Sayers caught up with Scott Atlas, a healthcare policy academic from the Hoover Institute at Stanford, who has become the latest lightning rod for the controversy around Covid-19 policy and his support for a more targeted response. Speaking from inside the White House, where he is now Senior advisor to the President and a member of the Coronavirus task force, he does not hold back. He tells us that he is disgusted and dismayed at the media and public policy establishment, sad that it has come to this, cynical about their intentions, and angry that lockdown policies have been allowed to go on so long. He won’t be rushing back to Stanford, where his colleagues have rounded on him, if the President loses in November. KEY QUOTES Why him? I’m a healthcare policy person — I have a background in medical science, but my role really is to translate medial science into public policy. That’s very different from being an epidemiologist or a virologist with a single, limited view on things. Dr Fauci He’s just one person on the task force — there are several people on the task force. His background is virology, immunology and infectious disease. It’s a very different background, it’s a more limited approach, and I don’t speak for him. Herd immunity policy? No. It’s a repeated distortion, lie, or whatever you want to call it… What they mean by ‘herd immunity strategy’ is survival of the fittest, let the infection spread through the community and develop a population immunity. That’s never been the policy that I have advised. It’s never even been discussed inside the White House, not even for a single minute. And that’s never been the policy of the President of the United States or anybody else here. I’ve said that many many times… and yet it persists like so many other things, hence the term that the President is fond of using called fake news. On herd immunity Population immunity is a biological phenomenon that occurs. It’s sort of like if you’re building something in your basement: it’s down on the ground because gravity puts it there. It’s not a ‘strategy’ to say that herd immunity exists — it is obtained when a certain percentage of the population becomes resistant or immune to an infection, whether that is by getting infected or getting a vaccine or by a combination of both. In fact, if you don’t that believe herd immunity exists as a way to block the pathways to the vulnerable in an infection, then you would never advocate or believe in giving widespread vaccination — that’s the whole point of it… I’ve explained it to people who seemingly didn’t understand it; I’ve mentioned this radioactive word called herd immunity. But that’s not a strategy that anyone is pursuing. What is his policy? My advice is exactly this. It’s a three-pronged strategy. Number one: aggressive protection of high risk individuals and the vulnerable (typically the elderly and those with co-morbidities). Number two: allocate resources so that we prevent hospital overcrowding, so that people can be treated for this virus and get the other serious medical care that is needed. Number three: open schools, society and businesses because keeping them closed is enormously harmful — in fact it kills people. Effect of lockdowns We must open up because we’re killing people. In the US, 46% of the six most common cancers were not diagnosed during the shutdown… These are people who will present to the hospital or their doctor with later stage disease — many of these people will die. 650,000 Americans are on chemotherapy — half of them didn’t come in for their chemo because they were afraid. Two-thirds of screenings for cancer were not done; half of childhood immunisations did not get done; 85% of living organ transplants did not get done. And then we see the other harms: 200,000 cases plus of child abuse in the US during the two months of spring school closures were not reported because schools are the number one agency where abuse is noticed; we have one out of four American young adults, college age, who thought of killing themselves in the month of June… All of these harms are massive for the working class and the lower socioeconomic groups. The people who are upper class, who can work from home, the people who can sip their latte and complain that their children are underfoot or that they have to come up with extra money to hire a tutor privately — these are people who are not impacted by the lockdowns.SHOW LESS
Re-Posted from Just Facts Daily By James D. Agresti November 24, 2020
A “fact check” by USA Today is defaming a Ph.D.-vetted study by Just Facts that found non-citizens may have cast enough illegal votes for Joe Biden to overturn the lawful election results in some key battleground states. The article, written by USA Today’s Chelsey Cox, contains 10 misrepresentations, unsupported claims, half-truths, and outright falsehoods.
Furthermore, Facebook is using this misinformation to suppress the genuine facts of this issue instead of honoring its policy to “Stop Misinformation and False News.” Compounding this malfeasance, a note at the bottom of Cox’s article states that USA Today’s “fact check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook.”
#1 Dr. Glen’s Credentials
Starting with the most simplistic falsehood in Cox’s piece, she impugned the character of Dr. Andrew Glen, a Ph.D. scholar who specializes in data analytics and who examined Just Facts’ study and found that it “provides a credible data analysis that supports a strong hypothesis of non-citizens having a significant effect on this election.”
Cox did this by claiming that “though he is attributed as a professor emeritus at the United States Military Academy, an ‘Andrew Glen’ did not appear in a search result on the website for the United States Military Academy, West Point. Glen attended the school as a student, according to his LinkedIn profile page.”
That statement reveals that Cox and her editor were ignorant of the fact that a professor emeritus is one who has “retired from an office or position.” Thus, Dr. Glen would not appear on the webpage of current faculty to which she linked.
Had Cox conducted a proper search, she would have found that West Point’s website lists Glen among a group of professors who wrote a reference work for its Department of Mathematical Sciences.
Cox could have also found proof of Glen’s professorship at West Point via a peer-reviewed journal, an academic book that he coauthored on the topic of computational probability, or the website of Colorado College, where Glen currently teaches.
