March 19, 2025
Judge Orders Astronauts be Returned
Timothy Birdnow
I guess the ACLU filed for this injunction:
I guess the ACLU filed for this injunction:
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:32 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.
Only Liberals...
Timothy Birdnow
You know, radicals are torching Teslas to show their displeasure at Elon Musk. So, they are telling the world "don't buy electric vehicles because we might burn them" at a time when they have been pushing very hard to get everyone into one. Brilliant marketing strategy!
Only liberals would be that stupid.
You know, radicals are torching Teslas to show their displeasure at Elon Musk. So, they are telling the world "don't buy electric vehicles because we might burn them" at a time when they have been pushing very hard to get everyone into one. Brilliant marketing strategy!
Only liberals would be that stupid.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:30 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.
Oswald was a Patsy
Timothy Birdnow
From the documents recently released by the Trump Administration.
This courtesy of Tony Heller and Real Climate Science:
From the documents recently released by the Trump Administration.
This courtesy of Tony Heller and Real Climate Science:
"After the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Underhill told his friend, Charlene Fitsimmons, that he was convinced that he had been killed by members of the CIA. He also said: "Oswald is a patsy. They set him up. It’s too much. The bastards have done something outrageous. They’ve killed the President! I’ve been listening and hearing things. I couldn’t believe they’d get away with it, but they did!”
Underhill believed there was a connection between Executive Action, Fidel Castro and the death of Kennedy: "They tried it in Cuba and they couldn’t get away with it. Right after the Bay of Pigs. But Kennedy wouldn’t let them do it. And now he’d gotten wind of this and he was really going to blow the whistle on them. And they killed him!”
Underhill told friends that he feared for his life: "I know who they are. That’s the problem. They know I know. That’s why I’m here. I can’t stay in New York.”
Gary Underhill was found dead on 8th May 1964. He had been shot in the head and it was officially ruled that he had committed suicide. However, in his book, Destiny Betrayed, James DiEugenio claimed that the bullet entered the right-handed Underhill’s head behind the left ear.”
Underhill believed there was a connection between Executive Action, Fidel Castro and the death of Kennedy: "They tried it in Cuba and they couldn’t get away with it. Right after the Bay of Pigs. But Kennedy wouldn’t let them do it. And now he’d gotten wind of this and he was really going to blow the whistle on them. And they killed him!”
Underhill told friends that he feared for his life: "I know who they are. That’s the problem. They know I know. That’s why I’m here. I can’t stay in New York.”
Gary Underhill was found dead on 8th May 1964. He had been shot in the head and it was officially ruled that he had committed suicide. However, in his book, Destiny Betrayed, James DiEugenio claimed that the bullet entered the right-handed Underhill’s head behind the left ear.”
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:27 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 234 words, total size 2 kb.
More on Quisling Roberts
Timothy Birdnow
Newt Gingrich points out:
Gingrich is right but does not go far enough. If Roberts truly does not want federal judges impeached he needs to take a firmer hand. He can do so. Technically speaking he does not have to wait for a formal appeal to be filed by the DOJ, for instance; he could simply overrule the judge in question.
Were I Donald Trump I would fly those criminals back and set up a tent camp in front of judge Boasberg and John Robert's homes and see how they liked living with these criminals.
Judge Boasberg denied the DOJ any response when issuing his ruling, BTW. I would call that a gross violation of protocol by the judge.
Of course it's not just these two:
If Roberts is so solicitous of precedent and tradition why isn't he dressing down all the judges who are making national policy at their own whims? Seems to me THEY are the ones threatening the Constitution, not the Trump Administration.
Newt Gingrich points out:
"If Chief Justice Roberts wants to minimize attacks on out of control appointed leftwing district court judges abusing their role and claiming to be able to overrule the elected President of the United States on management details that are clearly within his role as defined by the Constitution and the Federalist Papers then he should intervene and overrule these absurd power grabs. The Chief Justice can defend the Court by overruling bad judges before the Executive and Legislative Branches start acting against them. The burden is on the Chief Justice not the President.
Gingrich is right but does not go far enough. If Roberts truly does not want federal judges impeached he needs to take a firmer hand. He can do so. Technically speaking he does not have to wait for a formal appeal to be filed by the DOJ, for instance; he could simply overrule the judge in question.
Were I Donald Trump I would fly those criminals back and set up a tent camp in front of judge Boasberg and John Robert's homes and see how they liked living with these criminals.
Judge Boasberg denied the DOJ any response when issuing his ruling, BTW. I would call that a gross violation of protocol by the judge.
Of course it's not just these two:
LOL. The entire judiciary has apparently decided to light itself on fire while John Roberts stands by mumbling to himself about how he’s protecting the sacred legal guild from Trump tweets. https://t.co/psIlV4sclK
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 18, 2025
The Supreme Court press office is still refusing to make John Roberts’ statement about Trump available to the media writ large or the general public.
The deliberate lack of transparency here is extremely troubling. pic.twitter.com/485yQctckE
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 18, 2025
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 18, 2025
The Supreme Court press office is still refusing to make John Roberts’ statement about Trump available to the media writ large or the general public.
