Category: Uncategorized

Right from the git-go, I must admit that this was not my original idea, but I liked it so much, that I thought I would write about it. This is an approach being suggested by Rep. Mo Brooks, who is now running for Senate in Alabama. 

“I would say to the Canadian truckers — we’ve got our supply chain issues here in the United States of America. We could use some more truckers in the United States of America. And I suggest we give or offer them all political asylum,” Brooks said during an interview with Mobile, Alabama, radio FM Talk 106.5. “I think that’d be great if they were to leave Canada, come to the United States of America, move our goods from the East Coast to the West Coast and every point in between, and see what Canada then does — as they have, in effect, expelled these truckers by denying them their liberty and freedom.”

It seems like a win-win … a win for the U.S. and a win for freedom loving Canadians. Think about it. As Brooks said, the U.S. needs truckers. These Canadian guys are experienced journeymen. They have already been driving back and forth across the border. Driving semis in the U.S. would be no problem. Interested trucking companies would hire them in a nano-second, and the Canadian truckers would not even have to provide their own trucks. 

Whether they stayed indefinitely, or only for a short time, it would be a  win for these truckers as once again, they could provide for their families by doing what they do well. If, after a trial period, for whatever reason, they liked their new life in the U.S. better than their old life in Canada, so be it … become naturalized.

The other part of the win-win is that this would not only be a win for the truckers, but it would be a win for all freedom loving Canadians. It would be like poking a stick in Trudeau’s eye. At some point Canadians will get tired of supply chain shortages, all because the all knowing Prime Minister would not even meet with the truckers, but instead resorted to name calling. What goes around comes around, and hopefully his recent autocratic behavior will be his demise.

At this point many Americans would agree with Rep. Mo Brooks. Recruit the Canadian truckers. The one problem with this win-win idea is  … Joe Biden. The U.S. President is big buds with Trudeau … you know, birds of a feather. However J.B.’s polling numbers desperately need some good news, and resolving our supply chain misery would be one way for J.B. to potentially reverse his continued downhill slide.

2/23/22

A lot of people have been fired from their jobs and more are threatened to be fired from their jobs because they refuse to get the Covid vaccinations. Some non-vaccers are obstreperous or stubborn, but a fair number are claiming religious or medical exemptions.

Thus far most employers are refusing to consider either. In terms of the religious exemption a very recent court ruling may change that. 

From The Epoch Times:

“The United Airlines COVID-19 vaccine mandate has violated some employees’ religious beliefs, according to a federal appeals court.

The company’s mandate allows for religious exemption applications but even if those applications are granted, some employees to which they are granted are forced to stop working, receive no pay, and stop getting benefits paid by the company, a set of conditions described as unpaid leave.

The treatment of religious objections triggered a lawsuit, which asked a court to block the mandate for them, but a federal judge in November 2021 declined to do so, asserting plaintiffs didn’t prove they would suffer irreparably.”

However the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed:

‘United has presented plaintiffs with two options: violate their religious convictions or lose all pay and benefits indefinitely. That is an impossible choice for plaintiffs who want to remain faithful but must put food on the table. In other words, United is actively coercing employees to abandon their convictions,” Circuit Judges Jennifer Walker Elrod, a George W. Bush appointee, and Andy Oldham, a Trump appointee, wrote in the unsigned majority opinion. (Interestingly the judge, Mark Pittman, who initially ruled against the plaintiffs was also a Trump appointee. Also it is interesting that the dissenting judge of the three on the Fifth Circuit, Jerry Smith, is a Raegan appointee.)

I expect that across the country there will be more rulings in favor of religious exceptions to the vaccine mandates. Potentially this could be a expensive proposition for United Airlines and other companies who have basically not paid any heed to religious exemptions. They basically fired employees who claimed religious exemptions … or put them on unpaid leave. Potentially these companies will owe back pay for an extended period of time for a substantial number of employees. $$$!

If the foundation to vaccine mandates loses the religious appeal aspect, look for that foundation to start crumbling.

