Showing posts sorted by date for query giuliani. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query giuliani. Sort by relevance Show all posts

July 17, 2026

What He Said, and What He Didn't

There was a prime-time gabfest last night, with the president talking about himself, of course, and about our country and others. The gist of it, after he got past the chest-thumping, was that our elections aren't safe and won't be unless Congress passes the SAVE America Act

I removed the chest-thumping, in the interest of everyone's sanity, and added commentary; you know I can't help myself, and if you didn't want commentary, you wouldn't be here.

But we still have a major challenge that must be urgently addressed, because no country can be great without fair and honest elections. You have to trust your country because, if there can be no trust, there can be no greatness.

And that's very simple — no trust, no greatness. For many years I've called for bold, swift and decisive action to protect the integrity of America's elections. And, of course, he's called the 2020 election rigged zillions of times. In fact, he said even months before the 2020 election that the only way he could lose was if it was rigged; he did lose, so it must have been rigged. And he's said that basically every election where anyone he endorses doesn't win is rigged. They are all rigged; just ask him! Every American deserves to know that, when they cast their vote, that vote will be counted accurately in a system, (and, despite my best efforts, a good number of people still believe that's the case) and that is to make that system secure. One where cheating and interference are not just difficult, but virtually impossible. Unfortunately, the system we have today falls catastrophically short of that standard. That is absolutely not true. Even the Heritage Foundation's data says so. Tonight, I'm announcing the immediate declassification and release of critical intelligence, revealing shocking vulnerabilities in our election infrastructure. 'Shocking vulnerabilities' and verified 'cheating and interference' are vastly different things. 

This evidence shows that the election system we have dangerously exposes and really exposes, like levels never thought possible, to hacking, exploitation, and foreign interference. Just as disturbingly, this vital information has for many years been covered up and hidden from you, the American people — our beautiful, our great American people. I wonder, does that include 'the enemy from within (Dems like Adam Schiff), and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia, and all these countries," the haters and losers, the Dumocrats, and all the other terms he's used to disparage anyone who doesn't agree with him? 

But that all changes right now. The documents we will release starting tonight have been gathered by the White House Government Transparency Task Force, a great group of people, along with the staff of the president's Intelligence Advisory Board, supported by our top intelligence agency chiefs who have all personally reviewed the findings we are presenting this evening and fully confirmed their authenticity.

You can see these documents for yourself at whitehouse.gov, that's whitehouse.gov, go check it out. Our purpose in disclosing this information is not to weaken confidence in elections, but to earn that confidence by confronting vulnerabilities and correcting them very, very quickly, and that's what we're doing. Um, no, that's not what's happening. You're identifying potential vulnerabilities, but you don't address them with your signature solution.

The documents cover five major areas of concern. First, they show that, over a period of years, starting during the 2020 election cycle, the People's Republic of China carried out what is believed to be the largest compromise of election data in history, resulting in China's illicit acquisition of 220 million US voter files. American voter data is readily available for a variety of reasons. 

That information includes names, addresses, phone numbers, political party preferences and other sensitive data that would be needed to register to vote and engage in other nefarious activities, which is exactly what was happening.  No evidence of nefariousness was presented. This data loss presents an unprecedented election security nightmare. The intelligence even shows that China assigned a data exploitation unit specifically to this new project. The information may present an 'election security nightmare,' but it is readily available in most states. And no evidence was presented that a security lapse or breach occured.

Compounding the travesty, the second set of documents we are releasing reveals that members of the Deep State — a very, very famous group of people, in many cases (and I can't WAIT to see who these famous people are! —  in our intelligence agency, worked to actively suppress and downplay information about the extent of China's sinister election meddling, covering it up from both the president and the American people like nobody thought was possible.

US spy agencies began learning about the compromise of voter registration files in 2020, when they discovered that tens of millions of voter data — think of that, tens of millions of voters’ data — in 18 states have been bought, stolen or hacked by China. Yet those responsible for sounding the alarm instead kept the information secret and hidden. Bought, stolen, or hacked - which is it? And if it was obtained illegally, why no threat or warning to President Xi Jinping? Maybe some new tariffs like the ones he's threatened to place on Canada for their border-hopping wildfire smoke?

They did not disclose to me as president or to anyone else. As widely reported at the time, he was notoriously uninterested in briefings and didn't even read his President's Daily Brief. Was this information hidden, or wasn't it on the list of things he liked to hear about? And to the best of our knowledge, they did not inform Congress. In fact, all they kept saying is, this is the most secure election in the history of our country — a standard, very pat line that was divvied out to say. And dozens of audits, performed by Rs and Ds alike, in states red, blue, and purple, have uncovered no significant fraud in the 2020, 2022, or 2024 elections.

The cover-up of this colossal security breach is even more disturbing in light of the additional information showing that China engaged in other election-related activities to undermine my first administration and our 2020 campaign. And at the same time, Russia Russia Russia was trying to influence our election to ensure that Trump won; that wasn't mentioned during his remarks, but it's supported by the evidence.

They did not want — and they just didn't want it. They fought like hell not to have it, Donald Trump to win, and for good reason. As the documents we are releasing show, CIA reporting explicitly stated, and I quote, in mid-2018, the Chinese Communist Party's policy was to leverage all domestic and foreign elements that were opposed to the US president in an effort to reduce the US president's votes and make him resign or prevent his reelection. Is this a good time to mention the US government's efforts to influence elections in other countries, such as sending the Vice President to Hungary to personally urge voters to keep Viktor Orban in office? Or efforts by Rudy Giuliani and others to get Ukrainians to dig up dirt on Joe Biden?

Isn't that nice? Also, in mid-2018, China was working to influence the results of the US midterm elections and later the results of the 2020 presidential election itself. Separately, in mid-2019, the Chinese government's strategy against the United States was focused on undermining domestic confidence in the US president.

They wanted to just make you sound like your president wasn't so hot, when actually your president has done a great job. His approval ratings tell a different story... And they did everything possible to do exactly that. Going on this document says, and this is by the CIA, the strategy included efforts to use Chinese contacts with big US companies to influence US business leaders to turn against the president of the United States of America. It would be hard to imagine this working; he maintained very strong support from business leaders throughout his first term.

