AmRev2/WW3’s digital information battlefront includes government disinformation shills propagandizing comments of targeted articles. These may also come from cognitive-dissonanced useful idiots mind-controlled to defend the very “leaders” who torture and poison them.

Either way: we Patriots engage.

This article documents comment engagement on two articles from Tangle, a news site my younger brother mentioned two months ago as a favorite for his news. I’ve invited Tangle’s owner, Isaac Saul, to have a public conversation with me regarding my comments’ content and/or for Isaac to select the three most important so-called “conspiracy theories” he’s most curious about for me to offer him research, then for us to chat for public consideration. Despite the storm I’ve raised in the comments, Isaac has declined my three requests. I change two full names of commenters I quote so that I at least acknowledge their likely embarrassment from objective public consideration of their “comments.” All comments are visible at sources.

Our Need to Know News shows also have abundant examples; I selected a representative show but almost all have such examples.

My engagement in comments goes back to 2009 when I began public writing, and I consider an essential part of my work to offer choice between “commenter” policy advocacy/fallacies, and my good-faith documented objective facts and analysis.

After victory, Patriots will be interested in what percent were paid empire trolls, and what percent were mind-controlled sheeple.

Example 1:

Henry Kissinger's death. December 4, 2023

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

Kissinger was a leading War Criminal. All claims linked here: https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2023/12/55-minute-video-need-to-know-news-lucid.html

As an academic professional, I factually assert an Emperor’s New Clothes condition; an Orwellian reality that anyone who cares to lift their heads and look will see abundantly for themselves: the United States of America has been an ongoing illegal, looting, lying rogue state empire.

Because Americans are crippled by “official” disinformation, leaders must rise, stand, and teach objective, comprehensive, and independently-verifiable data that explain, document, and prove our .01% “leaders” are engaged in ongoing OBVIOUS CRIMES centered in war and money, with annual costs of killing millions, harming billions, and looting trillions.

The US has war-murdered 30+ million humans since WW2, and war-murdered ~300 million (300,000,000) in total. It would seem a rational human response must include withdrawal of consent, and at least personal voice to arrest US “leaders” committing prima facie crimes (an arrest is the appropriate lawful tool to stop apparent crime).

Many of us are Oath-bound to support and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. All in US military are trained to recognize and reject illegal orders, with officers trained to arrest anyone issuing a prima facie illegal order. All of you learned in your high school US Government class that any so-called “law” in violation of the Constitution is void and without power. Most of you are unaware how much of the Constitution has been intentionally, and illegally, destroyed.

Withdraw consent.

Demand "leader" arrests for OBVIOUS and ONGOING crimes centered in war, money, and media.

2 weeks ago

Carl I was hoping you might stick with your threat to not be a subscriber unless Isaac agreed to debate you. No such luck I guess. Cheers.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

NB: I was hoping you might READ PUBLISHED DOCUMENTATION, but no such luck ;)

I invited Isaac, and the ball is in his court. I might visit until he deactivates my access, but I'll only subscribe if he's willing to offer opportunity for a chat to do what you REFUSE: consider objective evidence.

Sad for Kissinger's official exit, NB, or can you handle an "official" War Criminal?

2 weeks ago

Just a joke Carl. Love having you here like I love root canals( that’s another joke).

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

NB: You won't be laughing when your karma's due for silence in the FACTS of ongoing lie-started, Orwellian-illegal Wars of Aggressions pimped by demons like Kissinger.

2nd request: Sad for Kissinger's official exit, NB, or can you handle an "official" War Criminal?

2 weeks ago

Thanks Carl. Life’s too short. But I’ll take it under advisement.

2 weeks ago

Just FYI.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/need-to-know/

Peter

2 weeks ago

Carl, what do you mean by "rogue state". In order for something to be "rogue" it must be in opposition to some authority. Against what authority is the United States going "rogue"?

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

NB: Just two of your errors:

1. I already cited my sources, and you REFUSE to look despite my published research via The Claremont Colleges, briefing Members of Congress ~300 times over 18 years, and assistance to create 2 UN Summits for heads of state. You treat wars as if they're funny, and ALL OUR FAMILIES' sacrifices over two world wars to EARN treaties of peace mean NOTHING TO YOU. Instead, you choose to be dictated to by "experts" about what life means. You don't qualify for a constitutional republic if you accept dictatorship without eyes-on verification. You're being played, and you'll find out soon from others since you refuse to look NOW.

2. That's not even my website, but a colleague, G. Edward Griffin.

2 weeks ago

Carl I’ve made it a rule to avoid any sources that are described by fact checking sites as “pseudoscience” or “quackery”. But it makes total sense that you dangle that as click bait along with your shameless plugging of your own blog. Too be honest I don’t know what you are talking about and frankly I don’t want to know. I’m sure you have wonderful and credible sources but I’ll pass. I’m not smart enough to decipher your posts. Cheers.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

NB: Then you will be dictated to about reality, and stand you're "not smart enough" for what I posted (1 paragraph copied below to prove you're UNWILLING rather "not smart"), and would rather attack peace-makers and those standing to STOP Orwellian-illegal Wars of Aggression:

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

Peter: as an academic professional, the best description of the US government is "rogue state empire" rather than limited government under the US Constitution upholding inalienable rights, as we're promised.

More from my paper, "US illegal: History of rogue empire REQUIRING arrests in the present. Introduction to define ‘rogue state’ as perfect match with US illegal Wars of Aggression, Crimes Against Humanity, dictatorial government (1 of 11)" https://web.archive.org/web/20190721111021/https://washingtonsblog.com/2016/04/us-illegal-history-rogue-empire-requiring-arrests-present-introduction-define-rogue-state-perfect-match-us-illegal-wars-aggression-crimes-humanity.html

"1. Defining rogue state:

Components of a rogue state include:

violate international law with focus on destruction of human life,

threaten other nations’ security,

rule by authoritarian regimes,

severely restrict human rights,

sponsor terrorism,

proliferate weapons of mass destruction,

lie to their own people through controlled media,

behave irrationally and not in its own best interests.

Consider two basic definitions of rogue state:

rogue state: A nation regarded as breaking international law and posing a threat to the security of other nations. ~ Oxford Dictionaries

rogue state: … ruled by authoritarian regimes that severely restrict human rights, sponsor terrorism, and seek to proliferate weapons of mass destruction. The term is used most by the United States… A common presumption applied to rogue states is that they do not necessarily behave rationally or in their own best interests. ~ common understanding of the term from Wikipedia

Let’s prove the US of today is both rogue and in Orwellian opposition of its founding ideals and constitution.

(the paper then provides abundant proof, that btw, Dr. King dedicated the last year of his life to stop the US rogue state for its illegal war on Vietnam)

Dojelle b friggs

2 weeks ago·Edited

Carl - I went to your “blog”. You are a board certified teacher. That doesn’t make you a certified historian or anything else. Sometimes, it’s better to speak simply and make your point so as to be understood by simple laymen. Your end of the world OMG tactics blow everyone off. Remember you get more honey from sugar than you do from $h1t. As an educator you should know this. Also - you’ve been banned on several platforms. Now, you may think you’re the only soldier of truth, but as an intellect you must be doing some self reflection, no?

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

Dojelle: do you have anything to say about the topic of Kissinger, lie-started and illegal Wars of Aggression, Vietnam, etc.?

I've provided full documentation for my factual claims, that you choose to ignore to focus on the messenger (ad hominem). I'm here to discuss the topic, not my character.

Grow up, citizen; millions of lives are being lost in horrific agony from ongoing illegal Wars of Aggression, extreme poverty as policy ("Control food and you control the people" is close to a Kissinger quote), and debt-damned economics.

Grow up, or enjoy more Kissingers as your "leaders" you ignore.

Dojelle b friggs

2 weeks ago

Carl: I am very much grown. I am a board certified pimp, born America to get paid shills to pimp propaganda for the empire. My only regret is not getting paid more.

Freedom of speech ENDS when you cause harm to others. You might want to consider that and make a softer landing.

To disparage every politician, every judge, every media outlet, every scientist, every medical professional, almost every public educator (except yourself that is), is truly at the heart of extremism, and lends itself well to Q-Anon.

No government methodology is perfect. If it was, I’m sure you’d move there, where the odiferous scent of perfection lives.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

Dojelle: do you have anything to say about the topic of Kissinger, lie-started and illegal Wars of Aggression, Vietnam, etc. for the "softer landing" you claim to want?

Or do you choose to continue projection, ad hominem, and tragic-comic straw-man arguments while US policies continue Kissinger's "extremist" evil to annually kill millions, harm billions, and loot trillions?

Your attempts to disparage/harm/censor messengers pointing to data is clear to any objective observer.

