Dear KMAG: 20200921 Open Topic

This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread is VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KMAG/KAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).

Yes, it’s Monday…again.


But it’s okay! We’ll get through it.


Free Speech is practiced here at the Q Tree. But please keep it civil.
Discussion of Q is not only allowed but encouraged. Imagine that! We can talk about Q here and not get banned.

Please also consider the Important Guidelines, outlined here. Let’s not give the odious Internet Censors a reason to shut down this precious haven that Wolf has created for us.

Our President is fighting for us night and day…please pray for him.


Wheatie’s Rules:

            1. No food fights.
            2. No running with scissors.
            3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.


For your listening enjoyment, I offer this composition from Jeremiah Pena of Alliance Music Group, Titled ‘The Speed of Light’:


“It’s Gonna be Biblical”



Wheatie’s Word of the Day:


‘Bumfuzzle’ is a transitive verb, which means…to confuse, perplex or bewilder.

Other forms: Bumfuzzled, Bumfuzzling.

Used in a sentence:

It can be bumfuzzling, listening to the senseless screeds from the Democrats.



698 thoughts on “Dear KMAG: 20200921 Open Topic

  1. POTUS has filed a new Executive Order today…


    Executive Order on Blocking Property of Certain Persons with Respect to the Conventional Arms Activities of Iran

    Here’s a small portion of the EO … you’ll want to read ALL of it…

    “…Section. 1. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:

    (i) any person determined by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, to engage in any activity that materially contributes to the supply, sale, or transfer, directly or indirectly, to or from Iran, or for the use in or benefit of Iran, of arms or related materiel, including spare parts;

    (ii) any person determined by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, to provide to Iran any technical training, financial resources or services, advice, other services, or assistance related to the supply, sale, transfer, manufacture, maintenance, or use of arms and related materiel described in subsection (a)(i) of this section;

    (iii) any person determined by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, to have engaged, or attempted to engage, in any activity that materially contributes to, or poses a risk of materially contributing to, the proliferation of arms or related materiel or items intended for military end-uses or military end-users, including any efforts to manufacture, acquire, possess, develop, transport, transfer, or use such items, by the Government of Iran (including persons owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of the Government of Iran) or paramilitary organizations financially or militarily supported by the Government of Iran;

    (iv) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

    (v) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.

    (b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted before the date of this order.

    (c) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section do not apply to property and interests in property of the Government of Iran that were blocked pursuant to Executive Order 12170 of November 14, 1979 (Blocking Iranian Government Property), and thereafter made subject to the transfer directives set forth in Executive Order 12281 of January 19, 1981 (Direction to Transfer Certain Iranian Government Assets), and implementing regulations thereunder.

    Liked by 15 people

  2. Justice Department Retweeted
    #DEA Acting Administrator Shea:”These enforcement actions have dealt a blow to the ELN & are a testament to the power of partnerships.DEA remains dedicated to our partners in the mission of bringing narco-terrorists to justice.”




    Liked by 8 people

    1. Justice Department Retweeted
      US Attorney SDTX
      In addition to suspected ELN leader Villegas-Palomino, authorities are also seeking Jaime Miguel Picon-Rodriguez and Diomedes Barbosa-Montaño. Anyone with information is asked to contact the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI or submit tips online at

      Liked by 8 people

  3. Justice Department Retweeted
    Kerri Kupec DOJ@KerriKupecDOJ
    Today, AG Barr announced $100 million in grants across the country to combat human trafficking – the largest amount from federal government in history. Funds will support state, local, & tribal jurisdictions, victim service providers, taskforces, and research.

    Justice Department Retweeted
    Kerri Kupec DOJ@KerriKupecDOJ
    Today, AG Barr & Senior Advisor to POTUS Ivanka Trump are in Atlanta with Governor Kemp visiting the Georgia Center for Child Advocacy, which offers therapy, protection, intervention strategies for abused children. DOJ has awarded 1.25 million to this Center. #SaveTheChildren

    Liked by 11 people

  4. This!

    Liked by 18 people

    1. Ohh, spoke too soon… had not read the 2nd tweet yet…

      ” Florida sheriff says he will deputize all gun owning residents if overwhelmed by #BlackLivesMatter rioters.

      WOW again ! That should put the fear of _______ in these Domestic Terrorists… AND, it means POTUS doesn’t have to send in NG and deal with optics of “Dictator” and/or the liklihood that one of the military might have to shoot one of these scum and ……………………….

      Liked by 13 people

        1. Have you seen POTUS’ EO this a.m. on Iran? I think something similar is coming, combined with what you are talking about, in the form of an EO… real soon!

          Liked by 5 people

              1. And the HOUSE has NOTHING to do with nomination of Justices or their confirmation… so seems her Quiver is EMPTY… she got nuttin’

                Liked by 3 people

    1. It’s too bad this is on such short notice. I’m sure a lot of us would have liked to mark the occasion…..possibly including VSGPOTUSDJT.


  5. Here’s a fine example of the propaganda machine. There’s a new TV series debuting tonight about the Olympic bombing in Atlanta. The bomber later bombed an abortion clinic and gay bar. When he was caught, he claimed he did it all to protest abortion. Now what are the odds that a TV series about an anti-abortion extremist airs at the same time a Supreme Court battle over RBG’s seat is brewing?

    Liked by 12 people

  6. Senate Cloakroom@SenateCloakroom
    Invoked, 65-25: Motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar #603 Edward Hulvey Meyers to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.

    Liked by 7 people

  7. Senate Cloakroom@SenateCloakroom

    Votes Scheduled: At 11:30 am on Tuesday, September 22nd, the Senate will proceed to 2 votes on the following:
    1. Confirmation of Executive Calendar #603 Edward Hulvey Meyers to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.

