A Deep Dive Into Those Trump/DOJ Phone Notes (A Pennsylvania Connection)

We'll start with this reporting from the NY Times:

President Donald J. Trump pressed top Justice Department officials late last year to declare that the election was corrupt even though they had found no instances of widespread fraud, so he and his allies in Congress could use the assertion to try to overturn the results, according to new documents provided to lawmakers.

The demands were an extraordinary instance of a president interfering with an agency that is typically more independent from the White House to advance his personal agenda. They are also the latest example of Mr. Trump’s wide-ranging campaign during his final weeks in office to delegitimize the election results.

The exchange unfolded during a phone call on Dec. 27 in which Mr. Trump pressed the acting attorney general at the time, Jeffrey A. Rosen, and his deputy, Richard P. Donoghue, on voter fraud claims that the Justice Department had found no evidence for. Mr. Donoghue warned that the department had no power to change the outcome of the election. Mr. Trump replied that he did not expect that, according to notes Mr. Donoghue took memorializing the conversation.

This is the framing for the (by now famous) takeaway from the notes:

“Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me” and to congressional allies, Mr. Donoghue wrote in summarizing Mr. Trump’s response.

The Washington Post had a similar take:

President Donald Trump pressed senior Justice Department officials in late 2020 to “just say the election was corrupt [and] leave the rest to me” and Republican lawmakers, according to stunning handwritten notes that illustrate how far the president was willing to go to prevent Joe Biden from taking office.

In place of looking at the "leave the rest to me" part, I'd like to focus on the other part of that phrase. Those The Times refers to as "congressional allies" and the Post as "Republican lawmakers."

What do the notes say?

We'll start with the DOJ's position (p. 4 of the notes):

Transcript:

but understand that the DOJ can't + won't snap its fingers + change the outcome of the election, doesn't work that way

Trump answers (p. 4-5 of the notes):

Transcript:

P: "Don't expect you do do that, just say the election was was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen."

Who are "the R. Congressmen" mentioned in the notes?

Well, for the sake of this conversation, it's Scott Perry (PA-10). But he's not the only Pennsylvania politician mentioned in the notes (p. 1 of the notes):

Transcript:

DAG Call - on w/ POTUS + wants to conference me in

P - Country is up in arms over the corruption

Scott Perry (PA) + Senator from PA - Guy Mastriano - some of the (many?) calling

(Since the reference is to a "Senator from PA" it's easy to assume Trump meant State Senator Doug Mastriano rather than Pennsylvania Representative Guy Reschenthaler.)

And this is what Trump was pushing onto the DOJ (p. 1 of the notes):

Transcript:

205K votes - more than they have voters - PA

This was December 27, 2020. On the very next day, December 28, 2020, Pennsylvania State Representative Russ Diamond issued a statement asserting that little bit if misinformation.

A statement easily debunked by December 29, 2020. 

Also on December 28 2020, State Senator Doug Mastriano sent his 5 page letter to Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue.

WTIF had some interesting things to say about that letter. For example:

Many of the roughly 18 claims in the five-page letter had already been proven wrong by then, or were debunked after Mastriano wrote the letter.

For example, the letter cites a discrepancy between the number of votes counted and the number of people who voted. By the next day, the claim had been debunked: the Department of State said the group had relied on incomplete data from the state’s voter database.

And:

The emails also show Rep. Frank Ryan (R-Lebanon) was also in the mix. He shared a slideshow outlining the misleading voter database claim with U.S. Rep. Scott Perry (R, PA-10) a week before he released it to the public on Dec. 28. Perry then forwarded the slideshow to Justice Department lawyers, referencing a previous discussion he had with Donoghue.

Keep the date in mind as well as the fact that Ryan passed the "205K more votes than voters" to Perry a week before it's mentioned by Trump on that phone call.  

Then there's this (p. 6 of the notes):

Transcript: 

- People tell me Jeff Clark is great, I should put him in. 
- People want me to replace DOJ leadership

What's the context on this? Take a look at this from the NYTimes:

The Justice Department’s top leaders listened in stunned silence this month: One of their peers, they were told, had devised a plan with President Donald J. Trump to oust Jeffrey A. Rosen as acting attorney general and wield the department’s power to force Georgia state lawmakers to overturn its presidential election results.

The unassuming lawyer who worked on the plan, Jeffrey Clark, had been devising ways to cast doubt on the election results and to bolster Mr. Trump’s continuing legal battles and the pressure on Georgia politicians. Because Mr. Rosen had refused the president’s entreaties to carry out those plans, Mr. Trump was about to decide whether to fire Mr. Rosen and replace him with Mr. Clark.

And:

As Mr. Rosen and the deputy attorney general, Richard P. Donoghue, pushed back, they were unaware that Mr. Clark had been introduced to Mr. Trump by a Pennsylvania politician and had told the president that he agreed that fraud had affected the election results.

A Pennsylvania politician? How interesting. Which Pennsylvania politician could that be?

The NY Times has the answer:

When Representative Scott Perry joined his colleagues in a monthslong campaign to undermine the results of the presidential election, promoting “Stop the Steal” events and supporting an attempt to overturn millions of legally cast votes, he often took a back seat to higher-profile loyalists in President Donald J. Trump’s orbit.

But Mr. Perry, an outspoken Pennsylvania Republican, played a significant role in the crisis that played out at the top of the Justice Department this month, when Mr. Trump considered firing the acting attorney general and backed down only after top department officials threatened to resign en masse.

It was Mr. Perry, a member of the hard-line Freedom Caucus, who first made Mr. Trump aware that a relatively obscure Justice Department official, Jeffrey Clark, the acting chief of the civil division, was sympathetic to Mr. Trump’s view that the election had been stolen, according to former administration officials who spoke with Mr. Clark and Mr. Trump.

