Formerly a Hillary Clinton supporter until 2018, the Democrat Party has gone so far left I now Support Donald Trump.

Democrat Policies are led by the insane George Soros. Soros has backed Move-On dot or, the Huffington Post Shadow Conventions, Media Matters, and ultra liberal District Attorneys such as George Gascon who has NOT PROSECUTED 10,000 CRIMINAL CASES. 

Gascon's criminal forgiveness has led to the deaths of several innocents who became victims of murder supsects and drug cartel members who have been let back out on the streets while they "await" their trial date that may take years to commence because Prosecuting Attorneys are leaving in droves and not being replaced.

I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and voted for Donald Trump in  2020. In between I witnessed the brutal medical malpractice of my Mother at West Hills Hospital ER. it took me five years to learn it was intentional understaffing as high as 34% that resulted in the multiple EMTALA violations that resulted. 

California is governed on every level by a super majority of Democrat Politicians who have succeeded in creating higher and higher population density centers called Sanctuary cities because it requires massive Government program payouts.

Forbes Article Proves Donald Trump could face Income Tax Fraud Charges and Billions in Penalties if Trump loses the 2016 Presidential Election to Hillary Clinton.

I have since seen the error of my ways and support Donald Trump. If Donald Trump were afforded the same level of immunity Nancy Pelosi has received for her various acts of insurrection against Donald Trump, there would be zero lawsuits against Donald Trump.

Forbes Article Proves Donald Trump could face Income Tax Fraud Charges and Billions in Penalties if Trump loses the 2016 Presidential Election to Hillary Clinton. 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Donald Trump Bombshell. The Real Reason Donald Trump won't release his income tax returns, Donald Trump may face IRS Tax Fraud, Income Tax Evasion, billions in penalties, and possibly Jail Time.

Donald Trump Bombshell. The Real Reason Donald Trump won't release his income tax returns, Donald Trump may face IRS Tax Fraud, Income Tax Evasion, billions in penalties, and possibly Jail Time. 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Democratic Party drops the ball on the meaning of Fair Reflection.

I was looking in the democratic party bylaws for the definition of Fair Reflection. The democratic party definition of "fair reflection" seems to define everybody by how they were born, and not by how they live their lives. This is a really big deal, and offensive as well.

It appears the democratic party judges you by the color of your skin, not by the ethics and character you develop or already possess. 

The democratic party defines fair reflection as fairly reflecting all races, ethnicities and both sexes within the party. However, nothing is said about fairly reflecting those whose daily responsibilities to their family, relatives and community consumes every waking hour and leaves them vulnerable to not being represented in caucus voting states.


You see, fair reflection only applies in states that generally vote democrat and put on actual primaries. Caucus contests are usually reserved for republican leaning states and fairly reflecting the democrat voters in those states does not appear to be as important to the democrat party.

Character apparently does not matter to the democrat party, so people with character, who live in a caucus state, will be IGNORED by the democrat party.

This is very disconcerting to me. You could be the most responsible, caring, community driven person alive, and not qualify for fair reflection within your own state if you live in a caucus contest state. This is just an outrage and explains a lot about the ethically bankrupt higher ups in the democratic party.

Ohio Voters sue for the right to have Fair Reflection.

Four Ohio residents have asked their own state to fairly reflect the will of the voters by requring vote by mail costs be the same in each and every Ohio county. The irony is the term fair reflection never came up in the article even though that is what these four residents are basically asking for.

This is a very important case that could have national voting implications. Click here to read all about it.

In 2008 lawsuits were filed in Nevada over how the caucuses were being run. The judge in the case basically held the position that even if the democratic caucuses were being unfairly run (and they apparently were favoring Barack Obama in an unfair manner), it was not up to a judge to fix the problem, but rather the democratic party!

The judges thinking makes sense. If the democratic party is that fouled up, it's not up to a judge to make the democratic party run fairer contests, instead, people can choose to vote another party.

