January 19, 2022

Rudy Giuliani SUBPOENAED (Pennsylvania/Mastriano Connection)

We'll start, my friends, with the January 6 Committee subpoena:

Pursuant to the authorities set forth in House Resolution 503 and the rules of the House of Representatives, the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (“Select Committee”) hereby transmits a subpoena that compels you to produce the documents set forth in the accompanying schedule by February 1, 2022, and to appear for a deposition on February 8, 2022.

 The Select Committee is investigating the facts, circumstances, and causes of the January 6th attack and issues relating to the peaceful transfer of power, in order to identify and evaluate lessons learned and to recommend to the House and its relevant committees corrective laws, policies, procedures, rules, or regulations. 

The Select Committee’s investigation has revealed credible evidence that you publicly promoted claims that the 2020 election was stolen and participated in attempts to disrupt or delay the certification of the election results based on your allegations. Between mid-November 2020 and January 26 (and thereafter) you actively promoted claims of election fraud on behalf of former President Trump -

At this point in the text, there's a footnote to a document from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York. It's the court's decision to suspend Rudy Giuliani from practicing law in New York State.

Aren't you curious about why I am going down this route?

Take a look at page 9-10:

Respondent repeatedly stated that in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania more absentee ballots came in during the election than were sent out before the election. The factual “proof” he claimed supported his conclusion was that although Pennsylvania sent out only 1,823,148 absentee ballots before the election, 2,589,242 million absentee 10 ballots were then counted in the election. This factual statement regarding the number of ballots mailed out before the election was simply untrue. The true facts are that 3.08 million absentee ballots were mailed out before the general election, which more than accounted for the over 2.5 million mail-in ballots that were actually tallied. Notwithstanding the true facts, respondent repeatedly advanced false statements that there were 600,000 to 700,000 fabricated mail-in ballots, which were never sent to voters in advance of the election.5 Respondent made these false claims during his November 8, 2020 radio program, Uncovering the Truth with Rudy Giuliani & Dr. Maria Ryan, during a November 25, 2020 meeting of the Republican State Senate Majority Policy Committee in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania [Emphasis added.]

There it is. That would be this meeting organized by Pennsylvania State Senator (and GOP candidate for Pennsylvania Governor) Doug Mastriano: 

At the request of Senator Doug Mastriano (R-Adams/Cumberland/Franklin/York), the Senate Majority Policy Committee is holding a public hearing Wednesday to discuss 2020 election issues and irregularities. The hearing will feature former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Hello Senator Mastriano!. Did you think I wasn't going to look for a connection to you in Rudy's subpoena? 

Your December 25 meeting is clearly referenced in the document. That's a BFD, don't you think?

Anyway, the letter to Giuliani ends with this:

Accordingly, the select committee seeks documents and a deposition regarding these and other matters that are within the scope of the select committee’s inquiry.
So Senator Mastriano: 

  • Are you worried that in his deposition to this congressional committee, the disbarred and discredited Rudy Giuliani will be mentioning you at some point? 
  • Are you worried that he might have to pass on to this committee documents with your name on them?
  • Are you worried that they might want to talk to you about your involvement in Trump's attempted coup?

If you're not worried about the above, don't you think you should be?


January 18, 2022

We Have An Answer! (PA Forged Electoral Certificate Story)

Former Tribune-Review investigative reporter Mike Wereschagin now working in Harrisburg filed this story yesterday at Lancasteronline:

An effort by former President Donald Trump’s campaign legal team to get Republicans in key swing states to send alternate slates of electors to Washington ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, election certification hit a snag in Pennsylvania when GOP leaders here balked, documents and interviews show.

Documents obtained by the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit American Oversight show Trump electors in five swing states signed documents wrongly declaring a Trump victory as they attempted to cast their states’ electoral votes for Trump.

Republican electors in two other states — Pennsylvania and Nevada — hedged the language on their certificates to say they’d cast their votes for Trump only if his election challenges succeeded in the courts.

This was yesterday, Janaury 17.

I had this story on January 13 - 4 days earlier.

Hey Mike! Nice to see you!

But as Mike has far more resources than yours truly, he does have some interesting info on why the PA GOPers hedged the language:

While Trump supporters in five states used identical language outright declaring themselves “the duly elected and qualified electors,” their Pennsylvania counterparts insisted on saying they would only cast their votes for Trump “if, as a result of a final non-appealable court order or other proceeding prescribed by law, we are ultimately recognized as being the duly elected and qualified electors.” Trump electors in New Mexico added similar language.

We were not going to sign unless the language was changed to say ‘if.’ This was in no way, shape or form us trying to go around the election,” said Allegheny County Republican Committee Chairman and Trump elector Sam DeMarco. DeMarco has been among the highest-profile Republicans in the state to push back against false allegations of widespread fraud in the 2020 election made by Trump and his allies. [Emphasis added.]