Dojelle b friggs

2 weeks ago

I choose to continue projection - ad hominem: the messenger absolutely matters when determining fact versus fiction. I especially want to continue the “tragic-comic straw-man” arguments, but alas, I also now have a toothache.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago·Edited

Great! Then we all know what you're doing here, and wish you well with dental health ;)

For those who want to discuss the topic of Isaac's post, the announced death of Kissinger, I'm interested :)

Btw: the history of the Vietnam War that I summarize in one paragraph is factually non-controversial, or so I've found among academic professionals:

After the “War to make the World Safe for Democracy,” Ho Chi Minh’s petition for a democratic Vietnam was denied by the victors of WW1. Vietnam remained under France’s dictatorship for economic and political colonial domination. The US supported Minh during WW2 in his guerilla warfare against Japan, only to deny his petition for Vietnam’s independence at the end of the war. The US paid for up to 80% of France’s military costs to keep Vietnam enslaved by the French. The US supported the cancellation of an election in Vietnam (and here) when it became clear that Minh’s socialistic economic plan was more popular than a Western-friendly leader. The Vietnam War exploded with SecDef McNamara’s contrived reporting of the Gulf of Tonkin incident; (25) manipulated intelligence at best (26) in first light, but then manipulated into an outright false-flag attack. Beginning with President Johnson’s “emergency” midnight television announcement to Americans that the US was “under attack in Vietnam,” the war escalated with unlawful invasions and attacks in Laos and Cambodia, dropping more bombs than from all sides of WW2 combined on a country smaller than California that killed perhaps 10% of their civilian population, ~3.5 million. The government’s stated goal at the time was to “defeat communism” by winning the hearts and minds of civilians while we killed over 1,000 civilian children, women and the elderly daily through high-altitude bombing. The war killed 58,000 Americans, and only ended through massive US demonstrations.

That paragraph is from my paper, "US illegal: History of rogue empire REQUIRING arrests in the present. Vietnam: canceling democracy to back a dictator and cause civil war, false flag for illegal US military invasion, war-murdering millions (8 of 11)": https://web.archive.org/web/20190721094933/https://washingtonsblog.com/2016/06/us-illegal-history-rogue-empire-requiring-arrests-present-vietnam-canceling-democracy-back-dictator-cause-civil-war-false-flag-illegal-us-military-invasion-war-murdering-mi.html

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 weeks ago

So! Nobody wants a factual discussion on Kissinger being an Orwellian-illegal War Criminal (among "leaderships" of both parties)?

I'm pushing for a chat with Isaac to DEMONSTRATE objective, comprehensive, and verifiable facts, AND that professionals like me have found ZERO COUNTERARGUMENTS to our documented claims, with corporate media REFUSING DEBATE.

Colleagues and I have discovered public "stunned silence", cognitive dissonance, and propaganda-level responses to these claims (such as on the few articles I've invested comments on Isaac's blog), and our experiences are well summarized here:

MIT’s Simon Johnson (and former Chief Economist of the International Monetary Fund) describes our big banks being led by gambling oligarchs who have captured government as in “banana republics” (his words). He concludes fraud is the heart of Wall Street. His best-selling book, 13 Bankers: The Wall Street takeover and the next financial meltdown, was discussed with over 30 Emmy Award-winning journalist Bill Moyers to explain the US banking system, loss of trillions of American taxpayer dollars to oligarchs’ manipulation as a matter of definitive fact, the looting of America being protected by partners with political muscle, and rational consideration of the facts proving massive financial crimes:

SIMON JOHNSON: The American democracy was not given to us on a platter. It is not ours for all time, irrespective of our efforts. Either people organize and they find political leadership to take this on, or we are going to be in big trouble, okay?… That’s absolutely the heart of the problem. I would also say and tell you, and emphasize, these people will not come out and debate with us. The heads of these companies or their representatives, they will not come out. They’re afraid. They don’t have the substance. They don’t have the arguments. We have the evidence. They have the lobbyists. And that’s all they have.

BILL MOYERS: They’ve got the power, the muscle, the money.

SIMON JOHNSON: They have money.

BILL MOYERS: You just have the arguments. You just have the facts. On your side.

SIMON JOHNSON: Absolutely. That’s exactly what it comes down to.

I've invited Isaac a few times via email for our public conversation, and I do so, again, to DEMONSTRATE as far as we know in colleagues' and my academic training and professional experience, NOBODY IS ABLE TO REFUTE OUR FACTUAL CLAIMS. This includes ~2,000 Advanced Placement US Government and Macroeconomics teachers with access to those discussion boards, Claremont Colleges professors publishing my research, and my open invitation to high school colleagues, parents, and students for 20 years.

Audience and Isaac: want us to chat about our extraordinary factual claims, or is silence in the face of ongoing crushing empire your choices?

Btw: I will increase pressure until Isaac either accepts a public conversation, or requests I leave his writings.

Time to choose a side in AmRev2/WW3.

Choose wisely.

Example 2:

Trump gets barred from the Colorado ballot. Dec 21, 2023

AGood

2 days ago

Ugh. All of this chaos is because of a man who is not a big enough person to admit that he lost in 2020. I can't wait until he fades into the past. Our country is better off without him.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Ugh, A: all of this chaos is because corporate media and "leaders" lie, and your cognitive dissonance will reject this data without looking, and without thought. Prove me wrong, Sister:

"Election fraud odds: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1"

https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/11/election-fraud-odds-1000000000000000000.html

Andrea: these "judges" DICTATED "guilt" without trial; you see that, at least, right?

D. A. K.

2 days ago

@Carl - I think I replied to you about this in the past, but those "odds" are actually from an off-hand comment by Rudi Giuliani and are actually completely made up. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Also btw this kinda makes your claim of the media lying and cognitive dissonance rejecting the idea of the odds and data, despite it being a lie and you being corrected, to be... delightfully and poetically ironic. Don't use false data just because it's convenient, do some research and number crunching.

That said, I completely agree that (regardless of what you feel of Trump's culpability of the Jan 6th riots) these judges are assigning guilt without a trial and without any guilty verdict, and even though he's been widly exonerated of blame for it. It's insane to declare someone can't be on a ballot because they personally feel he is responsible for an insurrection. This is an unethical, unconstitutional, political ruling.

Derrick White

2 days ago

I agree we're better off without Trump, but he would not have a chance to thrive without persistent and consistent misdoing by liberals like Colorado's supreme court. If the center right felt safe voting for democrat candidates, we would do so. But we don't, because of nonsense like this.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

D.A.K. You either REFUSE to look with your own eyes (TDS/cognitive dissonance?), OR you're lying.

This is Pennsylvania's state legislature's hearing reporting on "official" "vote" "counts" post 3AM "emergency" stoppage the same as other swing states. In this case, PA reports a "vote batch" of ~600,000 "votes" for "Biden" versus ~3,000 for Trump: https://youtu.be/cGGlnHe3Rgc?si=cJ_sW2-sgvuaSG-P

This is mathematically demonstrated prima facie election fraud. But I'm glad to see you at least can see an illegal court ruling.

So, D.A.K., you're also with me that those "judges" should be under charge for fraud upon the court?

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Isaac has this one right: "judges" DICTATED guilt OUTSIDE THE LAW. This is fraud upon the court: https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fraud-upon-the-court/

As the truth becomes clear: we'll see many such "judges" charged and convicted.

As the truth becomes clear: we'll see many such "leaders" charged and convicted.

The following is linked with documented proof from this article: "2024: Year 1 for Truth, Justice, Freedom = What/How will you think, speak, live upon AmRev2/WW3 VICTORY?" https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2023/12/2024-year-1-for-truth-justice-freedom.html

Earth’s Emperor’s New Clothes tragic-comedy’s last act before AmRev2/WW3 VICTORY will end in a relative heartbeat, and likely include last “scare events” of:

Paper-“collapse” of the US-“led” “debt system” (Orwellian-opposite of “monetary system”),

WW3,

another OBVIOUSLY illegal scamdemic,

“Shown” “assassinations” that could include actors playing “Zelensky” (blamed on Russia), “Biden” (blamed on MAGA DVIs), “Trump” (praised by corporate media?) before critical mass of humans demand “leader” arrests for past assassinations including JFK, MLK, and RFK (among 100s).

All Orwellian-illegal “official” narratives are collapsing in Q’s “drip, drip… flood” progression, which I conclude “White Hats” orchestrate for poetic power and justice for this literal Great Awakening of the mind-controlled general public. As we’ve abundantly covered on Need to Know News for over 3 years:

$: Earth’s central “bank” “monetary” systems are designed in mathematical certainty to create exponential debt, which must collapse in tragic-comedy or be “Great Reset.”

Lie-started Wars of Aggression: Israel on Gaza, Russia’s defense of the Donbas from Ukraine/US/NATO neo-colonial invasion, the wars formerly known as “On Terror,” and soooooo many more, going back by US War Criminals for over 200 years.

