2020 US Election - Let The Games Begin!

I believe I misspoke as there is no information of any current pardons by Trump.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1338740096540024834


https://twitter.com/x/status/1338750763955331074

https://twitter.com/x/status/1338767547148152834

ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com www.zerohedge.com
Political science courses used to teach that Republicans are conservative, oppose labor unionization and decent wages, always ready to war on somebody in the interest of “national security”. While they like to kill foreigners in their wars, especially people of color, they are appalled at the notion that American fetuses should be stopped from growing into human beings.

Democrats were said to be liberal, maybe even “progressive”, willing to protect workers on the job, allowing unions, using dialogue in diplomacy instead of warring - without good cause, of course. Just ask Bernie Sanders. He voted against the Iraq war, albeit voted for financing it once it began. All the other wars were OK for that so-called “socialist”. In comes the “peace president”. Barack Obama took over Republican Bush’s two wars — Afghanistan and Iraq — and extended them, and even added five more to his cowboy gun belt: bombing Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan. Every Tuesday he sat beside his CIA Director John Brennan, and pushed buttons on who should be droned that day. Never mind the fact that none of these wars were actually declared as such. They were “humanitarian actions” to purportedly help someone get human rights. That they were all unconstitutional did not faze Obama, the supposed lawyer specialist in the constitution.

Now, some political scientists could make the case that, still and all, Democrats are adherents of bourgeois democracy (some might dare say social democracy). Some contend that Trump has shown himself to be a neo-fascist with strong racist attitudes. Such pundits might find it difficult to explain that while Trump has been in office, the Democrats want to make war against Russia while he wants to do capitalist business with them. OK, both Trump and Democrat opponents want to encircle and threaten war with China, so they do have something in common.

When Assange/Wikileaks was revealing war crimes during the Obama regime, the president’s secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, wanted to drone Assange for revealing her communication to rig the Democratic presidential primary in her favor. So, she sat on Brennan’s lap and they did Russiagate. Trump declared, “I love Wikileaks”.

The Democratic National Committee, backed up by war addicts in the Pentagon and CIA and their sensationalist-seeking friends in the corporate fake news media world, forced Trump to sound tough for war too. He did some droning, and bombing here and there while he also sought to withdraw the U.S. from several of the Bush-Obama wars.

Lame-duck presidents usually pardon some prisoners, especially those they feel close to, or who have done them favors. Michael Flynn for instance. Trump’s three-week national security advisor talked with Russians. Democrats consider that to be treason. Maybe Democrats don’t know that the United States is not at war against Russia, not yet anyway. Well, they reply, Flynn must have lied to the FBI. Who wouldn’t lie to cops? Name me a politician, especially when they get to be secretary of state, directors of intelligence service and presidents, who don’t lie. Trump’s lies are simply more apparent than Obama’s Harvard voice reveals.

Remember Mike Pompeo chuckling with his audience at the Texas A&M University, on April 15, 2019:


The Trump administration calls the International Criminal Court a kangaroo court. He refuses to allow any U.S. soldier to be brought before the court for purported war crimes in Afghanistan. None of the court investigators or judges will receive visas to enter U.S. territory. Any property or bank accounts they have in the U.S. will be confiscated.

If any court is a disingenuous kangaroo court it is the extradition trial against Julian Assange, in London. The first magistrate who sat in judgment of possible extradition to the U.S. for alleged violations of its Espionage Act, is a subject in Wikileaks’ revelations. Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot, and her husband, James Arbuthnot, who was a defense minister for procurement, have “earned” money from two companies exposed by Wikileaks. During the August-September extradition hearings, Arbuthnot “stepped down” to be supervisor of the new magistrate, Vanessa Baraitser. During three weeks of hearings, Baraitser looked at her laptop to read decisions she had written before defense lawyers had made their arguments, or witnesses had testified.