2/22/22

I have always thought it was strange that when somebody died from Covid within three weeks of his/her initial vaccination, that individual was considered “unvaccinated.”

For the sake of discussion, let’s assume that someone went along for a year Covid-free and unvaccinated. He/she had not been isolating for that year, but rather had been going about as usual, doing his/her normal activity. Then for what ever reason that unvaccinated person (perhaps because of the threat of losing his/her job) gets vaccinated … and two weeks later comes down with Covid and dies. That person would then be categorized as an unvaccinated Covid death. Is somethin’ funny going on?

If a virgin (no shot whatsoever) non-vaccinated individual dies, then his/her death is categorized as an unvaccinated death, and rightfully so. But it stretches the limits of my imagination to categorize the death of a virgin-unvaccinated individual the same as someone who dies within two weeks of his/her initial vaccination.

In the same realm, if an individual dies two weeks after his/her second  vaccine, that person would be placed in the category of a death in someone who had had only one of the two recommended vaccines. Similarly if that individual had waited six months before getting his/her second vaccine, he/she would still be categorized as a death in someone who had had only one of the two recommended jabs. Although that conclusion is true on paper, going for six months doing okay and then dying within two weeks of the second jab is very suspicious. Is somethin’ funny goin’ on?

Likewise, if someone dies of Covid within two weeks of a Covid booster shot, that individual would be placed in the category of a fully vaccinated Covid death … with no recognition that possibly the booster could have played a role in his/her demise. 

I had my two initial Covid inoculations way back in the Spring of 2021. For the next nine months, I did not limit my activity. I did wear a mask like a good boy. I felt fine. In mid December, 2021, I did get my Covid booster, and two weeks and one day later came down with Covid. Now categorically speaking, I would be characterized as an fully vaccinated individual who got Covid. The fact that my booster preceded my infection by fifteen days would be totally disregarded. That is pure poppycock! I am not buying into that illogical thinking. 

Just like in all of the theoretical examples noted above, to me, the vaccination – whether it was the initial jab, the second jab, or the booster 

should be recognized – not ignored. The real question should be … did the jab play a role in the subsequent infection. There is nothing magical about three weeks. To me, if someone’s dies two weeks after receiving the initial vaccination, that is a death in a vaccinated person. However, even placing that death into the vaccinated category, adroitly avoids the issue of whether or not the vaccine contributed, in a causal way, to that individual’s death.

To extend this nonsense one more step … If someone had a reaction to the Covid vaccine sometime in the two weeks immediately after the vaccine, would any sane rational person call this “a reaction to the vaccine in an unvaccinated person?” 

In the latest data from Scotland (mid-Jan to mid-Feb, 2022) the Covid infection rate per 100,000 was significantly higher in the fully vaccinated as well as the three-dose group when compared to the truly virgin unvaccinated group. Could this be due to antibody dependent disease enhancement? (see a prior blog for full explanation) … in other words could the jabs be contributing in a causal way to the increased incidence of infection in certain groups? For some unknown reason, the Scots just stopped publishing their weekly data. Hmmm!

Is somethin’ funny goin’ on here?

2/21/22

“If you walk around a corner and you see your neighbor’s house on fire, you may call 911. You may play hero and enter the house and try to save them. You may cry out for help. The only thing you must not do is nothing.”

As is the tradition on Sunday today’s piece is about someone who deserves our respect because of his honesty, notably Dr.Hector Carvallo. The above words were spoken by him. You may not have heard of him because he lives in Argentina. However his positions as far as Covid are astute and should be listened to.

From the Epoch Times:

Dr. Hector Carvallo is a medical expert from Argentina. His focus since early 2020 has been the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

Dr. Carvallo continued:

“We knew from the very first day we entered the school of medicine that the sooner you treat any illness, the more chances you will have to be successful in the treatment. You have to treat quickly, and strongly. This is natural thinking. Nobody has to be a genius to know that. In this case, inexplicably, many doctors have been told to do nothing.