    6:52 PM · Sep 21, 2020·Twitter Web App

    Senate Cloakroom@SenateCloakroom
    Replying to @SenateCloakroom

    2. Motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar #706 Andrea R. Lucas to be a Member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for a term expiring July 1, 2025.

    Further, at 2:15 pm, the Senate will proceed to 2 votes on the following:

    1. Confirmation of Cal. #706 Lucas to be a Member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for a term expiring July 1, 2025.
    2. Motion to invoke cloture on Cal. #709 Sonderling to be a Member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for a term expiring July 1, 2024.

    Liked by 7 people

  8. Leader McConnell@senatemajldr
    House Democrats’ rough draft of a government funding bill shamefully leaves out key relief and support that American farmers need. This is no time to add insult to injury and defund help for farmers and rural America.

    Liked by 8 people

    1. Thankfully, Charles can’t rustle up an army. Only Parliament and the PM can declare and wage war.

      EVERYONE with one eye and half sense knows the whole Climate Change™ thing is a big stupid lie/hoax/scam.

      Liked by 7 people

    2. More attempts by the Cabal to steal mega $$$ from humanity…

      POTUS must have already cut off a lot of their ‘rat lines’ … that river of endless treasure is no longer flowing!

      Liked by 4 people

  9. Chad Pergram@ChadPergram
    A) Gardner: When a President exercises constitutional authority to nominate a judge for the Supreme Court vacancy, the Senate must decide how to best fulfill its constitutional duty of advice and consent.

    Chad Pergram@ChadPergram
    B) Gardner: I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution, not legislate from the bench, and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. oooK… does that put to rest the concerns from the gloom and doom that FOUR Republican senators would not support? Or, is that simply a vague statement that “I’m ready to vote”?????

      Liked by 4 people

  10. Chad Pergram@ChadPergram
    From colleague Caroline McKee: Romney: Before I have any comment I’m going to meet with my colleagues, which I’ll be doing tomorrow & if I have something at that point I’ll let you know what it is, but until then, I need to be waiting & get a chance to speak with those colleagues

    Liked by 3 people

  11. Chad Pergram@ChadPergram
    1) Graham: After the treatment of Justice Kavanaugh I now have a different view of the judicial-confirmation process. Compare the treatment of Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh to that of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan

    2) Graham: It’s clear that there already is one set of rules for a Republican president and one set of rules for a Democrat president.

    3) Graham: I therefore think it is important that we proceed expeditiously to process any nomination made by President Trump to fill this vacancy. I am certain if the shoe were on the other foot, you would do the same.

    Liked by 10 people

      1. Lots of peeps callin for this…

        if they do hold hearings, I expect DIM Senators to drag out the hearings and the vote… as long as they can… so I’m all for “no hearings”

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Hearings are simply a PR stunt for D-rats to falsely raise issues to delay and derail SC nomination.

          Piss on D-Rats. Steam roll the D-Rats!!!

          The GLOVES ARE OFF !

          Liked by 3 people

  12. Chad Pergram@ChadPergram
    Senate Maj Whip Thune on Fox on confirming the next justice: It comes down to whether or not we have 51 votes..really, it comes down to the math and the number is 51

    Liked by 10 people

  13. Chad Pergram@ChadPergram
    3) The House Rules Committee today is prepping an interim spending bill which runs through December 11. The government is only funded through September 30. The House plans to consider the bill this week.

    Chad Pergram@ChadPergram
    6) Keep in mind that the House and Senate will not be here on Monday due to Yom Kippur, which runs from sundown Sunday until sundown Monday.

    And, keep in mind that the government funding issue, to say nothing of any effort to tackle a coronavirus relief measure, has been shuffled to the side now as the sides conduct a cage match battle over a Supreme Court vacancy.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. This is not a criticism of Tucker or anyone, but I remember hearing about Soros and the district attorneys a number of years ago. I can’t remember who talked about it; maybe Glenn Beck. But no one did anything about it all of that time. Maybe we had to have a president and team whose leadership would give others the courage to take on stories like this.

      Liked by 4 people

  14. Justice Department@TheJusticeDept
    New York City Police Department Officer Charged with Acting As an Illegal Agent of the People’s Republic of China
    New York City Police Department Officer Charged with Acting As an
    A criminal complaint was unsealed today in federal court in the Eastern District of New York charging Baimadajie Angwang, 33, a New York City Police Department officer and United States Army

    Liked by 6 people

    1. excellent
      Almost ruined computer as I am eating while catching up here

      ground report:
      Enthusiasm is fantastic … but Many (all?) are worried about Dems cheating and stealing the election. Pushing hard for huge victory and Every vote possible here in TN so popular vote/mandate

      Liked by 7 people

    1. ^^^ Great news.

      Pierre DeLecto will come along when he learns he can’t play spoiler.

      Dimwit Collins will also come along as she needs help getting reelected. (Political self interest)

      TwitSki in Alaska won’t care. She is safe for another couple years. I anticipate President Trump will make a number of flights to Alaska in 2022 to Primary TwitSki for anyone breathing.
      NOW, we need the confirmation vote well before 3 November.

      Liked by 3 people

    2. Good! Now skip the useless hearings, and just vote. No need to put the nominee through whatever h3ll Dems have planned, no need to let them pontificate about how unfair the process is, and no need to give them the opportunity to lie (which they always do in some form). Let the whining and outrage begin, and show them we are willing to use the power we have.

      Liked by 5 people

    1. Rather sure President Trump will be in SC and bordering states a dozen or more times before 3 November.

      Rs really need to step up their fund raising game. They appear to have gotten complacent since we were doing so well through mid February.