Mr. Perry introduced the president to Mr. Clark, whose openness to conspiracy theories about election fraud presented Mr. Trump with a welcome change from the acting attorney general, Jeffrey A. Rosen, who stood by the results of the election and had repeatedly resisted the president’s efforts to undo them.

Could that be the same Scott Perry listed who is on the first page of those DOJ notes?

Why, yes. Yes it is. His name is right there right after Trump says this:

Don't expect you do do that, just say the election was was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen.

Congressman Perry, exactly what role did you play in pushing the big lie?  Are you the WH source for the 205K more votes than voters lie that Trump tried to push into the DOJ?

And State Senator Mastriano, your state legislative district butts right up against Perry's Congressional District, right?

Since you're listed in the notes like some sort of assistant to Perry, and considering your presence at the Capitol on January 6, your payment for the MAGA-filled buses, we already know you're (at the very least) treason-adjacent, what's your place in all this?

Some Thoughts On Yesterday's Trial Proceedings

First, Dan Rather:

The evidence is damning, chilling, and overwhelming. Only cowardice and complicity stands in the way of conviction.

— Dan Rather (@DanRather) February 10, 2021

Yep. That's about right.

More from Dan Rather:

I firmly believe that the vast majority of American citizens will see this clearly for what it is. But our voices are on the sidelines for now, other than the pressure of conscience we can bring to bear on the 100 senators who will stand in judgement. That these same women and men were also in the crosshairs of the murderous mob and that the trial is taking place at the scene of the crime, makes the events transpiring today on Capitol Hill even more surreal. 

• For the senators, there can be no hiding from this historic decision... silence or procedural excuses equal complicity.  
• For the rioters, there can be no leniency... terrorists are inspired by weakness.
• For the instigators, there can be no immunity... to drum up a mob hellbent on violent injustice is to encourage insurrection. 
• For those in the right-wing media who aided and abetted the lies, there can be no normalizing... their role in setting the stage for the insurrection is cemented by hours of television and thousands of tweets. 
• For those who have dabbled in the false equivalence framework so prevalent in Washington, this must be the end of that... there can be no comparison between the actions of the previous president and his enablers, abetters, and cheerleaders, and any "other side." Thankfully, I think many in the press have long ago realized this and have reported accordingly.

Some might argue that this is a rush to judgement, that the president's counsel has a right to present their case. That is indeed true. But you would have to be willfully ignorant, or cynical to the point of malevolence, to not see and hear with clarity the evidence as it stands.

The Senate must convict Donald Trump.

Two Slightly Different Messages From Two Leading Republicans In The House

From the Chair of The House Republican Conference, Representative Liz Cheney:

On January 6, 2021 a violent mob attacked the United States Capitol to obstruct the process of our democracy and stop the counting of presidential electoral votes. This insurrection caused injury, death and destruction in the most sacred space in our Republic.

Much more will become clear in coming days and weeks, but what we know now is enough. The President of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack. Everything that followed was his doing. None of this would have happened without the President. The President could have immediately and forcefully intervened to stop the violence. He did not. There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.

I will vote to impeach the President.

And she was not the only defection from the Trump party:

Ten Republicans joined Democrats in voting to impeach: Representatives Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the party’s No. 3 leader in the House; Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington; John Katko of New York; Adam Kinzinger of Illinois; Fred Upton of Michigan; Dan Newhouse of Washington; Peter Meijer of Michigan; Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio; David Valadao of California; and Tom Rice of South Carolina.

The defections were a remarkable break from the head of the party by Republicans, who voted unanimously against impeaching Mr. Trump just over a year ago.

Interestingly, they were not joined by the guy who said this:

Madam Speaker, let me be clear, last week’s violent attack on the Capitol was undemocratic, un-American and criminal. Violence is never a legitimate form of protest. Freedom of speech and assembly under the constitution is rooted in non-violence. Yet the violent mob that descended upon this body was neither peaceful nor democratic. It acted to disrupt Congress’s constitutional responsibility.

And:

And make no mistake, those who are responsible for Wednesday’s chaos will be brought to justice...

And:

The President bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack on Congress by mob rioters. He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding.

Because for some reason, GOP House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy doesn't seem to think that such actions rise to the level of impeachment. Oh, well.

If only Trump had lied about getting a blowjob from a woman who wasn't his wife, I suppose.

Article of Impeachment (January, 2021)

Resolution

Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, the Donald John Trump, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following article of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Article of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

ARTICLE 1: INCITEMENT OF INSURRECTION

The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" and that the President "shall be removed from Office on Impeachment, for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Further, section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits any person who has "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against" the United States from "hold[ing] and office ... under the United States.' In his conduct while President of the United States — and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, provide, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed — Donald John Trump engaged in high Crimes and Misdemeanors by inciting violence against the Government of the United States, in that:

On January 6, 2021, pursuant to the 12th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Vice President of the United States, the House of Representatives, and the Senate met at the United States Capitol for a Joint Session of Congress to count the votes of the Electoral College. In the months preceding the Joint Session, President Trump repeatedly issued false statements asserting that the Presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted by the American people or certified by State or Federal officials. Shortly before the Joint Session commenced, President Trump, addressed a crowd at the Ellipse in Washington, D.C. There, he reiterated false claims that "we won this election, and we won it by a landslide." He also willfully made statements that, in context, encouraged — and foreseeably resulted in — lawless action at the Capitol, such as: "if you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore." Thus incited by President Trump, members of the crowd he had addressed, in an attempt to, among other objectives, interfere with the Joint Session's solemn constitutional duty to certify the results of the 2020 Presidential election, unlawfully breached and vandalized the Capitol, injured and killed law enforcement personnel, menaced Members of Congress, the Vice President, and Congressional personnel, and engaged in other violent, deadly, destructive and seditious acts.

