RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://www.swtotd.blogspot.com

It may seem odd that I, a conservative, would quote Bertrand Russell in the rubric that heads this essay. But I find the sentiment expressed fitting for the world in which we live where hypocrisy and double standards are the standard. In my opinion, a hypocrite is one who professes virtues he does not possess, in the hope his words will camouflage his actions. It is a condition common to the halls of political power.

I was mocked for my prediction in my last essay – perhaps deservedly – that Trump would be as gracious in defeat as he was competitive in battle. It is still too early to know. Mr. Trump has not yet conceded, and Congress has yet to certify the election. But (and on this I am more certain) what he and his followers will not do is become the sore losers who created the “resistance” four years ago. Mr. Biden will not be subject, from the media, academia and our cultural elite, to the never-ending barrage of personal attacks Mr. Trump endured. Nor will the intelligence agencies and their flunkies in Congress try to upend his Presidency, as they attempted to do with Mr. Trump throughout his four years.

It is not easy to cast Donald Trump as the principal character in a morality tale, a “heroic but stubborn and self-fixated Antigone,” as Victor Davis Hanson, writing in National Review, described him. However, there is about Mr. Trump the possible makings of an heroic, but tragic, figure. He exposed much of Washington’s ruling class to be corrupt and self-serving, and he showed the media to be the partisan attack dogs they are. He brought to light the role universities have played in censoring conservative speech. He unmasked the hypocrisy of politicians for their refusal to accept school choice for poor and minority students, and he watched the Left’s double standards regarding masks in riot-torn streets. He ignored Chuck Schumer’s advice in 2017 about taking on the intelligence community. For this, he received no acclamation.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/11/13/centrist-democrat-praises-trump-wont-vote-for-pelosi-for-speaker-n1143569

Nancy Pelosi is going about her business during this post-election period, apparently oblivious to the storm that’s raging among her caucus members.

In truth, it isn’t so much that there is much disagreement between radical Democrats and the “moderates.” The problem, as the moderates see it, is “messaging.” The radicals make Democratic proposals sound, well, radical. Centrist Democrats want a spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down. They prefer to soft-pedal some of the more extreme rhetoric coming from the radicals while embracing the ideas. They don’t want to call it “government-run health care.” They want their health care plan to be “inclusive” and “affordable” and “fair.” Thus is their real intent hidden from the voter.

It worked in a lot of districts and failed in others. But one centrist Democrat had the audacity (or stupidity) to actually praise Donald Trump and says she won’t vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker of the House. Rep.Elissa Slotkin of Michigan thinks it’s time to rein in the radicals and bring the party down to earth. Politico posted a long, revealing interview with the congresswoman.

“You know, the one thing I will say about Donald Trump,” Slotkin began, “he doesn’t talk down to anybody. He is who he is, but he doesn’t talk down to anyone. And I think that there is a certain voter out there because of that who identifies with him and appreciates him.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/11/raphael-warnocks-blood-libel/

What else to call claiming that the Jewish state goes around picking off God’s children as if ‘they don’t matter at all’?

Raphael Warnock, the Democratic Senate candidate seeking to unseat Republican Kelly Loeffler in Georgia’s runoff election in January, has had some interesting things to say about Israel in the past.

Here is Warnock during a 2018 sermon:

We need a two-state solution where all of God’s children can live together. We saw the government of Israel shoot down unarmed Palestinian sisters and brothers like birds of prey. . . . It is wrong to shoot down God’s children like they don’t matter at all. And it’s no more anti-Semitic for me to say that than it is anti-white for me to say that Black lives matter. Palestinian lives matter.

Warnock, senior pastor of the church once led by Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., isn’t merely being “critical” of Israel, as his defenders claim. Arguing that Israel hasn’t done enough to placate Fatah is a criticism. Arguing that Israel’s refusal to return to 1967 boundaries is misguided is a criticism. Claiming that the Jewish state goes around picking off God’s children as if “they don’t matter at all” is a blood libel. It’s the kind of rhetoric that generates the anti-Semitism unfortunately found in some corners of black communities. It is also a complete fiction.

https://issuesinsights.com/2020/11/14/could-illegal-voters-hand-the-election-to-joe-biden/

Based on current population data from the Census Bureau and voting data from previous elections, Just Facts has conducted a study to estimate the number of votes illegally cast by non-citizens in the battleground states of the 2020 election. The results—documented in this spreadsheet—show that such fraudulent activities have netted Joe Biden the following extra votes in these tightly contested states:

Arizona: 51,081 ± 17,689
Georgia: 54,950 ± 19,025
Michigan: 22,585 ± 7,842
Nevada: 22,021 ± 7,717
North Carolina: 46,218 ± 16,001
Pennsylvania: 32,706 ± 11,332
Wisconsin: 5,010 ± 1,774

If the lower end of these illegal vote estimates were removed from the vote tallies as of November 8, 2020, 2:00 AM EST, Donald Trump would be leading in states that have a total of 259 electoral votes, or 11 shy of the 270 needed to win the presidency. If the upper end of the illegal vote estimates were removed, Trump would be leading in states that have 285 electoral votes, or 15 more than needed to win the presidency.

These estimates account for just one type of election fraud, and they tend to understate it because they depend on Census surveys, which are known to undercount non-citizens.

