MAKE THE WORLD SAFER. STOP TRUMP AND HIS MINIONS. (UPDATED.)

 

How should Democrats, Progressives, and Liberals Combat the Donald Trump/Republican Fascist Agenda of creating a Police State ruled by a few, Destroying and Eliminating such CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AS;

FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION.

...and turning the average American into a SERF, WHOSE LIFE AND WELL-BEING IS LEFT TO THE WHIMS OF THE NEW "ARISTOCRACY." 

#1-  Acknowledge that the Selfish, Self-Centered, and Dishonest also Vote, so Quit trying to Win over everyone through Fear of Confrontation.

#2-  Stop Allowing Trump and the Republicans to Hijack the Moral High Ground, when its Media Campaign is Transparent, and Easily Refuted. 

  

#3- Stand Up to the Outright Lies and Misrepresentations that are part of the Daily Drivel that spews forth from Donald Trumps mouth, which is usually little more than Irrational and Hate Filled propaganda.

#4- Never allow Statistics and Numbers to go unchallenged. The Bogus returns from the  2016 Election were a perfect example of what happens when you blindly accept results without proper examination.

#5- When Statistics are Trotted Out about possible Fraudulent Activities in Social Programs, Demand the Sources for such Claims, and what Procedures were used to draw specific conclusions.

Along these lines, make sure the following Key Points of the Republican Agenda are Studied and Examined thoroughly.

-  Corporate Bailouts that allow POOR MANAGEMENT

SKILLS TO BE REWARDED WITH A SAFETY NET

PAID FOR BY THE AVERAGE TAXPAYER.

-  Tax Breaks that allow Wealthy Individuals who

make Bad Investment Decisions to recover

their losses, paid for by MIDDLE CLASS

AMERICANS.

-  Funds Acquired Through Government Contracts,

that are Shifted to Foreign Markets with no Positive

Effects on the U.S. Economy.

-  Refusing to Raise Wages to a Minimal Level, which

Encourages Self- Sufficiency, and Decreases the 

Need for Government Aid.

...OTHER POLICIES THAT PUSH AN AGENDA THAT

BENEFITS A NARROW SET OF AMERICAN CITIZENS,

THAT ARE PUT IN PLACE TO INCREASE WEALTH AND

PRIVILEGE, AND NOT TO ADDRESS BASIC NEEDS.

FINALLY, DO NOT ALLOW IDEAS AND CONCEPTS SUCH AS 

"CRITICAL RACE THEORY" OR "CANCEL CULTURE" TO BE

DEFINED VAGUELY OR INCORRECTLY, ENCOURAGING THE FAR-RIGHT AGENDA TO BEND AND MOLD THEM INTO ANY SHAPE THEY WANT. THIS ALLOWS THE INTELLECTUALLY MEANINGLESS PROPAGANDA THAT FOLLOWS TO GO UNCHALLENGED, WHICH IS THE NATURAL PRODUCT OF TERMS AND PHRASES THAT DO NOT HAVE UNIVERSAL DEFINITIONS.

 

THE HIDDEN ALLIES OF DONALD TRUMPS ATTEMPT TO RETURN TO POWER.

 

In the past, I have used the following description to paint a picture of Donald Trumps most Hard Core supporters;

It is a mistake for Progressives to think that those who make up the Most Conservative Elements of the "NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY" ARE ALL CUT FROM THE SAME CLOTH. WHILE THEY MAY VOTE AS A BLOC THE PRIMARY MOTIVATION DIFFERS FROM GROUP TO GROUP.

While They are usually Packaged Together, ULTRA CONSERVATIVE POLITICIANS HAVE REALIZED THAT FINDING THE ONE KEY ISSUE THAT DRIVES CERTAIN GROUPS OF VOTERS TO THE POLLS, OFTEN WILL TURN THEM INTO LOYAL ALLIES, who will support an agenda full of Issues They may care little about.

It could be GUN CONTROL, SAME- SEX MARRIAGE, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, IMMIGRATION LAWS, REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE, etc. THE STRATEGY IS TO PUT FORTH AN UNCOMPROMISING, RIGID, AND VITRIOLIC POINT OF VIEW ON A PARTICULAR ISSUE, APPEALING TO THE BASER ELEMENTS OF HUMAN NATURE.

THE REASON: TO LEARN OF THE ONE ISSUE THAT EACH SECTION OF INDIVIDUAL VOTERS MOST IDENTIFIES WITH, AND MANIPULATE IT TO THEIR ADVANTAGE.