President Trump's conduct on January 6, 2021, followed his prior efforts to subvert and obstruct the certification of the results of the 2020 Presidential election. Those prior efforts included a phone call on January 2, 2021, during which President Trump urged the secretary of state of Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, to "find" enough votes to overturn the Georgia Presidential election results and threatened Secretary Raffensperger if he failed to do so.

In all this, President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of Government. He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of Government. He thereby betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, Donald John Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law. Donald John Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

Pennsylvania State Senator Doug Mastriano Is IN THE NEWS About His Involvement In DC Jan 6.

First, the news. From KDKA:

A Republican state senator who was on the scene when a violent mob of fellow Donald Trump supporters commandeered the U.S. Capitol should resign, the top Democrat in the Pennsylvania Senate said Thursday.

Minority Leader Jay Costa, D-Allegheny, said Sen. Doug Mastriano’s words and actions since November encouraged a coup attempt and inspired the people behind it. At least eight other Senate Democrats have said Mastriano should step down.

And something a little different from USA Today (by way of the York Daily News): 

State Sen. Doug Mastriano vowed Tuesday on the Pennsylvania Capitol steps that the election fight wasn't over. 

A day later, he traveled on the bus trip he organized to a "Save America Rally" that turned into an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, when four people died, 14 police officers were injured and 68 rioters were arrested. 

Mastriano, a Republican from Franklin County, said he was not part of the mob that stormed the Capitol, smashing windows, vandalizing offices and reigning terror over the people's house. 

But state Democrats are calling for his resignation and removal from office. 

You noted the phrase "bus trip he organized" right?

Mastriano made a statement on his Facebook page denouncing the violence and asserting that once he realized that the protest was turning violent, he left. He doesn't mention any "bus trip he organized" in the video, however.

So perhaps that part's just so much fake news, right?

And perhaps it isn't. Perhaps State Senator Mastriano is leaving out a few crucial bits of information in his denunciation of the violence. Let's go find out, shall we?

We'll begin our journey at The Western Journal, in a piece dated January 1:

Many thousands are expected to gather in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday to show their support for President Donald Trump and pressure Congress not to certify the Electoral College vote making Joe Biden the official winner of the 2020 election.

“We the People must take to the US Capitol lawn and steps and tell Congress #DoNotCertify on #JAN6! Congress cannot certify this fraudulent Electoral College,” the event organizers’ website, WildProtest.com, reads.

A few sentences down there's this:

Among the featured speakers scheduled for the rally, which starts at 10 a.m. at the Capitol, are Republicans Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona, Representatives-elect Majorie Greene of Georgia and Lauren Boebert of Colorado, state Rep. Mark Finchem of Arizona, state Sen. Doug Mastriano of Pennsylvania and Democratic state Rep. Vernon Jones of Georgia.[Emphasis added.]

Maybe The Western Journal got it wrong. We'll need to dig deeper.

Were you to click on that link, you'd find an empty screen that's wiped clean, nothing to be seen, you know what I mean, jelly bean?

Rhymes are keen.

If you chose instead to load that URL into the Way Back Machine you'd find a capture of the page (this one is time stamped on January 6, by the way). Evidently, it was set up by the "Stop The Steal" folks. 

Text on that page reads (in part):

We the People must take to the US Capitol lawn and steps and tell Congress #DoNotCertify on #JAN6! Congress cannot certify this fraudulent Electoral College. Our presence in Washington D.C. will let Members of Congress know that we stand with Rep. Mo Brooks and his colleagues in the House of Representatives who will bravely object to the certification of the Electoral College.

There's also a link to this youtube video:

With these words from Trump:

We will not bend. We will not break. We will not yield. We will never give in. We will never give up and we will never back down. We will never ever surrender because we are americans and our hearts bleed Red White and Blue.

The page also has a list of "Invited Speakers & Featured Guests" for that day's rally including: 

• Pardoned Obstructor of Justice, Roger Stone
• QAnon Congresswoman, Marjorie Greene
• Covid-19 Misinformer, Dr Simone Gold
  

And most importantly (for this story, at least):

Yep. That's right. Doug Mastriano was listed as a "Invited Speaker & Featured Guest" on a website set up by "Stop The Steal" though the website doesn't offer any information as to what exactly that means.

Did he speak at the rally? If he didn't speak, what was he doing there for the Stop The Steal folks? Was he handing out out complimentary hot chocolate and MAGA mittens?

The website doesn't offer any answers but maybe shouldn't someone maybe, oh I don't know, ASK STATE SENATOR DOUG MASTRIANO ABOUT THIS??

Because it certainly looks like his involvement runs a little deeper than just someone who was there.

See? There WAS Voter Fraud! Only TRUMP DID IT

52 U.S. Code § 20511: 

A person, including an election official, who in any election for Federal office...

(2) knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by...

(B) the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held...

shall be fined in accordance with title 18 (which fines shall be paid into the general fund of the Treasury, miscellaneous receipts (pursuant to section 3302 of title 31), notwithstanding any other law), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. 

GA Code § 21-2-604 (2016): 

(a) (1) A person commits the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the first degree when, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony under this article, he or she solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct.

And then this from the Washington Post:

President Trump urged fellow Republican Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia secretary of state, to “find” enough votes to overturn his defeat in an extraordinary one-hour phone call Saturday that legal scholars described as a flagrant abuse of power and a potential criminal act.

And:

At another point, Trump said: “So look. All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state.”

He later added: “So what are we going to do here, folks? I only need 11,000 votes. Fellas, I need 11,000 votes. Give me a break.”

And then this from the NYTimes: 

President Trump pressured Georgia’s Republican secretary of state to “find” him enough votes to overturn the presidential election and vaguely threatened him with “a criminal offense” during an hourlong telephone call on Saturday, according to an audio recording of the conversation.

And a few paragraphs down we learn of the threat:

“You know what they did and you’re not reporting it,” the president said during the call. “You know, that’s a criminal — that’s a criminal offense. And you know, you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. That’s a big risk.”