The Chinese government sought to identify US journalists who had reported negatively on the US president and pay them large sums of money to write more negative articles about him, as many as they could and they didn't care what they said. The Chinese government wanted the US president to lose the next election. You probably don't know this, but sometimes, I seek an hourglass figure...  While the Chinese may have wanted to see more negative stories about Trump (as if there weren't enough of them flying around already), there's no confirmation they were successful in this alleged effort, just like there's no evidence I've been successful in my mission.

And the reason they wanted me to lose is because they knew I was wise to them. Charged them billions and billions of dollars' worth of tariffs and built the strongest military anywhere in the world. We have the strongest military anywhere in the world. These are exact quotes from the CIA reporting. The name of the person doing the quote is now under review, but it gets even worse.

Raw intelligence obtained by the FBI in 2020, yet buried by rogue bureaucrats, stated that China's activities even included an attempt to manufacture illegal ballots for Joe Biden. Documents show that during this period, dozens of significant CIA and NSA reports about China's election targeting were kept out of the presidential briefing. Raw intelligence, experts will tell you, is notoriously unreliable and often isn't shared until it can be validated.

These were briefings I would get almost every day; everything was kept out that was of importance. One email among intelligence analysts admitted that they had, quote, deliberately massaged the presidential daily briefing to withhold information regarding Chinese activities related to the election. Another official inside the FBI wrote that she was running, quote, a shadow government, unquote, to keep intelligence about China's election meddling from becoming known and to keep it away from the honorable press. This is explained by Fox News, including that "The documents, however, do not establish Trump's broader allegation of a politically motivated conspiracy." Rather, it was a difference of opinion on intelligence matters.

Other officials who witnessed such efforts perceived the motivations to be blatantly political. Recently, we found significant numbers of burn bags information, and this is a group of bags that were used to destroy information, given by President Barack Hussein Obama to be burned, it was supposed to be burned. I have no idea what this even means, other than that three-name guy continues to live rent-free in the FOTUS' head.

These bags were supposed to be at a different level by different people, incinerated and checked, but it never happened. Maybe we got lucky. We believe this was not done on purpose, but rather through gross incompetence of the people that were supposed to burn the bags. But the findings are stunning.

Today, I'm asking the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Justice, the FBI and the CIA to investigate how and why such crucial information was hidden. To fire those involved in the cover up and to file criminal charges, if appropriate, against these people. It would be appropriate to investigate whether any crimes were committed; can we expect that the people in charge of those areas during Trump's first term will be among those investigated? And, of course, we don't have a DNI, and the guy who's been nominated has no intelligence experience. The qualifications of the FBI director are highly suspect as well, but yes, let's give it our best shot.

Yet concealing China's meddling was only the beginning. The third set of documents we are releasing proves that for many years, Americans were blatantly lied to about the security of our election infrastructure, including electronic voting machines and ballot counting systems, dishonest, almost all. Hold please, while I put on my seatbelt for this part: our election infrastructure itself is 'dishonest'?

They're vulnerable and they're easily compromised and people within our government knew that. Tonight, we're publishing a series of previously classified US intelligence community assessments and other reports proving that our government has long known these machines are extremely exposed to attack. As one assessment states, we judge that the United States' adversaries, including at a minimum Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, as well as non-state groups have the capability to compromise US election infrastructure. If that's true, we should certainly try everything we can to limit that ability.

That's unquote but that's some statement, isn't it, made by supposedly great patriots of our country? LOL! The people who support his allegations are "supposedly great patriots of our country?" The document goes on to further state that, quote, we assess that centralized election-related data repositories, such as voter registration databases, poll books, and other official election websites are most vulnerable to exploitation, and adversaries could use this access to these systems to disrupt election processes within the United States of America. Centralized election-related data repositories are bad? Aren't the FOTUS and his minions demanding that states turn over all their voter information to the federal government, which would actually put it in a 'centralized election-related data repository' rather than allowing the states to control their own data? Aren't they threatening to withhold Congressionally apportioned funds from states that don't comply?

Tonight, we're releasing all of those findings and spanning from January 2020 to June 2026. This is a cyber threat aimed at the very heart of our democracy. Many people have questioned whether it could actually be possible to electronically manipulate vote totals or change election results on these terrible machines.

Today, we are releasing documents that show the CIA obtained reporting of a specific plot to do a big number in favor of the corrupt Maduro regime in Venezuela, and that's exactly what happened, conspiring to digitally rig their own country's elections in 2020. And that's what they did. This reporting included precise details about methods to regime develop, to digitally alter vote totals in ways that could not be detected, even with an audit, no matter how deep they went. Reporting suggests Maduro simply ignored what the machines showed and announced totals that differed from those recorded. This is more about a person acting badly than an 'election infrastructure' failure. And we have our own example of this happening right here in the US, right? "I just need to find 11,780 votes," the most memorable line from Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, in which he sought to overturn the state's results.

This intelligence underscores why we must take urgent action to ensure that our own system can never, ever be hacked or compromised like it was in the past. Was it? Where's the evidence? Venezuela is not America (yet, anyway). The fourth set of documents reveals that even when significant evidence of fraud has been detected, it has been buried and covered up. Among the disclosures tonight are FBI files detailing evidence of alleged fraud by a large-scale voter registration operation in Michigan.

In 2020, Michigan State Police raided a Democrat Get Out the Vote Organization, corrupt group in Muskegon, and were so concerned by what they found. They were just so concerned, they couldn't believe it, actually, that they contacted the FBI in Detroit. The documents state that some canvassers admitted to FBI agents that they signed voter registration forms in other people's names, submitted fraudulent registration for people who did not exist, and received gift cards tied to the number of applications that they produced. Fraudulent voter registration is illegal in every state in America. Multiple investigations found no evidence that any fraudulent voter registrations were submitted or that any fraudulent votes were cast.