And this is what I wrote on the 13th:

For some reason [the Pennsylvania GOP electors] felt compelled to give themselves some sort of political cover. Why?

If only to show that they knew how fishy the original text was?

So I guess I was right? The PAGOP "electors" saw that the text that just happened to be used verbatim in five other states was an attempt "to go around the election" as DeMarco remarked?

Nice to get confirmed.

Hey, Mike! Any news on whether they hedged the language waiting for Trump v Broockvar?

Asking for a friend, my friend.

In related news:



 

 


January 17, 2022

January 17

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds."

But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone.

And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.

We cannot turn back.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating: "For Whites Only." We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride,    From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.

And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, and when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!

Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!

[Text from American Rhetoric]

January 16, 2022

A Forged-Certificate Follow-Up

I want to revisit the "forged" electoral certificate I blogged about recently.

I pointed out that other states (Nevada and Wisconsin, for instance) started their documents with this:

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, being the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Wisconsin, do hereby certify the following...
Whereas the document from Pennsylvania started this way:

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, on the understanding that if, as a result of a final non-appealable Court Order or other proceeding prescribed by law, we are ultimately recognized as being the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Pennsylvania, hereby certify the following...[Emphasis added.]

And I wondered why they put in the phrase that offered them some political cover. Was it because they sensed how fishy the original text was?

Then something else occurred to me. The text references a couple of would-be triggers for their elevation to real electors:

  • "a non-appealable Court Order"
  • "other proceeding prescribed by law"

And what would those have been for our fake-electors from Pennsylvania?

Let's start at the end and work our way back.

Was there any legislation working its way through the GOP controlled legislature in Harrisburg? 

The PA House concluded its business on November 20, 2020 and was scheduled to reconvene on January 24, 2021.

The PA Senate also concluded its business on November 20, 2020 but was scheduled to reconvene (unless called back early by the Senate Pres, Pro Temp) on January 14, 2020.

While there was legislation proposed in each chamber in the intervening days, none of it had anything to do with 2020 election, as far as I could tell.

So it looks like there was little, if any, legislative relief from Harrisburg to trigger these fake-electors into being real electors. 

Please check my work and correct me if I am mistaken. 

How about court cases?

Well, one would think that a "non-appealable Court Order" would have to come from a non-appealable court - namely the US Supreme Court. So what was bubbling up at the time (remember they drafted this on December 14, 2020) on its way, presumably, to SCOTUS?

One might think it was Kelly v Pennsylvania - the lawsuit filed to declare the mail-in balloting outlined in Act 77 to be unconstitutional. However The Washington Post reported, on December 8, 2020, that:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday denied a last-minute attempt by President Trump’s allies to overturn the election results in Pennsylvania, a blow to the president’s continuing efforts to reverse his loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

The court’s brief order denying a requested injunction provided no reasoning, nor did it note any dissenting votes. It was the first request to delay or overturn the results of last month’s presidential election to reach the court, and it appears that Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s latest nominee, took part in the case.

This was six days before those fake electors in Pennsylvania signed that fake electoral certification.

Perhaps it was Texas v Pennsylvania, filed on December 8. As reported by The Hill:

Texas announced on Tuesday that it would be filing a lawsuit in the Supreme Court against four battleground states in an effort to halt presidential electors from finalizing President-elect Joe Biden's victory.

Texas argued that electors from Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin should not be allowed to cast their votes in part because those states unconstitutionally changed their voting procedures during the coronavirus pandemic to allow for increased mail-in ballots. Biden won all four states.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) alleges that the new voting processes in the battleground states skewed the presidential election results and asked the Supreme Court to delay Monday's deadline for the Electoral College to make Biden's victory official.

"Their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election," Paxton said in a statement. "We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error.”

However, on December 11:

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a bid launched by Texas and backed by President Donald Trump that sought to undo President-elect Joe Biden’s wins in the key swing states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The ruling dealt a death blow to Trump’s desperate and unsuccessful efforts to reverse Biden’s projected Electoral College victory.

This was three days before the fake certificate was signed.

So what could they have been thinking of?

Well, there's Trump v Broockvar - filed on December 20, only six days after the signing of the fake electoral certificates.

This is how The Philadelphia Inquirer characterized the suit:

[I]t challenges three Pennsylvania Supreme Court decisions on mail ballots and says the state court overstepped its constitutional role. Those opinions, which resolved multiple cases, prohibited counties from comparing mail ballot signatures to those on file; said campaigns and political parties can’t challenge ballots as they are being processed and counted; allowed limitations on observers to the vote count in Philadelphia; and allowed ballots to count even if voters had forgotten to fill out the address or date on the envelope.