Hmm...a vague-ish threat for criminal prosecution (Trump IS still head of the DOJ, doncha know) unless Georgia officials "find" him just enough votes to win. All caught on tape for the entire world to hear.

I'm NOT a lawyer but it sure sounds to me like this runs counter to 52 U.S. Code § 20511 and Georgia Code § 21-2-562 (2016). 

How is this not illegal? And in light of this, how can the hundred or so House members (including one from my neighboring district, Representative Guy Reschenthaler) or the dozen or so Senators looking to upend Biden's win in November still support the criminal in the White House?

And snarkier still, how will Wendy Bell spin it?

No, Senator Toomey. You Can't Cleanse YOUR Legacy That Easily

From Bloomberg (via The Trib):

President Donald Trump risks being remembered for creating “chaos and misery” at the end of his term if he vetoes the $900 billion stimulus passed by Congress and triggers a government shutdown, Republican Sen. Pat Toomey said.

If, Senator? IF?

There are so many other reasons why Trump will be remembered for "chaos and misery" aren't there?

By the way, Trump signed the legislation last night:

President Trump on Sunday night signed a massive coronavirus relief and spending package, relenting on a measure he had called a "disgrace" days earlier.

The legislation, which combines $900 billion in COVID-19 aid with government funding through September 2021, was passed by large majorities in both houses of Congress on Dec. 21 — only to see Trump blindside legislators the next day and blast the bill.

So Senator let me ask you: Now that he's signed the legislation, does that mean he won't be remembered for creating "chaos and misery"?

But what about:

• Family separation/kids in cages
• Pardoning war criminals
  
• 300,000+ dead (most due to Trump's handling of Covid-19)
  

How's that for chaos and misery, Senator?

The fact that you're only speaking out now, a mere week and a half before a Joint Session of Congress makes the electoral college vote official and a little more than three weeks until the Biden Inauguration, shows your true level of political and moral courage.

You could have been speaking out about Trump's chaos and misery much sooner, Senator.

Because you didn't, Donald Trump's shameful legacy is and will always be your legacy as well.

Is This Sedition Or Treason Or What??

Teh Crazie appears again at the top. This was tweeted yesterday:

He didn’t win the Election. He lost all 6 Swing States, by a lot. They then dumped hundreds of thousands of votes in each one, and got caught. Now Republican politicians have to fight so that their great victory is not stolen. Don’t be weak fools! https://t.co/d9Bgu8XPIj

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 19, 2020

BTW, not one of those statements is true. Be that as it may, connect teh crazie above with this from CNN:

President Donald Trump convened a heated meeting in the Oval Office on Friday, including lawyer Sidney Powell and her client, former national security adviser Michael Flynn, two people familiar with the matter said, describing a session that began as an impromptu gathering but devolved and eventually broke out into screaming matches at certain points as some of Trump's aides pushed back on Powell and Flynn's more outrageous suggestions about overturning the election.

Flynn had suggested earlier this week that Trump could invoke martial law as part of his efforts to overturn the election that he lost to President-elect Joe Biden -- an idea that arose again during the meeting in the Oval Office, one of the people said. It wasn't clear whether Trump endorsed the idea, but others in the room forcefully pushed back and shot it down.

Donald Trump discussed in the Oval Office using military force to overturn the election he lost.

The election is over. The Constitutional process leading up to Joe Biden's inauguration is underway. Any attempt to thwart this process is by definition unconstitutional.

How do we know the process is under way? 

From the Congressional Research Service:  

November 4-December 14, 2020: Counting Popular Votes and Filing Certificates of Ascertainment Following election day, the states are to count and certify popular vote results according to their respective statutory and procedural requirements.When the states have completed their vote counts and ascertained the official results, the U.S. Code (3 U.S.C. §6) requires the state governors to prepare, “as soon as practicable,” documents known as Certificates of Ascertainment of the vote. The certificates must list the names of the electors chosen by the voters and the number of votes received in the popular election results, also the names of all losing candidates for elector, and the number of votes they received. Certificates of Ascertainment, which are often signed by state governors, must carry the seal of the state. One copy is forwarded to the Archivist of the United States (the Archivist), while six duplicates of the Certificate of Ascertainment must be provided to the electors by December 14, the date on which they meet.

And:

December 14, 2020: Electors Vote in Their States
Monday after the second Wednesday in December of presidential election years is set (3 U.S.C. §7) as the date on which the electors meet and vote. In 2020, the meeting is on December 14. Electoral college delegations meet separately in their respective states and the District of Columbia at places designated by their state legislature. The electors vote by paper ballot, casting one ballot for President and one for Vice President. The electors count the results and then sign six certificates, each of which contains two lists, one of which includes the electoral votes for the President, the other, electoral votes for the Vice President, each of which includes the names of persons receiving votes and the number of votes cast for them. These are known as Certificates of the Vote, which the electors are required to sign. They then pair the six Certificates of Ascertainment provided by the state governors with the Certificates of the Vote, and sign, seal, and certify them (3 U.S.C. §§8-10). The six certificates are then distributed by registered mail as follows: (1) one certificate to the President of the U.S. Senate (the Vice President); (2) two certificates to the secretary of state (or equivalent officer) of the state in which the electors met; (3) two certificates to the Archivist; and (4) one certificate to the judge of the U.S. district court of the district in which the electors met (3 U.S.C. §11).

All this has been done. Biden's 306 and Trump's 232 electoral votes have been cast and the results certified by each state and the District of Columbia. It's over.