In other words, it was pay, play and cheat. The FBI agents working on the case believe that crimes were committed, yet the Biden Department of Justice slow-walked the investigation and killed it. Actually, the Trump DOJ killed the investigation in September 2025, finding "no criminal violation or a priority threat to national security." Tonight, I'm asking the FBI director to ensure that the matter is fully investigated and to work with the Department of Justice to prosecute those responsible for any crimes.

Finally, to reveal just how vulnerable our elections continue to be, we are releasing the results of a stunning investigation by the Department of Homeland Security. According to the DHS review, state voter rolls and public records, they identified approximately 278,000 alleged non-citizens who are registered to vote in federal elections. 

Since Democrat states refuse to share their voter files the real number is actually much higher than that. Right - because there are allegations of non-citizens being registered to vote, there must be many more of them, because math... You know, like drug prices being 600%, 800%, or even 1500% lower under the current administration. Yet even this limited analysis found more than a quarter of a million foreigners illegally registered to vote. Put together, these disclosures reveal an election system so broken and so vulnerable that no one can possibly defend it. It is not defensible. Where is the data showing how many of them voted? Where is the proof that these people are all non-citizens?  Those are both important questions, the latter particularly so, because the Department of Homeland Security's SAVE database is inaccurate,

Hundreds of millions of US voter files are in the hands of foreign governments. Our machines and ballot counting systems are exposed to hacking and manipulation and corruption. China and other countries have been trying to meddle in our elections. Evidence of fraud has been buried. Hundreds of thousands of non-citizens and dead people are listed and active on the voter rolls. Repeating these statements doesn't make them true, and the risk of tampering or other vulnerabilities does not mean that those vulnerabilities have been or will be exploited.

And yet we still have elections with no voter ID (this is false; even if voter ID is not required at the polling place, it is required to register, and signature verification is a valid form of ID - and frankly, harder to fake than an ID - just ask an under-age drinker), no proof of citizenship, and tens of millions of ballots floating aimlessly through the mail (Yes, aimlessly being potmarked hours away from the local post office where they're mailed, for example.) As one example of the insanity, California's recent election for mayor of LA and governor, was held on June 2nd, long time ago, but it was just completed a few days ago, on July 10th. Think of that, much more than one month.

Took a month to count the votes. I wonder what they were doing. They counted in-person votes; they recieved over 8,423,000 ballots that were postmarked by Election Day and recieved timely per state law; they validated the signatures on the outside of the ballot with the signature on file BEFORE the ballots were opened; they mailed notices to anyone with a signature mismatch that there was an issue and provided details on how to 'cure' their ballot within ten days; they reviewed everytihng related to the cured ballots, then opened the ones that were attested to as being correct, and counted them. In short, they followed the law, and made sure that every legitimate vote was counted, which is what is supposed to happen. This is worse than any third-world country. There's no third-world country that has elections like we have. Right - they just make stuff up, or demand that people lie for them.

In a rare move, NBC and ABC fake news have both said that they would not cover this speech. They knew what it was about, because of the fact that they don't like the topic, because they know how corrupt our system is and they don't want to reveal it. They and others in the media are part of a plot. Yep - all the third-world leaders claim the press is against them, is an enemy of the people, and is fake news. Which is why the networks you're upset with all streamed the broadcast for anyone who wanted to watch. 

They want to continue this fraud for whatever reason. What? They want to keep it going. They want to protect the radical left. Huh? They can't have a great country um..? and that's true; you can't have a great country without free and fair elections. We have those here in America, and we have laws to prosecute people who try to get around the laws. Fraud like this should mean a revocation of their licenses. "Fraud like this" meaning the fake news you hate but love to criticize, denigrate, lie about, and sue, deciding to stream you rather than broadcast you? How is that fraud?  They use our public multibillion dollar in value airways for absolutely no money. Other than license fees, application fees, purchasing a station fees, and/or the FCC public auction fees... plus the cost of selling their souls to keep on the good side of whichever bully is in charge in DC.

They pay nothing. All we want is honesty in our elections and honesty in reporting. Does that include fact-checking? They pay nothing for multi-billion dollar assets. Great damage has been done to our country. Our elections were left vulnerable to being rigged and stolen, and the trust of the American people was lost. Actually, the American people's trust was stolen... This cannot be allowed to continue. The person who has single-handedly done more damage to American trust in our elections? Donald J. Trump, who has convinced people that the Democrats are so smart they could rig a presidential election but didn't bother to rig any races on the ballot. Donald J. Trump, who, knowingly on a recorded line, asked someone to find him just enough votes to win, and didn't care that he was being recorded. Donald J. Trump, he of the January 6th insurrection, who loved the people that were there, chanting to hang his vice president.

Every American, whether you're a Republican, Democrat, independent or otherwise, should be able to agree that we deserve the most secure, honest, and fair election system anywhere in the world. Secure elections should be a partisan — really, should just, we should be together Democrats, Republicans, independents, everybody, and it should not be a partisan issue. It's not a partisan issue - we all want free and fair elections, and as far as any investigations have shown, for the most part we have them. Every state has laws to deal with various types of election fraud, and people are caught and prosecuted for violations - Democrats and Republicans alike. That is as it should be. And as far as anyone has determined, there is NO evidence of fraud sufficient to influence an election. 

It should cause to unite us, not to divide us. This should be a cause, we should be united, not divided. In light of the brand new and irrefutable information, I have revealed tonight my administration is in the process of notifying the states whose election data was compromised by the People's Republic of China and many others. Again, nothing has shown that the information was compromised, or even that enough information was obtained to allow it to be compromised.

We will be working closely to mitigate any harm and we're taking swift action to ensure that sensitive voter data is better protected so we can never be bought, we can never be hacked, and we can never watch a stolen election again. That does NOT mean that all voter data should be provided to the Federal Government. One person who should know, at least as well as anyone, is the FOTUS, whose tax information was stolen and shared, along with the data of over 405,000 other individual and corporate taxpayers. Also, the voter information of everyone receiving a mail-in ballot certainly should NOT be shared with the US Postal Service, either.

Tomorrow, the Secretary of Homeland Security will hold a briefing to outline his department's recent work confirming cyber vulnerabilities in our electronic voting systems.

