I understand that Twitter is censoring links to Sidney Powell’s site to keep people from reading the complaints in GeorgiaContinue reading “A Modest Suggestion for those who can’t tweet out The complaints from Sydney Powell’s site”
Sonny: Now youse can’t leaveA Bronx Tale 1993
Last week I put up a piece basically asking what the incentives are for the Democrat left to suddenly behave honorably if we go along with their steal of this election. Now I’d like to point out some of the incentives or lack thereof that the GOP should consider before they jump on the Biden bandwagon.
Let’s say you are a GOP Governor, Senator or ex cabinet official who would like to run for President of the United States in 2024 or beyond who chooses to oppose President Trump fight to stop the theft of election 2020: What incentive does the President or his supporters have to turn out for you in the primaries or donate to your cause?
Let’s say you are the GOP nominee for President in 2024 or 2028 and you urged President Trump to concede and/or insisted that election 2020 was not tainted by fraud. What incentive do Republican voters have to turn out for you or to donate to you if they believe the fix is already in?
Let’s say you are a GOP governor or Senator or Congressman who is running for re-election in 2022 and you choose to oppose President Trump’s fight to stop the theft of election 2020: What incentive does the President or his supporters have to eskew supporting a primary challenger and/or hold rallies for a primary challenger running against you?
Let’s say you are a GOP member of a state legislature in Georgia, or Michigan or Pennsylvania or Wisconsin who has decided against pushing back against a corrupt election in your state: What incentive does the President or his supporters have to eskew supporting a primary challenger and/or hold rallies for a primary challenger running against you?
Let’s say you are a GOP member of a state legislature in Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania or Michigan and your state supreme court rejects compelling evidence of election fraud and sworn affidavits of day presented by Sydney Powell, Lyn Wood and/or Rudy Guiliani and you choose not to vote for an alternative slate of electors: What incentive does a potential primary opponent have to stay away when they can raise money nationally from angry supporters of President Trump and maybe even get a visit or rally from said president in your race?
Finally let’s say you are a GOP official or pol who decides to leave government after opposing President Trump attempt to stop the steal of election 2020. What is the incentive of any think tank or conservative group to hire you when having you on their staff could adversely affect their fundraising or credibility among the party base?
Update: added quote
By Christopher Harper
In a yearly ritual on November 22, baby boomers recall when and where they heard about the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Unfortunately, few of us reflect on how Kennedy, while tragically struck down as a young man, was a lousy president and an even worse man.
Many consider JFK one of the best presidents in the history of the United States.
But even a cursory view of his life and times demonstrates how his legacy became hugely inflated after his death in 1963.
For example, many consider Kennedy responsible for civil rights laws when his successor, Lyndon Johnson, was the man who made that happen.
Moreover, as a senator, JFK voted against President Eisenhower’s civil rights legislation to appease racist Democrats in the South. In collusion with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, Kennedy ordered wiretaps on Martin Luther King Jr.
In international affairs, he approved the assassination of the leader of the Dominican Republic, Rafael Trujillo, as long as the United States had “plausible deniability.” In Cuba, he launched an attack to overthrow Fidel Castro, known as the Bag of Pigs invasion, which failed because JFK failed to approve air cover. In Vietnam, he expanded the U.S. presence and endorsed a coup that ultimately resulted in the assassination of the president, Ngo Dinh Diem.
During his presidency, JFK engaged in various extramarital affairs, including Marilyn Monroe and Judith Campbell, who also dated Mafia boss Sam Giancana and posed an incredible security risk because of her ties to the Mob.
Sure, JFK did some things right. He stared down the Russians during the Cuban missile crisis. He rejiggered the tax code—changes that would rankle his fellow Democrats because it actually made it easier on the wealthy. I’ll even give him credit for encouraging American scientists to launch probes into space.
A longtime friend who covered JFK admitted to me that the reporters knew about the affairs and the political shenanigans. But the media saw JFK as the Great White Hope to bring the United States into a new era.
