominion machines, which is what he and Giuliani have claimed. His lies have been proven false, but just like Trump, he won’t shut up. Dominion has sued Giuliani for lying, and because News Max also doesn’t want to get sued for publishing false information, (because, at this point, they know this is a lie) the News Max hosts tried to shut him up, and divert the discussion to cancel culture, which was supposed to be the topic of discussion. Lindell just ignored them, and the anchor tried to get the control room to mute his mic, and then, walked off the set. The host repeated, several times, that Lindell’s claims have no basis in fact, and that News Max will not publish them.
BTW: you’re back to claiming that media have accused Trump of “working for” Russia. That’s not what the Mueller investigation was about, and I’ve yet to see any media claim this, but they have reported on his deference to Putin at Helsinki, which was an unheard of total public repudiation of his own intelligence agencies, that Russian hackers helped him cheat in 2016, and that he has tried to borrow money from Russians because his credit is so bad. You are lying when you say that it is a “total fabrication” that Russians didn’t help Trump cheat by manipulating social media. Dan Coats, formerly head of all American Intelligence agencies, a lifelong Republican, and appointed by Trump, made clear that Russians did help Trump. He got fired for telling this truth. Trump refused to cooperate with Mueller, and is guilty of obstruction of justice, but there was ample evidence of Russian hacking and the involvement with Trump’s campaign. Your “opinions” about Russia helping Trump in 2016 have no factual basis, no matter how many times you repeat them. It’s not a matter of opinion.
You speak of “concerns” about election integrity. What are these “concerns” based on, other than Trump’s lies and the devotion of disciples like you? The Secretaries of State of all 50 states CERTIFIED the results of their elections, including those in swing states which have Republicans in charge. In Georgia, there was a recount, a re-recount, and a signature match validation before the counts were certified, but Trump dogged the GA Secretary of State, demanding that he “find” votes, and when he refused, threatened him with criminal prosecution, then he went after the Governor, who refused him, and next, went after the GA Attorney General, all Republicans. Over 60 lawsuits were filed. The judges listened to what Giuliani and Powell said was their evidence, and found that it was insufficient to establish widespread voter fraud or manipulation, and the anomalies could not have been sufficient to overcome Biden’s 11 million advantage. Minor glitches and human error always happen, but there was NO evidence of widespread voter fraud. Next, Trump demanded that Barr investigate, which he did, and when he told Trump that there is NO evidence of widespread voter fraud, Trump fired him. Chris Krebs told Trump that 2020 was the most-secure election in US history, so he got fired, too. Over the weekend, 5 different attorneys quit Trump because they refused to go along with the lie that there was election fraud and that Trump really won. These are not “opinions”, these are FACTS. Ask yourself why you refuse to believe these facts.
Your suggestion that people just turn off Lindell if they don’t agree is not a simple matter of opposing opinions. You cannot slander someone’s product with lies when there is no evidence to back them up. Dominion Voting Systems is fighting for its company survival, and can prove that Giuliani lied about their equipment.
Lindell is the kind of person who gives “a bad name” to those who support President Trump’s economic, social, vaccine, etc. achievements based on the facts of his 4 years in office.
Lindell is a victim of the brutal oppression of totalitarian communist dictatorship.
Donald Trump is crass and boorish, and President Donald J. Trump is the Greatest President in American History.
thetennants1970 says: “Lindell is the kind of person who gives “a bad name” to those who support President Trump’s economic, social, vaccine, etc. achievements based on the facts of his 4 years in office.”
And what would that “bad name” be, pray tell? Deplorables?
THE UNITED STATES SHALL GUARANTEE TO EVERY STATE IN THIS UNION A REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Article IV, Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,…
______________________________________________________________________________
“[We gave you] a republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin, 1787
________________
Republic
Merriam-Webster
b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Never was one man, one vote democracy the design or intent of the American Founders.
America was established as a restricted-vote republic.
One man, one vote democracy always fails, resulting in dictatorship.
By law, the presidential election of 1788 sustained a turnout of 11.6%.
The 2020 election was stolen by Deep Deep State communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) who abhor freedom.
America is now a one-party state, communist dictatorship; the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
The entire American communist welfare state is unconstitutional.
The free American republic persisted for only 72 years.
After the engineered 1860 election (Lincoln 38.9% – 2M for, 3M against), “Crazy Abe” Lincoln’s totalitarian and wholly unconstitutional “Reign of Terror” commenced nearly simultaneously with the 1848 publication
of the Communist Manifesto (communist abolition of slavery must have occurred, per the Constitution, through advocacy, boycott, divestiture, etc. – no country in history ended slavery through war).
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always
votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy–to be followed by a dictatorship.”
– Alexander Tytler
______________
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and
to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
Of course, the computers were right in only Trump districts, right? The computers were right only in red states, right? The computers were right only in 2016, right? They seem to be wrong in only suburbs and major cities, right? Oh, and they were wrong where three fifths of a person voted, right? And of course, they were wrong when young people voted. Funny, the computers got it wrong only in areas where Trump lost, better take all that evidence and go to court, oh, that’s right they did, and lost bigly.
Outstanding points, as usual, and the logic of your argument is persuasive. However, Trumpsters don’t want to hear it, don’t believe it, and OANN, News Max and Fox all tell them not to believe these facts, so they don’t. How will we ever heal the divisions in this country when so many people are immune to reality?
Sooner or later it’s gonna hit them like a ton of bricks. Some have all ready turned back to the real world, some are still looking for the edge of the earth.
Fish– “Sooner or later it’s gonna hit them like a ton of bricks.”
***
It already has for the men whose pipefitters union told them to vote for Biden.
Thousands lost their jobs in an instant.
Kerry said they can make solar panels.
Some other Biden halfwit told them to dig for abandoned land mines.
I can’t repeat their response, but they really should have known better; it isn’t as if the Biden people haven’t been revealing themselves as Eco-Lunatics for a long time.
Whatever you do Young, don’t fall off the edge. Don’t even get close, you might lose your balance, and tip over.
Fish– That’s typical of your remarks when you have nothing of substance to say, which is generally the case and why I seldom respond to you.
Hear it from the workers:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/01/keystone-xl-pipeline-workers-speak-out-about-lost-jobs-following-cancellation-of-project/
So much for Democrats being the party of working men. Pushing them over the edge most like. It is the party of oligarchs and authoritarianism. Fascists and they don’t even pretend to hide it these days..
They want us to die, basically. That’s where this is all heading.
The roll back of policies from the previous administration is proceeding apace. I’m sure that many of the executive orders were already in the can and ready for signature. There’s an incongruity though in the momentum behind all of this and President Biden’s articulation of what the administration is doing. He looks like Rip Van Winkle waking up from a very long nap 💤 .
“Thousands lost their jobs in an instant.”
And their policy of compulsory wage increases is causing more businesses to close and more workers to be unemployed.
“Kroger Co. will close two Southern California supermarkets in response to a local ordinance” compelling a $4/hour wage increase. Numerous other cities in California are considering similar, coercive wage increases — with the predictable results.
Interestingly, the compulsory wage increases for grocery stores does *not* apply to companies such as Target and Walmart.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/california-supermarkets-closing-city-orders-pay-hike-75636159
Natacha,
Frankly, I am astonished that you would judge anyone about their opinion of election integrity. You spent years on this blog, on record, claiming Trump colluded with the Russians, and that he cheated to win an election.
The subsource admitted that none of the dossier was supposed to be submitted as fact. Some of it was bar talk, and some entirely fabricated. Yet still you pushed the delusion that Trump was a manchurian candidate.
You also could not accept the rules of the election, that the popular vote of each state determines their electoral votes, which in turn decide the president. You called following the 200 plus rules “cheating”. You could not even accept that the Electoral College is designed so that every president must be concerned with the needs of the entire country, not just a couple of major metropolitan areas.