They are bad. We're in the process of informing governors, Senators and members of Congress of potential issues in their states. If you look at voting today, it's in such bad shape in so many states, and we are committing to fix it and we're also committing to be working with those states and local jurisdictions to help them fix and patch known technical vulnerabilities before the midterm elections. Oh, the irony! This is the guy who just fired the Election Assistance Commission folks, the leaders of the very federal agency charged with assisting states with election security, after previously getting rid of the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. You can't make this stuff up.

We have very important elections coming up. We want those elections to be honest. I've also ordered DHS to notify every state about noncitizens on their voter rolls and direct them to remove all ineligible voters from the lists immediately. But most importantly, addressing this alleged crisis of election security demands that Congress must pass the SAVE America Act. How easy is that to do, unless you want to cheat. This is an absurd comment.

The only reason you wouldn't do it is you want to cheat because your policies are so bad, and your candidates are so pathetic that you can't get away or can't get elected any other way. Actually, those are the very reasons why a president would demand Texas redraw its Congressional districts off-cycle to gain him five more seats. And it's why other red states jumped on the redistricting bandwagon to curry favor with him. And why blue states foolishly fell for it, too. This landmark bill requires that all voters must show photo voter ID. How simple is that? Could I have your photo, please? Photo voter ID. He knows that is not what the bill asks for, and pretending that's all it is? It's a bald-faced lie. All voters must provide proof of citizenship. 

Are you a citizen of our country, please? And hopefully there will be no corrupt mail-in ballots, which, if you watched California and so many other places, mail-in ballots are inherently corrupt. Again, California ensured that the mailed-in ballots were NOT corrupt. So, you would have no mail-in ballots except for illness, disability, military deployment, or travel if you're going away on business or vacation. And what about you? Which of those reasons applied to your mailed-in vote in Florida's primary?

These reforms are urgently needed to stop the vulnerabilities that I've mentioned. He knows, everyone in DC knows, and anyone that has read the SAVE America Act knows that the bill does NOTHING to address voting machine vulnerabilities, foreign attempts to influence how Americans vote or who our candidates are, attempts to influece the press to report in a specific way about a candidate, individuals who make bad choices to earn bonuses or get gift cards, people who ignore actual vote tallies and use their own made-up numbers, people who try to get others to change vote totals, people who don't include things when they brief their bosses, selling or sharing voter data, or networks that don't put evyerthing the president wants on the air. To all Americans, I ask you to pick up your phone tomorrow, call your Representatives in the House and Senate and demand that they pass the SAVE America Act without delay. Together, we will restore faith and confidence in our country, and we will be bigger, better and stronger than ever before. The bill will NOT restore faith and confidence in our country, or in our elections, 

Thank you. God bless you. God bless our great military. And God bless America. Thank you very much. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO MY COMMENTS.

March 22, 2024

TGIF 3/22/24

I've got short good week/bad week lists for you, in this week that brought us the first day of spring and multiple cold, blustery, non-spring-like days.

It also brought us the start of the NCAA's March Madness madness, including anger over who got selected, and misery as brackets were busted by upsets. We also learned this week of a scandal in the circle of baseball's highest-paid player, and of a second cancer diagnosis in the highest echelon of the British royal family. 

We'll learn more about all of that in the coming days, I'm sure.  In the meantime, let's get to the lists.

The media - yet again - had a bad week.
The disappearance of a white male college student in Nashville garnered tons of breathless national news coverage, including the repeated airing of videos from the night he disappeared. You would have thought each of us - even me, sitting some 850 miles away - was part of his story, part of the search, part of his life. We were not. We are not. We shouldn't be.

Why was his story so important that it commanded so much of the limited national news time? Is it because it fits the narrative of out-of-control crime in our country? I guess it did, at least until this morning, when his body was found - and no foul play was suspected. 

But wait - there's more! News is breaking that NBC has hired Ronna 'I'm So MAGA I Changed My Name' McDaniel, the former head of the Trump National Committee, as a political commentator. 

McDaniel is expected to contribute to both NBC and MSNBC. Her first appearance will be on Sunday on “Meet the Press,” where she will give her first interview since stepping down from the RNC.

I hope you all laughed as hard as I did at "McDaniel is expected to contribute..." Honestly, I couldn't imagine how they could make Meet the Press worse, but a Kristin Welker/Ronna McDaniel interview is certainly a great way to start. Here's what network bigwig Carrie Budoff Brown had to say about the hire. 

It couldn’t be a more important moment to have a voice like Ronna’s on the team. 

And here's Ronna's voice, so you know what you have to look forward to. 

House Republicans - yet again - had a bad week.
Rep. James Comer (R-MAGA Camp), chair of the House Oversight Committee, is now saying that the best way to hold the Biden Crime Family accountable is through criminal referrals, and that he's got more than enough evidence to do that. This comes after Lev Parnas, former Rudy "Too Broke" Giuliani BFF, said he was sent to dig up dirt on Biden in Ukraine, and found none. 

Parnas also accused the GOP of doing Russia's bidding, and he named names, including Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Putin); you may remember he once famously spent our nation's birthday in Moscow. And after, of course, other witnesses have gone through some stuff.

But wait - there's more! Rep. Marjorie Taylor Flamethrower Greene (R-You Kidding Me?) has filed a motion to oust Speaker Rep. Mike Johnson (R-ighteous Indignation). She did that as the House passed the remaining bills to avoid a government shutdown by a vote of 286 - 134; 101 Republicans voted for the package, while 112 of them voted against it. It's "more of a warning" to Johnson, she said. 

I do not wish to inflict pain on our conference and throw the House in chaos, but this is basically a warning and it’s time for us to go through the process, take our time and find a new speaker of the house that will stand with Republicans and our Republican majority instead of standing with the Democrats.

Green doesn't recognize 47% of her own caucus, and apparently Johnson isn't supposed to recognize them either.

