Open Thread – Weekend 1 April 2023
1,601 responses to “Open Thread – Weekend 1 April 2023”
-
I just don’t understand the Liberal party, they are clearly as dumb as a bag of hammer handles, they can’t win by being more Labor than Labor. They need to oppose Labor on everything, they need their own policies. Remember Abbott, destroyed Labor by being in OPPOSITION.
Unless the Liberal party fight against the following they are doomed to extinction;
Climate Change mitigation
The destruction of our cheap energy
Mass immigration
The Voice
Empowering the Unions
Super changes
And on and on the list goes, no hope for conservatives with this wet useless opposition. -
In many ways, the trans stuff is the greatest win for cultural Marxism. They rub the patently absurd in your face and demand you celebrate it. Everyone knows you can’t change your gender. And yet everyone from doctors to the President of The United States will say you can.
Morons like m0nty-fa celebrate this as a triumph in the Culture Wars. The rejection of reality is wonderful, just ask the fascist left, who don’t follow science, but follow “The Science”, a false god.
-
Piers omitted the bit about winning the Aston byelection. Whatever the Lieborals are selling, people ain’t buying.
So what’s happened to the voters who gave Abbott a massive ten seat change to get 30 seats overall?
They voted for Abbott for real change, especially against global warming fantasies and carbon taxes.Those voters are still out there. Disenchanted, voting Labor holding their noses because the Liberals are so wet on energy and gender matters, the voters are drifting off to alternatives where they can.
If Dutton had been stronger, a change of sorts, even despite his unappealing presence (face it, he looks thuggish and this while not his fault is not great for elections), he would have got over the line in the Aston by-election. Instead he’s put forward Labor Lite and has hardly any media profile since taking over from Morrison. Where’s the dynamism one might expect from a major Opposition Party? The Libs as we often lament here give no hint of changing back to anything like Abbott’s policies. Maybe the time has come for a realignment of the right into a different set of coalitions? Do it soon, before the wretched Voice becomes entrenched in our Constitution.
How could things be worse than they are now for the Libs? Won’t someone tell them?
Half of the electorate are screaming out for something different, with energy at the core of it. -
m0nty says:
April 2, 2023 at 9:17 amI also know Piers, and would not conside myself, nor cassie or Piers, Crones
I believe you would enjoy his company
He would throw his Marie Antoinette glass of merlot at me within ten minutes.
I would make sure of it.
Pre judging is not a good look of an open mind!
-
Within no time, Russian Artillery barrages were called in on the 2nd Battalions precarious position and just like that the DPR militia was stuck, pinned by their Russian allies in a pocket of death, — the entire DPR 2nd battalion was wiped out by friendly fire.
Last night I watched a video which stated at least half of Russian aircraft losses were due to friendly fire. They really need to lay off the vodka.
-
So what’s happened to the voters who gave Abbott a massive ten seat change to get 30 seats overall?
They voted for Abbott for real change, especially against global warming fantasies and carbon taxes.Those voters are still out there. Disenchanted, voting Labor holding their noses because the Liberals are so wet on energy and gender matters, the voters are drifting off to alternatives where they can.
If you look at recent election results across Australia – where Teals, Greens and Labor (plus tree-hugging Pocock) swept to power from sea to shining sea – and think there is still a silent majority of fossil fuel freaks in the electorate, you are completely delusional.
But you just said that Liberal voters switched to Labor because the Libs are too green, which makes no sense at all. Look at yourself Lizzie, you are talking gibberish.
-
Trump & the Risk of an Indictment
QUESTION #1: Marty, What is going on over there in America? It looks like the country has completely lost its mind. Indicting Trump over such a stupid thing when our politicians over here have open mistresses and in France, you have the head of state who married his high school teacher. How about Berlusconi in Italy who married a 32-year-old? We have a war on our doorstep. Is this some planned distraction so they can start World War III? We are laughing at America over this craziness.
JQ
QUESTION #2: It looks like this indictment of Trump is precisely what Socrates has forecast. Then a major swing into 2026. Could that be a Trump victory as a backlash against this indictment? I think they are making Trump a symbol of absolute political victimization. The videotapes from January 6th show that were all blown out of proportion with the Democrats calling it an insurrection while the police had walkways set up and escorted the guy with the horns to the podium. What hypocrisy! Then there are videos of Hunter Biden with lines of cocaine where anyone else would be in prison. Just unbelievable how corruption is surfacing.
LK
ANSWER: It is hard to say. Some people hated Trump and already have declared him guilty. They are such fools for what goes around, comes around. It is these very people who are destroying the United States. Pelosi is a total fool who honestly does belong in jail for corruption.
I know a lot of Democrats who are not really happy about this at all. We don’t know for sure the charges yet. As they stand now, it is just insane. This may now have serious implications for prosecutors around the country can view this as fair game to start prosecuting politicians just as he says – haul in Pelosi and Hillary for starts. Everything is now on the table.
This represents the total collapse of the American Legal System. Bagg has crossed the Rubicon that can be so damaging to the United States and the world by undermining the confidence in the entire government. The rule of law has collapsed.
These charges as we know them, are a novel theory at best. What if Trump takes them on, goes to trial, and wins? What will that do to the Democrats altogether? That scenario would probably ensure he returns to the presidency. This, I fear, the Neocons will escalate the war on a fast track for they may end up in jail themselves as enemies of the state and treason if Trump gets back in.
This is what I mean. Socrates can project trends we do not even think about. I do not care what they say, the last election was rigged. They had to get rid of Trump (1) for this whole climate change agenda, and (2) so the Neocons could start World War III. None of this would have happened if they did not remove Trump. Not that he was this fantastic guy, there are far worse people in Washington. He fired all the Neocons when all they wanted was war – Bolton & Hill just for starters. The Neocons had to remove him and anyone who thinks they cannot rig the votes is a fool. This was certainly not the first time. Removing Trump was way too important for their agendas. We would not be facing World War III if Trump was still there. That is not a statement against Democrats. It is the Neocons who seized control because Biden is too old and too corrupt.”
-
On the Voice, as I’ve said often, the Libs should be against Constitutional change, just throw in a sop to waverers by having a policy of a Federalised Voice from all of the States, doing it via the existing billion dollar advisory group that already exists across Australia.
Show that there are other ways to Labor’s in dealing with significant issues like energy and remote aboriginal welfare and a symbolic ‘Voice’. Take charge of the debates rather than buckle under to Labor.
-
Pre judging is not a good look of an open mind!
I have heard and read enough of Piers Akerman over the years to know exactly what sort of person he is. I am sure he purrs like a kitten when he’s among friends who think the same way he does, that is unsurprising. In the presence of someone like me who think he’s a dickhead and would say so to his face, the bile would rise up quickly in him.
