Dan Warnick

U.S. Presidential Elections Status - Electoral Votes

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, turbguy said:

Possibly.  We shall see.  Such case are routinely reviewed on appeal.

 

The sitting judge brought up appeal, multiple times. If this were a black man on trial with crowds of KKK outside burning crosses and threatening people you'd be all over this being an unfair trial. That you can't or won't demonstrates a disturbing lack of discernment. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

23 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

The sitting judge brought up appeal, multiple times. If this were a black man on trial with crowds of KKK outside burning crosses and threatening people you'd be all over this being an unfair trial. That you can't or won't demonstrates a disturbing lack of discernment. 

A significant  consideration operating a court of law, by any judge, is the maintaining a decision that cannot be appealed.  That judge did well to keep the court within reasonable bounds.  He recognized, and vocalized, the potential for appeal..

Just what point(s) of law can be brought up for reconsideration is really quite vast.   I'm not going to go into them here.  You probably can add more, anyway.

Was the jury influenced by external forces or events?

ALL juries are. 

Does that influence cause an incorrect verdict?

No.

I have sat on juries for two capital cases.   

Edited by turbguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

8 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

You can't bury the truth. Please explain why the democrats were furiously trying to stop this audit? Hired Perkins Coie (the same firm behind the Russian hoax) to try and throw up roadblocks to the tune of tens of millions in legal fees. Why pray tell spend all that money? They've had months to bury the evidence, why are they so worried they missed something? Is it because they missed something?

Chris Krebs is a joke. People around the planet saw this election for what it was, a sham. 

I would not be surprised if Perkins Coie is working (at least partially) pro bono so that an Arizona senate which appears to have gone over the deep end don't do anything crazy.

Why are journalists so restricted from observing the audit? Well, except for OANN.ru, of course, which happened to raise money to perform the audit.  https://www.pinalcentral.com/politics/senate-gop-won-t-commit-to-letting-reporters-cover-its-election-audit/article_cf8326e2-6596-5af2-824f-7d3806a49989.html

What are they afraid of? Is :cueCat 2.0 going to have a ton of false positives? 

Krebs is way more well versed in the likely attack surfaces than anyone running this audit. Or was CISA involved in the vast algorithmic conspiracy (since 2017) to "rig the vote"?

I hope for a speedy and transparent audit, but given that they already conducted risk limiting audits, I don't think it's necessary. 

 

Edited by surrept33
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, surrept33 said:

Yeah, so they just found a high variance estimator with a high degree polynomial. No surprise. 

This (usually) is indicative of data snooping. aka one of the ways to lie with statistics. Usually people look down on it.

The fit goes perfectly across counties in the same state, but varies from state to state. 

This is not a result of "data snooping" 

I suggest you cease trying to pick up excuses for not taking election fraud seriously or come clean and say that you are for it or took part in it.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 0R0 said:

The fit goes perfectly across counties in the same state, but varies from state to state. 

This is not a result of "data snooping" 

 

To me, it looks like data snooping. He probably did it in Excel, lol. Increase the polynomial order until the R^2 looks good. 

Why would a hypothetical algorithm have such a simple "key"? Why would it nefariously need to commit fraud in so many counties? Were the humans in the loop? Where are the fake ballots?

Anyways, from the WaPo:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/04/12/how-people-who-should-know-better-abuse-math-bolster-election-fraud-lie/

Quote

 

How people who should know better abuse math to bolster the ‘election fraud’ lie

Imagine that you run a small deli. Over the years, you’ve noticed that there’s a rhythm to when you sell sandwiches during the week, with a peak generally landing about 1:30 p.m. or so and then fading over the next few hours.

Curious about whether you can precisely predict daily sales, allowing you to manage supplies and staffing, you decide you’re going to track sandwich sales for a week. The result looks like this.

You’re not a math whiz, so you pass the data to your cousin Fritz, who has a PhD. Your question to Fritz is simple: How many sandwiches should you expect to sell each hour of a weekday?

