Good concise summary of totalitarianism, justjoe.
There are many other books that explain in detail the same things. One of my favorite is The Soviet Tragedy: A History of Socialism in Russia, 1917-1991 by Martin Malia.

"Systemic"

"Critical"

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
And, when the list of 2020 words that should be banned in 2021 shows up, it damn well better include "bombshell." And "Kraken."

Add "Breaking", "Shocking" and "Biblical" to the list.

can't find out who the person talking is, but looks like House of Representatives ? or Texas ?

He says he is a SREC member.

SREC = State Republican Executive Committee of the governing board of REP Party of Texas.

repeating the claim a staffer heard Roberts yelling in the mtg about the Texas case.

video at link

https://twitter.com/i/status/1339641451215544322

Roberts ?
"I don't want to hear about it. At that time we didn't have riots"

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

edit

CTH provides details

https://theconservativetreehou...t-riots/#more-206185

During the Texas presidential electors legislative session there was a debate over an amendment to wording where the Texas House would rebuke the Supreme Court of the United States for “moral cowardice” in not allowing the Texas challenge to be heard.

During the amendment debate Texas Congressman Matt Patrick (CD-32) put into the ¹record a report from a claimed “Supreme Court staffer” about an internal debate taking place within the high court where justices were arguing the reasons for not allowing the Texas election challenge to take place. As outlined by Patrick Chief Justice Roberts was worried about riots in the streets if the court heard the Texas arguments and evidence.

"To be fair – It should be noted the claim comes with no specific citation for further review or analysis; and considering the heightened sense of concern over the election, more details should be requested before making assumptions about the described incident"

quote:

repeating the claim a staffer heard Roberts yelling in the mtg about the Texas case.

Regurgitated hearsay. Was initially brought up a few pages back.

Problem is that what the SC did in rejecting the Texas case was a Supreme act of cowardice.

And the obvious reason for DEMs to allow the big city riots and "take overs" was to damage President Trump.

And finally, from what we have seen of John Roberts, it fits quite well of who he appears to be.

Even if there wasn't screaming, do you really think Roberts had an honorable reason to reject the Texas case ?

xxxxxxxxxxxx

like so many things we don't understand today, the bizarre part is that such a report even might be true.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Good concise summary of totalitarianism, justjoe.
There are many other books that explain in detail the same things. One of my favorite is The Soviet Tragedy: A History of Socialism in Russia, 1917-1991 by Martin Malia.

Too many shithead lefty’s would see the above as a manual instead of a cautionary tale.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Problem is that what the SC did in rejecting the Texas case was a Supreme act of cowardice.

And the obvious reason for DEMs to allow the big city riots and "take overs" was to damage President Trump.

And finally, from what we have seen of John Roberts, it fits quite well of who he appears to be.

Even if there wasn't screaming, do you really think Roberts had an honorable reason to reject the Texas case ?

xxxxxxxxxxxx

like so many things we don't understand today, the bizarre part is that such a report even might be true.

We all know Roberts is a coward. Has been a coward ever since Obamacare. Wouldn't surprise me at all, if there was actual screaming. But, point here is we shouldn't jump at every unverified report like it's gospel. "A staffer told me so and so" is good for gossip garbage but is not real news.

Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...4A&feature=emb_title

Georgia Secretary of State Announces Statewide Ballot Audit

https://www.newsmax.com/politi...20/12/17/id/1002101/

Georgia's secretary of state has relented and announced a statewide signature-matching effort for the November election.

President Donald Trump's campaign claimed voter fraud and has requested that Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger order such an audit since the election ended.

Signatures for absentee ballots in all of Georgia's 159 counties will be reviewed, per The Washington Times.

Raffensperger's announcement came less than three weeks before the Jan. 5 Georgia U.S. Senate runoff election for both seats in the upper chamber. The election will determine which party will hold a Senate majority.

The University of Georgia will partner with the secretary's office to analyze a random sampling of signatures from each county for mail-in ballots during the November election, a Thursday press release said. The audit is expected to wrap up in two weeks.

"We are confident that elections in Georgia are secure, reliable and effective," Mr. Raffensperger said.

"Despite endless lawsuits and wild allegations from Washington, D.C., pundits, we have seen no actual evidence of widespread voter fraud, though we are investigating all credible reports. Nonetheless, we look forward to working with the University of Georgia on this signature match review to further instill confidence in Georgia’s voting systems."