All that's left is this:

January 6, 2021: Joint Session of Congress to Count Electoral Votes and Declare Election Results
Meets On January 6, or another date set by law, the Senate and House of Representatives assemble at 1:00 p.m.in a joint session at the Capitol, in the House chamber, to count the electoral votes and declare the results(3 U.S.C. §15). The Vice President presides as President of the Senate. The Vice President opens the certificates and presents them to four tellers, two from each chamber. The tellers read and make a list of the returns. When the votes have been ascertained and counted, the tellers transmit them to the Vice President.If one of the tickets has received a majority of 270 or more electoral votes, the Vice President announces the results, which “shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President.”

Go back and look at what Felon Flynn suggested (and Donald Trump discussed). How does this not fit into this definition of "Seditious Conspiracy":

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

 This can not be set aside after the inauguration. This must be pursued to the fullest extent of the law.

F**kers: The Suddenly Thin-Skinned GOP Reacts To The Truth

The GOP is all snowflaking over this:

President-elect Joseph R. Biden’s deputy chief of staff, Jen O’Malley Dillon, is getting roasted by conservatives on Twitter after she called Republican Congress members “f—kers” while in the same breath calling for unity during a new interview with Glamour magazine.

This, of course, is the same party boot-licking Donald Trump every chance it gets.

And recently we learned that the Trump Administration wanted this:

A top Trump appointee repeatedly urged top health officials to adopt a "herd immunity" approach to Covid-19 and allow millions of Americans to be infected by the virus, according to internal emails obtained by a House watchdog and shared with POLITICO.

“There is no other way, we need to establish herd, and it only comes about allowing the non-high risk groups expose themselves to the virus. PERIOD," then-science adviser Paul Alexander wrote on July 4 to his boss, Health and Human Services assistant secretary for public affairs Michael Caputo, and six other senior officials.

"Infants, kids, teens, young people, young adults, middle aged with no conditions etc. have zero to little risk….so we use them to develop herd…we want them infected…" Alexander added.

And, in case you were wondering:

Alexander was a top deputy of Caputo, who was personally installed by President Donald Trump in April to lead the health department's communications efforts. Officials told POLITICO that they believed that when Alexander made recommendations, he had the backing of the White House.

“It was understood that he spoke for Michael Caputo, who spoke for the White House,” said Kyle McGowan, a Trump appointee who was CDC chief of staff before leaving this summer. “That’s how they wanted it to be perceived.”

Of course, the killer "pro-life" administration has since back-pedaled on herd-immunity.

When Wendy Bell similarly pushed for "herd immunity" this summer, this is what I found posted at Johns Hopkins about why "herd immunity" is such a fucking dangerous idea:

To reach herd immunity for COVID-19, likely 70% or more of the population would need to be immune. Without a vaccine, over 200 million Americans would have to get infected before we reach this threshold. Put another way, even if the current pace of the COVID-19 pandemic continues in the United States – with over 25,000 confirmed cases a day – it will be well into 2021 before we reach herd immunity. If current daily death rates continue, over half a million Americans would be dead from COVID-19 by that time. [Emphasis added.]

In order to achieve "herd immunity" upwards of a half a million US Citizens would have to die. This was the idea the Trump Administration floated.

The Trump party also supports putting kids in cages and overturning (without any evidence) a constitutionally validated election.

So perhaps "party of fuckers" doesn't do them justice. How's this: "a party of cruel, seditious fuckers who might well be guilty of negligent homicide on a massive scale."

If you support Donald Trump, this is what you support. This is who you are.

Congratulations.

MAGA.

Wendy Bell, Yesterday. Still Unhinged From Reality

Wendy Bell continued with another ranting living room live broadcasts yesterday, (her living room being her last remaining venue after being fired from both TV and Radio for being, well, Wendy Bell).

You can see the Ireland Contracting logo on her BS/bullshit board. It includes their phone number. Do you see it? Wendy put it there. It's 1 800 NEW ROOF. Now, I am sure they do fine roofing work but do they know that they're sponsoring batshit crazy Wendy Bell? I am sure they do so there's no need to call them via the toll free number on Wendy's bullshit board to remind them that Wendy Bell is batshit crazy and they they sponsor her. That they're profiting off of her batshit bullshit. Nope. No need to do that at all.

Anyway. Wendy, after spouting some stats showing Trump's increases in the number of people who voted for him in 2020 compared to 2016 asks, about 9 minutes in:

But we're supposed to "suck it up" and believe that somehow Joe Biden, who couldn't pack his own lunch let alone a high school gymnasium with people, we're told that he, who did not campaign at all, who spent the majority of the summer and the fall in his basement "being safe" [irony airquotes here], we're told that he beat Donald Trump?

Yes, Wendy. You're told that because it's the truth.

Via the AP:

The popular vote

• Biden (the winner) 79,887,852
• Trump (the loser) 73,815,488

That's a difference of 6,072,488 votes, Wendy.

The electoral vote

• Biden (the winner) 306
• Trump (the loser) 232 

That's a difference of 74 electoral votes, Wendy. BTW, this is the exact same spread as last go-round. And of that spread (306-232) Trump said it was a "landslide." So this must be a landslide too, right??

The popular vote in Pennsylvania:

• Biden (the winner) 3,459,246
• Trump (the loser) 3,378,197
  

That's a difference of 81,049

That's a lot of votes Wendy, right? 

There's no evidence of voter fraud, Wendy. If there were then Trump's own lawyers would be presenting it in court. But they're not. So there isn't any.

How can you not see this?

Biden won, Wendy. Trump lost. By a lot.

Suck it up.

What, Exactly, Triggered Toomey's Trump-Disgust? And When?

 Not sure if you caught this, but look:

I'm not violating any pledge of journalistic confidentially in reporting this: 21 Republican Sens–in convos w/ colleagues, staff members, lobbyists, W. House aides–have repeatedly expressed extreme contempt for Trump & his fitness to be POTUS. (1/3)

— Carl Bernstein (@carlbernstein) November 23, 2020

With few exceptions, their craven public silence has helped enable Trump’s most grievous conduct—including undermining and discrediting the US the electoral system.