The deliberate lack of transparency here is extremely troubling. pic.twitter.com/485yQctckE
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 18, 2025
If Roberts is so solicitous of precedent and tradition why isn't he dressing down all the judges who are making national policy at their own whims? Seems to me THEY are the ones threatening the Constitution, not the Trump Administration.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:14 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 346 words, total size 2 kb.
Science? We Don't Need no STEEENKING Science!
Timothy Birdnow
The Biden Administration buried a study that would have stopped his scheme to stop handing out leases for liquified natural gas.
So much for "following the Science"!
The Biden Administration buried a study that would have stopped his scheme to stop handing out leases for liquified natural gas.
So much for "following the Science"!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:42 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.
Get Off Your Duff Roberts!
BTW Article III judges can ONLY be removed via impeachment. So they can do as they please - even Roberts cannot remove them. So where is the "legal remedy" John?
Roberts was and remains a lightweight who never should have been on the Supreme Court at all, much less Chief Justice.Texas Congressman @RepBrandonGill has a message for Chief Justice Roberts regarding activist liberal judges on The @MattGaetzShow: "If the Chief Justice wants to maintain the credibility that our courts have enjoyed for 200 years, then he needs to step in and overturn this… pic.twitter.com/fP4iA3gxq3
— One America News (@OANN)March 19, 2025
BTW Article III judges can ONLY be removed via impeachment. So they can do as they please - even Roberts cannot remove them. So where is the "legal remedy" John?
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:14 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.
Tesla Martyrs
Timothy Birdnow
This is what happens when you say there is no God and at the same time gin up rage and fear.
Hapless anti-Musk activist sets himself on fire after attacking South Carolina Tesla charging station with Molotov cocktails
Desperate, unhappy people figure they may as well go out in a blaze of glory, to be martyrs for "a better world" when in fact they are nothing but stoooges duped into supporting an evil cause and dying for no good reason but to give power to the Ruling Class.
It is rather sad actually; they are throwing away their lives and, more importantly, their souls for less than nothing. And if they actually had the world they THINK they want they would find themselves living in a giant prison, just like the Russian people did after the October Revolution.
But they've been told lies all their lives and believe they are waging war for a "just cause" when in fact all their are dying for is the power of the Democratic Party and the uber-wealthy socialists who support them.
Biggest bait-and-switch ever!
This is what happens when you say there is no God and at the same time gin up rage and fear.
Hapless anti-Musk activist sets himself on fire after attacking South Carolina Tesla charging station with Molotov cocktails
Desperate, unhappy people figure they may as well go out in a blaze of glory, to be martyrs for "a better world" when in fact they are nothing but stoooges duped into supporting an evil cause and dying for no good reason but to give power to the Ruling Class.
It is rather sad actually; they are throwing away their lives and, more importantly, their souls for less than nothing. And if they actually had the world they THINK they want they would find themselves living in a giant prison, just like the Russian people did after the October Revolution.
But they've been told lies all their lives and believe they are waging war for a "just cause" when in fact all their are dying for is the power of the Democratic Party and the uber-wealthy socialists who support them.
Biggest bait-and-switch ever!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:55 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.
John Roberts - Just Another Deep State Operative
Timothy Birdnow
John Roberts proves himself to be the self-serving fool we've always known him to be.
He says there are "remedies" for these lawless judges. Well, what are they? Going to a higher court. Of course that means HE and his friends at SCOTUS then have absolute power, something the Constitution never intended. There is an impeachment clause in the Constitution precisely to avoid absolute power by the Courts.
As Roberts may well end up ruling on the very case that is leading to impeachment of this judge he has absolutely no business commenting on anything to do with it.
Maybe we should consider impeaching Roberts for purposely prejudicing this case?
(Not going to happen of course but until these judges realize they are not omnipotent this sort of poliiticazion of the courts and weaponization of law will continue.)
I would remind everyone that the Supreme Court granted itself the right of judicial review - it's nowhere to be found in the Constitution. In Marbury v. Madison chief Justice John Marshall asserted that the Supreme Court's role should be to review laws for constitutionality and he then proceeded to do so. Nobody objected so it became a legal precedent. But it was a power not expressly granted the courts. We've been living with an extra-constitutional regime for most of our history. And it served us well because the men who reached the top of the legal profession were not activists but originalists, reading the intent of the law. Now we have this "living, breathing Constitution" and they have become legislators on their own authority.
So what other remedy does the Constitution offer but impeachment and simply going to a higher court? Well, according to Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers we can simply ignore the courts. They have neither money nor enforcement powers, and that by design. Hamilton said plainly they could be ignored if they overstepped their bounds. Somehow I suspect Roberts wouldn't be in favor of that either.
In fact it's called nullification and while we remember nullification being an antebellum idea about nullifying Federal laws that were in opposition to the Constitution (and I would add both Jefferson and Madison wrote in favor of this power held by the states) there is no reason why one branch of government cannot nullify another under extraordinary conditions. If the courts are packed with leftist partisans there is a duty to ignore them. But impeachment makes more sense; get rid of the bad apples.
Roberts says:
And for decades we've had radical activist judges simply rewrite the Constitution at their whim and what has Roberts done about it, save mildly rebuke these radicals? He cannot even remove them from their positions, so how is that a "remedy"? This judge can simply go ahead and issue another ruling if the Supreme Court overrules him. There is no accountability.
