RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-will-we-do-without-trump-11608073543?mod=opinion_lead_pos11

EXCERPT:

This Day in Political History

Four years may seem like a long time ago, and perhaps it was given the changes since then in American politics. By mid-December of 2016 Hillary Clinton and her supporters had accepted the results of the November presidential election and were treating America’s president-elect with graciousness and respect.

Just kidding. On this day in 2016, the FBI secretly recorded a conversation between a bureau source and Trump associate Carter Page. Two months earlier, the FBI had used a bogus Clinton-funded dossier of Russian collusion claims and misled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court into approving the first of several warrant applications focusing on Mr. Page.

Mrs. Clinton would continue for years promoting fact-free Russia conspiracy theories about her political rivals. And back on Dec. 15, 2016, many of her supporters were still seeking to prevent the winner of the November election from taking office. Calvin Woodward and Rachel La Corte of the Associated Press reported on an effort among Democrats to derail Donald Trump’s victory at the Electoral College. According to the AP report:

Republican electors are being swamped with pleas to buck tradition and cast ballots for someone else at meetings across the country Monday that are on course to ratify Trump as the winner. AP interviews with more than 330 electors from both parties found little appetite for a revolt…

The interviews found widespread Democratic aggravation with the electoral process but little expectation that the rush of anti-Trump maneuvering can stop him. For that to happen, Republican-appointed electors would have to stage an unprecedented defection.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/the-embarrassing-russian-disinformation-canard/

To help Biden win, former top intelligence officials, aided by a derelict media, deliberately misled the public.

If there’s one thing that the Hunter Biden laptop episode has proven, it is that former directors of the Central Intelligence Agency aren’t as adept at evaluating evidence as advertised.

Five former directors or acting directors of the CIA signed a letter asserting that the laptop, first reported by the New York Post in the weeks before the election, “has all the classic hallmarks of a Russian information operation.”

More than 50 former senior intelligence officials, including former director of national intelligence James Clapper, endorsed the letter, which was used by the Biden campaign and the press to discredit the damning emails about Hunter Biden’s business dealings.

The signatories should have thought better of their missive when they felt compelled to include the line, “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement.”

That also should have tipped reporters off to the fact that the letter was rank speculation masquerading as informed analysis. But true to form, they happily ran with it instead.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/12/protect-election-integrity-censor-anyone-who-daniel-greenfield/

Last week, Google’s YouTube announced that “supporting the integrity” of the election required it to censor anyone alleging that “widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of a historical U.S. Presidential election”.

By historical presidential election, Google meant this one. Democrats are still free to allege that they would have won in 2000 or 2016, if it hadn’t been for the chads or the Russians.

A huge tech monopoly closely tied to the Democrats, which was sued by the Trump administration over its illegal abuses, censoring critics of the Democrat election fraud is protecting and supporting something alright, but that thing is very definitely not integrity.

Election integrity, like fact checking, is one of those curious terms whose meaning was ‘Orwellianized’ in the last decade. Fact checking used to mean media organizations checking their facts before they published a story. Now the media has mostly done away with internal fact checking and uses fact checking to describe its efforts to censor conservative media.

Election integrity traditionally meant verifying the integrity of the process, but is now being used to mean silencing anyone who questions the integrity of the election. In both cases a term that meant protecting the integrity of an internal process has been turned inside out to mean covering up for the corruption of the internal process by censoring its outside critics.

That’s the new integrity.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/12/is_the_whole_government_in_on_this_fraudulent_election.html

Every once in a while, most of us wind up in situations where we are completely baffled.  It may be a simple situation, such as having looked literally everywhere for our reading glasses, and not having found them.  Did they violate the laws of physics and just vanish?  One knows that that cannot be true, and yet, as the old saying goes, once one has ruled out every logical possibility, only the illogical remains, no matter how unlikely it is.  

Another situation is the one we are in now.  Any informed person, with a modicum of sense, can see that the presidential election results, at best, are not to be trusted and at worst are rampantly fraudulent.  Yet it seems that court after court, and investigative agencies one after the other, are turning a blind eye.  Are they violating the laws of physics?  

It turns out that the reading glasses did not disappear; they were in place, but pushed up, on one’s forehead all along.  There was a logical explanation after all.  

And sadly, it turns out that the courts and government agencies were not turning a blind eye.  They have been, all along, part of the fraud.  No matter how unlikely that seems, it is the only answer remaining.  

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/12/the_fraudulent_2020_election_is_history_unfolding_before_our_eyes.html

History is usually written long after historical events play themselves out in real life.  It’s rare to understand the gravity of historical events as they are actually happening.

For example, I was in the Army and stationed in West Germany when the Berlin Wall came down in November of 1989.  It was news where we were, but I don’t think many of us in Rheinberg really understood that the epochal event of our generation was playing itself out only a few hundred miles away.  We look back at it today as the touchstone that it is — the death knell of the Soviet Union.  But at the time, most of us didn’t recognize it as such.

That’s likely because for all of my life, and most of my parents’ lives, the Soviet Union was the grand villain, the ubiquitous enemy, a fount of evil that simply was.  It was the perpetual enemy to be feared above all else, and it was the reason I and hundreds of thousands of others spent weeks, months, or years training to counter attacks coming from Poland or East Germany or the Soviet Union itself.

In an environment where the Soviets being enemies was as natural as gravity, it was hard to see the fall of the Wall changing the world.  But it did.  September 11 was something different altogether.  Most of the country was going about its normal business that morning, another mundane Tuesday.  Then the first plane hit.  It was a stunning event, but for a moment, we thought it was a tragedy of an accident.  The kind of bad thing that sometimes happens.  The moment the second plane hit, everyone in America knew that something was going on.  When those two buildings, those two signs of American strength and prosperity, came down, we knew that the world had changed.

And now we sit here, two decades later, and we are at a point in history no less important than the fall of the Berlin Wall or the attack on the Twin Towers.  When the Soviets or the Islamic terrorists were the enemy, we understood exactly what was at stake: our nation and our culture.  Today, both of those things are in peril, but in a far more pernicious way.