This was used to find 14550 people over 100-years-old who, if this DB is correct, voted in Michigan's elections. 7 of whom were apparently older than the oldest person ever to have lived according to another post.
Edit: Said Michigan, meant Pennsylvania. Long week.
These are only partially verified as yet, so tread carefully, as there's always a possibility it's a fake lead, but at present it's enough that many are using this database to match against various official/secondary records or are checking it for near-impossibilities like 100+-year-olds.
Use Glogg for a free reader that can handle files of this size. Word/Wordpad/Notepad/Notepad++ aren't capable.
I have it if necessary.
Yeah, I completely agree, however, whenever I go down this path, trying to imagine how I would have done it given the tremendous obstacles and thousands of enemies/RINOs smiling to your face while stabbing your back, I think that maybe he was trying to balance out the challenge of getting re-elected by all of the centrists/normies or gimme-type immigrants who care little for this "white man's country" and need much less sophisticated carrots than the phenomenal, dense history that led the West and especially the US to the rare fruits of individual sovereignty.
There's just so god-damned much to climb over and so many people, including many ostensible "conservatives", who still want their pound of flesh, pushing up our unfunded liabilities by trillions more, so he has to kick that can down the road and let Congress spend trillions here and there while he rigs the system with judges and subtle rules to try to set up its eventual crushing (but then recuperative) fall, which may well be the only way to reset it properly at this point.
I think you misspelled that: "Until Trump declares victory I do not recognize this election as legit!" :)
The more I think about this, the more I think the cars are either empty or have no keys in them (Secret Service wouldn't want a ton of potential weapons all aimed at Biden from feet away) and, further, I think the sound was foleyed (just effects or pre-recorded elsewhere). I don't know what it means other than that he had almost no one there, but that's what I think happened.
Edit: Could have just been an ad spot for GM/Jeep in exchange for campaign money (or personal cash to Biden). Everything's for sale these days, particularly things with a national viewership. Imagine what 200-300M viewers (I'm just including/estimating all national and international viewers here... not Biden supporters) seeing your brands would normally cost.
Does anyone have a link to the full contents? I'm really stuck here arguing with someone who rightly has me on why Giuliani never released enough to be independently verifiable, such as e-mail headers etc. There is reason to be cautious with personal details for legal reasons, but at some point we need a dump.
Yeah the issue will be whether or not there are any faithless electors who vote against the party that nominated them, meaning Republican electors who go RINO.
Not that it changes the video or how great it is, but I could swear this was either in the lead-up to 2016 or during the 1st term, not recently in the 2020 lead-up. Can anyone confirm?
Edit I realized that the cut in the video hides that they're probably talking about Hunter in the last part of the video when they say "he brings us together for every holiday" etc. I'm going to leave this up as I wrote it though, because I really want people to remember she is just a little kid and is probably still feeling terrible pain over the death of her father, plus the points I outline here aren't discredited... we don't really know what she's thinking about.
I'm going to just try to round this out a bit as, if we want to go by Occam's Razor, there's an equally, if not more, likely explanation, as she was asked "what does family mean to you", not a question about Hunter specifically. Since her dad Beau died when she was young, I'd think that his loss would be incredibly brutal on her.
Sure, it could be that Hunter then slept with her mom after Beau died or the other nasty stuff we're learning about now, but at the end of the day you'd think that her dad dying would be way up there in her mind when asked about what family means. At least, knowing a few people whose parents died when they were young, I'd hope that she would still put his death up there.
It's easy for us to look at it through out own lens of political corruption and Hunter's horrible behavior in general, but she's a young girl, probably isn't up on the politics of it (or is really trying to stay out of it because it's about her FAMILY, which are her entire world even if we don't like a couple of its members), and may not have known anything about the whole situation when this interview was done (not sure on date).
Lastly, though I know people don't want to hear this, she probably didn't think that whatever was going on between her and Hunter was that bad in the way that many victims of grooming or other abuse sometimes justify it with some twisted logic related to coping with her dad's loss or how to reconcile the knowledge that her mom moved to Hunter after it and other bad things like this which are inevitably going to create tremendous cognitive dissonance in anyone, especially someone without a lot of life to fall back on in times of tragedy. That's not to say anything about it is OK, just that we have to see that from her perspective she may well not have had any issues, consciously at least, with the really inappropriate relationship and may just be in understandably perpetual mourning for her dead father...
I just have to say this as we (the public) could make her life even more terrible just by focusing on her through this lens of politics and forgetting she's not only innocent but did nothing to deserve this type of attention.
Pond pass granted, my good man. Our slams of Europe, in particular Britain, are always from a frustration about how far things have gone awry there, distancing them from their former greatness. The good ones know the challenge and have nothing but our best wishes. We're all in for a fight that we will win because we have to.
47 Minutes, including tons of footage I don't even have and I've been cataloguing this for the last 2 years.
In many of these clips, cucks put up their fists before being shouted down or told to "give us your house" or the like. In more, they destroy properties and houses with "BLM" or similar in the windows. It's just the best proof ever that this is cancerous anarchistic rage that must be destroyed.
