[FoxNews] Former Justice Department attorney Hans von Spakovsky joined "Life, Liberty & Levin" for an interview airing Sunday in which he broke down what he considered the most alarming changes to election laws that come to be if Democrats are able to pass Rep. Terri Sewell's, D-Ala., "John Lewis Voting Rights Act."
Von Spakovsky, who served under President George W. Bush and is now a fellow at the Heritage Foundation's Election Law Reform Initiative, told host Mark Levin that Sewell's bill, heavily supported by Biden and fellow Democrats, will effectively erase any independent state government's control of their own election procedures.
"These laws do everything from gutting voter I.D. laws in all the states, to putting severe restrictions on states [from] being able to verify the eligibility and qualifications of voters, and [restrictions against] cleaning up and maintain[ing] the accuracy of their voter lists," he said.
But given the extreme efforts the Liberal Socialist Democrats are willing to try to skew the vote. It is clear they feel it is their only hope of retaining some form of control.
Without doubt, we the people must have Voting Rules and Regulations designed to protect the basic concept of 1 US CITIZEN, 1 VOTE. An with that said, I would say we do need common sense nationwide standardized Voting Rules and Regulations. But we need them written in simple, plain, Common person understandable level language. Whatever is developed needs to PROTECT THE VOTE, not lay a pathway for political abuse.
I would also suggest it be put to bed in the form of a Constitutional Amendment detailing a clear voting process not subject to change/adjustment every election by a bunch of State or DC politicians. Then voted on at the citizen level in each state.
But there must be criminal laws with serious repercussions for any one and/or Special Interest-Political Group violating Election Integrity.
A Citizens Civil Right to vote must be honestly counted. There is no room for fake voters, illegally printed absentee ballots, multi-state voters, the walking dead voting, and other creative schemes Radicals and Politicians dream up from time to time.
[FoxNews] Robert Patillo also offered a strategy to prevent crime on 'Unfiltered with Dan Bongino'.
ROBERT PATILLO: Most of this crime is being pushed by drug gangs throughout the country. So we need to use some of our counterterrorism laws, the same ones they're using to prosecute people for other crimes around the country, use it to prosecute many of these drug gangs that are terrorizing communities. Let's do something about the importation of guns and drugs across the southern border. I think Republicans and Democrats can agree on that. Let's reform the way that we police to get officers out of the car, back walking a beat, knowing the people in their community to inspire the type of trust and understanding necessary so that you can have a community that works with the police and police to work with the community…
[Townhall] When it comes to anything related to Covid-19, leftists have become experts at distracting, blaming, obfuscating, censoring opposing views, and outright lying in order to further their twisted narrative and enact their tyrannical agenda. Question them directly, even politely, and expect to be dismissed, maligned, and talked down to, if you even get a ’response’ at all.
The reason they hate our questions, obviously, is that they know they can’t provide reasonable, science & data-based answers. But the fact that they’ll do everything they can to avoid them doesn’t mean we shouldn’t ask anyway, because the mere act of asking these questions is an act of resistance against Covid tyranny. In fact, we should all be asking every possible question every chance we get, both on social media and in real life. Because the story told by their actions and demeanor is every bit as important as the ’answer’ itself, should you manage to receive one.
Just watch the haughty scowls of Mr. Science himself, Dr. Anthony Fauci, when being questioned by Republican Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul at one of several Senate committee hearings over the past two years. He has no choice but to be there (it IS the United States Senate, after all), but the thought of having to explain himself to the peasants clearly rankles him, and it shows. Does that deter Paul? Of course not, because he knows he isn’t reaching Fauci or brainwashed Branch Covidians, but rather non-insane, normal people on the fence who can be swayed by a solid argument.
To that end, in no particular order, here are six questions our Branch Covidian overlords refuse to answer, because they know they will look ridiculous if they even try to begin.
