Uncategorized

The Mushrooming of the 2020 US Election

On December 23 President Trump made a powerful speech summing up facts behind the purported win by Joe Biden of the US election. Our own transcript is below. As is normal, the mainstream US media and the Australian media en bloc have ignored or ridiculed this speech. Their narrative is that Trump is a spiteful and buffoonish loser.

In the real world, a Rasmussen survey showed that only 47 per cent of American voters believe that Joe Biden won. Only 10 per cent of Republicans think Biden won fairly.

And these American voters have good grounds for so believing. Quadrant Online now goes where the rest of the media refuses, and publishes our own and full transcript of Trump’s 14-minute address.

It exposes the disgraceful alliance of the media (including The Australian’s US correspondent, let alone the ABC), the media-technology giants and the Democrat Party to suppress pro-Trump news, up to and including censoring the President himself. Here is just one handy fact: Twitter has censored Trump and his campaign 543 times since May 2018. Its censoring of Biden: zero.

Tony Thomas

______________________

My fellow Americans,

Today I want to explain to you why I am so determined to pursue every legal and constitutional option available to stop the theft of the presidential election.

As President one of my most solemn duties is to protect the integrity of your sacred right to vote. This year, using the virus as a pretext, Democrat officials in the key swing states illegally violated their state laws in order to enable, encourage and facilitate fraud on a scale never before seen in the history of our country. The truth is we won the election by a landslide. We won it big. I am going to give you the facts that every American needs to know.

Let’s go back to the night of the election. By midnight we had a commanding lead in the swing states. We won Florida by a record number of votes. We won Ohio by a record number of votes. And likewise we won Iowa by 8.2 per cent, far different than the false narrative portrayed in the media. We were up by 293,000 votes in Mi

Michigan, 112,000 votes in Wisconsin, 356,000 votes in Georgia and nearly 700,000 votes in Pennsylvania, all swing states. These numbers were absolutely impossible for Joe Biden to overcome and the Democrats knew it, and everybody forecasting knew it and understood it well. Our nation’s greatest political professionals were calling to congratulate me on our victory. Then, suddenly, everything started to disappear, everything started to change.

The vote-counting abruptly stopped in multiple states. In the middle of the night a series of massive and statistically inconceivable vote dumps overturned the results in state after state. At 6.31am, very early in the morning Michigan, suddenly reported 147,224 votes, 94 per cent for Biden, 6 per cent for Trump. At 4.42am Wisconsin reported 143,279 votes, almost all of them for Biden. A similar massive drop of ballots happened in Georgia at 1.34am, again almost all of these votes for Biden. These gigantic and ridiculously one-sided spikes were miraculously just enough to push Biden into the lead in all of the key swing states.

These glaring anomalies are just the tip of the iceberg. We won 18 out of 19 bellwether counties — a record! — that have correctly predicted the winner of every Presidential election for the last 40 years. We also won Ohio, Florida and Iowa by historic margins, meaning Biden would be the first candidate since 1960 — and only the second candidate in American history — to win the White House while losing all three of those major states, and it was not even close. With Joe Biden at the top of the ticket the Democrats lost 25 out of 26 toss-up House seats, that is a record. The Democrats were projected to gain 15 seats and instead, because of my success and coat-tails, as they call them, they lost 14 seats. So think of that — they were going to win big and they ended up losing big.

My campaign received more votes than any president in history, almost 75 million people voted for me. We earned approximately 12 million more votes than we got in 2016, the largest vote increase for any incumbent president ever recorded. I also received the largest share of non-white voters of any Republican in over 60 years. In fact we did better with African American and Hispanic voters everywhere in the country except for a small handful of corrupt Democrat-run cities in key swing states, places notorious for fraud such as Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia, all run by Democrat machine politicians.

No president has ever lost re-election while making such extraordinary gains across the board. There has never been anything like it. Yet despite all this evidence of a thundering Trump victor,y and despite all those projections all through the night, they want us to believe that Biden, who seldom left his basement to campaign, somehow received 11.7 million more votes than Barack Obama, and he beat Obama all over the country. It is historically, mathematically, politically, and logically impossible. It didn’t happen. He didn’t win, we won by a landslide.

Over the past seven weeks we have put forward abundant evidence proving how Democrats perpetrated this monstrous fraud on the American people and, indeed, on the world.

Firstly we have shown officials in virtually every key swing state brazenly violated their own state laws in order to change the election procedures, eliminate safeguards, promote fraud and illegally benefit Joe Biden, and legislatures which have to make changes were seldom if ever used. For example, Pennsylvania’s radical Democrat Secretary of State suspended all signature verification requirements, breaking Pennsylvania law not to mention the big and very illegal ballot drops. In Michigan the Secretary of State, a Democrat, illegally flooded the state with absentee ballot applications even though Michigan law strictly limits distribution of absentee ballots. In Wisconsin major Democrat cities deployed over 500 unmanned, unsecured ballot drop boxes that were blatantly illegal, paving the way for unlawful ballot harvesting and tremendous fraud.