      Liked by 2 people


    The economy is recovering and retail sales is going to pop in Oct. The shopping season is going to begin early and the last quarter is going to take off. The [CB]/[DS] money laundering scheme is now being exposed to the world, this is the just the beginning. The [DS]/MSM are now trapped, the believed they had the upper hand but that was never true. They are preparing to introduce the new candidate in Oct, but this will not matter. The patriots have already begun to take precautions for the riots and chaos that will occur during and after the elections. A Fed judge wants the the full names of all people who have been transported to Epstein’s island, crimes against humanity is now on deck. B2 bomber incoming.

    Liked by 6 people

  16. I am trying to find old Supreme Court official protraits of RBG and they have been SCRUBBED. Does anyone know where there’s a collection of official Supreme Court photos taken over the years? I don’t care how wild this sounds, but I think the original RBG may have been replaced a long time ago.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. We love you but on this subject could you please stop with the conspiracy theory stuff? We have been accused of being a fringe group since we all started the tea party movement in 2010. It’s taken us this long to even get a modicum of respect. By promoting wild impossible scenarios like clones or doubles, you endanger that fragile respect by giving the enemy ammunition.

      I hope that you understand that this comment is not a personal judgment on you; just this one idea of yours.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I would be more than happy to be proven wrong by looking at old official Supreme Court class photos and portraits (preferably from the Clinton and Bush Jr. years). Unfortunately, those appear to be impossible to find. In fact, I challenge everyone reading this to try to find Supreme Court Class photos from before Obama and that aren’t black-and-white. Go ahead. Find the old photos and prove me wrong. I want you to.

        Liked by 8 people

          1. At this point I would be satisfied at finding -any- Supreme Court Class photos from either the Clinton or Bush Jr. years. I’ve spent the entire night searching and found exactly one class photo from that 16-year time period (the same one bflyjesusgrl posted). Does it not strike anyone else as odd that Supreme Court photos from 1993-2007 are near impossible to find? To me, that’s become the bigger mystery than anything going with RBG. Why were those photos scrubbed from the internet?

            Anyways, the only reason I made a comment here at all about it is because I was hoping someone else might know of a Supreme Court photo archive or collection that they could direct me to. I’ve already exhausted Google, Bing, and Yandex image searches.

            Liked by 5 people

            1. Interesting that this period is HTF (hard to find). I will try to find some, but yes – that could be odd.

              Searching Google for “ruth bader ginsburg through the years” is extremely useful just for continuity. There is a wealth of good, usable photos. Her face changes over the years – in many ways like my own mother, which is DRAMATICALLY. There are, however, a few facial “tells” that are conserved, and I am POSITIVE that it’s the same woman in all the pictures where the tells are visible, which is a big fraction of them, over her entire life. I’m not sure I want to give up the tells – I may look for some less important ones and reveal those.

              But an absence of photos during the Clinton and Bush years – that’s very interesting. CIA tends to be behind that kind of scrub. I’ll go looking.

              Liked by 3 people

              1. Trigger Warning: “Conspiracy Theory” ahead.

                “Searching Google for “ruth bader ginsburg through the years” is extremely useful just for continuity. There is a wealth of good, usable photos”

                I’m just going to come out and say that I don’t trust a single photo of RBG being published by corporate media right. Yes, even the “old” pictures. If they are this invested in a double, then I don’t put it past them to use CIA-level Photoshopping technology or outright staging photos with Hollywood makeup/special effects to create phony “old” pictures with the double. It’s a way of brainwashing the public into believing that RBG has “always” looked like this. All it would take is the usual compromised media outlets, compromised search engines, and compromised stock photo companies like Getty, and that would be enough to sell the lie to everyone but the “crazy conspiracy theorists” like me. That’s why I was really, really hoping to find some obscure Supreme Court photo archive that might have been untouched. If there is one, I can’t find it.

                My next step is to try to hunt down physical books from the time period in question. I tried searching for physical paper books of Supreme Court photo collections, and I can’t find any. I’d go to the library, but it’s closed.

                Liked by 3 people

              2. To Sadie: If SCOTUS official photos were “shopped” with CIA-level techniques, what is your theory about what was really going on? If RBG was not real in the pics, then what was happening in real life and how were the other justices impacted or involved?

                Liked by 3 people

              1. Thank you for this. This actually worked. I tried Getty earlier, but came up with nothing. Followed your link, fiddle with options in the sidebar a bit, and found class photos from 1993, 1994, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, and 2006. Not sure why some years are missing, but it’s progress. Thank you.

                Liked by 3 people

        1. It’s odd, but I have just this week been very interested in seeing Ruth’s pictures over the years for several reasons.

          ONE is that I just saw a very early picture of RBG (law school) that looked very much like a friend’s wife when SHE was younger. But RBG’s OLDER pictures DON’T look like that woman. This is a normal thing, but I wanted to VALIDATE continuity in RBG.

          That leads to the second reason. I actually love to debunk “double” theories when I can. It’s a hard-won skill of mine, which is related to not just facial recognition but pattern recognition in general. I did tons of computer programming in that area. To me it’s a game. It also leads into the psychology of human facial recognition algorithms and how to fool them.

          Facial recognition algorithms can be useful particularly to RULE OUT pictures of doubles that are used to FAKE an “alleged” person into a realistic picture. I catch these memes surprisingly often.

          But here is the kicker. I have a theory about RBG which is even more unbelievable than yours. I may or may not take it public. There are OTHER things dropping in the next few weeks which may make it come out as part of a larger discussion.

          Lastly, doubles are real. Doubles used in memes are often real. Double THEORIES are frequently NOT REAL.

          I was friends with a double. It was kinda fun. We were only close enough to lie about being brothers.

          Doubles are easy to spot when they’re together.