After reading what USA Today published about Dr. Glen, current West Point adjunct professor Dr. Joseph P. Damore wrote:
I can personally attest to the fact that Andrew Glen, COL USA, ret. was an Academy Professor at West Point. I know, because I was there with him.
And Ms. Cox, to imply that an Iraq war vet, a graduate of West Point, and a retired Colonel from the U.S. Army is somehow lying about his credentials is so egregiously offensive, that it demands your apology.
Instead of an apology, USA Today altered the article 18 hours after publication to remove this attack on Glen without issuing a correction. This is a breach of journalistic ethics that require reporters and media outlets to “acknowledge mistakes” and explain them “carefully and clearly.”
#2 Dr. Cook’s Credentials
Cox also assails the credibility of Dr. Michael Cook, another scholar who specializes in data analytics and reviewed Just Facts’ study. Cook found that the study is “methodologically sound, and fair in its conclusions,” but Cox dismisses him as a “financial analyst, according to his LinkedIn profile page.”
However, Cook’s LinkedIn profile states that he is an “applied mathematician and strategic thinker with experience on Wall Street, scientific research, statistical modeling.” This experience, coupled with Cook’s Ph.D. in mathematics, make him eminently qualified to assess Just Facts’ data-heavy study.
#3 Cook’s and Glen’s Qualifications
Cox also attempts to discredit both Ph.D. scholars by reporting that they “are not election experts.” Given that Cox gives no credence to their reviews of Just Facts’ study, she is overtly implying that they are unqualified to assess it. After reading this, Dr. Cook wrote:
Though I am not an “election expert,” I have training and experience in statistical modeling, statistical inference, and sampling theory, which is the basis of my comments on Agresti’s methodology and approach.
Agresti, the president of Just Facts, is the author of the study.
Dr. Glen replied similarly while explaining the folly of Cox’s argument:
Once elections happen, they leave the academic realm of sociologists and political scientists, and enter the realm of statisticians, data scientists, and operations research. Analogously, biostatisticians are often not medical doctors and yet are of great necessity in studying the effects of public health, disease spread, and drug efficacy.
That a “fact checker” would be unaware of these types of interdisciplinary interactions that are common in scientific and academic fields displays a significant lack of qualification for the job and reflects poorly on the trustworthiness of USA Today.
#4 Voter Registration by Non-Citizens
Cox also mangles the facts about every major aspect of Just Facts’ study. She mainly does this by treating unsupported claims from progressives as if they were facts, while ignoring or dismissing actual facts.
Cox asserts that “only a handful” of non-citizens ever register to vote, and “that’s not going to change an election.” Those words came from a lawyer named Robert Brandon, founder of the left-leaning Fair Elections Center. In the article from which Cox quotes him, Brandon provides no evidence to support this statement. He simply makes it. Yet, Cox accepts this unsubstantiated claim as a fact.
Meanwhile, Cox disregards these rigorously documented facts that appear in Just Facts’ study:
In scientific surveys conducted in 2008, 2012, and 2013, 13% to 15% of self-declared non-citizens admitted that they were registered to vote.
Database matches with voter registration records in 2008 suggest that the true rate of non-citizen voter registration is almost twice what they reveal in surveys.
Without a hint of skepticism, Cox also relies on “a 2007 report by the Brennan Center for Justice, a center-left institute” that allegedly shows “few people purposefully register to vote if they are knowingly ineligible.” Written by Loyola Law School professor Justin Levitt, the report provides narrow, weakly sourced evidence that does not come close to supporting Cox’s broad claim.
For example, Levitt’s first piece of evidence that non-citizens rarely register to vote is a Seattle Times editorial chastising a lone person who challenged the citizenship and voting credentials of 1,000+ people “based on the sound of their name.” Levitt gives the false impression that an investigation was conducted, but the editorial says nothing of the sort. Instead it says that “state election officials are not aware” of such illegal voting, but “that is not to say non-citizens did not vote or that non-citizens should vote.”
Levitt provides another fives examples that suffer from similar flaws, including arguments from silence, references to secondary sources, and the use of narrow probes with no capacity to root out voting by illegal immigrants who use false IDs.
All-in all, Cox does not provide a single fact to support her statement that “few noncitizens register to vote in federal elections.” She merely declares this to be a fact based on the allegations of two progressives—who she selects. Then based on this, she claims that Just Facts’ study “is unfounded.”
#5 Results of the Electoral Studies Paper
Furthermore, Cox misrepresents the results of a seminal 2014 paper in the journal Electoral Studies. She does this by quoting it out of context to convey the false impression that only “some noncitizens” vote. She never mentions the study’s striking results, which are as follows:
“Non-citizen voting likely changed 2008 outcomes including Electoral College votes and the composition of Congress.”
The “best estimate” for the number of non-citizens who voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election is 1.2 million, with a range “from just over 38,000 at the very minimum to nearly 2.8 million at the maximum.”
“Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass” Obamacare.
#6 First Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper
Cox also tarnishes the Electoral Studies paper, and with this, the reputations of the scholars who wrote it. Once again, she does this by treating unsupported and demonstrably false claims as if they were facts.