In Georgia the Secretary of State began illegally processing ballots weeks before election day and also destroyed the signature verification system in violation of the law. Many other horrible things were done in Georgia. Those actions alone were more than enough to rig the election results for Democrats.

Second, absentee ballot rejection rates prove that hundreds of thousands of illegitimate votes were counted in the key states. This was sufficient to change the election results all on its own. In 2016, 6.4 per cent of mail-in ballots were rejected in Georgia. This year fewer than a tiny percentage of one per cent were rejected. You went all the way down, a difference [reduction] of more than 30 times. The same phenomenon occurred in Pennsylvania and other states. They were accepting all of these ballots, many of which were absolutely illegal. In a year in which the number of mail-in ballots was the highest ever, the rejection rate was magically the lowest ever and it was not even close. The only possible explanation is that tens of thousands of ballots were unlawfully processed and counted.

Most Americans would be shocked to learn that in no swing state is there any meaningful attempt to verify citizenship, residency, identity or eligibility for mail-in ballots. The potential for illegal activity is unlimited. That is what we just experienced.

Thirdly, hundreds and hundreds of witnesses have come forward to testify under penalty of perjury about cheating and fraud they saw with their own eyes. Witness have sworn they saw ballot workers illegally backdating thousands of ballots, counting batches of the same ballots many times and unloading boxes and boxes of ballots, all bearing the same signature and all for Joe Biden. Other witnesses testified seeing thousands of so-called pristine ballots with no creases or folds, all voting for Biden. When you have no folds, it means it was not mailed. It means it was a fraud.

Republican poll watchers were denied critical access as hundreds of thousands of votes were counted in Democrat-run cities in the essential states. There is even security camera footage from Georgia that shows officials telling poll-watchers to leave the room before pulling suitcases of ballots out from under the tables and continuing to count for hours. The reason they were forced to leave the room there was they said a major water main break. The water main break never happened, there was no water main break. In many cases Republican poll watchers were physically removed from rooms.https://www.youtube.com/embed/g2GrVSsoVz4?feature=oembed

In addition, there was the deeply troubling matter of Dominion voting machines. In just one major county alone 6000 votes were switched from Trump to Biden and the same system was used throughout the majority of the US. No satisfactory explanation has been offered over why Dominion systems are able to switch votes with the mere push of a button. In Arizona the state senators recently issued a subpoena for forensic auditing of voting machines and similar investigations must be made in every state using Dominion systems, immediately.

In Texas they don’t allow Dominion system to be used.

As I have just laid out, we have unveiled overwhelming evidence of election fraud. None of this should ever have been allowed to happen in the USA. It is a travesty of democracy, it is a shame upon our republic. In 2016 we caught them by surprise. From that moment they had four years to work on these schemes to rig the 2020 election.

The rigging of the 2020 election was only the final step in the Democrats’ and media’s years long effort to overthrow the will of the American people and destroy our movement by any means possible — any means necessary.

For months and indeed years before the election, media and the big technology giants and the Democrat party were openly colluding to deceive the American public. Earlier this year it was proven beyond any doubt that Joe Biden’s family received millions dollars from the Chinese Communist Party. Yet media and the technology giants worked together to completely censor this information. Our country no longer has a free press, it is a press of suppression, a press where the truth will never come out. It is the greatest and most shocking scandal involving a presidential candidate in modern history. But surveys show that half those who voted for Joe Biden have never even heard of the story.

To continue the transcript, click here

52 thoughts on “The Mushrooming of the 2020 US Election

  1. Thank you for publishing the President’s speech.
    We have never faced a mutinous coup before.
    A mutiny against a lawfully elected President, and a coup against the country.
    The problem for my friends and family outside the US is that there seems to be an endpoint that encompasses much of the rest of the world.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Oh dear, the conspiracist theorists have taken over Cliscep. I think I’ll make an early New Year’s resolution not to indulge myself.

    Like

  3. Alan, you don’t understand. The Supreme Courts of all relevant states, as well as the Supreme Court of the United States, are all part of the Democrat conspiracy to steal the Presidential election result, even when a majority of the justices on said Courts are Republicans or are Republican nominees.

    Like

  4. Thankyou Tony, for printing the facts, the indisputable, undeniable facts as conveyed from the mouth of the President himself. It is a matter of huge regret that these facts have been denied by the entire main stream media and are blatantly being denied right here by commenters at Cliscep even. On another post, I have printed facts – scientific truths – about this supposed ‘new strain’ of Covid which politicians have used to lockdown the nation once again over Christmas. No commenters yet have sought to deny those facts, presmably because they lack the false (in that case scientific) authority to turn to which the Supreme Court of the US lends to those wishing to deny the facts of widespread election fraud in the US in the form of supposed judicial authority. Sad end to a catastrophic year in which science and the Enlightenment dimmed and the flames of Democracy across the Western World guttered and went out.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. My faith in the media died when I first discovered how they lie and distort about Israel. Climate change was the next big scandal for me. The way President Trump has been treated has utterly destroyed any hope I have for there ever being any honestly or accountability in media again. Trump won by a landslide. Biden is not the president. Anyone who won’t admit that is either willfully blind or part of the liars club.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Alan,
    Pretending that there hasn’t been a coordinated effort to censor the issues of this election prior to the vote, and that there weren’t voting irregularities in multiple democrat run vote counts requires a lot of tinfoil.
    The censorship contagion is spreading, quickly.
    The courts in the US have a history of choosing wrongly at key points. Look up Dred Scott, Plessey v Ferguson, the Japanese internment, the strange Court rewrite of Obamacare, as examples.
    I live in the US and we are undergoing a very reactionary coalition force through a change in government. Many immigrants from Venezuela, Cuba and Soviet bloc nation’s see the process clearly. Too bad so many in the US have become active, or at least silent, supporters.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Hunterson7. I refer you to the comment made by Mark (9.09am). Has the Republican judiciary in its entirety turned rogue?