More from my appearance earlier on @cnn: https://t.co/c1jZXMR0Pv (3/3)

— Carl Bernstein (@carlbernstein) November 23, 2020

Look who's on Bernstein's list: Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey.

While it's true that Toomey finally came around this weekend and issued a statement containing those eight syllables that are, at this point still banished from the GOP/MAGA episteme: President-elect Joe Biden. 

But when did Pat Toomey express "extreme contempt for Trump & his fitness as POTUS"? 

Was it before or after he voted to acquit Trump for obstruction and abuse:

Today, I joined a majority of senators in voting to acquit President Trump. The Constitution sets a very high bar for impeachment and removal of a sitting president. While some of President Trump's actions were inappropriate, they did not come close to meeting the very high bar required to justify overturning the last election, removing him from office, and kicking him off the ballot in an election that has already begun. In November, the American people will decide for themselves whether President Trump should stay in office. In our democratic system, that's the way it should be.

Was it before or after Trump tweeted this (in response to Toomey calling Roger Stone's pardon a "mistake"):

Do RINO’S Pat Toomey & Mitt Romney have any problem with the fact that we caught Obama, Biden, & Company illegally spying on my campaign? Do they care if Comey, McCabe, Page & her lover, Peter S, the whole group, ran rampant, wild & unchecked - lying & leaking all the way? NO!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 12, 2020

Note: Stone was convicted of seven felony counts, including lying to Congress and witness tampering. And Obama did not spy on the Trump campaign.

Senator Toomey, I have a few questions: 

• Did you discover your Trump disgust before or after either of the above?
• If it's before, then why weren't you honest with your constituents and say so then?
• And if it was after, can you please explain why you were OK with Trump then but not now?

I realize that you're not running for reelection in 2022 and so you have a fair amount of freedom from the Trump's MAGA crews, but if you could explain yourself, that would be great.

Ok?

Donald Trump Loses In Pennsylvania. Again.

 From the AP:

A federal judge issued a scathing order Saturday dismissing the Trump campaign’s futile effort to block the certification of votes in Pennsylvania, shooting down claims of widespread irregularities with mail-in ballots.

You can read the opinion here (and I suggest you do). 

Back to the AP:

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Brann wrote in his order that Trump had asked the court to disenfranchise almost 7 million voters.

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Brann wrote, so much that the court would have no option but to stop the certification even though it would impact so many people. “That has not happened.”

Let's take a deeper look at that section of the opinion - it's the opening of the Introduction:

In this action, the Trump Campaign and the Individual Plaintiffs (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”) seek to discard millions of votes legally cast by Pennsylvanians from all corners – from Greene County to Pike County, and everywhere in between. In other words, Plaintiffs ask this Court to disenfranchise almost seven million voters. This Court has been unable to find any case in which a plaintiff has sought such a drastic remedy in the contest of an election, in terms of the sheer volume of votes asked to be invalidated. One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.

That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

For those who are curious as to what it means to dismiss a case "with prejudice," it means: 

When a lawsuit is dismissed with prejudice, the court is saying that it has made a final determination on the merits of the case, and that the plaintiff is therefore forbidden from filing another lawsuit based on the same grounds.

And in case my non-attorney research is wrong, here it is from ABC News:

The judge, a Barack Obama appointee, dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the Trump campaign cannot resubmit the case. The defeat levels a blow to the most high-profile case brought by the president in his multi-state effort to challenge the results of the Nov. 3 election.

Let's not be so quick to dismiss him as an "Obama appointee" however. Take a look:

Brann, who is active in Republican politics in Pennsylvania, faced the most challenging questioning of the hourlong hearing at which five candidates for federal judgeships and a spot on the U.S. Sentencing Commission were considered. 

Citing Brann's involvement with the state Republican Party, the National Rifle Association and the conservative legal organization the Federalist Society, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., called him "probably the most Republican judicial nominee from the Obama White House."

There's more (I'm adding this just in case your MAGA uncle starts ranting about the Demonrat judge in Pennsylvania who's keeping Trump from fulfilling God's purpose of at least two terms:

Yep. Judge Brann is a Republican. He was nominated by Obama as part of a bipartisan agreement between PA's Senators (Casey & Toomey) in which they each got a pick, and both were unanimously confirmed via a voice vote. Brann was Toomey's pick: https://t.co/WXgUlvVZFC https://t.co/KM9yQA9Etc

— Max Kennerly (@MaxKennerly) November 22, 2020

And now, look at what's happenned. Senator Pat Toomey finally pulls the trigger: 

With today’s decision by Judge Matthew Brann, a longtime conservative Republican whom I know to be a fair and unbiased jurist, to dismiss the Trump campaign’s lawsuit, President Trump has exhausted all plausible legal options to challenge the result of the presidential race in Pennsylvania.

This ruling follows a series of procedural losses for President Trump’s campaign. On Friday, the state of Georgia certified the victory of Joe Biden after a hand recount of paper ballots confirmed the conclusion of the initial electronic count. Michigan lawmakers rejected the apparent attempt by President Trump to thwart the will of Michigan voters and select an illegitimate slate of electoral college electors. These developments, together with the outcomes in the rest of the nation, confirm that Joe Biden won the 2020 election and will become the 46th President of the United States.

I congratulate President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris on their victory. They are both dedicated public servants and I will be praying for them and for our country. Unsurprisingly, I have significant policy disagreements with the President-elect. However, as I have done throughout my career, I will seek to work across the aisle with him and his administration, especially on those areas where we may agree, such as continuing our efforts to combat COVID-19, breaking down barriers to expanding trade, supporting the men and women of our armed forces, and keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals and the dangerously mentally ill.

Of course Toomey is not running for reelection in 2022 so he's got little to lose politically.