And, just as Roberts was bloviating about the glories of judicial review, another judge declares Musk's DOGE must restore access to USAID workers and declares his actions "unconstitutional". Of course this would allow these people to destroy evidence and bury the bodies while the Administration awaits an appeal.
If Roberts had his head screwed on right he would admit the courts are far, far too slow in taking action in appeals and that one judge should never be able to overturn national policy and the will of the People out of personal whim.
Musk is working directly for Trump, who has the authority to shut the agency down. This idiot judge - Theodore Chuang - claimed only the head of USAID could fire people or close buildings. Funny; last I checked the Constitutuion made it quite plain the President is in charge of the execrutive branch of government. And Marco Rubio was made acting director of USAID, so THAT argument is completely erroneous.
What is happening is the Deep State is protecting their power and these faux judges are a part of the Deep State. And so is John Roberts.
John Roberts proves himself to be the self-serving fool we've always known him to be.
He says there are "remedies" for these lawless judges. Well, what are they? Going to a higher court. Of course that means HE and his friends at SCOTUS then have absolute power, something the Constitution never intended. There is an impeachment clause in the Constitution precisely to avoid absolute power by the Courts.
As Roberts may well end up ruling on the very case that is leading to impeachment of this judge he has absolutely no business commenting on anything to do with it.
Maybe we should consider impeaching Roberts for purposely prejudicing this case?
(Not going to happen of course but until these judges realize they are not omnipotent this sort of poliiticazion of the courts and weaponization of law will continue.)
I would remind everyone that the Supreme Court granted itself the right of judicial review - it's nowhere to be found in the Constitution. In Marbury v. Madison chief Justice John Marshall asserted that the Supreme Court's role should be to review laws for constitutionality and he then proceeded to do so. Nobody objected so it became a legal precedent. But it was a power not expressly granted the courts. We've been living with an extra-constitutional regime for most of our history. And it served us well because the men who reached the top of the legal profession were not activists but originalists, reading the intent of the law. Now we have this "living, breathing Constitution" and they have become legislators on their own authority.
So what other remedy does the Constitution offer but impeachment and simply going to a higher court? Well, according to Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers we can simply ignore the courts. They have neither money nor enforcement powers, and that by design. Hamilton said plainly they could be ignored if they overstepped their bounds. Somehow I suspect Roberts wouldn't be in favor of that either.
In fact it's called nullification and while we remember nullification being an antebellum idea about nullifying Federal laws that were in opposition to the Constitution (and I would add both Jefferson and Madison wrote in favor of this power held by the states) there is no reason why one branch of government cannot nullify another under extraordinary conditions. If the courts are packed with leftist partisans there is a duty to ignore them. But impeachment makes more sense; get rid of the bad apples.
Roberts says:
"For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.
And for decades we've had radical activist judges simply rewrite the Constitution at their whim and what has Roberts done about it, save mildly rebuke these radicals? He cannot even remove them from their positions, so how is that a "remedy"? This judge can simply go ahead and issue another ruling if the Supreme Court overrules him. There is no accountability.
And, just as Roberts was bloviating about the glories of judicial review, another judge declares Musk's DOGE must restore access to USAID workers and declares his actions "unconstitutional". Of course this would allow these people to destroy evidence and bury the bodies while the Administration awaits an appeal.
If Roberts had his head screwed on right he would admit the courts are far, far too slow in taking action in appeals and that one judge should never be able to overturn national policy and the will of the People out of personal whim.
Musk is working directly for Trump, who has the authority to shut the agency down. This idiot judge - Theodore Chuang - claimed only the head of USAID could fire people or close buildings. Funny; last I checked the Constitutuion made it quite plain the President is in charge of the execrutive branch of government. And Marco Rubio was made acting director of USAID, so THAT argument is completely erroneous.
What is happening is the Deep State is protecting their power and these faux judges are a part of the Deep State. And so is John Roberts.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:44 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 706 words, total size 5 kb.
March 18, 2025
The Fraud of the Century
Timothy Birdnow
German intelligence knew Covid was a lab leak back in 2020 yet they - and everyone else - pretended otherwise.
Covid was the fraud of the century (well, one of them anyway).
German intelligence knew Covid was a lab leak back in 2020 yet they - and everyone else - pretended otherwise.
Covid was the fraud of the century (well, one of them anyway).
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:21 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.
The Slings and Arrows of Woke Fortune
Timothy Birdnow
So Shakespeare is great because of white privilege and colonial thinking!
Decolonizing Shakespeare: Experts Blame White Supremacy for Playwright's Fame
So Shakespeare is great because of white privilege and colonial thinking!
Decolonizing Shakespeare: Experts Blame White Supremacy for Playwright's Fame
"Regarded as the most influential writer in the English language, some of William Shakespeare’s work is now viewed by critics as racist, sexist and homophobic.
As a result, the Shakespeare’s Birthplace Trust is decolonizing his hometown museum over the growing concerns about how his ideas are being portrayed today."
As a result, the Shakespeare’s Birthplace Trust is decolonizing his hometown museum over the growing concerns about how his ideas are being portrayed today."