In making those decisions, the campaign argues, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court violated the Constitution by taking the state legislature’s power to determine how federal elections are run, similar to an existing argument Pennsylvania Republicans are making in a separate set of challenges. The campaign also says the state court violated the Constitution’s due process clause and equal protection guarantees.

“Collectively, these three decisions resulted in counting approximately 2.6 million mail ballots in violation of the law as enacted by the Pennsylvania Legislature,” reads the petition for a writ of certiorari, the document which asks the Supreme Court to take up the case. If the state Supreme Court erred, the campaign said, that would mean “over 110,000 invalid ballots were illegally counted — more than enough to have affected the outcome of the election, where the margin between the two principal candidates for President currently stands at 80,558.”

So is this it? If SCOTUS ruled in favor of Trump that case, was that the trigger making the fake electors real-life honest-to-goodness true-blue Trump electors? 

In reality however, The Supremes were not cooperative:

The latest Trump campaign appeal to the Supreme Court won't see any action from the justices until after the inauguration.

The justices this week set a reply deadline for Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and the other respondents named in the case of Jan. 22. The campaign had asked for the Supreme Court to order those on the other side of the litigation to respond by Wednesday and have reply briefs from the Trump campaign submitted by Thursday. It also asked the court to rule by Jan. 6. But the court did not oblige.

This means that by the time Boockvar and the others the Trump campaign is seeking to take to the Supreme Court even respond to the petition, President-elect Joe Biden will already be sworn in.

One thing to point out about Trump v Broockvar. It was written (or co-written to be more precise) by John Eastman, counsel for the Trump Campaign who also wrote the Emerson Memo. CNN described it thusly:

John Eastman, a conservative lawyer working with then-President Donald Trump's legal team, outlined in a two-page memo a scheme to try to persuade then-Vice President Mike Pence to subvert the Constitution and throw out the 2020 election results on January 6.

The memo contains a six-part scenario for Trump's overthrow of the Constitution. 

Some highlights:

3. At the end, [VP Pence] announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States. That means the total number of “electors appointed” – the language of the 12th Amendment -- is 454. This reading of the 12th Amendment has also been advanced by Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe (here). A “majority of the electors appointed” would therefore be 228. There are at this point 232 votes for Trump, 222 votes for Biden. Pence then gavels President Trump as re-elected. 

4. Howls, of course, from the Democrats, who now claim, contrary to Tribe’s prior position, that 270 is required. So Pence says, fine. Pursuant to the 12th Amendment, no candidate has achieved the necessary majority. That sends the matter to the House, where the “the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote . . . .” Republicans currently control 26 of the state delegations, the bare majority needed to win that vote. President Trump is re-elected there as well.

The memo was presented to VP Pence on January 4 (twenty-one days after the Pennsylvania fake certificate was signed) but the plan seems to have been put in place.

However again I have to ask, why did the Pennsylvania fake-electors insert the phrase that both gave them political cover and also seemed to very closely align to John Eastman's scenario to overturn Biden's win?
 
Did they know the substance of Trump v Broockvar before it was filed? Were they privy to the substance of Eastman's memo 3 weeks before it was presented to the Veep? How much of the big picture did they know? 

Can someone ask them? Please?

January 14, 2022

A Question For PA State Senator Doug Mastriano

Senator;

Now that Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes has been indicted on a number of charges, including seditious conspiracy, I was wondering if you were free for a chat about that "Jericho March" you attended on December 12, 2020.

You were listed on the Jericho March press release as among the:

Political Leaders, Business Leaders, and Activists

who would be there. 

BTW, also on that list were:

RightwingWatch has this about the event:

At the Dec. 12 Jericho March rally emceed by Metaxas—at which Oath Keepers’ Stewart Rhodes threatened a bloody civil war if Trump did not remain in power—Mastriano told rallygoers not to be discouraged in spite of the “gut shot” of the night before, presumably a reference to the Supreme Court rejecting a case brought by the state of Texas contesting election results in battleground states won by Biden. Mastriano told the crowd that things had looked pretty bad in America in 1776, but God had intervened and handed George Washington victory. “This is our day,” he told rallygoers. “This is our hour. Let’s stand together. We don’t hang together, we’ll hang separately.”

So were you there when the now-indicted for Seditious Conspiracy Stewart Rhodes threatened a "bloody civil war" at that rally?

And if you were there at that point, what did you do to "obey and defend" The Constitution - as your oath of office demands

And are you worried that you might be subpoenaed?

 

January 13, 2022

Forged Certificates For Trump! (Pennsylvania Edition)

Steeped in political intrigue, this story has been brewing for a couple of days.

