The Eye of a Blind Newt

Part 1 of 2

Wow! Newt Gingrich has always been a whopper teller but this is beyond the pale. I’m going to put this out here for a day to let you read what he says before I talk about it.

Let me quote a few things Newt says:

“In 2016, I supported an outsider candidate, who was rough around the edges and in the Andrew Jackson school of controversial assaults on the old order. When my candidate won, it was blamed on the Russians. We now know (four years later) Hillary Clinton’s own team financed the total lie that fueled this attack. Members of the FBI twice engaged in criminal acts to help it along – once in avoiding prosecution of someone who had deleted 33,000 emails and had a subordinate use a hammer to physically destroy hard drives, and a second time by lying to FISA judges to destroy Gen. Michael Flynn and spy on then-candidate Donald Trump and his team. The national liberal media aided and abetted every step of the way. All this was purely an attempt to cripple the new president and lead to the appointment of a special counsel – who ultimately produced nothing.”

“Officials in virtually every swing state broke their states’ own laws to send out millions of ballots or ballot applications to every registered voter. It was all clearly documented in the Texas lawsuit, which was declined by the US Supreme Court based on Texas’ procedural standing – not the merits of the case. That’s the election.”

“You have more than 74 million voters who supported President Trump despite everything – and given the election mess, the number could easily be significantly higher. The truth is tens of millions of Americans are deeply alienated and angry.”

“Nor do I have any interest in pretending that the current result is legitimate or honorable. It is simply the final stroke of a four-year establishment-media power grab. It has been perpetrated by people who have broken the law, cheated the country of information, and smeared those of us who believe in America over China, history over revisionism, and the liberal ideal of free expression over cancel culture.”

Ok, let’s allow this to percolate for a day…

Save me, please, from the polls

The news media, print or otherwise, love to point to polls and pronounce how 86% of Americans think Donald Trump once walked on water or 72% think Nancy Pelosi is taking America to Hell in her pocket book. Ands then a bunch of Americans drool over the results and poop on the floor like Pavlov’s dogs.

I am simply astonished that so many writers report on poll results when the number of people surveyed is only about a thousand.

Of course, I hear fairly often how accurate polls are and that they have this down to a science. And I sit here wondering how do they know if they are accurate if they never actually measure their results by actually counting? Of course, I know math nerds can do correlation studies related to election polls and actual vote counts and census data for voting districts, blah, blah, blah.

Those kinds of polls are actually measured by the ballot box so they can be determined accurate or not pretty much when the votes are counted. I’m not talking about those things. I’m talking about these kinds of things:

a) “Only 31% of all voters think Pelosi should be elected as Speaker when the new Congress begins”, said the poll of 1,995 registered voters.

Excuse me? They asked 1,995 registered voters and extrapolated that to 150 million voters and never tested their results for accuracy? I mean, how could they?

I know, I know, I know already that THEY choose the areas they are going to ask and they choose how many they are going to ask but how do they know they are correct THIS time? 2,000 voters is about 40 from each state and depending upon the voter demographic selected by county or city, these published results may not be correct.

Want an example? Actuarial tables. These tables are used to predict how many living people are going to die in what time period. They are the best they can be because people can matriculate in actuarial science. And yet…they, too, adjust their tables every year to reflect the truth of things. These people make between $150,000 and $200, 000 per year to turn data into insurance dollars and they adjust their tables every year when the results don’t match their predictions across hundreds of millions of datapoints.

So when someone says they surveyed 1,995 people and decided that 50 million people out of 150 million don’t want Pelosi as Speaker, I call horse hockey.

How about this sentence: “Three-fourths of likely US voters reject socialism.”It is amazing that they don’t tell us how many they asked or where they were from. But they do say the choice was between socialism vs free market capitalism. I mean, really? Perhaps it would have helped to explain the difference between the two? And “likely voters”? What’s with that? Why not ask real voters?

So whenever you see these crazy polls that pronounce what everyone likes or dislikes, just forget it. It’s never been tested.

Who was Sen. Graham talking to?

“If you open that can of worms, we’ll want the FBI to come in and tell us about how people pre-planned this attack and what happened with the security footprint at the Capitol.”

Those are the words of Senator Lindsey Graham regarding the second impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump.