In short order, he tells you something unexpected. The data you gave him isn’t sandwich sales at all. Instead, it’s phony data, derived from an algorithm aimed at masking deli fraud. And he can prove it.

See, if you take the sales from two days — say, Monday and Tuesday — and average the values, you can then create a sixth-order polynomial that describes the hourly pattern. Fritz’s PhD allows him to do the math himself, he assures you, but he passes along a formula that he derived from Excel. There it is: the precise formula for determining how many sandwiches (the y value) you will sell each hour (the x value). That’s math, hard at work, way beyond your ken — but precise.

But wait! If you take that same formula and compare it to the sales each day of the week, something alarming happens. The formula predicts the number of sandwiches being sold very well. Suspiciously well. If you look at the R-value of the correlation between the sales each hour and compare it to the formula, you get numbers that are very close to 1, meaning it’s a perfect correlation. And in a human-based system like sandwich sales, that shouldn’t happen!

Below, we used the average to do the R-value calculation, but you get the point. For each day, the predicated sales — here, the average — is extremely close to perfectly correlated to the actual sales. Ergo: This could be a function only of a computer-based effort to forge sales data.

You find this surprising for quite a few reasons. The first is that you tallied the sales yourself, so you know they’re correct. The second is that, even if Fritz were right that the numbers were artificial, why does he assume there’s some deli-fraud algorithm out there that’s responsible? The third is that, even without a PhD, you see a problem with Fritz’s analysis. He’s comparing an average derived from two of the values with all five of the values. Doesn’t it seem obvious that the result would be a strong correlation?

 

The answer, of course, is yes. Being surprised that sandwich sales over the course of the day is correlated to an average of the number of sandwiches sold over the course of two days is like being surprised that a coin comes up heads about half the time you flip it.

Or, more to the point, like being surprised that an estimate of voter turnout based on four counties in Michigan correlates strongly to voter turnout in nine counties in Michigan — including the four used to generate the “sixth-degree polynomial” (that complicated formula) in the first place.

This, however, is what the analysis of Douglas Frank, PhD, offers. Frank’s analysis of voter data in Michigan has led him to determine with seeming authority that the election results in that state were rigged, tailored to match the precise formula he himself derived from the state’s results. Claims like Frank’s analysis of Michigan have earned him the attention of MyPillow chief executive Mike Lindell, whose efforts to prove that voter fraud occurred in 2020 has led him to elevate all sorts of unfounded allegations about last year’s presidential election. Frank’s analysis has convinced others, too, with the conservative polling firm Rasmussen Reports elevating a write-up of his allegations over the weekend.

 

Rasmussen highlighted a different part of Frank’s assessment, the idea that about 66,000 Michigan voters cast ballots in last year’s election who weren’t in voter rolls in October. As The Washington Post’s Lenny Bronner quickly pointed out, Michigan has same-day voter registration, so those 66,000 voters are almost certainly just people who actually weren’t registered in October but who voted anyway.

The firm, which consistently showed more favorable approval data for Donald Trump over the course of his presidency than other pollsters, has repeatedly elevated dubious and unfounded fraud claims over the past few months. That’s aligned with a broader shift in its public-facing presence to be more aggressive toward critics from the mainstream media. (Last year, it accused me of “republishing a defamatory falsehood [and] committing fraud” for pointing out that its 2018 general-election polling showed Republicans with a one-point leadover the Democrats in an election where Democrats won more votes in House races national by a nearly 10-point margin.) Responding to Bronner’s tweet, Rasmussen offered the equivalent of a “just asking questions” shrug.

It should know better than to take Frank’s analysis at face value. This is a polling firm, after all, a company whose business is statistical analysis. Yet, there it was, sharing Frank’s claims uncritically.

Frank has been working with an attorney named Matthew DePerno, who has been sharing graphs from Frank’s presentation on Twitter with a bit of colorful commentary.