We'll start here:

American Oversight has obtained copies of phony electoral vote certificates from seven states that were submitted to Congress as part of the failed attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

The fake electoral certificates were assembled by groups of Trump supporters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin who sought to replace the valid presidential electors from their state — who had been chosen by voters in free and fair elections — with bogus slates of pro-Trump electors.

None of the certificates contains any indication that they list illegitimate slates of electors not chosen by those states’ voters. [Emphasis added.]

You can find the "certificates" from Pennsylvania here (pg 32-43). We'll get to them in a minute.

Politico touched on this a few days ago:

The public focus of Congress’ Jan. 6 investigation, so far, is what happened in Washington, D.C. Behind the scenes, the probe’s state-level work is kicking into overdrive.

The House committee investigating the Capitol attack has gathered thousands of records from state officials and interviewed a slate of witnesses as it attempts to retrace former President Donald Trump's attempts to subvert the 2020 election, particularly in four key states that swung the presidency to Joe Biden. They're getting ready to take their work public, possibly as soon as the spring.

And:

The select panel asked states for any scrap of evidence to justify allegations of election fraud that Trump baselessly promoted, focusing much of its efforts on officials in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Michigan. Those states found virtually no evidence of fraud, according to Thompson. [Emphasis added.]

And here's the BFD:

As Trump's team pushed its discredited voter fraud narrative, the National Archives received forged certificates of ascertainment declaring him and then-Vice President Mike Pence the winners of both Michigan and Arizona and their electors after the 2020 election. Public records requests show the secretaries of state for those states sent those certificates to the Jan. 6 panel, along with correspondence between the National Archives and state officials about the documents. 
Rachel Maddow had some visuals:

Here's where things get interesting-er. Here's the text from Wisconsin's faked certificate (pg 45):
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, being the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Wisconsin, do hereby certify the following...

And Nevada's (pg 28):

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, being the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Nevada, do hereby certify the following...

There's a word that linguists use to describe the relationship between those to groups of words: identity. This is at the heart of Maddow's (undoubtedly correct) assertion that the forged documents from those state could not be coincidental. Where did the original text come from?

Now let's look at Pennsylvania's:

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, on the understanding that if, as a result of a final non-appealable Court Order or other proceeding prescribed by law, we are ultimately recognized as being the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Pennsylvania, hereby certify the following...

Look at what they added: 

...on the understanding that if, as a result of a final non-appealable Court Order or other proceeding prescribed by law, we are ultimately recognized as...

Everything else is exactly the same. For some reason they felt compelled to give themselves some sort of political cover. Why?

If only to show that they knew how fishy the original text was?

But they finessed the forgery sent it in anyway.

What does that tell you?

I'm wondering of Pennsylvania's own players in the Trump mob coup (Representative Scott Perry and State Senator Doug Mastriano) have any comment on these forgeries.

January 12, 2022

Wendy Bell Is Getting The UK Numbers Wrong! Again!

Take a look at her latest BullShit Board:

First off, take a look at Wendy's sources:

  • Infowars
  • Daily Expose

The first is the online latrine of Alex Jones. This is the same Alex Jones who had to apologize for pushing the QAnon-linked Pizzagate story. This is the same Alex Jones from this story in the NYTimes:

A state court in Connecticut granted a sweeping victory to the families of eight people killed in a 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., who had sued the far-right broadcaster and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and his Infowars media outlet for defamation.

The judge ruled on Monday that because Mr. Jones had refused to turn over documents ordered by the courts, including financial records, he was liable by default. The decision, combined with previous rulings in Texas in late September, means Mr. Jones has lost all the defamation lawsuits filed against him by the families of 10 victims.

This is how the factcheckers at Logically.ai view the Daily Expose:

The Daily Expose is a U.K.-focused conspiracy site created in November of last year, and since its establishment, it has promoted a standard portfolio of COVID-denialist, anti-vaxxer, and Great Reset myths framed as breaking news.

And:

Unusually for a conspiracy site, The Daily Expose produces original content several times per day, rather than resharing memes or articles from elsewhere. On its “about” page, it claims to use only official documents from government or scientific sources to write its stories. The writers often distort or misinterpret the information within the snapshots of the documents they use to push a number of conspiratorial narratives. For instance, The Daily Expose has claimed that vaccines were approved without any sort of safety checks and that vaccines are causing mass death. 

These are Wendy Bell's sources for this medical information.  Wendy, you were once an award winning journalist, right? Don't they teach, somewhere in Journalism school, about assessing the credibility of your sources? 

Did you forget all that or just decide it wasn't for you?

Maybe you did and for you Inforwars is credible. How did Sandy Hook turn out for Alex?

In any event, this is not the first time Wendy's played fast and loose with the UK fatality numbers.

Only 7 weeks or so ago Wendy danced this same denialist dance.

The story wasn't true then and it isn't true now - for the same reason.

