We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, December 13. 2016
Obama Crushes Conspiracy: No Evidence that Russia Tampered with Votes in Election
Democrats have been trying to de-legitimize GOP presidential victories for over 40 years. Let’s review...
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
"What will be next?"
Of course, that is the question; none of the stuff the Clintons and fellow Leftists are pulling would even have been conceivable a short time ago.
you're wrong. It'd not be refuted by anyone because nobody'd have a platform to refute it on, or to collect the information from he'd need to refute it.
8) Legal challenge to Electoral College vote schedule, demanding delay while "serious allegations" are investigated
9) Point to Trump choice of Rex Tillerson as evidence of Putin plotted takeover of US government
10) Promote more fake news stories to link Trump to nefarious Russian interests
11) Claim that Trump's fondness for "The Big Lebowski" is related to "white Russians"
12) Challenge Trump on why he named his daughter "Ivan"-ka
13) Trump Vodka. Sold only in Israel. Case closed.
Highly recommended. It is an investment of time but it is well worth it. Pat Caddell saw this election coming several years ago: https://www.hillsdale.edu/live/cca-democrats-republicans/pat-caddell/
re Obama Crushes Conspiracy: No Evidence that Russia Tampered with Votes in Election
"'Nevertheless, we stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people,'" said the statement from the White House. November 26th. "The administration said it was 'confident in the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure' and that the 'elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective.'" This is Barack Obama and his administration back on November 26th. That's not even a month ago. They were defending the integrity; they're claiming that everything was fine and aboveboard; the Russians did not succeed.
And yet Obama is now ordering a review of Russian election-related hacking! So what are you to believe? Even this now has become politicized, and look how the wheel has turned.
They are doing their best to destroy the Trump presidency before it begins so that it never has any legitimacy. I don't think they believe... Don't misunderstand. They don't think they think they can oust Trump as the president-elect. They don't think they can get Hillary elected. They would love if Trump didn't get to 270 and the Electoral College if they were able to intimidate enough electors.
They would love that. They love it if the House of Representatives has to elect Trump. Can you imagine the story then? "Trump loses popular vote, Trump loses the Electoral College, and the Republican Party shamelessly installs him as president against the will of the voters anyway," and he starts out as totally illegitimate. That's what their objective here is. And whether or not you think they can pull it off is not the point.
They are trying to, and it doesn't matter. The media is going to portray Trump as illegitimate anyway. That's what this is all setting up. The truth be damned. This is fake news for a purpose. And it's gonna be up to Trump to continue to do what he has been doing and just going over their heads and continuing to tweet about them and exposing them as the frauds that they are, as the architects of fake news.
feeblemind: No Evidence that Russia Tampered with Votes in Election
That is correct. There is no evidence that the counting of votes was impacted by Russian tampering or any other source. There is evidence of voter suppression, but that is a separate matter and has no impact at this point on the election results.
There is evidence, however, that the Russians hacked the political parties, then selectively released the information to interfere with the election, including leaking strategic documents internal to the Democratic Party.
feeblemind: They love it if the House of Representatives has to elect Trump.
Some people certainly want that to happen, but they are gravely mistaken. Overturning the electoral decisions of the voters would further destabilize the U.S. electoral system. The issue of the Electoral College should be addressed, if not towards popular election, but at least to end the possibility of faithless electors.
"strategic documents internal to the Democratic Party"--is that what we're calling them now?
Texan99: "strategic documents internal to the Democratic Party"--is that what we're calling them now?
Yes, internal strategic documents were included in the leaks. New information indicates that the hacks also included Democratic Congressional races.
"Overturning the electoral decisions of the voters would further destabilize the U.S. electoral system. The issue of the Electoral College should be addressed, if not towards popular election, but at least to end the possibility of faithless electors."
Yes, but if Americans truly are dissatisfied with the electoral college system, then it strikes me as a constitutional issue to be addressed for future elections, not past ones.
JJM: Yes, but if Americans truly are dissatisfied with the electoral college system, then it strikes me as a constitutional issue to be addressed for future elections, not past ones.
Of course. But, under the current system electors could conceivably overturn the election. Though very unlikely, it is a weakness of the current system. If it did happen, it would further destabilize American democracy.