To keep the patients in their homes on their own with just a few pills of Tylenol — which we know it’s good for nothing in Covid — until they cannot breathe properly. Then they have to be referred to the hospital. That is patient abandonment under any law in any country …

I believe in any attempt to keep a mild patient, mild. What I cannot accept as a medical doctor — because it is against our oath — is to remain with arms folded until that person gets worse. That’s criminal … There’s only one reason for all this. The reason is summarized in one word, greed.”

Interestingly, Carvallo had experience with ivermectin as an antiviral before the COVID outbreak. Argentinian doctors were using it against dengue fever, which is endemic in Argentina. Dengue is a mosquito borne illness that, like Covid, is also caused by a virus. So, when SARS-CoV-2 emerged, he decided to take another look at the drug to see if it might be useful.

In early April 2020, Carvallo and his team developed two trials submitted to the National Library of Medicine in the United States. One was for preexposure (prevention) and the other for treatment. In both cases, ivermectin was used as an adjunct to other compounds, as they didn’t believe it was a silver bullet by itself.

As for the safety of ivermectin, studies in Africa have used doses that were 10 times higher than the 0.2 mg/kg recommended for COVID, without toxic effects. Hydroxychloroquine, on the other hand, has a far narrower safety margin. This is well-known, and was clearly used to discredit the drug. As explained by Carvallo:

“What they did with hydroxychloroquine in order to discredit it was easy. Hydroxychloroquine is also very useful against COVID. But the safety margin is narrow. What they did was to use three times the dose in order to cause toxicity. There were 200 studies in favor of hydroxychloroquine.

There was one study talking about the toxicity, and all the scientific community in the world latched on to that one. That’s crazy. In the case of ivermectin, it was so wide a gap between safety and toxicity that they couldn’t do that. So, they just disregarded it.”

Carvallo is one of those rare individuals who has been able to perform research others cannot at this time. He’s retired, so he has no funding or career to lose. He hopes that, eventually, more doctors will go back to thinking for themselves and return to their oath to do no harm, and to focus on what’s best for their patients rather than the bureaucracy currently dictating what they can and cannot do.

2/20/22

For those of you not familiar with Novak Djokovic, he is a professional tennis player from Serbia. Not only is he a professional tennis player, but he is one of the world’s top professional tennis players, having won multiple Grand Slam tennis tournaments in the past. On Jan 16 Djokovic was deported from Australia before the first Grand Slam tournament of the year after having his visa canceled by Australian Immigration Minister Alex Hawke on Jan. 14.

His offense? … He was not vaccinated against Covid.

His main reason for not being vaccinated? … on Dec 17 he had tested positive for Covid.

From the Epoch Times:

Lawyers for the Serbian player contended that he should be allowed to stay in the country and compete under a medical exemption from the vaccination because he had tested positive for the virus in December.

However, he subsequently lost his court battle to have the cancellation of his visa overturned and was forced to leave Australia.

Djokovic’s rival Rafael Nadal went on to win the tournament.

So where’s the dilemma?

Well actually there are multiple dilemmas here.

First- Around the world people are being forced to get the jab, even though many have a variety of different personal reasons for not getting vaccinated. To me accepting some reasons and not accepting other reasons is ludicrous. Who is to judge? Three weeks ago I spoke to someone who was not vaccinated. When she started to explain why, I told her I didn’t care! I didn’t care because that was her personal choice, and if it was good enough for her, it was good enough for me. Get the vaccine or do not get the vaccine … who is right? Only time will tell.

Djokovic’s reason?

“I’ve always represented and supported the freedom to chose what you put in your body and for me, that is essential,” he said.

“For me, as an elite professional athlete I have always carefully reviewed and assessed everything that comes in, from the supplements, the food, the water that I drink or sports drinks, anything really that comes into my body as a fuel,” Djokovic continued.

“Based on all the information that I got, I decided not to take the vaccine as of today.”

