Anonymous ID: 72b9cf Feb. 9, 2021, 5:27 p.m. No.12875094   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5098 >>5142

Jeffrey Lord Read Through the Democrats’ 77 Page Impeachment Paper and Identified 75 Lies

 

Jeffrey Lord, a contributing editor to The American Spectator, is a former aide to Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp. Lord is also an author, former CNN commentator and staunch Trump supporter. On Tuesday he listed the many lies embedded within the Democrats’ unprecedented impeachment trial.

 

The Trump War Room retweeted Lord’s list of Democrat lies related to this impeachment:

 

Lord says that he read the 77-page report provided by the Democrats to support their spontaneous impeachment of President Trump. He then attempted to identify and list the numerous lies within the document. He came up with 75 lies. Here is a list of his first 10:

 

Lie # 1: The very first sentence reads: “This trial arises from President Donald J. Trump’s incitement of insurrection against the Republic he swore to protect.”

 

Fact: President Trump did no such thing. I had a front-row seat at his speech on the White House Ellipse. I listened to every word. (Here is the text if you want to read for yourself. https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-save-america-rally-transcript-january-6 ) The President recounted his views of what had happened in different states when it came to running the elections in their state. Then he said this: “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

 

There was nothing – nothing – said to cause “an incitement of insurrection”. That is a lie.

 

Lie # 2: The charge says: “In a grievous betrayal of his Oath of Office, President Trump incited a violent mob to attack the United States Capitol during the Joint Session, thus impeding Congress’s confirmation of Joseph R. Biden, Jr. as the winner of the presidential election.”

 

Fact: As stated above, Trump did no such thing. Saying “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard” is hardly a “grievous betrayal” of the presidential oath of office. That is a lie.

 

Lie # 3: “He spent months asserting, without evidence, that he won in a ‘landslide’ and that the election was ‘stolen.’”

 

Fact: Donald Trump produced volumes of evidence of a stolen election. There were state legislative hearings at which one person after another came forward, under oath, to testify to the evidence they had personally witnessed. Over there at David Horowitz’s Front Page is a detailed account of the evidence. The headline: “Yes, It Was a Stolen Election: You’d have to be blind not to see it.” This sentence in the impeachment charge is another lie.

 

Lie # 4: Here’s what the impeachment charges say about the crowd that gathered behind the White House Ellipse to hear the President and others speak: “The crowd was armed, angry and dangerous.”

 

Fact: I was there. In the front row. There was rock music being played. People all around me were dancing. Laughing. I have the video that I took. To say otherwise is a lie.

 

Lie #5: The crowd in front of the President was “tense.”

 

Fact: As said, a provable lie. I have the video.

 

Lie # 6: The charge: “Then he aimed them straight at the Capitol, declaring: “You’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”

 

Fact: Left out – again and deliberately – the President’s call to “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard” In short, no matter how many times this lie is repeated it is still a lie.

 

Lie # 7: The President is accused of a “failure to take charge of a decisive security response.”

 

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/jeffrey-lord-read-democrats-77-page-impeachment-paper-identified-75-lies/

 

The Democrats 75 Impeachment Lies

https://thejeffreylord.com/the-democrats-75-impeachment-lies/

Anonymous ID: 72b9cf Feb. 9, 2021, 5:35 p.m. No.12875162   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Two Crown Resorts directors resign after damning report halts opening of new Sydney casino

 

Crown Resorts directors Guy Jalland and Michael Johnston have resigned less than 24 hours after a scathing report all but detonated the company's hopes of opening Sydney's second casino.

Key points:

 

ILGA chair Philip Crawford said the resignations were a "promising start"

Crown were told to undergo significant cultural changes

Shares in Crown dropped almost 9 per cent when the market opened this morning

 

The report, which came after a lengthy inquiry commissioned by NSW's Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority (ILGA), deemed Crown unsuitable in its current form to hold the licence to operate a new casino at Barangaroo, which has already been built.

 

Commissioner Patricia Bergin's report said the company would need to undergo significant cultural changes if it were to hold the licence in the future, and ILGA chair Philip Crawford this morning quipped Crown would have to "blow itself up to save itself".

 

"I'd be very surprised if there weren't substantial changes to the Crown board," he said.

 

Just minutes after he made that statement in a press conference in Sydney, the company announced Mr Jalland and Mr Johnston had resigned in an ASX statement.

A composite image of two men looking at the camera

Michael Johnston and Guy Jalland resigned as directors of Crown Resorts on February 10, 2021.

 

When a reporter broke the news to Mr Crawford, he described it as "a promising start".

 

"That means somebody is listening to us and that's really positive," he said.

 

'"That's a big message to me and the media."