Citing an article in Wired magazine, Cox writes: “Michael Jones-Correa, a political science professor at the University of Pennsylvania and one of the study’s critics, told Wired that any responses from noncitizens” in the survey used for the study “were included due to error.”
Neither Cox, nor Wired, nor Jones-Correa present any evidence to support that accusation. Moreover, it is disproven by the fact that the survey posed this question to its respondents: “Which of these statements best describes you? … I am an immigrant to the USA but not a citizen.”
#7 Second Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper
Based on the same Wired article, Cox declares that “Jones-Correa also said the sample size is too small for a representative sample of the noncitizen population.” In reality, Jones-Correa makes a different claim (debunked below), but neither Cox nor the Wired reporter seem to understand the difference between them.
Cox’s argument about sample size is based on a puerile notion debunked by a teaching guide for K–8th grade students, as well as other academic sources. Snopes and PolitiFact previously made the same false argument, and for this reason, Just Facts’ study provides a warning about this “mathematically illiterate” claim and a link to the facts that disprove it. However, Cox completely ignores these facts and reports this untruth instead.
#8 Third Attack on the Integrity of the Electoral Studies Paper
The argument that Jones-Correa actually made in Wired is that the survey sample for the study was unlikely to “accurately represent” non-citizens. This has nothing to do with the sample size and everything to do with the fact that surveys can be highly inaccurate if they don’t use random samples of respondents. As stated in the textbook Mind on Statistics, “Surveys that simply use those who respond voluntarily are sure to be biased in favor of those with strong opinions or with time on their hands.”
However, the Electoral Studiespaper directly confronts this issue by “weighting the data” to produce “a non-citizen sample that appears to be a better match with Census estimates of the population.” As explained in the academic book Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A Comprehensive Guide, weighting “is one of the most common approaches” that researchers use to “present results that are representative of the target population….”
The book goes on to explain that weighting is far from foolproof, and both Just Facts and the Electoral Studiespaper directly state that. This is one of the reasons why Just Facts refers to its study results as “estimates” five separate times and directs readers to these “possible sources of error, some of which may produce overcounts and some undercounts.”
Nonetheless, weighting is a generally accepted means of making survey data representative, and Cox’s omission of this fact is grossly misleading.
Cox, Wired, and Jones-Correa are not the only ones to spread this half-truth. PolitiFact and Brian Schaffner of UMass Amherst have done the same—despite the fact that the Electoral Studiespaper addressed this issue right from the start. This shows that each of these people and organizations either did not read the full paper, did not understand it, or are deliberately trying to slander it.
#9 Pathways to Illegal Voting
Cox writes that “registrants voting in a federal election supply evidence of their residence,” but “Agresti argues some noncitizens manage to vote in federal elections despite preventive measures.” This mischaracterizes the facts on two levels.
First, proof of residency is not proof of citizenship. And as Agresti pointed out in his study and in an email to Cox, “all 50 states require people to be U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in federal elections.”
Second, Agresti does not merely argue that “some noncitizens manage to vote in federal elections despite preventive measures.” He provides reams of facts from primary sources showing that:
no state requires anyone to provide documentary proof of citizenship in order to register to vote because federal courts have stopped them from enacting this requirement.
the vast bulk of illegal immigrants use false identifications that would allow them to vote.
three scientific surveys and database matches with voter registration records show that millions of non-citizens are registered to vote.
Barack Obama stated that there is no effective way to enforce the law that prohibits non-citizens from voting.
The sources cited by Agresti to prove these facts include:
a U.S. Government Accountability Office investigation.
a study by the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration.
a video of California Senate Leader and Democrat Kevin De Leon stating that “anyone who has family members who are undocumented knows that almost entirely everybody has secured some sort of false identification.”
a video of Obama stating that non-citizens would not be deported if they voted because “there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over, and people start investigating, etcetera.”
Yet, Cox describes this stunning array of documented facts with the phrase “Agresti argues” and then rejects all of them in favor of an unsubstantiated claim from a progressive lawyer. That’s not fact checking but propagandizing.
#10 Confirming Fraud
Finally, Cox contests the reality that states have withheld public voter roll data from the Trump administration that could be used to prove how many illegal votes are cast by non-citizens. She does this by linking to a summary of state policies on public access to voter lists. She then points out that “voter information is publicly available” in the battleground states.
This is one of the rare cases where Cox actually presents facts to support her case, but she misinterprets them. She does this by failing to account for the differences between:
a policy summary versus its practical application.
limited public data versus detailed public data provided in a format that can be analyzed to root out illegal votes.
Once again, all of the facts needed to understand these points are documented in Just Facts’ study with links to credible primary sources, including the Federal Judicial Center and a statement from California’s Secretary of State.
Though California is not a battleground state, it provides a crystal clear example of the distinctions that Cox fails to recognize. According to the link she provided, California’s voter rolls are available to “candidates, parties, ballot measure committees, and to any person for election, scholarly, journalistic, or political purposes, or for governmental purposes, as determined by the Secretary of State.” Yet, when Trump’s Commission on Election Integrity requested the data, California’s Secretary of State vowed that he would not provide it and promised lawsuits and “opposition at every step of the way” to keep the data from the Commission.