I even linked back then to a page explaining your error, Wendy. Did you see it? Did you even bother to do any real research on this?

I suppose not.

So why then, Wendy Bell, are you pushing medical misinformation as if it's accurate?

By convincing people that the vaccines aren't safe, aren't effective, you're putting their lives at risk. It's as simple as that, Wendy (and Brock - you're just as guilty).

On the other hand, I'm wondering if you saw this this in The Washington Post:

In a sweeping speech on the pandemic and other global issues, Pope Francis on Monday called for widespread vaccination in all countries and suggested the global coronavirus response was being complicated by “baseless information or poorly documented facts.”

“Vaccines are not a magical means of healing,” Francis said, directly addressing vaccine hesitancy as the omicron variant surges. “Yet surely they represent, in addition to other treatments that need to be developed, the most reasonable solution for the prevention of the disease.”

Countries that have widely used vaccines, the pope noted, have seen a reduction in severe cases.

“It is therefore important to continue the effort to immunize the general population as much as possible,” Francis said.

Yea, I suppose not.

Wendy Bell, the Angel of Death.

January 11, 2022

When Do We Start Worrying About Wendy Bell's Mental Health (Part 3?)

Look at how much "air time" Wendy Bell spent on an extended Ranch Dressing metaphor:

Ranch Dressing? Really?

When do we start worrying about Wendy Bell's mental health?

January 10, 2022

Pennsylvania State Senator Doug Mastriano Announces For Governor!

Look how many people where there!

And look how many are masked!

Hey, look who was there!

Um, isn't that Wendy Bell and her husband Dr. Joe O'Toole?

Is there any verifying video of Dr. Joe being by Wendy's side at this Mastriano superspreader event?

Yes, there is:

Praising Doug Mastriano's honesty is a stretch, don't you think, Dr Joe? I mean there's this:

Internet sleuths have unearthed video from the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol that appears to show Pennsylvania State Sen. Doug Mastriano was much closer to clashes with police than earlier statements about his whereabouts that day indicated. 

And:

After photos emerged of Mastriano posing on Capitol grounds with former State Rep. Rick Saccone not long before the breach, the senator was quick to state that he had personally steered clear of police barricades and left soon afterward.

“When it was apparent that this was no longer a peaceful protest, my wife and I left the area and made our way out of the area,” Mastriano said. “At no point did we enter the Capitol building, walk on the Capitol steps, or go beyond police lines.” 

And:

Yet over the weekend, individuals using the hashtag “#SeditionHunters,” which has been used to crowdsource information about the riot from social media and many hours of streamed video, uncovered screenshots that appear to show Mastriano much closer to the action.

In one, he is visible standing on the Capitol lawn with his wife. In another, Mastriano appears poised to stroll past police barricades as rioters push past them. 

Um, doesn't this mean that Doug Mastriano lied?

Didn't Doug also take an oath to "obey and defend" The Constitution? How do you call him "honest" when he, in violation of that oath actively participated in Trump's attempts to overturn the election?  

And Dr O'Toole, does UPMC know that you were there, maskless, at what certainly looks like a Covid superspreader event?

So who else was there?

The York Daily Record has some info:

Mastriano is part of a cadre of military men who have worked to convince Americans the 2020 presidential election was fraudulent. He was flanked at his Saturday announcement by former Army Gen. Michael Flynn, who peddled unproven conspiracy theories that voting machines were hacked by the Chinese government to make Trump lose. Jenna Ellis, a Trump attorney who worked to overturn election results, also appeared with Mastriano.

 That would be one-time QAnon supporter Mike Flynn who admitted to lying to the FBI. And I say "one-time QAnon supporter" because:

Michael Flynn, who once filmed his family at a July 4 barbecue saying the QAnon oath, “Where we go one, we go all,” said in private that the Q conspiracy theory was “total nonsense” and a “disinformation campaign created by the left.”

In a recording of a phone call purportedly between Trump lawyer Lin Wood and Flynn released late Saturday night, Trump’s disgraced former national security advisor said of QAnon, “I think it’s a disinformation campaign that the CIA created. That’s what I believe. Now, I don’t know that for a fact, but that’s what I think it is. I think it’s a disinformation campaign.”

Did everyone at that Mastriano Superspreader event know that Mike Flynn thinks that QAnon is nonsense?

Finally there's this:

If you needed a refresher in what Everett Stern said about the Patriot Caucus, go here.

If you needed an update on all the "cadre of military men" involved with the Trump-coup go here

But one point to reiterate: Does the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) know that one of their doctors (cardiologist Joe O'Toole, MD) was at what looks like a huge (and thus quite dangerous) indoor Covid superspreader event? Do the other doctors and nurses and various aides who work along side him know?