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:16 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.
More Junk Climate Science
Timothy Birdnow
Another crazy study to make us all afraid of a modestly warming world.
Heat can age you as much as smoking, a new study finds
Haven't these fools seen Peasants in Russia, or Eskimo women who at age 35 look to be pushing 80?
For that matter the human race came out of the African Rift Valleys where it is freaking hot. We EVOLVED to live in warm climates.
This study looked at people in Phoenix and similar places and said people "looked 14 months older" because of the heat. Uh, did it occur to them to look at other factors, like where the people they were studying came from or their ethnic heritage? If you come from a Third World country you probably will age faster.
There is no question that excessive exposure to sun damages the skin and causes premature epidermal aging. But there are many benefits to sunlight, including vitamin D and other healthful benefits.
FTA:
What were the controls? Did they study people in cold climates, say, Buffalo or Anchorage?
In point of fact they cannot determine the increased temperatures in any meaningful way. The reality is people in warm climates are outside more than those in cooler climates. But they can't say "well, it's gone up five degrees so we see X" because it has NOT gone up five degrees, but rather a fraction of one degree - a statistically insignificant amount - and most of that warming is diurnal, meaning it happens when people are asleep.
I would add almost everyone has air conditioning or evaporative cooling systems and so are in no way subject to increased heat stress. If anything we experience far less heat than our nacestors did. Nobody noticed this before A/C.
Naturally there were no controls for this research. They did not differentiate those who do not have air-conditioning or other environmental factors from those who do not.
The article states:
So he is admitting here he has nothing but a very loose correlation that does not take other environmental factors into account. In short, this is junk science intended to keep the climate change scam alive.
Where did the great civilizations begin? Mesopotamia, Egypt, India, Mexico, all hot places. Only China breaks that pattern. Now why do you suppose civilizations flourished in hot climates? Why didn't they start in Germany or Russia or Canada?
I'm waiting for an answer.
Another crazy study to make us all afraid of a modestly warming world.
Heat can age you as much as smoking, a new study finds
Haven't these fools seen Peasants in Russia, or Eskimo women who at age 35 look to be pushing 80?
For that matter the human race came out of the African Rift Valleys where it is freaking hot. We EVOLVED to live in warm climates.
This study looked at people in Phoenix and similar places and said people "looked 14 months older" because of the heat. Uh, did it occur to them to look at other factors, like where the people they were studying came from or their ethnic heritage? If you come from a Third World country you probably will age faster.
There is no question that excessive exposure to sun damages the skin and causes premature epidermal aging. But there are many benefits to sunlight, including vitamin D and other healthful benefits.
FTA:
"Biological age is often correlated with chemical tags that accumulate and are shed from people's DNA over time, a process called methylation; it is often referred to as "epigenetic aging." "DNA methylation acts like a light switch for genes — so it can turn them on and off," Choi says.
Methylation doesn't change the genes themselves, but modifies the way those genes work — sometimes for the better, but oftentimes not. Many studies in both animals and humans have shown that DNA methylation patterns change over time and can be used as a sort of molecular clock, ticking along as people age.
Epigenetic aging can accelerate because people don't eat well or don't get enough exercise. But it is also associated with emotional or physical stress, as well as exposure to environmental harms like air pollution "and, in this case, heat," Choi says.
The researchers looked at blood samples from more than 3,600 older adults across the U.S. and assessed people's epigenetic age. They could figure out how much heat those people experienced over a few days, a few months, one year and six years prior to that sample collection using climate and weather models looking into the past, taking into account both temperature and humidity — factors that influence the danger of different heat conditions.
The outcomes were clear. People who experienced more heat over the long-term aged faster, biologically, than those living in cooler places. That's even after taking into account people's financial status, education, physical activity and whether they smoked.
Researchers have known for years that heat exposure correlates with long-term issues like worsened risk of cardiac problems. But "the mechanisms for how that happens haven't been clear," says Tom Clanton, a physiologist and heat expert at the University of Florida's College of Health and Human Performance, who wasn't involved in the research. This work, he says, begins to explain how those delayed effects might happen. At the genome level, heat exposure makes "you sort of accelerate your way towards an old heart, and an old vulnerable heart," he says.
Methylation doesn't change the genes themselves, but modifies the way those genes work — sometimes for the better, but oftentimes not. Many studies in both animals and humans have shown that DNA methylation patterns change over time and can be used as a sort of molecular clock, ticking along as people age.
Epigenetic aging can accelerate because people don't eat well or don't get enough exercise. But it is also associated with emotional or physical stress, as well as exposure to environmental harms like air pollution "and, in this case, heat," Choi says.
The researchers looked at blood samples from more than 3,600 older adults across the U.S. and assessed people's epigenetic age. They could figure out how much heat those people experienced over a few days, a few months, one year and six years prior to that sample collection using climate and weather models looking into the past, taking into account both temperature and humidity — factors that influence the danger of different heat conditions.
The outcomes were clear. People who experienced more heat over the long-term aged faster, biologically, than those living in cooler places. That's even after taking into account people's financial status, education, physical activity and whether they smoked.