Your position now damning opinions and concerns about election integrity shows an astonishing lack of self awareness.
You had your years of investigations. Give the other party the same courtesy.
Trump’s campaign did collude with the Russians. For example, Manafort willingly gave lots of campaign polling data to Kilimnik, a Russian intelligence agent. Can you admit that?
Guess what, you can give non-classified “data” to foreigners. It happens every day in business and regular social intercourse. idiot!
And why would Manafort give polling data to a known Russian intelligence agent, just to be a nice guy?
Why would Hillary sell American uranium to the Russians? Part of her “Reset?”
Hillary did not sell American uranium to the Russians –
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/
Learn not to ask loaded questions.
Anonymous the Stupid is providing links again. He can’t summarize what they said and probably doesn’t even know. The fact is that Hillary was the primary person to permit American uranium to be sold to the Russians. Yes, other people were also involved. There are loads of yes men in Washington and their job is to be agreeable to the powers that be.
Anonymous the Stupid, this linkage fetish you have is demonstrative of a mind that doesn’t think. People that don’t think are generally considered Stupid.
Why did Hillary pay for the pee pee dossier?
Guess what “idiot,” Kilimnik isn’t simply a “foreigner.” He’s an agent of the Russian government.
I didn’t say that it’s illegal. I said that it’s collusion. Do you know that there is no law against collusion, “idiot,” and that some collusion is illegal and some isn’t?
anonymous (at least do us the courtesy of picking a recognizable avatar and sticking with it):
Polling data? Sharing an internal poll is treason or collusion? To do what? Make himself seem important, no doubt. “Collusion” with Russia has now been dumbed down to include trying to convince a Ukrainian businessman that candidate Trump had a shot at winning, therefore Manafort should be taken seriously as a well connected man. Are you in earnest?
“Manafort’s business partner told the Mueller team that Manafort shared the data to smooth over a financial dispute with the Mr. Deripaska and to win new consulting business in Ukraine by showing he was well-connected.
Prosecutors said he also lied about his involvement in Mr. Kilimnik pushing a Crimea peace plan favorable to Russia and backed by former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, a Moscow favorite.
The Mueller report said Manafort did not share the plan with the campaign, the candidate, or the Trump administration. There is no indication from Mr. Mueller that Manafort lied about any knowledge of Russian computer hacking.
“The office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort’s sharing polling data and Russia’s interference in the election, which had already been reported by the U.S. media outlets at the time of the August 2 [Manafort-Kilimnik] meeting,” the Mueller report said. “The investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts.”
During pre-trial evidence discovery, Mr. Downing asked the Mueller lawyers for any information that Mr. Manafort had Russian government contacts. Mr. Downing said they reported back that they had none.”
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/23/two-secret-documents-disprove-claims-about-paul-ma/
Karen, this from the GOP majority Senate Intel Comm Report released in August:
“) Manafort hired and worked increasingly closely with a Russian national, Konstantin
Kilimnik. Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer. Kilimnik became an integral part of
Manafort’s operations in Ukraine and Russia, serving as Manafort’s primary liaison to Deripaska
and eventually managing Manafort’s office in Kyiv. Kilimnik and Manafort formed a close and
lasting relationship that endured to the 2016 U.S. elections. and beyond.
(U) Prior to joining the Trump Campaign in March 2016 and continuing throughout his
time 6n the Campaign, Manafort directly and indirectly communicated with Kilimnik, Deripaska,
and the pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine. On numerous occasions, Manafort sought to secretly
share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik. The Committee was unable to reliably
determine why Manafort shared sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy with
Kilimnik or with whom Kilimnik further shared that information. The Committee had limited
insight into Kilimnik’s communications with Manafort and into Kilimnik’s communications with
other individuals connected to Russian influence operations, all of whom used communications
security practices. The Committee obtained some information suggesting Kilimnik may have
been connected to the GRU’s hack and leak operation targeting the 2016 U.S. election.
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf
“Sensitive internal polling data”. I guess they told you this morning to try any chaff you could think of.
Are you hearing voices telling you things Arty?
No, I’m not going to pick an icon. If that bothers you too much, feel free to ignore me.
Yes, secretly sharing campaign polling is collusion. That data would have been quite useful to the Russians in targeting people with the troll farms whose aims were to influence voter turnout (e.g., encouraging weak Clinton voters to just sit out the election).
It’s not as though that’s the only example –
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-russia-government-contact-timeline-2018-7#november-2015-trumps-personal-attorney-michael-cohen-reaches-out-to-russian-weight-lifter-dmitry-klokov-in-an-attempt-to-secure-a-deal-with-russian-president-vladimir-putin-to-build-a-trump-tower-in-moscow-1
The SSCI Report identifies even more.
What you describe is fundamentally legal sharing of non-classified information with foreigners. I applaud Manafart for engaging in inter-cultural exchange. How diverse of him.
Election integrity is not a matter of opinion. Everything about elections is a matter for states to determine–from registering to vote, producing proof of registration, security for in-person or mail balloting, counting, certification, handling requests for recounts, etc.. All 50 Secretaries of State CERTIFIED that Joe Biden won the election, even after Trump tried to bully swing state officials into canceling Biden votes and awarding them to him. Trump had his day in court–60 different ones. Judges heard the arguments and found them to be either baseless or insufficient to overcome the 11 million vote advantage obtained by Biden. Dominion Voting Systems has proven that it’s machines were not, and could not be, manipulated by a foreign government, and that’s why the lawsuits were dismissed. Did that shut up Trump? No. His ego won’t allow him to acknowledge the truth–that he was the most-unpopular POTUS in the history of presidential polling (Biden has already beaten him), that polls predicted he would lose, and that he did, in fact, lose.
OK, here we go again: the “dossier” was NOT the basis for the Mueller investigation–an Australian diplomat reported to the CIA or FBI that someone associated with Trump’s campaign was bragging about Russians hacking into Hillary Clinton’s e-mail. Read the Mueller investigation, please, as I’ve asked you to do repeatedly. I have never said Trump was a “manchurian candidate” (BTW–you really don’t understand what this means–you probably haven’t even seen the movie, much less read the book). The “Manchurian Candidate” was about American soldiers who were captured by Korea and subjected to brainwashing such that when stimulated by a pre-arranged trigger (a certain playing card), they would turn into automatons and do whatever they were told to do. There is a scene in which Laurence Harvey was playing solitaire, turned up the triggering card, and heard someone say to go “jump in a lake”, so he does it, fully clothed. He was being groomed to assassinate a presidential candidate. I have pointed out that in Helskini, Trump publicly sided with Putin on the issue of Russian hacking, and against his own intelligence agencies, which is unheard-of. Dan Coats testified that Russians did hack into computers and also that they put out lies about Hillary Clinton on social media in districts directed by Trump’s campaign in districts which internal polling indicated that support for Hillary Clinton was soft enough that such lies might help him win the Electoral College. That is called cheating. It did happen. I’m sorry that you don’t seem to understand these facts, but they are facts, not subject to opinion.
A substantial majority of people believe that the Electoral College process is fraught with problems—mostly benefiting rural areas over urban areas, so that rural areas are unfairly over-represented. I never denied the process by which the popular vote affects the Electoral College.
I don’t have “opinions” about election integrity–I follow the facts. Trumpsters are the ones who ignore facts and maintain the opinions no matter what the facts. This isn’t a matter of opposing opinions at all–there is no evidence supporting Trump’s claims. And, the lie about election fraud isn’t innocuous, either. Five people died in the Trump Insurrection fomented by lies from a malignant narcissist who can’t admit he lost an election.
