Kansas Crimson

jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:09 pm Lol. Your move, rubes.

twocoach wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:23 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:09 pm Lol. Your move, rubes.

Think of the nationwide health advantages if we could get all of the alcohol, tobacco and fast food chains to do ads with people that Trump Humpers don't like.

During an interview on Fox News, host Maria Bartiromo asked Comer about evidence he had of Biden's alleged corruption.

"You have spoken with whistleblowers," she noted. "You also spoke with an informant who gave you all of this information. Where is that informant today? Where are these whistleblowers?"

"Well, unfortunately, we can't track down the informant," Comer replied. "We're hopeful that the informant is still there. The whistleblower knows the informant. The whistleblower is very credible."

"Hold on a second, Congressman," Bartiromo said. "Did you just say that the whistleblower or the informant is now missing?"

"Well, we we're hopeful that we can find the informant," Comer said, explaining the informant was in the "spy business" and "they don't make a habit of being seen a lot."

jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:47 pm Lol, so to recap...the pubs' grand investigation into the Bidens (1) has not revealed EITHER (a) illegality, or even (b) anything touching Joe or Jill at all, and (2) relies on informants who may well actually exist just as much as every middle school boy's "girlfriend from camp who lives in Canada but can't send pics" actually exists.

https://www.rawstory.com/james-comer-informant/

During an interview on Fox News, host Maria Bartiromo asked Comer about evidence he had of Biden's alleged corruption.

"You have spoken with whistleblowers," she noted. "You also spoke with an informant who gave you all of this information. Where is that informant today? Where are these whistleblowers?"

"Well, unfortunately, we can't track down the informant," Comer replied. "We're hopeful that the informant is still there. The whistleblower knows the informant. The whistleblower is very credible."

"Hold on a second, Congressman," Bartiromo said. "Did you just say that the whistleblower or the informant is now missing?"

"Well, we we're hopeful that we can find the informant," Comer said, explaining the informant was in the "spy business" and "they don't make a habit of being seen a lot."

japhy wrote: ↑Wed May 17, 2023 5:00 pm Another trial that is proving voter fraud in Arizona!

Kari Lake on Wednesday opened her (second) trial challenging the 2022 election.

Her attorney, Kurt Olsen, told the judge he’d be presenting evidence that Maricopa County didn’t verify the voter signatures on “hundreds of thousands” of early ballots, instead hiring signature reviewers who just went through the motions while the county looked on.

“This isn’t a question of not doing it well enough,” he told judge. “They’re simply not doing signature verification.”

Then Olson called his first witness: A “whistleblower” who proceeded to annihilate Lake’s case.

Jacqueline Onigkeit, who worked as a level one reviewer during last year’s election, spent more than an hour explaining the lengths to which county went to verify signatures -- the weeklong training of workers, the two shifts of level one reviewers, three levels of signature review, the admonition to get it right.

“They (supervisors) told us, ‘You need to be very cautious. You need to pay attention to what you’re doing and remember that whatever you reject or approve, you can be called in to testify,” Onigkeit testified.

As a witness for the defense, Onigkeit was dynamite. The problem is, she was supposed to be the star witness for Lake.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson made it clear what Lake needs to do to win this, her second try at booting Gov. Katie Hobbs out of office.

“The Court can – and does – hold Plaintiff to her counsels’ representation of the scope of her claim at Trial, that no signature verification was conducted,” he wrote, in a ruling issued Tuesday.

No signature verification.

Two hours in and this trial is already over. Or it should be.

Olsen, in his opening statement, told Thompson that signature reviewers were clicking through images of comparison signatures “as fast as they could tap the keyboard.”

As a result, he said, more than 274,000 ballots were approved in less than three seconds each.

Then he showed a video of a guy doing just that.

It might have been an impressive visual -- except for the fact that Deputy County Attorney Tom Liddy told the judge the guy was pulled from the job for not doing the job.

That just bolstered the county's case that it was taking signature verification seriously.

As Lake's "whistleblower" bolstered the county's case.

Onigkeit told Thompson that signature reviewers were “bombarded” with ballots the day after the election but that they were repeatedly warned about moving too quickly.

Any signatures they rejected were kicked up to level two reviewers who would sometimes kick them back for a second look. But even then, she said, there was no pressure on level one reviewers to accept those signatures. Meanwhile, there was a third level of people auditing their work.

“I don’t know who worked level 3,” she testified. “I just know we were informed … that we were being audited every day and if we were approving too many signatures or rejecting too many signatures we’d be called into an office and talked to and if it happened again, we’d be let go.”