I don’t want to speak ill of the dead. But I think Americans, particularly baby boomers, should analyze JFK’s legacy in a much more rational way.
I’ve never liked Twitter even though I’ve used it. I was a late adopter, and with good reason. It’s the crystal meth of social media — addictive and destructive, yet simultaneously unsatisfying. When I’m off it I’m happier than when I’m on it. That it’s also being run by crappy SJW types who break their promises, to users, shareholders, and the government, of free speech is just the final reason. Why should I provide free content to people I don’t like, who hate me? I’m currently working on a book on social media, and I keep coming back to the point that Twitter is far and away the most socially destructive of the various platforms. So I decided to suspend them, as they are suspending others. At least I’m giving my reasons, which is more than they’ve done usually.Glenn Reynolds
Apparently Twitter has decided that even though their written accusations against me are patently false it’s much too embarrassing to grant my appeals quickly only to have their apologies and claims of “mistakes” be illustrated as false.
In fact given the text of my last appeal...
For what is now the 6th time in under 20 days you have locked me out claiming that I was spreading intimate images when I was in fact each time tweeting out a link to a post on Benford’s statistical law which demonstrates the impossibility of Joe Biden’s magic ballots.
Moreover Every time I have appealed you have upheld said appeal apologized and claimed my lockout was an error. YET EVERY SINGLE TIME AFTER THESE “apologies” I HAVE RETWEETED THE VERY SAME LINK TO THE VERY SAME PIECE AND WAS LOCKED OUT WITH THE VERY SAME FALSE ACCUSATION AGAINST ME.
To say this is despicable and dishonorable is to not only repeat myself from previous appeals but to say something that is so apparent that it almost doesn’t need saying. That you still do this demonstrate why other alternatives like Parler are doing so well.
Bottom line you’re accusation is false and I’m not only not going to delete the tweet but after this appeal is won I will test to see if your upcoming “apology” and assertion of a “mistake” is worth any more than it was the last five times you sent them.
At least my next lockout for that same link will be lucky number 7emphasis mine
they have clearly concluded that there is no percentage in handling my appeal in a timely manor.
So I am now on day three of my lockout awaiting the results of my appeal and counting. For Twitter it’s the best of possible worlds in the sense that they keep me silent while pretending that they are carefully considering the nuances of my appeal but they keep the Benford’s law post from spreading, at least on their platform, while always dangling the carrot that if I just delete the tweet in question I’ll be welcomed back.
Now if I was 14 or 21 or maybe even in my 30’s that might has some oomph, alas dear twitter I’m nearer to my 70th birthday than I am to my 45th and thus lived many decades without twitter, and while it is a convenience I can continue to function without it.
While the in the short term such a plan will achieve goals in the long term discouraging your product (that’s folks like me) from being on your platform while encouraging them to go to other places such as Gab (Parler wants a cell phone number that I don’t have) might not be appealing to one’s customer base (advertisers) which is likely to have as bad an effect on shareholders as encouraging your voter base to not reproduce with the same predictable results.
The problem exemplified by the case of Lena Dunham is that the “r strategy” (parents having fewer children, with the idea of more “quality” in their offspring) pursued past a certain point, involves an increased risk of eventual reproductive failure. This is what I mean by taking into account secondary and tertiary consequences, thinking forward to the third generation down the line. Suppose this hypothetical:
John and Jane have two children.
If both of their children have two children of their own, John and Jane will have four grandchildren.
If all four grandchildren each have two children, then John and Jane will have eight great-grandchildren.
Now a slightly different hypothetical:
John and Jane have three children.
If each of their children have three children of their own, John and Jane will have nine grandchildren.
If all nine grandchildren each have three children, then John and Jane will have 27 great-grandchildren.
In other words, increasing average family size from 2 to 3 — which is not much, really, in terms of r/K theory — produces a third generation of descendants more than three times larger. This fact is obvious from simple arithmetic, yet its social consequences are profound.
Now if your business model is to attract users so that you can sell exposure to them to advertisers the exile of those who actually reproduce might be a bad idea if you wish to have your company last like a Ford or a McDonalds for generations after you are founded.