          Liked by 8 people

          1. I appreciate the link, but I don’t trust any of the carefully curated picture montages coming out of the media. That’s why I was hoping to find some obscure archive of official Supreme Court portraits and class photos. Incredibly, one doesn’t exist. You’d think there would be at least some historical interest in the those photos, but no. I have an easier time finding official black-and-white photos from the 1930s than I do official Supreme Court pictures from 1993-2007. I’d go visit the local library to try to locate physical books with these pics, but it’s shutdown due to COVID.

            Liked by 6 people

      2. Shut your ass or I’ll ban you out of here faster than you can say “queer” again, you hell-bound hypocrite.

        GOT IT?

        YOU – of all people – tell nobody here to shut up – and if you do it again, you’re gone.

        Liked by 7 people

        1. I will not tolerate ANY inhibition of earnestly offered and defended theories, no matter how seemingly wacky, wrong, or impossible. It’s not even the lack of hard rules which is important – it’s the subtle inhibition of people who think outside the box on this stuff. I cannot allow it. I *NEED* extreme and outlying theories to stretch the range of possibility for my mind to work. Making those people withhold their thoughts by subtle intimidation is not going to be tolerated AT ALL.

          Question, argue, whatever. I don’t mind. But don’t make people afraid to post ANYTHING here. THAT is the thing that makes me snarl. Every bit of my anger towards THEM will rage down here, inside the blog.

          *taking a deep breath*

          Liked by 11 people

            1. I know I was an incredible asshole there, but sometimes it feels like the only real skill I have left.

              There need to be places where people can feel free to postulate really hard-to-believe stuff that might have some truth to it, or LEAD to some truth that is hard to see. It’s like code. I saved all my failure code on a hunch that it might be useful again someday, and most of it WAS useful, although not always the way I thought it would be.

              I will take these theories seriously, because the world changes back to truth when we do, even if all the theories don’t pan out.

              They SPIED ON TRUMP. They SPIED ON MORE. They LIED TO COURTS. BILLIONS OF DOLLARS simply DISAPPEARED. And they told us that all this stuff was “conspiracy theories”.

              Or you can just look at the freaking pictures of the Pentagon after 9/11. Or you can correlate it with all the other tells (oh, and I have great ones, but they will be dog-piled in LATER, when they do the most damage to the coupists).. Or you can see the VIDEO of the Pentagon being struck.

              And I haven’t even published all my stuff about Scalia. Kinda been thinking about it. It’s not really a theory. It’s just background stuff – FACTS – which make all the weird theories a lot more plausible. Basically shows how easy an op would have been. So simple.

              So yeah. We’re gonna talk about this stuff. A LOT.

              Liked by 7 people

              1. “people can feel free to postulate really hard-to-believe stuff that might have some truth to it, or LEAD to some truth that is hard to see.”

                I’m on board with this. Every “conspiracy theory” that I can think of has some accompanying explanation for how it might have been accomplished, and often lengthy, detailed explanations — except the “RBG had a double” one (or other allegations of doubles in close quarters). I will entertain almost any theory because there is a great deal that we don’t know about what is possible scientifically, and, as you say, something “weird” can lead to other answers. But it is tiresome in the extreme when people don’t think through all the ramifications of what they postulate, and they won’t even discuss it. I’ve not seen this with any other “conspiracy theory.” I’m willing for people to try to convince me, but they don’t even try and won’t answer my questions — which are entirely reasonable and based on real-world, real-life, common experience.

                You have talked about using logic, not emotion. I find logic almost entirely missing on the “double” issues. And we need logic in this fight.

                Liked by 2 people

              2. In evaluating theories, I tend to approach things a lot like Mythbusters, but less like the first part, “can we make the myth work as told”, and more like the last part, “can we make the core myth work AT ALL by pulling out all the stops?”

                This typically clears the table pretty quickly. Or it doesn’t.

                The only explanations requiring doubles that really work and make sense against witnesses and long-time acquaintances are pretty science fictiony. But the problem THERE is that they tend to invoke technology which would likely work just as well on the person being doubled, so why not just do THAT?

                E.g., one has to train a double [with the agenda] to [act like the original].

                Why not just train the original to the agenda? Which is exactly what communism does, and particularly with brainwashing techniques which even work pretty well on fairly resistant people – because real brainwashing is about GETTING PEOPLE TO COMPROMISE – and reasonable people compromise – because reasonable people just want to get along. So weaponize honest desires, and good people give up to bad stuff.

                But I’m always open to a convincing case, because real spying and deception DO use doubles, and if people can overcome the big hurdles on a long-term deception, there are big payoffs. Potentially. Again. Because….. etc.

                Liked by 3 people

              3. Thank God….. and You for this “FREE SPEECH” site!
                Even “wacky” stuff can be discussed and not cussed (so to speak). I really appreciate the FREEDOM to expose and QUESTION everything.

                Liked by 4 people

            1. We’ll have to agree to disagree about weird theories being in short supply. I find our side increasingly putting forth theories that sound implausible and impossible. But the tiresome aspect is that people do not back up their theories with explanations about how they might be implemented.

              “Law clerks wrote her opiniions for her” does not explain the process. How much contact is there with other SCOTUS justices before, during, and after they write opinions? “Questioned documents” is a branch of forensics. Experts, and even non-experts, can spot differences in writing patterns even if the knowledge base is similar.

              When I ask people to flesh out their theories, they never do. When I ask if they think they could be fooled by someone impersonating someone they know well, they don’t answer. It’s easy to make statements, but it takes work to back them up. It takes knowing how the SCOTUS works and thinking about all the people with whom someone interacts, then explaining how all those people would be affected by a double and how that could be successfully pulled off. I’ve not found anyone who will answer even the most basic questions. And I haven’t found anyone who will think about how difficult such a thing would be to pull off in their own life, with all the people they know well and come into contact with.