Summary
A “fact check” by USA Today contains 10 demonstrably false claims that smear a range of scholars and denigrate a rigorously documented study as “unfounded.”
Facebook partly funded this defamatory work and then notified Just Facts that Facebook is:
placing a label on Just Facts Facebook post for the study that states: “Independent fact-checkers say this information is missing context and could mislead people.”
reducing the reach of the post.
counting this post as a “Page Quality Violation” against Just Facts.
Just Facts posed these three questions to Facebook about its so-called “independent third-party fact-checking organizations” and is awaiting a reply:
Given that Facebook has hand-selected these organizations to be the judges of truth on your platform, do you hold them to actionable standards and count quality violations against them?
If so, what exactly are these standards and the repercussions for violating them?
If not, why are you vesting certain people with unchecked authority to use Facebook to censor others, sow misinformation, and slander the reputations of scholars?
Useful Idiot: In political jargon, a useful idiot is a derogatory term for a person perceived as propagandizing for a cause without fully comprehending the cause’s goals, and who is cynically used by the cause’s leaders.
Some of the same people who brought us President McCain and President Romney are at it again. With their fingers held up into the political wind they are predictably waffling just when strength and perseverance are needed. The reason for this is that they are not conservatives where it counts, deep in their gut. They are fair weather politicians and talking heads, without the stamina or conviction to stand for principle when it gets tough. They still kowtow to the corrupt press, afraid to risk the ire of the Democrat propaganda machine. This is no surprise, but we need to put them on notice. The stakes are too high. We don’t accept your spinelessness and we don’t buy your political tricks anymore.
Republican politicians have become useful idiots. Useful to the Democrats
Without starting a distracting pissing contest, I will not name names. The petty back and forth squabbles that would erupt on social media do nothing, they are of no consequence. You can see who falls into the scope of my observations and ire easily enough. Simply go to main conservative sites and blogs and read, you will soon find the spineless who with intellectual dishonesty will say: “Trump lost, move on” or some other equally mealy mouthed equivocation. Listen to the legislators when they shuffle out of their offices and mumble some platitude about “working with the new administration” or “every legal vote counts” for the cameras, they may be hard to catch, sunlight makes them uncomfortable.
Oh sure, some are just lazy and tired and don’t have the stomach for the fight. Some do not have the skills to dig into the mountain of evidence and data and eyewitness testimony that screams fraud and conspiracy, it is admittedly overwhelming. Some actually work for the anti-American forces that are trying to destroy us. They may not even realize it, they have become useful idiots. Useful to the Democrats.
So what are the narratives that they embrace? You see them endlessly on the MSM. There is “no evidence” of voter fraud. It is a ‘conspiracy theory”. The “American People would never vote for this despicable Putin Puppet” and on and on in a hundred versions and recycled lies. Interviews with Democrat apparatchiks who oversaw the fraud are common. They mouth the same lies. “Our system is fool proof”, and “We found no fraud, only some errors” and “There may be some fraud, but not enough to alter the outcome” and “It was a computer glitch that only happened once”, ok, maybe twice, or at most three times, etc…
If Trump succeeds in fighting the fraud the Democrat funded and motivated mob will cause havoc, businesses will burn, innocent people will die
The Democrats are certain we are stupid enough to believe them. They are certain they can convince us to ignore our lying eyes. After all it has worked countless times before. It is working now. Our pundits and politicians who suffer from this unique form of political “Stockholm syndrome” are abetting an enormous electoral crime by not standing up and loudly demanding accountability. They can’t pretend it isn’t there anymore, right? Yes they can, and they will if they think they will profit from it. This time they are wrong no matter which way the election goes.
The thing is, this time the cheat is so huge, nationwide and in our face, with a clearly organized influence campaign supporting it that even people on the other side see and are concerned. Some few still believed the democrats had some integrity left. They know otherwise now, the Democrats have become the monsters they always falsely accused Republicans of being. The true believers and fanatics are calling the shots, making the political conflict incoherent, debate impossible, and the leftist mob they use to intimidate us is churning restlessly,preparing for violence,waiting for violence, yearning for violence.
If Trump succeeds in fighting the fraud the Democrat funded and motivated mob will cause havoc, businesses will burn, innocent people will die, and America will suffer at their hands. But Trump will fight back with law enforcement and federal agencies and yes, even the military if he must. That is his job, and he is not timid in pursuing his duty.
If Biden becomes President the mob will still be violent, innocent people will still die
If Biden becomes President the mob will still be violent, innocent people will still die, America will suffer greatly, but the mob will have a friend in the Whitehouse and will not fear the consequences of violence. Anarchy is a weapon the left uses to intimidate and subdue its opponents with fear. Even now they boast of taking their riots to the suburbs, to teach conservatives a lesson. They will do so with the Democrats’ blessing. Let them come, we are waiting.
The vast majority of Americans will know Biden to be illegitimate, they will never trust an election involving Democrat candidates, poll workers and officials again. Our election system is now crumbling into third world chaos. All trust is gone, no legitimacy remains. This is what they have wrought. The Democrats have unleashed a wave of evil they cannot control. In the end it will consume them. Let us all pray it does not consume us all.
