So, sundialsvcs, I'd like to just straight up ask you outright..."Is it far off the mark to conclude that you think Trump did win the 2020 election? that there was voting fraud perpetrated to elect Biden?"

When "pure power" is in play, as we have now seen, "all bets are off." People who are burning down police stations on public TV are "peaceful protesters," while citizens who are actually protesting are "insurrectionists." Kindly notice the prominence of "a label." It's a very-fundamental propaganda tactic.

Actually, I have never used "Facebook," nor any other "social media," and I never will.

In all these years, I have only used "conventional forums" to foist my opinions upon people who don't want to hear them. ;)

It is "absolutely and obviously true." And, when US States(!) tried to bring a lawsuit to that effect, in the only court they could use, they were "denied standing." When thousands of people showed up – as they had previously done for MLK (for example) – "to protest," they have been arrested and persecuted in classic "Banana Republic" fashion.

"Election Fraud" is a Federal crime. People have served actual prison terms for doing this in very small towns in very small elections. But, somehow, the very suggestion(!) that this crime took place continues to be ... "vilified and put down."

Exactly as you just did to me.

But never "put to trial." Hundreds of thousands of people now believe, rightly or wrongly, that "a Federal Crime has been committed," but there still has been no criminal trial. Why not? What is somebody afraid of?

The "Lawfare™ People" who have done this, plan to walk away with all of their power and wealth intact.

But: the Plaintiffs were denied the opportunity to even present(!) their "evidence."

Several "United States States" were simply told that "there is no Court" where you are allowed to bring your case for judgment.

And, in doing so, judgment was imposed against them without explanation.

"But, no." So sorry, "State of [X]," you simply have no power to have your evidence be heard nor weighed.

In 2019-2020, several US States, and several hundred thousand people, believed that a Federal Crime had just been committed against them, and so they "petitioned the Government for the Redress of Grievances." And, just look at what actually happened next.

Three years later: "Be Careful What You Wish For ..."

The reason I don't believe this is not because I would put it past the Democratic party to try it on ‒ this is after all the party that gave us terms like "gerrymander" and "Tammany Hall" ‒ but because I don't believe any political party could have organised something on the scale required. You can do that kind of thing in the London borough of Tower Hamlets, where Lutfur Rahman became mayor in 2010 with the help of a score or so of enthusiastic envelope stuffers, but not across the entire width of the USA. It would have taken huge coordination and a couple of thousand accomplices, all of whom have kept as silent as the grave about it ever since.

But I think Trump and his admirers believe it, and I can see why. Remember that 2020 was the covid election and the Democrats took covid very seriously. They were encouraged to vote by post and many of them did. Equally Trump encouraged his people to ignore covid and vote in person. So it was probably inevitable that Trump would be leading everywhere when the polling stations closed, but that Biden would catch up as the postal votes were counted. And, as they say nowadays, the optics of that are terrible.

Agreed. They might disagree behind closed doors, but no Republican in congress will vote in a way that would decide the GOP leaders to withdraw support the next time they are up for reelection. They will be threatened into standing with the party.

Oh dear. All this politcal vitriol and it's only early March. And there's European Elections, possibly UK, French & even Irish (by-)elections to come, along with who know where else :rolleyes::mad:.

It's going to be a long year. And the trouble about American elections is that they're not over when they're over. Time to avoid the General Forum.

You ignore the fact that most things require 60 senators, not a simple majority, to pass the Senate. They need at least 9 Republicans and all Democrat and independent Senate members to pass almost anything. (there are exceptions for some house policy and budget items)

Actually they WERE heard, but they failed to establish standing to bring the action.

It's all for amusement from here, 54 million feet away (or 16,500km in proper units).

Let them keep shuffling the deck chairs. At least we'll get more funny memes (about "fake nooze," "hamberders," and people holding their noses behind Trump) as the ship sinks.