However, in this instance, the lawsuit relates to ALL VOTERS, and so a judge may see the necessity in stepping in and making the ease of mail by voting be the SAME for all voters irrespective of which county they live in.

We Will Not Be Silenced Documentary Gets New Life on Fox News.

HillBuzz has devoted an article to the documentary "We Will not Be Silenced" which is helping to chronicle the cheating and thuggish tactics that went on during the 2008 democratic election process along with the presidential contest as well.

Here is another HillBuzz article about We Will Not Be Silenced. STRATEGY: Commit to 30 Days of pressuring the DNC and American Media to answer the question “Why was voter fraud and intimidation allowed to run rampant in 2008?”

And there is this thread on HillBuzz article about We Will Not Be Silenced.

Help keep this thread on GretaWire to the front so more people can learn about We Will Not Be Silenced

You can also see the latest youtube video of the Fox and Friends appearance here.

I wanted to contribute to the article but for some reason my comments don't seem to get through however don't let that deter you from contributing any bad experiences you had during the 2008 elections.

Barack Obama may not be a Natural Born Citizen.

According to wikipedia, the constitution is vague on what is meant by "natural born". The truth may lie in finding what the original founding members meant by "natural born" by investigating their writings in other books and newspaper articles written prior to and around the time that the constitution was written.

It is quite possible that what the founding constitutional members were concerned with was English aristocracy coming to the United States to have a kid so that that kid could one day be president.

Therefore, Natural born citizen as defined over 200 years ago probably refers to two actual US citizens living on US soil who have a child on US soil, thus allowing the child to be called "natural born".

Because the early days of the U.S were almost entirely slanted towards the male point of view, I think a compromise position to the natural born rule was allowed. If the male was a citizen of the United States, and lived on US soil, and the birth mother lived in the United States but was NOT a U.S. citizen, the child would be still be considered natural born because of the status of the FATHER, not the mother.

Isn't it ironic how after all the sexism allegations that have been leveled against the Barack Obama campaign that they must now cling to "mummy is a US citizen" as justification for Barack Obama being a natural born citizen.

If a FATHER was NOT a US citizen, but the birth mother was, that would NOT be considered natural born because 233 years ago the man was considered the primary wage earner of the family. For the son or daughter to be considered naturally born, the father would need to be an american citizen, otherwise British Aristocracy could impregnate american women citizens and hold future influence over their "Natural Born Citizen" son, even if the father's own allegiances remained with Great Britain.

Let us examine a very important challenge to Chester Arthur's run for vice presidency, from wikipedia, natural born citizen Chester A. Arthur (1829-1886), 21st president of the United States, might have been born in Canada.[21]

This was never demonstrated by his political opponents, although they raised the objection during his vice-presidential campaign. He was born to a U.S.-citizen mother and a father from Ireland who was eventually naturalized as a U.S. citizen. Arthur was sworn in as president when President Garfield died after being shot.

Arthur's VP candidacy was challenged even though his mother was a US citizen! Even though there were allegations Arthur was born in Canada, It wasn't until his FATHER became a US citizen that the controversy subsided. I don't know when Chester Arthur's father became a US citizen, but it apparently was before Chester Arthur became president.

One could argue that the above viewpoint is now outdated and sexist, and that probably is accurate. However, the spirit of the natural born citizen clause was that anyone who can become president of the United States needs to have familial roots on US soil, familial roots being defined as the parents living on US soil, the father most likely a wage earner, and you know, as they say on the Barack Obama side, "bro's before ho's. Mama's standing just wasn't the thing back then.

Barack Obama is a naturalized citizen, but he may not be a natural born citizen. However, both of his daughters are natural born citizens because Barack Obama IS a naturalized citizen of the United States. If Barack Obama's father had never become a United States citizen, then Barack Obama would not be a natural born citizen. Barack Obama would however be, a naturalized citizen of the United States, but not eligible to be president.

