Survey says, “Polls are useless!”  

We hear poll results reported to us on a daily basis.

“Most Americans believe this, or most Americans are in favor of that.”

“This politician is leading by so many points, or that politician is dropping in the polls.”

But, are these poll results worthy of even being reported anymore?

apolls 15

The Pew Research Center says, “Polling is not ‘broken.’”

Of course, what would we expect them to say?

That’s what they do…, they poll public opinion.

They’re not going to undermine their own industry, are they?

In an attempt to validate their own value, I believe they have done just that.

Let’s take a look at Pew’s defense of “survey methodology.”

“A comprehensive review of polling accuracy published in 2018 found that ‘relying on vote intention polls from more than 200 elections in 32 countries over a period of more than 70 years, there is no evidence that poll errors have increased over time….’”

Oh, really.

apolls 8

What about the 2016 presidential election polls?

“In 2016, problems with polls in a few key Midwestern states led many people to underestimate the chances of a Donald Trump victory. As a consequence, the immediate post-election assessment was that there had been a complete polling meltdown.”

And rightly so.

apolls 2

“But that ‘insta-narrative’ turned out to be oversimplified. The 2016 election was not, in fact, an industry-wide failure for the polls.”

I beg to differ.

apolls 16

The 2016 election WAS, INFACT, “an industry-wide failure for the polls.”

apolls 9

apolls 14

apolls 4

“Rigorous national surveys – designed to measure the popular vote rather than capture the effects of the Electoral College – were quite accurate by historical standards.”

Is that so?

Then where did all of the “Donald Trump has NO path to victory” talk come from?

“An average of the final, publicly released national polls suggested that Hillary Clinton would win the overall popular vote by 3 percentage points, and she ultimately won by 2 points.”

Again…, really?

I do not recall any polls reporting that Donald Trump was anywhere near 2-3 points within catching Hillary Clinton.

This seems like a bit of revisionist history to me.

apolls 6

Based on the polls, it was almost made to seem that a Trump voter was wasting their time even bothering to vote.

“Front and center among these problems is the fact that many state pollsters didn’t adjust their 2016 polls to reflect that college graduates are more likely to take surveys than adults with less formal education.”

Oh, really.

And what flawed survey did THAT information come from?

How would you “adjust” your poll in this case?

“This mattered more than in previous years, when there weren’t big partisan differences between the two groups. In 2016, however, college grads broke for Clinton while high school grads broke for Trump. State polls that didn’t adjust – or weight – their data by education were left with a biased sample.”

Sooooo, you have to be able to anticipate your poll results beforehand in order for you to be able to correctly adjust your poll results?

Alrighty then.

apolls 12

“Looking ahead to 2020, election junkies can expect to see some high-quality polling done at the national level and in many states.”

Really?

apolls 3

Why would we expect that?

Because that’s what you want us to believe for your own sake?

Survey says…, BINGO!

apolls 5

“The polling industry was founded using mail and face-to-face interviews before it adapted to the rise of telephone connectivity. It is in the midst of another metamorphosis, changing once again to meet the spread of internet access. This means we are in a period of great variety in survey methods. With that comes innovation, risk, creativity and challenges.”

“While evidence suggests that well-funded, telephone-based surveys still work [And what evidence would that be?], they have become much more difficult and expensive to conduct. Difficult because the swarm of robocalls Americans now receive, along with the development of call blocking technologies, means that lots of people don’t answer calls from unknown numbers.”

“Response rates have gone from 36% in 1997 to 6% today.”

Wait…, what?

apolls 11

“Response rates have gone from 36% in 1997 to 6% today.”

And Pew doesn’t see this as a serious problem?

Or, just a problem they are willing to overlook?

“The good news is that Pew Research Center studies conducted in 1997, 2003, 2012 and 2016 found little relationship between response rates and survey accuracy, and other researchers have found similar results.”

“Little relationship,” huh?

That would be “good news,” if it were true!

“The bad news is that it’s impossible to predict whether this remains true if response rates go down to 4%, 2% or 1%, and there is no sign that this trend is going to turn around as peoples’ technology habits continue to evolve.”

“It’s impossible to predict,” huh?

Again, I beg to differ.

The “bad news,” for Pew is, I think it’s completely reasonable to predict that such low response rates would definitely affect survey accuracy…, even more than they do now.

The question is, if the use of phone polls are fading out of these surveys, what is filling the response gap?

Pew Research Center says, “The internet.”

“As digital access became the norm, pollsters began to look for a way to reach respondents online. This method has a number of upsides [And a number of serious downsides.]. People can take the survey in private and at their convenience, pollsters don’t have to hire and manage roomfuls of live interviewers or pay phone bills, and survey methodologists have found that there are measurement advantages to self-administration. Market research surveys moved en masse to the web, and academics were drawn to the combination of low costs and ease of experimentation.”

“There is, however, one significant challenge. While there are ways to draw random samples of the U.S. population offline using master lists of people’s home addresses or phone numbers (thanks to the U.S. Postal Service and Federal Communications Commission, respectively), there is not yet a way to do this through the internet.”

NO WAY TO DRAW RANDOM SAMPLES THROUGH THE INTERNET!

Oh…, that’s the only “challenge?”

That’s a pretty significant challenge, I would say.

“Traditional survey research is aggressively based on the statistical theory of the random sample, where every member of the population has an identical (or at least known and nonzero) chance of being included. This produces surveys that reflect the country in all its racial, ethnic, religious and income diversity. Low response rates can erode the randomness of the sample.”

EXACTLY!!!

The methodology, that Pew describes here, blows the whole concept of “random sampling” out of the water…, making their surveys, and the surveys of others, virtually worthless.

apolls 1

It’s the complete randomness factor that lends any level of validity to any of these polls.  Without that, we are really left with nothing worth reporting…, unless, of course, the poll seems to be in your favor.

apolls 10

 

Thank you to The Pew Research Center, and these contributors to their report:

Claudia Deane, Vice President, Research, Courtney Kennedy, Director, Survey Research, Scott Keeter, Senior Survey Advisor, Arnold Lau, Research Analyst, Nick Hatley, Research Analyst, Andrew Mercer, Senior Research Methodologist, Rachel Weisel, Senior Communications Manager, Hannah Klein, Communications Manager, Calvin Jordan, Communications Associate, Andrew Grant, Communications Associate, and Travis Mitchell, Copy Editor.

 

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

We’re all entitled to our opinions.  I value yours and your feedback as well.

I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

 

Polls?  Who needs polls?

According to Joseph A. Wulfsohn of Fox News, “Stony Brook professor Helmut Norpoth says Trump has a 91% chance of winning in November.”

a2020 3

“Despite recent polls that identify Joe Biden as the heavy favorite in 2020, a political science professor is still standing by his prediction model that shows President Trump having a ‘91 percent’ chance of winning in November.”