Which is good news, I suppose, because:

Thanks Mark. It’s all a continuation of the never ending Witch Hunt. Judge Brann, who would not even allow us to present our case or evidence, is a product of Senator Pat “No Tariffs” Toomey of Pennsylvania, no friend of mine, & Obama - No wonder. 900,000 Fraudulent Votes! https://t.co/17rk2KsUPs

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 22, 2020

Again, no evidence of 900,000 fraudulent votes in PA. If there was evidence of such fraud it would have been presented in court.

And it wasn't.

 

Some More Election Result Numbers (PA 2020 vs MI, PA, WI 2016)

In Pennsylvania, according to the AP:

Biden: 3,445,548 votes

Trump: 3,363,951 votes

That's a difference of 81,597 in Pennsylvania.

Last go around (2016) three states from the so-called "blue wall" (Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) voted for Trump over Clinton by these differences:

Michigan: 10,704 more votes for Trump

Pennsylvania: 44,292 more votes for Trump

Wisconsin: 22,748 more votes for Trump

That's a combined tally of 77,744.

So what do we have here?

So far Biden has won more votes in Pennsylvania, a must-get "pivot point" state, than Trump won in those three states combined.

This was not a close election, folks.

And it's time for Trump to concede.

Follow-Up On Those Current Numbers From Last Week (Biden, Lamb, Trump, Parnell)

This is to update the numbers I posted last week. 

Covid deaths US: 244,810 (or about 74.59 per 100,000) 

Covid deaths Canada: 10,953 (or about 29.13 per 100,000)

Had the good ole US of A treated the virus as effectively as Canada, we'd be looking at about 95,604 Covid deaths here in The States instead of 244,810. Had we treated the virus as effectively as Canada, about 149,000 US Citizens would still be alive. We have to assume that all those 149,000 (or so) deaths were therefore preventable were it not for the incompetence and corruption of Donald Trump.

"It is what it is." said Trump.

Fuck Donald Trump. When will he be indicted for mass murder? Negligent homicide?

On to the election results. From the AP:

Current votes for Joe Biden: 77,170,769 

Current votes for Donald Trump:72,057,511

The AP is updating its numbers and they look even worse for Donald Trump. This was not a close election. No amount of stalling, denying or frivolous lawsuiting will change that.

Joe Biden is currently 5,637,779 votes ahead of Donald Trump.  (November 12, it was 5,113,258).

Fuck Donald Trump. It's time for him to concede.

Locally, the numbers are on a similar track in PA. From the AP:

Current votes for Joe Biden in PA: 3,423,976 (Nov 12 it was 3,386,380)

Current votes for Donald Trump in PA: 3,354,836 (Nov 12, it was 3,333,161)

Joe Biden is currently 69,140  votes ahead of Donald Trump (Nov 12, it was 53,219).

Fuck Donald Trump. It's time for him to concede.

And, if there is any justice in the world, Trump should be perp-walked out of DC immediately after Biden's inauguration. Perhaps to NYC to face tax-evasion charges. Perhaps to The Hague to be charged with crimes against humanity.

A side note, GOP candidate for PA-17 has yet to concede the Lamb-Parnell race. Here are the AP's numbers:

Conor Lamb: 221,112 (Nov 12, it was 218,185)

Sean Parnell: 211,256 (Nov 12, it was 208,074)

Conor Lamb is currently 13,038 votes ahead of Sean Parnell (Nov 12, it was 10,011).

Sean, it's time for you to concede. Where are you going to find those 13k votes? I'd DM this question to you via twitter but you've blocked me from your twitter feed. Why did you do that, by the way? You blocked me after I tweeted that question when you were "only" about 10,000 votes behind.

It's Friday, So Wendy Bell's Looking To Undermine PA's Election Credibility. (Spoilers: She's Wrong. Again.)

On her Facebook page Wendy Bell posted this:

In a February 2019 audit of Pennsylvania elections boards, Auditor General Eugene DePasquale found officials in 18 of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties reported accepting gifts, meals or trips from firms competing to sell new voting machines to counties ahead of the 2020 election.

 

Later that year in December, DePasquale also released the results of a sweeping audit of Pennsylvania's registry of electors, examining the voter registrations of more than 8 million registered voters in the state.

 

The results were staggering.

 

DePasquale found:

-24,408 cases where the same driver’s license number was listed in more than one voter record

-13,913 potential duplicate birth certificates

-6,876 potential date of birth inaccuracies

-2,230 cases in which voters were born AFTER they registered to vote, and

-2,991 records of potentially deceased voters, including 1800 people over age 110.

Two issues here. The February 2019 reporting on those gifts and then the December 2019 report on the voter records.

Presumably, Wendy wants her audience to infer large-scale voter fraud going on and is using the above to prove it. Guess what? It doesn't.

But let's look at the gifts, first. From the Auditor General's statement:

Auditor General Eugene DePasquale today said officials in 18 of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties reported accepting gifts, meals or trips from firms competing to sell new voting machines to counties ahead of the 2020 election.

So far, so good. But which counties were they? And how did they vote in the 2020 election?

• Berks County - Went to Trump by about 16,000 votes.
  
• Bucks County - Went to Biden by about 16,000 votes.
• Butler County - Went to Trump by about 33,000 votes.
• Cambria County - Went to Trump by about 27,000 votes.
  
• Cameron County - Went to Trump by about 1,100 votes.
• Clearfield County - Went to Trump by about 29,000 votes.
• Clinton County - Went to Trump by about 36,000 votes.
• Delaware County - Went to Biden by about 88,000 votes.
• Elk County - Went to Trump by about 8,000 votes.
  
• Forest County - Went to Trump by about 1,100 votes.
• Lycoming County - Went to Trump by about 25,000 votes.
• Luzerne County - Went to Trump by about 22,000 votes.
• Northumberland County - Went to Trump by about 16,000 votes.
• Potter County - Went to Trump by about 1,500 votes.
• Warren County - Went to Trump by about 8,000 votes.
• Washington County - Went to Trump by about 27,000 votes.
• Westmoreland County - Went to Trump by about 57,000 votes.
• York County - Went to Trump by about 58,000 votes.