So, rkelsen, do you think that had the Titanic sunk in Southhampton or Queenstown harbors, instead of many kilometers at sea, those sitting on runabouts and yachts in those harbors would have just ordered another cuppa and a cigar and found it an amusing distraction? ;)

Forgive me for saying so, sundialsvcs ol' buddy, but I think someone has infused your water with an unhealthy does of "the KoolAid". Considering Republicans, even many literally appointed by Trump, could not come up with a single disturbing shred of evidence of voter fraud even remotely close enough to provide anything close to a Trump win, yet there are videos of numerous MAGA and QAnon operatives being denied entrance to electoral offices precisely to prevent what they were there to do, subvert the vote count in favor of Trump despite not being elected officials.

I urge you to view recent events in Michigan by Republican Officials in any source you choose but here's a recap by Forbes (hardly a voice of "The Libtards") linked here with full original url (notice it's NOT CNN, quite the opposite)-

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisond...h=5af55e90ba4e

IIRC, the number has increased to at least 16 fake electors, all MAGA.

They did find less that 1.0% of attempted voter fraud (less than 1% of 5.5 Million voters) but the highest percentage of fraud attempts were in Trump's favor AND his was the only organized attempt at fraud visible and audible on film and there are recorded phone calls, tweets and letters of high ranking Republican officials, including Trump, asking for loyal members to "find me the votes I need to win".

Sundialsvcs, I submit to you that Trump tells the working class what they want to hear as a Trojan Horse and it won't be The Palace that burns. It will be where you and I live.

You are fake nooze! ;)
It's worse than that. He's gone full QAnon. You're attempting to reason with someone whose capacity for reason is quite patently impaired. You will not succeed.

Gentle Tolerence....
 

Like reasoning with someone who does or doesn't believe e.g. in God: one's ['certain'] thinking/thoughts [->'belief'] create their reality.

And it may be 'Politically Incorrect' (as in: Thread Closed) to ?judge? someone ?ad hominem? ... Not that I care...


BTW, the USPS didn't postmark my ballot, so I got a text msg saying it was invalid (tho mailed on-time).
Contrary info: the state website says all UNpostmarked ballots are accepted as on-time!
So, is mail-in voting: random incompetence, or planned fraud? IDK (&don't care). UNuseable in any case.

:)

While it is obvious that some people "go full QAnon" I don't see that as a reason to disown people or assume their "capacity for reason is quite patently impaired". People are completely capable of compartmentalization and after years of discourse with sundialsvcs, I find myself rather liking the man, or at least what I am exposed to here in text. We have some very deep disagreements but I enjoy his interest and knowledge in History and respect his intellect but more generally important I am aware that a lie told often enough can gain traction as truth. Any one of us can fall prey to seductive lies. I've watched videos of interviews with wide-ranging Trump supporters and most seem to be locked in to news sources that only serve to confirm what they already feel. Few are even aware of Trump's public statements honoring other dictators or his own aspirations to become like them.

I pointed out words from "the horse's mouth" via Forbes as one example of how solid the evidence actually is that "Stop the Steal" is an empty slogan only, a repeated lie or possibly simply a fantasy that Trump actually believes, because his ego just can't stand even the possibility of losing. That gives him an air of confidence and that is extremely attractive and charismatic. It is also quite dangerous.

It's well documented that all of Trump's claims about election fraud in the 2020 election were false. You can research Trump's comments, mostly on social media and then compare these to the actual ballot results and there is no correlation there. Similar to the claims that Obama's electing into office was based on vote rigging - i.e. registering ineligible people to vote. To this day there is not one shred of tangible evidence.

That's what's called electioneering - some of those loyal to either of the two main parties suck this kind of propaganda up quite readily. The fact that Trump was elected at all says a lot about the typical US voter (though we're no better on this side of the pond), and Trump and his advisers knew how to manipulate that herd successfully. Both sides use gutter tactics however, as their aim is to manipulate the masses into electing them into office at any cost, so that they can continue representing themselves and the millionaires and billionaires they serve.