However, Barack Obama's father RUINED his own citizenship a couple of different ways. This is the part of the story that nobody talks about. Barack Obama Sr. broke a morals clause, and later on became a political figure in Kenya, BOTH of these actions would INVALIDATE Barack Obama Sr's standing as a citizen of the United States. If Barack Obama's father is not a citizen of the United States, than Barack Obama may not be a natural born citizen.

The most effective way to have the Natural Born Citizen issue be decided in Barack Obama's favor is to show other examples of past presidents whose fathers were never US citizens, or lost their citizenship before their son tried running for president. If there are no examples, then Barack Obama's presidency could actually be breaking constitutional law.

If there are past presidents that had fathers who never became american citizens and therefore have already broken this specific constitutional law, and no challenges were filed, then Barack Obama would possibly have an out by arguing that you can't just pick and choose who the natural born citizen rule is applied to, it either applies to all presidents, or to none.

If there are no other presidents whose father was from another country AND never became a US citizen, and if it is true that Barack Obama's father did not retain US citizenship, then Barack Obama may not be eligible to become president of the United States until a change in the constitution would make him eligible for future presidential races, because the law cannot be backdated.

Besides violating the morals clause for incoming immigrants by having an affair, Barack Obama's father became a Kenyan political consultant later on in life, and that is SPECIFICALLY unacceptable for that persons son laying claim to being a natural born U.S. Citizen.

For you Barack Obama supporters who love to ridicule the whole natural born citizenship issue, it was your guy who has used every loophole imaginable to get ahead in his political career, so don't be so quick to presume the chosen one is above the very system he has used to defeat his rivals. Remember, "bro's before ho's" also counts in the natural born citizen debate and if Barack Obama's father never became and or REMAINED a US citizen, Barack Obama  may not be a natural born citizen.

But then there remains one final issue that becomes Barack Obama's get into Presidency free card. Is it fair to deny Barack Obama's eligibility based on the actions of his father? And even if the answer is  yes, once Barack Obama's father passes away, which occurred before he ran for president, should the prior actions of Barack Obama's father  continue to cloud Barack Obama's eligibility to run for president? 

Since Barack Obama's father passed away before Barack Obama ran for the presidency, would that take precedence over all other discussion and immediately make Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?  Probably yes.

FCC FINES CABLE NEWS COMPANY FOR FRAUD, the CABLE BARRIER HAS BEEN BROKEN.

Here is the link to FCC FINES CABLE NEWS PROGRAM FOR FAKE NEWS. I think this is confirmation that MSNBC CAN BE FINED for SPEWING their own agenda and news opinion as FACT. Please not the date, September of 2007.

Playing with Numbers in the 2008 Presidential Election.

Playing with numbers...

The Mainstream medias assault on Sarah Palin cost the Republican party 2.5 million voters who switched, for a 5 million vote swing.

John McCain was portrayed as too old even though his 96 year old mother accompanied McCain on the campaign trail and could kick the butt of many of the pundits who said John McCain was too old. Loss of another 2.5 million voters for another 5 million voter swing.

Barack Obama accepting over 200 million dollars in undocumented donations, another 2.5 million voters affected, for another 5 million vote swing.

The media used the above results to create an illusion that it was McCain who was desperate, another 2.5 million voters lost, another 5 million vote swing.

Bill and Hillary Clinton encouraging voters to vote for Barack Obama, another 2.5 million voters, for a swing of 5 million.

In terms of raw numbers it would be too simplistic to say that the above total cost John McCain 25 million votes. It is likely that more than one of the above affected the same voter. So even though there was a potential 25 million vote swing, I would say that average voter probably was affected by 3 of the 5 big reasons given above. So subtracting 15 million from the above we get a potential 10 million swing in voters if none of the big five had happened up above.