You follow the facts?…and science, too? But of course you do. And are you wearing two masks now? Or three? Was it ‘two masks are better than one’ that the “science expert,” the sainted Dr. Fowchi said a couple weeks ago? Oh that’s right, he DID say that, and then the very next week he said that really, to be honest, there is no data to support that. Say it ain’t so, Dr. Fowchee! Did he just pull some more of his “science” right out of his you know what…again. Of course he did. That’s what Dr. Fowchee does. But you keep following the science. Oh and the “facts” of course.
Having computers tally votes is an invitation to fraud. Beyond that, many seemingly knowledgeable people have provided expert testimony and/or sworn statements. Then the MSM reaction of just shouting the idea down, saying “baseless” 5 billion times, is itself circumstantial evidence of consciousness of guilt. I don’t know how any sane or rational person can say there’s “no evidence” of widespread election fraud. Which is not to say that proof to whatever level of certainty deemed sufficient has been made. But no opportunity to do that has been afforded either.
+10.
JMRJ, If Trump’s claims had had ‘any’ credence he would have scored at least a few court victories. Yet Trump’s court defeats were an unbroken string spanning several states. That doesn’t happen when a genuine case exists. And you’re totally disengenous to claim, like it’s a fact, that the probability was there.
Genuine cases are tossed all the time, especially when there are political ramifications.
The evidence of Smartmatic machine related FRAUD HAS been brought forth, it would be supported by proof IF it were investigated. The word “unsupported” should be changed to “Uninvestigated”, “Ignored evidence”. No one in proper authority IE the FBI has tested or investigated beyond the statement that “The fraud is possible”, and then left alone. The Michigan Judge who said Giuliani’s witnesses are “Incredible” has no basis or evidence to claim so, and showed no interest in justice. Access to the Smartmatic equipment and forensic testing is being denied, allowing this lie that “YOU have NO PROOF” to keep protecting evidence. WHY NEWSMAX is taking this position is beyond me, I thought this was an impartial unbiased News station. Turns out not so. The gauntlet is thrown down, and the challenge goes ignored, the dispute is unresolved, the line in the sand is drawn. The black-lie word for it is “Unsupported”. That should be “Ignored”, “Classified Top Secret”, “Cover Up in Progress”. In the news world now, you’re either black or white. Newsmax where did you jump off? You need to change your name to “NewsMini”. “CNN Jr.” Just walk away and stay gone.
Crazybear, the 9/11 ‘Truthers’ were making this same argument for years: ‘If only they had a chance to make their case in a proper forum surely the public would see that plausible doubts exist’.
Any conspiracy theory can be leveraged in the terms.
https://canada.constructconnect.com/dcn/news/others/2020/05/world-trade-center-7-building-did-not-collapse-due-to-fire-report
engineers and architects for 9/11 truth and a study from University of Alaska differ from the government’s patently unbelievable explanation of why wtc7 collapsed
but here you naive fools are years later bringing it up again, to demonstrate your credulity
no need for fancy forums. you can see for yourself.
Why don’t you believe the various Secretaries of State who CERTIFIED the results? The swing state ones are Republicans. Do you really believe they’d go along with fraud? All of them? And if so, why? What about Trump demanding that the GA Secretary of State “find” him 11,000+ votes, and when informed that the count was accurate (this was after recount, re-recount and a signature match validation, all done under scrutiny by watchers), then threatening him, and then calling the Governor and demanding the same thing, and then calling the GA Attorney General? Do you really believe they’re all in on the fix, or maybe, just maybe, media like OANN, News Max and Fox are feeding you what you want to hear, which is confirmation of the Trump lie that the election was stolen? I don’t know how any sane or rational person could believe that Trump could win, in a landslide no less, considering that he lost the popular vote in 2016, that he set a record for disapproval ratings, that the economy went to hell on his watch, that he lied to the American people about the pandemic, resulting in unnecessary deaths and suffering, and that every poll, including those by Fox, predicted he would lose. All of the so-called “expert” testimony and “sworn statements” have either been disproven or found to not have affected enough votes to change the outcome. Trump lost. Get over it.
Oy.
Okay, the “certification officials” are Republican? And that’s important because Trump always had uniform and enthusiastic Republican support? Try harder.
The phone call. Remember THAT was going to be the basis for a second impeachment because theories abounded that this, too, was a criminal act. And let me say this. I don’t even like Trump. I thought he was an inappropriate president. But I lost an hour of my life listening to that stupid phone call and I can tell you it was grossly misrepresented in the MSM, like so many things during the Trump era.
I agree it is plausible that Trump lost, for a lot of reasons, mostly different from those you cite. As a political neophyte and with lots and lots of detractors among the Republican operatives, and with the anomalous situation where we had not an election “day” but an election two months or more, the much more committed Dems could have mustered up a decisive “get out the vote” effort. That’s possible. That’s plausible. That would be legit, if a bit hard to take in some ways.
But this misses the point. The question is not whether the apparent outcome is plausible – apparent things always are. The question is whether allegations of widespread fraud are plausible. And they are as well, and the most emphatically is evidence to support that, and the issue should be aired and decided. And shouting “baseless” 10 billion times does nothing to dispel the idea. Quite the contrary, really.
And I’m not aware of any sworn statements or expert testimony having been “disproven” or found immaterial except maybe by the MSM or some hack judge.
Personally, I think Trump should just air it all out at his impeachment “trial”, but apparently every lawyer in the country has been cowed into forswearing any such argument. It’s too bad. The Dems have this idiotic trial, Trump could command the microphone and make his case in a way he’d never be allowed to do anywhere else. So what does he do? Defer to some lawyer telling him this is “not the right forum”.
There is no other forum. The judiciary is too political, too feckless and too corrupted to ever do anything about this kind of thing. And maybe that’s how it should be. These are political questions consigned to the other branches and they should fight it out and stop seeking some kind of judicial imprimatur for the result. It’s tiresome.
In any event once again it seems like Trump really isn’t up to it in the first place.
Natacha asked, “why don’t you believe the various Secretaries of State who CERTIFIED the results?”
Apparently, she did not read this blog:
https://jonathanturley.org/2020/11/19/two-republican-michigan-officials-attempt-to-rescind-certifications-of-election-results/
Jonathan Turley himself said, “two Republicans — Monica Palmer and William C. Hartmann, on the Wayne County Board of Canvassers sought to rescind their votes to certify. They claim that they were coerced by threats against them and their families by Democratic voters. The threats against Palmer and Hartmann are all-too-familiar in an election where Democratic members are calling for blacklists and others denounce any questioning of the Biden victory as akin to “Holocaust denial.” The Lincoln Project has led a national effort to harass any lawyers who represent Republicans or the Trump campaign. While it will be difficult to rescind such a vote, the silence in the media and from Democratic leaders on this harassment is chilling. Indeed, Democratic leaders have joined in the personal attacks.”
I prefer the explanation of Krebbs, who maintains there’s paper backup for the ballots this election cycle.
Elvis Bug
LOL who is Krebbs? “Paper backup”? So what?
You get some qualified people to do a forensic examination and, assuming both sides muster that up and they conflict, you air it out and let people decide. I’d say jury instead of people but this isn’t really a court thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Krebs
Paper backups matter because they allow you to audit the machine counts. You think that’s irrelevant?
Okay I remember who he is now. Most secure election in history? That’s truly risible. With it taking place over such a long period it’s basically impossible for it to be the most secure election in history.
He’s swamp on steroids. Even so, I can’t find anything that says that he maintains there’s paper backup for everything. He has advocated for that in the past.
And regarding my use of “swamp”. I’m not a Trump fan, but that doesn’t mean I think he’s wrong about everything.
Even if Krebbs does maintain that he can vouch for paper backup all over the country such that a computer falsification would always be discovered, there’s reason to doubt that. But let him make the case in an adversarial setting. I’m open to the idea.
Joe Biden’s press office got caught prescreening questions before briefings.