IT'S A TACTIC THAT REQUIRES NO INTELLECTUAL EFFORT ON THE PART OF THE LISTENER. THERE IS NO NEED TO UNDERSTAND, OR EVEN CARE ABOUT THE OPPOSITIONS POINT OF VIEW. IT PLAYS ON RAW EMOTION, WITHOUT THE NEED FOR CONTEMPLATION OR REFLECTION.

THE INDIVIDUAL IS ENCOURAGED NOT TO THINK ABOUT AN INTELLECTUAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE OPINION THEY ARE SUPPORTING, BUT TO REACT TO THE WORDS OF THE AUTHOR AND\OR SPEAKER, AND ACCEPTING THE MESSAGE AS TRUE, AND WORTHY OF SUPPORT.  THIS, IN TURN, ENCOURAGES AGREEMENT WITH OTHER OPINIONS THAT ARE EXPRESSED THE SAME WAY.

This analysis gives us a window into the mindset of Trumps most Vocal and Publicly recognizable supporters.To them,Trumps Intellectual and Moral Political Views are in line with their own. It is the desire to turn the U.S. Into a Fascist State where the Constitution is to be ignored or completely disregarded in terms of interpreting and setting Moral and Intellectual standards that create guidelines for the Legal System that Governs the lives of all Americans.

These are the MAGATS that are the Public Face for Donald Trumps Political Agenda, from the attempt to seize control of Government after Trumps 2000 Election defeat to the "Crowds" that attend his in person Rallies.

While Trump counts on their support for the upcoming Election, he and the GOP/FASCIST PARTY OF AMERICA  realize their numbers will not bring victory. So they have come to the decision that other sources must be cultivated to ensure victory at the Polls.  The MAJOR Difference between MAGATS and these new ALLIES IS NOT ONE OF MUTUAL SUPPORT FOR A COMMON POLITICAL AGENDA, BUT A DESIRE TO DESTROY THE CURRENT SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT TO CREATE ONE THAT MIRROR THEIR OWN POLITICAL IDEOLOGY. In fact ,WHAT TRUMPS CAMPAIGN AGENDA IS MEANS ALMOST NOTHING, IT IS THE SYSTEM ITSELF THEY WANT DISMANTLED.TRUMP IS JUST A TOOL  THEY ARE USING TO ACHIEVE THIS END.

In part 2 we will look at the ANARCHIST AND THE IDEOLOGICAL FASCIST.

FACT CHECKING TRUMP, AND ANYONE ELSE. PART 3.

 

Too often we allow our Feelings, Prejudices, Pre-Conceived Ideas, and Physical and Emotional Desires to lead us to draw conclusions that, Logically, are Invalid or not Proven to be Factual.

This, of course, is an error in Judgment anyone can make. Progressive or Conservative, Democrat or Republican, Well Informed or Ignorant. etc No one is immune to the Intellectual and/or Emotional Satisfaction of being Right or Vindicated in what they believe to be true.

The Problem is what one does when faced with contradictory Facts or Arguments that indicate that their Conclusion(s) are in error.

To make this easier to understand, let us examine two BASIC TYPES OF LOGICAL ARGUMENTS.

VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT: IF THE PREMISES ARE TRUE, THE CONCLUSION MUST BE TRUE. This establishes Conclusions that cannot reasonably be considered to be incorrect.

EXAMPLE:

PREMISE 1- Human Beings cannot survive in an environment where water is not present.

PREMISE2: Planet X is barren of any water supply.

CONCLUSION: Mankind cannot survive on Planet X.

As you can see, if we provide enough factual data that both premises are True, the Conclusion itself must be accepted as true.

So, when someone asserts something as Truthful, and you disagree, your first question should not be similar to the following:

"Your wrong, because I learned/Heard/Read something that proves you are incorrect."

That in itself usually leads to dueling opinions, because your contradictory statement must also be properly argued.

Try this instead: "That is interesting. Tell me what Data or Facts lead you to believe that to be true?"

Now you are not contradicting the speaker, but are forcing them to:

- Offer a Validly constructed argument. 

- Create premises that support the conclusion they are making, each of which also must be defended as true.

In the above example of Planet X, the conclusion that Mankind cannot live on Planet X rests solely on both premises being true, and that there is satisfactory Data that cannot be refuted that proves the accuracy of both premises.