“Covid” “vaccines”: Public harm from being shot, data disclosures of Orwellian-unethical “science,” and public recognition of “official” lies are becoming majority views.

2020 (and beyond) election fraud: “business as usual.”

January 6 false flag to cover-up 2020 election fraud: just as 2020 election fraud evidence was to be introduced for public consideration.

Epstein/Maxwell Island pedophile/pedovore clients: perhaps “Epstein didn’t kill himself” is the most recognized meme.

Pay-to-play: The Biden family is typical.

“Public-Private” censorship: The Twitter Files disclosed much.

“Transgender” indoctrination, sexualization of children, biological mutilations, males destroying female athletics, etc.

“Open border” “invasions”.

Lawfare on Trump/Patriots.

“Woke” agendas from “Blue” states while inflation, homelessness, unaffordable housing ALL explode.

Public “education”: the public are seeing more of their dictatorial “health” “orders” in a system lying our children into becoming uninspired and stupefied work animals.

Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) used on the Maui Massacre and NorCal “fires” (stories 7-13).

This comment has been removed.

D. A. K.

2 days ago

Reader beware: almost all links are to Carl's blogs and are not multiple sources verifying his narrative. Within those blogs, the vast vast vast majority of "sources" are also his blogs, and he's just chain-linking himself over and over. Pretty much no original sources, data, evidence, or even other people agreeing with him. Carl's source is Carl. It's "this is true because I say so".

I was going to be much more cruel, but I decided to delete that comment. 😂

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Readers beware: D.A.K. won't discuss factual claims, and he'll try to squirm away from any factual discourse ;)

But I'll try: the CO judges DICTATED "guilt" without charges, trial, and conviction, which makes this "legal" "ruling" outside the law, unless D.A.K. can explain otherwise, agreed?

D. A. K.

2 days ago

That's absolutely, wonderfully, beautifully delightful for you to say being that I actually commented to you earlier in which I completely agreed with that point. 🤣

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

D.A.K.: That's absolutely, wonderfully, beautifully delightful for you to say that this point invites examination of my other factual claims rather than your dismissals.

See you elsewhere on these comments soon ;)

D. A. K.

2 days ago

Thank you for answering my question Issac! I'll definitely check out those past articles and watch that YouTube video when it's released 😄

As for the current topic, I have nothing good to say about it. It's just a very stupid move.

1). It legitimizes Trump's claims that his legal pressures are political ploys to stop him from running for president. Instead of it being a fringe conspiracy theory and ramblings of someone claiming "I'm innocent, they're just out to get me" Trump how has something tangible and unmistakable to point to as proof. It will make people who are on the fence think "maybe he's right..."

2). It will of course be overturned by the Supreme Court, and this will be a colossal political victory for Trump. It will strengthen his ability to campaign, make any ability to remove him from the ballots (should he be convicted) more difficult, and will highlight that he was not found to be at fault for the Jan 6th riots even though the left says he is. He will use it as a "the deep state came after me and I won" narrative.

3). It gives him even more attention, which is great for his campaign and increases the chance he will be elected president.

4). It will strongly reinforce the conspiratorial belief that the 2020 election is rigged by the left and the left are trying to rig it again.

5). It will drastically increase distrust and dissolution in the electoral process, as well as the government in general.

6). This will further divide the country and bolster Trump supporters' hardline stance against the left.

7). Once it's overturned by the Supreme Court it will act as another de facto exoneration for Trump being responsible for Jan 6.

8). The left will see this as another failure to "stop Trump" and leftist support will further wane.

I guarantee that Trump and his advisors were celebrating this as a God-send for their campaign.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

2020 was indeed a rigged election, but your cognitive dissonance will reject this data without looking, and without thought. Prove me wrong, D.A.K.:

"Election fraud odds: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1"

https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/11/election-fraud-odds-1000000000000000000.html

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Oh, D.A.K.: the source of this information is the Pennsylvania legislature's hearing on the post ~3AM "vote" "count" that coincided with all 5 swing states having "emergencies" to stop counting, then after had mathematically IMPOSSIBLE votes for "Biden". In PA, the "official" claim is a "batch of votes" for "Biden" of ~600,000 to ~3,000 for Trump. This 200:1 ratio is in-your-face prima facie treason, but go ahead and tell people that this is somehow my referencing my internal dialogues ;)

Michael Snare

2 days ago

Carl,

Let's assume for the moment that the fraud charges have merit. And assume that approx half the judges, prosecutors, investigators, and election officials in the US are conservatives.

Given that, here's my question. How was it that not a single fraud case was prosecuted?

When I ask this question the usual response is along the lines of "you are so naive" or "you are so uninformed". Nobody has an actual answer though to how such a huge crime could escape prosecution when the "evidence" is as widely promoted as in this situation.

Disillusion me, inform me. Give me the details on how half of US law enforcement was prevented from doing a job they dearly would have loved to do? Please get into the details, how exactly was this done? Pointing to the "deep state" is not good enough. Surely there are some judges and prosecutors patriotic enough to resist any threat, bride, etc.

D. A. K.

2 days ago

I'm not going to engage in your strawman argument and shift of the burden of proof, Carl.

You probably should also do a bit more research into what cognitive dissonance is - it's a truly fascinating phenomenon. Although it can do something similar to what you're proposing, I think the knee-jerk blanket rejection of conflicting information you're thinking of confirmation bias, not cognitive dissonance. Confirmation bias is also a fascinating phenomenon, albeit not as fancy and complex as cognitive dissonance.

Nice try though 😉

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Michael: if the CO "judges" can issue such an Orwellian-illegal "ruling," then perhaps we can extrapolate to other courts' selections of controlled "judges" to be chosen to "rule" on empire-challenging cases? But this is speculation.

Are we in agreement that the PA "vote batch" of ~600,000 for "Biden" to ~3,000 for Trump is prima facie evidence of election fraud?

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

D.A.K. won't address Pennsylvania legislature's hearing on the post ~3AM "vote" "count" that coincided with all 5 swing states having "emergencies" to stop counting, then after had mathematically IMPOSSIBLE votes for "Biden".

In PA, the "official" claim is a "batch of votes" for "Biden" of ~600,000 to ~3,000 for Trump. This 200:1 ratio is in-your-face prima facie treason, but go ahead and tell people that this is somehow my referencing my internal dialogues rather than the state of PA's testimony of election results ;) https://youtu.be/cGGlnHe3Rgc

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

To help D.A.K. out with just how impossible the PA "vote" "count" is: https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/11/election-fraud-odds-1000000000000000000.html

Spiked “votes” for Biden in the ratio of ~200 to 1 are mathematically impossible. That such a spike would occur randomly in a condition of ~50% votes going to Biden and ~50% to Trump is similar to a coin-flip: one flip is calculated by 2 options to the first power. That two votes would both be for Biden produce odds of 2 to the 2nd power: one in four or 25%. Three consecutive votes to Biden is 2 to the 3rd power or one in eight (12.5%). But a ratio of alleged “random” ballots in a ratio of ~200 to 1 for Biden is similar to 200 coin tosses going all to one side before the other occurs.

This produces odds of a number with 50 to 60 zeroes behind it (x/base = 2, n/exponent = 200):

1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1.

Because we never work with such numbers, some comparisons:

The odds of a person being left-handed is 15% (~1/6 to 1/7). It’s more probable for a random group of 78 people to all be left-handed than that vote ratio for Biden was not spiked by fraud rather than actually happened. Verify yourself by placing 6 in a “power number calculator.”

The odds of a person having green eyes is 12% (~1/8, so place 8 in the calculator). That the next 67 people you see at a store all having green eyes is more probable than Biden’s “vote spike” not being treasonous election fraud.

The odds of winning the Powerball jackpot is ~175,000,000 to 1. The odds of winning two consecutive Powerball jackpots is 30,625,000,000,000,000 to 1 (175 million times itself). It’s more likely you'd win three consecutive Powerball jackpots, and almost more likely that you would win four straight Powerball jackpots than the Biden vote spike being true.

The number of days since the claimed life of Jesus is ~730,000 (2,000 times 365). If Jesus were alive for 33 years, that’s 12,045 days. This means Jesus was alive 1.6% of the days passed since his birth (about 1/60). If you had a time machine to pick a random day to visit in those 730,000 days, it’s as likely you’d have 34 consecutive days in Jesus’ lifetime than it’s likely the 2020 election was honest.

The Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, which is 1.64 trillion days. If we had a computer randomly select one of those days, the odds of you picking that same day is 1.64 trillion to 1. You are more likely to accomplish this miracle than it’s probable Biden’s spike is accurate.

In fact, the number of seconds Earth has existed is 141.7 quadrillion. You’re more likely to correctly predict which random second of Earth’s existence a computer selects than the “official” election count not being a lie.

Of course, we can also say you’re personally more likely to select a random 1/2,000th of a second from all Earth’s existence over 4.5 billion years than Biden’s spike not being a hoax.