#4
So people say we should not compare the treatment of the unvaccinated to the Jews of 1940, the Asians of the early 40's, or the blacks of the 1950's. But tell me the difference now of not being allowed into a city to eat, shop, or check into a hotel because your not vaccinated? The reasons for the segregation of the Jews and blacks were the same as today, they-we are considered diseased, dirty and not worthy of participating in society. The Asians were out of misguided fear, not unlike today. The newspapers today are calling to lock people in their homes or camps until the unvaccinated comply. People say what happened to the Jews, Blacks and Asians could never happen again, never happen here, but it is... Locking people up because of fear. Where are the Jews in America standing up against this? Where are the blacks standing up against this? Where are the Asians? Just like the German civilians, they are either in agreement or are hiding in fear.... Which are you??? What side of the history will you fall into?
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
01/17/2022 15:36 Comments ||
Top||
#5
A standard treatment protocol was established. It was remdesivir. It kills your kidneys and you drown.
#6
Re #4: I think our overlords would argue that it has to do with behavior (not being vaxxed) rather than some immutable quality or a "closely held belief" (race, color, or creed).
[Ron Paul Institute] There was much speculation toward the end of Donald Trump’s term as president of the United States that Trump would pardon Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, or both of these men who were responsible for exposing vast amounts of wrongdoing by the US government. But, it did not come to pass. Why? Glenn Greenwald, who played a key role in helping Snowden expose information about the US government’s mass surveillance programs and who advocated in public and behind the scenes that Trump pardon both men, has some interesting thoughts about that.
The reason Trump failed to issue a pardon for either Snowden or Assange centers on the deep state trying to protect itself by placing Trump in jeopardy, suggested Greenwald last week in an episode of his System Update show.
In a written introduction for the episode, Greenwald notes that Trump, while president, had both "raised the possibility that he might pardon Snowden" and was "actively considering a pardon for Assange."
Greenwald, in the introduction, zeros in on a recent interview of Trump by Candace Owens. In the interview, Trump stated he came "very close" to pardoning one of them but did not ultimately do so. Why? Trump said the reason was because Trump "was too nice" to issue the pardon.
Greenwald isn’t buying that explanation. He writes:
The question that obviously emerges from that answer: too nice to whom? To the U.S. security services — the CIA, NSA and FBI — which had spent four years doing everything possible to sabotage and undermine Trump and his presidency with their concoction of Russiagate and other leaks of false accusations to their corporate media allies? Too nice to the war-mongering servants of the military-industrial complex in the establishment wings of both parties who were the allies of those security services in attempting to derail Trump's America First foreign policy agenda? Too nice to John Brennan, James Clapper and Susan Rice, the Obama-era security officials most eager to see both Assange and Snowden rot in prison for life because they exposed Obama's spying crimes and the Democrats’ corruption in 2016? Trump's "I'm too nice" explanation is, shall we say, less than persuasive.
In the System Update episode, Greenwald further explains that Trump’s enmity toward these deep state forces that helped lead Greenwald and many other individuals to think that Trump may issue the pardons:
#2
"Too Nice?" Without hearing the original tape, or being there in person, I feel there is a high chance of Observer Bias on interpreting Trump's diction. Did Trump mean "It would be too nice to pardon (a scumsucker like) Assange or Snowden"...?
#3
Harris' job is to check two boxes. And she's doing it. Her actual skills are irrelevant in the world of identity politics.
Posted by: Matt ||
01/17/2022 9:12 Comments ||
Top||
#4
/\ Entirely correct! Neither she or Biden are exercising any executive leadership. They are simply tools and 'useful idiots' of media diversion. The Shadow Government aka Deep State conducts all the decision making.
#5
^ Which sort of leads to a discussion of the quality of the decisions being made. If the objective is the public good, the decisions over the last year have been shockingly bad (and I had low expectations). If the objective is the personal accumulation of wealth and power, they're knocking the cover off the ball. Public Servant Fauci has power that a medieval monarch could only dream of.
Posted by: Matt ||
01/17/2022 10:57 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Public Servant Fauci has power that a medieval monarchCardinal could only dream of.