But if you are merely using a publicly traded company as a means to an end either social acceptance or to advance a narrative a /la Tina Brown then it all makes perfect sense…to all but the shareholders who were looking for profit rather than status that is.
Those guys are into Parler and Gab
Closing thought, one must also consider that depending on who the shareholders are they might not CARE about profit as long as conservatives are silenced consider:
That’s the real point here. Economics isn’t what’s driving this ideology and status is. Jack and the big investors who back him don’t care about the money, they’re never going to be hurting or needing. It’s all about the stuff money can’t buy and by leaning on conservatives you remain acceptable to the “right” people.
Seriously did you think Tina Brown got all those people to lose all that money over the years because they thought she was brilliant or was putting out to get it? Nobody’s that brilliant and there are plenty of woman who would put out for less. It was all about getting the bona fides and entree to the right parties, and the right people and believe me those “right” people who hate our guts will use that for the fullest effect.
Jack and twitter aren’t going to change because of economic pressure or anything else. He’s virtue signaling and that signal is being seen by the people that he wants to see it.
If the primary goal isn’t profit it’s all good to them.
Senator: Perhaps the General would please tell us what his plans are.
General Andrew Jackson: Senator if the Hair on my head knew my plans I would cut it off.
One of the weapons that the left has been using in their quest to make sure their Magic BallotsTM are not thrown out either by the courts or by actions from the state legislatures has been to continually keeping any obvious cases of fraud or overwhelming circumstantial evidence out of the news cycle while demanding the Trump campaign reveal their hand.
While this has had a demoralizing effect on some it has had little or no effect on the Trump team itself.
Today at their press conference the Trump team pointed out that there are rules and procedures to be followed and that their case supported by hundreds under oath will be presented there.
Let’s cut to the chase, media may spin, and may scoff but in the end this team is in it to win it and they realize that nothing that is said on TV or in the newspapers or on social media actually means a thing.
What matter is the case that goes before the legislatures and the courts and given the fact that the media has been a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat party if I was the president’s team I’d not say a word that I’d not give them a clue until the moment things are presented in court.
As I’ve said before the media believes it’s primary duty is to convince Americans that Al Capone is not and never has been a gangster and no matter how many smart remarks & memes on social media or commentary on cable TV the left makes convincing any American not still in their bubble that these cities are not corrupt is no going to be easy. It’s Rudy’s job to make a good enough case to convince the courts and or the legislatures that they must not let the steal of an election stand.
And as for convincing the people as a whole that the election was stolen apparently he’s already convincing…DEMOCRATS :
But, Joe Biden’s problems are not simply because many Republicans believe the election was stolen. It’s true that the poll showed a significant partisan divide on this issue: 75 percent of Republicans believe it is very likely (61 percent) or somewhat likely (14 percent) that the election was stolen from Trump. But, according to the poll, while 69 percent of Democrats say it is not at all likely (61 percent) or not very likely (8 percent) that the election was stolen from Trump, 30 percent of Democrats believe it is very likely (20 percent) or somewhat likely (10 percent) that it was.
Let me repeat, nearly a third of Democrats believe it is likely that the election was stolen from President Trump. That’s a remarkable number. Huge, in fact.
If the people already believe it then the job of the legislatures to stop the Democrat coup against the American republic becomes easier.
Closing thought, that link is via instapundit where Sarah Hoyt makes a humorous but sobering note:
WHAT NO ONE HAS TOLD US IS IF THEY DISAPPROVE
sadly I’ve reached the point where I presume most democrats don’t disapprove of such a theft at all.
As you can see from the above image Twitter has once again upheld my appeal and restored my account this time waiting a full day as my last post about the instant automatic apology might have been a tad embarrassing for them. Of course they might not have gotten the Lewis Carroll reference I put in the last post comparing them to Fury in the famous poem which I included in my appeal (image follows)
fyi I only included the text not the image as it would not go in the appeal
But this latest “apology raised some questions which I took the liberty of asking and I include them here
If I were you no matter what odds anyone offers you on twitter letting the tweet go without a lock I wouldn’t take them.