Roger

Tangle Reader·One day ago

@ D.A.K

I agree it was a bad move for Dems/the left to get Trump kicked off the CO primary ballot. And I agree with your 1 through 7. On 8, I see this as decreasing the support of some center and center-left people, but the lefty-left, which includes most media, will likely double down. And if that doesn't work, they will chuck it all in the memory hole and try to create a new opportunity.

I'd point out other states have already tried/are trying to get Trump off their ballots. And more may try to even after this episode.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/full-list-of-states-trying-to-kick-trump-off-ballot-and-where-cases-stand/ar-AA1iLZ1b

Do you have any thoughts on why the Dems/the left made this move when it had so much risk to play into Trump's hands?

My answer to that question is that it's a mix of several things. One is the left sees the polls and honestly thinks in a Biden vs Trump election, Biden will likely lose. Many on the left also genuinely believe Trump is an insurrectionist, but don't care that has not been charged, much less convicted of insurrection. They also believe enough of the rest of the country agrees with them and the rest are insurrectionists or supporters of insurrectionists. Therefore, getting Trump off the ballot altogether makes sense in order to "save democracy." Anything done to "save democracy" is justified, tactically and morally. And if it doesn't work, memory hole it and go on to the next thing.

What are your thoughts on why the left is pursuing getting Trump off the ballot?

(note: D.A.K. chose retreat rather than further engagement)

B Kaseta

5 days ago

I agree you could call the insurrection a riot, I agree it would be difficult to get a jury of 12 to even agree on that. The 14th amendment clearly never envisioned a president lying to the public and creating an event on the day we transfer power where he whipped up the crowd which included militants and unleashed them on the capitol while watching for over 3 hours doing nothing. I guess shame on those who think that was an insurrection, their twisted minds imagine a country where this behavior would allow a vote to keep him off the ballot, let alone lead in the polls.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·5 days ago

J6 was a false flag to STOP the presentation of evidence 2020 was stolen. Congress has the world's most secure magnetic doors, and they were opened from the INSIDE, and after Pelosi refused National Guard help that was on display in the 2020 "Summer of Love/Arson" (~200 NG on the steps of Congress that any RATIONAL person would place again on J6). Your cognitive dissonance will reject this data without looking, and without thought. Prove me wrong:

"Election fraud odds: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1"

https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/11/election-fraud-odds-1000000000000000000.html

Stephen Dause

5 days ago

@Carl Herman (I apparently can't reply to your reply directly):

First, there was a trial in the district court where evidence was presented and witnesses were cross-examined. Granted, it was not the same as a full-blown criminal trial.

Second, this is not a question of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't think there needs to be a criminal trial and conviction for this statute to apply.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·4 days ago

Stephen: you want to argue that American law allows a "court" to DICTATE "guilt" without charges, trial, and conviction???

Consider carefully, Brother.

Wallflower

Yesterday·Edited

Stephen is correct. The Colorado court was not hearing a criminal trial. It’s decision was based on eligibility, just as an 18 year old or a non natural born citizen is disqualified from running. No due process is in order. Were the Southern rebels given due process when they were banned from Congress after the Civil War? There is nothing in A14 that determines any due process is in order. Only that one “engages” in an insurrection. Due process refers to criminal trial. And I keep hearing falsehoods in the comments. The Dems were not the petitioners in the law suit. The lawsuit was started by Republican voters in CO who did not want Trump on the ballot. There were no Dems named in it. What is the basic rule of due process? It is to protect one’s rights to life, liberty or property. Running for POTUS requires eligibility, not noted in the rights of due process. Due process is a right to all citizens. Running for Prez isn’t a right since millions of people are ineligible: those under 35 years of age, those not natural born citizens of the US, and those who are part of an insurrection (and due process is not required.) As others have stated, it is self executing.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Just now

Wallflower advocates DICTATORSHIP without charge(s), trial, or conviction that self-executes freedom.

Everybody sees: you're no wallflower ;)

Stephen Dause

2 days ago

@M Hutchinson: See my response to Carl Herman. But to add to that, I think it's certainly a problem that the statute is unclear about what body or bodies should decide that someone committed insurrection or whether it is self-executing. I'd argue that precedent has indicated that Section 1 is self-executing, so I don't see why Section 3 wouldn't be. But really, I am not a lawyer, so I refer you to what two experts wrote: https://akhilamar.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/The-Sweep-and-Force-of-Section-Three.pdf

I'd also recommend this interview with them as well as the two followup interviews: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-two-experts-on-section-three-special-guests/id1549624070?i=1000626157545

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

You graduated from high school, and should have been briefed that government cannot deprive liberty without the letter and intent of the 5th Amendment, right?

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

AK Oldroyd

Research Analyst·2 days ago

@Carl Herman

I graduated from high school and am smart enough to know that in this case Trump is not being "deprived of life, liberty, or property." He is being deprived of his eligibility to run for president. Where in the law does it state that a person has the same due process rights to run for public office as they do to be convicted of a crime and deprived of their liberty?

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

AK: Thank you for helping people choose between your dictatorial preference to strip freedom to run for public office OR the American way of innocence until proven guilty.

The US is LIMITED GOVERNMENT, and without authority to DICTATE "guilt", agreed?

Choose your future carefully, AK: you'll have what you work for.

AK Oldroyd

Research Analyst·2 days ago

@Carl: Except that there are all sorts of places in the law in which judges very much dictate guilt. I'm not stating a preference here, I'm just highlighting that the law itself does not assert the level of clarity you think it does.

I made the mistake of replying to your comment before I explored the comment section. Had I done so I might have realized sooner that you don't seem to be interested in good-faith debate and that this discussion probably isn't productive.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

AK: explain your theory how a US judge can DICTATE "insurrectionist" to remove right to run for office ;)

The rest is your projection, Brother, that you won't see.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

AK: Here's the best overview of applicable law I've found so far:

"the deep game: CO strikes trump off ballot."

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/the-deep-game-co-strikes-trump-off

Wallflower

Yesterday

Stephen, thanks for posting these links. I am reading! Also, the A14-3 ought to apply to any and all Congress persons who were involved in this insurrection. No one is talking much about it, but it’s not just POTUS. It covers any and all in the ranks of the “office” of government. We need more investigations by the DOJ in this matter. Peace.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Just now

Wallflower is another dictator-pimp LYING in claim that a 19th-Century law targeting 19th-Century Confederates applies to destroy the chief political opponent in the 21st-Century without charge(s), trial, and conviction.

Again, as a retired AP US Gov teacher: I have never ever ever ever heard (nor imagined) anyone arguing this law applies beyond 1800s Confederates until this call for tyranny cheered by wallflowers showing their allegiance.

2 days ago

I agree that January 6th was a disgrace. It's a disgrace that Pelosi didn't do her job and defend the capitol as requested. Why wasn't the National Guard called up? Why weren't more defenses erected? Why was the crowd incited? Why were completely peaceful people welcomed into the capitol (after most of the crowd had dispersed) and later imprisoned?

Pelosi and her accomplices did it for political gain, regardless of the harm it did to the country and the hundreds of people that are in prison, including those that were killed or died later.

Can you imagine neglected to do your duty, knowing what would likely happen to the country, its standing in the world, and to hundreds of families, likely leading to the death of multiple people...all for political gain?

How could you sleep at night?

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Nailed it, JW; thank you :)

J6 was a false flag to STOP the presentation of evidence of 2020 election fraud.

June Genis

Libertarian activist·2 days ago·Edited

Forgot to mention in my previous post that despite the desperation, the court did not have the power to remove Trump from the ballot.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

June, are you with me that this is fraud upon the court, prima facie illegal of the "judges", and they should be arrested to stop an apparent crime in progress?

https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fraud-upon-the-court/

June Genis

Libertarian activist·2 days ago

@Carl. No I am not with you. I never am. You are just a brainwashed Republican apparatchik who speaks only propaganda.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago·Edited

Projection, Sister, proven by "never" with me, "only propaganda", and "Republican" when we just agreed about the court's choice, and I worked to reform the Democratic Party from INSIDE with my colleague Dennis Kucinich to impeach Bush/Cheney (we lost to the "leaders" currently in charge):

https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2018/05/essential-history-to-understand-present.html

B Kaseta

2 days ago

@ Carl Herman,

January 6 was counting electoral votes and ceremonial. It was not a presentation of evidence of voter fraud. Do you believe Rudy? He admitted in court there was no fraud. To disbelieve the courts, the members of his staff and your own lying eyes isn’t what I would call “ any rational persons take” . If you say things over and over Carl, it begins to become truth and that’s what got us all into this mess. Repeated lies

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

B: J6 was not "ceremonial", unless you want to argue against the "Electoral Count Act" that allows disputes and evidence for Congressional oversight: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_Count_Act

Your question about anyone "believing" anyone is irrelevant to a factual discussion to consider objective evidence. Because you didn't/won't recognize FACTS, I'll repeat and ask you to explain how this is the mess rather than corporate media engaging in the projection you place upon me: "say things over and over Carl, it begins to become truth and that’s what got us all into this mess. Repeated lies."

