Pelosi's plan

 Nancy Pelosi is a very spiteful woman who hates Trump more than anything in the world. She is, at the same time, very clever and legitimately has a great deal of power that she has earned (unlike Harris, but that's a different subject), which makes her a serious threat to her enemies.

Now she has come up with a pretext to turn the power of Congress against Trump. She accuses Trump of being unstable and untrustworthy to hold the nuclear codes, assisted by the usual lies coming out of the media of how nameless (and imaginary) sources are seeing Trump lose his mind.

On paper, this is a clever attack. If you can not trust Trump with the nuclear codes, you can not simply take them away from Trump because the nation *needs* a National Command Authority with the ability to launch on warning, a time span of mere minutes. So the codes have to be given to someone else competent to use them.

This dilemma justifies an emergency session of Congress.

So far, very clever. But let's turn it up to 11. When she calls this special session, it will be a Congress that just survived a (as she will describe it) domestic terrorist attack incited by Trump. The actual details won't matter, emotions will rule the day. Almost all the Congress people will relive their day of terror and then be given a chance to take out their anger on Trump.

The ones who remain rational will also have seen the size of the crowd that was in DC on 1/6/2021 and see that Trump remains a big threat, to their career at least, if not their lives, after 1/20/2021. They will want a final solution to the threat.

Let your imagination run wild. 

Know that the incoming administration will not restrain them at all, but will eagerly implement what Pelosi commands them to do. SCOTUS has already been shown to be toothless even in the best of times. Trump will have no place to run, no place to hide. And all the Democrats will applaud.

Democrat wish list

It's almost Christmas time (1/20) for the Democrats. Shall we make a list of what they want the most?

1. Statehood for DC (2 D senators)

2. Statehood for Puerto Rico (2 more D senators)

3. Stephen Breyer retired and replaced by a black woman

4. Clarence Thomas replaced by a reliable liberal

5. 3 new reliable liberal SCOTUS justices to cancel out Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Barrett

6. An updated Patriot act 2 to deal with domestic terrorists like Donald Trump and his supporters. An alliance between Democrats and the social media gods to use the force of law to prevent conservatives from communicating.

7. A (so-called) Network Neutrality act to further regulate the network. Don't be fooled by the name any more than Antifa is about being anti-fascist.

8. A modest update to the 15th Amendment requiring racial, gender and sexual preference quotas in all areas of society. i.e. Mandatory Federal level affirmative action.

This will override state level laws or constitutions such as California's Prop 209. (the defeat of Prop 16 was only a temporary thing) 

Reporting requirements plus compliance/auditing bureaucracy.

Zuck, Dorsey, and the Google boys may regret this. Google especially will be hearing the name Timnit Gebru far too many times.

9. Racial reparations of course.

10. Tear down the wall/amnesty/dramatically increase immigration along with generous funding to help our new Americans get adjusted to their new country.

11. Very generous Economic stimulus/COVID assistance. At least 6 trillion dollars to start with. Every year.

12. Kill charter schools, enshrine the power of teachers' unions.

13. Fully transgender protections

14. Enhanced voters' rights legislation. This will mandate Federal level guarantees of simplified, no questions asked, access to mail in ballots for all elections. Plus the return of full Voting Rights Act Section 5 preclearance requirements.

15. Very, very strict gun and ammo restrictions. May have to wait for SCOTUS changes. But it is, at the same time, quite urgent.

Because of Trump supporters.

What have I left out?

Jenny Cudd and Jan 6.

 

cbs7.com

Capitol riots reaction: the congressman, the rioter, and the mayor

---

ODESSA, Texas (KOSA) - “They don’t know they just have awakened a sleeping giant.”

Congress was evacuated from its chambers as trump supporters stormed the U.U. Capitol building, forcing congress into lockdown.

Among those rushed to safety was newly elected Texas District 11 Representative August Pfluger. In a phone interview with CBS7′s Jay Hendricks, Pfluger lambasted the actions of the rioters.