 

So what do those graphs show? What our third sandwich chart shows: that a prediction of how many votes would be cast in a Michigan county by age derived from the number of votes cast in a Michigan county by age correlates with the number of votes cast in a Michigan county by age. Frank does a lot of hand-waving on the side, like that discrepancy between the October voter roll and votes cast and by including comparisons of Census Bureau population estimates — which appear to be five-year averages of the population from 2015 to 2019 — are lower than the number of registered voters in some places. (Frank does point out that this could be a function of outdated voter rolls, but he doesn’t dwell on it.)

The heart of his analysis, though, is that R-value correlation between his predicted turnout and the actual turnout. How did he generate his prediction?

“What I actually did is I averaged four counties, the four largest counties, and used that key to predict all nine,” he explains. A few seconds later, he marvels that “the accuracy of my prediction is just ridiculously good. It shouldn’t be that good.”

Well, it should, because you are predicting data based on the data itself. If it weren’t a really close correlation, that’s when things would get funky.

Incidentally, that Frank is using a “sixth-order polynomial” doesn’t mean he’s doing some incredibly complicated calculation. It just means that he’s trying to fit his prediction as closely as possible to the existing data, thereby increasing the correlations.

He does note that the fit between his prediction isn’t quite perfect.

“There are a few little wiggles that don’t perfectly line up, but that’s not unusual because, after all, we’re dealing with human behavior,” Frank says at one point. “But for me to be able to predict that that well, you know there’s an algorithm function.”

There are certain words I’m not allowed to use when writing for The Post, so I will describe that as “baloney.” First of all, his claim is that this isn’t human behavior, so he can’t use that as a rationalization. The deviation from his prediction is a function of his using an average of values, nothing more. And, yes, you do know that there’s an algorithm function: the one he made!

Even if he’d uncovered some weird pattern, that of course doesn’t mean that fraud occurred. This is what’s known as an ontological fallacy: He’s assuming that fraud exists and is using this purported weirdness to support that assumption. If there had been something odd about his data, one could also assume that, say, the data had some error in it. But that’s not what he set out to prove.

All of this assumes, of course, that there are common voting patterns by age in the same way that there are common sandwich-ordering patterns in our initial example. (Which, by the way, was simply applying a small randomization to a pattern in Excel.) But we know that there are common patterns in how people vote depending on how old they are. Six years ago, I wrote about the turnout curve in California, creating a graph that looks not entirely unlike Frank’s “key.” I did not prove that elections in California were riddled with fraud.

A lot of people won’t know better than to understand Frank’s assessments for what they are. Lindell doesn’t, it seems, nor do a lot of other people who, like Frank, are eager to assume that some fraud occurred. Rasmussen should and perhaps does, but they shared the analysis anyway.

There remains no credible evidence at all that anything untoward occurred in the 2020 election. Even if Frank’s analysis were not obvious question-begging, there’s no evidence of any effort to do the sort of rigging that he alleges. It’s the mathematical equivalent of prestidigitation, aimed at masking an empty argument with complexity.

A good show, but easy to explain as a trick.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Downvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 0R0 said:

I suggest you cease trying to pick up excuses for not taking election fraud seriously or come clean and say that you are for it or took part in it.

I take election fraud seriously. 

I didn't pay much attention to the election because I assumed Biden would win. I figured 'stop the steal' was a ploy for Trump to kick up turnout after he flubbed the pandemic . The Democrats were going to have turnout regardless because there were a lot of people enthused to vote against Trump. I knew that since 2017.

I didn't think he'd incite an abortive autocoup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup

That's when I started really paying attention again.

The GQP reminds me of Operation Mindfuck: https://evergreenreview.com/read/donald-trumps-operation-mindfuck/

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, surrept33 said:

I take election fraud seriously. 

I didn't pay much attention to the election because I assumed Biden would win. I figured 'stop the steal' was a ploy for Trump to kick up turnout after he flubbed the pandemic . The Democrats were going to have turnout regardless because there were a lot of people enthused to vote against Trump. I knew that since 2017.