Bill Gates, like his father, is a eugenicist. His dad was the head of Planned Parenthood and friends with the Rockefellers. The elitists at the top want us dead. Even Prince Phillip said if he was reincarnated he wanted to come back as a virus to wipe out mankind.
Gates isn’t waiting for reincarnation. He wants us gone from his planet now. Yes, that’s right. The elitists including Bill Gates believe they own the planet and most of humanity are useless eaters who are mucking it up for them. Especially under the great reset which means people won’t have jobs. That’s why Gates funds Planned Parenthood, Monsanto (GMO foods kill humans), the WHO, the CDC, a spate of big vaccine makers, and globalism.
Gates has already killed a great many in India and Africa with his experimental vaccines. He did not face justice. Like all of the elitists, he’s above the law. Now he’s pushing a vaccine for COVID-19. He already owns the patent for the virus and the vaccine is probably already made. He’s just waiting for the right moment to release it. First, he and his operatives—people such as Dr. Fauci, bought-out politicians, and the corrupted mass media—all want us to be miserable. They want us masked up, and joyless. “Safe,” but not really living. No job, no church, no holiday get togethers. They’re isolating us. They’re forcing degradation upon us. They’re humiliating us. They’re exhausting our will to resist. Gates wants us to beg for his vaccine. Politicians will see to it that we are forced to take it in order to work and travel and possibly even use financial services. It’s the mark of the beast.
Once nearly everyone takes the foul concoction, people will begin mysteriously dying in a few years because of it. Gates and the corporate shill media will say it’s not due to his vaccine, but rather a new strain of the virus. Gates has already warned about a new, stronger viral wave that’s coming. He’s got it all planned out. He even smiled when he said it. So did his wife, Melinda. They couldn’t help but smile. They are, after all, sadistic fiends. Regardless, more and more vaccines will be mandated. More death will result. A lot of people will have to die to satisfy their magic spell that’s written on the Georgia Guide Stones.
Even if you choose to disbelieve my ‘conspiracy theory,’ do not take the vaccine. Big Pharma and the so-called medical experts who march under the banner of ‘science,’ are paid to cherry pick data and ignore the myriad deleterious side-effects. Vaccine makers can’t be sued. Taxpayers pay damages in a special vaccine court. It means Big Pharma is unaccountable and reckless. They don’t care about you or your family. They care about money. A cure would stop the money flow, so there will be endless virus waves and endless rushed out vaccines.
Forget about taking their vaccine cure. It will be worse than the disease.
John Kerry is a Davos Man. He has already publicly stated at Davos at the World Economic Forum that a Great Reset was urgently needed to stop the rise of populism – (i.e. Trump supporters). They regard Trump was elected by “populism” so what he was saying was to suppress those who voted for Trump which is anti-Democratic. He is preaching totalitarianism because they are right and everyone else must therefore be wrong. Kerry vowed that under a Biden administration, America would rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement to push the Great Reset but added, that this was “not enough.”
“The notion of a reset is more important than ever before” according to Kerry. He added: “I personally believe … we’re at the dawn of an extremely exciting time.”
A Biden Administration will invoke civil war. Texas might as well secede from the USA now. They intend to wipe out the oil industry. They will bring Texas to its knees. Texas joined the USA on December 29, 1845. It is now in its 20th 8.6-year cycle. The Commerce Clause, provision of the Constitution (Article I, Section 8) that authorizes Congress “to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with Indian Tribes.” The commerce clause has traditionally been interpreted both as a grant of positive authority to Congress and as an implied prohibition of state laws and regulations that interfere with or discriminate against Interstate Commerce (the so-called “dormant” commerce clause). Under a Biden government, the Democrats have already been scheming to strip the Supreme Court of the power to rule on specific legislation.
In the case PATCHAK v. ZINKE, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, the court ultimately upheld the Gun Lake Trust Land Reaffirmation Act (Gun Lake Act) against a separation-of-powers challenge. However, because a majority of the Court could not agree on the legal basis for its decision, Patchak’s ultimate meaning with respect to Congress’s power over the courts remains uncertain. The various opinions in Patchak signal sharp divisions on the Court concerning the scope of Congress’s power to “strip” the jurisdiction of federal courts. Whereas at least four Justices appear to view that power as being “plenary” in nature, at least four other Justices embrace a more restricted view of Congress’s authority.
The Biden Administration WILL go after stripping the Supreme Court of ruling on pet issues from abortion to socialism. In HARRIS v. McRAE, 448 U.S. 297 (1980), the Supreme Court held that the Constitution was negative and as such it did not require the government to create any social programs or pay for anything on behalf of a citizen. The Constitution was intended to be a NEGATIVE RESTRAINT upon government rather than a positive list of rights for the individual.
So get ready. The Biden Administration is going to completely change the United States using executive orders to circumvent votes in Congress or debates. They argued that Kennedy was Catholic and the same argument was used against Barrett’s appointment to the Supreme Court that their religion would make them subservient to the Pope. This time, the Democrats are subservient to the World Economic Forum. Say goodbye to the Supreme Court on anything meaningful anymore.