So is Wendy Bell really thinking that by pointing out the gifts made to the election officials in the above 18 counties (where 17 of them went overwhelmingly to Trump), she's effectively undermining the credibility of the Biden win?

That's just crazy. Right?

Then there's the December 2019 report.

For all of the details Wendy includes, she leaves one part out. I'll let Todd Defeo of the conservative news source, The Center Square summarize:

An audit of the state’s voter registration system uncovered “potentially bad data and sloppy record-keeping,” but stopped short of saying the results revealed any inappropriate voting. [Emphasis added.]

Huh. So both pieces of info that Wendy Bell supplied as evidence to question the credibility of President-Elect Biden's win over Donald Trump do nothing to actually support her conclusion.

Did she even bother to do the research on this?

Any comments, Wendy?

Current Numbers (Trump, Lamb, Parnell, and Covid-19)

Covid deaths US: 239,590 (or about 72.47 per 100,000) 

Covid deaths Canada: 10,685 (or about 28.2 per 100,000)

Had the US of A treated the virus as effectively as Canada, we'd be looking at about 93,200 Covid deaths here in The States. Had we treated the virus as effectively as Canada, 146,000 US Citizens would still be alive.

Fuck Donald Trump.

From the AP:

Current votes for Joe Biden: 77,170,769 

Current votes for Donald Trump:72,057,511

Joe Biden is currently 5,113,258 votes ahead of Donald Trump. This was not a close election.

Fuck Donald Trump.

From the AP:

Current votes for Joe Biden in PA: 3,386,380

Current votes for Donald Trump in PA: 3,333,161

Joe Biden is currently 53,219 votes ahead of Donald Trump. This was not a close election in PA. And even if he were to win his lawsuits in PA, he would still not win Pennsylvania

Fuck Donald Trump.

A side note, GOP candidate for PA-17 has yet to concede that race. Here's the AP's numbers:

Conor Lamb: 218,185

Sean Parnell: 208,074

Conor Lamb is currently 10,011 votes ahead of Sean Parnell.

It's time for Donald Trump and Sean Parnell to concede their respective races. 

PS - When I say "Fuck Donald Trump" I do not mean that literally (unless you're looking for that sweet sweet Stormy Daniels payoff). It's not a command or even a suggestion for you to actually have sex with Donald Trump. I just wanted to make that clear.

Of Course, Wendy's Lying.

On her Facebook page yesterday, Wendy Bell posted:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former presidential candidate Evan McMullin tweeted that a list should be made to target those who back President Trump's call for investigating the election. Now, Jake Tapper of CNN suggested that Trump staffers who support the president in his legal and electoral fight should be blacklisted from further employment in politics. 

 

With this kind of rhetoric do you feel the democratic party and Joe Biden will be able to "bring the country together"?

 

Is there anything that could be done to "heal" the nation or are we fractured right now?

This is a lie. Here's what Representative Ocasio-Cortez actually tweeted:

Is anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future? I foresee decent probability of many deleted Tweets, writings, photos in the future

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) November 6, 2020

The "list" isn't actually a thing, as you can see. Ocasio-Cortez is looking to hold to account those current Trump supporters who in the future will try to deny their complicity and not, as Wendy is falsely asserting, those who simply "back President Trump's call for investigating the election."

 
The same can be said for what Representative McMullin tweeted:

We should keep and publish a list of everyone who assists Trump’s frivolous and dangerous attacks on the election. Name and shame forever.

— Evan McMullin 🇺🇸 (@EvanMcMullin) November 6, 2020

Those who "assist Trump's frivolous and dangerous attacks on the election" is not the same as "investigate", Wendy. You get the difference, right?

Then there's Jake Tapper. This is what he tweeted:

2/ I mean, I don’t expect the ride-or-die crew to listen to me, but ...

“So, it says here on your resume that you drove a sex offender to testify at Four Seasons Total Landscaping, north of the Tacony-Palmyra bridge...”

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) November 9, 2020

Wow. How did Wendy go from that to "blacklist(ing) from further employment in politics" anyone who "support(s) the president in his legal and electoral fight"??

 

There are those who still support Trump's (now lost) bid for re-election. Then there are those who are actively undermining the democratic principles upon which this republic was founded - the rule of law, fair elections with peaceful transfer of power afterwards - by demanding the election be scrapped simply because they say (without evidence) that it's not being fair to their losing candidate.

Those are the folks we're talking about, Wendy.

 

You're still defending the guy who bragged about being a pussy grabber, right?

You're still defending the guy who ordered the tear gassing of peaceful protestors for a church front photo-op, right?

You're still defending the guy who threatened to jail his political opponents, right?

You're still defending the guy who's been lying to the nation for years, right?

 

Just want to make sure we're both on the same page.

V Is For Victory, Elections Have Consequences, The Will Of The People And Son...

People should not be afraid of their government, government should be afraid of their people.

This happened this weekend:

And this: 

And this:

my middle finger is a big fan of u trump pic.twitter.com/US4vwyDsKQ

— Furrious The Blue Wolf (@ThatOneBlueWolf) November 8, 2020

And:

I knew we’d be happy but I didn’t realize we’d be spontaneous dance parties in the street happy. What a moment pic.twitter.com/8NsGheybEU

— Sarah Cooper (@sarahcpr) November 8, 2020

P-G Editorial Rebuttal/Fact-check

As we all know by now, yesterday the Post-Gazette posted an abhorrent endorsement of Donald Trump.

You can read it here.

Today, The Pittsburgh Current published a rebuke/fact-check of the P-G abhorrence.

I wrote it.