              Liked by 3 people

              1. I personally trust that RBG was RBG from the moment Scalia first met her until the day he died.

                It’s kinda funny – I had always thought that the RBG-AS friendship was weird, but just a day ago I was watching an RBG retrospective on TV with my wife, and the part about her college years just hit me – the similarity of her to people I knew in college – and I told my wife – I would have probably been friends with her, too – at least at that stage of life.

                Liked by 4 people

              2. I meant “places where weird ideas can be exchanged freely” are in short supply.

                After all this drama, I’m not sure “fleshing it out” would help, so I’ll say this much. “Infiltration, not invasion.” They stack as much of the staff with Deep State loyalists, and anyone not on the team is smart enough not to ask too many questions if they don’t want to get suicided.

                Liked by 4 people

              3. “We’ll have to agree to disagree about weird theories being in short supply.”

                I read Sadie’s comment to mean that it is the spaces “where weird ideas can be exchanged” are in short supply…not the theories.

                Thank you for striving to keep us honest, TheseTruths.
                We need that.

                And I think perhaps the reason people do not counter your thoughtful and logical comments which call for more clarity…is that, they do not have an answer.
                That’s why they don’t answer.

                You are right about how difficult it would be to pull off inserting a double.

                In the case of RBG, the covid thing has offered some ‘cover’ this year.
                It would easier to hide her death because she has been in such isolation.
                But that is just for the months since January 2020.

                Another explanation for Why people would be willing to assist in the subterfuge, is…money, lots of it, and the way that ‘true believers’ can be coerced into thinking that they are doing it for the ‘greater good’.

                Once someone has crossed-a-line…then they are compromised and have something to hide.
                So from that point on, they have to continue to assist.

                We’ve already seen CJ John Roberts do things that suggest he is compromised.
                If he were covering for RBG’s death and asserting that he ‘spoke with her’…then the other justices would like not question it.

                That’s all I got.

                It is the timing of her demise that makes us wonder if there is more to the story.

                Liked by 4 people

          1. THANK YOU.

            For some reason some of our tribe forget who they are and to whom they belong and take up the mantle of “hall monitor” inappropriately. Scolding others for what they choose to post is an insult against you first of all. And to the principles upon which our community stand. Cheers.

            Liked by 4 people

            1. Wish I would have said it in as Godly a manner as you did, but kinda like a scorpion simply is what it is, so is the wolf. I feel about as mangy as an old coyote right now. But the air is clear.

              And that’s what I’m gonna do. I’m gonna polish up my “Scalia post” – which only creates questions – but which addresses plausibility, and that’s very important after what Trump said today.

              Liked by 4 people

              1. Only RESPECT for your WOLF HEART.

                From your tone, you’d been saving up some steam on the issue. We only have a few with “hall monitor” tendencies and I sincerely love them all as brothers in the battle.

                Liked by 2 people

              2. I get frustrated by “theories I don’t believe” – but my logical thinking side reminds me gently that quite a few theories I DO believe were once in the “other” category, or were spawned off of them.

                It is often by taking ideas seriously and earnestly trying to prove or disprove them that I find NEW THEORIES which make sense.

                If we scare off what are quite possibly “myths”, we can’t be “mythbusters”.

                Today’s FRESH CATCH – RBG’s gloves were likely covering up Biden-style hand marks from IVs. I would not have realized this hidden gem without Sadie and Wheatie discussing the double theory seriously.

                Liked by 1 person

        2. Sorry I’m late to reply.

          Your accusation is inaccurate IMO. I never told her to shut up or stop having such ideas. What I said was that she should consider the effect on the entire ‘movement’, such as it is. I also used the word ‘please’ and closed the comment with a positive statement limiting the reach of my comment to the one subject.

          However, being so late to return to this thread has an advantage: it has allowed me to notice the distinct difference between your way of discussing the subject as opposed to hers. That goes right to my point.

          I also admit that a lack of clarity in my previous comment (although I don’t think it was not clear) may have led you to threaten my further participation in this blog. We are all practicing our skills toward mastering the English language, and I am no different.

          Sadie posited her theory as something that implied a default position as true unless disproved. I find that to be disingenuous because it implies a lack of challenge as equivalent to approval.

          I will post this as a standalone in the current Open Thread in case you miss this reply.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Thank you. Let me just be perfectly clear. Do not say things which inhibit people from posting “conspiracy theories”, even under color of being nice about it. This site WELCOMES THEM, and welcomes them IN FACT, not just on paper.

            Liked by 2 people

            1. Yes. My first sentence lacked objectivity. My bias crept in the way my cat creeps in – silently.

              I already posted this on today’s thread before I refreshed this page. If you wish to delete it, I’ll say it was wordpress. 🙂

              Liked by 1 person

    2. Getty has lots of photos here. RBG looks consistent in all of them that I saw.–justices?family=editorial&phrase=us%20supreme%20court%20%20justices&sort=mostpopular

      I do not believe it possible to fool people whom someone knows well, with a double. I have asked for people to provide an example of that ever happening, and no one ever has. (Not a double from a distance, like Stalin had. Not someone pretending to be a doctor or scientist; it needs to be someone that people know well.)

      Does anyone here think you could be fooled by a person pretending to be someone you know well?

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Frankly, “replacement” of anybody one knows well would be MORE creepy than when that person undergoes a major mental shift (often joining a religion, getting married or divorced, mental illness, drugs, drinking, etc.) I just don’t find it plausible with our own current/public technology, other than swapping in a twin or a clone. But even there, it’s just so burdensome. The amount of effort is simply not worth it – not compared to other things.

        Even if you had ALL that tech working, it’s just simpler and more effective to use the money, time and effort to do more normal unethical things.