PDF for download, so you don't have to deal with the 4chan image caps or the like: https://sci-hub.st/10.1177/1461444820948803
PDF for download, so you don't have to deal with the 4chan image caps or the like: https://sci-hub.st/10.1177/1461444820948803
PDF for download, so you don't have to deal with the 4chan image caps or the like: https://sci-hub.st/10.1177/1461444820948803
Do a ctrl-f and type "wonkette" or "https". I put it in the first reply under the post along with my big description of their "demands".
Original Link: https://www.wonkette.com/its-time-to-be-absolute-motherf-ckers
The article and comments section, particularly the longer comments, show you the real state of some of (at least) the harder leftists who are driving the party to ever-farther extremes. It's basically a collection of take-the-mask-off diatribes on how 1) if you can't win, change the rules and 2) make sure the new rules guarantee you always win, forever.
The three big ones they want:
-
Stack the supreme court (no surprises here).
-
Grant statehood to all territories that would likely vote in Democrat senators (basically packing the Senate)
-
Voting to increase the size of the House of Representatives, for the first time in some hundred years or so, in some belief that that will also favor them, as they will gerrymander and redistrict one last time, splitting huge urban Democrat strongholds, and then ban gerrymandering forever. Basically they will hold the wheel to the left with rebar, duct tape, and barbed wire to ensure it stays there.
All of these are being done "in the name of fairness" and "because Republicans always vote against their best interests". Lovely, I guess I can finally stop thinking since it's impossible for me to know my own mind.
I can tell you this for a fact... I live in close proximity to a number of wealthy neighborhoods north of LA and they almost never go black, but the comparatively poorer [still perfectly nice, nothing 3rd world, but this is how California thinks and works] area north of us gets nailed constantly. They're basically the first ones to go when anything happens because "fuck them", right?
Thank you for writing this... I'm always glad people are thinking outside of the box and questioning authority as it's a hallmark of the right in this country, but we must be precise in the sciences and not just find a few words randomly scattered around a poorly-described video. If we don't do that then we're no better than the emotional left because we're leaning on good feelings and scattershot attention to do the work our brains were meant to do, prying and learning until we get to the truth of something. This is especially true vs others whose reliance on structured education often blinds them to finding something truly new and unconventional because they only know what has already been found and what is possible within the limits of that conventional education's thinkiing, not the undiscovered "impossibilities" that require persistence and some creativity to seek out and refine. But none of that is permission to be lazy in our efforts to understand the discoveries on the bleeding edge and to sort the few real finds from the mountains of almost-breakthroughs and papered over false starts out there.
This is interesting for sure and not unheard of as there are several cases of two concurrent conditions either opposing each other (i.e. one condition takes out the other) or greatly aiding, usually unintentionally, the immune system or body in taking out the other condition. This is a bit different, in that it's a drug causing a selectivity that could be useful in therapeutic applications, but for people checking this out, don't read that as a cure too literally. It just means that it may be a means by which we could selectively "allow" some types of cancers to be attacked while protecting the body from the attacker, but there are still many things that can go wrong with that.
An example is that the virus may well still fill and pop millions of cancer cells, releasing a hideous torrent of viruses (the viral load) into the bloodstream and, even though your cells weren't initially attacked, the load is still a ton of crap your system has to neutralize and remove, assuming it doesn't overwhelm the HCQ and your immune system's protective abilities and end up infecting you with whatever took out the cancer...
Yeah, same here and I'm in a real liberal enclave where people aren't the least bit afraid to say shitty things about conservatives to your face because if you speak properly and are remotely intelligent then they "know" you couldn't possibly be that dumb and must be with them. It's an astonishing level of arrogance that makes their many defeats, like 2016, all the sweeter as I smile gleefully on the inside while wearing a stoic, non-partisan, apathetic professionalism on the outside, watching their friends abandon them for reason, whether in the center (which is miles away from the left at this point) or right.
It's a wealthy area that, as usual, requires a heavy dose of "looking the other way" to allow any services to function because otherwise no one outside of affluent professionals could afford to live here.
The problem is this looking the other way has gotten us (Californians) an entrenched base of people who came here, had their kids, and those kids now vote distinctly left. I'm not against everyone south of the border, or limited/selective immigration, but uneducated, foreign-allied voters who have no connection to the country (birth seems not to matter) are very easy to pull leftward because they don't often care about why America works (or that's a "white" thing they ignore) and the left is the party of handouts and zero-sum thinking (i.e. they imply the pie never gets bigger, so if you want anything you need to take it from those greedy white people rather than just baking a little more pie for yourself).
If you want to look more into this idea of the flip from what you might call the ruling-conservative 50s into the "Blue Church" of today, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQCTeGKHsVc
Charles Brown? Are you telling me Charlie Brown is with us? Nice.
This picture from another post will give you the idea... literally "his view" of the BS during his confirmation hearing: https://thedonald.win/p/11PpU0d7WH/justice-clarence-thomas-has-been/c/