I am not the only one hoping that Donald Trump will do the right thing with Julian Assange, and Edward Snowden too. The last president, one Trump hates, first put Assange’s key whistleblower in prison, in isolation, under torture. Chelsea Manning was sentenced to 35 years. Obama leaving office with a gesture of “goodwill”, commuted Chelsea’s sentence once she served seven years. She was later jailed for another year for not snitching on Julian.

Tulsi Gabbard, the only Democratic presidential candidate in 2020 who wasn’t a war hawk, is asking Trump for goodwill. She tweeted tagging Trump, “Since you’re giving pardons to people, please consider pardoning those who, at great personal sacrifice, exposed the deception and criminality of those in the deep state,” and named Assange and Snowden for him to drop charges.

The proposal for Trump to pardon Assange was also endorsed at this recent webinar which included speakers Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, Law Professor Marjorie Cohn, Consortium News editor-in-chief Joe Lauria.


If Trump did the honorable thing of halting the persecution of Julian Assange, it would be a blow for freedom and a middle finger to the Deep State including Obama and Clinton. Wasn’t Trump supposed to be the anti-Deep State candidate? Now’s his chance to prove it.
 
Joe said:
Yeah, in the same way that the 'Russia collusion' BS was done for clear geopolitical reasons, this new China gambit is a similar level of horse hockey.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Exactly. And if there is one country with a long and partly documented history of interferences in US politics from the USS Liberty sabotage and Meyer Lansky/Jack Rubinstein involvement in the JFK assassination to the 9/11 moving companies and dancing witnesses, it is not China.

Funny that these major and real interferences are barely mentioned by the media while the illusory interference of Russia in 2016 or China in 2020 gained so much traction.

It is also ironic that the USA who has been interfering for decades in world affairs through CIA operations, illegal experiments on foreign populations, military interventions, coups d'état, manufactured revolutions, illegal fundings, mass scale propaganda or targeted assassinations, embrace the narrative of a foreign country interfering in the US election. I guess it's a textbook example of projection coupled with a tendency to "seeing the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but not noticing the log that is in your own eye"
 
Last edited:
Since 1933 the formal advent and vestiture of the new president occurred on January 6, prior to this it was in March. The USA republic bankruptcy occurred in 1933 (see gold confiscation and the implementation of FDR government paternalistic socialism, 1963 JFK and Fed Reserve, 1993 Rep. Trafficant bankruptcy speech from the house floor- happenings at 30 year intervals). See the 20th amendment where the inauguration (auguring in the coming regime) was moved up ostensibly because of lame duck issues. Perhaps it had more to do with calendrical and religious reasons. The 12 days of Christmas came about because of differences in the solar and lunar calendars used in the divided Christian church, and it ends on January 6 the day of Epiphany.

"The word Epiphany is from Koine Greek ἐπιφάνεια, epipháneia, meaning manifestation or appearance. It is derived from the verb φαίνειν, phainein, meaning "to appear."[20] In classical Greek it was used for the appearance of dawn, of an enemy in war, but especially of a manifestation of a deity to a worshiper (a theophany). In the Septuagint the word is used of a manifestation of the God of Israel (2 Maccabees 15:27).[21] In the New Testament the word is used in 2 Timothy 1:10 to refer either to the birth of Christ or to his appearance after his resurrection, and five times to refer to his Second Coming.[21]" From Wikipedia

Its all very occult and ritualistic centering around recurrent/timely control of money and power.
 
Pierre said:
It is also ironic that the USA who has been interfering for decades in world affairs through CIA operations, illegal experiments on foreign populations, military interventions, coups d'état, manufactured revolutions, illegal fundings, mass scale propaganda or targeted assassinations, embrace the narrative of a foreign country interfering in the US election. I guess it's a textbook example of projection coupled with a tendency to "seeing the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but not noticing the log that is in your own eye"
Click to expand...

But, but... not our elections!!! That's soooo shocking that these people could doooo that! Blowing up the WTC or massacring Arabs is one thing, but how COULD such powerful people EVER rig the holiest of holiest, our super-constitutional-democratic US elections that make every bad guy shudder in awe and bow! That Can't Be!!! Unless it's the Commies!!!!! Muuuuhh!!
 