This White House takes transparency with the American people just as seriously as they take “unity.”
@lancegooden
Bob Sellers, keep walking…
straight over to CNN.
Newsmax may have repented.
I suspect they heard from a lot of people.
Mike was invited back with a different anchor.
What are they going to do with the anchor that screwed up the interview?
Will keeping him cost Newsmax some of its followers?
It might. Walking off the set was stupidly impulsive no matter what the subject. He will be the Chris Wallace of Newsmax and I don’t think they want one with the demographic they are trying to capture.
It seemed to me last night reading through The Gateway Pundit’s comment section regarding this Newsmax/Landle censorship story that Americans are sick of & they are done with this corporate/govt type crap.
Newmax/Fox/CNN/etc. approx 66% American’s are telling you to go Piss up a Rope. And that’s alot of economic power that’s walking away from them.
BTW: I’m buying some new Pillows, guess who from! 😉
I just looked at the comments on Gateway. There are over 5,000 of them and climbing, and they are quit with Newsmax.
What a stupid thing for the anchor to do just as the channel was building an audience
We should not be watching TV. We should be organizing and preparing.
Notice with the Nov,3, 20 Election Fraud issue/issues, as one of Trump’s adviser Attorney Robert Barnes noted that to date not one court anywhere would allow any Trump case at least have an evidentiary hearing.
So all those claims election has be debunked are crap at this point.
We now live in the day of the Red Queen, Sentence 1st, Trial later.
So next week could be interesting if the Senate is so bold to allow witnesses & evidence of facts.
“We now live in the day of the Red Queen, Sentence 1st, Trial later.”
***
With our corrupt courts you don’t ever get a trial on some issues. That, as you noted, is what happened with election fraud lawsuits.
Our elites in big tech, media and government have studied Goebbels closely: Repeat a big lie often and it will be believed.
Evidence not allowed.
Host throws a tantrum and ,,,, left the set with or without all the microphones? The reason for asking is were the two others able to keep the exchange going, If so were the two remaining able to keep an intelligent exchange focused or ,,,, what else is left but right?
This whole thing is out of hand. YES, there was election fraud! American elections have been plagued by fraud ever since the Founding. Were voting machines rigged? No one really knows because there has never been a thorough examination of them because of political pushback. By the way, “human error” is another term for manipulation. Voting machines don’t program themselves.
We could have “majority vote” ballot processing software (like was used on Apollo for mission-critical computations — 3 computers crunched the numbers and all 3 had to agree).
What if 3 ballot processing softwares took turns crunching the optical scan of a ballot — one software developed by Repub team, one from Dem team, and a third neutral from League of Women Voters or a non-profit?
If all 3 softwares agreed on the votes cast by the ballot, the ballot would then be put in the “done” pile, and results posted to a database.
If there were disagreement among any of the softwares, the ballot would go to a “discrepancy” pile, to be adjudicated by a resolution team consisting of reps from each team.
We could have solutions like this if we could rise out of the pit of unproductive factional paranoia, and start considering our range of options for running clean elections with high integrity built-in structurally.
Fine by me, but you’re going to have to convince legislators to provide the funding for all the extra machines.
The question isn’t whether fraud occurred. It did. Some people have already been arrested for voter fraud, such as this Trump supporter who illegally tried to obtain a ballot for his dead mother –
https://www.fox29.com/news/authorities-pennsylvania-man-tried-to-request-ballot-for-deceased-mother
If you have evidence that there was widespread fraud, sufficient to affect the outcome of the election, present it.
No, “human error” isn’t synonymous with “manipulation.” Human error occurs in lots of ways, not just programming errors.
YES, there was election fraud!
The military in Myanmar is alleging the same accusation against Aung San Suu Kyi so they staged a coup and detained her. Sound familiar? Biden’s White House is in chaos because they are dithering in supporting Aung San. This considering Aung San Suu Kyi is Recipient of numerous honors including
Presidential Medal of Freedom (6 December 2000)
European Union Sakharov Prize (1990)
Norway Nobel Peace Prize (14 October 1991)
Sweden Olof Palme Prize (2005)
United States Congressional Gold Medal (6 May 2008)
United Kingdom Amnesty International Ambassador of Conscience Award (2009), rescinded on 11 November 2018
England Chatham House Prize (2011)
United States The Wallenberg Medal from the University of Michigan (2011)
United States The Elie Wiesel Award from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (2012), rescinded on 6 March 2018.
Not one month into his Presidency, Biden vacillates on a foreign leader despite his 47 years in US Politics
China is happy though.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9213225/Biden-threatens-Myanmar-sanctions-administration-debates-calling-military-takeover-coup.html
Chaos’ in the White House as Biden administration officials argue over whether to call Myanmar military takeover a ‘coup’ over fears they will ‘anger China and be forced to withdraw foreign aid’
President Joe Biden threatened to reimpose sanctions on Myanmar on Monday as his administration debates whether to call the military takeover a ‘coup.’
Insiders familiar with the back-and-forth described the discussions as ‘chaos’ as officials fear that the White House calling the military takeover a coup could anger China and force the United States to withdraw foreign aid, Politico reported.
Myanmar’s army took power of the country early on Monday and declared a state of emergency after detaining de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi along with members of her party.
“it was clear that irregularities cited in the use of the Dominion computers were attributed to human error”
Was it human error or calculated human interference?
Mr Turley, Mike was asked why he was censored. Part of his answer was what Mike believes happened regarding lection fraud. newsmax shouldn’t have asked the question. They knew what it was about.
The News Max anchor left in an effort to try to shut up Mike Lindell, and to avoid getting News Max sued by Dominion, because Trump’s claims of vote manipulation have been disproven. Giuliani is getting sued for lying about this. I mostly feel sorry for Lindell, because he used to be a crack addict who got religion, turned his life around and started a successful business that actually employs Americans. Because of the controversy he is causing over his vocal devotion to Trump, retailers are starting to refuse to carry his products. He’s probably going to lose his business because he fell for the Trump lies. He fell hard, too, which is a likely due to his addictive personality traits. Trump was his new drug, and he’s hooked. Lindell is just more road kill on the Trump highway to hell.
And, Turley, you are wrong in claiming that any commission could ever lay to rest the matter of whether the election was fraudulent. Hell, multiple Secretaries of State, Governors, Attorneys General, including Bill Barr and Chris Krebs, multiple recounts, poll watchers, vote count watchers–none of these have convinced them. Trump is a pathological liar and narcissist, and he will NEVER shut up about this, never admit he lost fair and square, and his devoted disciples will never stop believing him no matter the quantum of proof, until or unless he admits the truth, which his mental illness prevents him from doing. They are literally immune to facts. You have to be immune to realty and facts to be a Trump supporter. Setting aside Trump’s lies about fraud, look at the big picture: Trump set a record for low approval ratings, he lost the popular vote in 2016 and 2020, he was predicted to lose, he put America into economic and health crises of historic proportions, his trade war with China flopped, his administration set records for departures, and he mostly governed by Executive Order. Most Americans disapproved of him and what he did and wanted him gone. So how likely is it that he not only won the election, but won by a landslide as he claims? If the votes were manipulated, how do you explain down-ballot Republicans winning on the same ballot in which voters chose Biden over Trump?
Totally spot on about Lindell’s emotional response to trumpy bear. It’s absolutely a product of an addictive mindset. Sad really, how trump was able to really lean on the inner authoritarian buttons on so many, and then use that to brazenly lie to them. That sort of emotionalism also grasped a segment of Bernie bros in recent years as well.
Elvis Bug
Yes of course, people who like Trump and Bernie are “authoritarians” and crippled by “emotionalism” unlike the high minded pooh-bahs of Wall Street and Silicon Valley, who are so smart they can decide everything for us. And we are just whining and crying like so many children, eh?