“I got to tell you, I strongly condemn any violence happening here at the Capitol,” Pfluger said. “We’re a country of law and order, and, you know, we were here today to debate the merits of the Constitution, and part of that Constitution is our first amendment rights, which calls for peaceably assembling.”

Midland resident Jenny Cudd was among the rioters who stormed the capitol.

“We start walking up to the Capitol, and we get the news that Pence betrayed us,” Cudd said. “He had way more power, and he wasn’t willing to exercise it. And when Pence betrayed us is when we decided to storm the Capitol.”

Unlike Pfluger, Cudd was proud of the actions of people she calls “patriots.”

“We did break down Nancy Pelosi’s office door, and somebody stole her gavel, and took a picture, sitting in the chair flipping off the camera,” Cudd said.

An unreal scene of a nation that hasn’t been this divided in over a century.

In Odessa, mayor and long-time Trump supporter Javier Joven lamented people’s actions violating the first amendment.

“It’s unfortunate. The thing is, we all have the right for peaceful assembly, and we want to maintain that,” Joven said. “Most of the Trump supporters are law and order, but obviously, we’re not seeing that. So, the thing is that this is a disappointment.”

And although law enforcement and the national guard successfully removed protesters from the Capitol, Cudd has no regrets.

“Hell, yes,” Cudd said. “I’d do it again, and I’d have a gas mask next time.”

Copyright 2021 KOSA. All rights reserved.

vaccine safety

 Double standards, a liberal hallmark.

Covid: 1 death is too many.

Vaccines: 1 death isn’t enough to be concerned.

Covid: This virus can cause severe side effects. Though rare, we must not turn a blind eye and we must take it seriously as we don’t know who will be severely affected.

Vaccines: Severe side effects are possible, but so rare. Please don’t pay attention or let anti-vaxxers scare you away from vaccinations. We don’t have any way of knowing who will be affected, but it’s a risk we must be willing to take for the good of society.

Covid: Though you may have survived Covid with no issues, we're unsure of any side effects that could take place in the long term or later down the road. This is serious.

Vaccines: You survived your vaccine and you’re fine. Anything that happens down the road is not associated with the vaccine.

Covid: Man has heart attack after being diagnosed with Covid. Though most likely rare, we now know Covid can cause heart attacks!

Vaccine: Boy has seizure after receiving vaccine. This is most likely a coincidence and has nothing to do with the vaccine. If it was a result of the vaccine, this is very rare. No reason to be alarmed.

Covid: Man diagnosed with Bell’s Palsy after being diagnosed with Covid. Family says we must take this seriously. Wear your mask and social distance and be afraid.

Vaccine: 4 people were diagnosed with Bell's Palsy after receiving vaccines. While most likely a coincidence, Bell’s Palsy resolves on its own and it's nothing to worry about.

Covid: Believe science. Believe doctors.

Vaccine: I don’t really care if you have any science and those doctors must be quacks.

Covid: HCQ doesn’t work, even though tons of doctors are prescribing it and have had success and even though it’s a 50 year old drug that thousands take daily with no issue. We did a rushed study and a couple of people had bad reactions. It’s not safe and we must block people from using it. We don’t know long term effects and we cannot chance it.

Vaccines: Please take this extremely rushed vaccine that hasn’t had time to be properly tested and please ignore any side effects and don’t worry about any long term effects. The risk is something we must take to help us get rid of this virus. But we also aren’t sure if it even stops transmission so continue to wear a mask and social distance.

Covid: Sorry, I don’t believe posts and articles coming from that news site and I don’t care if you’ve done you’re own unbiased research. I don’t even care about your anectodal evidence.

Vaccines: I haven’t done any research on my own, but I believe what CNN and MSNBC tell me and I have my own anecdotal evidence.

crossing the Rubicon

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/17/if-americans-can-no-longer-trust-our-elections-were-in-big-trouble/

The court-won destructions of state election law smacked Republicans  as nakedly political. Nobody seriously believes that allowing mailed  ballots to come in after the election has anything to do with actually  protecting people from the pandemic, especially when the same officials  applauding mail-in balloting have selectively applied coronavirus restrictions to reward their friends and punish their political enemies.