I didn't think he'd incite an abortive autocoup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup

That's when I started really paying attention again.

The GQP reminds me of Operation Mindfuck: https://evergreenreview.com/read/donald-trumps-operation-mindfuck/

The article is terrific. But it is not actually the critique you think it is. 

It views the more outlandish Satanic pedophile and extraterrestrial discussion among anons as being the central driver. What ts actually central to it is a real world practical concern about the corporatist = Fascist cabal ruling the world in general and the US in particular. The same thing that concerns the author. The China driven infiltration of academia politics and corporations with Cultural Marxist dogma now on full display seems to have escaped him. The author accepts fake garbage attributions from the MSM projected onto Trump as actually factually informed. They are not. 

The Anon's religious and anti Satanic secret society plane of thinking does not easily access proof as it is (1) secret societies are secret, (2) Proof of pedophile Satanic activity would be illegal to possess unless you are involved in prosecuting the practitioners. (3) A secret extraterrestrial military program would be highly secret, down to the point of killing witnesses and whistle-blowers. So while these are issues of extreme interest to many from a religious perspective, pseudo scientific interest, and historical roles of secret societies, by their nature, they have to be weakly documented, if the Q message is as it claims, disclosure and shedding light on these things in addition to the real life political and social structure issues then we will get whatever definitive evidence is available when they are ready to provide it. Claiming that they are a Mil Intel operation based out of Space Force, NSA and DIA, Q are in the unique position to know what the global leadership is up to and who they are. 

The self stated goal of Q is a "Great Awakening" that requires its participants to think for themselves, research history and the persons in power (politics, money, corporations, culture etc.) . One can hardly find fault with that. Once one does such research, the entire fabric of accepted reality as projected by the corporations and politicians by their media becomes unraveled and appears as a false facade hiding an evil power hungry money grubbing psychopathic genocidal elite controlling all levers of power and projecting fear onto the people of the world through fictitious wars pandemics and fake climate change "science"..   

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

 A secret extraterrestrial military program would be highly secret, down to the point of killing witnesses and whistle-blowers. So while these are issues of extreme interest to many from a religious perspective, pseudo scientific interest, and historical roles of secret societies, by their nature, they have to be weakly documented, if the Q message is as it claims, disclosure and shedding light on these things in addition to the real life political and social structure issues then we will get whatever definitive evidence is available when they are ready to provide it. Claiming that they are a Mil Intel operation based out of Space Force, NSA and DIA, Q are in the unique position to know what the global leadership is up to and who they are. 

The self stated goal of Q is a "Great Awakening" that requires its participants to think for themselves, research history and the persons in power (politics, money, corporations, culture etc.) . One can hardly find fault with that. Once one does such research, the entire fabric of accepted reality as projected by the corporations and politicians by their media becomes unraveled and appears as a false facade hiding an evil power hungry money grubbing psychopathic genocidal elite controlling all levers of power and projecting fear onto the people of the world through fictitious wars pandemics and fake climate change "science"..   

Aliens now, seriously?  This why the courts don't bother listening to the cult, the law is based around "reasonable" people.  

You need to seek medical care; life is short - don't waste years living in a paranoid delusion.

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, 0R0 said:

I suggest you cease trying to pick up excuses for not taking election fraud seriously or come clean and say that you are for it or took part in it.

Come clean and say you don't accept the legitimacy of the government or rule of law.

 

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Biden Admin and the rule of law are not compatible with each other. They are mutually exclusive. 

One will have to take precedence over the other. 

Biden/Dems are a Chinese occupying power in Washington installed by a cyberwar and a Chinese intelligence operation using many corporation's executives and several NGO foundations. . 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, -trance said:

Aliens now, seriously?  This why the courts don't bother listening to the cult, the law is based around "reasonable" people.  

You need to seek medical care; life is short - don't waste years living in a paranoid delusion.

 

I don't see how reporting on someone else's narrative reflects on my psychological state. I am talking about how you would deal with the interpretations of Q questions by the anons to confirm or dismiss them and the difficulty of obtaining solid facts on these issues. 