But while the "crooked Hilary" campaign worked out well (for various reasons) to get Trump elected in the first place - eventually people start to see through that - and shaking faith in the electoral system ultimately works against all parties, to decrease turnout and increase voter apathy. It's obvious that his handling of the "covid phase" was instrumental in his downfall, as he failed to stick to the narrative (which he should have done if he wanted to survive the next election), but also his constant jabs at the opposition's credibility/morality and accusations of vote rigging, while mired in his own corruption scandals, only display a breath taking arrogance.

Is the underlined bit in your link? I do agree with hazel that any systemic/organized, Nation-wide effort to steal votes by Dems would have leaked by now.

So, why was there never a trial? Several US States attempted to bring a "timely action" in the only Court that was Constitutionally required to hear their case ... and, no case was ever heard. Despite the plain language of "Article 3, Section 2," they were informed that they "had no standing." In this way, six people effectively silenced the voice of more than 100 million.

Likewise at several other levels: "no case was ever permitted." They were all discarded, on various administrative pretenses.

Given the profound gravity of assertions of "election fraud at the national level," in which literally every one of (today) over 336 million people can call themselves "a plaintiff," why was this matter never adjudicated? And, why does this continue to be the situation today?

If the Federal election in 2020 (and, 2022) was "tampered with," then this is a serious Federal Felony. Anyone who believes that this crime has been committed against them is supposed to be entitled to Judicial relief.

Why, then, and despite the abundance of findings that many people continue to pour out, has this matter never been brought before any Court?

There are, today, literally hundreds of millions of "plaintiffs" who still are legally entitled to their day in Court. But, the Court [strangely ... and, I think, illegally ...] still "declines" to hear them. Let them come forward and – if this happens – be resoundingly "proven" wrong. But, "hear ye, hear ye," let them come forward.

"The Honorable Court" is not(!) entitled to tell them: "No, I'd rather not listen to you." But every single one of them, "as one," did.

Disputes can always be brought in courts. There are several things that can stop a case, one is standing see https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/standing. If there is no real dispute, or you are not a party to the dispute in question, you have no standing to bring the case.

Another is jurisdiction: you cannot bring a case in a court that does not have primary jurisdiction. (in this context, venue also matters but I have No legal training and would have to research to understand proper venue and how that relates. I would rather you do your own research of the vocabulary and side issues.)

When you bring a case you must be able to prove that you are bringing a real dispute, to which you have valid standing as one of the parties, and that you are bringing it in the proper court for this action.

In the case you mentioned, they failed to establish proper standing. That does not have to end a case, but it means that you need to correct what has been missed and bring one of the proper parties in the dispute question into the case and re-address the court. That did not happen. Perhaps the case was technically unsupportable and that COULD not happen, but that would be the fault of hose who tried to bring the case and not the fault of the court.

Disclaimer: this is MY lay opinion from having read FAR MORE CASE DISCUSSIONS that I am comfortable with and no training whatever in law. If anyone with a legal degree would chime in with corrections or better explanation I would be thrilled. Seriously, I would rather look silly or wrong than have bad information stand! We have FAR too much bad information already.

Now that Haley is out of the race it is a certainty that the Biden/Trump death match 2.0 is coming. I'm curious to see if Elon or others will rescue Trump and pay his tab. The SCOTUS has all but guaranteed that Trump won't be convicted prior to November 5th.
Maybe Trump will be brought down by a porn star. :)

I personally can not validate every single vote.

No credible election official or expert has publicly stated there was systemic voter fraud or massive overturning of votes even by those hired by Trump himself.

No "independent" audit or recount has shown any systemic voter fraud or massive overturning of votes.

No credible evidence exists that election machine votes were overturned by Martians, satellites or by Hugo Chavez.

No credible evidence exists of voter rigging has been shown even from the My Pillow Guy or the film 2000 Mules.