This years race would have been a virtual tie if Bill and Hillary Clinton had not been involved, and if Bill and Hillary Clinton had jumped ship over to McCain's side, they might have made enough of a difference to swing the race to John McCain, although they would have create a scenario in which both sides of the political landscape at one time either loved them, or hated them.

I wonder how many will respect the Clintons.

What is Fair Reflection?

Fair Reflection is a democrat tenet in which each state's population must be fairly accounted for in the voting process. The purpose of Fair Reflection is to not ignore any group. 

Fair Reflection is a tenet that was urinated on this year, and we can thank George Soros, David Axelrod, Barack Obama and democratic party Higher ups for that.

If you lived in a caucus state and work a swing shift or two jobs, or are elderly, retired, the head of a household that can't take supper time off and spend the night caucus voting, or are a single parent, the democratic party basically took your vote away. 

All of these groups were passed over in the caucus states by the democrat party. I consider it fraud to use fair reflection in democrat bylaws, but then not practice them in reality, it certainly is bait and switch at the least.

YOUTUBE VIDEO, I AM am a HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTING and I APPROVED THIS MESSAGE, is now on GOOGLE VIDEO also!

I AM am a HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTER and I APPROVED this message. Please share this video if you know a Hillary Clinton voter that is still on the fence.

I am a Hillary Clinton Supporter, and I APPROVED this Message.

MSNBC Daily Promos, unethical by FCC standards, it sure looks like it to me.

The daily MSNBC promos they they run all day long, in my opinion, are out of bounds of fairness.

Here is the transcript of the one running today, Oct. 27, 2008.

Voice over says, "Tonight, It's the final stretch, and it's getting ugly," (cut away to Chris Matthews on camera sound bite " Two Strongest emotions in politics are, JEALOUSLY, and FEAR" (back to voiceover) As McCain's ad go even more negative, can they turn the tide in his favor, or will voters swing the other direction? (Back to Chris Matthews on camera sound bite) "Here's my Theory", (Back to Voiceover) Hardball with Chris Matthews, tonight at 7 on MSNBC.

This is absolutely outrageous, for a news channel to actually state their opinion as a fact that John McCain's ads are "going more negative"...

These MSNBC news hacks know better. This is definitely worth a report to the FCC. You have the text up above, I checked and rechecked it for accuracy. It is the Chris Matthews Hardball Promo for Oct. 27, 2008 on MSNBC. The complaint is MSNBC stating their opinion as if it is a fact.

How to Report MSNBC News when they Violate FCC LAW.

Edit Note, I found the following information at the beginning of Dec, 2008, SEVERAL MONTHS after I postulated this article. Here is that info that backs up the rest of this article. Here is the link to FCC FINES CABLE NEWS PROGRAM FOR FAKE NEWS.
I think this is confirmation that MSNBC CAN BE FINED for SPEWING their own agenda and news opinion as FACT. Please not the date, September of 2007.Here are some examples of Possible FCC violations being committed by MSNBC on a daily basis. (End of Edit Note).---------------------------------------------------------

MSNBC Polling analyst, Chuck Todd, may say, "John McCain has given up in Michigan and moved his operations out of the state to solidify other locales that normally are solidly Republican". This one sentence is mind boggling damaging to the McCain campaign, primarily because it is opinion being reported as fact.

The implication being made is that John McCain can't retreat fast enough from Michigan and is running out of time, and places to campaign. This type of statement is so full of distortion and wrought with gloom and doom, but it is being sold as FACT, when it is not fact, it is merely Todd's OPINION.

If MSNBC were being objective rather than simply moving an agenda forward to elect Barack Obama, they could just as easily have reported that McCain's strategy was to move his operations to as many toss up states as soon as possible so that if those states tip his way and get reported as such, it may invigorate the other states that are 5-10 points down in the polls to move closer towards McCain, which in turn creates excitement and increased momentum...