        Back to current public tech – fooling people. Such things only work in psychological tricks where you make a person ASSUME it’s somebody, and the less well the target knows the person, or the longer it has been since they’ve actually SEEN that person, or the farther away the witness, the easier it is to fool them. Old friends are VERY hard to fool, but even they can be tricked into making assumptions.

        Example: I need somebody to think I’m “in town”. A double can pull that off, and a neighbor can “swear” that they saw me, but it’s not really me.

        The thing is, this is impossible to pull off continuously – and what’s the point?

        As for RBG, she could not have died during Clinton and not been replaced. Likewise, under Obama. So there is no motive. The only motive to replace would have been death under Bush, but Obama would have then replaced the double, which he did not, so there is again no need.

        She should have retired under Obama, just to be safe. Big mistake for the left.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. On the other hand…

          What would be ‘better than RBG’? — A double that is compromised and have to rule as she is told?
          That would be ‘better’ wouldn’t it?

          Maybe Clinton didn’t know about the switch.
          Or maybe he did…and went along with it.
          The Dems lost control of the Senate during Clinton’s term.

          Scalia became friends with RBG — but that happened over the years *after* a switch may have taken place.

          Then…Scalia was murdered in order to get another leftist on the bench.
          Risky business, since the R’s were in control of the Senate.

          Was Scalia starting to wonder if RBG was really RBG?

          Liked by 3 people

          1. I do believe that Scalia was a trick to guarantee the election – Garland would have tipped decisions to Cankles and she would have fought it out if he’d been there.

            “Timing is everything.”

            But I just think Ruth was a true believer in feminism from her youth, and just rebelled more and more along the way. Her rulings always seemed organic and predictable.

            Liked by 2 people

            1. Yes…but the leftist version of feminism.

              A lot of conservative women were onboard with feminism in the beginning, before the Left went too far with it.

              It started out with the ‘equal pay’ thing.

              Liked by 2 people

    3. Okay, that intrigued me about there not being Scotus pictures from the Bush years. I went to DuckDuckGo and searched on “2004 scotus pictures” and got this:

      There are actually some much older pictures in that grouping with Sandra Day O’Connor in them. I think the pictures are actually for a lot of different years. You may find what you are looking for there.

      Liked by 3 people

  17. Larry Schweikart@LarrySchweikart
    And there it is. The NYTimes just said Rs have the votes.

    Larry Schweikart@LarrySchweikart
    “We have the MEATS!”
    Quote Tweet

    · 2h

    Larry Schweikart@LarrySchweikart
    Sad to say, I think this means Cory knows he’s going to lose in Nov. But, also this likely means he has a nice spot lined up in the new Trump administration!!
    Quote Tweet

    The Washington Times
    · 2h
    Cory Gardner says he will vote for ‘qualified nominee’ to fill Supreme Court vacancy

    Liked by 6 people

  18. via Larry Schweikart

    The Slow Roll – UncoverDC

    It’s well known that the Democrats have announced their plan to delay the counting of votes in the November presidential election as long as possible. Some think they want it to go to the US Supreme Court, where John Roberts might again abandon conservatives and stick it to Donald Trump. Remember, despite the polls, increasingly the murmurs coming from the Democrats are that they will drag the vote-counting out until 2021 and/or put the matter into the courts.

    Can they do this? Is it possible? The fact is, almost no one knows.

    In the 1876 presidential election, the electoral counts from three states were in dispute, creating a stalemate that took weeks to resolve.
    One less-than-reliable answer comes from the less-than-reliable Atlantic, which cited the 1887 Electoral Count Act adopted in the wake of the 1876 election between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel Tilden. Easily, this was the closest election in American history, requiring a joint commission of Congress to evaluate contested electoral votes from Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina—all of which apparently favored the Democrat Samuel Tilden. Each state, however, had claims of vote fraud and threats of violence against Republicans (especially the freedmen who voted Republican). South Carolina, for example, saw 101% of all eligible voters vote, auguring the famous 1960 election in Chicago where the dead voted. (It’s worth noting that the loser, Tilden, won the popular vote with a whopping 57% to Hayes’s 42%).

    The Electoral Count Act requires that electors be chosen for the Electoral College no later than 41 days after the national election. In this case, that date would be December 14. A reading of the language of the act seems to say that whoever is ahead on December 14 wins, period. But what is meant by “ahead?” A US Congressman tells me that the requirement is fixed in stone: someone has to get to 270, but National Review’s Andrew McCarthy disagrees. The law itself seems to say just the opposite: “The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed.” What is the “whole number of Electors appointed?” Does that mean “appointed” by the states that have submitted elector slates or appointed by the de facto total number of electors available? McCarthy says that the president must have a majority of those submitted, not 270.

    In the U.S. Civil War, we had exactly this situation. Remember, Lincoln defined the war as a “rebellion,” meaning the Southern states never left the Union. But in practical terms, they had. So what happened with their electors in 1864? There were none submitted. Yet the election went forward with Lincoln winning because he won the majority of the electors submitted.

    More at the link

    Liked by 5 people

    1. All the more reason to have a full Court. A S A P !

      Surely don’t want to hear about any of the “Conservative Justices” recusing from any election related case.

      Liked by 5 people

  19. The current population of the USA is around 331 million people. 5.1 million people watched the Emmy’s in 2020. Talk about whistling past the graveyard…these people are stupid.

    Liked by 8 people

    1. All those sanctons? POTUS’ EO this a.m. ? The ongoing peace agreements between Israel and individual Arab counries? The King of ‘Let’s Make a Deal’ Donald J. Trump?

      Liked by 8 people

    2. ^^^ IF true, YSM can’t ignore this.

      Hope we get that guy that has been there seemingly forever. Allegedly an CIA guy. think he was reportedly dead. Would really like to see him come home tohis family.

