"Someone" else "discovered" it.
Trump has the consistent pattern of pretending he has no cards and getting people to commit, double-down, triple-down, etc.
You have something like 98% of politicians, 200% of the press, and "top economists" willing to misuse words. From the jargon of economics (price, cost value), to the total redefinitons of grifter-land-SJW, and the rampant switching back and forth of "What is the subject of this paragraph" sorts of silliness. Ad infinitum.
The shocking thing is that anyone's bought a clue.
The phone call was recorded, "accidentally deleted" by the CA SoS when pressed by Trump to help disprove the story, and "independent sources" recovered the phone call, somehow.
So: the "Someone" is basically the SoS.
-
Zen Driving.
-
"We can't stop honey"
-
Guy washing windshields ...
G.I. Joe's already got the treatment.
I forget where (movie?) but ... he's a UN soldier...
There's a second piece.
Some of the same charts that lead to the basic 'N95 is around 95% effective!' have 'ordinary cloth mask' on there as 'up to 5% effective'.
They're basing the entire "political mandate" portion on "Well, 5% is better than nothing!" levels of bullshit. They know the best case is a minuscule effect ... with perfect adherence and solid no-face-touching and ...
The part that boggles me is how face shields were never mandated. If it's a true aerosol, then "BioHaz4" is honestly the only thing doing a damn thing. If it's entrained droplets that's the concern ... droplets follow 'standard physics' as opposed to Brownian Motion sorts of mixing. So ... with a shield, they hit the inside. Or they hit the outside. Or, at the very least, they're deflected down and are unlikely to ever come back up.
The thing is, these are the sort of people who would normally have their makeup crew do their best ti minimize the effects. Or take a week off specifically to avoid the mockery and the photos floating around forever.
There's something going on. There's plenty of "dots", but any connections you can make between the perfectly truthful dots seem whackadoodle.
salty: speaks like a sailor
cracker: white
It's actually shockingly on target :D
The issue is, in part, warning the enemy of your intentions
Every single "obvious problem child" that we don't need named is another step in the correct direction. Getting mittens gone, and the NH duo, and Murkowski, and...
Everyone of those deposed before naming the next tier that also need to go is a two-vote-swing that makes the next step easier.
And then there's the "Vetting new blood" front.
Both more "slow boil" than flat-out "Declare War!" A full on declaration means you'll have even crazier shit going down. "Bipartisan bills on primary rules" or something ... because more will realize that their ass is on the line a vote in nutty shit with the Democrats specifically (as opposed to merely assuming they already have a lock).
The core reason we (or I, at least) would feel like I would really like exactly what you want is trust . We've been burnt by enough McCains that we want the firm commitments. But ... Trump's got the trust already.
There's also, imo, trouble identifying "true betrayal" from the outside. We don't know how many and when on any given anything are given the 'vote against me' orders. Which does happen when they know a vote is going to fail/whatever anyway.
-- Edited to add, Well, I guess Trump in comfortable with attacking thses guys:IN ORDER
SEANTORS Mitt Romney - UTAH Ben Sass - NEBRASKA Richard Burr - NORTH CAROLINA Bill Cassidy - LOUISIANA Susan Collins - MAINE Lisa Murkowski - ALASKA Pat Toomey - PENNYSLVANIA
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tom Rice - SOUTH CAROLINA (7TH DISTRICT) Adam Kinzinger - ILLINOIS (16TH DISTRICT) Dan Newhouse - WASHINGTON (4TH DISTRICT) Anthony Gonzales - OHIO (16TH DISTRICT) Fred Upton - MICHIGAN (6TH DISTRICT) Jamie Hererra-Butler - WASHINGTON (3RD DISTRICT) Peter Meijer - MICHIGAN (3RD DISTRICT) John Katko - NEW YORK (24TH DISTRICT) David Valadao - CALIFORNIA (21ST DISTRICT) Liz Cheney - WYOMING
I found a tool that seems like it would be useful for figuring out "Country of Origin" sorts of things.
Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. -- Robert A. Heinlein
"The whole point of Jacksonianism is 'You leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. You play fair with me and I'll play fair with you. But if you fuck with me, I'll kill you.' " --Steven Den Beste
The basic "Jacksonian Axes" is from Jacksonian to Wilsonian. My short version is that Jacksonian Law can handle "Thou shalt not murder" as encompassing everything that needs to be said on the subject, 12 Jurors debate the details when needed. Whereas "Wilsonian" likes to spell every damn think out: "Yes, a knitting needle is a lethal weapon, and we have amended the law to reflect that! And spoons, yeah. And..." Wilsonian-ism focuses on process very much. And. That process is open to corruption and being all the worst parts of Statism.
Then there's the "Pournelle Political Axes".
Amusing to note that Jackson went after the central banks ... and was vilified...
The part that's boggling is just how many people buy the idea that the RINOs are "Centrists" between the FreeShitParty and the Nazis. When the RINOs are precisely the ones that get their shenanigans into the D bills ... and their mechanisms for whatever it is are precisely the parts that get the Left riled up.
Something similar can be said about "Right v Left" ... using the press definitions for right and left.
It's entirely an argument about how often the totalitarian government uses tongs to control the populace, as opposed to exerting their force directly.
Trump is off this standard political axis a very long way. The differences are highlighted by the press as being "Far Right" ... but he's a long way away in another direction entirely. The Jacksonian/Freedom direction (as opposed to the Team Karen direction), if one needs a map.