 

Mr Johnston and Mr Jalland are also directors of James Packer's separate company Consolidated Press Holdings (CPH), which technically holds Mr Packer's shares in Crown.

 

Since taking over as a major shareholder of Crown in 2008, CPH was afforded two nominated directors on Crown's board.

 

The inquiry was also told of a special arrangement between the two companies where confidential financial figures from Crown were regularly shared through CPH, notably without the knowledge of shareholders.

 

The report found it was through this 'protocol' that Mr Packer maintained his thought he was in control of Crown.

 

"The irresistible conclusion from the evidence is that Mr Packer took the view and behaved in a manner consistent with the view that he was still in control of Crown," it said.

 

It stated Mr Jalland was an "honest witness" but deemed his future on the board of Crown was likely over, given the arrangement between the two companies had recently ended.

 

Mr Johnston, a former senior partner with Ernst & Young, actively worked with Mr Packer to develop the VIP gaming business model and apart from the CEO was the only Crown director on the VIP working group.

 

In the inquiry he accepted there was a risk of infiltration of organised crime into casinos.

 

The report recommended he "conclude his tour of duty as soon as possible" because his position with both companies meant lines of reporting were blurred, risks were not properly identified and conflicts of potential conflicts were not recognised.

 

Crown shares were put in a trading halt on the ASX yesterday as the report was released, and dropped almost 9 per cent when the market opened this morning.

 

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian said the report was thorough, direct and clear and that she would await for recommendations and advice from the independent regulator.

 

"It's all there in black and white and I'm sure both Crown and any other organisation will read that report carefully and accept what action has to occur before anybody is able to have a licence in NSW," she said.

 

"Anybody who wants to operate a casino in NSW has to stick to the rules, has to stick to the law.

 

"The Government doesn't apologise for upholding those high standards."

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-10/two-crown-resorts-directors-resign-after-casino-report/13139534

Anonymous ID: 72b9cf Feb. 9, 2021, 5:37 p.m. No.12875186   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Here's the narrative

 

Buffalo shooting: Gunman Gregory Ulrich a ‘wack job’ who just got legal firearm: report

 

The gunman who killed a nurse and injured four other people inside of a Minnesota health clinic Tuesday had a vendetta against doctors because they refused to give him painkillers and had recently been given a permit for a legal firearm, a report said.

 

Gregory Ulrich, who killed at least one nurse at the Allina Health Clinic in Buffalo outside of Minneapolis, had a particular grudge against one doctor and even affixed a sign in front of his mobile home calling the professional a “quack,” former roommate Raymond Zastra told FOX 9.

 

“He didn’t like the doctors because they wouldn’t give him all the painkillers he wanted. They’d give him a month supply, and it would be gone in a few days,” Zastra, who lived with Ulrich in his trailer for two years until last July, told the outlet.

 

The former roommate said Ulrich was often high on painkillers and was seen sniffing glue, smoking marijuana, drinking excessively and would “just sit on the couch high.”

see also

 

Buffalo shooting: Gunman opens fire inside Minnesota health clinic

 

A year ago, Zastra said he saw a letter Ulrich received that granted him permission to carry a weapon, even though local cops “knew he was a wack job.”

 

“He showed me a new handgun he got, I said, ‘What?’ You shouldn’t have a gun,” the roomie recalled.

 

The Buffalo Police Department and the Wright County Sheriff’s Office both said Ulrich was well known to the department and “had a history of conflict” with incidents dating back to 2003.

 

https://nypost.com/2021/02/09/buffalo-shooting-gregory-ulrich-a-wack-job-who-just-got-legal-firearm/

Anonymous ID: 72b9cf Feb. 9, 2021, 5:38 p.m. No.12875207   🗄️.is 🔗kun

https://www.9news.com.au/national/donald-trump-impeachment-news-live-updates-australia-breaking-news-february-10-2021-australian-open/4d506d72-1648-4042-919d-1f383803b94a#post=0ee74173-cbe2-4e92-adf4-e531e7ab6554

 

Chairman Dan

Anonymous ID: 72b9cf Feb. 9, 2021, 5:39 p.m. No.12875224   🗄️.is 🔗kun

PolitiFact rates claim that Maxine Waters said Trump supporters ‘not welcome here’ as ‘mostly false’

 

Highly frequented fact-checking site PolitiFact rated a claim that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) said supporters of former President Donald Trump “were not welcome here” as “mostly false,” since her remarks were directed at Cabinet officials, The Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.

 

“Waters did say that members of Trump’s Cabinet are ‘not welcome anymore, anywhere’ in a June 2018 critique of the administration’s zero-tolerance immigration policy,” PolitiFact stated. “But she did not direct her comments at all Trump supporters as this post suggests.”