Researchers have known for years that heat exposure correlates with long-term issues like worsened risk of cardiac problems. But "the mechanisms for how that happens haven't been clear," says Tom Clanton, a physiologist and heat expert at the University of Florida's College of Health and Human Performance, who wasn't involved in the research. This work, he says, begins to explain how those delayed effects might happen. At the genome level, heat exposure makes "you sort of accelerate your way towards an old heart, and an old vulnerable heart," he says.
What were the controls? Did they study people in cold climates, say, Buffalo or Anchorage?
In point of fact they cannot determine the increased temperatures in any meaningful way. The reality is people in warm climates are outside more than those in cooler climates. But they can't say "well, it's gone up five degrees so we see X" because it has NOT gone up five degrees, but rather a fraction of one degree - a statistically insignificant amount - and most of that warming is diurnal, meaning it happens when people are asleep.
I would add almost everyone has air conditioning or evaporative cooling systems and so are in no way subject to increased heat stress. If anything we experience far less heat than our nacestors did. Nobody noticed this before A/C.
Naturally there were no controls for this research. They did not differentiate those who do not have air-conditioning or other environmental factors from those who do not.
The article states:
"The next step to connect heat exposure to specific health problems, Meade thinks, is to further personalize the analyses, because even within the hottest parts of the country, people experience very different heat exposures. "What people actually experience in their homes, whether they're in an overheated mobile unit or they have air conditioning available, can be wildly different temperatures," he says.
So he is admitting here he has nothing but a very loose correlation that does not take other environmental factors into account. In short, this is junk science intended to keep the climate change scam alive.
Where did the great civilizations begin? Mesopotamia, Egypt, India, Mexico, all hot places. Only China breaks that pattern. Now why do you suppose civilizations flourished in hot climates? Why didn't they start in Germany or Russia or Canada?
I'm waiting for an answer.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:12 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 810 words, total size 5 kb.
Willis Loses in Court
Timothy Birdnow
Slowly but surely justice is being served.
Fani Willis Ordered to Pay $54 K for Violating Open Records law in Trump Case
Why hasn't her law license been revoked?
Slowly but surely justice is being served.
Fani Willis Ordered to Pay $54 K for Violating Open Records law in Trump Case
Why hasn't her law license been revoked?
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:40 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
"Better Put Some Ice on That" Brodderick Swatted
to terrorize Conservatives and any perceived enemies.
Swatting, for those who do not know, is placing a fake 911 call to get police to show up in force with guns drawn and raid an enemy's home. There was a huge spate of swatting going on recently, all of Republicans.
But Brodderick? Her claim to fame was her credible accusations of rape against President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton back in 1978. Clinton was then the Arkansas Attorney General and she feared going public against someone with so much power. She only came forward against Clinton when the GOP offered her protection in the latter 1990's.
So they are STILL harassing the poor woman after all these years. The Left does not forgive, nor do they forget.
This is an important lesson; they cannot be reasoned with or worn down. We should always be on offense against them.
Kash Patel is vowing to go after the perps.
After Clinton raped her, he told Brodderick "better put some ice on that". It is apparently their admonition to her now.
Swatting, for those who do not know, is placing a fake 911 call to get police to show up in force with guns drawn and raid an enemy's home. There was a huge spate of swatting going on recently, all of Republicans.
But Brodderick? Her claim to fame was her credible accusations of rape against President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton back in 1978. Clinton was then the Arkansas Attorney General and she feared going public against someone with so much power. She only came forward against Clinton when the GOP offered her protection in the latter 1990's.
So they are STILL harassing the poor woman after all these years. The Left does not forgive, nor do they forget.
This is an important lesson; they cannot be reasoned with or worn down. We should always be on offense against them.
Kash Patel is vowing to go after the perps.
After Clinton raped her, he told Brodderick "better put some ice on that". It is apparently their admonition to her now.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:32 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.
Biden Kids Lose SS Protection
Timothy Birdnow
This is a very bad idea and I wish the Trump Administration wouldn't do it.
Secret Service Protection Withdrawn for Hunter and Ashley Biden by Trump [WATCH]
Yes, the Bidens are POS's, but they are also in an uniquely dangerous position and America made a committment to protect public officials and their families, even if they are POS's. This sets a bad precedent and will become standard operation procedure in the future. Furthermore, I want them protected so we can get them to sing; they know where the bodies are buried. Allowing them to be assassinated serves no useful purpose exxcept to feed our desire for revenge. And if something happens to either it will rebound horribly on Republicans.
The Administration needs to reconsider this.
This is a very bad idea and I wish the Trump Administration wouldn't do it.
Secret Service Protection Withdrawn for Hunter and Ashley Biden by Trump [WATCH]
Yes, the Bidens are POS's, but they are also in an uniquely dangerous position and America made a committment to protect public officials and their families, even if they are POS's. This sets a bad precedent and will become standard operation procedure in the future. Furthermore, I want them protected so we can get them to sing; they know where the bodies are buried. Allowing them to be assassinated serves no useful purpose exxcept to feed our desire for revenge. And if something happens to either it will rebound horribly on Republicans.
The Administration needs to reconsider this.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:14 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.
VOA DOA
Timothy Birdnow
Trump is dissolving Voice of America asit has become a radical leftist propaganda machine.