Democrats have compared Trump to Adolf Hitler and have widely called  his supporters white supremacists and fascists. If they believe half the  things they are saying about Trump or his supporters, why wouldn’t  massive vote fraud be justified and even moral?

The same people who ranted about Russia hacking the 2016 election—to the point where almost 70 percent of Democrats falsely believed that Russia had hacked and changed vote totals—tell  Trump’s base that it is dangerous and unpatriotic to doubt the results  of this election. 

Russia, via a so-called troll farm, spent less than $100,000 on social media advertising before the 2016 election, but that didn’t stop House Democrats and many  Senate Republicans from treating this spending like it was the biggest  problem this country faced.

The censorship of any post questioning any part of the election on  social media and the denial and dismissal of obvious signs of fraud only  add fuel to the fire. These fly in the face of common sense. Consider  an article from the BBC in September 2016, about vote rigging in Africa. The article says that  classic signs of fraud include “high turnout in specific areas,” and  “delay in announcing results.” Note that states like Florida had high  turnout, but it wasn’t hugely concentrated to certain areas and ballots  were counted instantly.

But if Trump loses his court challenges and recounts, his supporters  aren’t going to forget about this. People are angry unlike anything this  author has seen before. The Jeffrey Epstein affair, the FBI corruption,  and the riots have completely eroded trust in basic institutions,  especially on the right.

If the fraud alleged did occur, it was pre-planned, industrialized,  and brazen. This isn’t 1960, where John F. Kennedy received more votes  in Cook County than the number of people living there. It isn’t 2000,  where a legal battle is ensuing over one state’s balloting issues.

This is an allegation that there was massive fraud, on a scale never  seen before—and the allegation comes from about 50 million Americans.  The allegation is plausible because the establishment denying it has  hated Trump and his supporters from the get-go. Trump supporters deserve  to be paranoid—they have been neither accepted nor understood.

Overall, people feel like America has been sliding for decades, and indeed the American working class has been  sliding for decades. If people begin to feel like elections no longer  matter, the only avenue to settle differences is through force and  violence. The far-left in this country has already skipped belief in the  electoral system and reached this conclusion. How else does a divided  people settle disputes without the ballot box?

The phrase “crossing the Rubicon” refers to the moment Julius Caesar  crossed the Rubicon River, which precipitated the Roman Civil War and  the end of the Roman Republic. It’s like saying “the point of no  return.” People can laugh at what this is implying, but America is  reaching a dangerous point if the people—on both sides—no longer trust  elections.

anti-Asian discrimination

 The Democrat party is the party of anti-Asian discrimination.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-duo-that-defeated-the-diversity-industry-11605904415

No on 16 had to overcome a vast funding disparity. Whereas the referendum’s backers had a war chest of $27 million, “we raised a little over $1.7 million,” Ms. Wu says, “and nearly all of our funds came from 7,000 Chinese-American donors of modest means.” 

Asians are harder hit than whites by racial preferences in higher education; Ms. Wu estimates their admissions to UC schools would have fallen as much as 50% if Proposition 16 passed. 

When an NBC reporter raised this point with a Democratic state senator, he shrugged it off: “Black and Hispanic people have even greater concerns.”

The Yes campaign received $6.5 million from a single donor—Quinn Delaney, chairman of the Oakland-based Akonadi Foundation, which says it aims to “eliminate structural racism.” The largest contribution received by No on 16 was less than 1% as large—$50,000 from Students for Fair Admissions, a nonprofit group that has sued Harvard, alleging that it discriminates against Asians.