Allow me to remind you of another poll that had a “heavy favorite!”

a2020 22

I think we have seen these polls are extremely flawed and propagandistic in nature.

a2020 11

‘“Mediaite’ [Mediaite is a digital news site that covers political news] reported on Wednesday that Stony Brook professor Helmut Norpoth is doubling down on his ‘Primary Model,’ which has correctly predicted five out of the past six elections since 1996 and every single election but two in the past 108 years.”

‘“The Primary Model gives Trump a 91 percent chance of winning in November,’ Norpoth said. ‘This model gets it right for 25 of the 27 elections since 1912, when primaries were introduced.’”

“As Mediaite noted, the two elections the model failed to predict were the 1960 election of John F. Kennedy and the 2000 [hanging chad] election of George W. Bush.”

“Norpoth’s model examines the results of presidential primaries as the strongest indicator as to the outcome in the general election, not the polls that dominate the political discussion. According to Norpoth, Biden is in a much weaker position than Trump because of his poor showing in the first two primary races.”

“Before making the stunning comeback in the South Carolina primary and carrying the following races, Biden came in fourth place in Iowa with just 15.8 percent of the vote and came in fifth place in New Hampshire with just 8.4 percent.”

“Norpoth stressed that ‘enthusiasm is key.’”

a2020 5

a2020 12

And I think we all know where the enthusiasm lies.

a2020 9

a2020 10

“Norpoth’s model, which correctly predicted Trump’s victory roughly nine months before the 2016 election, suggests that the president will win by even a wider margin in the electoral college with 362 electoral votes versus the 304 he earned against Hillary Clinton. Mediaite pointed out such a victory would nearly match Barack Obama’s 2008 election, when he earned 365 electoral votes.”

a2020 1

a2020 2

Please check out my own prediction blogs from March 16, 2020,

EXTRA, EXTRA, READ ALL ABOUT IT!  THE DEMOCRAT PARTY WON’T BE THE SAME AFTER THE 2020 ELECTION!

https://mrericksonrules.com/2020/03/16/extra-extra-read-all-about-it-the-democrat-party-wont-be-the-same-after-the-2020-election/

 

And from December 18, 2018.

“It’s tough to make predictions…, especially about the future.” – New York Yankee great, Yogi Berra

https://mrericksonrules.com/2018/12/18/its-tough-to-make-predictions-especially-about-the-future-new-york-yankee-great-yogi-berra/

 

“The Stony Brook professor appeared on ‘The Ingraham Angle’ back in May making the same prediction.”

“While the ‘Primary Model’ hands Trump his reelection, national polls suggest Biden will win handily in November. The Real Clear Politics average shows the former VP besting the sitting president by 8.7 points. In the latest Fox News poll, Biden has a 12 point lead over Trump.”

a2020 8

a2020 6

a2020 7

All I can say is, “All of you democrats/socialists/fascists/communists out there…, you just go on believing you have a 12 point lead over our guy.  That’s fine with us.”

I refuse to believe that the majority of the people in this country…

… want to defund and do away with police departments across the country.

a2020 20

… feel that rioting, looting and burning is a right.

… agree that the mob rules, and can destroy any statue, monument or memorial they feel like destroying, and at any time.

… feel that criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens do.

… feel that illegal immigrants have more rights than law abiding citizens do.

… feel it’s okay to disrespect our country and our flag.

a2020 16

… feel that it’s okay for politicians and the media to lie right to our faces, and on an on-going basis.

a2020 17

a2020 18

… feel that it’s okay to mercilessly attack, investigate, and harass our duly elected president.

… feel that it’s okay for our schools and colleges to operate as indoctrination centers for the liberals and their socialist/fascist/communist ideals.

a2020 25

… feel it’s okay for our country to have open borders, allowing people to stroll into our country whenever they want, while immediately becoming eligible for any and all benefits.

… feel our country and our society is evil at its core and needs to be “transformed” into some other vague type of socialist/fascist/communist hybrid type of government.

a2020 13

… want our tax cuts rescinded, and our taxes raised.

… want business tax cuts rescinded, and businesses forced out of our country again.

… want to allow climate change scientists to dictate our economy and our way of life.

… want the price of gas to go up, and want us to become dependent on Middle Eastern oil again.

… want to hand over all of our guns and do away with our 2nd amendment rights.

a2020 24

… want to move away from a free market economic system to a socialistic system.

a2020 21

a2020 15

… want our jobs to head back overseas.

… want our manufacturing companies to disappear…, again.

… want our country to be played for a fool, internationally…, again.

… want government to control every aspect of our lives.

a2020 19

And that’s just the start of what I refuse to believe the majority of the people in this country support.

Just sayin’.

a2020 23

a2020 14

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

We’re all entitled to our opinions.  I value yours and your feedback as well.

I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Sleepy Joe will be a “no show!”

Yes…, Sleepy Joe will be a “no show” when it comes to any kind of presidential debate.

There’s no way the democrats let Creepy Joe out on a stage to go one-on-one with President Trump!

I’m calling this one right now.

adebate 4

Again…, there’s no way the democrats let Creepy Joe out on a stage to go one-on-one with President Trump!

adebate 1

Every time they let Quid Pro Quo Joe out of his basement, he sticks his foot in his mouth.

adebate 10

Most recently Sleepy Joe proclaimed that “120 million Americans died” from the Chinese virus, coronavirus, Covid-19, or whatever you want to call it.

adebate 8

Yes, Joe…, losing over a third of our country’s population would be a very serious matter, if that were the case.

Which it isn’t.

adebate 9

The democrats will use any and all kinds of excuses to avoid Biden participating in a live debate with President Trump…, and the fake news media, of course, will give him a pass.

adebate 7

We’ll hear how debates are actually not that important and how they really don’t add much to the process anymore.

We’ll hear that no debate is worth spreading the coronavirus and possibly killing others!

Why, it’s a matter of life and death!

Mark my words…, THERE WILL BE NO LIVE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES.

That being said…, as a response to this, I humbly suggest that President Trump and his campaign produce their own version of a “debate,” using a stand-up cardboard cut-out of Sleepy Joe to stand at the opposing podium, and someone who sounds like Creepy Joe to provide his verbal “answers.”

Can you imagine?!

This world be hysterical, totally effective, and challenge the Super Bowl for the most watched television program of the year.

Would this type of event be right up President Trump’s alley or what?!

It would be an absolute win-win-win-win-win scenario!

adebate 5

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

We’re all entitled to our opinions.  I value yours and your feedback as well.

I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

My reaction to some recent headlines:  (1) Lock up Attorney General William Barr?  (2) Another date that will “go down in infamy?” (3) Why are the House Democrats out to get Attorney General Barr?  (4) Democrat lawmaker records himself harassing a pro-life woman.  And (5) Joy “less” Behar of “The View” is at it again. 