Wish he'd do that to PBS/NPR too.
VOA and other such outlets were created during the Cold War to broadcast into the Warsaw Pact countries to make sure they had actual information about the West and be discontented to be slaves of the Revolution. It worked to a large degree. But with the fall of the Soviet Union it should have been dissolved. VOA is an example of what Ronald Reagan meant when he said ". Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" They go on forever if someone doesn't make it their business to kill it.
VOA needs to be DOA.
Trump is dissolving Voice of America asit has become a radical leftist propaganda machine.
Wish he'd do that to PBS/NPR too.
VOA and other such outlets were created during the Cold War to broadcast into the Warsaw Pact countries to make sure they had actual information about the West and be discontented to be slaves of the Revolution. It worked to a large degree. But with the fall of the Soviet Union it should have been dissolved. VOA is an example of what Ronald Reagan meant when he said ". Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" They go on forever if someone doesn't make it their business to kill it.
VOA needs to be DOA.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:44 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 130 words, total size 1 kb.
Trump's Strategy on Deportation Lawsuit
Timothy Birdnow
Here is an interesting article discussing the legal implications of Trump invoking the Alien Enemies Act and the ridiculous court ruling that demanded the Administration turn planes around in mid air and international waters and return the gangster thugs. The author makes many good points but he criticizes the Administration for making public political arguments and not legal ones. I tend to disagree with him on this; the legal arguments will come. Right now Trump is playing rope-a-dope with the Left, angering regular Americans but not showing his cards as of yet (well, his peeps,notably Pam Bondi, are the ones doing that.)
The fact is this is a battle Trump will win. He holds all the cards - the AEA is old, established law that does NOT simply pertain to a time of war but can be used when the President believes it necessary, as the text and historical context shows (there was no war in effect in 1798 when the bill was passed.) It specifically mentions INVASION which we most certainly just endured. Also, SCOTUS has ruled in bygone times that the President has sole power over evicting illegal aliens and that his power is not under judicial review.
U.S. code 8 USC 1252 says:
"No court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed a criminal offense."
The author rightly states the Constitution does not give the power of judicial review to the Courts; they usurped that in Marbury v. Madison. But America is not under a purely codified legal structure but under British Common Law, and precedents do actually make law. Congress let John Marshall get away with asserting that in Marbury and thus it became law - although it is not actually Constitutional law. Of course if someone wanted to challenge it they would have to use the courts...
And he is also right in worrying about which way this double-minded court will swing. You can never trust John Roberts, nor Amy Conehead Barrett.
So this judge has no legal leg to stand on - he was just trying to toss something to see if it would stick. And to grandstand and give Democrats a hook to grab onto. The hope is, of course, that they will run with it, painting Trump as lawless and tyrannical. Trump is focusing on the nature of the deportees and how these are the scum of the Earth and the Democrats want to protect them over protecting Americans. I don't dispute his approach; he's trying to circumvent media propaganda. Most people will not understand or even bother to read the legal arguments.
The author rightly argues that this legal strategy of trying to get a SCOTUS ruling in his favor is a high risk tactic and could backfire. He argues it would be better to simply deny the lower court's authority altogether. How would that work out? He could do it but if in two years the Democrats take both houses of Congress Trump will be impeached and removed from office and prosecuted to the fullest extent possible. They'll try to do it anyway, but it will be much harder if Trump doesn't give them so dandy a weapon. The author's point is correct but he doesn't quite grasp the political realities. And the public will not understand Trump is in the right, not after the media spin machine goes into overdrive. Better to do this by the book.
I think Trump and Bondi and company know what they are doing here.
Here is an interesting article discussing the legal implications of Trump invoking the Alien Enemies Act and the ridiculous court ruling that demanded the Administration turn planes around in mid air and international waters and return the gangster thugs. The author makes many good points but he criticizes the Administration for making public political arguments and not legal ones. I tend to disagree with him on this; the legal arguments will come. Right now Trump is playing rope-a-dope with the Left, angering regular Americans but not showing his cards as of yet (well, his peeps,notably Pam Bondi, are the ones doing that.)
The fact is this is a battle Trump will win. He holds all the cards - the AEA is old, established law that does NOT simply pertain to a time of war but can be used when the President believes it necessary, as the text and historical context shows (there was no war in effect in 1798 when the bill was passed.) It specifically mentions INVASION which we most certainly just endured. Also, SCOTUS has ruled in bygone times that the President has sole power over evicting illegal aliens and that his power is not under judicial review.
U.S. code 8 USC 1252 says:
"No court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed a criminal offense."
The author rightly states the Constitution does not give the power of judicial review to the Courts; they usurped that in Marbury v. Madison. But America is not under a purely codified legal structure but under British Common Law, and precedents do actually make law. Congress let John Marshall get away with asserting that in Marbury and thus it became law - although it is not actually Constitutional law. Of course if someone wanted to challenge it they would have to use the courts...
And he is also right in worrying about which way this double-minded court will swing. You can never trust John Roberts, nor Amy Conehead Barrett.