THE MESSIAH CHRONICLES: BREAKING DOWN THE MUELLER REPORT: FOR ANSWERS, LOOK IN THE RIGHT PLACES.

           SMITHSONIANMAG.COM                                                       CBSNEWS.COM

PICTURES FROM THE JAN, 6, 2021 ATTACK ON THE WHITE HOUSE. HERE IS A SAMPLE

OF THE "AMERICANS" THAT TRUMP AND THE RUSS-PUBLICAN PARTY COUNT ON TO 

KEEP THEM IN POWER.

BLAST FROM THE PAST.

HERE IS PART OF THE STORY OF THE 2016 ELECTION,

THE YEAR THE U.S. PLACED AN INCOMPETENT DEMAGOGUE

IN THE WHITE HOUSE. IT IS ALSO THE STORY OF A RIGGED ELECTION

THAT WAS ALLOWED TO STAND, EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS DIRECT

EVIDENCE OF BOGUS RETURNS IN A NUMBER OF STATES.

Any words that are colored RED represent portions
of the Transcript that were BLACKED-OUT, 
AND COULD NOT BE READ. WORDS LIKE
"INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE" ARE NOT
MY CREATION, BUT WERE PLACED OVER
BLACKED-OUT AREAS)

As you go through the MUELLER REPORT, there is one very important detail that must be acknowledged: IT IS THE STORY OF TWO INVESTIGATIONS. Why do I say this? BECAUSE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN WERE NOT ARRIVED AT BY THE SAME PROCESS,WITH JUST ONE AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OR INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR EVALUATING EACH EVENT, AND THE VALUE OF THE CORRESPONDING EVIDENCE.

WHAT DO I MEAN? CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING EXCERPTS, TAKEN 
DIRECTLY FROM THE TEXT. (IN ITALICS)

The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. Evidence of Russian government operations began to surface in mid-2016. 

As set forth in detail in this report, the Special Counsel's investigation established that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations.

First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. 

RUSSIAN SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN. 
(HERE ARE SOME EXCERPTS FROM THE BODY OF THE TEXT.)

Internet Research Agency (IRA) carried out the earliest Russian interference operations identified by the investigation. A social media campaign designed to provoke and amplify political and social discord in the United States.

- The IRA was based in St. Petersburg, Russia, and received funding from Russian oligarch Yevgeniy Prigozhin and companies he controlled. Pri ozhin is widely reported to have ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. HARM TO ONGOING MATTER.

- The campaign evolved from a generalized program designed in 2014 and 2015 to undermine the U.S. electoral system, to a targeted operation that by early 2016 favored candidate Trump and disparaged candidate Clinton. 

- The IRA later used social media accounts and interest groups to sow discord in the U.S. political system through what it termed "information warfare." 

 The IRA' s operation also included the purchase of political advertisements on social media in the names of U.S. persons and entities, as well as the staging of political rallies inside the United States. To organize those rallies, IRA employees posed as U.S. grassroots entities and persons and made contact with Trump supporters and Trump Campaign officials in the United States. 
-


Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released the stolen documents. 

RUSSIAN HACKING OPERATIONS. 
(HERE ARE SOME EXCERPTS FROM THE BODY OF THE TEXT.)

At the same time that the IRA operation began to focus ·on supporting candidate Trump in early 2016, the Russian government employed a second form of interference: cyber intrusions (hacking) and releases of hacked materials damaging to the Clinton Campaign. The Russian intelligence service known as the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Army (GRU) carried out these operations. In March 2016, the GRU began hacking the email accounts of Clinton Campaign. 


In March 2016, the GRU began hacking the email accounts of Clinton Campaign volunteers and employees....the GRU hacked into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The GRU stole hundreds of thousands of documents from the compromised email accounts and networks. Around the time that the DNC announced in mid-June 2016 the Russian government's role in hacking its network, the GRU began disseminating stolen materials through the fictitious online personas "DCLeaks" and "Guccifer 2.0." The GRU later released additional materials through the organization WikiLeaks. 

The presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump ("Trump Campaign" or "Campaign") showed interest in WikiLeaks' s releases of documents and welcomed their Potential to damage candidate Clinton. Beginning in June 2016, HARM TO ONGOING MATTER forecast to senior Campaign officials that WikiLeaks would release information damaging to candidate Clinton. WikiLeaks' s first release came in July 2016. 