There are so many topics I’d like to offer my insight on, but so little time!  So every once in a while I like to respond to a number of articles that I couldn’t necessarily devote an entire daily blog to on an article by article basis.

Welcome to my second edition of “MrEricksonRules’ headline buffet line!”

100 chance of winning

Pick your favorite(s) or have some of each.  It’s totally up to you!

<<<<<<<1>>>>>>>

“Imprisoning Bill Barr is [the] left’s new rallying cry: ‘Have him locked up!’”

By Brooke Singman of Fox News.

“The battle between congressional Democrats and the Justice Department over Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report has reached new levels of vitriol, as some on the left call for Attorney General Bill Barr to be physically dragged in to testify or even locked up for defying congressional subpoenas.”

“The demands have escalated after the attorney general refused to appear before the House Judiciary Committee last week amid disagreements over the format of the hearing.”

“Though he testified a day earlier on the Senate side, Democrats on the committee still want to bring in the DOJ leader to answer questions on the conclusion of Mueller’s investigation. Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., also imposed a Monday morning deadline for Barr to turn over the full, unredacted Mueller report and additional files — a deadline the DOJ apparently missed, prompting Nadler to schedule a Wednesday vote on contempt proceedings against Barr.”

Everything that William Barr has done up this point is completely within in rights and responsibilities as Attorney General.

What we have on the democrats’ side is a bunch of grandstanding, and now desperation, as they learned that Mr. Barr was looking into what really happened regarding Russian collusion, and what really happened regarding spying on Americans, and what really happened that caused this fraudulent investigation to be launched in the first place.

headlines 3

Their main goal now is to discredit him, silence him, and preferably have him resign or be removed from office.  Anything but allow him to drag their “swampy” friends out into the sunlight.

headlines 15

‘“He [Attorney General Barr] lied to Congress.  And if anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime,’ Pelosi told reporters. ‘Nobody is above the law. Not the president of the United States.  Not the attorney general.’”

Apparently Mrs. Pelosi is an exception to that rule…, as she lies ALL of the time to Congress, to us, to basically anyone within earshot of her.

“Pelosi’s public comments came after she, according to Politico, told Rep. Charlie Crist, D-Fla., during a private caucus meeting Thursday: ‘We saw [Barr] commit a crime when he answered your question.’”

“However, according to both the Post and the Justice Department, Mueller made clear that he did not feel that Barr’s summary was inaccurate.  Instead, Mueller told Barr that media coverage of the letter had “misinterpreted” the results of the probe concerning obstruction of justice.”

We all know it doesn’t matter to the democrats what anyone actually says…, the only thing that matters is what they want us to hear.

<<<<<<<2>>>>>>>

“NPR reporter refers to Barr summary in same terms as FDR describing attack on Pearl Harbor.”

By Anna Hopkins of Fox News

“The Department of Justice reporter for NPR [National Public Radio] referred to the date of Attorney General Barr’s summary of the Mueller report as ‘a date that will live … in infamy,’ a phrase many associate with President Franklin Roosevelt’s 1941 speech following the Pearl Harbor attack.”

headlines 10

“NPR’s Carrie Johnson made the comment during the NPR Politics podcast last Wednesday while discussing Barr’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, during which he answered questions about the summary he gave of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.”

NPR…, another arm of the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

Aren’t you be a tad dramatic there Ms. Johnson?

“A day that will live in infamy?”

Really?

How about the day that people in our government were contemplating a coup against President Trump?  How about that day?

How about the day the DOJ and the FBI decided they were going to falsify testimony to the FISA court and spy on the Trump campaign?  How about that day?

How about the day that the FBI overstepped its bounds and declared Hillary did not break any laws, regarding obstructing justice by destroying her server and then deleting over 33,00 emails, because that was not her “intent.”  How about that day?

You’re pathetic, Carrie Johnson.  You’re just a tool to be used by the liberal propaganda machine. You’re no journalist, and you’re no reporter.

You’re a fool.

<<<<<<<3>>>>>>>

“Why are the House Democrats out to get Attorney General Barr?”

By Representative Andy Biggs for Fox News

“Democrats in Congress are so worried that the American people will find out what is NOT in the Mueller report that they will say and do almost anything. The report exposes their false assertions that President Trump cooperated with the Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election. They will resort to embarrassing stunts like bringing fast food chicken buckets into congressional hearings. And, they will attempt to destroy the reputation of Attorney General William Barr simply because he is the messenger who released the Mueller report to the public.”

headlines 13

“Consider that House Democrat leaders are claiming Barr lied about … what? They are upset because he wrote a memo iterating the major findings in the Mueller report. They castigated Barr for the few weeks it took for him to make legally required redactions in the Mueller report before he could publicly release the report. Turns out Barr’s initial summary was accurate. And, we have a special counsel report that is available for public viewing with very few redactions, proving that Democrats weren’t telling the truth for over two years.”

“The Democrats must also be troubled that the inspector general will soon be releasing his report regarding the findings of his investigation into the abuse of power, which includes obtaining secret warrants to spy on the Trump campaign under the Obama administration. They dare not let go of their attack on the president and anyone who works with him, knowing that the IG report will likely contain damaging revelations of the Democrat National Committee and the Clinton presidential campaign working with Russians to unleash the police apparatus under President Obama to spy on the Trump campaign for political purposes.”

headlines 5

The democrats are counting on the complicit “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” to do their part and downplay or ignore any potentially damaging evidence that turns up.

They, in turn, will just continue to deny, deny, deny, and attempt to discredit William Barr, and anyone else that may need to be silenced.

Republican Representative Andy Biggs represents the 5th Congressional District of Arizona.

<<<<<<<4>>>>>>>

“Dem state lawmaker records himself harassing pro-life woman outside Planned Parenthood”

By Caleb Parke of Fox News

“PA [Pennsylvania] State Representative Brian Sims recorded himself harassing a pro-life woman peacefully protesting outside a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Sims’ Philadelphia district.”

headlines 12

“A Pennsylvania Democratic state representative went on an eight-minute rant, verbally harassing an elderly woman protesting outside a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic.”

“Brian Sims recorded a woman outside Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, which is in his district, telling her to pray at home, calling her an ‘old white lady’ and lecturing her about her Christian beliefs on the Periscope app.”

‘“Push back against Planned Parenthood protestors, PLEASE!’ Sims wrote on Twitter Thursday. ‘They prey on young women, they use white privilege, & shame. They’re racist, classist, bigots who NEED & DESERVE our righteous opposition. Push back, please!’”

So here we have another obvious example of double standards exhibited by the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake new media.”

Here we have a politician no less, harassing an elderly citizen, who is doing everything within her rights as a citizen to do.