No, it was not or I would have included it within the Forbes quotes. It was mentioned in some of the many interviews with Michigan officials but I didn't see a gaggle of Dems showing up en masse trying to gain forbidden access to the count by faking out the guards. When you realize the actual religious fervor common to hardcore MAGA, QAnon, Proud Boys, etc. (just look at some of the T-shirts, posters, and banners) I am reminded of my High School days doing a term paper on The Gunpowder Plot. The most radical, including Jesuit Priests subscribed to what they termed "equivocation" aka "lying for a good cause". I found that almost as disgusting as actually attempting to blow up hundreds of people where innocents were "acceptable collateral damage". The Dems wish they were that organized and loyal. I'm glad they aren't and prefer Republicans return to real Conservative values instead of engaging in chaotic rabble rousing or cowardice..

Some perspective from the outside: Why do millions of Americans believe the 2020 presidential election was stolen from Donald Trump?

Well it coulda been those pesky Jewish Space Lasers ;) ;)

Trump won his first election because he was able to tap into a huge reservoir of partly justified anger in working class men and women who had been systematically attacked and downvalued by rich Democratic intellectuals. I remember hearing on the news that Hilary Clinton had called Trump supporters "a basket of deplorables" and thinking, "She's just lost the election". A lot of people who were reluctantly preparing to hold their noses and vote for her decided not to after that. Trump also won a bigger black vote and a bigger Latino vote than any previous Republican candidate. I suspect a lot of those people were angry small shopkeepers who had seen their businesses wrecked by BLM rioters whom the Democrats refused to condemn.

If you don't like populism and don't want people to vote for populist candidates, stop treating them as if they and their concerns don't count.

SCOTUS recently ruled that physicians who resented the possibility that a woman who had had an abortion could show up in their offices for follow-up care had standing. Before this, to have standing you had to have been actually injured. Now that people only have to imagine being injured have standing it makes standing available to anyone. Standing may end up being a requirement only in cases SCOTUS doesn't like.

True, but for Federal matters you can go to any district court in the country. There's one in a small town in Texas that has been taken over by litigants because of its bench's favoritism to their causes.

Who had been provided universal pensions, medical care, the 40-hour work-week, minimum wages, safe workplaces, college educations, subsidized home mortgages, highways, food stamps, and more by the work of the Democratic party over the objections of the Republican party.

Rich Republicans have been misusing them forever.

There are rich Democrats and intellectual Democrats, usually not the same people. What's wrong with intellectuals? We wouldn't have computers or heart transplants without them.

She pointed out that supporters of Liddle Donnie included frank racists, islamophobes, antisemites, homophobes, identified them as deplorables, not all of his supporters.

I thought it hurt her. She doesn't have the style to put that over; she comes across as a prissy librarian. 'Basket' is a silly word.

Such people were too few. Gustavo Arellano opined that Mexican supporters of Liddle Donnie had an appetite for caudillismo. Clinton won 3 million more votes.

Hilary would have done more to address their material concerns, as Democrats have done beginning in 1933, over the objections of Republicans. But man doesn't live by bread alone; he must hurt a notional inferior.
George Orwell wrote, in his review of Mein Kampf, There's nothing wrong with populism, in itself. Populism used to hurt people you don't like, to suborn legal and democratic institutions - that's what's wrong.

Although I hate to use the term after so many have been co-opted by MAGA, it's not really populism, it's fake populism. The Donald will never deliver on what he says, any more than he pays his bills, even to poor people in his employ. Again, at the moment of his birth he had a net worth in the millions. Look it up if you have any doubt. It's a bit more posh than a silver spoon. It's not even as "kindly" as stated by Anthony Hopkins character in the film "Howards End" - "The poor are poor. One feels sorry for them, but there it is."

Once he is in power we should know he won't deliver because he doesn't have to and he's already proved that when he did get the power. If you doubt this, name what he did in 4 years that was beneficial to the working class. This fact does not depend on any news service real, fake or otherwise. It's a matter of record and historical fact

He delivers the psychic gratification of making some people hurt that they enjoy seeing hurt.

I believe she put half of Trump's supporters in the 'deplorables' basket. Tens of millions of people and as opined by hazel - a self inflicted wound.
I wonder how much Hydergine they will have to pump into 'Dementia Joe' to get him lucid for tonight's 'State of the Union' address?