Unexpectedly of course
Professor: Nobody minds giving his life, but this is throwing it away. Why?
Sgt Gunn: Why? Why’d did they go about their business in London while the Germans where throwing everything in the book at them. Why did your boats take the men off of Dunkirk? Why did the Russians make a stand at Moscow? Why did the Chinese move whole cities thousands of miles inland when the Japs attacked them? Why Bataan? Why Corregidor? Maybe they were all nuts. But there is one thing they did do. They delayed the enemy and kept on delaying them until we until we got strong enough to hit them harder than they were hitting us. I ain’t no general but it seems to me that’s one way to win. If all I’ve said doesn’t answer your question then somebody tell me why.Sahara 1943
I have some questions for our “friends” both in the GOP establishment and on the right who keep insisting that we give up the fight on election 2020 before President Trump presents his cases at the state and federal level.
This week we saw at the DC rally in support of the President Conservatives once again physically attacked without consequence and without the media finding that newsworthy? What incentive will there be for such physical attacks against conservatives to be stopped if we concede quietly?
This week we saw bloggers de-platformed by their service provider because of their Pro-Trump pro-administration reporting. What incentive will there be for hosting company to stop doing this if we concede quietly?
At commentary Magazine Seth Rothman has a piece called “The Riots Won’t End Themselves. Democrats Must End Them.” What incentive is there for those rioting to stop when they know they will not have to worry about a Trump AG or Justice department?
We have already seen harassment of lawyers and law firms representing the President without any blowback. What incentive is there for those doing this to stop at a GOP president with a media backed by a Democrat administration?
We have seen social media platforms penalize those who present statistical evidence illustrating the steal of the presidential election punished and locked out of accounts (I myself have been locked out by twitter three times in a week for sharing a post on benfords law while being accused of spreading “intimate images…without consent” What incentive will there be for social media to treat the GOP in general and conservatives in particular fairly if the President’s appeals disappear?
We have already seen members of media, academia and elected federal officials talk about punishing individuals who participated in the Trump administration or supported the Trump presidency: What incentive will there be for such people to avoid doing this once the President’s appeals are dropped?
We have clearly seen four major Democrat cities steal in four key states used to steal an election; What is the incentive for major cities in other states, perhaps Red States to not emulate these tactics if this blatant theft of an election is allow to stand?
We have already seen moves by the left to attack religious faithful on the grounds of “discrimination” What is the incentive for the left to respect the rights of religious Americans if the president’s team turns tail and runs?
And finally the question that is so obvious that I”m shocked that it isn’t being asked: If the GOP quietly accepts Democrats stealing an election on the presidential level in such a blatant manor what is the Democrat’s incentive to not steal federal presidential elections from this point on?
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh to Ted Cruz Questioning Jack on Vote Fraud Censorship so I thought it was a good time to give a 4th test to see if twitter is still locking folks who put out that Benfords law tweet
So I tweeted out the following:
So I tried tweeting it out again, guess what happened:
One guess what the email from Twitter accused me of:
Cue my shocked face.
Thanks to the horrible Trump Economy I’m working extra hours 4 pm to 2 AM so my lockout will run out when I get home from work and I will appeal at that time and will expect it to be auto approved like the last one was
Unexpectedly of course
Update: put in my appeal at 2:40 AM when I got home from work, this time the auto win didn’t happen (I quoted Lewis Carroll’s long sad tail to them with them cast as Fury) I’m wondering if they are holding back because I was so public about it particularly during the hearings. We shall see.
King Arnulf: Now, I know what some of you must be thinking… the day has come…. we’re all going down, etc. etc. But let’s get away from the fantasy and look at the FACTS. FACT ONE – The threat of total destruction has kept the peace for one thousand years. FACT TWO – The chances of it failing now are therefore one in three hundred and sixty-five thousand. FACT THREE…[by this time the water is up to people’s knees, and several have crowded onto the lower steps to avoid getting wet.] FACT THREE – Our safety regulations are the most rigorous in the world. We are all nice to each other, we never rub each other up the wrong way or contradict each other, do we?