Looking here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_the_Union
Note that Clinton has seven listed, not eight. Bush has 7. Obama has seven. Trump has 3.
The "missing years" are always the first year of their first term.
Not sure there is a 'regular, formal' SOTU in a President's first year. (They might call something that, but, look at the titles of the SOTU in the like I gave. "Bushes seventh and final...")
They've baked assumptions into their formal procedures and definitions.
If you look up "Wray under oath" videos, there's the definitions.
-
Violence happened to a person of African decent is assumed to lead directly to "Victim of White Supremacy".
-
Violence happens to anyone semitic is also assumed to be because of White Supremacy.
Yes, this does mean that two rabbis and two joggers having a throwdown is "Four victims of White Supremacy" And, in case you're curious, NYC has gangs meeting the criteria for any fight to be entirely White Supremacy ... and there's no Skinheads involved. It isn't all spelled out in one clear definition, it's laid out as an inevitable path of escalation, and it's precisely why the press is so comfortable being so blatant. The FBI definitions back them up.
This does not address your point, but it's an interesting thing to poke at:
There's a computer programming sub-field called "Genetic Programming", with John Koza outlining the concept twenty years back. It takes some simple premises and comes up with odd and wild results.
Cripple a programming language in ways that specifically forbid the key trouble spots (recursion, infinite loops, etc), and force the entire program to conform to tight syntax (much like DNA, 'four letters only, go!')
Now make 100,000 literally random computer programs. Now "evolve" them and "mutate" them.
This is absolutely not an actual biological system, it isn't even really intending to be one, it's really a study of randomness, and how likely various things might be. But there's a zillion counter-intuitive things that come up.
Cognitive dissonance is wild.
I do basically agree, but "The American Experiment" was largely an attempt to get off the axis. The anti-aristocracy/anti-monopoly aspects have been methodically encroached. It was a fundamental step off the European Political Axis - which, if you think about it is merely arguing whether the government should use tongs to control the populace. It's the standard historical model, really - just with more cover for the aristocrats.
Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. -- Robert A. Heinlein
Until someone they know personally...
There's a difference between the intellectual "I know the press is wrong, but they're what I've got" and the "Well, that story I KNOW is flat fucked up"
People are innately "Narrative Driven". We're organized to 'follow the leader' or rebel and fuck off to make our own tribe. Rebellions are always some tiny sliver (1/6 to 1/3) of the populace that's boiled over.
Calling the "middle 2/3" sheep is less derogatory than a reasonably accurate representation. There's a large slice of "I just don't give a fuck" who are simply carried along, and then there's another slice that's simply long ago made choices of "Trusted Sources" and they follow their trusted sources - and would follow them straight to Hell.
I agree with another couple comments - plenty are "awake", but "What could I do" and just going along "Because". So, that's another slice of "the sheep".
Think "Custom Firmware".
The machines would never have passed any sane purchasing procedure if there wasn't some functioning software somewhere. So "Just buy one" means "Ok, so this one works fine..."
The hole is that it's easy to flash to something else , and their formal defense is "Yeah, but we keep them under lock and key with no one having access!" (Which is also a joke, but...)
It's a matter of examining the actual machines that were actually used. And. At this point. It would need to be a forensic audit going to extremes, because the guilty just re-flash things if they had the time.
Because the leadership of the Republicans don't actually oppose Democrats. Not really.
Trump is portrayed as "Far Right" even though even a casual glance at the guy's deeds wouldn't put him there. Trump is very far from the RINOs and usual Republican leadership ... but not on the standard "Nazi-to-Communist Axis" that the press insists we all should be using.
The "endless betrayals" like John McCain campaigning nearly entirely on "building a wall" and yet also being the deciding vote to kill finding/manpower/authorization repeatedly ... The "Never Trump" block aligned themselves with the Democrats so easily because their world-view aligns. The Military-Industrial complex and entrenched Big Business is fine with screwing small business, the little guy, and only ever pays lip-service to the Pillars of The Right sorts of things. They are the fascists that they scream all the flavor-of-the-week-populists have to be. Near-monopoly companies are fine "Paying the government more", because they know this will sifle actual competition, and the easy to grasp: Companies always pass costs to consumers. Always. No law can even eliminate that - it's a natural law of markets.
Trump is off-axis in the Freedom direction. Or the traditional American direction. This is precisely how you get 40% Democrats at rallies, and have to come up with last minute vote fixing inside deep, deep blue precincts , which is where some of the key warning flags/proof of shenanigans went down.
They're cunning linguists and impressed by their own wordplay.
And they delight in being called hypocrites. It's basically a badge of honor, because they aren't breaking their own rules.
They have just the one rule: Power
All the flip-flops and etc. are always (A) A better tactical position is 180 degrees from yesterday ... so we switched! and (B) Oh, well, that's the rule for the populace, not the leadership, and everyone even knows this.
The "direct to channel" links for a fair chunk (all the ones I tested) of my personally subscriptions are failing to load currently.
I can get to the YT main page, or to "Subscriptions" and see videos, but when I go to, say "Lab Padre's Channel" I get nada.
Works: (has videos from the channels with problems)
https://www.youtube.com/feed/subscriptions
Does not work:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFwMITSkc1Fms6PoJoh1OUQ?pbjreload=102
or
Mac/Brave. Was logged out - clicked 'sign in' and was signed in.