The reason I asked is that your first sentence read, at least to me, as if the link included such info. After reading it twice I looked up 2 of the people charged with crimes and couldn't find if the ballots alleged to be fraudulent went for Biden, Trump or if it was simply a case of sick and or disabled residents of the nursing homes not being aware of votes cast in their name. Both cases involved 'only' 50 ballots.
Paraphrasing your link, there was "far less than 1% voter fraud." True enough but in a very tight 'battle ground' State it's not completely implausible that ballot stuffing could swing a race, especially down ballot contests. In the case of Georgia only 1 vote in 400 could have swung the vote for Trump, exceeding the 11,799 votes by which Biden won the State.

Georgia - 4,935,487 x .0025 = 12,339
Michigan - 5,500,000 x .0025 = 13,750

I assert that there is abundant evidence of, and by now a very clear understanding of, a nationwide Federal Crime which as of today has still gone unpunished – even though it still could be.

Most damningly, every Court who could have heard the case – simply refused to do its duty. They never said anything about the merits or demerits of the cases: they simply refused to hear them at all. This was obviously the greatest conspiracy of them all, because it happened from the very bottom to the very top. The SCOTUS, for example, told several US States, who had come to the only Court that the Constitution allows them to come to in such a situation, and simply told them to "go away." (I wonder if they're having "buyer's regret" now ...)

The Law means nothing, and dissuades no evildoer, if that Law is not only "not enforced," but "not tried." There are over 336 million plaintiffs, because a crime against the election process damages every citizen of the country at the same time. You suffered "actual damages." No matter who nor where you are. Election Fraud is anything but "a victimless crime."

Here's what's supposed to happen: you present your case. The case is tried. You present your evidence and arguments, and the opposing side does the same. The evidence is weighed and a verdict is reached, with an accompanying explanation. You can appeal. But, the judicial process actually happens. Here, it simply did not – and still has not.

Election Fraud boldly occurred also in 2020, and we must have no illusions that it will not happen in 2024. In order to "win," Trump Supporters must manufacture more fake ballots than the opposition does, and somehow force those fake ballots to be counted along with the other fakes. And then prevent some DBA somewhere from simply executing an SQL "UPDATE" query. I assert this because: no legislature is taking any steps (that I know of) to timely change their laws and/or to reverse the extra-legal decisions that were made by various state officials and judges, specifically to facilitate fraud. And, courts still refuse to hear any election-fraud cases. Therefore, the 2024 elections and all future ones will be fraudulent. And 336 million people just lost their right to vote, forever. You may as well not show up: you will have "voted" anyway. Welcome to the United States of Banana.

Really? Show us the evidence.

Almost anything is plausible but I will just go with Occam's razor.

I hope there are future elections...

In Court, I am entitled to do so.

I am supposed to be able to go to the Honorable Court and declare under penalty of perjury, "I have been wronged – I have suffered actual damages – by this party and in this way!" And the Honorable Court shall lend an ear. Then, in the Court's presence and mine, the accused shall hear my accusations and they shall make their defense. Both sides are entitled to cross-examine the other, and to call witnesses and experts to support their version of the case. The Honorable Court then renders a verdict, which is subject to appeal. But finally, and in this way, the matter will be settled and the final verdict will stand.

None of this ever happened. Yet.

I assert that "a monstrous Federal Crime has been committed in broad daylight against every citizen of this nation, including you and me," and that not one Court has ever yet convened to formally decide the matter. As, I aver, they are required to do. Like every other voter, and every State, in this country, "I do 'have standing.'" I am legally entitled to be heard – and thereafter, to win or to lose.

- - -

An equally-troublesome aspect to this problem is that, even when people have been caught red-handed on surveillance video, apparently committing a Federal Crime, the State and Federal prosecutors who are supposed to be the ones to bring criminal charges ... "seem curiously unconcerned."

Anyone who is at all familiar with organized crime understands very plainly: "The Fix Is In."

Any case should have some merit or basis in fact. It is the right of any court to dismiss a case. As an example the lower courts found no evidence to substantiate the claim there was massive mail in ballot fraud and so was rejected by SCOTUS.