      Liked by 4 people

        1. Yes, Thank you. Bob Levinson is the man. Against the odds, hope he can come home alive. If not, his remains. His family deserves to know and find some comfort. Incredibly sad.

          Liked by 4 people

  20. As found on Gab…

    Now you see why they want to take your guns. Australians had guns until not too many years ago. Police in Australia can now drag people out of their homes and force vaccinate them.

    Liked by 3 people

  21. For with thee there is merciful forgiveness: and by reason of thy law, I have waited for thee, O Lord. My soul hath relied on his word: My soul hath hoped in the Lord.

    Psalm 129:4-5

    Liked by 4 people


    tl;dr: – IF – there was a switch, then I believe it happened sometime in 2014. The infamous “RBG falls asleep during the SOTU” happened in January 2015. In retrospect, the hunched over sleeping may have been a deliberate act. Perhaps they wanted to hide her face, or perhaps it was a distraction to get the audience to focus on “lol drunk RBG” instead of asking questions about why she looks different.

    For most of her career, RBG wore thin or clear rimmed glasses.



    The latest picture I could find of her in this style is April 2014.

    I could not find pictures of her between April 2014 and November 2014. November 2014 is when the very thick glasses debuted.

    Two months later, RBG fell asleep at the SOTU. Once again, I now suspect that this was an act.

    Over the years, I’ve noted the thick glasses on patsy mass shooters, especially when they hadn’t worn glasses previously. I’ve long speculated that that the glasses are used either because they lost vision from heavy drugging, or that glasses are used in mind control itself. I couldn’t help but think back to this observation when I noticed that RBG’s glasses drastically changed.

    *** Note: I don’t trust Getty for reasons outlined in previous comments, but this is what I have to work with. I find the sudden change in glasses very unusual, and that is why I posted this here. ***

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Interesting observation. I’ve noticed that people generally choose the same general look when getting new frames. Might be a variation but usually close in style, color, etc.
      The thick dark frames are a big change and the fact that she kept them as her style is notable maybe because I have and I’ve known others that deliberately went outside the glasses comfort zone and regretted it until it was time to get an upgrade and then finally chose a more familiar style.

      Solid point Sadie. Also spot on about so many of the shooters and weird glasses

      Liked by 6 people

      1. I didn’t realize that the black thick glasses were a relatively new look for her. I guess the media propaganda worked its magic on me because I thought she had -always- worn that style of glasses. Nope. She changed it around the same time the Republicans took control of the Senate in 2014. Very bizarre timing.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. I’ve read that dark thick-rimmed glasses can thwart Facial Recognition software.

          It messes with the algorithm somehow.
          So…there’s that.

          It’s conceivable that thick-rimmed glasses can be loaded with tiny cameras that can put displays up on the lenses.
          Or signals of some sort.

          I’ve seen it in films…used in spycraft…but haven’t dug into it to see if it’s something that actually exists.

          Also, my foggy brain is recalling something I saw about eyeglasses that would flash a signal or something — that helps epilepsy patients to avoid a seizure.

          Like I said, it’s conceivable that the technology exists, given all the advances that have been made in just about everything.

          So in theory, the dark thick-rimmed glasses could have been used to further some sort of MK programming or something.

          Liked by 2 people

      1. Short Answer: Republican obstruction prevented them for installing the replacement they wanted. Perhaps they felt they have a better chance gambling with 2016 than they did dealing with Mitch McConnell.

        Wild Answer: Refer to my 2014 speculation, then line the dates up with the Republicans taking control of the Senate in November 2014. That’s all I’ll say about since I really am trying not to get to into it in a second thread.

        I think she wanted out, and they miscalculated on 2014. She was planning on RETIRING then, IMO, but McConnell threw a wrench in the deal.

        Then she got screwed on the Senate for 2 more terms – 4 more years. She almost made it to 2020.

        Political animal.

        OK – I’m seeing it now. Podesta and the “war gamers” of Coupville were VERY worried about SCOTUS. They gamed out the Loretta Lynch and Judge Sullivan offers.

        But IMO they and Brennan gamed out SCALIA, too.

        Liked by 6 people

        1. There is no telling how many they dangled that big fat carrot in front of, to get them to do something at the time.

          That big fat carrot of becoming a SC Justice.

          They probably swore each one to secrecy.
          Wouldn’t want any of them to compare notes during diner party talk.

          Liked by 6 people

          1. Exactly. This is the way criminals work – make MULTIPLE offers one one slot to get the most bang for the buck. “The Producers.”

            I think that “offering judicial office” is one of the few temptations that actually WORKS on judges and people qualified to become judges. It *SEEMS* above-board to them – RIGHT? – because THEY are JUST and THEY the embodiment of justice – and “we need YOU” seems so honest – only once they get in, the HOW they got in becomes a MEANS OF CONTROL.

            Liked by 3 people

        2. I’m wondering how far back Q’s “Senate was the target” goes. Theories about RBG aside, it appears the Deep State was caught unprepared for the Republicans taking back the Senate in 2014.

          Liked by 3 people

          1. [They] thought that they had beaten down the Tea Party to the point that ‘those people’ were no longer a threat to them.

            But what they didn’t realize, was that for every one of the people who openly professed to be part of the Tea Party…there were thousands of other people who agreed with the Tea Party and voted the same way.

            Liked by 3 people

            1. Yes – the commies had NOT put out that fire as much as they THOUGHT they did. Note also that they used Sarah Palin to personify the movement – to freeze it and give it an identity that they could crush – so at the same time they tried to “wrap it up and throw it in the trash” using her as a figurehead, SHE was making actual changes in races based on it – and in 2012-2014 (and beyond) she was making a big enough difference in Republican recovery and shift toward populism that many people figured she was “almost owed VP” in 2016, even though she was already damaged goods by then.