Now, the Investigation into the above 2 categories provided enough evidence to the committee that
made them confident in drawing definite conclusions, and in some cases, filing Criminal Charges. I will cover these in more depth at a later time, but there is one more category to cover. What you read below may seem to be a part of the RUSSIAN HACKING OPERATION...

...BUT THERE IS ONE MAJOR DIFFERENCE.


EXCERPTS FROM THE BODY OF THE TEXT.

In addition to targeting individuals involved in the Clinton Campaign, GRU officers also targeted individuals and entities involved in the administration of the elections. Victims included U.S. state and local entities, such as state boards of elections (SBOEs), secretaries of state, and county governments, as well as individuals who worked for those entities. 186 The GRU also targeted private technology firms responsible for manufacturing and administering election-related software and hardware, such as voter registration software and electronic polling stations.187 The GRU continued to target these victims through the elections in November 2016. While the investigation identified evidence that the GRU targeted these individuals and entities, the Office did not investigate further. The Office did not, for instance, obtain or examine servers or other relevant items belonging to these victims. The Office understands that the FBI, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the states have separately investigated that activity. 

By at least the summer of 2016, GRU officers sought access to state and local computer networks by exploiting known software vulnerabilities on websites of state and local governmental entities. GRU officers, for example, targeted state and local databases of registered voters using a technique known as "SQL injection," by which malicious code was sent to the state or local website in order to run commands (such as exfiltrating the database contents). 188 In one instance in approximately June 2016, the GRU compromised the computer network of the Illinois State Board of Elections by exploiting a vulnerability in the SBOE's website. The GRU then gained access to a database containing information on millions of registered Illinois voters, 189 and extracted data related to thousands of U.S. voters before the malicious activity was identified.

GRU officers INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE scanned state and local websites for vunerabilities. For example, over a two day period in july 2016, GRU OFFICERS INVESTIGATVE TECHNIQUE
for vulnerabilities on websites of two dozen states. INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE.

Unit 74455 also sent spearphishing emails to public officials involved in election
administration and personnel at companies involved in voting technology. In August 2016, GRU officers targeted employees of **** ,a voting technology company that developed software used by numerous U.S. counties to manage voter rolls, and installed malware on the company network. Similarly, in November 2016, the GRU sent spearphishing emails to over 120 email accounts used by Florida county officials responsible for administering the 2016 U.S. election. 191 The spearphishing emails contained an attached Word document coded with malicious software (commonly referred to as a Trojan) that permitted the GRU to access the infected computer.192 The FBI was separately responsible for this investigation. We understand the FBI believes that this operation enabled the GRU to gain access to the network of at least one Florida county government. The Office did not independently verify that belief and, as explained above, did not undertake the investigative steps that would have been necessary to do so.



The Hacking operations that included the following:

- Individuals and entities involved in the administration of the elections.

- U.S. state and local entities, such as state boards of elections (SBOEs), secretaries of state, and county governments, as well 
as individuals who worked for those entities.

- Private technology firms responsible for manufacturing and administering election-related software and hardware, such 
as voter registration software and electronic polling stations.

- Employees of **** ,a voting technology company that developed software used by numerous U.S. counties to manage voter rolls, and installed malware on the company network. 

- Florida county officials responsible for administering the 2016 U.S. election...


WERE NOT EVALUATED, IN TERMS OF THE QUALITY OF THE EVIDENCE, BY THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL.


FROM THE TEXT:
While the investigation identified evidence that the GRU targeted these individuals and entities, the Office did not investigate further. The Office did not, for instance, obtain or examine servers or other relevant items belonging to these victims. The Office understands that the FBI, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the states have separately investigated that activity. 


The Office did not independently verify that belief and, as explained above, did not undertake the investigative steps that would have been necessary to do so.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? WHILE THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IDENTIFIED EVIDENCE THAT THE GRU"TARGETED THESE INDIVIDUALS AND ENTITIES", NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION WAS DONE.

WHY?

"The Office understands that the FBI, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the states have separately investigated that activity."

"The Office did not independently verify that belief and, as explained above, did not undertake the investigative steps that would have been necessary to do so."

Well this answers the question: "Who is exonerated by the Mueller Report?"
ANSWER: NO ONE. The Evaluation of the
most important information regarding fraud in 
the 2016 election was not part of their 
responsibility. They couldn't exonerate anyone
even if they wanted to. 

TO BE CONTINUED...