How exactly is this a threat to Democrats? Is there something we are not aware of?

In my view, inviting the FBI to talk about the three-hour planning meeting held at the White House with Rep.elect Marjorie Greene and “several Republicans” on overturning the Electoral College vote would be an illuminating conversation. (see previous post)

We know the Commission that oversees the Capitol Police forbid the use of guns and cut the number of police on duty to an ordinary day’s component. Even though there were tens of thousands of MAGA supporters who had been whipped up to a high froth by the likes of Alex Jones and Rudy Giuliani, among others, the police staffing was not increased. You can watch the videos of both of them on the internet.

Was Senator Lindsey Graham perhaps also sending a warning to the President’s defense counsel? If they bring in one witness, Senator Graham will go all in and let the President’s conspiracy committee be exposed for what it really was?

And me? I’m thinking the FBI is doing its job and that President Biden trusts Christopher Wray (Director of the FBI) and that is why he kept him on. He counts on Wray to conduct an impartial inquiry into the actions and the actors who planned this event and whether they took any orders from the WH cabal that held a 3-hour planning meeting 9 days prior to January 6th.

The question remains, Who was Sen. Lindsey Graham actually talking to?

And is there a connection between House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s trip to former President Donald Trump, and this WH planning session, and the impeachment process, and then all of Donald Trump’s legal team quitting? So many questions and so few facts, and so little information.

I know everyone wants this to go away. But I have to say, I’m expecting a series of indictments for those anonymous Republicans engaged in a 3-hour planning meeting at the White House.

Perhaps the WH visitor logs will tell the story…if Biden and the Executive Branch lawyers will turn them over to the WH Press Corps. They were requested today.

WH Plan to overthrow election: foiled by Trump supporters

The Washington Times reports its news from a Republican perspective. It chooses its words to highlight the values of Conservatives and diminsh the values of Liberals. While it doesn’t scream like Breitbart, it is a source of Conservative and Republican news and views even if its thumb is on the scale.

Missing from the Washington Times online archives is an article written by Dave Boyer. It was printed in the December 28, 2020 National Weekly edition that is mailed to subscribers. I don’t know why it’s missing but my searches have failed to turn up a Washington Times e-version. I was able to find an e-version over at

The article reports on a WH planning session with the President, Vice President, then Representative-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene, and “several other Republicans”. I don’t know why they aren’t named but perhaps anonymity is best when planning to overthrow the US presidential election.

Quoting Rep-elect Greene exclusively in the article, there is evidence that the White House was planning to overthrow (sorry, maybe I should be PC and use the word “challenge”) the election results.

Collusion and Intent. That is exactly what it was to undermine the authenticity of electoral college votes… only in states that, per Rep-elect Greene, “When you look at what’s happened in a lot of these liberal swing states, that have liberal governors, and liberal secretaries of state, you can see that they have broken the law and gone against the our Consitution with this election.”

There isn’t a shred of truth to these wild allegations and yet she uttered them. Do you need a run down? A) There are no liberal and conservative swing states. If she knew what a swing state was then she would never have said that. B) In the swing states, three of them have Republican governors and three have Democrat governors. C) The Secretaries of State are the same party as the Governor. D) There is no evidence that any elected official of any state interfered with the vote counting or vote result reporting.

The WH Plan was to contest the vote in several states and simply not count those Biden-electoral college ballots until Joe Biden was under the 270 votes needed to reject his win in the national election.

In addition, the Republican Party brought a Republican slate of electors to Washington for them to vote (instead of the Democrat slate of electors) to increase the Electoral College count, if needed. This was obviously discussed as a strategy but discarded as too farfetched.

However, what may have been discussed is what happens if both candidates do not receive the 270 EC votes to win. In which case Congress votes; the House votes for President and the Senate votes for Vice President. In an interesting twist, each state gets one vote in each chamber. It isn’t one vote per Representative or one vote per Senator. It’s one vote per state. And there are more Republican states than Democrat states in Congress. The election could easily turn into a referendum for Republicans.

But it didn’t. Why?

Because the invasion of Trump supporters caused the Electoral College to be halted and, when it resumed, Congress decided NOT to contest the certified election results.

If the Capitol had not been breached, there is an excellent chance that Donald Trump would still be president today.