He brings her race into play, and then has the nerve to later call her a racist!

He also attacks her religion, which is okay to do, as long as it’s Christianity.  God forbid he would attack a Muslim!!!  Then we would really have a problem here!

The level of confusion exhibited by these clowns is just so impressive.

<<<<<<<5>>>>>>>

“Joy Behar slams ‘unpatriotic’ Trump, says GOP supporters should remove ‘those flag pins.’”

By Brian Flood for Fox News

‘“The View’ co-host Joy [less] Behar said on Monday that Republicans who support President Trump should take off ‘those flag pins’ because the president’s behavior regarding Russian meddling is ‘unpatriotic.’”

headlines 2

‘“It isn’t just that. Let’s talk about, you know, the fact that he met with Putin for 90 minutes… and never once brought up the fact that Russia, Russia interfered in our election,’ Behar said.

These libs just throw this stuff around like they know what they’re talking about.

How exactly did the Russians “interfere” with our elections?  They sure interfered far less than our own FBI and DOJ!  And I don’t hear her crying about James Comey or Loretta Lynch though!

That’s because Joy “less” Behar has no idea what she is talking about.  She is just a part of the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

headlines 3

“Behar continued: ‘I said last week I don’t want to see any of those flag pins anymore on Republicans who don’t stand up against this guy for Russian meddling, and other things that he’s done. It seems as though he’s unpatriotic.’”

headlines 4

Joy “less” Behar is so far off base here, it’s hard to know how to respond.  So I guess I won’t.

“You can’t argue with crazy” is something my wife says all of the time.

And she’s right.

So I won’t.

“Behar has attacked Trump and his supporters on a regular basis, mocking everything from Mike Pence’s Christian faith to women who support Trump.  She immediately backtracked last September after saying ‘God forbid President Trump lives another 20 years.’”

What a peach.

headlines 1

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

“Waaaah…, the election was stolen from me…, waaah!” – Hillary Clinton

According to Liam Quinn, a senior editor at Fox News, “Hillary Clinton suggests the election was ‘stolen’ from her, and other Dems could ‘suffer the same fate.’”

“Hillary Clinton suggested she had the 2016 election ‘stolen’ from her during the latest stop of her slumping speaking tour.”

hillary stolen 9

“Taking the stage with her husband Bill in Los Angeles Saturday night as part of the couple’s ‘Evening with the Clintons’ tour, the former Democrat presidential nominee told the crowd she has been warning potential candidates they could suffer the same fate.”

Ha!  An evening with the Clintons!?

More like an evening with a serial sex offender and his scheming, apologist, power hungry, wanna be president, partner in crime.

hillary stoen 10

‘“I think it’s also critical to understand that, as I’ve been telling candidates who have come to see me, you can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you,’ the former secretary of state said.”

Oh really?  Which candidates exactly have been coming to see you, Hillary?  I’m calling bull caca on that claim.

hillary stolen 2

“She’s hardly the only prominent Democrat claiming to have been wrongly kept out of office. On Friday, Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams again claimed she won the state’s 2018 gubernatorial race, despite losing to now-Gov. Brian Kemp.”

‘“I’m here to tell you a secret that makes Breitbart and [Fox News host] Tucker Carlson go crazy: We won,’ Abrams said, according to The Houston Chronicle. ‘I am not delusional. I know I am not the governor of Georgia — possibly yet.’”

No, Stacey, you’re not “delusional,” you’re just a bad loser, and a typical racist, liberal, socialist…, and you don’t know how to talk.

Bam!  Ya, I just said that!

“Abrams justified her refusal to accept the result of the election by calling Kemp ‘an architect of voter suppression that spent the last eight years knitting together a system of voter suppression that is unparalleled in America.’”

Ya…, how dare Governor Kemp attempt to suppress the votes of dead people, non-citizens, and fraudulent mail-in ballots!

The nerve of that guy!

“At the Clinton event, the crowd broke out in applause after Hillary Clinton delivered the ‘stolen’ election line, before she continued with a jab at President Trump.”

‘“And that, my friends, has nothing to do with the economy,’ she said.”

No it doesn’t, Hillary…, but “It’s the economy, stupid” was coined by your hubby’s own campaign strategist, James Carville, during his successful 1992 presidential campaign…, stupid!

“So part of our challenge is to understand what it will take to put together not only the popular vote but the Electoral College.”

Wow…, that’s a good idea Hillary!  Maybe you should have thought about that before the last election…, since, you know…, the winner is decided by which candidate gets the most Electoral College votes.  Duh!

“Clinton won the popular vote in her 2016 campaign against Trump, but lost the Electoral College — and with it, the race.”

She not only lost the Electoral College election, but she got creamed, 304 – 227.

It’s pretty hard to “steal” something from someone who never had the thing to begin with!

Fox News contributor Dan Bongino asked, “How can the woman whose team colluded with Russia during the 2016 campaign claim the election was ‘stolen’ from her’ [by the Russians]?”

hillary stolen 1

“The former first lady also questioned how Trump could still hold conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin following the release of the information in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report.”

Uhhh, maybe because Mueller found no proof of collusion between President Trump and “the Russians,” whatever or whoever “the Russians” means…, or haven’t you heard?

hillary stolen 6hillary stolen 4

“Mueller’s report ‘not only decisively proves, but goes chapter and verse about how the Russians — in the words of the report — conducted a sweeping and systemic interference in our election,’ she said, according to the Seattle Times. ‘And then you wake up and your president is spending an hour on the phone with Vladimir Putin, who was the mastermind of the interference and attack on our election.’”

I’ve said this before…, but Hillary has not read the Mueller report.  All she does is make up whatever narrative she wants and then attributes it to the report, which she know the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” won’t question or dispute.

hillary stolen 5

According to Michael F. Haverluck, of OneNewsNow.com, “The first Clinton event that was held at a Canadian hockey area – which houses nearly 20,000 seats – saw a mere 3,300 tickets sold, and more seat backs than Clinton fans were visible when the lights dimmed and the couple started talking.”

“For their May 19 show at The Forum in Inglewood, California, – which seats more than 17,000 – tickets usually priced at $77 are now going for $35, with $120 tickets discounted to $50, and $175 seats down to $72,” the U.K. daily informed [And tickets were all the way down to $6.50 just prior to the event!]. ‘Despite the site telling customers that ‘tickets are selling fast!’ with ‘limited time remaining,’ it appears that less than 450 discounted tickets have actually been sold.’”

I guess Hillary is about as popular now as she was during the election!

Unlike during the election, however, you can’t pay people to come to your events…, because, in this case, what would be the point?

