Is America Becoming a Banana Republic? | The New Yorker
The Independent with Scott Atlas on X: “Atlas:
. These are the real threats to democracy. [Claiming] Trump…is a threat to democracy—that’s self-contradictory, they’re claiming democratic outcomes are threats to democracy.” Whereas, the media is a gross failure [and] the courts have been politicized
Democracy is evil and that word should never have gained prominence relative to a description of the USA’s form of governance. No libertarian minded or constitutional minded or natural law minded person would use that word to describe USA’s form of governance if they knew what it meant.
EXACTLY!!! I really like Victor Davis Hansen a lot, and this is a great video… I wish ppl would just wake the eff 
up. They use these catch phrases, and can’t even explain them!! #DemocratsAreDestroyingAmerica, and a vote for them, is a vote against the American people.
Democratic Republic. It means, in the end, you can’t fight the people. But, you can restrain hysteric passions, and protect the minority.
I accept democratic republic. But I don’t accept when people say we have a democracy or that something is a threat to democracy. Democracy is evil. Lord of the Flies is my current go-to example of democracy.
We live in a constitutional republic where all have individual rights that are protected. We are not a democracy where mobs rule by majority vote. The threat to our Republic is when people who should know better adopt the talking points of the left. We do not have a democracy in the United States. Our founding fathers were well aware of democracies all over the world throughout history, and they gave us a Republic.
They want you to believe we are a democracy to bypass individual rights.
Trump spent four unpaid years as our President… Never once did he threaten any of our freedoms while keeping Putin at bay. We had a strong economy, super low unemployment rates across the board, and never once did he act like a dictator. Cannot say the same for the current folks
Our country wouldn’t be in near as much trouble if the media would do their job and tell the truth. They set up there and get paid a lot of money to tell lies. I don’t know how they can do it with a clear conscience and go to sleep at night.
“Failed” or “politicized” are the wrong words. The word you’re looking for is corrupt: Courts & DAs are corrupt Media is corrupt Congress is corrupt The Exec branch is corrupt The Military is corrupt Big business is corrupt Finance and banking is STUNNINGLY corrupt
Donald Trump indicted again for trying to interfere in presidential election (msn.com)
When you come to realize that the people in charge are not accountable for anything that they do then
Very true, honest words are being spoken here. Very scary and very true. Most of today’s journalists are no long truth seekers, and our courts have been politicalized and resemble the courts of NAZI Germany during WW2.
They do not hear their own hypocrisy.
I have a friend. Successful. Intelligent (mostly). Articulate. BUT total mental block as to any information counter to his preferred progressive bull-S. Actually relied in one conversation on the hate spewed by Liz Cheney as gospel regarding Trump. Completely fatal TDS.
Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a very real disease
“The threat to democracy is when people in power are not accountable.” — Dr. Scott Atlas
Dr. Atlas, I enjoyed your book. The root problem is that our legislators are pressured, bribed or blackmailed to vote contrary to what is sane. However, our Constitution allows safe and secure voting where legislators are 100% guaranteed a safe way to secretly vote their conscience.
ABSTRACT / PREVIEW OF THE EASIEST WAY TO CLEAN UP CONGRESS The US Congress is not composed entirely of millionaires who are saints. Some observers suspect that some legislators are pressured with future job offers, pressured with threats or other incentives, or even blackmailed so that they vote a desired way. “We’ve been betrayed” is a common complaint voters make about their legislators in some districts (or states in the Senate). What if a legislator could truly vote their conscience/intellect in a way with 100% guaranteed secrecy?
There are minimal constraints about legislative voting put on our legislative process in the US Constitution: Article 1, Section 5, Paragraphs 2 and 3. There, it fully accommodates letting legislators vote secretly, as long as a 100% accurate tally of the Yes’s and No’s are done and recorded (but even that is not required if 20% or more of the legislative chamber agree to waive the tally).
This proposal is extremely simple and it will easily make legislative voting bulletproof secure, providing total secrecy and security. It involves, minimally, a ledger (used at the very end of voting), an oath (passing a lie detector test as proof that one has not previously been subjected to a lie detector test to reveal how they vote), a black handkerchief (to conceal their vote markup as well as their fingerprints), a 1 inch square cube on which they mark their vote, a Sharpie pen for doing the marking, a wooden box (with a hole big enough to insert the marked wooden cubes), and padlocks for the box, so it is not opened until voting ends and then only by representatives and auditors of each party.
In this scenario, it is impossible to determine the vote of any legislator, unless the vote is lopsided 100%. Voters will pick their candidates based upon other, but accessible characteristics, discussed below in the article. I cannot think of a simpler way to get legislators to vote their conscience, their intellect, without a future majority-controlled legislature being made of millionaire saints who do not need other people’s money and can’t be blackmailed, bribed, or pressured.
People’s dream for honest legislative voting now depends upon the legislators being rich enough without any vulnerability that could be compromised if threatened, intimidated, or pressured (and that means if they have family that they’re rich enough to have full time security to protect them). It is a pipe dream to expect a majority of legislators to meet this requirement. Too often, citizens suspect that some legislators are being obviously compromised (pressured) to vote contrary to how they campaign.