Do you see how my opinion is just as valid as Chuck Todds? That is why both positions are opinions, and not facts. Completely opposite interpretations can be made from the same observation. But when Chuck Todd, or any other news anchor on MSNBC reports on McCain leaving Michigan, they make it sound like McCain is fleeing the state, losing ground, running out of options, giving up, etc.

That is MSNBC's OPINION, it is not fact. However, because MSNBC broadcasts 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, their "opinion" becomes reality.

Another example. MSNBC has been reporting on an almost hourly basis about how unpopular Sarah Palin is in the polls, MSNBC further is reporting that Sarah Palin is dragging down John McCain. Yet just a few days ago MSNBC was crowing about how Pennsylvania was in the bag for Barack Obama. So what happens? Sarah Palin shows up to campaign in Pennsylvania and suddenly within a day or two there are secret talks in Obama's camp that Obama is actually only up by two points in Pennsylvania!

If Sarah Palin is so unpopular and hurting McCain's cause as MSNBC keeps reporting, then how does her appearance in Pennsylvania result in Barack Obama's lead shrinking? Answer, MSNBC is once again trying to spout off their opinion as FACT, when it is just an OPINION. However, the continued attacks on Sarah Palin by MSNBC DO WORK, and the result is not as close as the two points that was "leaked" to MSNBC from the Obama camp.

The other thing MSNBC does is the "damned no matter what they do" attack method. When John McCain wanted to suspend his campaign to deal with the bailout bill, MSNBC first claimed that John McCain was suspending his campaign to avoid debating Barack Obama. When McCain went to Washington, MSNBC clobbered John McCain as being ineffective and inept and contributing nothing to the bailout bill vote. To make matters even worse, MSNBC immediately took the position that the bailout bill MUST BE PASSED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, and all of their reporting was based on this presumption. Considering that phone calls to congress were running 20-1 AGAINST the bailout bill, not rushing the bill made the most sense, and was completely counter to MSNBC's position.

As time passes, it becomes obvious that MSNBC attempted to help the original bailout bills pass while using the non passage to attack John McCain for wanting to postpone the first presidential debate and deal with the bailout bill. MSNBC's politicization of this entire incident may go down as one of the most egregious, narcissistic, agenda driven media coups ever attempted, and frankly, an investigation needs to be done. Did MSNBC commit either fraud or treason in their coverage of the first two bailout bill votes? If you have access to the original MSNBC Bailout Bill coverage, you will be shocked to see how they politicized the situation to benefit Barack Obama and attack John McCain.

MSNBC used the opinion that the bailout bill MUST BE PASSED and based all of their reporting on this opinion.

Once the Bailout Bill did not pass on the first vote, MSNBC then dragged McCain through the mud claiming that he had no ability to gather yes votes, and in essence did nothing in Washington while he was there. Then, Chris Matthews stated that McCain had no backbone because McCain backed down from his suspending his campaign position and found time for the second debate. The "damned no matter what McCain did ploy" by MSNBC was in play, and it was disgusting to see MSNBC do it.

Another example of the "Damned no matter what they do approach" involves Sarah Palin's wardrobe. It's been gleefully revealed by MSNBC that Sarah Palin's wardrobes are expensive. But lets think about this for a moment. MSNBC has attacked Sarah Palin mercilessly for being an outsider, imagine how much more brutal they would have been if Sarah Palin didn't look so classy during her campaigning. Isn't it possible that MSNBC would have hired a fashion consultant to bury Sarah Palin on national television for dressing like a country bumpkin?

Once again, MSNBC has set up a scenario where no matter how Sarah Palin dresses, they will ridicule her choices, either she is a fashion unconscious small town girl, or she is overspending on her wardrobe and therefore has shown bad judgement.

In my opinion MSNBC is running a news scam, concocting opinion generated news to fit their own agenda and I sincerely hope somebody will make it their job to sue MSNBC, and do it quickly.

Is MSNBC OPINION GENERATED NEWS, NEWS you CANNOT TRUST? HOW to REPORT MSNBC NEWS when they VIOLATE FCC LAW.