Ready?

Pennsylvania legislature's hearing on the post ~3AM "vote" "count" that coincided with all 5 swing states having "emergencies" to stop counting, then after had mathematically IMPOSSIBLE votes for "Biden" to this extent: "Election fraud odds: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1"

https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/11/election-fraud-odds-1000000000000000000.html

In PA, the "official" claim is a "batch of votes" for "Biden" of ~600,000 to ~3,000 for Trump. This 200:1 ratio is in-your-face prima facie election fraud: https://youtu.be/cGGlnHe3Rgc

dicki blueberg

2 days ago

IMHO the fact that Colorado is both following the letter of the law and the spirit in which this amendment was written, and yet at the same time violating Trump’s due process and American’s right to vote for the candidate of their choice might just be showing the amendment itself is and always was dysfunctional.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

dicki: how is US letter and spirit of law expressed by "judges" DICTATING guilt without charge, trial, and conviction?

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Here's the best overview of applicable law I've found so far:

"the deep game: CO strikes trump off ballot."

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/the-deep-game-co-strikes-trump-off

This comment has been removed.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Craig: yeah, and the issue is that CO dictatorially removed him from democratic process "to protect democracy": see the hypocrisy?

And "Trump encouraged insurrection" when he Tweeted for peaceful protest, and we're starting to get the proof that Feds led the J6 false flag?

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Here's an accurate frame of what we witness:

"Colorado Supreme Court launches actual INSURRECTION against America with election de-platforming of Donald J. Trump"

https://naturalnews.com/2023-12-20-colorado-supreme-court-launches-actual-insurrection-against-america-election-de-platforming-trump.html

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Here's an application of similar "legal" reasoning as CO:

"TX Lt. Governor Dan Patrick: ‘Maybe We Should Take Joe Biden off the Ballot in Texas for Allowing 8 Million People to Cross the Border’ (VIDEO)"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/12/tx-lt-governor-dan-patrick-maybe-we-should/

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Here's more useful history for context:

"The Last Time Democrats Took a GOP Candidate Off the Ballot Was in 1860 – They Would Not Allow Abraham Lincoln’s Name on the Ballot in Their Slave States"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/12/last-time-democrats-took-gop-candidate-ballot-was/

B Kaseta

2 days ago

Carl, I’m sorry I can’t get beyond the False Flag operation portion of your comment. You are entitled to believe what you want. If Pennsylvania or any other party found abnormality in the voting, they had opportunity to bring these issues to the court. Some did, 60 plus cases failed to prove. The issue of these conversations is about Colorado’s Supreme Court decision. You may not agree with it but many do based on J6.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

B: 60+ courts REFUSED to hear such cases, and NOT as you state that the cases were heard and "failed to prove."

I like your connection with those other cases: if CO can make such an Orwellian decision to DICTATE guilt without charge(s), trial, and conviction, wouldn't it be easier for similarly Orwellian "judges" to simply decline to hear a case?

Please answer at least that.

And while we're chatting, B: do you recognize any other "official" lie/crime of the US, such as lie-started Orwellian-illegal Wars of Aggression, bankster looting, an open border, etc.?

Wallflower

Yesterday

I’m to the point where I just skip over Carl’s unsound thinking. As stated he’s entitled to believe what he wants but I have no obligation to read what he believes.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 minutes ago·Edited

Wally straw-man argues for dictatorship then censorship of those pointing it out, while LYING the 5th Amendment is a "belief" rather than a document rooted in ESSENTIAL history ;)

And while we're chatting, too, flower: do you recognize any other "official" lie/crime of the US, such as lie-started Orwellian-illegal Wars of Aggression, bankster looting, an open border, etc., or do you claim all is rainbows and flowers?

dicki blueberg

2 days ago

Carl, the "spirit" of the amendment was to make it (almost) impossible for any government official to regain their positions of power after breaking thier oath to support their county and it's constitution.

There was no litmus test or trial, the amendment was a just a big 'ole "hell no!" to confederates who participated in insurrection of rebellion.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

The text of the 14th Amendment prevents/removes 19th-Century Confederates, so that's the test/trial: https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-14/

dicki blueberg

2 days ago

Your going to have to get out the highlighter for me on that one Carl, I'm not seeing it. It

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Read Section 3. The letter and spirit of the entire 14th Amendment addresses post Civil War citizenship, political representation, and debt, but Section 3 disables Confederates from public office unless "Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

dicki blueberg

2 days ago

Carl?

The law in Colorado states that a person can't be listed on the PRIMARY ballot if they aren't qualified to take office, the state also allows citizens to challenge an individual candidate and receive a speedy ruling on thier claim.

So while a "vote of 2/3's of each house" may be a potential remedy to Trump's dilemma, there had been no vote so it was not an option up for the consideration of these judges.

I don't think many people on either side like this ruling, but as I said the judges followed both the letter and the spirit of our existing election laws.

It will be interesting to see if SCOTUS nitpicks for a loophole, or throws it to congress for a vote on either defining "due process" or removing Trump's "disability"

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

dicki?

State the disqualification to hold office ;)

And no, the 2/3rds applies to Confederates of the 19th Century, with nobody ever ever ever making a legal opinion I'm aware of outside that context. Therefore, your statement of a "potential remedy" is without legal precedent or standing in the law, unless you can explain otherwise.

Thank you, dicki, for helping make public choice clear: you stand that being an AMERICAN upholding LIMITED GOVERNMENT under the Constitution, in spirit of The Declaration of Independence, and upholding inalienable Divine Rights means that a court can DICTATE "guilt" without legally filed charges/complaint, trial, and conviction. That's your position, yes?

Here's my take on the letter and law: without CONVICTION, there is no INSURRECTIONIST. We are free people, and innocent until proven guilty through due process in a court of law (in context of the above LIMITED government statement).

It will be interesting to see when and where the US has its "Emperor's New Clothes" BREAKTHROUGH to withdraw consent.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

... and it will be even more interesting to see how many of these wanna-be DICTATORS outside their limited governmental authority are on the Epstein list ;)

"Judge orders names of more than 170 Epstein-connected individuals to be released"

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2023/12/19/judge-orders-names-of-more-than-170-epstein-connected-individuals-to-be-released-1421237/

dicki blueberg

2 days ago

Carl?

Mind reading isn't a thing, and FYI -name calling and a dependency on copy-pasta posts is ALWAYS a tell of a weak hand.

Now piss off.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·2 days ago

Thank you again, dicki, for making objective readers' choice clear between the quality of your responses and mine.

All I'm offering is a choice between dictatorship by an evil empire, and standing for LIMITED GOVERNMENT under the Constitution, in spirit of The Declaration of Independence, and upholding inalienable Divine Rights.

dicki supports court DICTATORSHIP to engage in actual insurrection to prima facie-illegally remove Trump as a candidate WITHOUT charge(s), trial, and conviction. dicki then evades discussion of the law that would DEMONSTRATE the court's DICTATORSHIP is Orwellian-illegal by devolving to tragic-comic straw-man argument, counter-accusation that we literally have to mind-read 'cuz dicki makes zero rational connection to anything, and then descends to ad hominem. dicki concludes her argument with piss.

Interested readers: choose wisely if you will support dictatorship exposed in this kangaroo "court" "ruling", or stand with Patriots for limited government.

Patrick Joseph Maloney

Informatin addict and Fair Flay aficionado·Yesterday

Everyone seems to have missed the judgement by Sarah B. Wallace in which she found Trump guilty of insurrection. She balked at the idea of banning him from running, but the Colorado Supreme court agreed with her finding of guilt and then went on to declare him unfit to stand.

Perhaps Issac , in your haste you forgot to read, or allude to, these incontrovertible facts.

There are so many hob lawyers dancing on the heads of pins these days, they all must be suffering from bunions.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Yesterday

Patrick: explain to us how a federal district judge has authority to DICTATE "insurrectionist" without charge(s), trial, and conviction.

The USA is founded by Patriots who recognized illegal "orders", right, Patrick?

The "incontrovertible fact" is that unconstitutional "orders" are void (Marbury v. Madison), Americans are free and innocent until proven guilty, and unless Patrick or anyone else can explain this judge's lawful declarative authority for "guilt", then "We the People" (especially those of us under Oath to defend and protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic) apply the legal concept of "prima facie": ON ITS FACE, we're witnessing Orwellian-illegal dictatorship.

Patrick: will you obey such an order, or stand with the US Founders, Gandhi, and Dr. King to withdraw consent from apparent illegal "orders" THAT YOU CANNOT EXPLAIN AS UNDER US LAW?