              But at the Holder level they knew Trump was a threat, and THAT is why they got caught spying on him earlier – the Montgomery stuff. When Trump looked at BIRTHER early on, they knew somebody with MEANS was looking at Obama’s past. They had to ridicule him – spy on him – pull out all the stops

              Liked by 3 people

              1. Thanks – great point. Yup – I think the ChiComs realize they’re going to be CUT OFF very shortly, and they have to go back to Soviet-style Maoist gahrbaghe. So they need to psy-op their own people that they’re under attack.

                Liked by 2 people


      Republicans took control of the Senate in November 2014. Deep State realizes that they are unable to replace her with an equally Left (if not farther Left) judge until 2016 at minimum. They panic because they don’t know if they can keep her alive that long. Two weeks later, RBG appears with drastically different glasses. A week after that, she is hospitalized. When we next see her again, she is slumped in her seat at the SOTU. Meanwhile, the Hollywood propaganda machine gets busy pushing out a film about her.

      I don’t know exactly what happened, but I find it no coincidence at all that RBG’s appearance changed only two weeks after the Republicans finally won back control of the Senate. Perhaps it was the launch of a brand new propaganda campaign since they knew they had to deal with Republican obstruction until 2016 at minimum. The memorable image of RBG slumped over in 2015 may have been meant to sear the image of Ruth’s new look into the public’s mind (myself, I thought she always had worn the black glasses until I discovered that she only started wearing them in late 2014). Perhaps the Deep State wasn’t confident of RBG living until 2016, and swapped in a double before the Republicans officially took control of the Senate. I don’t know. I just can’t get past the timing of the glasses change with the Republican victory in the Senate.

      — TIMELINE —

      November 4 – Republicans take majority in Senate

      November 19 – RBG debuts the black glasses at The New Republic Centennial Gala

      November 26 – RBG hospitalized to place a stent.

      December 15 – Deep State goon Franklin Leonard adds RBG movie script to the Black List; film is released in 2018

      January 20, 2015 – Infamous image of RBG slumped over face down at the SOTU

      Heart surgery:

      2014 Gala:

      2014 film script:

      Liked by 2 people

      1. OK, I think this is correct, but I think it’s not a double – it’s EXTREME political gaming of SCOTUS by the commies that was totally under the radar. If the public realized how much, they would FREAK.

        So CONTROL OF SCOTUS is as important to them as control of the WH. Trump and Q team got that from the beginning.

        The commies know that DECAPITATION AND REPLACEMENT is how they can really game the system from the inside to advance. And Ruth was not just a willing accomplice, I think she was an early MK recipient – very likely voluntary.

        SO – here is what this means in practice. Like Hillary, everything about her medical is controlled and hidden. She does not decide anything – THEY DECIDE. And they decided after the 2014 election that she had to get surgery RIGHT THEN, to make it to 2016, whether she liked it or not.

        If this theory is correct, then there will have been similar ADJUSTMENTS both in the past, albeit perhaps less obvious, AND in late fall of 2016, after THAT election failed to change the Senate AND created the Trump problem for them.

        Oh, this is all making sense now.

        So the GLOVES were likely to cover up the IV marks on her HANDS, which is something BIDEN can’t do.

        And all of this fits with the idea that they can’t really swap out these controlled individuals so quickly – they have to recycle many of them, or keep them running long past the expiration date.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. And THAT explains promotion of the DOUBLE THEORIES – they’re CHAFF to keep us off the idea that SCOTUS IS CONTROLLED – that it’s 100% political – that the ROBOTIC VOTING of the LEFTISTS on the court is robotic because they’re predictable political animals, not subject to interpreting as much as finding a way to interpret the law to justify a POLITICAL VOTE.

          Double theories are the opposite of “Keep real RBG in there forever”. They want us chasing THAT lead.

          And so they may even be controlling stuff like “you need these news CIA wonder glasses”. Imagine what they can watch. Like SCALIA talking about his “secret” stuff at the lodge.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Oh, wow – CIA glasses. I had at first expected that RBG’s friendship with Scalia was used against him, but I really hated that idea – that she would turn on her friend like that. But I wasn’t seeing it right.

            Agencies use friends and family all the time – this is just normal – even people who are targeted through friends and family “get used to it” – you can’t really get away from it and lead anything close to a normal life – the agencies know people accept it.

            RBG was not only hardcore on the left and vulnerable through that – and likely MKed early but that’s not even really necessary – when people get old, they just do what they’re told, and if the person who takes her to the optometrist steers her to a tech option, she is steered to a tech option.

            2014 – they are DESPERATE. They have a back-up plan for 2016, and it is NOT pretty. SCALIA OUT.

            Ruth cannot know about this. All she needs is to carry the surveillance tech. She was likely LOADED.

            Liked by 3 people

        1. My question is with all the cancer treatments that she went through why no hair loss? You can’t say she used a wig because of the way she wore her hair. Unless of course they’ve really come a long way with wigs for that style.

          Liked by 2 people

      2. Sadie – History Daily has a lot of Ruth photo’s. I asked Daughn to share one to you that is from 1948 at 15 years old, if you are on fb one of the comments under History Daily has a wedding photo too.


      3. Sadie – this thread has a lot of RBG photos that you can sift through – there is one photo that shows her left hand that appears badly bruised, probably about the time she started wearing gloves. In the bottom right corner it also shows similar photos of the same pose. I realize you don’t trust these type of photos in a string like this but the differences become more apparent.

        The other thing that is interesting as you pointed out was the glasses, some appear that the glasses are very strong and others almost clear lens. Also the chipmunk jowls are more apparent seeing the photos side by side.

        If I am headed in the wrong direction on this – guidance would be appreciated.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s