Second- Djokovic already had Covid as documented by his positive Covid test in December. Almost on a weekly basis these days there are studies coming out that are documenting immunity to Covid from a past Covid infection. Initially an Italian study said that the immunity lasted eighteen months, and a more recent study upped the ante to two years. Where will the bidding stop? SARS 1 which started in the early 2000s has a virus very similar to our present SARS 2, and the natural immunity to SARS 1 is still present now … going on twenty years!

Third- in different countries things are different. In some countries, notably France, the vaccine passport can also be used by individuals who have tested positive for COVID-19 and recovered within the past six months. The French Open is in May. Since Djokovic tested positive for the virus on Dec. 17, this means he could potentially still travel to the county up until June without getting vaccinated.

Meanwhile, the UK government has declined to say whether or not Djokovic will be able to take part in Wimbledon this year if he remains unvaccinated. Current rules for unvaccinated travelers to the UK mean they only have to take pre-departure and post-departure tests but are not required to isolate unless they test positive for the virus.

Why are we being confronted with this dilemma? The answer is very simple. Those who should know best, e.g. Fauci et al, for whatever reason, have not had the chutzpah to say what will eventually prove to be obvious … infection with Covid provides natural immunity to further Covid. Will this turn out to be 100%? … Probably not, but the protection will be in the 90% range.

Be that as it may, the consequences of this dilemma are far from over. Note that five Supreme Court Justices are apparently not aware of natural immunity, as they just recently ruled that health care workers must get the vaccine to keep their jobs. Whereas it should have been intuitively obvious to SCOTUS that a large percent of these health care workers have already had Covid, and thus, like Djokovic, have natural immunity, I did not notice any reference to natural immunity in their decision.

The present mayor of New York City just fired about 1400 city workers because they were not vaccinated. When the beneficial effect of natural immunity becomes more and more apparent, will many of these workers file suit to not only get their jobs back, but also to get their deserved back pay?

From now on each time you hear about the continuing consequences of the Djokovic Dilemma, remember that it is all because ‘those that know best’ did not have the courage to say what they should have known about natural immunity all along!

2/19/22

As almost all of you are aware on 2/13/22, the Super Bowl was played in Los Angeles, and as I am sure, most of you are also aware, Los Angeles is in California. Now perhaps those of you who live outside of the state of California may not realize that on 2/13 there was a mask mandate in California. Knowing that would have been impossible from watching the Super Bowl on T.V. as the vast majority could be seen not wearing a mask

At 12:01 a.m. on 2/16 the mask mandate will officially end … but it will not end in schools. Taken at face value, this borders on the nonsensical. Wait! I take that back. It doesn’t border on the nonsensical … it is nonsensical. How can it possibly make sense to continue the mask mandates on the group (school children) who are at the lowest risk? … and the lowest risk by far. What happened to follow the science?

Dr. Mark Ghaly … who’s he? Dr. Ghaly the state’s health and human services director, hinted that mask mandates in schools could end in a few weeks, but that school districts will be able to continue requiring masks, if they wish. “Local decisions are not just allowed; they are supported,” said Dr. Ghaly. 

To that I would say, “What’s going to happen in two weeks to change anything? And if local school districts are then encouraged to make decisions, why can’t local districts make them now?”

Come on Dr. Ghaly! Everyone who is paying any attention knows that all of this delay in ending the masking of school children is solely because of the Teacher’s Unions. Most of the local quotes in the Main Stream Media that are continuing to encourage the continued masking of school children are from reps of the Teacher’s Union or reps of Teacher Associations.

Last week American Federation of Teachers union president Randi Weingarten was asked about unmasking children. She responded, “I am in favor of an off ramp on masks. The real issue becomes, is the spread low enough so that there’s no dissemination and transmission in schools?” 

No dissemination or transmission!!! That’s says it all! … Nonsense!

All over the world children are now attending school unmasked. Why not in California?

Hmmm!

Is Dr. Ghaly an elected official? … No! He was appointed by Newsom in 2019. It seems to me that he has much too much power for a non-elected person. One might add, “Is Is it nonsense to ask if is he merely a shill for the Teacher’s Unions?”