In conclusion…, let’s be clear…, nothing was “stolen” from you Hillary.

hillary stolen 8

In reality…, you just plain lost…, and conversely…, we know that YOU were the one who cheated during the debates.  You were the one who had your party rig the primary election against Bernie Sanders.  YOU and your partners in crime were the ones who colluded with the Russians in an attempt to dig up dirt on and/or frame Donald Trump.  And YOU were and are the one who has obstructed justice at every turn.

And you just continue to lie misinform the people whenever you open your mouth.

LOCK HER UP!

LOCK HER UP!

LOCK HER UP!

Fox News’ Adam Shaw and Andrew O’Reilly also contributed to Liam Quinn’s report.

hillary stolen 11

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Oh, Hillary…, lying for you is as easy as breathing, isn’t it?

When talking with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, Hillary Clinton said the most important thing she learned from the Mueller report was “the Russians were successful” in sowing “discord and divisiveness.”

First of all, “Crooked Hillary,” you, yourself, did not read one word of the Mueller report, so you actually learned nothing from it.

Then you, “Crooked Hillary,” suggest it was the Russians who were “successful in sowing discord and divisiveness” during the 2016 election, when in all actuality it was you, “Crooked Hillary” and your crooked partners in crime!  You know…, the same people you gave money to so they could give money to Christopher Steele to collude with the Russians and help to fabricate the infamous dossier.  You know…, the real colluders with the Russians…, You, “Crooked Hillary,” the DNC, the company Fusion GPS and Nellie Ohr, the wife of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr.  This is all common knowledge now, except many Americans are not aware of it thanks to the complicit “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

lying hillary 1

The next thing that oozes from “Crooked Hillary’s” mouth is, “China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?”

“Turnabout,” she hypothetically suggests to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, “might be fair play.”

Then again it might not.

maddow

You, “Crooked Hillary,” wouldn’t be inciting operatives of the Chinese government to illegally obtain and distribute information about the current President of the United States, would you?

Because if you were, I would consider that a treasonous act and you, “Crooked Hillary,” an accessory to that crime…, another crime…, another crime in a long list of crimes.

lying hillary 12

According to Bianca Quilantan for Politico, “Hillary Clinton on Wednesday night suggested that if the Justice Department was going to let Russia get away with interfering in the 2016 presidential election, it might be OK if one of the 2020 Democratic candidates enlisted China for help.”

lying hillary 11

Speaking again to Rachel Maddow on her MSNBC show, ‘“Imagine, Rachel, that you had one of the Democratic nominees for 2020 on your show, and that person said, you know, the only other adversary of ours who is anywhere near as good as the Russians is China,’ Clinton told Maddow. ‘So why should Russia have all the fun? And since Russia is clearly backing Republicans, why don’t we ask China to back us?’”

‘“And not only that, China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?’ Clinton continued. ‘I’m sure our media would richly reward you.’”

lying hillary 2

I’m sure our “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” would reward them too!  Just as long as they don’t come around with dirt on you or the democrats, right!

I’m also sure that China would be more than happy to back the democrats and go back to the Obama days when they were getting away with economic murder all of those one-sided trade deals.

“Clinton said the No. 1 thing she learned from reading special counsel Robert Mueller’s partially redacted report (which she didn’t read) was that Russia conducted a “sweeping and systemic interference” in the 2016 election and has not been held accountable. And that she worries there is reason to believe Russia will do it again.”

Extra!  Extra!  Read all about it!  Russia has been trying to interfere, and interfering, in our elections for like the last 70 years!  This is nothing new and I’m sure they won’t quit trying now.

Mrs. Clinton, “Crooked Hillary,” is just one giant and continuous misinformation machine.  In other words, lies roll off of her tongue like water flows over a waterfall.

lying hillary 5

“When asked about Attorney General William Barr’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier Wednesday, Clinton said that ‘calling for his resignation makes perfect sense.’”

‘“I think that the Democrats on the committee did a good job today in exposing that he is the president’s defense lawyer,’ Clinton said. ‘He is not the attorney general of the United States in the way that he has conducted himself.’ Clinton added that House Democrats ‘have every reason to’ find Barr in contempt.”

lying hillary 13

Standing up for the truth, the law and common sense does not make you “the President’s defense lawyer,” Hillary.

You, “Crooked Hillary,” feel that “calling for his [Attorney General Barr’s] resignation makes perfect sense.”  Oh, you mean like when Obama’s Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, met privately with your husband, on a plane, sitting on the tarmac, in the middle of their investigation of you?  Is that what you mean?

lying hillary 3

lying hillary 7

‘“But this is part of their [“their” meaning the whole right-wing conspiracy thing I guess] whole technique to divert attention from what the real story is,’ Clinton continued. ‘The real story is the Russians interfered in our election. And Trump committed obstruction of justice. That’s the real story.’”

Wrong again “liar, liar, pants on fire!”  “The real story” is that you and your partners in crime fabricated the fairy tale dossier and used it as a basis for attempting to frame President Trump, and his people, with colluding with the Russians…, which is exactly what you and your friends did.

That’s “the real story.”

LOCK HER UP!  LOCK HER UP!

lying hillary 6

Lies, lies and more lies.

lying hillary 8

lying hillary 10

lying hillary 9

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Hillary Clinton says, “Anyone other than Trump would have been indicted for obstruction.”

No.

Oh no you didn’t!

Please tell me that those words did not come out of your lying, corrupt pie hole, Mrs. Clinton!

hillary summit 1

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, “These democrats just have NO shame.”

They will lie straight to your face and smile while they’re doing it.

Which she did while speaking at the TIME 100 Summit, in New York, Tuesday, April 23, 2019.

According to Alex Pappas for Fox News, “Hillary Clinton said Tuesday she believes Donald Trump would have been indicted in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe if he weren’t president, though stopped short of calling for his impeachment.”

“Clinton, the Democratic nominee for president in 2016, argued during a Q&A session in New York that Mueller’s report ‘could not be clearer’ in making the case Trump tried to obstruct the Russia investigation — even though Mueller did not come to an explicit conclusion on that question.”

Well, I have to agree with you there Hillary.  It “could not be any clearer,” and it’s as clear as mud!

And again…, BELIEVE ME…, if Robert Mueller could have charged President Trump with ANYTHING…, and I mean ANYTHING…, he would have.

She continues by saying, ‘“I think there’s enough there that any other person who had engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted, but because of the rule in the Justice Department that you can’t indict a sitting president, the whole matter of obstruction was very directly sent to the Congress.’”

I guess Hillary should know.  She is the queen of obstructing justice after all.

hillary summit 2

“Clinton, who was defeated by Trump in the election, said it’s too early to call for Trump’s impeachment.  She said she supports Congress investigating Mueller’s findings ‘based on evidence’ and without a ‘preordained conclusion.’”

We all know democrats never let a little thing like “evidence” get in the way of anything they want to promote.

And a “Preordained conclusion?”