Patrick Joseph Maloney

Informatin addict and Fair Flay aficionado·Yesterday

Carl is an obvious Troll and intent on ruining this thread for everyone with his incoherent, unfathomable lies.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Yesterday

Thank you, Patrick Joseph Maloney, for obvious ad hominem, straw-man argument, and undocumented factual claims.

You make the choice of interested readers between:

A) My factual claims and documentation.

B) Your claims of:

1. My trollishness,

2. my intent as a retired teacher (honored by two Los Angeles Mayors as among Central L.A.'s very best among ~10,000 teachers) to "ruin" an academic discussion on the very topic of my expertise in AP USGov "for everyone," despite presenting no evidence of such intent,

3. that interested readers are incapable of reading clear documentation I provide, and that you insult all of us that such a task is because high school-level reading is somehow "incoherent." Idiocracy much, Pat?

4. You conclude that I'm both a liar, but the lies I tell are "unfathomable." Interesting: you admit that because you can't comprehend the documentation I provide at high school-level reading ("unfathomable"), that somehow your lack of understanding gives you credibility to determine the documentation you didn't fathom as "lies."

Again: perfect response to offer choice to everyone between the quality of Patrick's speech versus my good-faith attempt to summarize and point to objective and independently-verifiable documentation.

Liz

4 days ago

I think Donald Trump is extremely dangerous and quite obviously racist. I still agree that as he’s not been tried and found guilty for insurrection he should remain on the ballot.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·4 days ago

That's an American response! Thank you, Liz :)

Wallflower

Yesterday·Edited

A14 is self-executing. Nothing to “try” in a court because A14 does not require a guilty verdict.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Just now

So, Wallf: you claim as objective fact and rooted in history that a federal judge has authority to declare a defendant guilty of whatever crime without charge(s), trial, and conviction.

State the case/common law for your assertion of legal precedents and legal "reasoning" ;)

Roslyn8

Yesterday

Interesting how one argument of not removing trump from the ballot is the hue and cry to “let the voters decide”. How does everyone forget that the voters decided overwhelmingly in 2020, trump and his henchmen were barely stopped from overturning that and they have not stopped denying it ever since? In the interim, the gerrymandering and voter suppression laws have come hot and heavy. We have no idea if letting the voters decide is a reasonable option.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Yesterday

Roslyn: are you arguing for dictatorship then, or ...?

How does everyone forget the massive evidence of 2020 election fraud: 5 states that Trump is winning all declare ~3AM "emergencies" to stop vote counting. When they resume, we all witness mathematically IMPOSSIBLE "vote" "counts" for Biden that reverse the "election."

The most ridiculous example of prima facie election fraud is PA's legislative hearing exposing that after their "emergency stop", a claimed "vote batch" was ~600,000 for "Biden" and ~3,000 for Trump. This 200:1 ratio is as likely as flipping a coin for 200 straight donkey tails, which we can calculate as impossible by odds with 50-60 zeroes behind it.

Roslyn: explain to us how/why this is unreasonable evidence.

Documentation: "Election fraud odds: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1" https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2020/11/election-fraud-odds-1000000000000000000.html

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Yesterday·Edited

Oh, and do you know that "stolen election" claims AGAINST TRUMP was/is wildly popular among Dem "leaders"? https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s?si=qFXTdKE9vh9lpb5t

Wallflower

Yesterday

Or even possible now as more gerrymander is in the works.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Just now

Hey flower: are you joining Ros advocating for dictatorship? And what do you say about the massive evidence of 2020 election fraud: 5 states that Trump is winning all declare ~3AM "emergencies" to stop vote counting. When they resume, we all witness mathematically IMPOSSIBLE "vote" "counts" for Biden that reverse the "election."

Roslyn8

Yesterday

Carl herman I’m sorry you choose to believe the fox news evidence, as opposed to that shown (NONE) in 63 court cases that trump lost. Those proclaiming that pretend evidence have all retracted - fox news, guliani, powell, cheseboro, and on and on. Please note the line in the following study about one commissioned by trump. https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/ensure-every-american-can-vote/vote-suppression/myth-voter-fraud

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Yesterday

Ros: I'm sorry you choose straw-man argument and denial to the evidence I provided without response (I doubt you even looked).

You also choose to ignore my question whether you're in support of DICTATORSHIP for judges to declare "guilt" without charge(s), trial, and conviction, so I'll ask again following three observations on your comment:

1. Almost all of the cases were not allowed to be heard, NOT that "trump lost," as you claim. Trump and allies won most of the cases that were heard (I don't have that documentation handy).

2. You make a claim about retraction of factual claims without documentation, while PA's "official" post 3AM "emergency" stoppage "vote batch" claim still stands as mathematically impossible.

3. You conclude with a claim to trust the system ;)

To repeat what you ignored:

Roslyn: are you arguing for dictatorship then, or ...?

Roslyn: explain to us how/why this is unreasonable evidence.

Oh, and do you know that "stolen election" claims AGAINST TRUMP was/is wildly popular among Dem "leaders"? https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s?si=qFXTdKE9vh9lpb5t

Roslyn8

Yesterday

No sense relitigating the court decisions with you. I’m sure you can look them up and read them yourself, if you chose. The republicans can nominate any number of election deniers who did not participate in the insurrection (I assume thhere are a few). The 14th amendment says nothing about being convicted of insurrection, just about participating in one. I assume you know the constitution. Just so you know, I am on the side of folks like Lawrence Tribe, Judge Luttig, and othr prominent conservative scholars on this, so you can read their arguments. Bye.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Yesterday

Ros retreats with the argument that the US allows "leaders" to DICTATE "insurrectionist"/"domestic terrorist"/whatever to strip rights from anyone at will, starting with the DICTATORSHIP's chief executive office's opponent in the next "election."

Wow. Readers should let that sink in. That's the status.

Thanks for making your side clear, Sister. Best wishes to find virtue.

Jim Denton

Yesterday

“Colorado’s highest court overturned a ruling from a district court judge who found that Trump incited an insurrection for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, but said he could not be barred from the ballot because it was unclear that the provision was intended to cover the presidency.” -AP

The district court ruled Trump participated in insurrection. The Colorado Supreme Court was ruling on if the 14th amendment applies to Trump. It seems this Tangle article is conflating the two actions. Painting the picture of an overreach, implying this is not following legal process that Trump deserves. Whatever you think of Colorado Court, it did follow process. And now the it will continue on to the Supreme Court. All working as intended IMO.

It’s also really odd to present a take that points out these are democrat appointed judges but not have anything that mentions the members of the GOP are the originators of this case. The undercurrents of this entire read are hard to chew.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Yesterday

Jim: explain how US due process can DICTATE "guilt" of "insurrection" without charge(s), trial, and conviction.

The conclusion of Orwellian-illegal judgment is what is hard to chew.

Useful analysis: former Democrat Comedian Jimmy Dore: "The REAL Reason Trump Was Kicked Off The Colorado Ballot!" https://youtu.be/-IwD-reg4NE?si=6orZTo8IsBOlSby8

dicki blueberg

Yesterday

Jim

Here is a good 'splainer of why the court was following the letter of the law in Colorado

The basics include

#1 Colorado is one of the few states where voters are allowed to challenge candidates on the primary ballot, (in most states it's only the political party)

#2 The court must respond w/in five days

#3 Putting an unqualified candidate on the ballot could be considered a "wrongful act" by the Secretary of state which is why Ms. Griswald is named in the lawsuit.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Yesterday

Addendum to dicki's #2: a lie of omission to ignore court prima facie-illegal DICTATE to DESTROY "We the People"'s right to democracy (2024) if a "leader" (CO SC) DICTATES a name ("insurrectionist"/"domestic terrorist"/whatever) to any targeted individual (Trump).

Seriously: the court's response is if we call you a "special name" then we destroy your rights without legal charge(s), trial, and conviction.

That's dictatorship, Americans.

The court's response ignored Section 3's letter and intent applicable only to 19th-Century Confederates. Again, as a professional historian teaching AP US Government, I'm not aware of any previous interpretation applicable to any other group who were not Confederates, and invite documented correction. Without correction, we read Section 3 to limit government authority to Confederates, and not to political targets of opportunity.

This comment has been removed.

Wallflower

Yesterday·Edited

I agree. The constitutional experts you spoke of will be shown to be on the right side of this I believe. Whatever decision the scotus decides is what we will have to accept. That is how the process works. And I respect that process as the CO courts are rightly following that process. So people that are mad about the CO Supreme Court decision will have to just be mad. And if Scotus overturns that decision then I will have to accept it as settled law. Either way, this is how the process works. I just hope as Americans we can accept those decisions we don’t agree with. Because the alternative will result in civil unrest.