I want to thank you for all of your work and have enjoyed meeting you at the WEC’s and Computer event in Miami Beach that was a real eye-opener and also John McAfee had some very entertaining stories.
As in the Hawthorne Effect in Stanford County Jail study do you think the Mayors /Governors/ CDC/NHI heads and political class are playing the guard’s role and the public are the prisoners?
Thank you
DS
ANSWER: Oh yes, that is when I was a speaker at the American Hackers Convention. John McAfee was interesting. We had drinks together and was relaying his support for me in my confrontation with the government.
The Hawthorne effect is a term referring to the tendency of some people to work harder and perform better when they are participants in an experiment. The term is often used to suggest that individuals may change their behavior due to the attention they are receiving from researchers rather than because of any manipulation of independent variables. I believe we are finding politicians imposing lockdowns and closing schools simply because other politicians are doing it and they have no clue as to the legitimacy of their actions in any context.
The PCR (polymerase chain reaction) is a NAT (Nucleic Acid Amplification Technology) method which is not really valid. I personally was tested 5 times in one month and when I told that to a pulmonary specialist in Tampa hospital he said that did not mean anything because the tests were not valid. The test measures sequences, i.e. nucleic acids contained in the virus. A positive test only indicates that SARS-COV-2 RNA is present, but does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the presence of an infection and whether it is contagious. This can only be done by means of virus detection through reproduction in cell culture.
I want to thank you for all of your work and have enjoyed meeting you at the WEC’s and Computer event in Miami Beach that was a real eye-opener and also John McAfee had some very entertaining stories.
As in the Hawthorne Effect in Stanford County Jail study do you think the Mayors /Governors/ CDC/NHI heads and political class are playing the guard’s role and the public are the prisoners?
Thank you
DS
ANSWER: Oh yes, that is when I was a speaker at the American Hackers Convention. John McAfee was interesting. We had drinks together and was relaying his support for me in my confrontation with the government.
The Hawthorne effect is a term referring to the tendency of some people to work harder and perform better when they are participants in an experiment. The term is often used to suggest that individuals may change their behavior due to the attention they are receiving from researchers rather than because of any manipulation of independent variables. I believe we are finding politicians imposing lockdowns and closing schools simply because other politicians are doing it and they have no clue as to the legitimacy of their actions in any context.
The PCR (polymerase chain reaction) is a NAT (Nucleic Acid Amplification Technology) method which is not really valid. I personally was tested 5 times in one month and when I told that to a pulmonary specialist in Tampa hospital he said that did not mean anything because the tests were not valid. The test measures sequences, i.e. nucleic acids contained in the virus. A positive test only indicates that SARS-COV-2 RNA is present, but does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the presence of an infection and whether it is contagious. This can only be done by means of virus detection through reproduction in cell culture.Video Player00:1301:28
They now test so many people that the positive rate would normally increase since where you tested only people who had symptoms, now everyone is being tested. The average age of death in Germany is 81 years with COVID which is no different from the flu. They are clearly using this to terrorize the population to get them to surrender their liberty and in the process destroy as much of small business as possible which employs 70% of the population for the Great Reset – you will own nothing. There is NO POSSIBLE WAY we will ever return to not just “normal” but the economy will be destroyed and people will be forced to buy online where it takes minimal skill to just filling orders if not by robots. The equality gap will increase and this is one reason BigTech supports the Great Reset.
My grandchildren will NEVER know the world as I did growing up. These people are destroying our culture and future. When courts and police support this tyranny, that backs the people into a corner and the only solution becomes civil uprising where revolutions unfold.
Comrades, the Pennsylvania authorities have announced new COVID-19 compliance dictates to ensure full control during the holiday week. “Under the new order, bars and restaurants will not be permitted to sell beer and liquor between 5 p.m. Wednesday and 8 a.m. Thursday morning.” Welcome to selective COVID prohibition, because a virus…
Additionally, all schools must now restrict attendance and comply with “full remote learning.” It is all for your best interest citizen as explained by the command and governing authority: “Having someone in your home who does not live with you – not part of your household – even if they are part of your extended family, or your close friends, puts your entire household at risk.”
Be a good citizen and snitch on your neighbors.
Pennsylvania – officials are issuing new orders and advisories they are calling “additional safeguards” as they work to slow the spread of coronavirus across the state.
Gov. Tom Wolf made the announcement alongside Pennsylvania Health Secretary Dr. Rachel Levine during a press conference on Monday afternoon.
[…] Schools that do not sign the form or fail to comply are required to provide only fully remote learning and suspend all extracurricular activities as long as the county remains in the substantial transmission level.
The Democratic governor also reissued orders intended to protect businesses, employees, and customers. The orders include reiterating cleaning and social distancing requirements, mandatory telework requirements unless impossible, and other safety measures. (read more)
Dr. Andreas Noack was reportedly under investigation by German authorities for being non-compliant with the COVID-19 lockdown laws enacted by the government. During a livestream broadcast of his views on the authoritarian COVID-19 rules, the German police broke down his door and arrested him. The arrest was made after the German Parliament passed the “Infection Protection Law”.