    I am speculating that if, you answer my last question in the affirmative, I will need to re-examine my entire stance on climate for the past thirty-odd years since my judgement is also entirely shot.

    Like

  8. I am very troubled that the speech got no coverage in the media and that you can’t share the speech or this post either on facebook. The accusations do not prove anything but they do mean that an audit is in order in order to explain why all the suspect data are inconsistent with the results. If the results are as claimed why can’t the votes be checked? At the very least it would allay the concerns of half the country that thinks there were problems in just enough states to affect the election.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. My take is that the various supreme courts are desperately trying to stay above this highly political issue. So much so that they do not even want to look at the evidence. They have used procedure to try to escape from the political process. The system is horribly broken and I don’t think that Humpty can be remade. We are seeing this in the UK over Brexit.

    Like

  10. Another conspiracy theory: all supreme courts are remiss in carrying out their duties of upholding the constitution. This is getting weirder and weirder.

    Like

  11. MIAB suggests a more benign reason as to why the federal and supreme courts in the US have failed to even examine the evidence for widespread election fraud. Personally, I feel that Trump Derangement Syndrome runs so deep in the US that it has infected the entire judiciary. If that makes me a conspiracy analyst, so be it. But this is not the main issue. The main issue is the evidence – and there is a ton of it. People are point blank refusing to look at the evidence – for whatever reason. So instead of challenging those who present that evidence by seeking to refute that evidence directly (which they can’t, obviously) they instead try to divert attention from that evidence by claiming that it can’t be valid simply on the basis that the federal and Supreme Court have thrown it out – without even looking at it!

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Well Jaime, you allege a refusal even to look at the evidence, on the part of US Courts, but cite no decisions, with links, in support of that extraordinary claim. Of course you could try reading some of them, e.g. this one from the Nevada Supreme Court, ruling on the decision of the Court below, which also appears at this link:

    https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20421618-supreme-court-order_trump-election-contest

    I agree that there is a such a think as Trump Derangement Syndrome, but we’d probably disagree about what exactly it is…. 😉

    Like

  13. Mark, thanks for providing an example which illustrates my point. When I say that the courts refused to look at the evidence what I mean is that they failed to subject it to proper scrutiny in a court of law. In the example you provide, Nevada SC threw out the appeal on the basis that IN THEIR OPINION it did not meet the requirements for a SC hearing, so the appeal was not held and the evidence was not heard or scrutinised in detail. You may argue that the lower federal court did this but if so, why did the appellants feel the need to appeal to the SC? A very similar process has happened in the UK with Simon Dolan’s case against government lockdowns. Lower courts summarily dismissed the case without really considering it on its legal merits, passing the buck to higher courts in so doing and eventually the Supreme Court decided they would not allow the appeal to go ahead. This is ‘justice’ in the 21st century for you.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Alan, perhaps you are inadvertently relying on straw man arguments eerily similar to one of the climate consensus:
    Misdirection by way of claiming one’s interpretation of the challenge to the consensus is improbable, therefore the consensus is correct.
    Neither your argument or the consensus argument actually address the issues raised.
    The courts are not the arbiter of reality.
    Data is.
    As far as the credibility of the consensus, the media and politicians asserting the security of the recent election are largely the same people who have been flagrantly lying about basically everything they have claimed regarding President Trump for over four years.
    So a fair minded, data driven person might pause to at least question the issue as presented,. And not echo the dismissals that are basically versions of the old, “who ya gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?”

    Like

  15. “The courts are not the arbiter of reality.
    Data is.”

    What utter tripe. Data is, almost by definition, neutral. What data means is debatable. Courts are the current arbiters of which interpretation is acceptable to society.

    Like

  16. The best compilation of the evidence of a rigged election is by Peter Navarro, summarized in this article:
    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/why_democrats_should_read_the_navarro_report.html
    Navarro looks at the six swing states whose results the Trump campaign has been contesting, and lays out a grid of election irregularities that swung all of those states to the Biden-Harris ticket in the days following the November 3rd election. “These six dimensions include outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, Equal Protection Clause violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies,” he writes.

    He doesn’t engage in conspiracy theories, or impute malign intent or foreign domination of voting machine companies. While those may be true, it will take a criminal investigation that could last years to prove them.