Just asking.

January 8, 2022

Wendy Bell's BS Continues (Yes, I have To Keep Correcting Wendy Bell's Voter Fraud Lies)

We have a lot of material to cover today so let's get on with it.

This was the top of Wendy Bell's BS board yesterday:

The funny thing is that Wendy gets this close getting it right about the Trump plan. If only she'd replaced the word "fraud" with "security" she'd be absolutely 100% correct.

I can't believe I still have to write this but the "false narrative" here is that the election was anything but free and fair.

Who says so?

The Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council Executive Committee for starters. They released a statement on November 12, 2020 (when Trump was still legally occupying the Oval Office. This was a committee in his administration) that started with:

The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history.

The statement goes on to say how, at that point, each states' election officials are "reviewing and double checking the entire process prior to finalizing the result."

Down the page a bit they say: 

There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised. [Bolding in original.]

This was Trump's own Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

Then there was this from Trump's own Attorney General, William Barr a few days later on December 1, 2020:

Disputing President Donald Trump’s persistent, baseless claims, Attorney General William Barr declared Tuesday the U.S. Justice Department has uncovered no evidence of widespread voter fraud that could change the outcome of the 2020 election.

Barr’s comments, in an interview with the The Associated Press, contradict the concerted effort by Trump, his boss, to subvert the results of last month’s voting and block President-elect Joe Biden from taking his place in the White House.

Barr told the AP that U.S. attorneys and FBI agents have been working to follow up specific complaints and information they’ve received, but “to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.”

In another interview he said:

“My attitude was: It was put-up or shut-up time,” Barr told me. “If there was evidence of fraud, I had no motive to suppress it. But my suspicion all the way along was that there was nothing there. It was all bullshit.”

From that same Atlantic article, there was this:

Barr also looked into allegations that voting machines across the country were rigged to switch Trump votes to Biden votes. He received two briefings from cybersecurity experts at the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI. “We realized from the beginning it was just bullshit,” Barr told me, noting that even if the machines somehow changed the count, it would show up when they were recounted by hand. “It’s a counting machine, and they save everything that was counted. So you just reconcile the two. There had been no discrepancy reported anywhere, and I’m still not aware of any discrepancy.”

 Again, this was Trump's own Attorney General.

Then there were the court cases. For example this one in Pennsylvania. Judge Matthew Brann (an Obama-appointed Federalist Society type of Republican) wrote in Donald Trump for President v Kathy Brockvar:

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.

No compelling legal arguments and (more importantly for this blog post) no factual proof of rampant corruption.

Then there's this from The NYTimes. (Published November 10, 2020):

The New York Times contacted the offices of the top election officials in every state [between 11/9 and 11/10] to ask whether they suspected or had evidence of illegal voting. Officials in 45 states responded directly to The Times. For four of the remaining states, The Times spoke to other statewide officials or found public comments from secretaries of state; none reported any major voting issues.

Statewide officials in Texas did not respond to repeated inquiries. But a spokeswoman for the top elections official in Harris County, the largest county in Texas with a population greater than many states, said that there were only a few minor issues and that “we had a very seamless election.”

There's much more evidence like this, Wendy. I've laid out evidence from Trump's own IC, his own AG, and a GOP Judge.

Where's your evidence of "obvious voter fraud" Wendy?

There isn't any.

You got bupkes. You know that, right?

Here, let me fix your BS for you:

There. That's better.

That is the plan, Wendy. Isn't it?

January 7, 2022

President Joe Biden Speaks To The Nation On The Anniversary of January 6.

The White House has the transcript.

Some highlights:

For the first time in our history, a president had not just lost an election, he tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power as a violent mob breached the Capitol.

But they failed.  They failed.

And on this day of remembrance, we must make sure that such an attack never, never happens again.

And:

And here is the truth: The former president of the United States of America has created and spread a web of lies about the 2020 election.  He’s done so because he values power over principle, because he sees his own interests as more important than his country’s interests and America’s interests, and because his bruised ego matters more to him than our democracy or our Constitution.

He can’t accept he lost, even though that’s what 93 United States senators, his own Attorney General, his own Vice President, governors and state officials in every battleground state have all said: He lost.

That’s what 81 million of you did as you voted for a new way forward.

He has done what no president in American history — the history of this country — has ever, ever done: He refused to accept the results of an election and the will of the American people.

Truth.

January 6, 2022

It Was One Year Ago, Today (Trump's Coup Attempt)

We'll start here:

And the transcript from ABC News:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Is his failure to make that statement criminal negligence?

CHENEY: You know, I think that there are a number of -- as the chairman said, potential criminal statutes at issue here, but I think that there’s absolutely no question that it was a dereliction of duty. And I think one of the things the committee needs to look at is we’re looking at a legislative purpose is whether we need enhanced penalties for that kind of dereliction of duty.