So this judge has no legal leg to stand on - he was just trying to toss something to see if it would stick. And to grandstand and give Democrats a hook to grab onto. The hope is, of course, that they will run with it, painting Trump as lawless and tyrannical. Trump is focusing on the nature of the deportees and how these are the scum of the Earth and the Democrats want to protect them over protecting Americans. I don't dispute his approach; he's trying to circumvent media propaganda. Most people will not understand or even bother to read the legal arguments.
The author rightly argues that this legal strategy of trying to get a SCOTUS ruling in his favor is a high risk tactic and could backfire. He argues it would be better to simply deny the lower court's authority altogether. How would that work out? He could do it but if in two years the Democrats take both houses of Congress Trump will be impeached and removed from office and prosecuted to the fullest extent possible. They'll try to do it anyway, but it will be much harder if Trump doesn't give them so dandy a weapon. The author's point is correct but he doesn't quite grasp the political realities. And the public will not understand Trump is in the right, not after the media spin machine goes into overdrive. Better to do this by the book.
I think Trump and Bondi and company know what they are doing here.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:39 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 602 words, total size 4 kb.
French and Indian Givers
Timothy Birdnow
So a French politician wants the Statue of Liberty back, eh? Maybe we should demand Normandy in return...
French Politician Demands US Send Back Statue of Liberty - There's Only One Thing Trump Should Ask for In Return
Here everyone thought we called it the French and Indian War because the French were allied with the Native Americans. Turns out it's because the Frogs are indian-givers.
So a French politician wants the Statue of Liberty back, eh? Maybe we should demand Normandy in return...
French Politician Demands US Send Back Statue of Liberty - There's Only One Thing Trump Should Ask for In Return
Here everyone thought we called it the French and Indian War because the French were allied with the Native Americans. Turns out it's because the Frogs are indian-givers.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:24 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.
March 16, 2025
Plandemic II
Timothy Birdnow
The Covid "vaccine" has caused countless deaths and it cannot be proven to have saved any lives at all. So naturally the media is trying to rehabilitate it's memory,now that we are a few years past the pandemic and people are forgetting.
First, there is this Yahoo News story waxing poetic about the fficacy of the clot shot and how "researchers" are convinced it saved lives.
FTA:
You will notice these were all the same people who promised us this would save lives, keep people from getting Covid, and make us not contagious. In other words they arethe ones who lied to us in the first place.
This is pure fantasy; the disease peaked and waned as do all epidemics along a predictable pattern. The numbers they are generating are simply being pulled from thin air.
The Pandemic was the perfect weapon to use against America because claims made by the health cartel cannot be verified and they knew it at the time, which is why they came out so boldly.
In a related post at Yahoo we are being told long Covid is making a comeback and that health issues suffered by folks now isn't caused by the shot but by a mysterious lingering of the illness. Ri-ight.
So why bring this back now? Probably they are dipping a toe in the water to see if they can manufacture another pandemic to stop the Trump juggernaut. The first pandemic was designed with that in mind.
I am perhaps a tinfoil hat guy, but I believe Covid was not just a "leak" from a Chinese lab but was purposely released to influence the American electorate. It also served a "good" purpose in culling the human herd, something near and dear to the anti-humanist population hysterics on the Left. You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet, no? Getting rid of Trump was worth a few million dead in their minds.
I have little doubt they are plotting another lab leak. We've had a few trial balloons already - Bird flu, monkey pox, that respiratory illness (can't remember the name). If they can get a disease running rampant again they can blame Trump. In fact they will claim his closing USAID allowed a disease to get out of control, and his getting us out of the WHO. It's a made-to-order situation for them. So they need to gin public fear back up, and gaslight the public into believing their policies worked.
So watch for many more such stories in the leadup to Pandemic II. I don't see any way it's NOT coming.
The Covid "vaccine" has caused countless deaths and it cannot be proven to have saved any lives at all. So naturally the media is trying to rehabilitate it's memory,now that we are a few years past the pandemic and people are forgetting.
First, there is this Yahoo News story waxing poetic about the fficacy of the clot shot and how "researchers" are convinced it saved lives.
FTA:
"As the world marks the 5-year anniversary of the start of the coronavirus pandemic, one persistent question has been how many lives COVID vaccines helped save.
In January, during his Senate confirmation hearing, Heath and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. was asked by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont whether he believed the vaccines had been effective.
"Was the COVID vaccine successful in saving millions of lives?” Sanders asked.
"I don't know," Kennedy responded.
That runs counter to studies conducted by researchers at Brown University, Yale University, Imperial College London, the World Health Organization and others who have all concluded that, yes, millions more people around the world would have died of COVID-19 were it not for the rollout of vaccines.
And yet, like Kennedy, a growing number of Americans mistakenly believe that COVID vaccines have been responsible for thousands of deaths, according to a 2024 survey by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center. In the August poll, 28% said they thought COVID vaccines had caused thousands of deaths. In June 2021, that number was 22%.
Yahoo News spoke to Christopher Whaley, a health economist at Brown University, to help clarify how we should view the effectiveness of the shots and the estimated number of lives they’ve saved."
In January, during his Senate confirmation hearing, Heath and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. was asked by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont whether he believed the vaccines had been effective.
"Was the COVID vaccine successful in saving millions of lives?” Sanders asked.
"I don't know," Kennedy responded.