Adobe said:
Catherine Fitts made a point I liked during one of her last videos, and that was in reference to mind programing: (paraphrased) “be careful mixing your entertainment intake mode with your taking in of news/information mode. If you do…they’ve got ya! I swear during the Kavanaugh hearings you couldn’t find anyone to talk to as they were all glued to the tube cheering and booing, completely entertain with all they’re emotion in full view. Like it was a sports game.

They’ve got “the show” much of it fake of course, but becoming more popular than the entertainment shows, and that’s a slippery slope.

So, stop watching it….? NO!

And this is a recent change for me. At this point it’s important to have an understanding of what is going on “in the show” as not knowing what they are telling the herd, can leave you at a disadvantage, and perhaps in danger.

So, paying enough attention to the show is wise at least for our own preservation. After that, there is still personal work that can be done, as well as the enjoyment of as much of the last few moments of “normal” as possible.
Click to expand...
Fitts brought up the Kavanaugh hearing especially since it was exactly when that was happening that Trump, Pelosi, Schumer, McConnell, and a few others got together and signed FASAB 56 -- The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board's Standard 56. This allows for complete lack of transparency in government accounting, granting further allocation of public funds to black operations without the public's knowledge.

So, she wasn't necessarily saying you shouldn't be aware of the Kavanaugh "circus," but that you shouldn't allow such "fur balls" (she calls them that in comparing them to two cats fighting & whirling around in a fur ball) to take your attention away from what these entertainments are largely a cover for.

For detailed information on FASAB 56 (which she pronounces Fasbi 56), here's what she's got posted on her Solari Report website:

FASAB Standard 56 and the Authority of the Director of National Intelligence to Waive SEC Financial Reporting – The Missing Money

constitution.solari.com constitution.solari.com

Excerpt:

Financial accountability for the government is a cornerstone of a functioning representative democracy. The ability for the people to know where taxpayer money goes to is crucial to having an informed opinion regarding the actions of your representatives and to react accordingly. Unfortunately, as we’ve discussed in previous articles, the current state of government accounting is far from ideal–often bordering on useless to the public. This is largely due to lax enforcement of existing laws such as the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act, but also stems from the very real tension between completely transparent government financial disclosure and national security interests (see The U.S. Statutes Creating Modern Constitutional Financial Management and Reporting Requirements and the Government’s Failure to Follow Them, available at The U.S. Statutes Creating Modern Constitutional Financial Management and Reporting Requirements and the Government’s Failure to Follow Them). As of the last few months, this tension has taken the future of government financial disclosure to the public to new levels of opacity. The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) has released Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards 56 (Standard 56), taking government accounting practices from laxly enforced reporting standards to a new benchmark entirely–expressly approved obfuscation of reporting and, in some cases, outright concealing financials.

This sounds fairly alarmist at first blush but, simply put, Standard 56 creates a set of situations where government entities may move numbers around to conceal where money is actually spent or even not report spending outright. Many of the concepts in Standard 56 are not new and have been discussed in FASAB reports for nearly a decade. However, these new changes make a substantial portion of government financial reporting so unreliable as to not be a useful tool to the public (see FASAB Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards 56, available at http://files.fasab.gov/pdffiles/handbook_sffas_56.pdf)
Click to expand...

I do hear what you are saying, @Adobe, about not wanting to be ignorant of what the MSM is up to. But for me watching MSM is so corrosive overall that I prefer to approach what's going on there through other sources. Certainly shows like the Tucker Carlson Show (which is MSM "light" let's call it) offer a critique of what the other networks are up to, and in that way you're not digesting straight garbage, day after day. Still, you are going to miss a good deal of the MSM's "show" that way.

Maybe you, @Adobe, could highlight for us "the best of MSM" since I'm sure I'm not alone here in wanting to avoid consuming straight poison, day after day!