But I think it's also important for the American people to understand how dangerous Donald Trump was. We know as he was sitting there in the dining room next to the Oval Office, members of his staff were pleading with him to go on television, to tell people to stop. We know Leader McCarthy was pleading with him to do that.

We know members of his family, we know his daughter. We have firsthand testimony that his daughter Ivanka went in at least twice to ask him to please stop this violence.

Any man who would not do so, any man who would provoke a violent assault on the Capitol to stop the counting of electoral votes, any man who would watch television as police officers were being beaten, as his supporters were invading the Capitol of the United States, is clearly unfit for future office, clearly can never be anywhere near the Oval Office ever again.

It was an attempted coup and these are some of the local insurgents (by way of the Insurrection Index): 

It was an attempted coup one year ago today.

Investigate the attempted coup, investiate those who planned the attempted coup, those who funded the attempted coup, and anyone else who participated in anyway in the attempted coup.

If they broke the law, prosecute them for treason. 

If they currently hold public office, they are unfit for their current positions and should never ever be allowed anywhere near public office ever again.

They are traitors.

January 5, 2022

It Was A Coup Attempt. And Rep Perry And PA State Sen. Mastriano Were Involved

Here:


And here:


What Peter Navarro described was a coup. 

Representative Scott Perry has taken this oath  on the first new day of each Congress:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

He's done this each odd-numbered year since 2013.

Pennsylvania State Senator Doug Mastriano took this oath when he assumed office in 2019:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth, and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity.
And yet, as we know, each was mentioned in that DOJ phone call and each was named in the Senate Report urging House investigators looking into their spreading of 2020 election misinformation.

In the report itself there's this:

Mastriano’s letter raised a litany of false and debunked claims of widespread election fraud in Pennsylvania, which Mastriano had previously aired at a November 25, 2020 “hearing” at a hotel in Gettysburg featuring Trump campaign lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis and a phone call from Trump himself. Mastriano would later assume a lead role in the “Stop the Steal” movement, spending thousands of dollars from his campaign account to charter buses to Washington for Trump’s January 6, 2021 “Save America Rally.” He and his wife took part in the January 6 insurrection, with video footage confirming that they passed through breached barricades and police lines at the U.S. Capitol. To date, no footage has emerged showing Mastriano in the Capitol itself, but his presence on the Capitol grounds and his involvement in funding travel to Washington have prompted calls for his resignation. (p. 26)
Then there was that Trump/DOJ phone call.

Scott and Mastriano were a big part of spreading the 2020 election fraud lie that the mob that stormed The Capitol believed.

Doug even watched the storming of The Capitol from the Capitol grounds (and lied about it later).

It was a coup - Trump's attempted coup - and they're involved. They took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Each man broke their oath.

Investigate them and if necessary prosecute.

January 4, 2022

Meanwhile, Outside

From the scientists at NOAA:

The global average temperature over the land and ocean surfaces for November 2021 was 0.91°C (1.64°F) above the 20th century average of 12.9°C (55.2°F), the fourth highest for November since global temperature records began in 1880. The 10 warmest Novembers have occurred since 2004. November 2021 also marks the 45th consecutive November and the 443rd consecutive month with temperatures, at least nominally, above the 20th century average.

And now the chart:


This is still happening outside.

The science says so.

January 6 Is Coming Round Again - A Reminder

Today is January 4, 2022. That's only a couple of days away from the one-year anniversary of Trump's coup attempt.

There are a few things we should keep in mind as we revisit that day.

Like what?

Like this from The Philadelphia Inquirer:

An investigation by U.S. Senate Democrats has singled out two Pennsylvania Republicans — U.S. Rep. Scott Perry and state Sen. Doug Mastriano — as key figures who used false and debunked theories to pressure the country’s top law enforcement officials to investigate the state’s 2020 presidential election results.

A report on its findings urges House investigators to look more deeply into what role Perry and Mastriano may have played in fomenting the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. It names them as two of three key allies of former President Donald Trump who aided his efforts to subvert the election results and have “notable” connections to the insurrection.

“These ties warrant further investigation to better place Trump’s efforts to enlist [the Department of Justice] in his efforts to overturn the presidential election in context with the January 6 insurrection,” says the 394-page report released Thursday by Democrats on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.

Or this from Politico

A Senate Democratic report released Thursday places Rep. Scott Perry at the center of efforts to help former President Donald Trump overturn the 2020 election results, urging other congressional investigators to further probe his involvement in the runup to the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Or this from CNN:

Pennsylvania state Sen. Doug Mastriano went out of his way to help advance former President Donald Trump's election lies: He spearheaded a "hearing" at a hotel in Gettysburg a few weeks after the 2020 election, where Trump and his lawyer Rudy Giuliani made false claims about election fraud. He chartered buses to ferry his supporters to Washington on January 6. And he was briefly in charge of the Pennsylvania state Senate's partisan "audit" of the 2020 election.