Voters in my neck of the woods had a good week. Now, I know that can be said pretty much any time people can vote, but I'm talking about an unusual situation here. Village officials made a decision that would make it much harder for a local business owner to sell his business and retire. Villagers were highly disappointed in the actions of the officials, enough so that another businessman started a write-in campaign against the mayor - and he won.

This is a big deal for the little village where it happened, but it's a big-picture story, too. It shows the power of engagement, the power of fighting for something you believe in, and yes, the power of voting. Hopefully, this will resonate with people who think no one listens, or who think that one or ten or 302 votes don't matter - because they do. 

TGIF, everyone. 

July 13, 2022

Wondering on Wednesday 7/13/22

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

So, we had another January 6th Committee hearing this week. I'd love to know if folks are still watching, or if everyone's over it by now? 

I'm not over it yet - not by a long shot, although I was multi-tasking a bit yesterday and missed the part about the "unhinged" meeting with Sidney Powell, Rudy Giuliani, Mike "The Traitor" Flynn, and Patrick Byrne, the Overstock.com guy -who, according to something I read today, 'overstocked' on meatballs at the meeting. 

After watching replays today, I can't help wondering how much worse things would have been on January 6th if there hadn't have been any adults in the room on December 18th. 

Another thing I can't stop wondering about is if the Committee's going to do anything about the comments from Rep. Debbie Lasko (R- I Didn't Mean to Say I'd Kill My Grandkids). I don't think it was fully explained how the Committee got hold of the tape, but here's what Lasko said "on the eve of January 6th." 
I also asked leadership to come up with a safety plan for members. I'm actually very concerned about this because we have who knows how many hundreds of thousands of people coming here. We have Antifa. We also have, quite honestly, Trump supporters who actually believe that we are going to overturn the election. And when that doesn't happen, most likely will not happen, they are going to go nuts.
First, I'm wondering who Lasko spoke to. If I had to guess, I'd think it was Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyRep. Steve Scalise, and/or  Rep. Elise Stefanik - they're the top three Republican 'leaders' in the House; but what if it was House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, or anyone on her leadership team? 

Second, I'm wondering what response she got from whomever she spoke with, and whether the Committee's spoken with anyone involved in those conversations. 

And finally, I'm definitely wondering about her saying "most likely will not happen." Did she actually think there was a chance all of this nonsense would work??

Much of my wondering is centered on the horrific story about the ten-year-old Ohio girl who had to travel to Indiana to have an abortion because she was a few days too pregnant to get one at home; this was a hot topic  in last week's Sunday School. 

Since the story first hit the headlines, many have suggested it was a fake, something someone made up to get people all riled up for the primaries and the mid-term elections, or just riled up in general. Among the folks saying it was a made-up story? The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal.


Here's a tweet with more information from the editorial. 


Reporters at the National Review questioned it. The Washington Post tried to fact-check it, and failed. 

And none other than Ohio's own Rep. Jim Jordan, who also controls the House Judiciary GOP Twitter account, determined it to be fake. Jordan's comment is below. 


I wonder how shocking it must have been for them to find out that, this morning, a man was charged for raping the little girl? And I wonder, too, what would have happened if the media had identified the girl or found our where she lived? Would they have staked out her home? Attacked any males in the house as potential rapists?  Would they have followed her to Indiana? 

I also find myself wondering if we've become so jaded by things like the Jussie Smollett case, and fake Go Fund Me accounts and all the rest, that the first thought when something horrible is reported is that it's not true? 

And if that's the case, I wonder how we recover from that level of distrust?

What are you wondering about tonight?

July 3, 2022

In Case You Missed It (v96)

It was another slow week for writing here at veritable pastiche. Here's a recap of the three posts that made it out the door.

Nothing really caught my eye in the classroom, so I didn't make you work for Sunday School or Extra Credit. I did, however, tempt you with another chapter in the Journal of Unpopular Opinions about the SCOTUS decision to give the decision on the legality of abortion to the states. And where many people have been posting RBG memes, I posted an article quoting her saying that Roe was the right decision for the wrong reason. It's not a privacy issue, it's an equality issue. 

There's also a lot about it that's discriminatory; I gave some examples, including these:

  • Forcing motherhood on a pregnant woman is discriminatory and unequal, because fatherhood is not being forced on the man. 
  • Forcing parenthood on a pregnant woman is discriminatory and unequal, because parenthood is not forced on any other women (or men). These laws unfairly favor 'pre-born' children over living children who are parentless in homes, shelters, and state-run institutions.
  • Declaring that life begins at fertilization imposes a faith-based decision on all citizens, favors one set of beliefs over all others, and denies pregnant women the right to practice their religion, as guaranteed under the First Amendment. 
The unpopular ones? You can read those in the post. 

I didn't publish again until it was time for Wondering on Wednesday, which was after both Cassidy Hutchinson's in-person testimony before the January 6th Committee, and my home state's gubernatorial primary. 

Here's a bit of wondering on the former, in response to the seeming millions of Trumpworld denizens who've added expertise in all matters judicial to their already-impressive resumes, which include expertise in infectious diseases, immigration, foreign policy, economics, hamberders, golf, taxes, health insurance and more.

Hearsay - or 'Hear-Say' or 'Hear Say' or 'stuff she made up that people didn't say' - you pick - was a big topic in the Interwebs, and it got me wondering.
Hutchinson seemed very clear, to anyone who actually watched the hearings (other than the aforementioned Twitter user, who said no one was watching) about what things she was personally involved in, and what things were told to her by others. 
So, for example, when she said she texted Kevin McCarthy, one could surmise that those text messages were made available to the January 6th CommitteeAnd I wonder why so many people who obviously didn't watch are so dead-certain about the veracity of her testimony...

On the latter, the candidates leading in the polls won, pretty easily, in both the D and R primaries. Which means that Andrew Giuliani, did not win. He did win most of the NYC vote, which is fine - he can go back there and not interrupt me here in that vast expanse called Upstate New York. He did prompt some wondering, though.

Although, now that I think about it, I do sort of wonder how Andrew, son of Rudy (My Back Hurts, but Otherwise I'm Able to Walk and Stuff Like That) Giuliani would be able to withstand the rigors of being a politician. After all, male pols are frequently given a sturdy handshake and countless bicep grips and backslaps. If he's got a glass back like his daddy, he'd be in big trouble, so it's probably good he didn't win.