Oh…, you mean like how you were preordained to win the democrat presidential nomination?  And then you and the DNC submarined poor old Bernie Sanders and all of his supporters?

Is that the kind of “preordained conclusion you’re referring to?”

Robert Mueller’s investigation was all backwards and illegitimate.  It was an investigation that was initiated based on a fabricated and a disingenuous document, and paid for by Hillary and the DNC no less.  It was also an investigation that knew what result it wanted before any evidence or proof of a crime was established.

Investigating people in America just for the sake of investigating them is not legal in America.  Typically we have to have an established reason, with supporting evidence, for doing so.

‘“I’m really of the mind that the Mueller report is part of the beginning,’ Clinton said. ‘It’s not the end.’”

Again, I find myself agreeing with Mrs. Clinton’s words but not the nature of her beliefs.

I also believe it is the “beginning,” but the beginning of getting to the bottom of who was behind the initiation of this “witch hunt” of an investigation.

I believe it is the “beginning,” but the beginning of getting to the bottom of who authorized the spying on of a US citizen and an opposition’s campaign.

I believe it is the “beginning,” but the beginning of getting to the bottom of who felt they could take the presidential election into their own hands and attempt to overturn the election results.

I believe it may also be the beginning of making Hillary herself pay for her numerous sins throughout the whole process.

I’ll keep you posted.

hillary summit 3

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Delusional liberals and what they actually seem to believe.

Here we have a recent example of the fairy tale world that most of these liberals reside in.

In this particular case, we have Alec Baldwin tweeting that “beating Trump would be so easy” if he ran for president.”

“Easy,” Alec?

Did you just stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, Alec?

Or do you feel you could be president just because you play one on TV?

And not very well I might add.

baldwin 3

“If I ran for President, would you vote for me?” Baldwin tweeted recently.”  “I won’t ask you for any $.”

“President” of what…, the Mickey Mouse Club!?

He then tweeted, “And I promise I will win.  Beating Trump would be so easy. So easy. So easy.”

Like I mentioned at the top…, delusional.

I’m sure he gets that impression from the liberal weirdos he’s surrounded by on a daily basis…, but I’ve got some breaking news for you, Alec.., you don’t live in the real world.  You live in some twisted, socialist, “fake news,” self-fulfilling “prophecetical” drama.

Ya…, I just created the word “prophecetical.”

He then followed up by tweeting, “These tweets save me millions in polling.”

Ha!  And they’re just as scientific too I bet!  Polling all of your titter followers would seem like a fair cross section of society.  Not.

And speaking of twitter followers…, President Trump has around 85 million followers, between his personal and his official twitter accounts, which puts him at #4 on the most followers list.

It’s a little embarrassing, but Mr. Baldwin on the other hand, has a mere 276 thousand followers, or about 3% of President Trump’s followers, which would rank him down around #10,000 on the list.

Like I said…, delusional.

According to Sasha Savitsky for Fox News, “Baldwin and [President] Trump have long butted heads over everything from politics to the actor’s impression of him on ‘Saturday Night Live.’”

baldwin 2

“Trump sent a tweet directly calling out ‘SNL’ for being biased against his administration and Republicans in general, ‘Nothing funny about tired Saturday Night Live on Fake News NBC! Question is, how do the Networks get away with these total Republican hit jobs without retribution? Likewise for many other shows? Very unfair and should be looked into. This is the real Collusion!’ he tweeted back in February.”

These are good questions, Mr. President, and a fair assessment.

“Baldwin then responded to Trump’s tweet and asked whether or not the president’s comments counted as a threat against him and his family.”

‘“I wonder if a sitting President exhorting his followers that my role in a TV comedy qualifies me as an enemy of the people constitutes a threat to my safety and that of my family?’”

Nobody likes an idiot, Alec…, or a chicken for that matter.

These are two qualities that are not very endearing for any presidential candidate.

Maybe this isn’t as “easy” as you thought, huh?

baldwin 1

I’m not going to beg you to run, Alec, like so many of your liberal talk show host friends begged Donald Trump to run, but it would be the most entertaining thing you’ve done in quite a while, and most assuredly the funniest thing as well!

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

 

Is California voter fraud a fraud?

According to Ed Kilgore of New York Magazine, and most liberals, it is.  In a recent article, Mr. Kilgore calls “voter fraud” a “Republican myth.”

voter fraud schumer

Commenting on Republicans’ questioning of the California voting process during the midterm election, “… they professed mystification at the final results. I say “professed” because it’s hard to believe Speaker Paul Ryan is as stupid as he sounds here:”

“The California election system ‘just defies logic to me,’ [former Speaker of The House, Paul] Ryan said during a Washington Post event.

‘“We were only down 26 seats the night of the [midterm] election and three weeks later, we lost basically every California race….’”

‘“In Wisconsin, we knew the next day. Scott Walker, my friend, I was sad to see him lose, but we accepted the results on Wednesday,’ Ryan said.  In California, ‘their system is bizarre; I still don’t completely understand it. There are a lot of races there we should have won.’”

Kilgore adds that, “All in all, the situation in California was well summarized by the statewide elected official in charge of the system, Alex Padilla, [The Secretary of State for the state of California], in a tart response to [then Republican Speaker of The House, Paul] Ryan:”

‘“It is bizarre that Paul Ryan cannot grasp basic voting rights protections,’ Padilla said in a statement to ‘The Hill’….”

But…, “In just [the last] four years, the number of absentee ballots distributed in California has increased by 44 percent. ‘Nearly 13 million voters have received a ballot in the mail, compared to just 9 million in the last gubernatorial election in 2014,’ notes Paul Mitchell, vice president of Political Data Inc.”

‘“In California, we believe in an inclusive and accessible democracy. We provide voters as many opportunities as possible to cast their ballots,’ Padilla’s statement continues. ‘That is why we have no excuse vote by mail, automatic voter registration, same-day voter registration, and early voting. These reforms helped drive California’s historic registration and a 30 year high in midterm turnout.’”

Kilgore then adds, “This brouhaha might not matter if it did not feed the same myths of voter fraud that led Donald Trump to claim without a hint of evidence after the 2016 elections that ‘millions’ of illegal votes had been cast for Hillary Clinton in California, robbing him of a popular-vote plurality nationally. Going into 2020, this sort of loose talk needs to be debunked wherever possible, unless we want to risk the possibility of a GOP election defeat that is not simply questioned but denied.”

Okay Ed Kilgore, and all of your liberal friends…, my turn.

Liberals (democrats) are always quick to dismiss any concerns about voter fraud.  They dismiss these concerns as if you were stating a concern about extraterrestrials (ETs) affecting the voting process.

This is exactly the case and the honest to God’s truth.

Let me state this again, “Liberals (democrats) are always quick to dismiss any concerns about voter fraud.  They dismiss these concerns as if you were stating a concern about extraterrestrials (ETs) affecting the voting process.”