Limited my answer to politics just so, apparently, you could twist it out of proportion and put words in my mouth.
Elvis Bug
“And, Turley, you are wrong in claiming that any commission could ever lay to rest the matter of whether the election was fraudulent. Hell, multiple Secretaries of State, Governors, Attorneys General, including Bill Barr and Chris Krebs, multiple recounts, poll watchers, vote count watchers–none of these have convinced them.”
A “one-size-fits-all” commission might be a waste of time. Individual county audits could be the way to go: “Maricopa County’s election audit isn’t about 2020. It’s about the future”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/maricopa-countys-election-audit-isnt-about-2020-its-about-the-future/ar-BB1derB6
“The News Max anchor left in an effort to try to shut up Mike Lindell, and to avoid getting News Max sued by Dominion,”
***
No. All they had to do is day that views of guests do not represent views of the network and let people hear what Mike had to say.
Using the term “human error” is a joke. Ballot stuffing is not human error, It’s criminal, 130,000 Biden votes overnight. If there isn’t fraud in the elections then why are the Democrats so afraid of picture voter I.D. and having proof of citizenship for mail in ballots?
It is the showing of ID that is the issue, it is the obtaining the ID. Many states make it hard for low income people to get IDs. In my county, the DMV is about 6 miles outside of town with poor bus service. Many states have one DMV per county, and it is only open a few days a month. Then there is the issue of obtaining the needed documents. Voter ID laws allow states to put many barriers in place to vote.
Molly: “Many states make it hard for low income people to get IDs.”
***
Nonsense. They get ID for everything else.
In predominantly black Caribbean countries that are very poor compared to our ‘poor’ they have photo ID for voting. I have seen it myself. Apparently those very poor people can get it even in Third World countries..
Are you saying that our poor blacks are stupider or more incompetent than those isolated on Caribbean islands? Seems like. You have a very low opinion of the abilities of our poor.
Shame on you.
Racist!
I did not bring race into this at all. My point is that state governments use the combination of voter ID laws and making it hard to get IDs as a form of voter suppression.
It is hard to get an ID because people use fake ID to try and steal things.
And also because our government has to stay on the alert against terrorism threats from the many angry foreigners, from places that the US has unjustly bombed and invaded and interfered with in recent memory.
Perhaps if the US would stop interfering in foreign nations affairs, then there would be less anger.
Say, is it true Joe Biden just sent troops back into Syria? So sad that he now must be called a war-pig.
https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2101/S00075/what-bidens-warmongering-will-actually-look-like.htm
Young, you said “black”, Molly didn’t.
It is a fact – not a matter of opinion – that photo ID laws impact poor people more than others and that group can be of any race and include many older people. I’m fine with photo IDs if the government requiring them proactively gets one to all citizens. That is not the usual proposal. Given that there is no data suggesting polling location fraud is a problem of any kind – no, less than .001% is not a problem – the motive for GOP pushing of this idea is as some of them have announced – a way to win elections by lowering turn out by demographic groups that typically vote Democratic. This is not a secret or even challengeable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW2LpFkVfYk
Start at 1:30
The liberal mindset embarrasses themselves by making believe that blacks are ignorant. The truth is the liberal mindset is ignorant. That is what a bunch of these people say along with calling it a bit racist.
That video was filmed in NYC. Do the same thing in rural south and see what happens.
Yes, It was filmed in Harlem. The big push against voter ID was because some felt it disenfranchised African Americans even though it didn’t. Most African Americans live in cities like Harlem so you can end your racism claims now. You should also end your claims that African Americans need you in order to function in society. They don’t.
You and your type prevent them from getting a better education. You and your type screw up their families so the family units are broken. You and your type want to defund the police or you do things to make the police less effective. That might be desired by the criminal class and gangs but most functioning black families would like you and those ideas thrown out.
No, they don’t get an ID for everything else.
Just because YOU have an ID and I have an ID does not mean that everyone has an ID.
Shame on YOU for asking a loaded question, and then assuming that you know the answer.
Get real. The numbers of legal citizens that have a real problem getting an ID is pitifully small and once the ID is obtained they have it. This excuse doesn’t pass the Stupid test which is obvious.
Food stamps
Welfare
Unemployment insurance
Walmart will demand an ID if not paid in cash.
Airplanes require ID
opening a bank account
buying cigarette and alcohol
driving a car
renting or buying a house
Even Stupid people can get an ID
Even stupid people can get ID.
But I wonder if Anonymous has one.
All you need to do to find out how hard it’s become to get a govt. issue :Photo Id is to lose the one you have. You may be in for a shock bubbo. Things have changed. Take a copy of all your id’s , for what good it will do. DL’s have “Audit Numbers” on the bottom. Lose that and you got problems.
I wonder what per cent of the Stupid people that wish to vote but don’t have ID are driving on our roads without a driver’s license.
Millions of people don’t have a government issued photo ID –
https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet
No one cares whether you think that # is large versus small. It’s greater than 0. Voting is a constitutional right. Not a single one of the things you listed is a constitutional right.
If the government wants to require one for voting, the government has to provide assistance to make sure that all citizens can get one without it costing anything.
Pathetic liars the ACLU
You haven’t produced any evidence that it’s false, much less that it’s knowingly false.
You based your comments on the ACLU and linked to it yet you got everything wrong.
“Voting is a constitutional right.”
The so-called “Right to Vote” wasn’t specifically addressed by the Constitution. If you recall in 12 of the 13 states women were not permitted to vote and the 13th state denied their vote at a later date. The states have the responsibility over election laws.
“Millions of people don’t have a government issued photo ID –”
Millions of people aren’t old enough to vote.
Millions of people aren’t citizens
Millions of people cannot vote for legal reasons
That demonstrates a low grade understanding of what you have said.
“Millions of people don’t have a government issued photo ID –”
Not having a photo ID doesn’t mean one cannot a photo ID
That demonstrates a lack of understanding of what you said and your almost total reliance on a secondary or tertiary source to tell you how to think.
“If the government wants to require one for voting, the government has to provide assistance to make sure that all citizens can get one without it costing anything.”
Why?
(I am not against providing such an ID for free.)
Allan the Stupid says “The so-called “Right to Vote” wasn’t specifically addressed by the Constitution,” despite the Constitution addressing the right to vote multiple times, including the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments. Allan the Stupid apparently confuses the Bill of Rights with the Constitution.
+10
Anonymous the Stupid is telling us his IQ again.
Anonymous the Stupid, you said in the Constitution. You didn’t mention the amendments and you don’t seem to understand the role the state plays. That is too much for a Stupid fellow.
Take note how I provided you the courtesy of answering legitimate argument without addressing you as Anonymous the Stupid but since you recognized how stupid your answer was you started with the insults again. OK I will address you as you desire, Anonymous the Stupid.
Of course you didn’t reference the rest of my response that demonstrated your Stupidity and reliance on others to do the thinking for you. Nor did you recognize the logic involved in your statement that just because one doesn’t have an acceptable ID doesn’t mean they can’t get one.
Anonymous the Stupid, you are really dumb.
The Amendments are part of the Constitution, idiot.
“a constitutional right”
Anonymous the Stupid. We all know that women were given the right to vote through amendment. It’s not even part of the first 10. The way you said it makes you look ignorant. Even the right isn’t absolute. Civil rights laws had to be passed to protect the ability of some groups to vote.
Try not to forget the Constitution was written in Philadelphia in 1787. The amendments were written afterwards.
You demonstrate low level thinking on a consistent basis.
“We all know that women were given the right to vote through amendment. ”
Yes. And all rights that are provided via amendment are constitutional rights. Why don’t you understand that?
“Even the right isn’t absolute.”
Duh. No rights are absolute, Allan.