Now Mastriano's role behind the scenes helping Trump try to overturn his loss to Joe Biden is under renewed scrutiny after a Democrat-led Senate Judiciary report released last week revealed his correspondence with the Justice Department spreading debunked claims of fraud. Mastriano is one of three under-the-radar figures the report singles out for further investigation for their efforts helping Trump try to subvert the election.
 
Rep. Scott Perry, a Pennsylvania Republican, introduced Trump to a top DOJ official who was open to election conspiracy theories. Attorney Cleta Mitchell helped Trump try to convince Georgia's secretary of state to "find" enough votes for him to win. And Mastriano pushed his fraud claims to the No. 2 Justice official while Trump was trying to convince then-acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen to publicly say there was fraud in the election, according to the report.

And this from Huffingtonpost

A Republican state senator who was at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 appears in videos and images that contradict his claims that he never breached police lines and left the area before violence broke out.

Pennsylvania state Sen. Doug Mastriano, whose campaign spent thousands on buses to ferry supporters to D.C. for the rally that led to the attack, said after the riot that he did not enter the Capitol, walk on its steps or go beyond police lines; and that he left the area with his wife “when it was apparent that this was no longer a peaceful protest.” He released a statement at the time condemning the violence and calling for those who broke the law to be prosecuted.

But in videos analyzed by members of the online “Sedition Hunters” community and posted on social media over the weekend, Mastriano and his wife appeared to be in a crowd as it breached a police line. Mastriano was wearing one of his campaign hats and a dark-green scarf on the day.

The video shows people moving forward as a man picks up and throws away the police barricades. Another image shows the couple on the northwest lawn.

Pennsylvania State Senator Doug Mastriano and Congressman Scott Perry are, in different but overlapping ways, involved in the Trump coup.

Investigate and, if necessary, prosecute their actions.

January 3, 2022

I Wonder If PA State Senator Doug Mastriano Is Getting Nervous (Maybe Someone Should Ask Him?)

I mean, look at this from ABC News:

They’ve interviewed more than 300 witnesses, collected tens of thousands of documents and traveled around the country to talk to election officials who were pressured by Donald Trump.

Now, after six months of intense work, the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection is preparing to go public.

In the coming months, members of the panel will start to reveal their findings against the backdrop of the former president and his allies’ persistent efforts to whitewash the riots and reject suggestions that he helped instigate them.
So, Senator, are you worried that you might be mentioned when the committee starts to reveal its findings?

You were there outside The Capitol building during at the insurrection, weren't you?

Yes, Senator, you were.

Donald Trump mentioned you specifically while trying to pressure the DOJ to overturn the election he lost during that now-infamous phone call, isn't that right?

Yes Senator, he did.

ABC says that the committee is planning on public hearings and:

In the hearings, which could start in the coming weeks, the committee wants to “bring the people who conducted the elections to Washington and tell their story,” said the panel’s chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. Their testimony, he said, will further debunk Trump’s claims of election fraud.

The committee has interviewed several election officials in battleground states, including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania, about Trump’s pressure campaign. In some cases, staff have traveled to those states to gather more information.

Senator, what do you think the chances are that some election official from Pennsylvania (where you're a State Senator and where you've been shown to be a part of Trump's pressure campaign) is going to mention you by name?

I'm thinking the chances are pretty good.

Are you nervous that your name will come up in a public hearing investigating Trump's attempted coup?

Didn't Steve Bannon (who's under criminal indictment for Contempt of Congress) declare in public that the effort to invalidate Biden's win start at the Gettysburg conference you hosted?

Yes Senator, he did.

Again, doncha think your name will come up in one or more of these public discussions?

Again, I'm thinking the chances are pretty good.

Then there's this from ABC:

The panel also is focusing on the preparations for the Jan. 6 rally near the White House where Trump told his supporters to “fight like hell” — and how the rioters may have planned to block the electoral count if they had been able to get their hands on the electoral ballots.

They need to amplify to the public, Thompson said, “that it was an organized effort to change the outcome of the election by bringing people to Washington ... and ultimately if all else failed, weaponize the people who came by sending them to the Capitol.”

Weren't you on the list of "Invited Speakers and Special Guests" for that rally?

Yes Senator, you were.

Didn't you charter a number of buses to bring Trump supporters to that rally as well?

Yes Senator, you did.

Senator, how deeply involved are you in Donald Trump's attempted coup?

Considering how the January 6 Committee is going public soon with hearings/reports, I am guessing we'll find out pretty soon.