All I have to say is, “E.T…., phone home.”

The group “Judicial Watch” is currently suing California and Los Angeles County over “dirty” voter registration rolls.

Before I go any further, let’s see who “Judicial Watch” is.

Per “Judicial Watch’s” website:

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations, and public outreach.

The motto of Judicial Watch is “Because no one is above the law”. To this end, Judicial Watch uses the open records or freedom of information laws and other tools to investigate and uncover misconduct by government officials and litigation to hold to account politicians and public officials who engage in corrupt activities.

Okay, back to talking about unicorns…, ooops, I mean voter fraud.

“Judicial Watch” has filed a federal lawsuit against Los Angeles County and the State of California over their failure to clean their voter rolls and to produce election-related records as required by the federal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

“Judicial Watch” argues that the State of California and a number of its counties, including the county of Los Angeles, have registration rates exceeding 100%!

According to “Judicial Watch,” “Eleven of California’s 58 counties have registration rates exceeding 100% of the age-eligible citizenry.”

“Los Angeles County has more voter registrations on its voter rolls than it has citizens who are old enough to register.  Specifically, according to data provided to and published by the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), Los Angeles County has a registration rate of 112% of its adult citizen population.”

Why is this important to note?  Well, besides the obvious concerns about potential fraudulent votes, Los Angeles County is particularly noteworthy because of the number of potential voters it represents.

Here are a couple interesting facts:

There are only 7 states that have larger populations than Los Angeles County!

Los Angeles County has a larger population that Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Delaware and Washington DC combined!

 

la county vs 10 statesSo when we’re talking about the numbers of potential fraudulent votes in Los Angeles County, and California overall, we’re talking about millions of votes. That is nothing to sneeze at or dismiss out of hand.

Judicial Watch points out that, “About 21% of all of California’s voter registrations, or more than one in five, are designated as ‘inactive.’”

“California has the highest rate of inactive registrations of any state in the country…, [and] Los Angeles County has the highest number of inactive registrations of any single county in the country.”

Interesting.

Judicial Watch explains that, “Even though a registration is officially designated as “inactive,” it may still be voted on Election Day and is still on the official voter registration list. The inactive registrations of voters who have moved to a different state “are particularly vulnerable to fraudulent abuse by a third party” because the voter who has moved “is unlikely to monitor the use of or communications concerning an old registration.” Inactive registrations “are also inherently vulnerable to abuse by voters who plan to fraudulently double-vote in two different jurisdictions on the same Election Day.”

Judicial Watch has sent numerous written requests for public records pertaining to their voter lists and inactive registrations, but was stonewalled each time. In other cases their requests were just ignored by “The People’s Republic of California.”

“California may have the dirtiest election rolls in the country,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Federal law requires states to take reasonable steps to clean up their voting rolls. Dirty voting rolls can mean dirty elections. This lawsuit aims to ensure that citizens of California can have more confidence that their elections are fair and honest.”

Judicial Watch has previously filed successful lawsuits against Ohio and Indiana that resulted in those states taking several actions to clean up their voting rolls.  Judicial Watch is currently suing Kentucky over its failure to remove ineligible voters, and is suing the State of Maryland and Montgomery County over their failure to release voting-related records.

So, there you have it.

Please tell us again, Ed Kilgore, how, “Voter fraud is just a Republican myth.”

Please tell us again, Mr. Kilgore, how “stupid” we are for even thinking there might be something to be concerned about here.

Please explain to us again, Mr. Alex Padilla, how, “In California, we believe in an inclusive and accessible democracy. We provide voters as many opportunities as possible to cast their ballots.”

What this translates to is, “In California, we believe in giving democrats access to every opportunity in order to guarantee their candidates get as many votes as is necessary to win.”

Please tell us again, Ed Kilgore, about, “The myths of voter fraud that led Donald Trump to claim without a hint of evidence after the 2016 elections that ‘millions’ of illegal votes had been cast for Hillary Clinton in California, robbing him of a popular-vote plurality nationally.”

Again, we see that President Trump was probably right, again.

Please tell us again, Mr. Kilgore, how, “Going into 2020, this sort of loose talk needs to be debunked wherever possible, unless we want to risk the possibility of a GOP election defeat that is not simply questioned but denied.”

Oh…, Mr. Kilgore, you mean like how you and your democrat friends have not only “questioned but denied” Hillary Clinton’s defeat in 2016?

Is that what you mean?

Again we see that the hypocrisy and shamelessness of the democrats knows no bounds.  They are willing to do absolutely ANYTHING to promote their candidates and their agenda…, ANYTHING.

As patriotic Americans, it is our duty to realize this and to continue to fight for honesty and fairness in the voting process and in our government in general.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

voter-fraud

 

Well, I guess we can add Senator Ted Kennedy to the list of treasonous liberals!

Watching “Life, Liberty and Levin” the other night, a TV show hosted by (The Great One) Mark Levin, I was floored by a letter his guest, Paul Kengor, discussed.

Paul Kengor is a political science professor at Grove City College, and the author of the book, “The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism,” among others.

According to Sheila Fitzpatrick of the Wiley Online Library, “The opening of formerly closed and classified archives following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 was a remarkable experience for historians…, our data base abruptly expanded in a quantum leap…”

This is how a KGB letter, dated May 14, 1983, written at the height of the Cold War, from the head of the KGB Viktor Chebrikov to Yuri Andropov, who was then General Secretary of the Soviet Union’s Communist Party, came to light.

Here is the translated letter:

Special Importance Committee on State Security of the USSR

14.05.1983 No. 1029 Ch/OV Moscow

Regarding Senator Kennedy’s request to the General Secretary of the Communist Party, Comrade Y.V. Andropov

Comrade Y.V. Andropov,

On 9-10 of this year, Senator Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant J. Tunney was in Moscow.  The Senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Center Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.

Senator Kennedy, like other rational people, is very troubled by the current state of Soviet-American relations.  Events are developing such that this relationship coupled with the general state of global affairs will make the situation even more dangerous.  The main reason for this is Reagan’s belligerence and his firm commitment to deploy new American middle range nuclear weapons within Western Europe.  According to Kennedy, the current threat is due to the President’s refusal to engage any modification on his politics.  He feels that his domestic standing has been strengthened because of the well publicized improvement of the economy: inflation has been greatly reduced, production levels are increasing as is overall business activity.  For these reasons, interest rates will continue to decline.  The White House has portrayed this in the media as the “success of Reaganomics.”

Naturally, not everything in the province of economics has gone according to Reagan’s plan.  A few well known economists and members of financial circles, particularly from the north eastern states, foresee certain hidden tendencies that many bring about a new economic crisis in the USA.  This could bring about the fall of the presidential campaign of 1984, which would benefit the Democratic Party.  Nevertheless, there are no secure assurances this will indeed develop.