The proposed approach below lets the individual legislators be free to vote their conscience/intellect with impunity. The main objection to this proposal is that voters typically want to know how their legislator voted. The voting record has been well documented to be a con game and keeping it forces your legislator, to use an analogy, to show up at a gun fight with a water pistol.
He/she is vulnerable to the others and the audience inviting retribution that could be truly placing himself/herself or their family in true danger. There are other metrics, discussed in depth below, that can virtually assure voters that you, as a candidate, is worth their trust and vote.
After all, what the voters want is a functional legislature that improves their lives. The last time a functional Congress and President ended a presidential term with the country in less debt than before the president started was with President Calvin Coolidge.
The interest on the national debt “already costs over $1 trillion a year and will cost $3 trillion annually in less than a decade.”
Judge Christina Ryba invalidated 100K+ signatures for RFK Jr’s New York ballot access.
In 2015, Ryba was fired from her position as a lawyer for a state appeals court the day before she was elected as Supreme Court judge for “ethical missteps.” Presiding Judge Karen Peters “informed Ryba of her termination following a sequence of events that began in March [2015] when Ryba, a Democrat, began her run for state Supreme Court.” Peters tried to distance herself from Ryba’s campaign “from the outset,” but she “found herself mentioned in a Ryba campaign letter” in October. Ryba also “solicited court system employees, including judges at various levels, with two election-related emails sent to their court system accounts,” one of which was about a campaign fundraiser.
New York’s Commission on Judicial Conduct “prohibit a judge or candidate from engaging in inappropriate political activity, which includes ‘publicly endorsing or publicly opposing (other than by running against) another candidate for public office’ or personally soliciting campaign contributions.”
In her October campaign letter that mentioned Peters by name, Ryba “not only made not only what was seen as direct criticism” of her opponent, but also “downplayed the fact that he had been rated ‘qualified’ by the Independent Judicial Election Qualification Commission, a judicial screening panel within Peters’ court.” Ryba could not be assessed by the Commission, since she had a hand in appointing it in her previous position.
She described that in her October campaign letter as “simply the price I pay for having higher standing in the legal community having been placed in such roles by my respected peers.” Peters repeatedly asked Ryba to resign throughout her campaign, but she was eventually fired after declining to resign gracefully. Ryba was then elected as Supreme Court judge with 51% of the vote against 49% for her opponent. From The Times Union
What to know about the ruling that bounced RFK Jr. from the New York ballot.
Politics Aug 14, 2024, 4:24 PM EDT
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent presidential campaign suffered a blow this week when a judge in New York invalidated his petition to put his name on the state ballot, a ruling that could potentially create problems for the candidate as he faces challenges elsewhere.
Kennedy’s attorneys filed an appeal Wednesday to a ruling this week from Justice Christina Ryba, who said the residence listed on his nominating petitions was a “sham” address he used to maintain his voter registration and to further his political aspirations. The judge ruled in favor of the challengers, who argued Kennedy’s actual residence was the home in Los Angeles he shares with his wife, the “Curb Your Enthusiasm” actor Cheryl Hines.
New York is just one of more than a half-dozen states where challenges have been made to Kennedy’s petitions from Democrats and their allies. Some of the challenges allege he falsely listed the same New York address that was the subject of litigation in that state, or that there were problems with petition signatures.WATCH: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on why he thinks he has a chance as an independent candidate
In Pennsylvania, challengers contend that papers filed by Kennedy list an incorrect address in New York and that he and his running mate demonstrated “at best, a fundamental disregard” of state law and the process by which signatures are gathered. An attorney for Kennedy said the challenge contained specious allegations. A court will conduct an evidentiary hearing next Tuesday in Harrisburg.
Kennedy’s campaign says it has collected enough signatures for ballot access in all 50 states and that it is officially on the ballot in 17 states. His candidacy has at various times drawn concerns from both Democrats and Republicans who think he could siphon votes from their candidates.
National Democrats in particular have been active in trying to undercut his candidacy, while former President Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, has alternated between criticizing Kennedy as liberal and courting his endorsement or the backing of some of his supporters.
Independent presidential candidate Robert F Kennedy Jr does not meet the legal requirement of a New York resident and therefore cannot be on the state’s election ballot, a judge has ruled. Kennedy’s claim of a New York address as his “place of residence” on nominating petitions was a “false statement”, said Judge Christina Ryba.
As a result, the petitions were considered invalid. Mr Kennedy has rejected the judge’s ruling and vows to appeal. If the ruling is upheld, it would not only bar Mr Kennedy from the New York ballot but could also lead to challenges in other states where he uses that address. Mr Kennedy dismissed the ruling as a partisan attack and noted the judge as a Democrat.
“They aren’t confident they can win at the ballot box, so they are trying to stop voters from having a choice,” he said in a statement.
“We will appeal and we will win.” Mr. Kennedy, 70, had argued in court that he considered New York his home since childhood and intended to return.