B Kaseta

Yesterday

I agree with your inclination. Wallflower, thank you, long winded answers based on conspiracy theories are hardly worth challenging.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Just now

What, Wally, in the US Constitution allows 5th Amendment rights to be destroyed by a federal court DICTATING guilt without charge(s), trial, and conviction?

What, BK, makes the above question a "long winded ... conspiracy theory"?

AMERICANS began from recognizing our own government's prima facie-illegal "orders", right? YOUR ALTERNATIVE OF DICTATORSHIP is the civil unrest, which will be fully recognized in an "Emperor's New Clothes" moment to come ;)

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Just now

Ladies and Gentlemen: After "We the People" win AmRev2/WW3, you'll be surprised to learn about "sock puppets" among government propaganda, and the pattern is recognizable in these comments among "different" people ALL REFUSING factual engagement on 5th Amendment Right to be innocent and free absent charge(s), trial, and conviction.

I've written over 1,000 public articles since 2009 with 50+ million page views, and offer this possibility from extensive experience: do you notice from these "individuals" that

*NONE mention 5th Amendment rights,

*ALL advocate dictatorship,

*ALL are REMARKABLY insulting to a retired and honored AP US Gov teacher (who does that other than the twisted?) with published research pointing to the law and asking OBVIOUS and REQUIRED questions,

*NONE answer if "they" recognize any "official" lies/crimes requiring "leader" arrests,

*many advocate censorship/ignoring my responses,

*ALL never ever ever quote me but instead LIE about what I clearly state,

*ALL descend to tragic-comic ad hominem and straw-man arguments, and

*ALL push the US to "Idiocracy" rather than revisiting the inalienable Rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights? Do you notice now?

The purpose of sock puppets is false perception of public agreement that CANNOT be ethically argued: in this case the argument for tyrannical dictatorship. Therefore, these "different" voices are either all coincidentally American dictatorship pimps, OR paid shills. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sock_puppet_account

Consider that we are in AmRev2/WW3: https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2023/12/my-57-minute-presentation-at-false.html

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·Just now

Ask yourself and answer: Which is the more reasonable answer:

A) Individual Americans read and comment on this article ALL REFUSING to mention 5th Amendment codified right of presumed innocence, attacking a college-level teacher pointing to that OBVIOUS right, and a history of these alleged "individuals" (insert research to discover how many other "official" talking points "they" "support", such as ongoing Orwellian-illegal US/UK/NATO-led Wars of Aggression, bankster looting, "Biden" "leadership" after "the most secure election ever" against "insurrectionist" "White supremecist racists," "transgender" grooming to children, "Covid" dictatorship, etc.)

B) Ordinary individual Americans would pause and at least rationally consider and discuss the 5th Amendment with inalienable right of innocence until proven guilt under due process.

Well, what's your answer?

Recent documentation on "sock puppets" to propagandize "comments" to manipulate the appearance of false consent in the game-changing Twitter Files:

"Whistleblower Docs Expose Key Tactics Of The Censorship Industrial Complex: Matt Taibbi" https://www.activistpost.com/2023/12/whistleblower-docs-expose-key-tactics-of-the-censorship-industrial-complex-matt-taibbi.html

Example 3:

NEED TO KNOW NEWS (25 SEPTEMBER 2023) WITH CARL HERMAN, JOE OLSON & CHRIS WEINERT

cmm629

Oh Carl, you're going to exhaust yourself arguing with trolls!
While I've had my own moments of doubt (having been awake and diving down rabbit holes since I saw no plane at the Pentagon) I've never been more convinced that there are white hats in charge. The Leftists were never this clownish before this faux JB administration.
I read serious journalists' headlines from various news sources that I have to do a double take on just to check that they are not Babylon Bee articles - on a daily basis it appears to me that we are descending further and further into clown world.
My guess is it is precisely because so many people refuse to wake up that we are being shown in such obvious ways what the DS's plans for us were. They were much more subtle prior to the Trump admin., but now they are so over the top, that they can't possibly be doing all of what they're doing of their own volition. I think they've still got some moves left, but every time they make one (like Maui) they show more of what's left in their hand, Sadly, we won't be able to avoid every catastrophe - it is war, after all.
If you've not yet listened to Trump's SC speech at around 7:40 he says "Less than 5 months from now we're going to defeat crooked Joe Biden" I had to play it a couple times as I wasn't sure I heard it right. But Nov 2024 is a little more than 13 months from now and it wasn't like he said less than 14 or even 15 months from now. Sure 'nuf, he said "less than five" - and we know how he drops clues. https://rumble.com/v3kr127-full-speech-president-donald-j.-trump-to-deliver-remarks-in-summerville-sc-.html
As for the clot shots, Elon Musk dropped this great compilation on X this morning (9/26) https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1706676593261785178 [show less]

Reply·21·Mute·Flag

3 months ago
You
Exposing trolls and their usual ad hominem to distract, discourage, and disperse Patriots is part of my Service :) At least to the point where the choice becomes clear to any rational audience that our opponents' paid propagandists EVADE factual consideration, and want human beings to devolve toward Idiocracy. I also consider it an important service to offer karmic choice to the troll.

Yeah, is it Peak Clown Show yet, or more to come?? We'll all discover together what evolves, but it sure looks like something has to break big soon. Twitter is down for me now, but Musk has power in his hands to expose. [show less]

Reply·21·Edit·Delete
3 months ago
camus10
incredible Cl. these rap artists you selected are awesome. some if us pats are living isolated from this rap and wondering why our ranks are stuck. wow, we are not alone, conservative sentiments are exploding

Reply·10·Mute·Flag

MeanStavrakas

Seeing to many niggers in ads now.

Reply·21·Mute·Flag

3 months ago
You
To see your "comment" is too tragic-comic ;)

Who pays you to throw garbage in our comments?

Is your pay worth the karma you'll receive to disrupt/divide/discourage Truth and Justice attempting to save millions of lives, prevent harm to billions, and reclaim looting of trillions? [show less]

Reply·11·Edit·Delete

tnpride

"Need to know "news",,, lol, TOO FUNNY.

Reply·02·Mute·Flag

3 months ago
You
Nobody needs to know this empty "comment" without comment on the news ;)
Edited 3 months ago

Reply·00·Edit·Delete

dxrinc

There are NO WHITE hats...

Reply·40·Mute·Flag

3 months ago
You
Here's how making a factual claim, as you are, works: you have a burden of proof that I request you demonstrate to prove "there are no White Hats." If you can't demonstrate your factual claim, then you are offering your OPINION, which is legit.

Did you mean that the existence of White Hats can't be demonstrated, and that's your concern?

Have you examined the evidence I offer? From the show notes:

6. As scary as the WW3/“Covid” culling “Show” we’re watching is, I’m at 95% certainty that White Hats are in control of AmRev 2.0, with the single best evidence being a 49-minute summary of Charlie Freak’s epic 7-hour presentation of verifiable facts (censored multiple times, and in 4 parts here). A strong briefing is also Good Lion Films’ 120 minute The Greatest Show on Earth. Nicholas Veniamin compiled a powerful 63-minute video from 57 sources of testimony, documents, and photo/video evidence to communicate the breakthroughs emerging NOW empowering us into a Star Trek-like future:

Game Over for the Cabal - The Takedown of the Cabal From A to Z https://rumble.com/vcl7gj-game-over-for-the-cabal-the-takedown-of-the-cabal-from-a-to-z.html

The Takedown of the Cabal from A to Z (all parts): https://rumble.com/search/all?q=The Takedown of the Cabal From A to Z

2-hour video: “The Greatest Show on Earth” documents Q’s “Plan” for “The Show” (2020 election fraud, J6 false flag, “Covid” + all “Biden” tragic-comic clown show exposures) REQUIRED ‘cuz as Patriots discovered: OVERWHELMING facts insufficient to de-program sheeple, so Trump’s trials watched by all will disclose empire-ending facts in court https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2023/09/2-hour-video-greatest-show-on-earth.html

EVERYTHING IS ABOUT TO CHANGE https://www.bitchute.com/video/9Uheo3kjMUcf/ [show less]
Edited 3 months ago

Reply·11·Edit·Delete

You

More articles from the show that don't fit in the description directly under the video:

6. As scary as the WW3/“Covid” culling “Show” we’re watching is, I’m at 95% certainty that White Hats are in control of AmRev 2.0, with the single best evidence being a 49-minute summary of Charlie Freak’s epic 7-hour presentation of verifiable facts (censored multiple times, and in 4 parts here). A strong briefing is also Good Lion Films’ 120 minute The Greatest Show on Earth. Nicholas Veniamin compiled a powerful 63-minute video from 57 sources of testimony, documents, and photo/video evidence to communicate the breakthroughs emerging NOW empowering us into a Star Trek-like future:

Game Over for the Cabal - The Takedown of the Cabal From A to Z https://rumble.com/vcl7gj-game-over-for-the-cabal-the-takedown-of-the-cabal-from-a-to-z.html

The Takedown of the Cabal from A to Z (all parts): https://rumble.com/search/all?q=The Takedown of the Cabal From A to Z

2-hour video: “The Greatest Show on Earth” documents Q’s “Plan” for “The Show” (2020 election fraud, J6 false flag, “Covid” + all “Biden” tragic-comic clown show exposures) REQUIRED ‘cuz as Patriots discovered: OVERWHELMING facts insufficient to de-program sheeple, so Trump’s trials watched by all will disclose empire-ending facts in court https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2023/09/2-hour-video-greatest-show-on-earth.html

EVERYTHING IS ABOUT TO CHANGE https://www.bitchute.com/video/9Uheo3kjMUcf/

61-minute video: definitive proofs of ancient technology bigger, faster, better than ‘modern.’ From ‘Atlantis,’ alien, or both? https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2023/09/78-minute-video-need-to-know-news-lucid.html [show less]

Reply·00·Edit·Delete

3 months ago
josephboyat
Could you please get rid of this bum Weinert?