2/18/22

In the late 1870s the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that fraud vitiates everything. (Don’t be embarrassed, as I too had to look up ‘vitiate,’ which in this context, means ‘to make legally defective or invalid; invalidate.’) In essence what the 1878 Supreme Court said in UNITED STATES v. THROCKMORTON is that if fraud is the basis for something, that something is invalidated. Although I am not familiar with the make-up of the Supreme Court in 1878, it is important to note that SCOTUS concurred 9-0! It is also important to note that the United States is not bound by the Statute of Limitations, as an individual would be. 

Why am I bringing up “fraud vitiates everything?” 

It’s because of an essay written by Edward Hartnett Jr. which points out a number of individual states which still have cases of possible election fraud creeping through their legal system.

For instance, from Hartnett:

In Pennsylvania, PA attorney Zimolong won a major case in the PA Commonwealth Appeals Court (2nd highest court in PA), that over 2 million 2020 Election mail-in ballots, around 40%, were ruled as being illegal and unconstitutional because of Act 77, which was signed into law before the 2020 Election, and should have been voted on by the PA Voters.

If the PA Supreme Court rules in favor of the PA Appeals Court Ruling, then the over 2 million 2020 ballots will not be counted and that will mean that President Trump won the State of Pennsylvania by over 1 million votes. The electors must be awarded to President Trump and/or the 2020 Election must be decertified and the electors called back.

“Does fraud vitiate everything?”

In Wisconsin:

There were over 500,000 voters registered on WI voter rolls all with a registration date of January 01, 1918 (over 100 Years), and over 100,000 of them voted in the 2020 election. Also discovered were 40,000 inactive voters in 2021 that also voted in the 2020 Election. Other issues of concern and/or fraud include:1. WI has 4 million adults but 7.1 million voter registrations2. 10% population growth between 2012 to 2020 but a 128% increase in registered voters3. 50,000 fraudulent phantom (nonexistent) voters4. Single-family homes with 19 registered voters, they found tens of thousands these5. 3,713 voters registered to U.S. Post Office

“Does fraud vitiate everything?”

In Georgia:

On January 20, 2022, a press conference was held by Garland Favorito and voter GA’s David Hancock identified at least 100,000 2020 Election ballots as missing the required Chain of Custody Documentation. Recently as well, a Fulton County, GA election official has admitted and confirmed that almost 24% of Mail-In ballots do not have the required Chain of Custody Documentation.

There is now sufficient evidence by CCTV videos, sworn affidavits, and a new whistleblower that illegal ballot harvesting and other irregularities being investigated that the GA 2020 Election should never have been certified.

“Does fraud vitiate everything?”

In Arizona:

After many months of waiting, finally, AZ State Representative Mark Finchem and co-sponsored by several AZ Representatives and Senators; including AZ Senator Wendy Rogers, introduced a resolution, HCR 2033, for Maricopa, Pima, and Yuma Counties in AZ that provides convincing evidence that the 2020 Election wasirredeemably compromised and requires the results of the 2020 election be decertified. This still has some hurdles to go through, but believe AZ may be the first state to decertify the 2020 Election and recall its electors

“Does fraud vitiate everything ?”

Military ballots:

Three States, AZ, GA, and MI are now reporting a similar pattern that the military and/or overseas ballots appear to have been compromised. These ballots were sent out as 11 1/2 x 19-inch ballots and it has been found that what is contained in the ballot storage boxes are 8 1/2 x 11-inch pieces of copy paper sheets with no ID or chain of custody. Mr. Paul Harris was the team audit leader in Arizona responsible for the military ballot counting and inspections. What they found was very telling and alarming.  In 2016 they had only 1,600 total military ballots, but in 2020 that increased to 9,600 and 95% of those were for Joe Biden. Please know the military is primarily conservative and the majority would have voted for President Trump. It is also being reported the same issues have been found in Georgia and Michigan; no ID or chain of custody with 93% going for Biden in Georgia, and, in Michigan, all 100% of military ballots were for Biden.