The only real threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations.  These issues, according to the Senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.

The movement advocating a freeze on nuclear arsenals of both countries continues to gain strength in the United States.  The movement is also willing to accept preparations, particularly from Kennedy, for its continued growth.  In political and influential circles of the country, including within Congress, the resistance to growing military expenditures is gaining strength.

However, according to Kennedy, the opposition to Reagan is still very weak.  Reagan’s adversaries are divided and the presentations they make are not fully effective.  Meanwhile, Reagan has the capabilities to effectively counter any propaganda.  In order to neutralize criticism that the talks between the USA and the USSR are non-constructive, Reagan will grandstand, but subjectively propagandistic.  At the same time, Soviet officials who speak about disarmament will be quoted out of context, silenced or groundlessly and whimsically discounted.  Although arguments and statements by officials of the USSR do appear in the press, it is important to note the majority of Americans do not read serious newspapers or periodicals.  Kennedy believes that, given the current state of affairs, and in the interest of peace, it would be prudent and timely to undertake the following steps to counter the militaristic politics of Reagan and his campaign to psychologically burden the American people.  In this regard, he offers the following proposals to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Y.V. Andropov:

  1. Kennedy asks Y.V. Andropov to consider inviting the senator to Moscow for a personal meeting in July of this year. The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA. He would also like to inform you that he has planned a trip through Western Europe, where he anticipates meeting England’s Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and French President Mitterand in which he will exchange similar ideas regarding the same issues. If his proposals would be accepted in principle, Kennedy would send his representative to Moscow to resolve questions regarding organizing such a visit. Kennedy thinks the benefits of a meeting with Y.V. Andropov will be enhanced if he could also invite one of the well known Republican senators, for example, Mark Hatfield.  Such a meeting will have a strong impact on American and political circles in the USA (In March of 1982, Hatfield and Kennedy proposed a project to freeze the nuclear arsenals of the USA and USSR and published a book on the theme as well.)
  2. Kennedy believes that in order to influence Americans it would be important to organize in August-September of this year, televised interviews with Y.V. Andropov in the USA. A direct appeal by the General Secretary to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. The senator is convinced this would receive the maximum resonance in so far as television is the most effective method of mass media and information.

If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews.  Specifically, the president of the board of directors of ABC, Elton Raul and television columnists Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters could visit Moscow.  The Senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.

Furthermore, with the same purpose in mind, a series of televised interviews in the USA with lower level Soviet officials, particularly from the military would be organized.  They would also have an opportunity to appeal directly to the American people about the peaceful intentions of the USSR, with their own arguments about maintaining a true balance of power between the USSR and the USA in military terms. This issue is quickly being distorted by Reagan’s administration.  Kennedy asked to convey that this appeal to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union is his effort to contribute a strong proposal that would root out the threat of nuclear war, and to improve Soviet-American relations, so that they define the safety of the world.  Kennedy is very impressed with the activities of Y.V. Andropov and other Soviet leaders, who expressed their commitment to heal international affairs, and improve mutual understandings between peoples.

The Senator underscored that he eagerly awaits a reply to his appeal, the answer to which may be delivered through Tunney.

Having conveyed Kennedy’s appeal to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Tunney also explained that Senator Kennedy has in the last few years actively made appearances to reduce the threat of war. Because he formally refused to partake in the election campaign of 1984, his speeches would be taken without prejudice as they are not tied to any campaign promises.  Tunney remarked that the Senator wants to run for president in 1988.  At that time, he will be 56 and his personal problems, which could hinder his standing, will be resolved (Kennedy has just completed a divorce and plans to remarry in the near future).

Taken together, Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president. This would explain why he is convinced that none of the candidates today have a real chance at defeating Reagan.

We await instructions.

President of the committee,

Viktor Chebrikov

 

Well what do you think about that?

Again…, can you imagine a letter like this being unearthed that implicated a Republican, and the blood bath that would ensue?

It’s so obvious that the “biased, liberal, fake news media” has been “running interference” for democrats for the last 60+ years now, and it continues today.

It sure sounds to me like Senator Kennedy wants to conspire with the Russian leader against the President of the United States at the time, Ronald Reagan.

I don’t know how you call this anything less than treason.

Kevin Mooney, a staff writer for Crosswalk.com at the time, seems to agree with me.  In October of 2006, he wrote, “A KGB letter written at the height of the Cold War shows that Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) offered to assist Soviet leaders in formulating a public relations strategy to counter President Reagan’s foreign policy and to complicate his re-election efforts.”

In his letter, KGB head Viktor Chebrikov offered the USSR General Secretary Yuri Andropov his interpretation of Kennedy’s offer.  Former U.S. Senator John Tunney, a democrat from California, and Kennedy’s law school roommate at the University of Virginia, had traveled to Moscow on behalf of Kennedy to seek out a partnership with Andropov and other Soviet officials, Professor Kengor claimed in his book.

At one point after President Reagan left office, Tunney acknowledged that he had played the role of intermediary.  Tunney later told the London Times that he had made 15 separate trips to Moscow!

Kennedy’s attempt to partner with high-level Soviet officials never materialized, at least as far as we know.  Yuri Andropov died less than eight months receiving the letter about Kennedy from his KGB head, and it is not clear if the Soviet Communist Party chief ever acted on the Democrat senator’s proposal.  Andropov was succeeded by Mikhail Gorbachev.

“There’s a lot more to be found here,” Professor Kengor told Cybercast News Service. “This was a shocking revelation.”

Kevin Mooney, later an author at “The Daily Signal,” wrote in 2016, “Sen. Edward “Ted” Kennedy had “selfish political and ideological motives” when he made secret overtures to the Soviet Union’s spy agency during the Cold War to thwart then-President Ronald Reagan’s re-election…”

“In the 1980s, Kennedy was ‘terribly misguided’ and ‘a fool’ for seeing Reagan as a greater threat than either the leader of the Soviet Union or the head of its brutal secret police and intelligence agency,” political science professor and writer Paul Kengor told The Daily Signal.  “But what is clear from history is that Russian agents have worked with “dupes” such as Kennedy and other “naïve” Americans to influence U.S. policy to serve their own ends.”

So, what is the point of this article?

Here’s the point:

President Trump has been under a daily attack, for the better part of two years, from the “biased, liberal, fake news media” regarding some uncorroborated claims of collusion between President Trump and Russia.

In the case of Senator Kennedy, we have an actual letter describing his desires to conspire with a foreign government, and the “biased, liberal, fake news media” chose to, and chooses to, look the other way.

That’s the point.

Whose side are these guys on anyway?

Whoever’s side it is, it’s not “We the People’s” side, that’s for sure.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

ted kennedy

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