@sundialsvcs: you seem to be asserting that anybody be hauled up in front of a court, based on baseless allegation alone. That's not how any legal system works - unless in Banana Republics...

Harvard Crimson article:

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...tion-lawsuits/

Slight correction: Democrats, Progressives, and constitutional scholars refused to criticize BLM protesters: because they were not causing damage and were exercising their constitutional rights under the law. EVERYONE was willing to criticize rioters (who were mostly NOT BLM protesters but rioting AGAINST the BLM protesters) because they WERE breaking the law AND causing damage. The problem was that many conservatives lumped the two groups together, even when local law enforcement was reporting that the protesters were helping them catch and identify the rioters! The conservative stories based upon conspiracy theories are still more widespread than the truth, and might always be. I wonder what THAT will look like in the history books? (We will probably all look silly and primitive.)

Addressing the issues that resulted in the first (and hopefully ONLY) Trump election success: Democrats have always (since the 1960's) better supported real people and the working class while Republicans supported corporations and political ideals NOT supported by their voting population but that paid them in dollars and power. The problem with that is that Democrats did not always do the job WELL and really failed at communicating properly. They also slid more conservative with time and discarded some of the more progressive and ambitious goals that their constituents NEED! Between the trends and lack of good communication making them appear too much like the Republicans they still won the popular vote but lost in the electoral college.

The Democratic party needs to #1 communicate better, #2 keep their goals aligned with the needs of the constituents even when that hurts a bit in the short run, and #3 listen to the progressives and young members who are fresh off the stump and life outside of politics and have the strong feel for the trends and opinions of their communities. On everything other than budget they tried to blow off Bernie Sanders for decades, but he had the most consistent policies, goals, and support among voters. They cannot afford to keep making those kinds of errors, and WE cannot afford that either!

Or televisions or phones or radio or WiFi or cars or skyscrapers or cinemas or even simpler technologies like steam engines and sewerage systems... We basically wouldn't have had any of the technological progress of the last 200 years without intellectuals.

The "anti-intellectual" movement is something that has never sat well with me. A society should celebrate its best and brightest... but perhaps even more fundamentally, respect them at the very least. As we saw during the covid years, this is something that some in America don't seem to understand. For example, Mr. Trump's treatment of Dr. Fauci, (an established Doctor with decades of experience in immunology, whose only mistake was speaking truth to power) is the perfect example of behaviour that should not be tolerated in any decent society.

Can someone please explain why, here of all places, an internet forum dedicated to Linux, populated by computer nerds, we see someone denouncing intellectuals? What is that about?
I don't think you understand how the criminal justice system works. Hint: It's nothing like any of the TV shows you clearly watch.
Thank you wpeckham. Your posts here, along with those of enorbet and RandomTroll, give me hope that the majority of Americans are smart enough to know everything you've highlighted.

The allegations were, and still are, "anything but 'baseless.'" And a crime which has 336 million plaintiffs is definitely something to be investigated and resolved. But instead, they executed a "palace coup d'etat." And, to these ends, they systematically refused to allow anyone (so far ...) to "have their day in court."

I am of course quite familiar with the formal process for bringing criminal charges, the grand jury system and so on. And also with the fact that, despite widespread recognition by literally millions of people that "something seemed to be desperately wrong," this never took place.

But the "coup de grace" of the "coup de etat" was when several US States asked to be heard in the only(!) Court that they are entitled to go to, and they would not be heard. On the entirely absurd premise that, somehow, they "lacked standing" in spite of the very plain language of Article 3, Section 2. It is perfectly obvious that "election fraud," if committed on the Presidential level, creates "hundreds of millions of plaintiffs, and in every single State simultaneously. They tried, therefore, to "take it to Court," and were utterly rebuffed.

If you assert – with what you consider to be "very ample evidence" – that a crime of this truly-nationwide impact has just been committed, but you are then entirely denied "your day in Court," then you have no rights at all. As has been very-famously said: "It's not the votes that count. It's who counts the votes."