 

The fact-checker rated the claim that the congresswoman, a harsh critic of the former president, directed her comments specifically at Trump supporters as “mostly false.”

 

The fact-check, according to The Washington Examiner, appeared to be the result of a Facebook post that misquoted Waters as saying “every Trump supporting American” is not “welcome here.”

 

However, the California congresswoman’s actual comments were aimed at members of Trump’s Cabinet.

 

“If you think we’re rallying now, you ain’t seen nothing yet,” Waters said at a Los Angeles rally on June 23, 2018. “Already, you have members of your Cabinet that are being booed out of restaurants, who are — protesters taking up at their house, who are saying, ‘no peace, no sleep. No peace, no sleep.’”

 

“And so, let’s stay the course. Let’s make sure we show up, wherever we have to show up,” she continued. “And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out, and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

 

Months later, the congresswoman defended her remarks, saying that while she did not threaten Trump’s supporters in that particular speech, she has threatened them in the past, as The Washington Examiner pointed out.

 

“I did not threaten [Trump] constituents and supporters. I do that all the time, but I didn’t do that that time,” Waters said in a September 2018 speech to a laughing Los Angeles crowd.

 

Nonetheless, PolitiFact still rated the Facebook post’s claim as “mostly false,” as The Washington Examiner noted.

 

“And while Waters did make statements suggesting Trump Cabinet members should be singled out in public, she did not direct her comments at Trump supporters broadly, as this post suggests,” the fact-checker also said.

 

On top of misquoting Waters about Trump supporters, the Facebook post, according to PolitiFact, also misquoted her as saying: “We must welcome everyone who crosses our borders, whether they are illegal or not.”

 

However, the fact-checker said that “neither quote is accurate.”

 

“The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed,” PolitiFact went on to say, providing a link to more information about its partnership with the massive social media site.

 

https://saraacarter.com/politifact-rates-claim-that-maxine-waters-said-trump-supporters-not-welcome-here-as-mostly-false/

Anonymous ID: 72b9cf Feb. 9, 2021, 5:43 p.m. No.12875264   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Time Magazine Gushingly Profiles The Successful ‘Conspiracy’ To Rig The 2020 Election

 

Time magazine's article intones the 'Trump is crazy' mantra over his claims of a 'rigged' election while telling anyone who reads it how powerful people conspired to rig the 2020 election.

 

Corporate media has spent the last year arguing that Donald Trump’s claims about 2020 election integrity amount to “seditious” conspiracy theories. While maintaining that narrative despite the cognitive dissonance, Time magazine’s Feb. 15 cover story pulls back the curtain on a “conspiracy” among a “well-funded cabal of powerful people” in an “an extraordinary shadow effort” that successfully pushed Trump from office.

 

“In a way, Trump was right,” writes Time national political correspondent Molly Ball. “There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes.” She later describes this “conspiracy” as something that “sounds like a paranoid fever dream — a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information.”

 

Trump was treated like he had three heads for complaining the election was “rigged.” In the infamous speech he gave as violence broke out in the U.S. Capitol the day Congress certified the Electoral College votes, Trump said, “This year they rigged the election. They rigged it like they’ve never rigged an election before.” The left and some Republicans like Rep. Liz Cheney have insisted Trump’s strong claims like this incited an “insurrection.”

 

Yet Ball makes exactly these kinds of claims in the Time article, and goes on to substantiate them. It’s really hard to tell if the article is just a gloating bat flip, a horrifying attempt to radicalize more people among Democrats’ political opposition, or evidence the left believes Americans are so deadened under Democrat control they will not react to such public revelations of conspiracies to betray American self-governance.

 

The article is above all a striking work of doublespeak. It intones the “Trump is crazy” mantra at Trump’s charges of election-rigging while telling how powerful people conspired to rig the 2020 election. Ball documents a massive election-manipulation “conspiracy” among the nation’s rich and powerful. She shows an amazing level of contempt combined with ignorance about how someone who believes in self-government, as opposed to rule by oligarchs, might take this information.

Election Tampering

 

The conspiracy’s “work touched every aspect of the election,” Ball writes. “They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time.”

 

This, she and the “dozens” of conspiracists she interviewed claim, is evidence of their efforts to “protect the election.” In fact, all of these tactics weaken election integrity.

 

For example, mail-in ballots are known as an unreliable voting method, even without its potential assistance to criminal fraud such as ballot-stuffing, because they create margins of error well within the margin of actual votes in a close election. That’s why labor unions, Jeff Bezos, and many foreign countries refuse to use them.

 

https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/09/time-magazine-gushingly-profiles-the-successful-conspiracy-to-rig-the-2020-election/