“Try not to forget the Constitution was written in Philadelphia in 1787. The amendments were written afterwards.”
Allan, the Amendments are PART OF the Constitution. Our Constitution wasn’t written in a single year, or even a single century.
Your endless desire to insult only reveals more of your own ignorance. You’re describing yourself when you say “You demonstrate low level thinking on a consistent basis.”
Anonymous the Stupid, when one discusses complex things with you one has to speak on a level that is consistent with an ignorant person’s ability to comprehend. You are too fixated on the gotcha and not fixated on facts or learning.
In 1791 our founding fathers ratified the Constitution. When one looks at the Constitution of the United States we note that in their “We the People…’’ they, the founding fathers, made no direct reference to the “right to vote” and left election laws as a state responsibility.
The “right to vote” was not directly addressed until the Constitution was further amended. Can you get that through your thick skull?
Later you demonstrated ongoing Stupidity when you used the Constitution as your basis that included the amendments. There was nothing wrong with such an inclusion but unfortunately your Stupidity and desire for the gotcha led you to say: “Allan the Stupid says “The so-called “Right to Vote” wasn’t specifically addressed by the Constitution,” despite the Constitution addressing the right to vote multiple times, including the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments.” That demonstrated your lack of comprehension.
That was wrong! I had clearly addressed the amendments in the comment you were whining over. I said, “The so-called “Right to Vote” wasn’t specifically addressed by the Constitution. If you recall in 12 of the 13 states women were not permitted to vote.”, The 13th state denied their vote at a later date. I also informed you that the states have the responsibility over election laws.
This clearly demonstrates that we were talking at cross-purpose. I was talking about the Constitution as an individual document when it was ratified in 1791. You were referring to it as a document with its amendments. That is not a big deal until you act in your typical Stupid fashion and can’t see that you were talking about the whole and I referred to it as a whole with two parts where I included the parts involving the “right to vote”.
Included in that was a history lesson for you that 1 state permitted women the right to vote (later cancelled… much like our cancel culture of today). I also gave you a short lesson in logic along with the notion that not having something doesn’t mean one is being denied something.
I noted you even had to applaud your intelligence (actually a lack of) with a separate posting intended to give you a high approval score demonstrating your second personality to be as Stupid as your first. You are too Stupid to be on a list of this nature.
:Allan the Stupid apparently confuses the Bill of Rights with the Constitution.”
***
The Bill of Rights is an amendment to the Constitution and is therefore a legal part of the Constitution just as an amendment to a contract or deed of trust or modification of a note or mortgage is incorporated into and becomes a part of the original.
The confusion is wholly yours; embrace it.
“The Bill of Rights is an amendment to the Constitution and is therefore a legal part of the Constitution”
Duh. I pointed out over two hours ago to Allan the Stupid that “the Amendments are PART OF the Constitution.” Allan doesn’t understand that. Maybe he’ll listen to you, since he won’t listen to me.
“The confusion is wholly yours”
I’m not confused. You may be confused, since — as you’re wont to do — you ignored the reason I said “Allan the Stupid apparently confuses the Bill of Rights with the Constitution.” Do you understand why I pointed that out to him, or are you confused about it?
The Bill of Rights is a proper subset of the Constitution. A part is not the whole. Ask yourself how you would have preferred that I correct Allan the Stupid’s false assertion that “The so-called “Right to Vote” wasn’t specifically addressed by the Constitution,” despite the Constitution addressing the right to vote multiple times, including the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments. Then tell Allan why he’s wrong.
I see I created a bit of a stir. Anonymous the Stupid is too Stupid to review what was said. He can only move in a forward direction even when that means he will go over a cliff. He will know he was right up to the point he smashes into the ground below. Anonymous the Stupid reminds me of the Buffalo that used to freely graze throughout the West. Anonymous the Stupid has that same Buffalo mentality as he follows the left’s dictates to his own destruction.
Rather than write something new I will keep continuity by quoting what I just said to this Stupid person and leave that as my response even if it might miss a point or two.
“Anonymous the Stupid, when one discusses complex things with you one has to speak on a level that is consistent with an ignorant person’s ability to comprehend. You are too fixated on the gotcha and not fixated on facts or learning.
In 1791 our founding fathers ratified the Constitution. When one looks at the Constitution of the United States we note that in their “We the People…’’ they, the founding fathers, made no direct reference to the “right to vote” and left election laws as a state responsibility.
The “right to vote” was not directly addressed until the Constitution was further amended. Can you get that through your thick skull?
Later you demonstrated ongoing Stupidity when you used the Constitution as your basis that included the amendments. There was nothing wrong with such an inclusion but unfortunately your Stupidity and desire for the gotcha led you to say: “Allan the Stupid says “The so-called “Right to Vote” wasn’t specifically addressed by the Constitution,” despite the Constitution addressing the right to vote multiple times, including the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments.” That demonstrated your lack of comprehension.
That was wrong! I had clearly addressed the amendments in the comment you were whining over. I said, “The so-called “Right to Vote” wasn’t specifically addressed by the Constitution. If you recall in 12 of the 13 states women were not permitted to vote.”, The 13th state denied their vote at a later date. I also informed you that the states have the responsibility over election laws.
This clearly demonstrates that we were talking at cross-purpose. I was talking about the Constitution as an individual document when it was ratified in 1701. You were referring to it as a document with its amendments. That is not a big deal until you act in your typical Stupid fashion and can’t see that you were talking about the whole and I referred to it as a whole with two parts where I included the parts involving the “right to vote”.
Included in that was a history lesson for you that 1 state permitted women the right to vote (later cancelled… much like our cancel culture of today). I also gave you a short lesson in logic along with the notion that not having something doesn’t mean one is being denied something.
I noted you even had to applaud your intelligence (actually a lack of) with a separate posting intended to give you a high approval score demonstrating your second personality to be as Stupid as your first.You are too Stupid to be on a list of this nature.”
I am not going to tell Allan why he is wrong because I am not sure whether he was referring to the original Constitution or that with some subsets of its amendments. You injected additional confusion by tangling the discussion with the Bill of Rights. Yet none of the amendments you just cited for removing specific disabilities to voting actually are part of the Bill of Rights; i see the point you are making but think it would be better with the amendments just cited rather than dragging in the first 10. You might be trying harder to insult than to make a valid point.
“I am not going to tell Allan why he is wrong because I am not sure whether he was referring to the original Constitution or that with some subsets of its amendments. “
Young, that is correct. I was referring to the Constitution as ratified in 1791 based on the brilliant thoughts of our founding fathers. I also included the fact that amendments occurred later but like the Buffalo, Anonymous the Stupid drives himself over the cliff. He lacks both the mental capacity for critical thinking and self-reflection.
Thanks for your comments that are always helpful and thanks for reinforcing the two different ways the Constitution was viewed.
The valid point is that Allan is wrong but can’t admit it.
” wasn’t specifically addressed by the Constitution.”
Anonymous the Stupid, Yes, constitutional law addresses the “right to vote” by amendment. It can also be addressed through case law. The thing that demonstrates your Stupidity is that you forget my following sentence where amendments were brought in. That clearly demonstrates that I separated the two into two parts.
You are too nasty and gotcha inclined to read things properly. For that reason alone you will remain Stupid forever.
No, he is not wrong. He used the past tense, “wasn’t in the Constitution’ when first drafted. He did not say later amendments did not include it. You are so determined simply to attack someone that you are tripping over yourself. Embrace your confusion.
Really?? So they can’t cash a check or get a job?? They don’t drive?? They don’t buy alcohol?? Do they live in the underground???
You do not need a government ID for lots of jobs. Lots of people don’t drive and cannot afford a car. Lots of people don’t drink or are old enough that they don’t get carded. Some people don’t have bank accounts. Etc. Maybe if you learned more about the full range of people’s lives, you wouldn’t be asking those questions. Even if it’s only 0.5% of Americans, that’s still millions of adults.