Is The Deep State At War... With Itself?
We can now discern the warring camps of the Deep State more clearly. On the one side is the C.I.A., the mainstream media, and the civilians who have feasted on wealth and power from their participation in the neocon's Global Project.
On the other side is the Defense Department's own intelligence agencies (D.I.A. et al.), the N.S.A., the F.B.I. and at least a few well-placed civilians who recognize the neocon agenda as a clear and present danger to the security of the nation.
From this perspective, the C.I.A.'s rash, evidence-free "report" is a rear-guard political action against the winning faction of the Deep State. The Deep State elements that profited from the neocon agenda were confident that Hillary's victory would guarantee another eight years of globalist intervention. Her loss means they are now on the defensive, and like a cornered, enraged beast, they are lashing out with whatever they have in hand.
This goes a long way in explaining the C.I.A's release of a painfully threadbare and politicized "report."
We are being played of course. Not very differently from how the AGW scam is run. A reliable source declares it is true and after that it is settled and if you disagree then you are the denier. Make no mistake this isn't "just" to diminish Trump and hopefully prevent him from achieving much in his term. They really do want to steal this election on the 19th. There really is a concerted effort both visible and behind closed doors to get the electoral college to vote Hillary in. Don't laugh. We won't know until the electoral college votes and once they do it is a "done deal". Yes the House can overturn it but what then? Deeper chasm between the left and right, constant turmoil in congress, nothing gets done. This is developing into a full blown cluster, er, thingy. Made all the worse by the dangerous world that Obama has left us with.
Question: How can the Left OPPOSE Russian hacking? Fellow lefties and all that. Likely Putin has repudiated his Communist past, but who's gonna BELIEVE that, either?
Y'know, this makes more sense if you can view it in a good vs. evil context rather than progressive vs. conservative, or left wing/right wing. Also helps if you've been married to a couple of sociopaths.
In short, a coup attempt!
As a joke, I once said that Barrack Obongo would need to be
pried out of the White House with a freaking crowbar. This
whole Russian cyber-hacking thing is a total farce. But then,
Obongo is sending CIA agents to "Interview" all of the electors.
How much do you want to bet that all of the electors, mean
all of the "Republican" electors.
A false narrative is being established that Russians "Hacked"
the voting machines in order to ensure a Trump win. There
are two problems with this scenario;
Hillary has already established that she can be bought by
Of the two of them, even without a corruption issue, Clinton
is a typical liberal push-over. If anything, Putin would normally
prefer a cookie cutter Carter, Clinton, Obongo pantywaist over
a foreign policy hawk like Trump.
I would not be surprised if sometime before the inauguration,
Obongo declares a state of emergency, if not martial law on the
grounds that the election is null and void because of some
imaginary foreign influences in the election in favor of Trump.
I would put NOTHING past these people!
Yeah, and you're acting like a chicken little, afraid of everything you that doesn't fit your view of the world. Tell me you honestly expect obola to declare a national emergency and stay in office another term.
Two weeks ago I never expected Democrats or Republicans to try to force the electoral college to vote against the electorate and "deem" the wrong candidate to be president. I was wrong! I should have been more paranoid.
I do not think and have never thought that Obama would declare martial law or try some extra-constitutional attempt to stay in office. But... I used to feel that way 110% and now it's closer to 99 and 44/100ths%
But pretty much everything else Mr Jones said sounded true and not paranoid at all.
you take demoncrap BS too seriously.
they're desperate losers.
No Sir, not at all, never in the 200+ year history of the
United States has a political party pulled out all of the stops
in an attempt to overturn the results of a presidential
election! Like Donald Trump or hate him, he is the duly
elected President Elect!
The Clinton Campaign leaked the names, addresses, phone
numbers and E-mail addresses of all of the electors in a
blatant attempt to overturn an electoral landslide!
Obama has just crossed a line that no other president in
American history has: He has ordered CIA officers to
"Question" electors! This is the stuff that has until now
been restricted to third world tin-pot dictators!
Of course, I am going to be a little concerned. But I am
not a paranoid. I have rejected every conspiracy theory since
the JFK assassination. They are Contrails, not Chemtrails,
as any elementary school student knew in my third grade
class back in 1965.