Maybe you're "perfectly okay with that." I'll check back with you in eight years.

You'll be speaking Russian by then.

C'mon ...

"This is our nation, not any of theirs." And, if the idea of "make [your_nation] great again" has been consigned to being nothing more than "an acronym on a red hat," the rest of the nations on this planet are surely already laughing at us. Because, you can be damned sure that they are doing everything within their power to advance their nations, as "any rational citizen thereof" of course would.

If you want examples of "election fraud," you can very-certainly go back to the various centuries of Rome, of which the most-reliable records now exist. But you can also look into a few episodes of our own nation's very-brief history. IIRC, it was first attempted in our nation's third Presidential election . . .

The essential question (to me ...) therefore becomes: "how much do [you(!)] actually care about what even might be happening to [you] right now?" (Once again using [brackets] to denote "the impersonal 'you.'") Does it actually concern [you] that such a momentous Federal Crime might(!) have just been perpetrated against ... [you(!)]?

I acknowledge: "maybe it actually doesn't."

Do you even inquire? Or is everything that has been supplied to you simply ... "okay?"

And, might I dare to suggest: "what, exactly, persuaded you to actually defend these people, whom you never even knew?" I think that this is a perfectly valid question here.

If you dare to seriously question where 'your' opinions actually came from ... of course your instinctive reaction will be to protect yourself. This is anticipated.

Because: "propaganda" is actually a very scientific topic of study that, generally, it is not a popular thing to admit to even having studied. Nor, having bended to. (Literary references omitted.)

And so, specifically without "anything further," I just want to leave you with that one ... thought question.

There I agree with you. Sanders is a populist too, a left-wing one, and I think none the worse of him for that. The common perception that populists are always right-wing "nasties" is certainly not true. We have and have had plenty of left wing populist parties in Europe and they were doing very well in the polls around that time.

I remember thinking in 2016 that Sanders could well have beaten Trump because he appealed to the same constituency, the same sense of anger and betrayal. But the Democratic party machine squashed him and they paid the price for that.

Fauci's hands are not exactly clean either. He and other Western virologists were eager to sub-contract work to the Wuhan virology lab because they were cheaper than any Western university. And now we know why! They were cutting corners on biosecurity. It was a cock-up, not a conspiracy, that unleashed covid on the world, but there was then (understandably) a conspiracy by Fauci and others to hush it up. Don't you remember how any suggestion that covid had come out of that laboratory was censored during the pandemic? And yet now most people accept that that is probably what happened. Even the WHO, who were very much in China's pocket at the time, changed their minds after they visited China and were locked up in a theatre for three days to watch propaganda films and never allowed to set foot in the laboratory itself.

Those talking about "populism" are those who want people to elect a regime according to the chosen narrative, rather than electing the leader/party they want to see in power themselves. These new buzz words should be treated with suspicion and caution.

The only thing that comes to my mind right now is: "... and then, they came for me."

The Government (sic ...) is ramping-up efforts to arrest more people who dared to protest on January 6th. Some of those people have now been held in prison for three years without a trial, and The Government (sic ...) might manage to scoop up more than 4,000 people before the statute of limitations kicks in. ("Better hurry.")

Last night, a "Gold Star parent" shouted back at The Puppet – and now faces a hefty fine and maybe 90 days in a DC jail. So much for "petition the Government for the redress of grievances!" Clearly, dissent is not tolerated by The Regime. Your son's "ultimate" sacrifice, also, means squat.

Maybe you are content to live in a nation like this. I am not. I want to continue to pretend that the nation which I grew up being taught about, somehow, "still exists." No. I want it back.

Remember: throughout the beginnings of WW2, there were plenty of "Good Germans." Likewise, there were Jews in the city of Warsaw who were, indeed, "fine, upstanding citizens."

Face it: you might like to pretend that "your self-image of yourself" will somehow carry the day, but history books very plainly tell that it does not. Those "very nice people" who devote so much time and energy towards teaching you to say what they say ... actually don't give a tinker's dam about you. They've got their 'power,' and they've got their 'money,' and they are also clinging to the illusion that they will somehow make it out of this whole thing alive.