    The full report is here:

    Click to access The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20-1.pdf

    Liked by 2 people

  17. Well, I’m not a US lawyer, but their system is based on the common law, as in England & Wales, so I imagine that their system of appeals is like ours too. It’s the job of the lower Courts to examine the evidence (unlike the appeal Courts, they have witnesses available before them giving direct evidence and being cross-examined on it), and then, having established the facts, to determine the law as it applies to the facts as found.

    Unless there is strong evidence that the the lower Court ignored or misunderstood the evidence, the job of appeal Courts is to decide whether or not the lower Court misapplied the law. The Nevada case is an example of the system working as it should.

    If anyone here has evidence that the Courts are not doing their job properly (based on a proper understanding of how the US judicial system works, and citing case decisions with links) then please offer it up for scrutiny. Otherwise, I will have no choice but to ignore your bizarre conspiracy theories.

    Like

  18. “Courts are the current arbiters of which interpretation is acceptable to society.”

    I feel like a horse that suddenly had its blinkers removed.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. I would never argue that there was no evidence of electoral fraud in November (since I have no access to unimpeachable evidence for or against) but I do know (because it’s a matter of record) that Republicans have been unable to provide sufficient evidence to convince the US judiciary that this has been sufficient to overturn the presently accepted result. I cannot believe claims that Supreme Courts across the country have broken their oaths to uphold the constitution and refuse to see the evidence. More likely is that they saw no reason to re-examine evidence that had already had been evaluated by lower courts. Until a convincing explanation of the behaviour of courts is provided, I use the razor of Occam.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. I note the often and continued use of the term ‘conspiracy theories’ by those commenters on here who object to the presentation of evidence and/or alternative interpretations of evidence which runs counter to a prevailing or popular narrative. This has been the favoured tactic, of course, of those people who wish to discredit man-made climate change sceptics (most notably Lewandowsky), which makes it all the more bizarre that such accusations should be coming from people who might also be termed ‘climate sceptics’.

    “Ever since the philosopher Sir Karl Popper popularised the expression in the 1950s, conspiracy theories have had a bad reputation. To characterise a belief as a conspiracy theory is to imply it’s false. More than that, it implies people who accept that belief, or want to investigate whether it’s true, are irrational.”

    “It’s a function similar to that served by the term “heresy” in medieval Europe. In both cases these are terms of propaganda, used to stigmatise and marginalise people who have beliefs that conflict with officially sanctioned or orthodox beliefs of the time and place in question.

    If, as I believe, the treatment of those labelled as “conspiracy theorists” in our culture is analogous to the treatment of those labelled as “heretics” in medieval Europe, then the role of psychologists and social scientists in this treatment is analogous to that of the Inquisition.”

    https://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-conspiracy-theories-and-why-the-term-is-a-misnomer-101678

    Like

  21. The censorship of news against Biden was real. It was significant. The propaganda designed to deceptively paint President Trump in a negative light was real. It was coordinated.
    Can those two points at least be agreed on?

    Liked by 1 person

  22. “I note the often and continued use of the term ‘conspiracy theories’ by those commenters on here who object to the presentation of evidence and/or alternative interpretations of evidence which runs counter to a prevailing or popular narrative.”…

    Like chimps
    yr human conspiracists’
    coteries, cabals and cliques,
    tho’ Stephan Lewandowski
    tells us ‘no,’ despite
    his own Moon-Landing
    survey tricks

    Like

  23. Beth.
    Conspiracy theories
    are in the eye of the beholder,
    but what if one has many eyes,
    like Lord Indra?
    Images proliferate
    from all sides
    Do they cancel
    or amplify
    one’s prejudices?
    Tis a puzzlement.

    Singer beneath bridges

    Liked by 2 people

  24. Hunterson7:

    “The censorship of news against Biden was real. It was significant. The propaganda designed to deceptively paint President Trump in a negative light was real. It was coordinated.”

    I would come close to agreeing with you. Many things about the last 2 US Presidential elections have left me bemused. From my UK perspective, which is also the perspective of the disinterested bystander (I have no dog in the fight, disliking Hillary Clinton almost as much as I dislike Donald Trump, and being mightily unimpressed by Joe Biden), the behaviour of the establishment strikes me as being contemptible.

    When Trump won the 2016 election the US (and UK) MSM went into melt-down, appalled at the result, refusing to believe it possible, and using every trick in the book to cast doubt on it. They just couldn’t believe that so many US citizens would vote for him, so it must have been the Russians wot dun it. Now that Biden has won, funnily enough, it doesn’t appear that the Russians made any attempt to interfere in the 2020 election, though I can’t help feeling that if Trump had won again, allegations of Russian and/or Chinese interference would have been rife.

    However, 2 wrongs don’t make a right. Trump lost, perhaps not fair and square, given the behaviour of the MSM, which was far from impartial, but he lost. All attempts to argue otherwise, in the face of the evidence, strike me as being as ridiculous as the hysterical response of the establishment to his election in 2016.