[BrownstoneInstitute] We’ll be putting together the timeline of this disaster for many years to come. It all comes down to those fatal days between January and March 2020, from the news out of China, to the lockdowns in Northern Italy, to the lockdowns in the US.
The documented and admitted record is clear and this is the source of scandal, in my view. Top public health officials in the US, UK, and Australia spent the good part of six weeks obsessing over whether the virus was a lab leak, accidental or deliberate, and therefore what the political spin should be if it turned out to be true.
Something certainly happened to change the script in the last week of February. On February 25, 2020, Anthony Fauci wisely told CBS News the following: “You cannot avoid having infections since you cannot shut off the country from the rest of the world… Do not let the fear of the unknown…distort your evaluation of the risk of the pandemic to you relative to the risks that you face every day…do not yield to unreasonable fear.”
The next day, something shifted. Fauci wrote an email to the actress Morgan Fairchild that read as follows:
"Thanks for the note and the offer to help. It would be great if you could tweet to your many Twitter followers that although the current risk of coronavirus to the American public is low, the fact that there is community spread of virus in a number of countries besides China…poses a risk that we may progress to a global pandemic of COVID-19… And so for that reason, the American public should not be frightened, but should be prepared to mitigate an outbreak in this country by measures that include social distancing, teleworking, temporary closure of schools, etc. There is nothing to be done right now since there are so few cases in this country [NB: no way he could know this] and these cases are being properly isolated, and so go about your daily business. However, be aware that behavioral adjustments may need to be made if a pandemic occurs."
Suddenly, lockdowns were on the table. And we know what happened next. Fauci and Dr. Birx worked over the coming weeks to warm Trump up to the idea, culminating in the March 16, 2020, press conference that announced lockdowns to the nation.
Two weeks earlier, from March 3, 2020, at least, we had very good reports of the evidence out of China concerning the risk profiles of people who were vulnerable to the virus.
The new coronavirus is not an equal-opportunity killer: Being elderly and having other illnesses, for instance, greatly increases the risk of dying from the disease the virus causes, Covid-19.
Just like every other disease I can think of, being unhealthy in one direction makes the patient vulnerable to everything else coming down the pike.
It’s also possible being male could put you at increased risk.
For both medical and public health reasons, researchers want to figure out who’s most at risk of being infected and who’s most at risk of developing severe or even lethal illness. With that kind of information, clinicians would know whom to treat more aggressively, government officials would have a better idea of steps to take, and everyone would know whether they need to take special, additional precautions….
Elderly patients “were more likely to develop ARDS,” the researchers wrote, suggesting how age can make Covid-19 more severe and even fatal: age increases the risk that the respiratory system will basically shut down under viral assault.
Youth, in contrast, seems to be protective. The WHO mission reported a relatively low incidence in people under 18, who made up only 2.4% of all reported cases. In fact, through mid-January, zero children in Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak, had contracted Covid-19. It’s not clear whether that’s because children do not show signs of illness even if infected.
Even cases among children and teens aged 10 to 19 are rare. As of Feb. 11 there were 549 cases in that age group, 1.2% of the total, China CDC found. Only one had died….
Co-morbidities also raise the risk of dying from Covid-19. China CDC’s analysis of 44,672 patients found that the fatality rate in patients who reported no other health conditions was 0.9%. It was 10.5% for those with cardiovascular disease, 7.3% for those with diabetes, 6.3% for people with chronic respiratory diseases such as COPD, 6.0% for people with hypertension, and 5.6% for those with cancer.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[FoxNews] Robert Patillo also offered a strategy to prevent crime on 'Unfiltered with Dan Bongino'.
[Ron Paul Institute] There was much speculation toward the end of Donald Trump’s term as president of the United States that Trump would pardon Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, or both of these men who were responsible for exposing vast amounts of wrongdoing by the US government. But, it did not come to pass. Why? Glenn Greenwald, who played a key role in helping Snowden expose information about the US government’s mass surveillance programs and who advocated in public and behind the scenes that Trump pardon both men, has some interesting thoughts about that.