Here are some examples of Possible Fraud being committed by MSNBC.

MSNBC Polling analyst, Chuck Todd, may say, "John McCain has given up in Michigan and moved his operations out of the state to solidify other locales that normally are solidly Republican". This one sentence is mind boggling damaging to the McCain campaign, primarily because it is opinion being reported as fact.

The implication being made is that John McCain can't retreat fast enough from Michigan and is running out of time, and places to campaign. This type of statement is so full of distortion and wrought with gloom and doom, but it is being sold as FACT, when it is not fact, it is OPINION.

If MSNBC were being fair, they could just as easily have reported that McCain's strategy is to move his operations to as many toss up states as soon as possible so that if those states tip his way and gets reported as such, it may invigorate the other states that may be 5-10 points down in the polls to move closer to him, which in turn creates excitement and increased momentum...

Do you see how my opinion is just as valid as Chuck Todds? That is why both positions are opinions, and not facts. Completely opposite interpretations can be made from the same observation. But when Chuck Todd, or any other news anchor on MSNBC reports on McCain leaving Michigan, they make it sound like McCain is fleeing the state, losing ground, giving up, etc.

That is MSNBC's OPINION, it is not fact.

Another example. MSNBC has been reporting on an almost hourly basis about how unpopular Sarah Palin is in the polls, MSNBC further is reporting that Sarah Palin is dragging down John McCain. Yet just a few days ago MSNBC was crowing about how Pennsylvania was in the bag for Barack Obama. So what happens? Sarah Palin shows up to campaign in Pennsylvania and suddenly within a day or two there are secret talks in Obama's camp that Obama is actually only up by two points in Pennsylvania!

If Sarah Palin is so unpopular and hurting McCain's cause as MSNBC keeps reporting, then how does her appearance in Pennsylvania result in Barack Obama's lead shrinking? Answer, MSNBC is once again trying to spout off their opinion as FACT, when it is just an OPINION.

The other thing MSNBC does is the "damned no matter what they do" attack method. When John McCain wanted to suspend his campaign to deal with the bailout bill, MSNBC first claimed that John McCain was suspending his campaign it to avoid debating Barack Obama. Then MSNBC clobbered John McCain as being ineffective in his trip to Washington. To make matters even worse, MSNBC immediately took the position that the bailout bill MUST BE PASSED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, and all of their reporting was based on this presumption. Considering that phone calls to congress were running 20-1 AGAINST the bailout bill, not rushing the bill made the most sense, and was completely counter to MSNBC's position.

However MSNBC continued to report the news based on a their own agenda driven premise that the bailout bill MUST be immediately passed. Once the Bailout Bill did not pass on the first vote, MSNBC then dragged McCain through the mud claiming that he had no ability to gather yes votes, and in essence did nothing in Washington while he was there. Then, Chris Matthews stated that McCain had no backbone because he backed down and found time for the second debate. The damned no matter what McCain did ploy by MSNBC, and it was disgusting to see MSNBC do it.

Another example of the "Damned no matter what they do approach" involves Sarah Palin's wardrobe. It's been gleefully revealed by MSNBC that Sarah Palin's wardrobes are expensive. But lets think about this for a moment. MSNBC has attacked Sarah Palin mercilessly for being an outsider, imagine how much more brutal they would have been if Sarah Palin didn't look so classy during her campaigning. Isn't it possible that MSNBC would have hired a fashion consultant to just bury Sarah Palin on national television for dressing like a country bumpkin?

Once again, MSNBC has set up a scenario where no matter how Sarah Palin dresses, they will ridicule her choices, either she is a fashion unconscious small town girl, or she is overspending on her wardrobe and therefore has shown bad judgement.

In my opinion MSNBC is running a news scam, concocting opinion generated news to fit their own agenda and I sincerely hope somebody will make it their job to sue this station, and do it quickly.