-
If ‘No One Is Above The Law,’ Democrats And Their Partisan Pawns Would Be Arraigned, Not Trump
America’s two-tiered justice system status was solidified on Thursday after a Manhattan grand jury voted to hit former President Donald Trump with a felony indictment and the threat of imprisonment.
Cue the chorus of Democrats and corporate media mouthpieces who spent all of Thursday night on Twitter condescendingly warning: “no one is above the law, not even the former president.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the anti-Trump Adams, former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, Rep. Adam Schiff, and even Trump’s ex-attorney Michael Cohen say Trump- or anyone else- doesn’t just get a free pass because he’s a 2024 presidential candidate. Yet, it doesn’t take an expert to know that the sole reason Trump ever faced indictment is because his political enemies requested it.
In addition to suggesting that Trump is not “above the law,” former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi claimed that the former president has the opportunity to “prove innocence” in court.
Of course, the law, smugly touted by Pelosi, dictates that defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty- not the other way around
Whether Pelosi’s “innocence” comment was a Freudian slip or a genuine assertion, we may never know.
What we do know is that for years, Democrats have operated under the belief that their party members and their partisan allies are above the law.
1. The Criminals Alvin Bragg Refused To Prosecute
2. Hillary Clinton
3. Barack Obama
4. Election Law-Breakers Like Marc Elias
5. President Joe Biden
6. Hunter Biden
7. Eric Swalwell
8. Eric Holder
9. Susan Rice
10. The Pelosi FamilyThe same people who love lording “no one is above the law” over Americans are the ones who think they are above any semblance of oversight or law, or constitutionality. If Democrats truly valued rule of law, illegal border crossers, Russia hoaxers, Jeffrey Epstein’s clients, pro-abortion vandals, rioters, and the people who run corrupt government agencies like the Department of Justice, the FBI, the NSA, and the Manhattan DA’s office would be the ones standing in court next week, not Trump.
-
Call it a Federal Voice rather than a Constitutional Voice and sell it hard on the view that it will operate well at the State level as well as having a right to represent a Federal view to Federal Parliament.
Why can’t they start to do some thinking on these issues rather than blindly flail and follow?
-
More proof the US is fu.ked:
New Report on Motive of 2017 Las Vegas Shooter is Raising Eyebrows
The shooter was a disgruntled punter!
-
As C.L. wrote on his blog about Dutton and Aston….
“He made a meal of the Deeming affair when it was actually an opportunity to stake big claims about religious liberty, free speech, women’s rights, woke extremism, the whole shebang.
The thing is, Dutton is no conservative, as he said in May of last year upon becoming Liberal leader, he’s a “Liberal”. Well that’s great Peter, but you and the Liberal Party refuse to speak up and stand up for Liberal values, such as religious freedom, free speech, limited government, individual responsibility, aspiration and so on.
When you stand for nothing, you lose. But it’s even worse than that. The Liberals now just do the bidding of the Labor Party, the Greens and the leftist partisan MSM. They’re chasing their own tail. They fell for the nonsense that the Liberal Party has a “woman problem” and so they decided to parachute into Aston a candidate who wasn’t even a local, all because she’s a woman, ignoring the branches who’d chosen a local former mayor.
You reap what you sow.
-
m0ntysays:
April 2, 2023 at 9:17 am
I also know Piers, and would not conside myself, nor cassie or Piers, CronesI believe you would enjoy his company
He would throw his Marie Antoinette glass of merlot at me within ten minutes.
I would make sure of it.
LOL. m0nty=fa is a front bar urger, except his front bar is in Melbourne, Piers is in Sydney.
-
You only have to read the 1st sentence of this article to see where it is going ..
“When Roger (not his real name) migrated to Australia in 2017, he looked forward to settling down in Melbourne, close to family and friends.”
This isn’t about “migrating” this is about coming in on “student” visas and then whinge-ing when you have to apply to stay ……. it’s no wonder they aren’t allowing comments .!
-
In the presence of someone like me who think he’s a dickhead and would say so to his face, the bile would rise up quickly in him.
Guileless and bileless, that’s you is it, M0nty Black Shirt?
Go join your friends and punch up another woman wanting to speak.
Piers would eat you for breakfast and still be hungry, Black Shirt Soy Boy.
-
“In the presence of someone like me who think he’s a dickhead and would say so to his face, the bile would rise up quickly in him.”
LOL…..soon the pervert apologist will be taking selfies of himself with toy guns and kitchen knives, warning everyone……”I’m coming for you”. I wonder if he’s written his manifesto yet?
Piers would just laugh at him, because at the end of the day, he’s sad, pathetic and laughable.
-
Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare says:
April 2, 2023 at 9:32 amOn the Voice, as I’ve said often, the Libs should be against Constitutional change, just throw in a sop to waverers by having a policy of a Federalised Voice from all of the States, doing it via the existing billion dollar advisory group that already exists across Australia.
Show that there are other ways to Labor’s in dealing with significant issues like energy and remote aboriginal welfare and a symbolic ‘Voice’. Take charge of the debates rather than buckle under to Labor.
Someone is trying to Take charge of the debates rather than buckle under to Labor.
We are one together, not two divided.
https://www.fairaustralia.com.au
Australia is the greatest country in the world. We’ve enjoyed a peace and
prosperity that’s the envy of nations from all corners of the globe. But we’re
not perfect and there is no issue that exemplifies our shortcomings as the
ongoing disadvantages faced by our Indigenous brothers and sisters.We understand the gap in health and economic outcomes between Indigenous
and non-Indigenous Australians is a national problem that needs solving and we
believe the promise of Australia is in our capacity to find solutions together,
not separately.The upcoming Voice referendum will ask you a basic question: do you want to
change the Constitution?The Constitution is our founding document, our national rulebook.
It has underpinned our success, and it gives us the tools to solve the problems
we face together. Not apart.There is nothing modest about changing the Constitution because when you
change the Constitution you’re changing the foundation of the country. There’s
no reason to do it otherwise.In 1967 Australians voted overwhelmingly to change the Constitution so that
Indigenous Australians were “recognised as part of the Australian population”1, to
make Australians one together.The proposed Voice undermines 1967 by enshrining division in our constitution.
Instead of being one and equal, we become divided, with separate voices,
separate powers, separate votes.At its core, the Voice is divisive.
And that’s why we’re voting ‘no’!
Because we’re not going to help our Indigenous family by separating them.
We need to do it together.
As Australians. One and free.
CONTENTS
WHY VOTE ‘NO’? – HERE ARE 10 REASONS WHY
It’s not ‘modest’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
It undermines ‘recognition’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
It will divide us . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
It’s expensive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
It’s a Canberra politician’s Voice . . . . . . 8
It divides Indigenous Australians . . . . . . 9
It’s a package deal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
It undermines our one-vote
democratic system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
It won’t Close the Gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
It’s a platform for radical activists
to attack our values and institutions . . . 13
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 -
If you look at recent election results across Australia – where Teals, Greens and Labor (plus tree-hugging Pocock) swept to power from sea to shining sea – and think there is still a silent majority of fossil fuel freaks in the electorate, you are completely delusional.
m0nty=fa’s short term memory loss is such that he jas completely forgotten the triumphal expectation of decades of Labor political dominance in the aftermath of the KRudd ascendancy. Yet, within three years, Labor was reduced to relying on Windbag and Okaesnott to stay in power.
Pride and Hubris go before a fall and Nemesis.
-
m0ntysays:
April 2, 2023 at 9:32 am
Pre judging is not a good look of an open mind!I have heard and read enough of Piers Akerman over the years to know exactly what sort of person he is. I am sure he purrs like a kitten when he’s among friends who think the same way he does, that is unsurprising. In the presence of someone like me who think he’s a dickhead and would say so to his face, the bile would rise up quickly in him.
LOL, absolutely no self-awareness at all.
-
I just don’t understand the Liberal party, they are clearly as dumb as a bag of hammer handles, they can’t win by being more Labor than Labor.
Actually…
The problem is that the Libs of today all start in the same sausage factory as the Labs and Greens. They get the same indoctrination that ‘nice people think and say these things so they are trying to say ‘We are nice people too!! Let us into the nice people’s club. Pretty please?’But the nice people’s club is the in-crowd of the whole educated CLASS. Being a class enemy of your own class is utterly demoralising. They try again and again chanting the formulas for acceptance but the door remains shut.
Our generation at least got taught a bit of classical liberalism (like the lefties did). We started from a very obvious set of shared values and the ‘educated people’s class’ had relatively unstupid people on both sides. (Monts, take a bow).
Then the feminists allowed the Marxists and rad-fem-seps to set doctrine and they privileged emotional identity-stories over truth and justice, and after twenty-odd years of purity spiralling, the Left has self-lobotomised (hi again, Monts).
So yes, the Libs are hopeless. They are the ‘gilded youths that line the barber’s wall; their eyes are dull, their heads are flat, they have no brains at all.’
-
our politicians over here have open mistresses and in France, you have the head of state who married his high school teacher
She was/is a weirdo and he was/is a cuck.
. How about Berlusconi in Italy who married a 32-year-old?
So what? That’s normal. If you have a problem with it or equate it with the above mentioned example, *you* have the problem.
-
I wonder whether any of you might ponder for a moment whether it is possible that you are the problem. No, no, it’s the children who are wrong, you say. Let us continue to exhort Murdoch’s opinionist bullpen to drag the Liberal Party further and further to the right. Conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed.
Electoral reality is here, and it is telling you that you are wrong and getting more wrong every year. You can choose to listen or not. The less you listen, the less relevant you become.
-
Trump Indictment Is a Perversion of Campaign-Finance Law
If a candidate has to pay for his own clothes, surely hush money is likewise a personal expense.
In choosing to convene a grand jury to pursue the Donald Trump-Stormy Daniels affair, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg faced two big problems—one political, one legal. The indictment of Mr. Trump will address the first, likely at the expense of the second.
To recap how we got here: Ms. Daniels, a pornographic film performer, alleges she had a fling with Mr. Trump in 2006, nearly a decade before he entered the Republican primary for president. Once Mr. Trump became a candidate, Ms. Daniels began demanding money in exchange for her silence. Mr. Trump obliged, and his company, the Trump Organization, sent $130,000 to Ms. Daniels through Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. The expense was apparently recorded on the company books as “legal fees,” which the indictment is expected to allege was a falsification of business records.
Mr. Bragg’s political problem is that this charge is chump change, merely a misdemeanor under New York law. To ratchet it up to a felony indictment, the district attorney has to show, among other things, that the falsification was designed to conceal another crime. That crime is believed to be a campaign-finance violation—an illegal corporate contribution by the Trump Organization to the Trump presidential campaign—which the false business reporting was meant to conceal.
Here’s where Mr. Bragg’s legal problem comes in: Was the hush money a campaign contribution? The governing statute, the Federal Election Campaign Act, provides that a contribution is any donation made “for the purpose of influencing any campaign for federal office.” The Trump Organization, says Mr. Bragg, paid Ms. Daniels to prevent revelations that would have hurt Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign.
Thus the payments were “for the purpose of influencing” a federal election—and, since corporate contributions to a campaign for federal office are illegal, the case is closed.
Not so fast.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that because campaign-finance laws infringe on core First Amendment activity, they can’t be dependent on vague, subjective interpretations. Accordingly, the clause “for the purpose of influencing any federal election” is an objective standard. As another section of the statute states, an obligation isn’t a campaign expenditure if it exists “irrespective” of the campaign. In other words, campaign funds pay for campaigning—the campaign manager’s salary, ads, campaign travel, venues for rallies, polling and so on. They don’t pay for personal expenses not created by the act of campaigning, even if the candidate intends for them to benefit the campaign.
The statute’s objective nature is demonstrated by a noninclusive list of things that campaign funds may not be spent on no matter how much they might benefit—or be intended to benefit—a campaign. For example, if a candidate wants to look good in a debate and purchases a $4,000 suit he would never have bought if he weren’t running for office—that is to say, he buys it with the subjective intent to influence an election—it still can’t be purchased with campaign funds, because he would have to buy clothing anyway. A country-club membership can’t be purchased with campaign funds, no matter how much the candidate intends for it to benefit his campaign by giving him a place to schmooze donors.
Candidates with substantial business interests, such as Mr. Trump, will frequently find themselves facing lawsuits—some merited, some not. If such a candidate were to instruct his company’s legal counsel to settle them, the settlement payments would, subjectively, be made “to influence an election.”
Legally, however, such payments couldn’t be made with campaign funds and would have to be made by the company or the candidate personally, because the underlying obligation wasn’t created by the act of campaigning.
These restrictions on converting campaign funds to “personal use” may be the one meritorious part of our complex, often destructive system of campaign-finance regulation. They define the difference between bribes—donations for the candidate’s personal benefit—and campaign contributions. Who really thinks that a candidate can—let alone must—use campaign funds to pay hush money for past affairs, and who knows what else? But that’s what Mr. Bragg’s theory would require.
In other words, the “crime” that Mr. Bragg claims is being covered up isn’t a crime at all. Worse still, one is left with the distinct impression that if Mr. Trump had used campaign funds to pay Ms. Daniels, Mr. Bragg would be alleging that the underlying crime the business records were intended to cover up was the illegal conversion of campaign funds to personal use.
This is a classic Catch-22 that undermines the rule of law.
Mr. Trump has a remarkable ability to make both his ardent supporters and his ardent critics abandon long-held principles for short-term satisfaction.
If Mr. Bragg is somehow able to make these charges stick, it will betray fundamental tenets of campaign-finance law and those who believe in the rule of law.
Mr. Smith is chairman of the Institute for Free Speech and a law professor at Capital University in Columbus, Ohio. He served as chairman of the Federal Election Commission in 2004.
-
I was sent off to Colesworth this morning to buy a carton of crème fraîche. Imagine my surprise at being required to pay $5 for an essential item that only weeks ago cost $3.75.
My rough calculation suggests that annualised inflation is running at around 350%. Productivity has collapsed and we are in a Zimbabwean whirlpool.
Time for Death Duties and CGT on the family home.
-
Brief change of tangent. There was media during the last week or so about apparently the biggest Australian arms export deal ever in the offing, being producing Rheinmetal Boxer AFV’s for the German army in the new Brisbane factory. ‘Hooray’, but surely this will just mean redirecting production to Germany instead of ourselves. I also don’t understand the relative economics of this, it can’t possibly be cheaper to build them here than Germany, surely? Speed and volume of supply perhaps, realising they need to rapidly replace older equipment donated to Ukraine?
-
We have all witnessed the level of fear in the community generated by medical bureaucrats and pollies in relation to Covid. It is increasingly clear that this generalised fear has not abated. Indeed, it seems to have become endemic and more generalised as “climate change,” economic volatility and international crises grip society.
In this article Mattias Desmet (of “mass formation” theory) proposes that this fixation is fracturing western societies.
-
Palm Sunday of the Passion of the Lord
One of the fundamental questions at the heart of contemporary Western culture concerns what it means to be a man.
Do men have a place in our culture anymore? How should men act? How can he love and protect those entrusted to his care? How can he air his concerns without them being immediately smacked down because they are different? How can he be faithful to his role as one of two parents—the sole primary educators of their kids? How can he share his anxieties and struggles without diminishing his manhood? How can he find profound happiness, freedom, and real interior peace?
In our first reading Isaiah turns our eyes to the contemplation of the complete and definitive answer to these questions: the co-eternal son of God become man, Jesus Christ. And the first thing we see is, quite simply, that Jesus is a man—that God became a male human being.
There is no nonsense here about concluding that men are superior to women. Given he received his male body from a woman, men and women are clearly equal in dignity. But it clearly proclaims the Creator’s unchangeable decision that men, just like women, have an unalterable place in society as well as in creation for all the rest of eternity.
-
Somebody above mentioned Ed Dowd saying Brooke Jackson case was important if could show Pfizer’s trial fraudulent as would negate the contracts.
Unfortunately the judge threw her case out as per her Twitter account yesterday. A lot was riding on that case which had a big team of lawyers.
I believe will appeal.
-
There was media during the last week or so about apparently the biggest Australian arms export deal ever in the offing, being producing Rheinmetal Boxer AFV’s for the German army in the new Brisbane factory.
I understand there is a particularly powerful new rifle being manufactured at a certain NSW facility as well. Who knew? It’s impressive.
-
But you just said that Liberal voters switched to Labor because the Libs are too green, which makes no sense at all. Look at yourself Lizzie, you are talking gibberish.
Leave the word ‘gibberish’ to Matrix’s friendly fire, M0nty Black Shirt. Find one of your own.
People vote Labor when they are committed to a two-Party electoral tradition; ‘I’ll give the other mob a go’ is what you often hear when times are tough. For some years now the Liberals have downplayed the energy issue whereas Abbott brought it to front of mind and explained it. Believe me, M0nts FS, the issue is still a simmering cauldron in much of the electorate and will become explosive soon enough. If the Libs can’t capitalise early on that, then they truly are done. And so are we as a nation.
You go ad hom onto Piers because you cannot sensibly reply to his viewpoints.
-
Aimee Terese
@aimeeterese
·
7h
“How did you become a police officer?” is a ridiculous question. She’s performing the job she was trained to do. Billboard Chris is an enemy of the regime, and so he is not afforded the same rights and protection as his adversaries, who are friends of the regime. Simple as.
Quote TweetDan Dicks
@DanDicksPFT
·
22h
I showed this officer footage of @BillboardChris getting physically assaulted 3 TIMES and she says that HE incited violence by wearing his sign…
Badge number 3081 of the VPD…she wouldn’t tell me her name… -
From the Oz What the fvck have the financial geniuses of the Labor Party got in store for us now?
Franking credits shake-up ‘double tax by stealth’
Exclusive
By GEOFF CHAMBERS
Chief Political Correspondent
@Chambersgc
12:08PM April 1, 2023
65 CommentsFund manager Geoff Wilson says the government’s franking credits shake-up will deliver “double taxation by stealth”, significantly increase the budget deficit and impose “long-term and unintended consequences” on Australian companies and investors.
The Wilson Asset Management chair, whose company manages more than $5bn for 130,000 investors, said changes to Treasury laws impacting the franking system would spark an investment plunge.
A submission by Mr Wilson and WAM chief financial officer Jesse Hamilton to a Senate economics committee inquiry into Treasury laws amendments, which will report back by May 26, said the two franking measures would weaken a system that has “underpinned Australia’s economy … over three decades”.
Read Next“Treasury’s proposed policy will have a significant impact on Australian companies and their ability to pay fully franked distributions to their shareholders and will delay and/or discourage the normal process of investment, economic growth and capital formation in Australia,” the submission said.
“The proposed legislation will promote debt over equity and discourage large, mature companies from paying tax in Australia (or encourage them to defer or minimise their tax as much as possible), leading to a significant increase in the budget deficit.
“It will result in the unfair reintroduction of double taxation by stealth and negatively impact charities, low-income earners, SMSFs and retirees – not the institutions/investment funds as communicated by government.”
Submissions to the Senate inquiry closed on Friday, three weeks after Liberal senator Andrew Bragg won support to establish the parliamentary probe and attacked the legislation as a “dangerous and underhanded measure to stop the payment of franked dividends”.
Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones has said the government is closing “an unintended loophole that allows large corporations to effectively gain a taxpayer subsidy for off-market share buybacks”. He said the legislation made “no change to the fact companies can still issue dividends that attract franking credits”.
The government has flagged its two measures will raise $550m by aligning the tax treatment of off-market share buybacks and $10m a year to stop companies paying dividends and restricting access to franking credits for individual shareholders.
Under current tax rules, when a company pays or credits dividends that have been franked, investors are entitled to a franking offset for the tax the company has paid on its income. The offset covers or partly covers the tax payable on dividends.
Mr Wilson – who led the grassroots campaign against Bill Shorten’s policy banning excess franking credit refunds ahead of the 2019 election – said Australia must not follow Britain’s “disastrous” path that led to the abandonment of its Advanced Corporation Tax system.
“One of the many great attributes of the Australian franking system is that it encourages all Australians, from mum-and-dad investors to large industry and superannuation funds, to support and invest in Australian companies,” Mr Wilson’s submission said.
“The fact the UK doesn’t have a dividend imputation, or franking credit system … has led to a drastic fall in UK investment in UK companies. In 2000, the share of the UK stockmarket owned by UK pension funds and insurance companies was 39 per cent. By 2020 this figure has plummeted to only 4 per cent.”
-
TUCKER CARLSON: Leaders turned the American legal system against their political opponents
He calls this the new standard of justice
The defining principle of the American legal system, really of American life, the principle that has kept us free, is equal justice — and the principle is fairly simple. No matter what you look like or who your parents were or what your politics might be, the law treats you exactly the same way as it would any other American. In this country, justice is blind.
Now, that’s a lofty standard, but because Americans have long believed in fairness and because most of the people in charge of administering that system have behaved in good faith, this country has, for the most part, lived up to its core ideal for 250 years, making it the greatest country in the world, but the populist surge of 2016 changed everything.
Permanent Washington suddenly felt more threatened by its own voters, by American voters, than by any foreign adversary. Donald Trump, to them, seemed more dangerous than ISIS. They panicked, and in their panic, our leaders decided to turn the American legal system as well as the American intel agencies and if necessary the U.S. Army, against their political opponents.
They felt they had no choice. In doing this, they abandoned the ancient principle of equality under the law and they replaced it with what is effectively a loyalty oath. Opponents of the regime became enemies of the state. That’s a huge change and you’re seeing the results of that change tonight.
Just 24 hours after a Manhattan grand jury indicted Joe Biden’s rival in the next presidential race, another jury also in New York convicted a Republican social media influencer called Douglass Mackey.
What did Mackey do wrong?
Well, Douglass Mackey’s crime was mocking Hillary Clinton voters online. You’re seeing on your screen the meme that Mackey posted on Twitter during the 2016 election. In that meme, Mackey suggests it’s possible to vote for president by text message because only Hillary voters could be stupid enough to believe something so absurd, but of course, in real life, no one did believe that.
Mackey’s insult did not alter a single vote in the election and no one has proved otherwise. The government brought forth not a single victim of this crime. It couldn’t. Douglass Mackey was joking.
Nobody believed he was a federal election official and in fact, his social media profile picture had a Donald Trump hat. It was unmistakable.
This was mockery, but in the wake of the 2016 election and the rising hysteria about Donald Trump, mocking the Democratic Party became a crime. So as a result tonight, Douglass Mackey faces 10 years in prison. The case against Doug Mackey is the most shocking attack on freedom of speech in this country in our lifetimes.
It’s also a useful lesson in who will be allowed to speak going forward. As it turns out, a woman called Kristina Wong posted an almost identical meme the same year back during the 2016 election, but unlike Doug Mackey, Wong voted for Hillary Clinton. “Hey, Trump supporters,” she wrote. “Skip poll lines and text in your vote.” Same crime, but the Department of Justice under Joe Biden has shown no interest in prosecuting Kristina Wong.
Do you see how this works? Have you internalized our new partisan legal standards? That would be the point of the exercise. They want you to know the rules. We’ll have more on the Doug Mackey case and what it means for you and for America in just a moment and by the way, Douglass Mackey is not the only Trump supporter who’s now going to prison because of how he voted.
According to new reporting from Julie Kelly, the FBI’s counterterrorism division just arrested a grandmother in the state of Virginia on four misdemeanors this week.
What exactly did she do?
She entered the Capitol with her elderly mother for a total of 15 minutes on January 6. She hurt no one. She destroyed nothing. She just stood there and yet, at the very same time, during the very same week, none of the transgender thugs who invaded the Tennessee State House yesterday have been rounded up by the FBI counter-terror division and, of course, they won’t be. Joe Biden just honored them with a trans day of visibility.
So, what we’re watching here unmistakably is bigger than Donald Trump, but we’re going to begin tonight with the latest on his case, and we’re doing that because he is — and this is not at all incidental to his prosecution — he is the leading Republican candidate for president.
From the Comments
– Soviets used to sentence people to 3 years for anti-Soviet propaganda. Mr. Mackey supposed to be sentenced to 10 years for criticizing a Democrat politician. Looks like Dems are even better at this.
-
If a candidate has to pay for his own clothes, surely hush money is likewise a personal expense.
I repeat. This issue has been adjudicated.
Stormy and Avennati tried to overturn the confidentiality of the hush agreement and obtain a judgment the payment was illegal. They failed. Now Bragg has made up a new offence beyond his powers. Normally bragg would be in trouble for exceeding his powers but in NY and a left run US where the justice system has been corrupted who knows what will happen.
What is being overlooked is that Stormy tried to extort/blackmail Trump. The hush payment was a commercial decision. It’s done all the time.
-
Rise and shine, citizens of Minister-prasident Mark McGowan’s Far East Germany!
-
There is no nonsense here about concluding that men are superior to women. Given he received his male body from a woman, men and women are clearly equal in dignity. But it clearly proclaims the Creator’s unchangeable decision that men, just like women, have an unalterable place in society as well as in creation for all the rest of eternity.
This is beautifully put, P.
However one explains it, the existence of two inter-dependent human sexes on this planet is both essential and unchangeable. That is Reality 101.
-
Electoral reality is here, and it is telling you that you are wrong and getting more wrong every year. You can choose to listen or not. The less you listen, the less relevant you become.
Utter drivel.
We aren’t “wrong”. We are different. Different from pervert loving freaks like you mOron. And, not speaking for anyone else, I’m very comfortable to remain that way. The truth of the matter is mOron, you are a disgusting little lemming. Never with any original ideas or thoughts, following the mindless herd, uttering the standard leftist lies and propaganda. Essentially just an idiot. And a universal trait of an idiot is that they rely on other idiots feeding them thoughts and ideas just to get by with the lemming herd. So at best, you are a useful idiot. Useful to the freaks and creeps you mindlessly give support to here, day in and out.
Loathed and ridiculed – that’s your your place in a sensible world.
-
Believe me, M0nts FS, the issue is still a simmering cauldron in much of the electorate and will become explosive soon enough.
That just happened, Lizzie. Except it happened exactly the opposite way to what you were hoping. The Libs lost their blue ribbon Federal seats to the Teals who are just small-l liberals plus climate change realism. The heart of the party’s base is now green-tinged. I’d call the Libs imploding so badly that they ended up losing Josh Frydenberg’s seat rather explosive, and the damage was all to the fossil fuel dead enders.
This Black Knight routine is funny for a while but then it just turns sad. No, you aren’t biting anyone’s kneecaps off. You are bleeding everywhere.
-
We watched Tucker deliver that speech on Foxtel, as Hairy had deliberately recorded it.
We usually browse the Saturday paper over lunch on Saturday, but didn’t yesterday.
I think we should watch this today, said Hairy, because it’s going to be important.
Tucker’s delivery as well as his content was stunning, impressive.
America is well down the road to lawlessness now.Our air-fried bacon and chopped boiled egg burgers were easy to eat in hand while watching. 🙂
-
As Effort To ‘Get Trump’ Ramps Up, Are Leaks From Bragg’s Grand Jury a Crime?
The protection of secrecy is as applicable to President Trump as it is to anyone else.
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
It is likely that a serious felony has been committed right under District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s nose and he is not investigating it. Under New York law, it is a felony to leak confidential grand jury information, such as whether the jurors voted to indict. The protection of secrecy is as applicable to President Trump as it is to anyone else.
We know that the information was disclosed while the indictment itself remains sealed and before any official announcement was made or charges brought. It is unlikely that the leak came from the Trump team, which seemed genuinely surprised.
The most likely, though uncertain, scenario is that a person in Mr. Bragg’s office or a grand juror unlawfully leaked the sealed information. That would be a class E felony, subject to imprisonment.
It is possible of course that an investigation is underway, but it seems more likely that Mr. Bragg is too busy making up a crime against the man he promised in his campaign to get than investigating a real crime that took place on his watch.
Under Mr. Bragg’s likely theory, Mr. Trump should have disclosed in his public corporate records that he paid the hush money to avoid his adulterous affair from becoming public.
But no one in history has ever publicly disclosed the reason he paid money for a non-disclosure agreement.
Why would Mr. Trump pay the money in the first place if he had to publicly disclose the embarrassing reason? Furthermore, no one in history has ever been indicted for listing “legal expenses” for setting a potentially embarrassing payment of hush money.
Thus, even the misdemeanor allegation involving false entries is unprecedented and represents selective prosecution. It is also almost certainly barred by the two-year statute of limitations. In order to elevate this bookkeeping case into a felony, Mr. Bragg must also prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the reason Trump made the false entry — if he himself did it — was solely as a campaign contribution to help him win his election.
If Mr. Trump was motivated in part by his desire to protect his wife, children, and business interests from harmful disclosures, that would not constitute the crime of making an undisclosed campaign contribution. So this too is a stretch.
It is a fundamental tenet of American law that criminal law should not be stretched to fit targeted defendants. Criminal statutes must be clear and unambiguous. If there is any doubt, the age-old concept of “lenity” requires that these doubts be resolved in favor of the defendant.
Thomas Jefferson once quipped that for a criminal statute to be valid, it must be so clear that a reasonable person could understand it if he read it “while running.” A nice image!
I intend to read the text of the indictment, while sitting, with 60 years of experience behind me. I doubt I will find that it meets the constitutional criteria for “fair warning,” although I maintain an open mind until I have studied it carefully.
The important point is that when a district attorney ran for office as a Democrat pledging to get Mr. Trump, who is a candidate for president against the incumbent Democrat, that district attorney must have an airtight case.
A weak, questionable, unprecedented, and novel stitching together of two inapplicable statutes, will not, and should not, satisfy the American public that this is not a partisan targeting of a political opponent.
Mr. Dershowitz is professor emeritus at Harvard Law School. He has written 52 books, more than 1,000 articles & has successfully litigated hundreds of cases, half of them Pro Bono
-
Old Ozzie:
Report of the National Independent Panel on Military Service and Readiness
I read the part you put up and I’m currently printing out the entire paper.
It’s quite interesting and perhaps worthwhile pointing you toward a paper I no longer have a copy of – just the short article. It’s called “Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht” by Janowitz and Shils.
After WW2, the US army tried to find out how many German formations had suffered 90% casualties and yet remained coherent units capable of carrying out their missions. In short, it identified many of the problems in your Report. I suspect the creeping politicisation and social engineering that is now flowing into the US Armed and infecting soldiering at the squad level is having a disastrous effect on retention rates and the ability of soldiers to openly relate to each other.
One way around collapsing retention rates is conscription and I think the politico/military class will go for this solution rather than address the issues causing the problems.
Anyway, it’s a fascinating study and has effects and insights well beyond the military and into society at large.
Unfortunately I am unable to get a copy of the full document as I no longer have access through the army. Perhaps someone may be able to assist with access. -
“The Libs lost their blue ribbon Federal seats to the Teals who are just small-l liberals plus climate change realism. “
LOL, the pervert apologist is once again lying. He’s quite “unseemly”. He doesn’t have a grasp on reality. It’s like him saying last Sunday that there was no violence at the Auckland rally and that the women who attended to hear Kellie-Kay speak and to stand up and speak for themselves were asking to be punched, to be assaulted and to be silenced by the tranny perverts.
The teals are not small-l liberals plus climate change realism, THEY ARE GREENS.
But carry on pervert apologist, you give us a good laugh.
Oh and let us know how your manifesto is going.
-
Hey pervert apologist, what are you thoughts on Alex Greenwich’s original remarks, which started the melee, where he described Mark Latham as a “disgusting human being”?
And no, Latham hasn’t been “universally loathed and ridiculed for it”, not by ordinary people, who can see right through the manufactured spin of the MSM.
-
m0nty=fa
I’d call the Libs imploding so badly that they ended up losing Josh Frydenberg’s seat rather explosive, and the damage was all to the fossil fuel dead enders.
Speaking of fossil fuel “dead enders”, have you gone fully renewable in your home, and your slum, sorry, rental properties? Solar panels on the roof, battery in the yard, EV in the garage? Are your computer and server fully renewable? Have you cut a deal with a renewable provider that all of your users can receive fully renewable power when playing fantasy football?
It’s for the planet, and if you have not done so, you are even more hypocritical (that’s not praise) than the usual fascist leftard.
-
Zatara:
6 civilians and 2 flag officers. Yeah, that’s who I’d pick.
Not a panel of senior NCOs, mid range officers, recruiters, etc. You know, the ones on the ground who know exactly what’s going on and may have some very unpleasant truths to tell the hierarchy.
That was exactly my thought as I started to read. I don’t know the background of the civilians, but would have thought some detail of military service would have been appropriate.
-
The Libs lost their blue ribbon Federal seats to the Teals who are just small-l liberals plus climate change realism.
I live and vote in Wentworth, M0nty Black Shirt, and I know a thing or two about why Teals romped it home here and in other wealthy electorates. Money, money, and more money, to put it bluntly. Lotsa luverley climate change money for wealthy investors and people hoodwinked by woman-good stuff.
That’s ‘realism’ for you.
-
International EMF Scientist Appeal calls for greater health protection
I like this line –At a minimum, regulatory agencies need to make strong recommendations for consumers to take precautionary measures and avoid close contact with their mobile phones.”
That’ll work.
-
“I live and vote in Wentworth, M0nty Black Shirt, and I know a thing or two about why Teals romped it home here and in other wealthy electorates. Money, money, and more money, to put it bluntly. Lotsa luverley climate change money for wealthy investors and people hoodwinked by woman-good stuff.”
This resident of Wentworth concurs.
-
m0ntysays:
April 2, 2023 at 10:15 am
Loathed and ridiculed – that’s your your place in a sensible world.Hey Makka, your thoughts on Mark Latham’s recent comments to Alex Greenwich? You know, the ones he was universally loathed and ridiculed for, even by Pauline Hanson?
I do not think that the word “universally” means what you think it means. If you did not suffer from a bad case of short-term memory loss, you would recall comments here that prove you wrong.
-
m0nty says:
April 2, 2023 at 10:15 amLoathed and ridiculed – that’s your your place in a sensible world.
Hey Makka, your thoughts on Mark Latham’s recent comments to Alex Greenwich? You know, the ones he was universally loathed and ridiculed for, even by Pauline Hanson?
Mark Latham doubles down after homophobic tweet to gay MP
The NSW One Nation leader has doubled down on his extreme opinions in a series of new tweets, including one which references the Nashville school shooter.
NSW One Nation leader Mark Latham has doubled-down on his decision to tweet about a gay MP, claiming his extreme opinions match those of the masses.
Mr Latham wrote the tweets on Thursday in response to comments from openly gay MP Alex Greenwich blasting him for his involvement in an event where LGBTQIA+ protesters were targeted.
Mr Latham continued his efforts on Twitter on Saturday claiming his extreme views are not that uncommon.
“I’m only saying what normal people know to be the truth,” he said.
“The elites deny this because they are caught up in a weird identity politics cult. In which alphabet people are accorded automatic sainthood.”
Mr Latham went on to reference Nashville school shooter Audrey Hale, who identified as transgender and killed six people in the horror tragedy this week.
“How many other homicidal maniacs get a leave pass, like this trans shooter in Nashville?” he wrote.
“Alphabet Ideology is a direct threat to the fairness of the rule of law, a pillar of Western civilisation
Summed up quite well by Comment in Daily Mail
That’s the trouble these days . Someone can call you names , but if you respond in a colourful or unacceptable way then you are in the dog box . It doesn’t mean I condone what he said , but I commend Mark for saying what others also think , but are to afraid to say it .
-
I was sent off to Colesworth this morning to buy a carton of crème fraîche. Imagine my surprise at being required to pay $5 for an essential item that only weeks ago cost $3.75.
Going into Colesworth any time and buying something at the same price as last week is akin to winning Lotto these dayz .. last week .. “homebrand” ginger snap biscuits (250g) $1.10 .. this week $1.70 ..
-
All of this stuff about mobile phones is mostly garbage. Does electricity flow in wires? No. Do you know what a Poynting vector is? There is EMF everywhere. It’s your choice to live with technology or not.
How does 2000 MW get distributed to homes By electrons on a chain being pushed and pulled?
No, not really.
The whole grid is an array for masses of different strands of Poynting vectors.
I’ve seen some of the stuff about wifi and young plants, but that’s the thing, you’re not a plant. Nor are you meant to being glued to any EMF emitting device. No one ever slept on the back of an old CRT TV did they?
Luckily people stare at their phones these days, rather than hold them up to their ears all day.
-
“I’m only saying what normal people know to be the truth,” he said.
Hey mOron, Latham says it all.
Try to understand that because you aren’t normal is your problem and nobody else’s. So you can give up trying to convince us normies you don’t have a problem and get back to celebrating the perverted human dross you are obsessed with.
-
MatrixTransform says:
April 2, 2023 at 10:28 ammUnty … when you wank all day
… how do you manage to stay tumescent?
Matrix do you think Monty enjoys
-
In the presence of someone like me who think he’s a dickhead and would say so to his face, the bile would rise up quickly in him.
Well, if and when you do do that when wearing your fat maternity dress, then why wouldn’t he react to your theatrics/histrionics/pouting?
MontyPox Virus, just get jabbed (if not already) with the so called ‘vaccine’ and have 11 boosters. There, that should do it nicely. Hopefully, you will soon appear in the Excess Deaths statistics under the heading of ‘surplus to requirements’.
-
Monty approves. FMD, the Hun:
Meet the Stags & Vixens.
You may be surprised to know that ‘cuckold porn’ was the second most searched porn term after ‘youth’, according to the authors of the book A Billion Wicked Thoughts: What the Internet Tells Us About Sexual Relationships. While wife sharing may be a commonly held fantasy, in reality, it’s a sexual scenario that is a step too far for most men.
Not for Stags though. These guys get their rocks off watching their wife or girlfriend having sex with other dudes. The Stag either joins in, or watches as a voyeur. The Vixen, or, as they are known in some circles, Hotwife, has sex with the encouragement of her husband or boyfriend with the Bull (that’s the guy who is servicing her).
Another scenario is that the Vixen has sex with a Bull outside of the couple’s shared abode, then comes home and recounts all the details in a blow-by-blow description to turn the Stag on.
So, are we talking cuckolds?
No. However you could be mistaken for thinking that as the definition of a cuckold is a man who enjoys the act of his wife being pleasured by another male. You may have heard the term ‘cuck’ being bandied about of late. In political circles, it’s a barb that the alt-right throw at lefty men as in, “You snowflake cuck,” before the left cluck back and call them “Cuckservatives.”
These insults allude to the fact that in some cuckhold scenarios, there’s an element of ritualised humiliation, submissiveness, jealousy, or denial that comes into play. The Bull, the wife or both dominate the encounter and the cuckhold gets his sexual thrill from the masochistic shame and humiliation.
Their little secret
Meet Stag & Vixen couple Susie*, 36, and Shane*, 38, who are based in the USA and go under the Twitter handle, @Ourlittlesecret. So called, because apart from indulging in extra circular bedroom activities, they’re otherwise a long term straight married couple with kids and regular jobs, whose friends have no idea what they get up to. Although their 72K Twitter followers do.
For Susie and Shane, the term Stag & Vixen was a better fit than cuckhold. “It’s a description that suites us perfectly as there is no humiliation or denial involved,” explains Shane. “I prefer to be a voyeur, but occasionally, I’ll join in. Watching my wife with another man is a big turn on for me. It’s like foreplay. As much as I love watching, I can’t wait for the Bull to leave so I can ravish Susie myself”.
In Stag & Vixen circles, this is known as “reclaiming” and the focus of the couple returning back to each.
It was Shane’s long held fantasy for Susie have sex with another man. “We’d often role play it in a fantasy situation,” explains Susie. “However, I was too insecure about my body to entertain the thought of having sex with anyone else. Then we started the Twitter account and started posting naked pictures (Susie never shows her face, so there’s an anonymity). I enjoyed the exhibitionism and the compliments. I got talking to a guy who lived in our city and he asked me out for coffee. Shane was all for it.”
After the date, the Bull came home with Susie and they had sex. “Sex with another man was appealing because Shane and I have been together since I was 18” she says. “I felt like a teenager who was dating again.”
However Susie found being watched by Shane awkward at first. “Initially, I found it hard to have sex in front of Shane,” she says. “He knows my comfort levels, so now he leaves us to it, until I get into it. Once I’m warmed up, then he’ll come into the room and I feel okay.”
“Once I walked in on them and she was on top; it’s your bed, your wife and another man. It’s crazy, but it’s a big turn on,” says Shane. “However, it’s not like in the movies, with the guy directing the scene, I just sit there quietly.”
“Every now and then, I’ll look over, smile and giggle Shane’s way,” adds Susie. “Or Shane will come over and give me long hot horny kisses.”
The Rules (are there any? Gawd almighty)
Interestingly, many stags have no interest in sexual encounters with other women. “I’ve got a hall pass to sleep with other women but that wasn’t original intention. It was always about Susie’s pleasure and the pleasure I get from her experiencing it.”
However, the couple say there are rules in place. “The rules are Shane has to know about everything and we can’t have any secrets,” says Susie. “If I happen to go out by myself, he has to hear all the details.”
Shane says there definitely was a learning curve when the couple first started living the Stag & Vixen lifestyle. “Susie would get lost in the moment on dates and forget to keep in touch,” said Shane. “Once she had sex in the car before she got home, which was a sore subject as I wanted to be her to be here when she was having sex.”
The obvious question that has be asked is whether Susie ever felt coerced in anyway? “No, I wouldn’t have done it if I didn’t want to,” she asserts. “I like being able to experience pleasure with other men. However sex anyone other than Shane is purely sexual. Our relationship is my prime focus.”
The couple say they have more sex together now. “Susie tends to be more horny before, during and then after, if she has a date. It has brought us closer together more,” says Shane.
The decadent West is gone. FMD again
-
Victoriastanis have voted themselves right back to Cain/Kirner. Democracy isn’t a one way street.
Sure it is. Dan Andrews is a speeding, drunk, filthy garbo driver going the wrong way at 4.30 AM and the soyjaks on the Vespas delivering foie gras and soy lattes to SES band Vicco PS psychopaths don’t have time to turn around or cut and run.
-
Black Ball:
Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) CEO Behyad Jafari said the electric transition of commercial vehicles will be faster than conventional cars.
“The big factor is economic,” he said.
“Electric trucks cost more to buy, but you actually save money over time due to lower fuel and maintenance costs.” (except when they catch fire)Well, old mate Behyad is wrong. The big factor is political. It depends on how much the government is willing to throw at the problem they’ve created, to hide their culpability.
I really hope I live until 2030 – just to watch an enraged citizenry put heads on pikes, or watch the useless bastards do the piano wire mazurka after the whole damn stupid AGW/EV bullshit goes tits up. -
Political left is undermining faith in our government
By Editorial Board – The Washington Times
On the day House Democrats voted to impeach former President Donald Trump for a phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Mr. Trump tweeted a photo of himself — an homage to the Uncle Sam “I want you” poster — with the words “In reality they’re not after me they’re after you I’m just in the way.”
The left’s pursuit of Mr. Trump has been unrelenting. They continue to shatter norms, hoping to guarantee Mr. Trump never returns to power, and thus, his voters never have a voice.
Mr. Trump was the first president to be impeached twice. His presidential campaign was the first to be wiretapped by the Department of Justice. He’s the first former president whose home was raided by the FBI. He was the first president to be banned from social media. He was the first private individual that Congress decided was OK to publicly release his tax returns.
Now, he’s the first ex-president to ever be indicted on charges even many of his critics agree are flimsy.
But the left’s weaponization of the entire federal government against its critics has gone beyond Mr. Trump.
As he foretold in his 2019 tweet, Democrats will stop at nothing to delegitimize, destroy and suppress anyone who doesn’t completely subscribe to their ideology.
It was revealed last week the Department of Justice instructed the U.S. marshals who were assigned to protect Supreme Court justices’ homes after the reversal of Roe v. Wade last year not to arrest abortion rights protesters “unless absolutely necessary.”
In 2022 and the first couple of months of 2023, there have been more than 81 reported attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers and 130 on Catholic churches. However, only two individuals have been charged.
Over the same period, DOJ announced charges against 34 people for blocking access to or vandalizing abortion clinics.
Visitors to the National Archives had been told to remove or cover articles of clothing with pro-life messages, as the political apparel “disturbs the peace” and could “incite others.” The security officer responsible was fired, but only after a lawsuit was filed.
Lastly, Christians who stand against the mutilation of young children in the name of “gender-affirming care” are now being targeted. Six people, including three children, were killed last week in a school in Tennessee by a gender-confused attacker.
Attorney General Merrick Garland said it was too early to say if the shooting was a hate crime, as the police are still investigating the assailant’s motive.
On Thursday, on the White House podium, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, “Our hearts go out to the trans community, as they are under attack right now.” Later that day, the White House said transgender people “shape our nation’s soul” in an official proclamation and declared March 31, 2023, to be Transgender Day of Visibility.
The left doesn’t care about norms or unifying this country. It’s clear they’ll use every tool at their disposal to crush their opponents. It’s bigger than Donald Trump. You could be next.
Leave a Reply