If you noticed, Q is not in court. 

Siding with Biden, his policies, his means of coming to power is not within the realm of "reasonable".

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

22 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Meaning that they are expecting to stop the audit another way or just in a few days onwards. 

Presumably the rush of Antifa into Phoenix hotels has something to do with it.

Deucey deliberately sent his National Guard down to the border away from the Arena so it could be more easily overwhelmed by rioters. . 

Edited by 0R0
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

Siding with Biden, his policies, his means of coming to power is not within the realm of "reasonable".

check

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, 0R0 said:

I don't see how reporting on someone else's narrative reflects on my psychological state. I am talking about how you would deal with the interpretations of Q questions by the anons to confirm or dismiss them and the difficulty of obtaining solid facts on these issues. 

If you noticed, Q is not in court. 

Siding with Biden, his policies, his means of coming to power is not within the realm of "reasonable".

How do you know whether something is a "solid fact"?

Keep in mind you live in an era of https://yalereview.yale.edu/computational-propaganda and more and more people on the whole planet will be 'connected'. Welcome to the '20s.

Barriers to information are frictionless, but time and attention are ultimately the two most scarce commodities. What type of information do you pay attention to?

Edited by surrept33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, surrept33 said:

How do you know whether something is a "solid fact"?

 

I found that to be a rather difficult task in the case of the more esoteric issues raised by anons when answering Q questions. 

I think you would find this collection of videos interesting, I should add that the US corporation of DC was an occupying power of the 50 several states since 1933. The USA corp and its officers have been in frequent violation of its obligations under the Geneva convention, which it (not necessarily the organic several states) signed. These are enumerated in the Law of War Manual. 

The Biden belligerent occupation of Washington on behalf of China and allied entities is also under the terms of the Geneva Convention as put into the Law of War. The DNC controlled Congress is also part of the occupying belligerents as so many of the membership have been bribed or blackmailed by China and its commercial partners. The Biden admin and Congress members are acting in clear violation of their obligations under the Geneva Convention. 

The National Guard occupation of DC also comes under the same Law of War. and has an interesting twist in that the sovereign of Washington DC, the USA corp. has been cancelled due to termination of its bankruptcy liquidation process over which Trump presided. Thus there is no sovereign entity of DC. 

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ku3QO1kMAjm5/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/smHo7L5LhZhc/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Uo2gcVUzcNWb/

Follow what the guy is saying to get an understanding of where the practical side of the Q narrative is going. Note that in public the anons have only come up with this interpretation just recently. 

The key issue is the prosecution by the military of the occupying foreign forces (Biden and company) and their cooperating locals for violation of the Law of War in the scope of reprisal etc. and the prosecution of about 440k people under 220k still sealed Federal indictments. There are purported to be crimes against humanity charges to be brought on the covid disinformation, scientific fraud, lockdowns, mandates, etc. which may be prosecuted within the military tribunals or through additional Federal indictments. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2021 at 3:11 PM, surrept33 said:

Barriers to information are frictionless

Where in the hell have you been? Here's your homework assignment, look up censorship. Apply definition of said word to the clear and present censorship by Big Tech on anything with which they don't approve. Look back through these 155 pages of links and see just many of them have been censored out of existence. Then look up frictionless. It obviously doesn't mean what you think it means

8112B3F4-6597-4A1A-8D09-71E9995BEE8F.png

FC501BB5-CBD2-4E17-8B24-6ADD4C2FE9FF.jpeg

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

Where in the hell have you been? Here's your homework assignment, look up censorship. Apply definition of said word to the clear and present censorship by Big Tech on anything with which they don't approve. Look back through these 155 pages of links and see just many of them have been censored out of existence. Then look up frictionless. It obviously doesn't mean what you think it means

8112B3F4-6597-4A1A-8D09-71E9995BEE8F.png

I would not say it is censorship. It is a war on the promotion of disinformation and keeping the community (those who watch youtube) safe:

https://blog.youtube/inside-youtube/the-four-rs-of-responsibility-raise-and-reduce

There are many studies (maybe 1000s) on why/how people go down the rabbit hole btw:

https://deepai.org/publication/a-longitudinal-analysis-of-youtube-s-promotion-of-conspiracy-videos

Youtube has been very transparent about site changes.