The balaclavas and heavily armed tactical rifles are a nice touch, WATCH:
(Media Report) – Reports from Germany indicate that a German doctor, Dr. Andreas Noack was arrested during a police raid while he was recording a live video. The reasons for the police raid and arrest of the german doctor have not been officially revealed yet. However, there are rumors that Dr. Andreas Noack provided medical assistance to hundreds of protestors during lockdown protests against the administration. (read more)
It is the Democrats who want to tell us what we can and cannot do, and what we can and cannot say. It is their arrogance that will cause this country to self-destruct
With the integrity of the 2020 elections in shambles, our country is at its tipping point. Forget the notion that because the GOP won down ballots, they will come back strong in the next election. If the results of this election stand, and the Democrats win the two Senatorial run-off elections in Georgia, fundamental changes will be made to our government and to our voting process that will ensure Democratic control of the White House, the Senate, the House of Representatives and the Supreme Court only to be rectified via a revolution or Civil War if you will.
Constant attacks on both Trump and his supporters, with the enthusiastic support of the mainstream media, Big Tech, Hollywood, businesses that want to have access to cheap goods from China
By the time the Biden and/or Harris term is over, not only will the election process have been changed to advantage Democrats, but they they will flood the country with immigrants who tend to vote Democratic, and they will add Washington DC and Puerto Rico as new states giving the Democrats four more Senate seats and, therefore, control of the Senate. They will pack the Supreme Court with as many Justices as it takes to give them a majority. With their long-term power ensured, they will exact revenge on Trump and his supporters. They will do away with the Electoral College, transferring national power to the relatively few states that have cities with large urban populations. The opinions of the millions of Americans in fly-over states won’t matter. They will do away with the filibuster, making it impossible for the Republican minority to have any influence whatsoever in determining policy. Hate speech will be redefined to include only conservative points of view and then it will be criminalized. The liberal mob will register our guns, then it will tax them, and eventually it will find a way around the 2nd Amendment and confiscate them. We are, without a doubt headed, toward a Marxist/Socialist one-party government, if the Democrats take control of the Executive and Legislative branches of our Federal government.
We have endured four years of constant attacks on both Trump and his supporters, with the enthusiastic support of the mainstream media, Big Tech, Hollywood, businesses that want to have access to cheap goods from China —American workers be damned, foreign countries that don’t like Trump’s America First policies and want a return to a more “generous” and “apologetic” United States, and the globalists who want to see the United States come under the control of an international governing body. It is in every sense a liberal mob. They embrace the “cancel culture” that tries to silence or destroy any person or entity that disagrees with their leftist points of view, making Americans and American institutions afraid to say what they really think. And the social media giants Twitter and Facebook, along with Google, have become even more brazen in their censorship of conservative views. They are not only silencing dissenting opinions, but they are driving a wedge between an already dangerously divided American public.
To Hell with the 1st Amendment; if they don’t like it, we can’t say it
Not content with the current level of censorship, many Democrats are calling for even more control over what people can say and what information they are allowed to receive. This includes Senators Dianne Feinstein, Chris Coons, Mazie Hirono, and many others, such as Richard Blumenthal who wants to put the heads of Trump’s people “on pikes”. And people like Richard Stengel, who is on Biden’s transition team, want to punish people for what they perceive to be, and define as, hate speech. To Hell with the 1st Amendment; if they don’t like it, we can’t say it.
Add to these things, increased taxes and regulations, the return to dependency on foreign oil and gas and the resulting loss of American jobs, the Great Reset, which will bring America more and more under the control of foreign institutions such as the United Nations, and the belief that people don’t have the right to defend themselves or their property with legal firearms, as evidenced in St. Louis with Mark and Patricia McCloskey, and the divide between Americans will grow still wider. Every crisis will be weaponized and used as an excuse to implement permanent changes to our way of life that will impinge upon our freedoms. COVID-19 is the most recent example, but by no means the first. The hysteria over global warming predated it by more than a decade and it is the “crisis”, albeit a faux one, that offers Democrats and globalists the best chance of turning America into a country that our parents wouldn’t recognize or like.
We’re not interested in trying to tell the liberal mob how to live their lives
Ever since Hillary Clinton’s shocking loss to Trump, Democrats and their consortium of self-serving supporters have gone all-in to destroy those who disagree with them and to obtain absolute power by any means necessary. But the fact that roughly half the country does not support them or their agenda won’t go away. And that half of the country is not going to sit by idly and allow their freedoms to be taken away by people who think they know what is best for them. They are not going to tolerate the shows of force and attacks from groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter. At some point, they will push back and they will push back hard. The most likely catalyst will be when the liberal mob tries to register, then tax, and then mandate the buyback of our guns. If/when this country gets to that point, it won’t be pretty. There will be bloodshed and a lot of it, and it will all be on the liberal mob and their quest for power over a population that doesn’t want to give it to them. Conservatives just want to be left alone. We’re not interested in trying to tell the liberal mob how to live their lives. It is the Democrats who want to tell us what we can and cannot do, and what we can and cannot say. It is their arrogance that will cause this country to self-destruct.