He currently lives in California which he moved to in 2014 to be with his wife, Curb Your Enthusiasm actress Cheryl Hines. In court, Mr Kennedy sought to make the case that he had been renting a bedroom from a friend in Katonah, roughly 40 miles (65 km) north of Manhattan.
The friend, Barbara Moss, testified in court that she charges Mr Kennedy $500 (£301) a month. She also said there was no written lease.
Mr Kennedy also offered evidence of his residency by showing that he pays New York state taxes and has a law practice in the state.
However, in her 34-page ruling, Judge Ryba said “the overwhelming credible evidence introduced at trial” suggested that Mr. Kennedy only held a New York address for “political standing”.
“Given the size and appearance of the spare bedroom as shown in the photographs admitted into evidence, the Court finds Kennedy’s testimony that he may return to that bedroom to reside with his wife, family members, multiple pets, and all of his personal belongings to be highly improbable, if not preposterous,” the judge wrote.
Mr Kennedy is the most well-known independent candidate but his popularity appears to have plummeted since Democratic Vice-President Kamala Harris entered the race.
You can Overturn this decision. In New York and also in Massachusetts…For Kennedy to win.. in those 2 states …just get out and write his name in ..it’s that simple… Kennedy’s polling shows “31.3% of American voters would choose Kennedy if they believed he could win, including 42% of voters aged 18-24, 41.7% of Hispanic voters, and 39.7% of Black voters.”
As a lifelong New Yorker, I’ve never felt so disrespected by the state I live in. And whether or not you are voting for RFK Jr, you should be furious. They are taking your rights away from you and your neighbors in the land of the free. We collected signatures with pride and passion in NY. I met some of the nicest people collecting signatures on Long Island. Just so the Democrats can flick away the 100k signatures we all collected? If you are voting for Harris, you don’t respect your personal freedom or your neighbor’s. Between the ballot removal in NY and their “high school” level press statements about the X interview with Elon and Trump, enough is enough. CPAC on X: “THREAD: What does a Kamala Harris Administration look like? While presiding over the U.S. Senate as VP she has cast the most tie-breaking votes (33) in history. These votes are not just politically polarizing but show how damaging a Kamala Harris White House would be. See for https://t.co/GopXYtgrtn” / X
RFK Jr. won’t be able to remove himself from ballot in Michigan and Wisconsin (msn.com)
Fall of the Cabal | Parts 1 – 10 Full Documentary| HD (rumble.com
The Fall of the Cabal: Season II FULL DOCUMENTARY (rumble.com)
“Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote.” — Marvin Simkin
Democracy (noun) [dəˈmäkrəsē] · democracies (plural noun)
- A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives: “capitalism and democracy are ascendant in the third world” Similar: self-governmentautonomyrepubliccommonwealth representative governmentelective governmentconstitutional governmentpopular governmentgovernment by the people
- Opposite: tyranny dictatorship
- a state governed by a democracy:”a multiparty democracy”
- control of an organization or group by the majority of its members:”the intended extension of industrial democracy”
- the practice or principles of social equality: “demands for greater democracy” Similar: independenceself-governmentself-determinationself rulehome rulesovereigntyautonomyautarkyself-sufficiencyindividualismseparation
- nonalignment emancipationenfranchisementmanumission self-legislation Opposite:dependence
Is the United States a democracy or a republic?
The average democracy last 200 years – Search (bing.com)
Did Benjamin Franklin really say, He suggested that democracies go through a predictable cycle of stages, ultimately leading to their decline
“We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years.”?
The source of this quotation is a journal kept by James McHenry (1753-1816) while he was a Maryland delegate to the Constitutional Convention. On the page where McHenry records the events of the last day of the convention, September 18, 1787, he wrote: “A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy – A republic replied the Doctor if you can keep it.”
Then McHenry added: “The Lady here alluded to was Mrs. Powel of Philada.” The journal is at the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress. The United States is both a democracy and a republic. Democracies and republics are both forms of government in which supreme power resides in the citizens.
The word republic refers specifically to a government in which those citizens elect representatives who govern according to the law. The word democracy can refer to this same kind of representational government, or it can refer instead to what is also called a direct democracy, in which the citizens themselves participate in the act of governing directly.
Moreover, this “quote” doesn’t pass the smell test. The language doesn’t sound like it’s from the 18th century to me. That’s hard to explain, but it’s just an instinct. In particular, I don’t think Franklin would have used the words “We need a revolution.” ranklin died in April 1790. The basic idea of a “right of revolution,” which this quote sort of draws on, was common by then. It’s the idea that free people have a right to abolish an unjust government.
The U.S. Declaration of Independence uses this language: “when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.”
Likewise, in 1787, Jefferson wrote, “what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signifies a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants.
The idea that democracies last around 200 years is often attributed to the “Tytler Cycle,” named after the Scottish historian Alexander Fraser Tytler. 200 years ago, everyone lacked democratic rights. Now, billions of people have them – Our World in Data