    I believe in democracy, for all its faults, as (to paraphrase Churchill) the alternatives are worse. It’s why I was so angry when some remainers and most of the UK establishment refused to accept the result of the Brexit vote; it’s why I was angry when the US establishment and much of the world MSM tried to cast doubt on Trump’s election; it’s why I’m angry that the SNP still refuses to accept the result of the “once in a lifetime” Scottish independence referendum, and it’s why I’m angry that some people still won’t accept the result of the 2020 POTUS election.

    It’s strange, I confess, that many of those people who refused to accept one or more of the votes I mention above were among the first to rush to acclaim Biden’s win and to denounce Trump for not accepting it. Their conversion to democracy is certainly belated, but nevertheless is to be welcomed (though I suspect it will last only so long as the results of democratic votes go “the right way”).

    I hope, whatever my faults (and I’m painfully aware of plenty, and no doubt in blissful ignorance of many more), that I do try to be consistent. The inconsistencies on display around recent popular votes, on all sides, strike me as staggering, and certainly as bemusing. Perhaps cliscep should add to its threads on Provocation and Despair, another, entitled “Bemusement”?

    Like

  25. Hunterson7, like Mark Hodgson I agree with much of what you wrote, but take exception to your claim that opposition was organised. In the past the British press were overwhelmingly anti-Labour. One lived with it.

    In Trump’s case he actively encouraged press opposition, before being elected but especially in his first weeks of being POTUS. The more strident the opposition became the more Trump could tweet or grandstand that he was opposed by the forces of fake news and outright bias. This played directly to his fan base and stimulated further press bias. There needn’t have been any organisation (except when Trump banned representatives from certain organisations and the Press Corps acted in concert to counter this). If you are anti-Trump, then to prevent a second term, you had to be pro-Biden and play down any deficiencies he had.

    Like

  26. I believe the definition of a “free and fair” election includes two elements: Free: The voters have full unfettered access to messaging from all candidates and parties; Fair: Each eligible voter gets one vote.
    Following the 2020 US election, one survey of Democratic voters had 25% saying that wouldn’t have voted for Biden-Harris had they known about Hunter Biden’s influence-peddling. And as the Navarro reports shows, supported by thousands of sworn affidavits, the vote-counting was weighted in favor of Biden.

    Obviously, the judges want to avoid looking at the evidence, lest they be seen as partisan, even though many state level judges unconstitutionally overturned election procedures set by state legislatures, which contributed to the mess. And even though the behavior described by witnesses in sworn statements is criminal. So it will be a political fight, and six states will be the battlegrounds for real, and maybe for the last time if this travesty becomes official.

    Like

  27. “Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons.” – Michael Shermer

    Tony Thomas is a smart person. People who post on this site are smart people. That doesn’t preclude Tony and others from believing things that are total crap.

    I’m starting to think that Trump deliberately tanked this election, so that he could cash in on the suckers who support him and have handed his PAC over $250 million since the election.

    Like

  28. I’m sure there were shenanigans here, but enough to swing the election? A fair (under 2020 rules) win for Biden looks a lot like an unfair win under other conditions. Obviously a large quantity of postal votes and election officials that have never dealt with such leaves a situation that smells like fraud to one side. (It certainly had an amateurish appearance at least to external observers.)

    But that horse has bolted. Better to expend energy arguing for a system next time that is fair and is agreed to be fair by both sides, and whose result will be accepted by both sides. There is plenty of scope to tighten procedures so that large scale voter fraud is impossible – and importantly, could never *appear* possible.

    Liked by 2 people

  29. The election results make sense to me. The mail in votes are more likely to be from democrats who are more likely to be worried about COVID and they were counted later. The public is weary of the polarization and picked someone they perceived as more centrist. Bernie had huge rallies, yet got blown out of the water by Biden. When they actually got a chance to see Biden as the nominee, the public split their ticket. Trump has a fanatical base, but he’s also a negative turn out machine. Look at 2018. There are also a lot of never Trump conservatives.

    Like

  30. Talking of conspiracy theories (sorry if this is the wrong thread), yesterday Stephan Lewandowsky both retweeted and liked this tweet by Genevieve Guenther:

    twitter.com/DoctorVive/status/1343597391430217730

    It strikes me as a weird coincidence that much of the research about climate change and “cultural cognition” was published precisely in the years when climate was being polarized by dark money groups spearheaded by the Kochs.

    Of course, Herr Prof Dr Lewandowsky could say that a retweet doesn’t equal endorsement, even when you also like the tweet; and Dr Guenther could say that she only said it was a weird coincidence, not evidence of another Koch conspiracy; and both could say that a theory about a conspiracy stops being a conspiracy theory if it’s true. But conspiracy theorists always do that – see Lewandowsky et al (201x-202y).

    In other news, Lewandowsky has just repeated his claim that Brexit is ‘the most extreme rightwing project in last 50+ years’. I think I’ve already mentioned here that Lew has also said that Brexit is the product of a coup by a cabal of fascism-enablers and perhaps of outright fascists (I’d have to check).