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 4/24/2021 at 12:14 PM, -trance said:

Aliens now, seriously?  This why the courts don't bother listening to the cult, the law is based around "reasonable" people.  

You need to seek medical care; life is short - don't waste years living in a paranoid delusion.

 

 

You know, there's a lot of "stuff" that's hard to dismiss when it comes to the existence of extraterrestrials or even paranormal activity, for that matter...

That said, Biden has been constitutionally elected President #46.  It's done.  It's baked. It's over.

Edited by turbguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

You know, there's a lot of "stuff" that's hard to dismiss when it comes to the existence of extraterrestrials or even paranormal activity, for that matter...

That said, Biden has been constitutionally elected President #46.  It's done.  It's baked. It's over.

I agree that by the constitution he's been selected Resident of the White House. Now just for fun let's say the Arizona, New Hampshire, Georgia and several other ongoing investigations start producing fruit. Up against massive censorship it becomes apparent even to the dim witted that massive fraud occurred in this election. What then? I predict that even in the face of massive evidence the democrats will respond exactly as you just did, "too bad so sad he's in office and there's nothing you can do". That's when things start to get really interesting. Would the RINO republicans vote to impeach? Does anyone want President Harris to take over? One constitutional crisis after another. Then, massive economic meltdown to distract everyone, maybe with a couple of shooting wars thrown in. Interesting times indeed. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I agree that by the constitution he's been selected Resident of the White House. Now just for fun let's say the Arizona, New Hampshire, Georgia and several other ongoing investigations start producing fruit. Up against massive censorship it becomes apparent even to the dim witted that massive fraud occurred in this election. What then? I predict that even in the face of massive evidence the democrats will respond exactly as you just did, "too bad so sad he's in office and there's nothing you can do". That's when things start to get really interesting. Would the RINO republicans vote to impeach? Does anyone want President Harris to take over? One constitutional crisis after another. Then, massive economic meltdown to distract everyone, maybe with a couple of shooting wars thrown in. Interesting times indeed. 

It's over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

It's over. 

 

AE34D25E-EC6F-427C-94DF-6BF994764C51.jpeg

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

5 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

 

AE34D25E-EC6F-427C-94DF-6BF994764C51.jpeg

It's over.

But that is funny!

Edited by turbguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, turbguy said:

It's over. 

Actually I would agree in many ways, until I watched Ben Carson do his best to evade Neil Cavtuo challenging Carson to state Biden had won. Carson could not summon the words to do as much. In fact with some relief he actually stated the opposite, Cavuto paused, he had no concept where to go from there. The interview ended.

Watching AZ doing this audit the judge intervened sighting voter privacy, that would indicate the auditor's are actually checking voter's identities as in legal citizens ...if that proves to be true the results have a very real potentail for the beginning of a true insurrection as the progressive party calls it.  

https://www.mediamatters.org/neil-cavuto/foxs-neil-cavuto-asks-ben-carson-joe-biden-legitimate-president-united-states

NEIL CAVUTO (HOST): Finally, Secretary, there's a strong plurality of Republicans led by no less than Donald Trump himself that thought the wrong person won the presidential election, that -- that Donald Trump was robbed of that victory. Do you agree with that?

BEN CARSON (GUEST): Well, I think it's certainly worthy of investigation. What disturbs me is when people say you can't even talk about that. It's like you stole the cookies from the cookie jar and then you said, "No one can talk about the cookie jar or even go near the cookie jar."

That does raise your suspicion. I would like to see any credible things investigated so we can put it to rest once

Watch the video, his last statement is all telling. Men of such character do not go to those places on whims.

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

citing ?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.