There’s not one true statement in this paragraph. MollyG, blacks don’t need you and you should stop pretending they do.
Molly looks on black people as pets rather than people capable of acting without her ‘nurturing’ assistance.
Nothing could be more insulting.
Yet all those folks can get Library Cards, Social Security assistance, Welfare, Medicaid, Prescriptions, cash checks, and so many other functions of life that require Photo ID cards……but when it comes to Voting….the Democrat howl at the Moon over Photo ID’s….now why is that?
A quick pick from a five second Google search…… https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id.
They don’t provide evidence that a photo ID is truly required for those things. I don’t think I’ve ever been required to present a photo ID to rent. People can have prescriptions mailed to them without a photo ID. For the things on your list that do require an ID, it’s easy to live life without doing them.
“Many states make it hard for low income people to get IDs. In my county, the DMV is about 6 miles outside of town with poor bus service. Many states have one DMV per county, and it is only open a few days a month.”
I hear this exact same argument EVERY election cycle, going back at least three decades. It’s laughable, especially with the quadrennial “get out the vote” campaigns sponsored by mostly liberal organizations. It is not difficult to get a state-issued ID. All it takes is a just a little bit of effort, like getting out of the house…how difficult is that? You can’t tell me that 87 year-old Aunt Edna hasn’t been able to get an ID her entire life.
Aunt Edna gets Social Security benefits and Medicare and drove a car for 50 years, but cannot get a state-issued photo ID. She was employed with scant interruption from age 20 to age 63, but she cannot get state-issued photo ID. She has a bank account, but cannot get a state-issued photo ID. She cannot ask her daughter, her niece, her pastor, or the hospital social worker she spoke to the last time she was in to help her get one.
Maybe MollyG is just hopeless in everyday life and projecting.
Such problems may become the NORM for “Trump Supporting Domestic Terrorists” who chronically vote Republican. This is the heading for our democrat govt. the next 4 years, & the past 12 years.
Most people have to show ID for a medical appointment.
Depends a lot on the context.
Here’s a counterexample –
https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/vaccine/how-to-book-a-vaccine-appointment-without-a-photo-id-in-the-dmv/65-c54ec15b-3f27-4286-bc01-49cdacc8bc5c
Anonymous the Stupid, you can’t stand self-reflection. Cassidy said “most” and you retracted your statement. Unfortunately you persisted and demonstrated your inability to accept your limitations. You tried to prove the point Cassidy made trying to rectify a prior point that was wrong.
There is nothing wrong with being wrong and learning. There is something about being wrong and refusing to learn. That is just one of your problems Anonymous the Stupid. You are wrong very frequently and do not learn.
There was no “ballot stuffing”. It was predicted that in-person voting would favor Trump, but as absentee and military ballots would be counted, these would overwhelmingly favor Biden. That’s exactly what happened. In-person votes are immediately tabulated. Mail ballots have to be opened, flattened and fed into counting machines, and that takes more time. And Democrats aren’t “afraid” of anything, either. In order to vote by mail, a voter has to REGISTER, and that’s when the vetting about citizenship and ID is done. You have to be registered to receive a mail ballot. What do you want voters to to–send in their driver’s license and passport with their ballot? The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania laid this nonsense to rest.
The instant and coordinated “shut down” of the polls in the democrat controlled “battlefield states” easily shows that the election counting was purposely put on hold to bring in prepared phoney ballots by the boxloads, pallets full, as seen by potential witnesses who were sent home, with the counting continued by “partisan” activists. Highly suspect ballots were brought in after the poll closed. Machines and ballots are kept out of touch or reach by investigators who aren’t making any effort to prove suspected ballots. The machines can be operated and coordinated from onliine stations overseas, and it’s known that foreign countries were involved in our vote counting. The entire process is corrupted in every way imaginable. Supreme Courts in “democrat run” states have shut out and down any impartial investigations. You speak as though they’re reliable and completely to be assumed as honest as every suspect ballot is. I agree with that, so let the investigations begin. What have they got to hide? PLENTY of Corruption.
Something missed here also is the 13 billion dollars law suit against Dominion. If they don’t have evidence that suit wouldn’t be filed.
Here’s another thing that might cause a meltdown:
H. R. 127
“To provide for the licensing of firearm and ammunition possession and the registration of firearms, and to prohibit the possession of certain ammunition.”
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/127/text
Let’s not become the Weimar Republic…
“The Weimar Republic’s well-intentioned gun registry became a tool for evil.
The perennial gun-control debate in America did not begin here. The same arguments for and against were made in the 1920s in the chaos of Germany’s Weimar Republic, which opted for gun registration. Law-abiding persons complied with the law, but the Communists and Nazis committing acts of political violence did not.
In 1931, Weimar authorities discovered plans for a Nazi takeover in which Jews would be denied food and persons refusing to surrender their guns within 24 hours would be executed. They were written by Werner Best, a future Gestapo official. In reaction to such threats, the government authorized the registration of all firearms and the confiscation thereof, if required for “public safety.” The interior minister warned that the records must not fall into the hands of any extremist group.#ad#
In 1933, the ultimate extremist group, led by Adolf Hitler, seized power and used the records to identify, disarm, and attack political opponents and Jews. Constitutional rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident publications ensued. Police revoked gun licenses of Social Democrats and others who were not “politically reliable.”
During the five years of repression that followed, society was “cleansed” by the National Socialist regime. Undesirables were placed in camps where labor made them “free,” and normal rights of citizenship were taken from Jews. The Gestapo banned independent gun clubs and arrested their leaders.”
http://www.campaignforliberty.org/nazis-used-gun-control
This isn’t a Democrat vs Republican argument in the grand scheme of things. The statists wish to retain and entrench power and they care not about party allegiance.
Prairie, it is already established that types of weapons may be regulated by the government. That’s a good thing.
You seem concerned with health issues, so read some of the statements by trauma docs who try to treat wounds from AR15 type weapons. They can’t very well. These weapons feature high velocity, small caliber rounds. Damage – by the laws of physics – are exponentially proportional to speed while only directly proportional to mass. These weapons were designed to inflict maximum damage with ease of use. The high velocity does the former while the smaller caliber does the latter by reducing recoil to a minumum, thus more control by the shooter. The rounds essentially explode in the body, damaging organs and tissue near to their path – they don;t even need to hit the organs. Do you think that this is a proper weapon for people to now carry around our streets, in our schools and churches and even in the Capital?
Really?
“high velocity, small caliber”
I am really worried about the AR-15 and dying from falling out of bed which is a much more frequent occurrence. The peak velocity when falling out of bed is rather small compared to the AR-15 so I am not so sure we should be focusing on peak velocities.
Blah blah blah, another gun grabber speaks. A proud Democrat! They want us all incapable of resistance so we can be enslaved by their taxes.
This only challenges the type of ammo, not the type of weapon. Other more “appropriate” ammo could be used like .40 S&W, or at least 9mm.
Gun licensure is managed by the states. The Constitution outlines what the Federal government gets to do. Licensing guns ain’t in there. This is a massive overreach since it entails not just licensure but also total registration. This is not Constitutional, and, there is precedent that gun registration is a very bad idea.
Prairie, I think we can agree that bill is going nowhere, and I’d take bets on that.
Do you oppose limitations on the types of weapons available to the general population?
Joe Friday,
“Prairie, I think we can agree that bill is going nowhere, and I’d take bets on that.”
I am not nearly so optimistic, but I hope you’re right.
I cautiously and guardedly say I agree that there can be limitations on certain types of weapons.
I have not read the following laws, but their overview seems reasonable:
National Firearms Act
Federal Firearms Act of 1938
Firearm Owners Protection Act
And, background checks.