    In further other news, less than a month after Jem Bendell organised and published an open letter responding to criticisms of his extreme eschatonanism by members of the climate doomer community…

    iflas.blogspot.com/2020/12/international-scholars-warning-on.html

    …the doomer community has attacked him again, this time in an article in the New York Times:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/26/style/climate-change-deep-adaptation.html

    Bendell is understandably a bit upset. See his responses here:

    twitter.com/search?q=from%3Ajembendell&src=typed_query&f=live

    Liked by 1 person

  31. Vinny, the paper Guenther refs, Sander van der Linden, Edward Maibach, John Cook, Anthony Leiserowitz, Michael Ranney, Stephan Lewandowsky, Joseph Árvai & Elke U. Weber, is a bash Kahan effort. Largely because he has a fair grip, within the unique situation for the US at least, on how cultural bias works and polarizes the CC domain. However, Kahan’s view does not accord with the ultra CC orthodox, not least because it implies that the Lib/Dem public are supporting climate change policies for the wrong reasons. The paper’s argument seems to be that it’s all much more complex, and so Kahan can’t possibly be right, and for sure if you can only explain that ‘all the scientists agree’ to the public, they will magically believe what they’re supposed to believe, for the ‘right’ reasons.

    ‘Cultural cognition’ has been very much Kahan’s term and the name of his blog, which I used to frequent, and which sadly ceased about 2 years back. So if by this comment there is an implication that Kahan was explicitly Koch funded (he works in Yale Law School, which no doubt has many donors), I’d say that was beyond risible and some way out beyond Mars too. Certainly qualifies as a conspiracy theory, but given Lew was an author of the paper that Guenther refs further down her tweet thread, and sole author on another she refs at bottom of thread, I guess he could say he was just liking / retweeting the plugs.

    The Lew sole (and latest) effort (Sept 2020) according to the abstract, follows his well-trodden path of ‘just explaining the science’, and ‘inoculation’, i.e. highlighting the total science consensus to a group of folks, plus warning them that undesirables are gonna chuck politically motivated info at them, all before anything else gets to them. Surprise that modifies the answers. But I think would make no real dent on cultural bias in the real world, in part by magnitude, and also missing the point that people preference sources that match their cultural views, so would avoid such censoring attempts anyhow (which for any topic and whether ‘the science’ is right or wrong as shown by future history), is what this amounts to.

    Like

  32. P.S. The Deep Adaptation folks are always fun. They take to a logical conclusion what the establishment consensus turns a blind eye to (because it serves the cause so well), from all the countless authority statements of Presidents, Prime Ministers, UN elite and practically every other authority source. I.e. ‘the train is going over a cliff’, there’s ‘no planet B’, etc etc. Then DA get hammered for this, because they’re exposing the completely anti-scientific and cultural nature of the belief in doom. Albeit the kind of doom that DA think we can survive in caves with a patch of veggies outside.

    Like

  33. Commentary by Conrad Black on Dec. 19:

    “For the first time in 90 years the United States is in an epic internal struggle that is very profound and sometimes violent. As a young man, Abraham Lincoln said that no foreign army “will ever drink from the Ohio River or leave a track on the Blue Ridge Mountains. America will flourish as a democracy or perish by suicide.”

    It is an irony that the United States that has secured the apparent triumph of democracy and the free market in the world is not now a well-functioning democracy. The recent presidential election appeared to me to be rigged sufficiently in five swing states to determine a winner in a close election, and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to adjudicate the issues even when petitioned by 18 states to do so.

    The national political media are a totalitarian cartel of ideological and partisan bigotry and the heads of the social media giants sandbagged the president, shut down the Twitter account of the White House press secretary, boycotted the country’s oldest newspaper, owned by one of its largest media companies (the New York Post) and they all stifled in the last month of an election campaign and dismissed as “Russian disinformation” what we now know to have been for the last two years a burgeoning grand jury criminal investigation into the family of the presumptive president-elect.

    “Peaceful protesters” ransacked cities across the country all summer killing scores of people, injuring 700 police officers and committing $2 billion of property damage while masquerading as crusaders for civil rights. None of it was mentioned at the Democratic National Convention. Prosecutors win 98 per cent of their cases, 95 per cent without a trial; the American criminal justice system is an anthill of corruption and hypocrisy. America’s claim to being a democratic society of laws has become tenuous.”

    https://nationalpost.com/opinion/conrad-black-america-in-a-shambles

    Liked by 2 people

  34. Andy, that’s a fair comment about Lew’s retweeting and liking of Guenther’s tweet perhaps having more to do with self-citation than with endorsement of a possible conspiracy theory.

    Dan Kahan? Not a huge fan. I don’t really see the point of what he does. That’s probably because I lack the patience and intellect to delve deeply into such matters, but it all seems a bit too meta. I mean, what was the actual point of the Cultural Cognition Project?

    Perhaps it really was to sow doubt among the righteous and lend credence to the wrong, as Dr Guenther implies.

    Just kidding.