Crowd: [As the building sink and fall] No.
Citizen: We… er… do seem to be going down quite fast, Your Majesty – not trying to contradict you, course.
King Arnulf: No, of course you’re not, citizen. But let’s stick to the facts. There has NEVER been a safer, more certain way of keeping the peace. So whatever’s happening, you can rest assured, Hy-Brasil is NOT sinking. Repeat, NOT sinking.Erik the Viking 1989
There is one dynamic that is playing on in the challenge to the Democrat Magic Ballots that deserves more attention.
I’ve already talked about the uphill climb the President has legally here. But it’s the mountain that the Democrat / Left / Media has to conquer is a higher one that is forcing them into absurdity at best and violence and intimidation at worst.
You see people who know statistics and elections know what happened. People who have followed Philadelphia, Detroit, Milwaukee and Atlanta know what shenanigans have gone on in the past and continue to go on. this is no secret to anybody even remotely connected to these cities and states.
After all if the case for the existence of vote fraud is weak you (and remember Trump has to win in 3 or 5 states ) you don’t target people’s lawyers to withdraw and particularly not entire firms. You don’t censor people, particularly low level people for tweeting out charts and you don’t slap warning labels on a former UN Ambassador and governor for stating simple direct facts. And you certainly don’t falsely claim that a whistle blower has recanted when he has not.
In fact the Democrat / Tech / Media left has apparently gone all in on the idea that there is no such thing as election fraud but that any who dare suggest so must be punished.
Donald Trump is playing Elliot Ness, he is attempting to expose and stop the corruption that people have known has been going on for decades in these cites and prove that is was enough to overturn the results of an election. He will have to have a strong case, there is a reason why Al Capone was convinced of Tax Evasion rather than bootlegging and conspiracy.
The Media / Democrat / Tech left is not satisfied with those advantages. They have they have decided to go all out to prove that there is no fraud PERIOD. It’s like telling people in Chicago in the 20’s and 30’s to declare in public that Al Capone isn’t a gangster and to punish anyone who doesn’t say so.
I think this is a mountain beyond them and even if they manage to win their cases this is a moment that has within it the seeds of their destruction.
Cue Sean Connery:
By John Ruberry
Illinois conservatives have reason to feel pretty good after Election Day. Pretty good but not great. Still that’s a rarity in this state that has been trending blue for decades, much of the reason for that is the tortured gerrymandering practiced by Boss Michael Madigan, the longtime state House speaker and Democratic Party chairman.
The Land of Lincoln’s feckless GOP, which local radio host Dan Proft calls “Stockholm Syndrome Republicans,” has contributed to the decline, doesn’t deserve much credit for this bit of success.
The big win for conseratives–really, for all Illinoisans–was the resounding defeat to the so-called Fair Tax Amendment, which would have replaced the state’s flat-rate income tax with graduated rates. Sixty percent of voters neeeded to approve the amendment to the state consitution–of 50 percent of all those voting. Despite big votes for Joe Biden and Dick Durbin, Illinois’ senior Democratic US senator, only 45 percent of voters supported the Fair Tax.
Credit for the victory for keeping the flat tax goes of course to Prairie State voters, but also for the libertarian think tank, the Illinois Policy Institute, as well as Illinois’ richest resident, Ken Griffin, who funded highly-effective television ads against the amendment. Slow down liberals, if you think a billionaire “bought” the win against the Unfair Tax Amendment. Illinois’ billionaire Democratic governor, J.B. Pritzker, spent $58 million of his own money on the campaign for the amendment. Griffin spent $53 million opposing it.
Illinois doesn’t tax retirement income–all 32 states with progressive tax rates tax pensions. The anti-Fair Tax ads said that retirement income wouldn’t be untouchable, and an admission, quickly retracted, by state treasurer Michael Frerichs, that the Fair Tax would be a first step to taxing pensions aided the argument of the “antis.”