That runs counter to studies conducted by researchers at Brown University, Yale University, Imperial College London, the World Health Organization and others who have all concluded that, yes, millions more people around the world would have died of COVID-19 were it not for the rollout of vaccines.
And yet, like Kennedy, a growing number of Americans mistakenly believe that COVID vaccines have been responsible for thousands of deaths, according to a 2024 survey by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center. In the August poll, 28% said they thought COVID vaccines had caused thousands of deaths. In June 2021, that number was 22%.
Yahoo News spoke to Christopher Whaley, a health economist at Brown University, to help clarify how we should view the effectiveness of the shots and the estimated number of lives they’ve saved."
You will notice these were all the same people who promised us this would save lives, keep people from getting Covid, and make us not contagious. In other words they arethe ones who lied to us in the first place.
"It’s really hard to think that President Trump’s Operation Warp Speed is anything but that largest public health success in history,” Whaley said. "I think we sometimes lose appreciation for how important and how impactful getting access to vaccines was.”
Whaley has published two studies on the number of lives saved by the COVID vaccines; one of them looked at the impact that the vaccine rollout in December 2020 had on the rate of deaths being recorded.
"In the United States, we found that COVID vaccines averted nearly 140,000 deaths than would have otherwise happened [over the six months studied] if vaccines were not rolled out,” he said.
Calculating excess mortality figures, or the increase in the number of deaths over a given time period versus a comparable period, Whaley then included factors such as the age of a state’s population and how individual states went about distributing the vaccine.
"Alaska, for example, was the first state to reach 20 COVID vaccine doses per 100 adults,’ he said. "Alabama was almost a month later to reach that same threshold in 2021.”
While studies like Whaley’s are estimates, and figures can vary depending on the data set used by researchers, he stressed that the basic approach is scientifically sound and used to calculate outcomes for a variety of things."
Whaley has published two studies on the number of lives saved by the COVID vaccines; one of them looked at the impact that the vaccine rollout in December 2020 had on the rate of deaths being recorded.
"In the United States, we found that COVID vaccines averted nearly 140,000 deaths than would have otherwise happened [over the six months studied] if vaccines were not rolled out,” he said.
Calculating excess mortality figures, or the increase in the number of deaths over a given time period versus a comparable period, Whaley then included factors such as the age of a state’s population and how individual states went about distributing the vaccine.
"Alaska, for example, was the first state to reach 20 COVID vaccine doses per 100 adults,’ he said. "Alabama was almost a month later to reach that same threshold in 2021.”
While studies like Whaley’s are estimates, and figures can vary depending on the data set used by researchers, he stressed that the basic approach is scientifically sound and used to calculate outcomes for a variety of things."
This is pure fantasy; the disease peaked and waned as do all epidemics along a predictable pattern. The numbers they are generating are simply being pulled from thin air.
The Pandemic was the perfect weapon to use against America because claims made by the health cartel cannot be verified and they knew it at the time, which is why they came out so boldly.
In a related post at Yahoo we are being told long Covid is making a comeback and that health issues suffered by folks now isn't caused by the shot but by a mysterious lingering of the illness. Ri-ight.
So why bring this back now? Probably they are dipping a toe in the water to see if they can manufacture another pandemic to stop the Trump juggernaut. The first pandemic was designed with that in mind.
I am perhaps a tinfoil hat guy, but I believe Covid was not just a "leak" from a Chinese lab but was purposely released to influence the American electorate. It also served a "good" purpose in culling the human herd, something near and dear to the anti-humanist population hysterics on the Left. You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet, no? Getting rid of Trump was worth a few million dead in their minds.
I have little doubt they are plotting another lab leak. We've had a few trial balloons already - Bird flu, monkey pox, that respiratory illness (can't remember the name). If they can get a disease running rampant again they can blame Trump. In fact they will claim his closing USAID allowed a disease to get out of control, and his getting us out of the WHO. It's a made-to-order situation for them. So they need to gin public fear back up, and gaslight the public into believing their policies worked.
So watch for many more such stories in the leadup to Pandemic II. I don't see any way it's NOT coming.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:48 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 861 words, total size 6 kb.
GOP Files Impeachment Against Judge
Timothy Birdnow
Now they're getting it!
GOP Rep Filing Articles of Impeachment Against Judge Who Ordered Plane Carrying Deported Illegals to Turn Around
Now they're getting it!
GOP Rep Filing Articles of Impeachment Against Judge Who Ordered Plane Carrying Deported Illegals to Turn Around
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:51 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.
Mi6 Knew Covid was a Lab Leak
Timothy Birdnow
The British knew.
Labour minister 'rubbished' spy chief's secret dossier on Wuhan lab leak theory during pandemic despite Boris demanding probe... to 'avoid offending China'
Covid was the fraud and crime of the millenium.
The British knew.
Labour minister 'rubbished' spy chief's secret dossier on Wuhan lab leak theory during pandemic despite Boris demanding probe... to 'avoid offending China'
Covid was the fraud and crime of the millenium.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:50 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.
84kb generated in CPU 0.0883, elapsed 0.5545 seconds.
49 queries taking 0.5363 seconds, 243 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
49 queries taking 0.5363 seconds, 243 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