“Does fraud vitiate everything?”

And to close … still from Hartnett:

2000 MulesPlease know a new documentary movie by Houston area resident, Dinesh D’Souza will be shown in select theaters around the country, called 2,000 Mules. This Documentary was put together in conjunction with the tireless efforts of True The Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht and her team with Dinesh D’Souza. True The Vote first identified 240+ individuals in the 2020 Election that illegally stuffed ballot boxes in the State of Georgia in the middle of the night. These people are referred to as ballot harvesters or mules. By a combination of the video cameras around the ballot boxes and pings between cell phones towers, they identified 240+ involved in Georgia, and know at least one of these has turned whistleblower and stated he did this for the 2020 and 2021 Elections and was paid $10 a ballot and made tens of thousands of dollars. True The Vote took the same approach in Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and identified hundreds of these Ballot Mules in each of these states, thus the movie title, 2,000 Mules, which is shocking but also is another piece of the 2020 Election Steal and one of the patterns now emerging that was used.

There is no doubt that the movie industry will attempt to blackball “2000 Mules,” but it is already on my list.

The major question here is after 144 years will our present day Supreme Court agree that “fraud still vitiates everything?”

2/17/22

Perhaps many of you do not remember ‘Solidarity.’ Perhaps many of you do not recognize the name, Lech Walesa who brought Solidarity to international acclaim back in the early 1980s. For those of you who have forgotten or who were not alive in the early 1980s, Solidarity is a Polish trade union founded in August 1980 at the Lenin Shipyard in Gdańsk, Poland.[1] Subsequently, it was the first independent trade union in a Warsaw Pact country to be recognised by the state.[5] The union’s membership peaked at 10 million in September 1981,[2][3] representing one-third of the country’s working-age population.[6] Solidarity’s leader Lech Wałęsa was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983 and the union is widely recognised as having played a central role in the end of Communist rule in Poland.

Why bring up Solidarity now? I bring it up because I just watched a video of Artur Polowski giving a speech to a group of truckers inside Smugglers Saloon in Coutts, Alberta, Canada. Many times during his speech, he referred to Lech Walesa and the Solidarity movement.

He was talking to the group of truckers because they had just reached a deal to end the blockade of the Coutts US-Canada border crossing and take their trucks and their protest to Edmonton.

Many of you probably remember Polowski as the preacher who kicked the police out of his church service back when the Canadian government forbade indoor church services. At that time he resisted and was arrested … basically because he said the the government could not forbid services nor control the practice of religion. Although his continued protests against the over-extended police-like state in Canada went largely unnoticed here in the U.S., Artur Polowski has not been subdued. He has been arrested multiple times for going against the “Nazi government” in Alberta.

Polowski was then arrested after the truckers in Coutts changed their mind and decided to hold the fort at Coutts. He was arrested for giving the aforementioned impassionate speech. The charge ? … prosecutor Steven Johnston called Pawlowski’s words an “overt threat to violence,” CBC News said. 

Now let’s be clear. I listened to the entire twenty minute speech. There was no threat of violence. Zero! Zip! Nada! During his speech Pawlowski implored the truckers to stay and “hold the line.” And while he did say “if this is our Alamo, then so be it,” the pastor more than once said the truckers should protest peacefully and that their sheer numbers and trucks are enough. He stated, “Bullies will continue to bully unless they’re stood up to.”

Was this a good speech? Indeed, it was. Is a good speech against the law? … Not that I know of, even in Canada.

Was this an impassioned speech? Indeed it was. Is an impassioned speech against the law in Canada? … Not that I know of.

His arrest was solely a vendetta. Making something up, and throwing  Polowski into a dirty solitary confinement cell will “teach that Bastard!”

Sounds to me a lot like Nazi Germany!

1/16/22

Perhaps most of do not recall that after the 2020 election many said that the Dominion Voting Systems used in many states were defective and wide open to hacking. Of course, the left scoffed at these accusations. Because the left controls basically all that Americans read or watch on TV, this accusation never got any traction.