This summer a federal investigation of rank-and-file Illinois political corruption implicated Boss Madigan. The speaker has not been charged. But the stench from the ongoing investigation served as a potent reminder that Illinois isn’t just mismanaged, it’s crooked. Clearly Illinois kleptocrats don’t need more money to squander and steal, many voters–including some Democrats–reasoned.
Illinois hasn’t had a balanced budget since 2001, when there was a GOP majority in the state Senate and a Republican in the governor’s mansion, despite a constitutional requirment for a balanced budget. The current budget has a $7.4 billion deficit. That GOP governor in ’01, by the way, was George Ryan, who later served time in federal prison for corruption.
For many good reasons Illinoisans don’t trust state government.
Illinois is still counting ballots. I can mail a letter from Illinois that is addressed to someone in Los Angeles and it will probably arrive there in three business days. But my state is allowing mail-in ballots to be counted if they arrive at one of Illinois 102 county clerk offices by November 17. So a few races are yet to be called. While it appears the Democrats will pick up a seat in the state Senate, the Republicans will probably gain two seats in the state House of Representatives. The Dems will maintain supermajorites in both chambers of the General Assembly. But there is a budding revolt by Democrats in the House against Madigan because of the election results. Pritzker and Durbin have called for Madigan to resign his chairmanship of the state Democratic Party. A few brave Democrats in the House have called on this term as speaker for Madigan, who has held the gavel since 1983 except for two years, to be his last. Illinois’ other US senator, Tammy Duckworth, also a Democrat, has called for Madigan to resign his speakership as well as the party chairmanship.
A weaker Madigan–and a specially a Democratic Party without him in leadership posts–means a weaker Democratic Party, which is why the Boss still has support. That’s good news for Illinois conservatives. But the state Republican Party still might find a way to squander this gift.
Other pretty good news for Illinois conservatives is that Donald Trump bettered his performance over his 2016 effort by two percentage points. Two Republican candidates nearly ousted two Democratic incumbents. One of those close calls was in Illinois’ 17th Congressional District. Despite being heavily outspent by Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Cheri Bustos, GOP challenger Esther Joy King came within three points of upsetting the incumbent, whose role as DCCC chair is to elect more Democrats to Congress.
On the other hand, Illinois will lose at least one congressional seat in the 2020 reapportionment. A downstate rural district, the 15th, that is currently represented by a Republican, is expected to be sacrificed. During the 2018 gubernatorial campaign, Pritzker vowed to support fair legislative maps rather than a gerrymandered ones.
Don’t hold your breath for Pritzker to fulfill that campaign promise.
Illinois conservatives need to get firmly and publicly behind two new constitutional amendments, the first one to eliminate the pension guarantee clause, so that reasonable and financially responsible pension reform can occur. The biggest challenge for Illinois is its worst-in-the-nation $230 billion in unfunded pension debt. Illinois cannot tax itself out of this mess, an insight not lost on voters when they voted “No” on the Fair Tax. Pension reform will be painful–but even moreso if state politicians continue the decades-long policy of kicking the can down the road.
Meanwhile of course the Illinois Exodus continues. The Prairie State has lost population every year since 2015.
Oh, I almost forgot. There was another victory of note for conservatives on Election Day. Voters chose not to retain Illinois Supreme Court justice Thomas Kilbride, a downstate Democrat. One of the reasons for Kilbride’s defeat was his being in the party-line 4-3 majority that prevented a redistricting reform amendment from appearing before voters in 2016. The suit against the Fair Map Amdendment was filed by a long-time Madigan ally. Kilbride is the first Illinois Supreme Court justice to fail to be retained. But the victory was short-lived. Kilbride’s interim replacement, chosen unaminously by the remaining justices, is a Democrat. Ken Griffin also funded much of the anti-Kilbride effot.
The second amendment conservatives need to rally around is another attempt at an Illinois Fair Map Amendment.
John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.