    Re its funding, that is and was listed at the foot of every page on its website:

    Research of the Cultural Cognition Project is or has been supported by the National Science Foundation; by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania; by the Skoll Global Threats Fund; by the Putnam Foundation; by the Woodrow Wilson International Center of Scholars; by the Arcus Foundation; by the Ruebhausen Fund at Yale Law School; by the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University; and by GWU, Temple, and NYU Law Schools.

    Yikes! I can now see why an Aryan like Dr Guenther might be suspicious. Forget the invisible Kochs! Most of those funders are Jewish!

    Just kidding.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Vinny, heh, nice 🙂

    I am fan of Kahan. I like that he revels in actual data, plus respects / uses tried and tested defences against bias, both of which seem to me to be rather unfashionable in social psychology recently, and despite such leanings have brought him to confront that which maybe his prior values would rather not have done. And I like still more that so much was done in open forum, where all the cogs can be seen and understood, and indeed contributed to / critiqued if one can. I have found his work and approach most valuable in pursuing / characterising Catastrophic Climate-Change Culture, indeed eventually in directly measuring it from hard social data. There’s a great deal of point in that 🙂

    I think it’s also quite likely that without the Cultural Cognition project and allied work, academia and the establishment in the US would still be thinking that the Dem/Lib public must be endorsing climate-change policies simply because they’re rational science-supporting folks, and hence by inference the Rep/Con public are just nasty anti-science folk. Whereas it is now all too obvious and so fairly accepted in the mainstream, that the bulk public on *both* sides are not supporting or opposing for any rational reason at all, but simply due to cultural loyalty only, which polarization actually *increases* for those who have greater climate-science literacy and cognitive capability. I think it sticks in the craw of some, like the tweeters above, that the Dem/Lib public support CC for the ‘wrong’ reason, and not only that, but ‘explaining the science’ actually makes the polarization worse on both sides, i.e. far from changing anyone’s mind it merely entrenches the existing cultural positions. I guess it’s not too surprising that someone would simply cast doubt on the motivations for the work therefore, one day, albeit Kahan is wisely not directly named. After all, smearing the less than ultra-orthodox is a regular pastime within the consensus; Oreskes even called Hansen a denier for favouring nuclear. I think the work is far too robust to bring down via the papers ref’d above or anything similar. But smear and closing ranks and such, can bury anything, given enough time.

    Like

  36. Thanks, MiaB. I watched the whole darn thing – that’s 5h plus I’ll never get back. I thought I ought to inform myself about whether there was any evidence for shenanigans.

    Well, there were some hysterical people, some rambling people, a guy who claimed to be in everyone’s pocket (owning scanning patents), one guy near the end who needed a crash course in elevator speeches, & a lot of minor “I thought that was strange” reports.

    However, there was something compelling at about 3h 50 in, when someone showed a video of State Farm Arena where the election workers were to be seen scanning the same ballots through several times. Shenanigans indeed!

    A rather professional seeming outfit at the end majored on the “deleted votes” theory. If what they say is true, anyone logged in to the system would have been able to modify votes in between reporting periods. Alas it wasn’t clear to me whether they had hold of the wrong end of the stick, & if not, whether what was possible actually happened. Was there a harmless reason for the vote swapperoos?

    Elsewhere vote jumps in the tally were reported. They look fishy. Definitely do. But what I wanted to know was, did similar patterns occur in safe seats? An answer was not forthcoming. Same with the vote swaps.

    My overall impression was, there were just so many varying fraud reports that their impact was diminished. We had: multiple ballot scans, Republican ballots printed wrong, absentee ballots printed on a photocopier, people voting in more than one place, vote adjudicators not bipartisan (3 dems to 1 rep, 2 dems on 1 machine, dem+rep on the other), ballots being shredded behind the manual recount venue, scanners that failed, secretary of state uninterested in reports of malfeasance, whistleblowers fired, election workers not the usual election workers, IT security failings, deleted votes, dead voters, felon voters, fake address voters, votes filled in by machine, no audit trail once votes had been adjudicated, voter rolls with too many unique names to be statistically possible….. to name just the ones I can remember.

    One thing I am sure of: it’s a flippin’ mess, and it all comes about because rather than just counting by hand UK style, there’s too much IT.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. The Trump supporters who invaded the Capitol building were angry about the evidence for election fraud that they’d seen, and were made angrier by the media’s insistence that there was no evidence, and by the censorship of President Trump for contradicting CNN and the New York Times in insisting that there was.

    They will no doubt be made angrier still by the total removal of Trump from social media like Twitter and Facebook, making it impossible for him to defend himself publicly against the attempt to impeach him (ostensibly for stoking anger.) This anger won’t be visible, because anyone protesting on Twitter at the censorship of the President of the United States is also being censored. In case you think this only affects far right Trump supporters, leftwing journalists like Caitlin Johnstone are reporting that hundreds of followers are mysteriously disappearing from their accounts.

    Steve McIntyre has recently tweeted a comparison between the Reichstag fire and recent events in, er, Belarus. When the world’s foremost critic of climate alarmism has to be very careful what he says in public, you know it’s time to worry.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. Hm. I have never seen a tweet by Trumpy other than in a media article.