But, if you've noticed, "history books" do not feature: survivors. For example, "the American Civil War" consumed (and, recorded) more than 600,000 individuals who today are nothing more than a number on a government ledger. Kindly bear in mind that you, along with 100% of your to-you-precious hopes and dreams, could also soon become: "++".

Do you think that people should not be punished for breaking the law?

Those sentenced on 6 Jan were mostly I believe for illegally entering, willful destruction of property, illegally carrying weapons and assault.

It is a misdemeanor for the public to illegally demonstrate or disrupt a session of Congress.

Your equating the Nazi evasion of Poland who subjected Jews to forced labor, to live in ghettos and finally murder to what? I find this offensive.

Hello again, sundialsvcs. Could you please cite a source for the above statistic? So far I can't find any corroborating evidence.

Can you rephrase/clarify that first sentence?

I reject the entire "Make America Great Again" movement because #1 I assumes that the USA (what they mean when they say the name of the continent) is NOT great when it CLEARLY is great. #2 Presumes that it is not great now, but was better at some time in the past (it is clearly, by the facts and evidence, better now than it has ever been in the past), and #3 that there is some value in reversing time to reach some previous state and that this is both desirable and possible (it is clearly not). From the actions and words of those who support the movement, it appears really a desire to reverse certain trends, including the 19th amendment (women's suffrage) as well as the 14th and 15th amendments and resume a mythical condition in which only white men who own land have any rights.

Some seem to fail to understand why any old white guy might object, but this old white guy absolutely does!

As for laughing at us, we used the music of an old European beer drinking song for our national anthem. We have been getting laughs since Benjamin Franklin showed them how to party before the US was a nation!

There is no evidence that there were corners cut on biosecurity at those labs, and they were MILES form where the first cases appeared leading investigators to believe that the lab area was NOT source of the the original contamination. Case 0 for SARS-2 is likely to have been the same as for SARS-1, the open air meat markets.

Those labs are cheaper because #1 the government there subsidizes them to pull over western science (and it works), #2 they pay their scientists a lot less. The US government spent time and dollars helping them build up their infrastructure, technology, and economy under the assumption that it would drive them to move form an aggressive and oppressive communist oligarchy to a more democratic and friendly society. We ENCOURAGED moving technology, research, and production migration to China for that reason. So far, that has really not worked out as planned and recent governments have started to pull back those resources. (Never more than the current administration!) Building and supporting China may have been an error, but for political and economic reasons. There is no evidence it has anything to do with any pandemic. In fact, it is the parts of Chinese society and culture that have NOT changed that appear problematic in a medical sense.

There is no such thing as total immunity.

The Supreme Court will carve out what is and is not protected by immunity.

Lets say the POTUS murders 10 people 9 hrs from his countdown to zero. You don't get immunity for that.

Finding docs in a "well protected" place 3mo after POTUS leaves office, highly likely carries immunity due to the nature of how they can take docs, that whole process is a boondoggle or sorts.

Finding docs in a "not so well protected" place 3mo after V-POTUS leaves office, highly un-likely carries immunity.

The situation is not a one-solution thing, it all kinda depends of the "crime" committed.

Trump will get immunity on the docs case.

SARS is a basis for most bio-weapons. Having your enemy lungs fill with fluid is a good weapon. Having that weapon be able to spread across the platoon, even better.
The wuhan lab was doing GoF reserach on SARS, and their goal was to see if they could get the new stuff into bats which could then transmit out. Placing viruses into bats can kill them, so it's not easy to do.
The bat story aligns with the latest news found from lab notes, and it's why China blamed bats that were 500mi away. Yes, bats carry sars, but can't carry all the variants.
SARS-2 most likely leaked out of the lab by someone working in the lab.
Most likely unintended consequences to the very questionable activities of the lab.

And don't forget, China USA Xyz, all have their own very secret labs that the public never gets to see or know about. But sometimes hiding nefarius activities in a "public" lab makes for great obfuscation, until something bad happens.