We have NEVER in American history had a sitting president
actively attempt to subvert a presidential election!
So if 3 bullets were fired from the Dallas book depository but 4 or more bullets were accounted for who sot the other bullets?
If the doctor who examined JFK swore that he was shot from the front and he was bullied into changing his opinion, why? If the "magic bullet" was somehow found on a gurney in the hospital who put it there? Why did a mob insider decide to shot Oswald? Why was it that when the FBI tried to duplicate those difficult shots from the boo depository 6th floor expert shooters failed to do it? Why does Oswalds background and history more resemble a CIA undercover agent than it does a conspirator? Why was the famous picture of Oswald with the Carcano Rifle "photo shopped". Why did the 80 or so people that Life Magazine associated with the JFK assassination all die mysteriously? Why was the Warren Commission report so full of lies and coverups? What would have been wrong with the truth? Why were many of the facts and testimonies sealed from public view for 50 years? Why was the original autopsy report destroyed? Too many questions to list.
Leonard Jones: No Sir, not at all, never in the 200+ year history of the United States has a political party pulled out all of the stops in an attempt to overturn the results of a presidential election!
Little known fact about U.S. history: Some states rejected the presidential election of 1860.
A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union... Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery
for f'sake. pwning someone like Leonard is bottom of the barrel argumentation.
as much as I despise your always wrong and inevitably worthless opinion, Leo's is worse, because he should know better.
Secession is not the same as the scenario I outlined. That is
unless the Southern Democrats sent government agents to
"Interview" the electors. Right now, the Democrats are
pulling out all of the stops to de-legitimize a duly elected
president with asinine and untrue tales of Russian meddling
in an American election.
One might say that the average Southern gentlemen of the
19th century had more class than to openly attempt to subvert
a presidential election, unlike modern Democrats.
they're playing the game and are going to lose again.
stop acting like they're trying to steal your candy. deal with it.
Not one item on the list involving the Kennedy assassination
is factual, including the one about FBI marksmen failing to
duplicate Oswald's shots. I could teach a 9 year old to
make 3 out three head shots at a target moving directly
away from the shooter at such close range with a .22LR!
I have read almost every single JKF assassination conspiracy
book written ever written. My conversion came with a greater understanding of ballistics once I started target shooting. Most of the authors simply pull facts out of their rectal orifices.
There were ONLY 3 shots fired that day. Only one of the 200+
witnesses thought he heard a 4th shot. Guess which one
was cited by the conspiracy nuts? Ditto the grassy knoll,
one person thought he saw something behind a bush. Of all of
the (I believe it was 20+) doctors who examined Kennedy's
head wound, only one concluded he was shot from the front.
Guess which doctor is always cited as the source of that
As to Kennedy's rearward head snap, it is entirely consistent
with being shot in the BACK of the head, it is a simple matter
junior high school level physics.
At least one witness (Named Brenner or Brennan,) heard
the first two shots and looked up to witness Oswald firing the
third and last shot. It was his description that caused Officer
J.D. Tippit to pull Oswald over on the street, thereby refuting
at two or three more false assertions by the conspiracy nuts!
If anything, Oswald was a mediocre shot. His first shot (A miss)
was a simple matter of hold-over error, meaning his wide field
4x was off. He simply forgot to compensate, the same thing
he did in an earlier assassination attempt.
How could a bullet penetrate as much as it did? The 6.5mm
has greater penetration characteristics than a 7.62mm NATO
round. Moving target? 11 miles an hour DIRECTLY away
from the shooters POV. But those were hard shots!
so you're saying that the 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano has more stopping power than the 7.62x51mm NATO.
Looks now like the real hack attacks did not come from Russia, they came from Obama's Department of Homeland Security:
In fact it is possible to teach someone to hit that target but without a lot of hands on instruction even a good shot would miss it because it was such a steep angle. The experts that the government used failed and they were experts. Not an easy shot. BUT to make it worse thanks to the video we know that there were at least three shots in 5.6 seconds using that klunky old rifle. THAT is what the experts had a problem with and that is what your nine year old would have a problem with. Other then that little fact you are right. The shot isn’t that bad I could probably learn to do it to with enough practice.