Licensing and registration isn’t confiscation. Making certain kinds of ammunition illegal also isn’t confiscation of guns.
Can you quote something in the text of H.R. 127 that you object to and explain why you object to it?
Can you tell us why force is justified in making certain types of ammunition illegal?
Allan, can you quote something in the text of H.R. 127 that you object to and explain why you object to it?
I haven’t claimed that “force is justified in making certain types of ammunition illegal,” so you’ll have to ask your question of someone who did claim that.
HR 127 can’t function without force.
Therefore unless you believe in a totalitarian government and that people should not be free you should be able to prove why force is necessary.
I haven’t said that I support the bill, Allan the Stupid.
If you weren’t so Stupid, you’d stop making baseless ASSumptions.
“I haven’t said that I support the bill, Allan the Stupid. If you weren’t so Stupid, you’d stop making baseless ASSumptions.”
Anonymous the Stupid learn to read and comprehend.
I said: “HR 127 can’t function without force.”
You were arguing the side of HR 127 without definitive commitment. That crap might be OK where you come from and it might be OK for your mother but it isn’t for me. That is nothing more than Stupid gamesmanship that you are not very good at.
I’ll repeat the rest of the statement and you can answer or not, but stop playing the part of the fool.
“Therefore unless you believe in a totalitarian government and that people should not be free you should be able to prove why force is necessary.”
I object to that bill because it is unconstitutional and thus illegal, and would immediately lead to a civil war.
Firearms ownership by the people is only feared by tyrants and cowards
We will go to war over a bill like that one.
Bill Clinton’s assault weapons ban was not worth it, it was a trifle compared to that. It could be redressed by normal politics. It was not cause for just resistance.
HR 127 would be.
THAT bill would be declaration of war. And it quite possibly is coming. Consider all these troops the federal tyrants have quartered in DC now
Why on earth would you go to war over it instead of simply filing a lawsuit to test whether you’re correct that it’s unconstitutional?!?
Democrats arent suing anyone, they’re geared up and ready to start confiscations and martial law, they have camps to lodge dissenters, and have been training troops to deal with this. A lawsuit wont do it, the Republicans must remain firm and show strength. The Dems will tell you this is no longer a Christian or Constitutional nation. We may have to find out the hard way what it takes for a nation to retain or regain the political stance and identity of the founding fathers. The word “Patriot” refers to someone who identifies with his “Pater”, father, the “Patri-otic” subject to these kings are considered as “domestic terrorists” since Obama took office. They’ve redefined many words to justify their capture of America’s freedoms.
What nonsense.
Because right now the CIA creep Richard Grenier is planning on treating Americans he disagrees with as terrorists
It’s obvious a lot of Democrats like Speier US Rep from California agree with him– calling Republicans terrorists on twitter
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/02/963343896/former-cia-officer-treat-domestic-extremism-as-an-insurgency?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=nprnews
You nutjobs want to make war on Americans? We can have it. Let it rip. Let it rip! We can have this out the old fashioned way.
Dissolve the United States peacefully before it comes to that. Really, that’s a perfectly lawful idea which could be done. Otherwise- sic semper tyrannis
Bill Clinton was dead serious about confiscation, the nation was gearing up for it with compounds in state capitals, road signs on the left side of highways with “Kilometers” marking distance to the capital. The Republicans finally reined in the effort at the last signs of troops and equipment mounted and ready. What? YOu ignored all that? Or just a liar?
Licensing and registration schemes are always connected to confiscation. Duh. See how the 1937 National Firearms Act worked. You either are ignorant or a liar.
I have a driver’s license and car registration, and the government has never attempted to confiscate my car, so no, licensing and registration schemes are very clearly NOT always connected to confiscation.
Try and drive down the street without a vehicle registration and tags, and see if when the police catch you, you will be allowed to proceed.
duh
Gosh, you mean if I break the law, my car might be confiscated? Imagine that!
Your logic is backwards. We’re not discussing what happens if you’re not obeying the law, but about whether obeying the law and registering it leads to confiscation. It doesn’t.
False lie. Weapons not properly registered under the National Firearms act have been and are confiscated. That’s how it works. No license, illegal to own
That law wants to make all firearms and ammo illegal to own.
Let’s just be frank. Don’t pass this bill unless you are ready for war.
If they’re not properly registered, then you’re not obeying the law.
Again, I said “We’re not discussing what happens if you’re NOT obeying the law, but about whether obeying the law and registering it leads to confiscation. It doesn’t.”
Yet you shift back again to the case of someone NOT obeying the law.
Find someone else to discuss that with.
Anonymous the Stupid, you are very dull.
Allan, one of your mottoes appears to be “when I have nothing to say, resort to insult.”
Anonymous the Stupid, that seems the only way you are able to communicate.
This is very simple. Let’s say you make Catholicism illegal. First amendment disregarded. Forget about court cases, Catholics will go to war over it. Maybe not the weasels and wimps, but the men will go to war.
This is how it works and how it will always work. You go too far, courts will not resolve it. The political questions come down to force in the end.
That’s odd. Trump created a Muslim ban (which was rejected several times by the courts until he changed it enough that it was no longer a Muslim ban) and Muslims didn’t go to war over it. You have an overactive imagination, or you think Catholics are more inclined to war than Muslims are.
The United States can make a religious ban on migration. That’s not a violation of the First Amendment.
My analogy related to making a specific religion illegal. Yes I think if you made Islam illegal here then they would fight over it. And bully for them.
Second amendment secures the right to bear arms. That law above would end it. A right is not “licensed.”
The law would violate US V Miller, also, and be patently unconstitutional. but nobody would wait for the SCOTUS. It would be war
you want it? Give it a try. Molon labe!
In California illegals are said to be given a pass on that registration, tags and insurance crap for social justice.
Try and look up the word erosion. Erosion of liberty doesn’t seem like much in the beginning but at the end there is no liberty.
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/02/963343896/former-cia-officer-treat-domestic-extremism-as-an-insurgency?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=nprnews
CIA CREEP COMPARES TRUMP TO SADDAM HUSSEIN AND TRUMP SUPPORTERS TO THE TALIBAN– just listen if you think I exagerrate!
NEW DEMOCRAT TALKING POINTS DEMANDING PERSECUTION OF AMERICANS !
REPREHENSIBLE TYRANTS WANT WAR, PROVOKING IT!
Anonymous,
H. R. 127
“To provide for the licensing of firearm and ammunition possession and the registration of firearms, and to prohibit the possession of certain ammunition.”
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/127/text
I object to the premise. It is not only unConstitutional, being that the Constitution outlines what the Federal government *gets* to do and this is outside its jurisdiction, but it gives the Federal government far too much power, and, the Executive Branch is already becoming the Imperial Executive Branch. Further, there is already precedent that gun registration is a precursor to tyranny, as I noted above.
How close are we to becoming that turnkey totalitarian state William Binney warned of?
That proposed law would be illegal. Clearly unconstitutional, oppressive, and tyrannical.
If the “Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act” passes and is attempted to be implemented by an evil and tyrannical government, then violent civil war will ensue. It will trigger open, violent, and organized resistance. There will be fierce retribution on the oppressor and all those who support it, too. Just so you know.
We fully expect that would end in victory and a much needed reform of the nation. If we die along the way, then we die with pleasure to be part of such a just cause.
Of course, that will not happen, because they do not dare. They are not that stupid. It is grandstanding, to wheedle donations away from rich idiots who dream of such things.
And so, this bill is just a fundraising boon for the NRA and GOA
https://www.gunowners.org/
They should send a thank you note to Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee, the bill’s sponsor.
Again, why would you start a civil war instead of just filing a lawsuit?
Because my ancestors did it that way at Concord that’s why. Give it a stab, King George was less a tyrant than the scum in DC today by far