Onigkeit said she was diligent in doing the work.

“I was very focused on verifying signatures and making sure the signatures matched,” she said.

As blockbusters go, Kari Lake is halfway there.

If you count the “bust” part.

As Missouri girds for an anticipated fight at the ballot box next year over an amendment overturning its near-total abortion ban, some Republicans have begun saying they expect a majority of voters to support restoring access to the procedure.

The stark admissions have also been accompanied by intense efforts to make it harder for Missourians to amend the state constitution – an extraordinary acknowledgment that the Republican-controlled General Assembly must erode direct democracy in the state or risk decades of anti-abortion policy unraveling in a single election.

“I think we all believe that an initiative petition will be brought forth to allow choice,” House Speaker Dean Plocher, a St. Louis Republican, said Friday. “I believe it will pass. Absolutely.”

[...]

Eleven amendments have been proposed so far that would allow various levels of abortion access and abortion rights supporters are expected to seek signatures through an initiative petition to place at least one on the ballot. Republican lawmakers have until then to pass an overhaul to the initiative petition process that would raise the threshold for passing an amendment at a statewide vote – and, the thinking goes, place a victory out of reach for abortion rights supporters.

A compromise lawmakers agreed to last week but couldn’t pass through the Missouri Senate would have required amendments to receive 57% of the vote instead of the current simple majority, a threshold that would have prevented recreational marijuana legalization from passing last November (the measure received 53% of the vote). GOP leaders have already said they will try again next year.

Whatever changes the General Assembly approves must then itself go to a statewide vote and pass with a simple majority. Republicans have signaled they would try to win support for the overhaul with arguments that the state constitution, at 253 pages, has grown too complex and that a higher bar for passage will require amendments to receive more buy-in from rural voters.

One idea that was discarded during negotiations, but could be revived next year, would require amendments to also win a majority of congressional districts if they only obtain a simple majority statewide. The change would empower residents in the rural areas to block amendments even if a majority of voters support them.

“The threat of abortion with no restrictions looms large and we are committed to finding the answer early next year. That timeline allows us to see the actual language of abortion advocates and plan a path to defeat it,” Senate Majority Leader Cindy O’Laughlin, a Shelbina Republican, wrote in a newsletter to constituents Monday explaining that the Senate would act on initiative petition changes in 2024.

The fight between DeSantis and Disney illustrates the dramatic ideological change in the Republican Party in the last two years. No longer committed to keeping the government weak to stay out of the way of business development, the party is now committed to creating a strong government that enforces Christian nationalism.

This is a major and crucially important political shift.

From the earliest days of the Reagan Revolution, those leaders who wanted to slash the federal government to end business regulation and cut the social safety net recognized that they did not have the votes to put their program in place. To find those votes, they courted racists and traditionalists who hated the federal government’s protection of civil rights. Over time, that base became more and more powerful until Trump openly embraced it in August 2017, when he said there were “very fine people on both sides.”

As he moved toward the techniques of authoritarians, his followers began to champion the system that Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán called “illiberal democracy” or “Christian democracy” in his own country. Orbán argued that the principle of equality in liberal democracy undermines countries by attacking the national culture. Instead, he called for an end to multiculturalism—including immigration—and any lifestyle that is not based on the “Christian family model.” He seized control of universities to make them preach his values.

Today’s Republican leaders openly admire Orbán and appear to see themselves as the vanguard of a “post-liberal order.” They believe that the central tenets of democracy—free speech, religious liberty, academic freedom, equality before the law, and the ability of corporations to make decisions based on markets rather than religious values—have destroyed national virtue. Such a loss must be combated by a strong government that enforces religious values.

Right-wing thinkers have observed with approval that DeSantis’s Florida is “our American Hungary.” Indeed, DeSantis’s “Don’t Say Gay” law appears to have been modeled on Orbán’s attacks on LGBTQ rights, which he has called a danger to “Western civilization.” DeSantis’s attack on the New College of Florida, turning a bastion of liberal thought into a right-wing beachhead, imitated Orbán’s attack on Hungary’s universities; on Monday, DeSantis signed three more bills that undermine the academic freedom of all the state universities in Florida by restricting what subjects can be taught and by weakening faculty rights.

DeSantis’s attack on Disney is yet another attack on the tenets of liberal democracy. He is challenging the idea that Disney leaders can base business decisions on markets rather than religion and exercise free speech.