I have a friend who I can "sort of" discuss political issues with, although I find it exhausting at times. The thing is, you can sort of see the blind spots in people based on how much MSM garbage is being consumed without the proper filter. Also, I wonder, even in having the proper filter, if you insidiously get worn down, and start to see things through their corrosive lens almost unconsciously. So, all these things are concerning, I find.
 
Hey Heather:

Actually, I don’t watch MSM. I get angry in just moments. I can’t do it.

I get my information on “the show” (as you said from other sources) from here, the forum, sott, Polly, Corbett, Fitts, Webb, and the like. I do not suggest watching or listening directly to the MSM, unless of course that's what you are doing to report on it. Your point about proper filter is a good advise for anyone, even watching Tucker.

Recent example: I wanted to travel to see my daughter in California, and had to check “the story” to see if the boarders had been closed down, or quarantines for moving around, or whatever. That’s what I meant by watching the show for our own preservation.

I hope I added some clarity. And thanks for your response.
 
Revolver posted and exclusive analysis of the 2020 election from a non-partisan group that indicate extreme deviations from expected outcomes in swing states compared to other states.

The analysis suggests that there is a linear relationship between predictor and outcome variables. Non-linear relationships between variables were also explored. The model(s) seem to be able to explain 95% of the variability in election results, which is good, sometimes
plain ol' linear regression is as good, (or better) than more sophisticated models.

Statistical Model Indicates Trump Actually Won Majorities in Five Disputed States and 49.68 Pecent of the Vote in a Sixth - Revolver

2020.12.10-02.19-revolvernews-5fd185b0d92f9-1536x765.png


Other excellent analyses of both the 2020 election data and COVID-19 data suggest manipulated outcomes to support certain agendas. In a world where reality is what psychopaths wish it to be, however, objective analysis takes a backseat to greed, lust for power, and deep state 'fun and games'.

3. Every one of the contested states shows a larger predicted vote share for Trump than what he actually received. This is surprising, because in any set of observations, random chance might expect some predictions to favor Biden, but none do. In Georgia and Arizona, the model does not predict a narrow race, but a decisive Trump victory; the size of the anomaly is (much) larger than the reported margin of victory.

4. The model also performs well in battleground states that have not been contested, and thus where the election was presumably clean. Every one of these is correctly predicted, including both battleground states that voted for Trump (e.g. Ohio, Florida) and those that voted for Biden (e.g. New Hampshire). Indeed, there are no states that Trump won which the model predicts should have been won by Biden. Meanwhile, the errors in the model are constructed to average to zero, so the model cannot favor one candidate over the other. Instead, it reveals the places where actual outcomes differ the most from our predictions.

5. The model is robust to alternative specifications of the regression formula and weighting.

6. The model places the burden of proof on fraud skeptics to explain why nearly all the states where fraud has been alleged, and only those states, have results inconsistent with statistical trends in the rest of the country.

7. Our model highlights the importance of a systematic comparison of all counties in the US when trying to understand whether the contested states are actually unusual. Simply picking isolated comparison cities, or one-off comparisons to past elections, is a very inferior way of doing the comparison. This model takes this base intuition (which is actually good), but greatly improves it by making the comparison systematic. The fact that the contested states are mostly predicted to have been won by Trump using simple but powerful demographic models further adds weight to the existing evidence that these outcomes may have been altered by fraud.
Click to expand...

Nevertheless... I suggest this be added to SOTT's already excellent collection of 2020 election data analysis reports.

Much data wrangling was done to collect and prepare the data for analysis, some of it is available for download with a subscription, but other pieces may not be so easy to get.
 
SOTTREADER said:
I haven't watched MSM in years. I find the whole thing detrimental to my wellbeing.
Click to expand...

I can somewhat tolerate it but it took practise. I figured that if I can't even watch the news how I'm supposed to hold my own in a good manner in discussions with people who spat the same BS.

I always look up to Putin how he stays calm and strategic with MSM journalists. This attitude also helps to suffer less because of it.

The only place where I vent is this forum.

But I understand where you'all are coming from. Outrage is a good response. But don't let it get to you. OSIT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom