Robert Poage

Here's another example of Democrats creating an environment supporting election fraud, this time from Arizona -- Democrat Gov Hobbs pushes back on counties who refuse to certify votes due to fraud by threatening them with jail time or with throwing out their votes to allow state results to be certified! Here's the details from Arizona State Senator Wendy Rogers: ********* REPOST: You may remember that last election that the Cochise County BOS refused to certify the results because they were shady and tainted. Katie Hobbs threatened them with jail if they didn't certify. So under that threat, they did. Now, those mafia-style tactics are over. THIS IS HUGE NEWS! George Behizy reports: BREAKING: A federal judge in Arizona just ruled that the Democrat Secretary of State can NOT certify the results of the 2024 election if any counties withhold certification due to fraud "Plaintiffs allege that the plain terms of the Canvass Provision require the Secretary to nullify a county’s votes if the county board of supervisors fails to timely canvass... Considering the above, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have plausibly alleged a severe burden on their right to vote. The right to vote is fundamental." - Judge Michael T. Liburdi In 2022, the Cochise County Board of Supervisors voted to stall certification so they could investigate the fraud that took place. Democrats threatened them with lawsuits, forcing them to certify under duress. Wanting to stop that from happening again in 2024, Corrupt Secretary of State Adrian Fontes added a new provision to the Election Procedure Manual, mandating the certification of statewide results by tossing out the votes from counties that withheld certification. The Rule: If the official canvass of any county has not been received by this deadline, the Secretary of State must proceed with the state canvass without including the votes of the missing county This ruling is a GAME CHANGER because it empowers counties to halt the certification process if fraud occurs in November. Bravo to Judge Liburdi. This is so big. It means they can't shove another fraud down our throats without investigation. No certification without integrity.

1

https://lnkd.in/e7wAPuJR Believe it or not ... The odd truth is that the liberal side of politics has a conservative streak. It treasures the ideals of the Declaration Of Independence and Constitution, including its amendments. It believes that democracy depends on the guarantee of individual rights and the duties and accountabilities associated with them. Polls suggest that the public finds it hard to believe social conservatives and social liberals can share the same core values and call them virtues necessary for a healthy society. But it’s true. One reason for public incredulity is the public has bought into the idea that conservatives and liberals are on extreme opposite sides divided by an unbridgeable chasm. That’s the story pitched by propagandists, news media, and social rumor mongers. Told often enough in colorful ways, it becomes believable as a self evident truth. There is also a strong tendency for people to engage in false equivalency in the assumption, I suppose, that if one side is dominated by extremist voices, the other must be also. T At the same time there are legitimate differences between the more reasonable elements of social conservatives and liberals who make up the broad center right – center left public whose views will shift from one side to the other depending on issues and conditions. Social conservatives tend to define their values and virtues as adhering to social norms popularized during the two or three decades following WWII, but which they call traditional. Family for instance is defined as a married man and woman with children. Extended family is an appendix to the nuclear family. Social liberals hold family in equal esteem but give it a broader definition that includes different ways for people to associate as family. Extended family is important to them but need not be limited to kinship ties. For both liberals and conservatives, family and friendships form the bonds on which community is built. A spectrum ranging from impenetrable barriers to permeable boundaries separate communities from one another. Conservatives tend to favor the barrier side until they are certain removing them will do no harm. Liberals tend to favor the boundary side, and assume the good will of those crossing them. Who is right? It depends. It all comes down to two big questions. What social norms should guide American society? How active should the federal government be in seeing that opportunity to have what’s needed to achieve a good life is distributed as equitably as possible to all persons without discrimination? Imperfect but acceptable agreements are reached in the push and pull of a healthy democracy where opposing sides willingly negotiate in good faith. We have allowed people of bad faith and no interest in democratic processes to control the public conversation. They are political parasites who will suck the life out of the nation if allowed.

18

22 Comments

It happened on a Monday. Monday, 29 April 2024. A Regional Fugitive Task Force was attempting to arrest a 39-year-old male on a multiple count felony warrant. The fugitive from justice shot first. He fired from a concealed, elevated position, killing 4 law enforcement professionals and wounding 4 more before he was in turn shot to death by responding officers. This attack was an ambush. Ambushes are extremely rare in Police work. The very nature of an ambush vastly increases the odds in favor of the defender. An ambush is a surprise attack. An attack carried out by someone in a concealed, advantageous position against an unassuming opponent. An opponent denied The Gift of Time & Distance. This was not a unique warrant execution by any means. You had a prior convicted felon wanted for possessing a firearm. Additionally, the warrant cited two felony instances of fleeing and eluding. Those charges combined in that manner generally demonstrate a suspect who ‘picks and chooses’ which laws apply to them and when and where they’ll allow themselves to be contacted by police. This fugitive task force was comprised of experienced, veteran officers from a variety of backgrounds. They had access to information, intelligence, advanced weapons, optics and tactics – and on this Monday night, a determined enemy from an elevated ambush position rendered those advantages moot. I offer this instance as a reminder to rehearse your plan for predicting, detecting and countering an ambush today - even though an ambush is such a rare occurrence. Learn more about The Gift of Time & Distance at Arcadia Cognerati. 

18

https://lnkd.in/eYfibh3f Biden Has Allowed the Marine Corps to Become Irrelevant From my former colleague at Vanderbilt University ....as always spot on ! "Under President Biden and his woeful national security team the Marine Corps has fallen from the nation’s premier 911 force to a regional coastal artillery force concentrated on China and a light infantry force of marginal use in a conflict anywhere else. Moreover, our president and what passes these days for military leadership probably do not realize what they have done. Force Design will not seriously deter China from attacking Taiwan. The Marine Corps’ senior leadership promotes itself as China-focused and no one has questioned its wisdom, despite the possibility that China is a “flavor-of-the-month” in national security circles. In addition, what is not to like about a service that voluntarily divests itself of $3.8 billion in capabilities at a time that other services are competing desperately for a share of the defense budget. Harry Truman once vowed to reduce the Marine Corps to little more that the Navy’s police force. Biden has largely succeeded where Truman failed. The Corps’ situation is largely self-inflicted, as an intellectual civil war within the Marine Corps has entered its fourth year. At issue is the current leadership’s effort to reduce Marine Corps amphibious attack capabilities in return for anti-ship missiles to fight the Chinese Navy. This has upset many inside the Corps and a cadre of former Marine Corps general officers. In order to placate its critics, the current leadership of the Corps has changed the name of its controversial “Force Design 2030” strategy to simply “Force Design” (FD). Under pressure from critics who believe that the Navy-Marine Corps team had reduced amphibious forward presence to dangerously low levels. There are two reasons for my unrelenting opposition to FD. First, it is bad strategy, operational art, and tactics. The second reason flows from the first. The rationale for FD is based on some war games that are suspect at best and rigged at worst. A recent article in the Marine Corps Times detailed this controversy, and the current senior leadership has yet to tell its side of the story. However, it is instructive that — with the exception of the current commandant in his guidance to the Corps — not a single three or two star general officer has come out to defend Force Design publicly. They are staying low in their foxholes. This is an issue that Mr. Trump and the Republicans should jump on in the coming election. Force Design will not seriously deter China from attacking Taiwan, nor would it be decisive if a war should occur over that island nation."

118

28 Comments