“Patricia Quillin, wife of the Netflix CEO, gave $1 million,” Ms. Wu adds, then goes on to list other givers of “big sums”: the California Teachers Association, Blue Shield, the Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 

Other donors include Steve Ballmer, former CEO of Microsoft, as well as owners of the San Francisco 49ers, the San Francisco Giants and the Los Angeles Dodgers. By contrast, Ms. Wu says, the lone $50,000 donation accounted for “only 2.9% of our funds.”

Ms. Wu came to the U.S. in 2009 from Wuxi, population five million—“a small town by Chinese standards.” She earned a doctorate in international studies from the University of Miami and was “perplexed” when it dawned on her that Asians, “as a group, are being scapegoated in education to fulfill a narrative of very shallow diversity.” It shocked her to discover that America wasn’t living up to its ideals as a “land free for everyone.”

She hears from parents in New York’s Chinatown who fear their children will be squeezed out of the city’s specialized public high schools because of their leftist mayor’s push for “diversity.” They tell her that they worry their kids will be unable to “redeem the American dream.” These are poor parents who don’t speak English and have told their children: “You work hard, you study hard, you’re going to get out this ethnic enclave. You’re going to get out of Chinatown.”

When politicians and school administrators say there are “too many” Asians in elite classrooms, “I feel minimized,” Ms. Wu says. “I feel stigmatized that I was reduced to a racial box—that my hard work is being blamed for the lack of so-called proportionality in these institutions.” 

Mr. Connerly, listening, can’t contain himself. “I have a more visceral reaction,” he says. “I am repulsed by that kind of language, because I have lived it. That’s what’s wrong with prejudice. You don’t see people as individuals.”

Mr. Connerly describes the Asian-American fight for educational equality as “probably the truest civil-rights movement of our time.” The civil-rights movement in the 1960s, he says, “was about civil rights, yes. But it became about advancing the condition of black people.” That’s why “you have people who have accused me of not really being a civil-rights guy—because civil rights in their mind is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. But those guys are race advocates.” 

Mr. Connerly offers a test for whether people are “really pro-civil rights”: “It’s when they will defend the right of a white person—a white male—to be treated equal to everyone else.”

disparate treatment of Pennsylvania voters

 Here is text from the actual complaint:

https://cdn.donaldjtrump.com/public-files/press_assets/2020-11-09-complaint-as-filed.pdf

“The right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.” Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 104-05 (2000).

All citizens, including Pennsylvanians, have rights under the United States Constitution to the full, free, and accurate elections built upon transparency and verifiability. Citizens are entitled – and deserve – to vote in a transparent system that is designed to protect against vote dilution.

The right to vote includes not just the right to cast a ballot, but also the right to have it fairly counted if it is legally cast. The right to vote is infringed if a vote is cancelled or diluted by a fraudulent or illegal vote, including without limitation when a single person votes multiple times. The Supreme Court of the United States has made this clear in case after case.

See, e.g., Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368, 380 (1963) (every vote must be “protected from the diluting effect of illegal ballots.”); Crawford v. Marion Cnty. Election Bd., 553 U.S. 181, 196 (2008) (plurality op. of Stevens, J.) (“There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the State’s interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters.”); accord Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 554-55 & n.29 (1964).

The disparate treatment of Pennsylvania voters, in subjecting one class of voters to greater burdens or scrutiny than another, violates Equal Protection guarantees because “the right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.” Reynolds, 377 U.S. at 555.

In a rush to count mail ballots and ensure Democrat Joe Biden is elected, Pennsylvania has created an illegal two-tiered voting system for the 2020 General Election, devaluing in-person votes. For voters that appeared at the polls, those citizens were required to sign voter registrations, have those signatures checked against voter rolls, vote in a polling place monitored by statutorily authorized poll observers, and have their votes counted in a transparent and verifiable open and observed manner.

By contrast, due to the arbitrary, unauthorized, and standardless actions of the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Kathy Boockvar, nearly 2.65 million votes were cast through a “mailin” process that lacked all of the hallmarks of transparency and verifiability that were present for in-person voters.

In fact, Secretary Boockvar affirmatively excised nearly every element of transparency and verifiability.