And, before you know it, I turned 64, it turned July, and it was time to make the TGIF lists. In addition to SCOTUS shenanigans, and insurrection insights, there was some Biden bluster that needed to be added to a list.
President Biden has thrown his support behind a filibuster 'carveout' to codify Roe v Wade. It will take a bigly miracle for this to happen, and the chances of that are probably slim to none at best. First of all, Sens. Joe Manchin (D-Coal in Everyone's Stocking!and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Why Am I Doing This?) are opposed to doing that; second, there's bipartisan disagreement  on how far they should go with abortion legislation, and third, Sen. Pat Leahy (D- The Only Real Democratic Senator from Vermont) is going to miss at least some time as he rehabs from hip surgery, so there clearly aren't the votes.
  • Good week: no one.
  • Bad week: Biden and Leahy, for vastly different reasons, and Chuck Schumer, who can't wrangle his caucus to save his life.

See you later - I've got a couple of drafts I hope to get out of purgatory, and I'll give Sunday School a shot as well. 

June 29, 2022

Wondering on Wednesday 6/29/22


Ready... Set... Wonder!

The wondering is wandering today. 

I wonder why so many people think that a House committee investigation is a trial, and that a hearing room at the Capitol is the same as a courtroom

And why would anyone who managed the House Judiciary Committee GOP cabal's Twitter feed would think that everything Cassidy Hutchinson said yesterday - the entirety of her testimony - was hearsay? I wonder if it's because Rep. Jim (Who's Going to Play Me in Clooney's Documentary?) Jordan is the goofball behind the keyboard?

Hutchinson seemed very clear, to anyone who actually watched the hearings (other than the aforementioned Twitter user, who said no one was watching) about what things she was personally involved in, and what things were told to her by others. 

So, for example, when she said she texted Kevin McCarthy, one could surmise that those text messages were made available to the January 6th CommitteeAnd I wonder why so many people who obviously didn't watch are so dead-certain about the veracity of her testimony...

Happily, I'm able to report that Andrew Giuliani was not successful in his bid to become the Republican nominee for governor of NY, not that I wondered a whole lot about the possibility of him winning the primary. Truth be told, I spent zero time on that. 

Although, now that I think about it, I do sort of wonder how Andrew, son of Rudy (My Back Hurts, but Otherwise I'm Able to Walk and Stuff Like That) Giuliani would be able to withstand the rigors of being a politician. After all, male pols are frequently given a sturdy handshake and countless bicep grips and backslaps. If he's got a glass back like his daddy, he'd be in big trouble, so it's probably good he didn't win.

Incumbent Gov. Kathy Hochul, who took over after the Sonofa Gov's fall from grace last year, easily won the Democratic primary. Hochul won every county in the state, most of them easily, over runner-up Jumaane Williams and Tom Suozzi, who finished a distant third. 

On the Republican side, Rep. Lee Zeldin cruised to victory over Giuliani, 2014 nominee Rob Astorino, and 'turn-around expert' Harry Wilson. I don't think any of the Rs ran a good race, really - and we never heard much at all from Williams and Suozzi. It almost felt like the Rs ran upstate and the Ds ran downstate. 

So, what's the wondering on our election results? Now that the campaign will start in earnest, how bad are things going to get, advertising-wise? Hochul's raised over $34M so far, with a goal of raising $50M-$70M by Election Day. That's a whole lot of money for a whole lot of ads, to go along with a whole lot of bill-signing still to come, I'm sure. And Zeldin? He claims over $11.5M in 'pre-primary' fundraising, so we'll be seeing a lot of him I'm sure, too. He certainly wasn't shy with his ads during the primary, and I don't think that'll change. 

Early voting turnout was "anemic" in New York City, with fewer than 90,000 people taking advantage of the opportunity, out of some 3,600,000 registered voters. Not sure how that amount of apathy will impact what happens in August, or November, but it does make me wonder if we really needed to have several days of early voting in New York.

In New York, R Kelly was sentenced to 30 years in prison for his decades of sexual trafficking and racketeering; he faces additional charges in Illinois and Minnesota. My only wondering here is if any of his victims will ever feel safe and whole again. 

And finally, I'm going to drop a blanket wondering: what the heck's going on with the Supreme Court and their recent decisions, and did anyone really see all of these coming?

What's on your wondering minds tonight?

June 17, 2022

Happy 50th Anniversary, Watergate

Today is the 50th anniversary of Watergate, the scandal that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon

And I can't help drawing comparisons between that crisis and the one in which our most recent former president finds himself knee deep.

 For example, 

  • Richard Nixon had a CREEP - the Committee for the Re-Election of the President; Donald Trump is a creep
  • Nixon's scandal came to light with a break-in at the Watergate Hotel, a building in DC; Trump's came to light with the break-in at the US Capitol, a building in DC. 
  • Nixon dealt with shady characters in support of his winning re-election effort; Trump had Rudy Giuliani, Steven Bannon, and countless others helping him try to steal back an election he lost. 
Let's all raise a glass to the Republican who had the good sense to quit, shall we? 

October 12, 2021

Sunday School 10/10/21: Extra Credit

Your Sunday School this week included interviews with Steve Scalise and Janet Yellen. For your Extra Credit, I've got the mess that was Chuck Todd on Meet the Press talking with former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham, who I hear has written a book.  

Here's Chuck's intro to Grisham.

The White House press secretary is one of the most high-profile jobs in Washington, but you'd be forgiven if you had no idea what Stephanie Grisham looks like. That's because she's the former Trump press secretary who never actually held a press conference.

That's true. Here's a bit of what the WaPo had to say about her tenure.

Unlike her overexposed predecessors, Sean Spicer and Sarah Sanders, Grisham was infamous for being invisible. In her nine months on the job (her tenure lasted from July until her firing on April 7), Grisham never held a White House press briefing. This makes her unique among the roughly 35 people who have held her position. She rarely conducted the smaller informal briefings known as “gaggles” and almost never appeared on TV, unless it was Fox News.