Measures such as ending cash bail and removing discretion from elected judges to keep a community safe are not popular in our country, even in California, our most liberal state, and in New Orleans, one of our most liberal cities
In theIn the 2020 election, the far left failed miserably. At the presidential level, Donald Trump added 11 million votes to his 2016 total. In other races, the GOP had a particularly good Election Day as Republicans gained control of at least a dozen U.S. House seats, a governorship, three state legislative bodies and probably retained control of the U.S. Senate, although the answer will not be known until the outcome of the two Georgia races are decided in January.
“Defund the Police”
Some House Democrats were furious with the far-left “squad” gaining control of the airwaves and promoting such messages as “Defund the Police.” They believe this rhetoric cost the Democrats many of these contested congressional seats. In the wake of riots and out of control crime in many urban areas this year, voters are concerned and want law and order, even in liberal areas.
For example, earlier this year, New York had to scale back criminal justice reforms enacted in 2019. At that time, their state legislators passed a measure that eliminated all forms of cash bail for non-violent offenders and forced prosecutors to turn over all evidence within two weeks of arrest.
The result was predictable as repeat offenders released into the community committed horrific crimes. Not only prosecutors and police were upset, but the public as well. Eventually, the reforms were changed, and cash bail was returned for a variety of crimes, while prosecutors were given over a month to provide their evidence. The new rules went into effect in July of 2020.
In the most liberal state in the nation, California, voters passed a variety of criminal justice reform measures in November. Thus, funding will be shifted from police to social services, oversight of law enforcement will increase, sentences will not be increased for petty crimes and parolees will be given the right to vote. However, on one important issue, the voters were clear, cash bail will stay.
In a lopsided vote, 56.4%, California voters rejected Proposition 25
In a lopsided vote, 56.4%, California voters rejected Proposition 25, which would have ended cash bail and replaced it with an algorithm threat assessment that would determine whether or not a defendant would be a flight risk or show up for court proceedings. This new process would have possibly cost the taxpayers of California hundreds of millions of dollars to implement. More importantly, it would have subjected the citizens to unnecessary danger as criminals would have taken advantage of a system that is not in use anywhere else in the country.
In New Orleans, Louisiana’s most liberal city, voters soundly rejected candidates running on a criminal justice reform platform promoted by a group called PAC for Justice. This is remarkable because Republicans only comprise 10% of the electorate in New Orleans.
The motto of these seven progressive candidates was to “Flip the Bench.” All the candidates were previously public defenders and supported a platform that included eliminating the bail system, removing discretion from judges to hold defendants pre-trial and ending any fees or fines paid by defendants who plead guilty or are convicted for their crimes.
Of the seven candidates, only two were victorious, and it is entirely possible that the reason for their victory was not their affiliation with PAC for Justice, but the fact that they are African American females, which comprise 34% of the total New Orleans electorate. In the 2020 elections, African American female candidates were successful in a wide variety of races in New Orleans. A similar outcome occurred in Houston in 2018 when 17 African American females were elected to judgeship positions.
The candidates supported by the PAC for Justice lost
The candidates supported by the PAC for Justice lost even though they outspent their opponents by a wide margin. The PAC for Justice was founded by a convicted murderer, Norris Henderson. Despite his controversial background, he was able to solicit massive donations from philanthropic groups and liberal activists from across the country.
Along with the PAC for Justice, two other progressive organizations, Working Families Together and NOLA Defenders for Equal Justice, lent their support to the seven “Flip the Bench” candidates. The groups financed slick mailers, billboards, and a coordinated media campaign for these candidates. On Election Day, paid workers distributed professional flyers at high traffic spots and near voting precincts.
Despite a huge financial advantage, five of the seven candidates running on this ticket lost, with a meager 37% average vote total. One reason for their defeat was the involvement of The Watchdog PAC, which highlighted the background of Norris Henderson in a series of social media ads, as well as television and radio commercials.
Another factor in the election was the rapidly rising crime rate in New Orleans
In their TV commercials, viewers were reminded that Henderson was found guilty of murdering a teenage girl while she was riding her bike to school. Instead of being wrongly convicted as he claimed, the ads emphasized that he was convicted twice of the crime and never exonerated. It asked voters to “remember the Flip the Bench candidates who have forgotten Henderson’s murder victim.”
Another factor in the election was the rapidly rising crime rate in New Orleans. The murder rate in 2020 will far exceed last year’s total. In fact, the 2019 murder rate was surpassed in September of this year. With crime on the increase, even the liberal voters of New Orleans did not want to support “Flip the Bench” candidates who they felt would not hold criminals accountable for their actions.
With such decisive results in New Orleans, California and other areas, voters have sent a clear message to future candidates. While voters want a justice system that is fair and constructive, they will not embrace an agenda that lacks accountability.
Measures such as ending cash bail and removing discretion from elected judges to keep a community safe are not popular in our country, even in California, our most liberal state, and in New Orleans, one of our most liberal cities.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
In the 2020 election, the far left failed miserably. At the presidential level, Donald Trump added 11 million votes to his 2016 total. In other races, the GOP had a particularly good Election Day as Republicans gained control of at least a dozen U.S. House seats, a governorship, three state legislative bodies and probably retained control of the U.S. Senate, although the answer will not be known until the outcome of the two Georgia races are decided in January.
Centinel2012 