    I think banning him, or “permanently suspending” him (what is that actually supposed to mean?) looks like a good way to unify left and right under the new centrist Biden regime over the next few years, which will look to enact policies that are acceptable to both sides.

    Anyone who moans about so-called “censorship” can simply move to another platform dealing in bite-sized snippets of gobbledigook. There’s one called Parler.

    (If they ever learn to recognise sarcasm, everyone will live happily ever after.)

    A conspiracy ideationist, or whatever they’re called, might note a juxtaposition: one side gets chucked off twitter/facebook at the same time as “the alternative” gets banned or threatened with a ban by the other tech titans. The same tin-foil-hatter might wonder if the whole thing was a stitch up, and that to prevent droves of folks abandoning twitter in disgust, they had arranged to pre-emptively torpedo the lifeboat.

    At least there will be some entertainment during lockdown.

    Like

  39. JIT
    The fact that you’ve only ever seen a Trump tweet in a media article doesn’t alter the fact that 70 million followers who expect to see them on Twitter now can’t. And if they tweet a complaint their twitter accounts are suspended too.

    I’m not sure I recognise sarcasm when I see it. Are you being sarcastic when you put “censorship” in quotes?

    The Parler app has just been banned by Apple. The first people to go to Parler were the extremists promoting violence, so anyone going there now is going to be identified with them.

    According to Roger Tallbloke
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/the-crackdown-on-wrongthink-be-prepared/
    “WordPress has been a strong supporter of free speech, but even they are showing signs of being coerced to limit content.”

    He who is not a conspiracy ideationist is not paying attention.

    Liked by 2 people

  40. Anyone who thinks this stuff about Trump and internet censorship is irrelevant to things climatical needs to dig a little deeper.

    Parler, the alternative to Twitter, has just been banned from its Amazon server for allegedly being a “platform for threats of violence and illegal activity.” Of course, any violent content on Parler can be matched by similar stuff on Twitter. This is simple cartel capitalism which would, in normal times, be subject to political oversight with the possibility of severe sanctions on some very rich and powerful people. Thanks to a few hundred votes in Georgia, this won’t happen, and Bezos, Zuckerberg and Dorsey can continue to decide together what we get to see and hear – just like Secretary Xi Jinping (except that Xi was elected, even if not by direct democracy.)

    According to this article,
    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/amazon-employees-demand-company-drop-parler-aws-cloud-app-becomes-1-download
    Amazon acted due to pressure from an employee advocacy group – “Amazon Employees for Climate Justice.”

    That’s “Climate” as in the Crichton novel “Climate of Fear.”

    Liked by 1 person

  41. I’m not ‘entertained’ by my critical voice being shut down on Palrler whilst I am ostensibly imprisoned in my own home for the crime of being a healthy human being I must say. A mass cyber attack on free speech platforms and non left wing voices in the media is not the stuff of conspiracist ideation either, it’s bloody real and ongoing. I wonder who will be ‘entertained’ when this site is shut down for daring to be sceptical? I would rather full out war than this creeping submission and suffocation. Looking to move to Telegram or some other platform whilst Parler is down. Gab is still up I think. I’ll be there, using my dissenting voice. Cancelling my Amazon account too. Already closed down Google.

    Liked by 2 people

  42. Blackouts at the Vatican (and other places around the world apparently). Shots fired reportedly. Pope arrested for involvment in organised paedophilia reportedly. None of it verified, but the world is changing very rapidly. There’s a Reset going on, definitely. Whether it’s good or bad only time will tell. I’m off out to kill some people.

    Like

  43. See Jo Nova re Parler:
    https://joannenova.com.au/2021/01/big-tech-axes-parler-they-are-very-afraid-of-donald-trump-and-his-supporters/

    “Parler promise to set up again by noon tomorrow
    The defiant message from John Matze of Parler:

    10:10 PM ET: Sunday (tomorrow) at midnight Amazon will be shutting off all of our servers in an attempt to completely remove free speech off the internet.

    We prepared for events like this by never relying on amazons proprietary infrastructure and building bare metal products.”

    Liked by 1 person

  44. Gab is frantically adding servers at a rate of knots to try to keep up with demand after people have turned away in their millions presumably from the Big Tech monopolies of Twitter, Facebook etc. who have banned the US president himself.

    Free speech is more popular than Jesus right now.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. @ Andy I love Jo Nova. It’s an all-you-can-eat buffet of conspiracy theories. Apparently Trump has Pelosi’s laptop, the election was stolen by shadowy operatives in Italy, there’s going to be mass arrests of Democrats in the coming days, blah de blah, Obama’s in trouble, Pence is a traitor…

    I’m sure there was some point that Jo Nova was a place for rational discussion of climate alarm, albeit with a few “fringe” opinions within scepticism. Now it’s unreadable. But it is great fun.

    Like

  46. JIT, I used to read regularly when it was a climate site, but very rarely drop in now. As you note, climate related posts have virtually disappeared, which are my main interest. Plus indeed, it doesn’t seem like the replacement material gets the same level of objectivity 0:

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.