If you believe there were only three shots fired then you haven’t read everything. One of the three shots that were “probably” fired from the book repository went into the pavement in front of the cars. Probably there were three shots fired from the 6th floor and at least two fired from somewhere in front of the cars. The magic bullet was at least two different bullets one of which was never recovered and the other one mysteriously left by hand on a gurney at the hospital (which implies it was fired before the assassination to be used to implicate Oswald). The magic bullet left behind lead in Kennedy’s and Connally’s body but magically had not lost that much lead so it wasn’t the bullet that hit them.
It was more then the fact that kennedy’s head flew backwards when he was shot from the front. The attending doctor identified the wound in the front as an entry wound and the much larger wound in the back as an exit wound. Not speculation but common everyday forensics admissible in court.
Six spectators in Dealey Plaza saw a gunman on one of the upper floors of the Texas School Book Depository. Their descriptions, however, were vague and contradictory, and only one of them identified Oswald. So they didn’t have a description of the shooter they had a description of Oswald. Almost as though it was someone’s intent to pin it on Oswald. Also there was a good witness that Oswald was on the first floor within seconds of the shots fired but showed no signs of having run down the stairs to get there. Howard Brennan was not, however, an especially reliable witness:
He claimed that the man was standing up when aiming the rifle, but the sash window made this impossible; it was open only up to about waist height.
He claimed that “I was looking at the man in this window at the time of the last explosion”, but later explicitly denied that he had seen the man fire the gun.
He claimed on the afternoon of the assassination that “I believe that I could identify this man if I ever saw him again”, but he was unable to pick out Oswald at an identification parade a few hours later, despite having seen Oswald’s photograph on television in the meantime.
Two witnesses, Arnold Rowland and Amos Euins, gave descriptions that were more precise than Brennan’s, but which did not match Oswald’s appearance in crucial ways:
Rowland described the gunman as having “dark hair … it was dark, probably black. … It didn’t appear as if he had a receding hairline”.
Euins stated that “I seen a bald spot on this man’s head, trying to look out the window. He had a bald spot on his head. I was looking at the bald spot”.
Two other witnesses disagreed with Rowland about the colour of the man’s hair: Robert Edwards claimed that it was “light brown”, and Carolyn Walther remembered “blond or light brown hair”.
Oswald’s hair was light brown, and receding slightly, but he did not have a bald spot.
You left out a good reason for the Warren commission to release a report that they knew was full of lies. At least one of the members of that commission did in fact answer that question. He said that if the American people found out the truth that it could have disastrous effect on the country. Why ?
The picture of Oswald holding the rifle is a combination of two pictures and show two different shadow signatures indicating different times of day. Of course that was the best they could do before a decent photoshop program.
Although Oswald appears to have owned the rifle discovered on the sixth floor, the eye–witness evidence casts doubt on the notion that he was the man seen with the rifle during the assassination. This is consistent with the paraffin test on Oswald’s right cheek, which suggests very strongly that he had not fired a rifle that day. Wherever he was, Oswald almost certainly was not guilty of killing President Kennedy.
Multiple witnesses saw two people shoot officer Tippit. They also testified that they saw one of them throw a handful of fired shells in the air to fall to the ground at the crimes scene. Interesting, huh?
The list of information that contradicts the theory that Oswald killed JFK is too long to list. It is so extensive that it is unlikely that a DA could convict him in court today.
26 witnesses who identified someone other than Oswald or events other than what was reported by the Warren commission were mysteriously killed.
The doctor who actually did the official autopsy on JFK had never done an autopsy before and he was guided through it by two FBI men and two unidentified men who told him what to say on the record.
another four hundred witnesses saw Bigfoot, Col. Mustard with a knife in the kitchen, Dr. Evil, SMERSH, the KGB, SAVAK, Dr. No, Dr. Yes, the complete League of Extraordinary Assholes.
but none of them killed Kennedy that day. it was Oswald, described by Marine Corps as a above average shot, using a military rifle that anyone except a cornspiracy loon could be taught to shoot rapidly and accurately.
I swear on all that is holy, you people will believe anything.
There's something psychotic going on here, what on earth makes you want to believe this crapola?
Wait did Colonel Mustard really do it with a knife in the kitchen? I hope he had some really good pastrami and rye.