Reply·03·Mute·Flag
3 months ago
Youjosephboyat
I'd rather ask Jim Fetzer if we can please get rid of ad hominem bum "commenters" who REFUSE to engage in the evidence we offer ;)

But go ahead, given this is a news show, explain and document how Chris Weinert is a "bum" with his historical knowledge giving context to current news. You won't do this, of course.

What side are you on in WW3, "josephboyat"? [show less]

Reply·10·Edit·Delete

Bonus examples:

I won't cut and paste, and I like this example I'm currently working on (Dec. 30):

NEED TO KNOW NEWS (29 DECEMBER 2023) WITH CARL HERMAN & BRIAN DAVIDSON

And one more added on Feb. 11, 2024:

COLLEGE OF COMPLEXES (10 FEBRUARY 2024) SANDY HOOK: WHAT WE KNOW NOW THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW THEN

And another from April, 2024 perhaps showing evolution of public recognition of "official" lies/crimes (oh, ok, one more, and here). The blog author is apparently unfamiliar with professional pro-empire propagandists in the comments. Also apparently, the propagandists attempted to censor me with sock-puppet "complaints" to the author. This was the email exchange:

Isaac Saul

Apr 11, 2024, 6:41 AM (2 days ago)

to me

Carl,

Can you please take it easy in the comments section? I've gotten a half dozen complaints from other readers about you being aggressive and constantly ruining opportunities for civil discourse in our comments section. I've never had any issue like this before and I am committed not to limiting or banning any commentators. I'd really appreciate it if you acted with the same respect and rapport our community does with each other.

Thank you,

Carl Herman

Apr 11, 2024, 7:09 AM (2 days ago)

to Isaac

Isaac:

Point to a section of comments, please, and we'll see who is being aggressive and attempting to stop civil discourse. Those "complaining" refuse civility and discourse, as my example below demonstrates.

You have this complaint backwards from people projecting what they do onto me for the purpose of censorship. Are you aware of CIA Operation Mockingbird to control media narratives, that would be perfectly aligned with sock-puppets "complaining" to you for the purpose of censorship against people like me documenting "official" lies/crimes?

Counter proposal: have a show where I walk you through war law, and we discuss.

You've never had any issue like this before because you've never had anyone in the comments as dangerous to "official" lies/crimes before.

Example passage:

RMac

Human·2 days ago

Carl Herman, ramming your bullheaded comments home does not teach nor does it inform or enlighten. You are not teaching. You are merely a bully who will be otherwise ignored.

AndrewW

Military, Industrial, Power, Oil·2 days ago

How to say you didn't read any of it and are stuck in your own little worldview and refuse to look at anything that might change your precious little opinion.

At least Carl puts in actual research unlike you who just pukes out petty insults. You are truly a bundle of sticks.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·One day ago

RMac: You project, hugger of War Criminals ;)

YOU, and all readers, have a choice:

1. Use attacking language to defend yet another false flag-started and Orwellian-illegal War of Aggression. You'll attempt to "ram bullheaded" bullshit that REFUSES to address published research and the two treaties after two world wars to END WARS OF AGGRESSION. We all see your uninformative, endarkening, non-teaching bullying arguing to ignore peace.

2. Address the evidence for independent media to fulfill its purpose: get to the truth.

RMac: address this first, from my friend and colleague (retired Advanced Placement US History teacher):

October 7 Was An Inside Job - documentary (2024) by John Hankey

D. A. K.

One day ago

@AndrewW - ... You have not read his articles or done any kind of followup research. I have, I have read a bunch of them, and every time I do, I am extremely disappointed at the incredibly poor research he puts into them.

Whenever I do indepth research into his claims and blogs and information, particularly to find where it originated, it tends to either be false, incorrect, dubious, out of context, cherry picked, exaggerated, debunked, unsubstantiated, unsubstantiatable. He stringing things together using a LOT of assumptions, phantom connections, and wild theories which he presents as factual. The sources he seems to use he just runs with without ANY fact checking or verification or research. If it agrees with his worldviews and conspericies, he'll grab it and present it as conclusive fact. No critical thinking, no verifying, no scrutiny.

And his primary source in all his comments tends to be, humorously, himself. His primary sources are his blogs and articles, and in those he also primarily cites himself. Imagine someone writing as if they do extensive research, but the citations he peppers throughout are essentially "because I say so" (which is also why I have to do my own research).

No, Andrew, he does not put in actual research.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·One day ago

D.A.K. claims my published research via The Claremont Colleges is somehow "not research" WITHOUT ANY CITATION as proof ;) Gee, that sounds familiar: a prima facie-criminal narrative unhinged from reality, which is what all War Criminals do.

D.A.K. "argues" to NEVER allow people to review factual claims and see for themselves, but attempts to DICTATE for others, as all War Criminals do.

D.A.K. must resort to TRAGIC-COMIC ad hominem, lies, and straw-man arguments because the facts destroy his narrative. This killer will only lie, because only lies support war. D.A.K. won't address actual research, but project "'cuz I say so".

To borrow another "official" lie narrative ("Covid"), the point remains: WE SEE YOU: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wIWnPwkBv8&pp=ygUKd2Ugc2VlIHlvdQ%3D%3D

Readers: will you look at the evidence to see for yourselves, then address those factual claims? Or will you cower to RMac-like bullies who Andrew properly nails: "just pukes out petty insults"?

Choose wisely: you will have what you work for.

RMac

Human·One day ago

Your fiddles are grossly out of tune.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·One day ago

RMac projects his own fiddling yet again, as he demonstrates his choice to INSULT published research while refusing to cite anything, and deny reality of genocide with denial for adult conversation.

RMac is a predator to peace, and most importantly peace upon our children. Real humans defend children.

The American and world public see more clearly now than ever. A BREAKTHROUGH event will occur whereafter such criminal-huggers as RMac cannot win any argument to tune out important truths through paper-thin propaganda and evasion as RMac attempts.

Imagine RMac's karma/rewards to argue for genocide.

Choose wisely: you will have what you work for.

Carl Herman

Retired AP Macroeconomics/US Govt. Teacher·One day ago·Edited

FYI: My primary sources are our own government's most authoritative agencies in their most authoritative documents, such as the US Army Official Law Handbook, UN Security Council documents, applicable treaties, CIA and FBI documents, all US intelligence agencies documents (NIE), DOE, and IAEA, the UK Foreign Affairs most applicable documents, as well as Dutch and Afghan governments, among just some of the sources. See for yourself: https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-one-article-you-need-to-prove.html

RMac lies.

RMac lies to war-murder children.

Choose your side wisely.

I make all factual assertions as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History (also credentialed in Mathematics), with all economic factual claims receiving zero refutation since I began writing in 2008 among Advanced Placement Macroeconomics teachers on our discussion board, public audiences of these articles, and international conferences (and here). I invite readers to empower their civic voices with the strongest comprehensive facts most important to building a brighter future. I challenge professionals, academics, and citizens to add their voices for the benefit of all Earth’s inhabitants.

Carl Herman worked with both US political parties over 18 years and two UN Summits with the citizen’s lobby, RESULTS, for US domestic and foreign policy to end poverty. He can be reached at Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu

Note: My work from 2011 to October 2017 is on Washington’s Blog, which the owner closed from Internet censorship in 2019, and here since. Work back to 2009 is censored by Examiner.com (blocked author pages: here, here). This means that some links in essays are inactive. If you’d like to see those articles, go to http://archive.org/web/, paste the expired link into the search box, click “Browse history,” then click onto the screenshots of that page for each time it was screen-shot and uploaded to webarchive.

Search This Blog

Carl Herman

Sparring with ‘Loyalist’/Empire shills in article comments: a case study

NEED TO KNOW NEWS (29 DECEMBER 2023) WITH CARL HERMAN & BRIAN DAVIDSON