I recently had the opportunity to participate in a seminar in South Korea for future leaders regarding the role and importance of soft power, and the influence that it provides a country globally. No longer are soldiers, tanks and guns needed to fight a war, but other forms of influence known as soft power can have a greater impact with less physical destruction.

The recent – or more appropriately worded, current – U.S. elections have many scratching their heads. While here in the United States, you have Trump supporters wondering how brazen the left has become, across the globe there are many more that are watching in utter disbelief. The United States has been a country of tough rhetoric, but a beacon of honesty – until now. What we have seen in the months leading up to the November 3rd elections is the role of soft power in our own country and its use by enemies of the constitution from within. The loss [at present] that President Trump and more than half the country is experiencing is nothing short of a soft coup.

This use of soft power by the rising American socialist left to influence or steal an election has many in Europe concerned. Former Vice-President Joe Biden announced his win when it was already November 7 in Europe and to these concerned leaders the coup they see here is reminiscent of the Russian Revolution and specifically the Bolshevik Coup which also took place on November 7 in 1917. Europe was not the same since that event and now they are concerned about United States. For our European friends 1917 was not that long ago, and to many more the impact of that event is not something that they may read in a history book.

For years U.S. leaders have urged for democracy in countries that may not have wanted it, and for “free and fair” elections in countries where it may not be possible. In such cases the United States, along with others, have played the role of observer. The country that has been the visible leader in personal freedom and the rights of the individual has always been there to urge the same for all.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/13/5-historical-trends-that-show-its-utterly-shocking-if-trump-lost-in-2020/

If I told you an incumbent president had 52 percent approval on Election Day and ended up winning 10 million more votes than during his first election, would you predict victory? What if 56 percent of voters felt they were better off since the president had entered office? What if you knew that the incumbent had a nearly 30 percent enthusiasm edge over his opponent, or that when asked for whom they thought their neighbors were voting, nearly 10 percent more Americans expected the president to be re-elected than to lose?

With those numbers in mind, wouldn’t you feel pretty confident that the sitting president had, indeed, been re-elected? Alternatively, wouldn’t you consider it an amazing feat if, instead, the president’s challenger was victorious? The improbability of that result should be newsworthy all on its own.

Donald Trump has majority approval. Nearly six in 10 Americans feel better off today than when Barack Obama was in office, and 15 percent more voters pulled the lever for his re-election than in his 2016 victory. These are not the numbers of a losing candidate, yet we’re told Joe Biden managed to prevail.

The media and pollsters, of course, predicted a Biden landslide, not a very narrow squeaker in which Democrats lost in almost every other avenue of government. Considering the following five facts about the election, it’s no wonder Biden failed to achieve a landslide victory.

1. 10 Million More Votes

Not since President Grover Cleveland’s re-election campaign in 1888 has a sitting president won more votes the second time around and still lost, which is one reason he successfully ran again four years later. To put this in perspective, Obama lost 5 million votes between his 2008 and 2012 elections. He is the only president to have lost voters and still won re-election.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/arizona-state-rep-calls-for-audit-and-recount-of-vote_3576918.html?utm_source=news&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2020-11-13-3

Arizona state Rep. Kelly Townsend said there should “absolutely” be an audit and an accurate recount as soon as possible in the state, adding that voter confidence for many has been damaged.

Townsend, a Republican who serves the 16th Legislative District, said she has a “long list of things that are questionable” and that hundreds of Arizonians have contacted her over perceived irregularities and concerns over the integrity of the state’s election process.

“We need an audit and a recount—there are too many uncertainties and until we do that, I don’t think there’s enough confidence to have a healthy election in the future,” she told The Epoch Times. “We need to reassure the people that their vote counted because right now it is chaos.”

Townsend said she has “no faith” in the state’s election process, adding that “the vote should not be certified under these circumstances.”

“The biggest issue is voter confidence,” she added. “If you don’t have voter confidence you have big problems—and we don’t have voter confidence.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/questioning-of-usps-whistleblower-clearly-sought-to-weaken-voter-fraud-claim-fbi-veteran-says_3576905.html

A U.S. Postal Service whistleblower in Pennsylvania was questioned by agency investigators in a way that was designed to undermine his allegations of voter fraud, according to a veteran FBI agent.

The whistleblower, Richard Hopkins, had told investigative journalism nonprofit Project Veritas that he overheard a USPS postmaster pull aside a supervisor to tell them that they “messed up” in marking a ballot “for the 4th, instead of the 3rd, because they were supposed to put them for the 3rd,” referring to Nov. 3, Election Day.

Hopkins deduced the officials were talking about backdating ballots that arrived late so they could still be counted in the election. He affirmed what he told Project Veritas in an affidavit.

During the subsequent questioning by two USPS investigators, Hopkins said they got him to question himself. He acknowledged that he didn’t hear the entire conversation and that it’s possible he misunderstood what the officials were talking about, according to Hopkins’s recording that captured at least half of the interview.

After the interview, he made it clear he stands by his original allegations.

From the recording, it appears the investigators were using interrogation methods normally used to extract a confession rather than to interview a witness, according to Mark Ruskin, a 27-year veteran of the FBI and former assistant district attorney in Brooklyn, New York.