To me, Todd started in the right place: before her book, she had a high-profile job, and for all intents and purposes, didn't do it.  

She has, however, written a book, I'll Take Your Questions Now. - Get it? - What I Saw at the Trump White House. It is a rather chatty account of her time with Team Trump, where she also was chief of staff to Melania Trump, who has responded to Grisham's book this way, quote, "Ms. Grisham is a deceitful and troubled individual who doesn't deserve anyone's trust." So, with that, Stephanie Grisham joins me now. Ms. Grisham, welcome to Meet the Press.

So, maybe we should delve into that first part, the 'not doing her job' part, at least a little? I mean, she's there to answer questions, right? Wouldn't the first question be, "before we get to the book, I've got to ask. Why didn't you ever engage with the press? Wasn't that your primary job, as press secretary?"

Oh, heck no - it's Chuck Todd, after all - so that didn't happen. Here, in order, are the questions he did ask,  and excerpts from her answers.

So, I want to start with you explaining why viewers tonight, today, should trust what you say in response to my questions. Because you lay out in the book, you admit you were, many times in Trump world you're asked to misinform or perhaps lie on behalf of the boss. So, you're doing a tell-all now. Why should we believe you? In short, I don't have anybody to answer for anymore... And I thought to myself, if I'm going to write a book, I want to write something that is just honest and brutal. And, you know, I don't spare myself in there either. 

I would have asked: "You say you don't spare yourself in the book; can you give us an example? And, following up, how does that make us want to trust you now?"

So, I'll just start with some of the things. Do you regret not resigning sooner? You waited until January 6th. After seeing everything you saw for four years, you wait until January 6th, some might argue the day everybody was wanting to run for the hills from Team Trump. Why did you wait so long? ...for about the last six months, I actually tried to resign a couple of times and Mrs. Trump talked me out of it... But absolutely, to answer your question, I do regret it...

I would have asked: "She talked you out of it? Can you give us some insight to those conversations? And, can you share anything you said in your resignation letter?"

When do you believe -- do you believe President Trump thinks he actually lost the election or not? I do think he believes it. That's been part of what has been scaring me as I've been watching from afar... I honestly thought this was a lot of his bluster, which you know, he's good at doing. He was doubling down. He'll never admit to losing, et cetera, et cetera. I thought he was going to just kind of raise some money so he could pay off legal bills, et cetera. But I think now, because his base is reacting to him the way that it is... and very, very few Republicans are refusing to speak up about, you know, his role in January 6th, but also this current attack on democracy with regard to election integrity, I think he is going to run again.

I would have asked: "Is there anyone you think would be able to talk him out of running again? Mrs. Trump, maybe? Is this something that would fall to Jared and Ivanka to do? Or is there no one in his circle who has that kind of influence with him?"

(Referencing his interview with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse just before he talked with Grisham) ...do you have an idea of who was helping sort of fund and back these crazy claims of the president and his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows? Well, certainly, I know, you know, as does the public, that there was Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell and some of those charactersI do know that there were a lot of private meetings in the residence taking place that were perhaps not taking place in the White House where there would be public documents about that... I don't have a specific name. I don't think it was one person. I think there were probably a few.

I would have asked: "Were you involved in or informed about any of those meetings? Can you give us any hint as to who the attendees were - was Mrs. Trump involved, was it administration officials or outsiders, or both? Did Meadows talk to you about keeping the meetings quiet, or give you information for Fox News or any other outlets?"

So, walk me through election night and the day after. There seems to be some evidence that he was accepting what was happening with the results and then something changed. Can you pinpoint it? I can't. I was with Mrs. Trump most of the night, to be honest with you...So, I think he just refused to give up. I mean, it's Donald Trump, right? And he will never admit to being wrong or to losing anything...I think one thing he's gotten really good at or he did get really good at as president is taking advantage of the base and this group of people who are, you know, so desperate for a voice, which I understand and support. But I think they're being taken advantage of now. And I think he knows they'll do whatever he says.

I would have asked: "You say you "understand and support" the people who are so desperate for a voice, but at the same time, you don't think Trump is the right person to help them. What message would you give his supporters? If Trump's not the right guy, who is? Where do they go instead?" 

Did you get taken advantage of by him? You know, it was interesting to me that you sort of admit that you got into that White House and perhaps you wouldn't have gotten there with another campaign. Did he take advantage of you? I think, I don't want to pin that on him. I definitely got very excited to be around this glamorous world of the TrumpsAnd certainly, when I got into the White House, you do get heady with power. I don't know that he took advantage of me in that regard. I think that that was my own weakness there.

I would have asked: "I can't help wondering, would there even be a book if you had only worked for Melania Trump? In hindsight, is there anything you would have done differently? Do you regret working for the administration?"

You know, I've heard from several former Trump staffers, some of whom share your concerns about him, but say that every decision you made was always in the best interest of yourself. Whether it was to stick in order to get a good job in the White House or, now, to do a tell-all when you need to make money. What do you say to that criticism? Well, two things. If there are people who are sharing my same concerns, I wish they would speak up, because looking back, I don't think is what's as important in terms of personalities and who did what and why. But I would disagree with that wholeheartedly. When I was in the White House, I lost a lot of friends and a lot of family. And I think I lost a little bit of my own moral compass.... And now, leaving, you know, yes, I got paid to write a book, but you cannot put a price tag on what is happening to me nowThe right is mad at me, the left is mad at me. My family is getting threats. I'm being smeared. I'm being sued.

I would have asked: "Your family is being threatened? I know it might be difficult, but can you talk about that a little?" 

You said one of the reasons you're speaking out is you hope he doesn't run in 2024. If he does, do you plan to actively work against him? If I'm asked to. If there is anybody who wants me to speak out or talk, yes, I will. I think that, you know, I had a very unique perspective in that I worked for the former president, I worked for Mrs. Trump, and I worked for both of them at the same time. I know the way they think. I know the way they try to distract. And if there's any way I can be helpful, to help decipher some of those movements and what's really going on, I would do that, yes.