The state already was auditing signatures for mail-in ballots in Cobb County, an Atlanta suburb. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation is helping with that effort.

"The Trump campaign claimed that Cobb County did not properly conduct signature match in June," Jordan Fuchs, Georgia’s deputy secretary of state said. "After the countywide audit, we will look at the entire state. We will look at the entire election to make sure signature match was executed properly."

Georgia was among several battleground states accused of widespread voter fraud, centering on mail-in ballots, by President Trump.

The president lost the state by 0.2 percent or 11,779 votes.

^^^If breaking, shocking, and biblical are out...can we say hell has frozen over?

Kidding aside, the "random sampling is going to be a freaking joke. It's another delay tactic to run out the clock, which may make the legal challenges even more difficult because they can say they are examining the ballots.

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
Maybe we check with Mark Robinson. he just entered the political field and has not had time to become corrupt.

We might need to look for those just entering politics like Mark Robinson.

President Trump became President as a non-politician, so I am hopeful we can find others.
George Washington did not necessarily want to be President.

Politicians are corrupt because they think they cannot be replaced.
We need show them that, that is a false assumption.

Heck, yes!

quote:

Originally posted by sigspecops:
For starters we go back to representatives that live in their own districts all of the time and each day they conduct business out of a local office and their constituents can stop by for visits most any time. When they screw us over they need to feel the heat and pressure of a face to face conversation from the ones they represent.

Heck, yes!!

quote:

Originally posted by az4783054:
term limits!

HECK, YES!!!

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

repeating the claim a staffer heard Roberts yelling in the mtg about the Texas case.

Regurgitated hearsay. Was initially brought up a few pages back.

Noise and more noise. So the Supreme Court justices were arguing over a case. Isn't that what they are supposed to do? So it got a little heated and one justice loudly said something that was overheard by some clerk and or someone else and was leaked to the media. So what? does anyone think this is going to change anyone's mind or reverse the outcome of the election?

This and so many other things are the shiny things we are supposed to be looking at. This is in Trump's and only Trump's hands at this point imo. Is he willing and does he have what he needs to declare a national emergency or the insurrection act? This is the Trump card if you will. If someone sees another way other than that I'd like to hear it.

Sounds like Ratcliffe is the lone fighter standing with Trump. He needs to produce the goods. Something far more than just disagreeing with the rest of the entire intelligence community. Lets hope he can deliver.

The real shame is, it's taken President Trump four years to find people who will really stand up with him. People like Ratcliffe, Grenell, Pompeo; and in Congress Jim Jordan, Tom Cotton, hell, Ted Cruz.
Having survived everything the Dems could throw at him, he was ready to kick ass and take names.
Now, even his attorneys and other surrogates seem to have failed him in defending him effectively against the stolen election.
It will be a tragedy if it plays out that way.

Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?..._U&feature=emb_title

quote:

Originally posted by tigereye313:

quote:

Originally posted by az4783054:
term limits!

The simplest answer.

How do you get senators, representatives to vote for endings of their careers? I would speculate that a limit would have to pass both house and senate.

It’s a good solution but how can it be implemented?

quote:

Originally posted by Wolfpacker:

How do you get senators, representatives to vote for endings of their careers? I would speculate that a limit would have to pass both house and senate.

It’s a good solution but how can it be implemented?

Senator Cruz supports the idea.

I think the only way it could ever happen is via a Constitutional Convention.

quote:

via a Constitutional Convention.

given the opportunity to introduce chaos and turmoil, how would the actual results be properly ascertained?

And given the depths of cowardice & misrepresentation on all manner of other political issues, how could realistic debate be conducted?

And given what a wretched threat to all manner of basic rights just barely in the thinnest margin of balance between the urban interests in mismanaging their part of the Republic, what would dissuade them from further ruining rural version of self rule?

quote:

Originally posted by signewt:

quote:

via a Constitutional Convention.

given the opportunity to introduce chaos and turmoil, how would the actual results be properly ascertained?

And given the depths of cowardice & misrepresentation on all manner of other political issues, how could realistic debate be conducted?

And given what a wretched threat to all manner of basic rights just barely in the thinnest margin of balance between the urban interests in mismanaging their part of the Republic, what would dissuade them from further ruining rural version of self rule?

Didn't say it was a good idea, only said it would be the only way I could see getting it done.

^^^wrt the agencies slow walking the into for the required report on foreign interference with our elections....POTUS should go stand over someone’s desk with his Secret Service agents playing with their handcuffs...