Now let’s be clear … I do not know if these Dominion Voting Systems are secure or not. However what does seem clear is that if these Dominion Voting Systems can be hacked and consequently votes changed, common sense would dictate that allegations that this system is not as advertised need to be looked into and investigated.

So I was taken aback when I read the following headline:

“Biden Administration Urges Court Not to Allow Release of ‘Secret Report’ on Dominion Voting Machines”

Actually, I was not shocked, as I am no longer shocked by anything that the Biden administration does, but thought, “Why would anyone not want this secret report to be released?” Only one reason! One big reason, namely that the secret report verifies at least some of the accusations leveled against Dominion. And if the results that were spit out by these Dominion Voting Systems were indeed not kosher, then the results of the 2020 election might also not be kosher. Hmmm!

From the Epoch Times:

“Top officials at a U.S. federal cybersecurity agency are urging a judge not to authorize at this time the release of a report that analyzes Dominion Voting Systems equipment in Georgia, arguing doing so could assist hackers trying to “undermine election security.”

To me this seems like an exercise in circular reasoning, namely … don’t release a report on possible hacking because others will use the report to facilitate hacking!

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was recently provided an unredacted copy of the report, which was prepared by J. Alex Halderman, director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society.

The report discusses “potential vulnerabilities in Dominion ImageCast X ballot marking devices,” or electronic voting devices, according to the government.

While CISA supports public disclosure of any vulnerabilities and associated mitigation measures with election equipment, allowing the release of the report at this point  ‘increases the risk that malicious actors may be able to exploit any vulnerabilities and threaten election security,’ government lawyers said in a Feb. 10 filing in the case.”

I have got your interest? 

Good, as two other things make this even more interesting

First, the case was brought in 2017 by good-government groups and voters who say the lack of paper ballots undermines the voting process.

(Note that this is way prior to the 2020 election, but if Dominion Voting Systems we’re faulty prior to 2017, they were undoubtedly still faulty in November, 2020.)

Second, U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg, an Obama nominee overseeing the case, was urged by CISA to reject attempts to release a redacted version of Halderman’s report for now.

(For the life of me, I cannot fathom that Judge Totenberg will rule against the Biden administration, can you?)

State tuned!

2/15/22

At some point should the citizens of a country of be able to sit down and consider whether or not their leader has character. Here I am assuming that character is important in a leader. When the leader of a country says X, should it’s citizens be able to rightfully assume that, indeed, X is true. Certainly leaders have been known to stretch the truth, or have a difference of opinion, but to me that is not the same as lying … lying is saying X when you know that X is false.

I know, I know, that questions about character should have been brought out into the open before an election. However the issues concerning J.B. were there, but our media refused to inform us Americans that our President could well have some serious character flaws.

From the Washington Examiner:

“President Joe Biden denied the firsthand accounts made by multiple U.S. military leaders who were in Afghanistan during the final days of the mission back in August.

The president told NBC’s Lester Holt he’s “rejecting” the accounts given by military leaders who pointed blame at the administration for costly foot-dragging in the botched withdrawal. Thirteen service members were killed and hundreds of Americans were left behind in the chaotic emergency evacuation after the Taliban’s recapture of the war-torn country following the U.S.’s 20-year occupation.

‘No. No. That’s not what I was told,’ Biden told Holt when pressed on whether the claims were accurate, adding, ‘Yes, I am. I’m rejecting them.’”

To me, here we have a real problem that is difficult to figure out as what the military is saying and what Biden said to Lester Holt do not jive with each other. There are limited explanations : 

Perhaps all of the military quoted in the article are lying. … Unlikely!

Perhaps Biden’s advisers did not tell him that the military were against his approach. … Scary!

Perhaps Joe Biden has forgotten what transpired with the decision making. … Scary, but believable!

Perhaps Joe Biden is lying. … More scary, but more believable! 

Why do I say that? … because we know about his character!

2/14/22

www.californiacontrarian.com