I would have asked: "You say 'if you're asked' you'll do it. Can you tell us if you've heard from anyone yet? And are you actively volunteering your assistance to anyone?" 

Do you think, if he's elected again, he'll destroy the democracy? I think he's on a revenge tour right now, right, with the people who voted to impeachment -- impeach him. I think it will be nothing but revenge, retribution, and how he can benefit himself. There will be pardons happening. I think there will be very draconian policies that go way too far. So, I believe, if he is re-elected again, it will be a really, really scary time.

Kind of like a Chuck Todd interview... See you around campus.

April 28, 2021

Wondering on Wednesday 4/28/21


Ready... Set... Wonder!

In no particular order, here's tonight's wondering.

The police bodycam videos in the shooting of Andrew Brown, Jr. in Elizabeth City, NC won't be shared with the public right now, although edited versions will be shared with Brown's family, supplementing the 20 seconds they've already seen. According to judge Jeffery Foster, the media organizations which had requested the video "did not have standing to petition for release, and that the public release could harm the reputation or safety of the deputies depicted in it and affect the state's investigation."  

I wonder then, if releasing the videos would "affect the state's investigation," why is the district attorney releasing details of the investigation himself, to counter comments made by the family's attorney?  

I wonder why they are not allowing all members of the House and Senate to attend the president's address tonight?  I would certainly allow anyone who's been fully vaccinated (meaning, two weeks past their final shot, whether it's a two-shot regimen or the one-shot version).  And, I wonder how they decided who gets to be among the 200 or so who attend? And finally, I wonder, will Fox have a camera glued to Speaker Nancy Pelosi's face, to see what she thinks of Biden's speech?

I wonder, who are the people who particpate in the surveys on Family Feud?

Andrew Giuliani, former Special Assistant Because of His Last Name to Former Guy, was getting all kinds of hot and bothered talking to the press about the search warrants executed at his father Rudy's home and office. Among his comments? "If this can happen to the president's lawyer, this can happen to any of us." I wonder if he realizes how silly he sounds? Honestly, if this can happen to any of us, it can happen to the president's lawyer, too. That's the way it's supposed to work in America. 

California Governor Gavin Newsom will face a recall, barring a miracle that results in the tossing of a whole boatload of signatures on the petition. Among the candidates hoping to replace him?police officer-turned-insurance broker, a familiar sight on billboards, a former adult film star, a senior pastor, and former Olympian and reality TV star. 

There's a former mayor, too - but sadly, not a sonofa former mayor. I'm wondering if we could send them Andrew Giuliani, to keep him out of the race here in NY?

Beyond this, I'm wondering about the Biden speech, and Sen. Tim Scott's response, and the punditry jibberjabber, which we can talk about later.

April 7, 2021

Wondering on Wednesday 4/7/21

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Former Vice President Mike Pence has signed a multi-million-dollar deal to write not one but two books. I'm wondering when the second book begins; maybe it's after all 50 states certified the election, and the guy who occupies The Office of the45th President started trying to rally the troops for the insurrection? I'm also wondering if Trump will offer some kind words for the book jacket? You know, something along the lines of 

Mike? Where's Mike? I heard he wrote a book, probably not as good as my books, and it won't sell as many copies, but he was a nice guy, for the most part. But he could have solved all the problems if he had just done his job and overturned the election. I hope he writes about that part - the worst decision he ever made, and me too.

Rudy "Gee, Your Hair Dye Looks Terrific" Giuliani's son Andrew, has announced he's going to run for governor of New York. And after I stopped laughing - seriously, he has zero qualifications, other than a resemblance to a younger Eric Trump, and a "job" as a "special assistant" to Former Guy - I had to wonder what he's smoking, or what kind of mirror he looks into in the morning that gives him this level of confidence

Outside of anybody named Trump, I think I have the best chance to win and take the state back, and I think there's an opportunity in 2022 with a wounded Democratic candidate, whether it's going to be Gov. [Andrew] Cuomo, whether it's going to be a radical [Attorney General] Letitia James, whether it's going to be a no-name lieutenant governor, I think there's a very, very real chance to win. I believe I can win the race. I think I'm the right candidate, and this is the right time to help change New York State, and we've got a playbook that works.

I wonder, will the NYS GOP disavow Junior G-man's candidacy, right now? Do they have the cannolis to do it, I wonder?

Matt Gaetz? Yeah, I wonder about him. And I wonder about Women for America First, a pro-Former Guy group, who will have Gaetz as a speaker at an event held, of course, at a Trump-owned property. Gaetz, you'll recall, is under federal investigation for alleged child sex trafficking - an investigation started under Snitty Snitty Bill Barr's term as Attorney General. And not for nothing, the women know he's under investigation, but it doesn't matter. And you know what else? The woman behind the group hosting Gaetz this week was behind the rally at the Capitol on January 6th. 

I also wonder about Mitch McConnell, who on Monday told CEOs to stay out of politics, and accused companies of acting like a "woke alternative government" and yes, he threatened them, he did. 

Corporations will invite serious consequences if they become a vehicle for far-left mobs to hijack our country from outside the constitutional order. 

The wondering part was, has he lost his mind? But it's OK - we subsequently learned that he didn't really mean that, he didn't. He thinks corporations should be involved and CEOs should continue donating millions of dollars to Republicans, but he doesn't want them getting involved in, you know, acting like good citizens and stuff. That's woke, and woke is bad. Because the more woke they are, they less money they'll donate to people like Mitch McConnell - and we surely can't have that, can we?

I also wonder about FEMA and its plan to provide up to $9,000 towards funeral expenses to folks who lost a loved one to COVID. I sort of understand wanting to help, but I just wonder if there is a limit to our collective generosity here. And, of course, there are already scammers trying to get in front of this - and that's before applications even get submitted. 

Finally, and I'll take the hit if you think this is premature, since the Derek Chauvin trial is still going on, but I wonder this: would George Floyd have died on that street, next to that patrol car, on that day last May, had Chauvin not had held him down? The answer is no. 

What are you wondering about?