That inconvenient US State Dept memo on mass correspondence voting — in Ukraine

F/N: Notice, no one has a sound innocent explanation for alterations to US election practices given the context of Ukraine 2004. That is a sobering warning, one that implicates the movements, institutions and influences involved. KF kairosfocus

NB: AmHD, "as·pect (?s?p?kt) n.1.a. A way in which something can be viewed by the mind: looked at all aspects of the situation. b. A characteristic or feature of something: a novel with many unusual aspects." kairosfocus

PPS, once we recognise just how rare truly competent breakthrough political, military/naval and civil leaders of high character and great prudence are, then it naturally leads to a certain prudent conservativism. The sort brought out by the product of those rare moments of genuine advance:

When . . . it becomes necessary for one people . . . to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God [--> natural law context is explicit] entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind [--> they were consciously universal in their appeal] requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, [cf Rom 1:18 - 21, 2:14 - 15; note, law as "the highest reason," per Cicero on received consensus], that all men are created equal [--> note, equality of humanity], that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights [--> thus there are correlative duties and freedoms framed by the balance], that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But 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, and to provide new Guards for their future security . . . . We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions [Cf. Judges 11:27], do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Which, BTW is my personal political credo. kairosfocus

By the way, on a more positive note, I appreciate Pyrrhomaniac1 very refreshing commentary from what I’m used to seeing AaronS1978

AF You are strong with the lib side of the force. AaronS1978

PM1: It is clear that no one can counter the primary observation in the OP that we see very dangerous election patterns. That such patterns are being pushed, then backed by move along, nothing to see here and now reichstag fire incident tactics further flashes warning signs. Turning to Plato [and to Luke in Ac 27 who cites a microcosm real world case of money corruption of decision making], we can always, always, always assess various aspects of his case. It is not all or nothing, I add overnight, we go further, an inductive, key case study texts approach allows us to interact with and balance our overall themes or systematic view, an issue that has revolutionised Bible Study and Theology including hermeneutics, study of interpretation. For instance if and when we detect a sense of despair that even among students of phil most will fail the true test, that should/will constrain and temper much onward . . . and it does with this text. That is obvious to the point that it is sad to have to state it for record, as is the Peloponnesian war context and at other times and places I have discussed Alcibiades and co as part of that. We have mutiny in the ship of state with incompetent, factional looter state emerging, heading for shipwreck. For Athens, the Sicilian expedition and the onward path to final defeat speak for themselves. The problem of the manipulated body politic speaks for itself. The general incompetence of pols, profs, generals and civil servants also speaks. Especially in an increasingly lawless polarised community. Defeat loomed and then ruled the roost. These dynamics, historically, have played out over and over again. As to philosopher kings, the passage is actually on why they are exceedingly rare and in the parable there is a subtle but once noticed undeniable scent of despair. Most of the students of philosophy will fail too. So, the underlying message is, in part, government in a corrupt culture will fail, the generals will fail and the money interests who do the bribing will be caught up in the sinking ship too. There are far too many, too close historical examples to list. Of philosopher king candidates I can only think of Marcus Aurelius as a possible serious case in our civilisation. Alfred the Great was not an original thinker. In India, I think Ashok may be an even better candidate. Coming back, pure democracy was so discredited by the failure of Athens that it was what2300 years before we saw the Glorious Revolution and its step child the American Revolution, and these hedged about democratic elements. Constitutional monarchies and Republics with a measure of democratic character work more or less once buttressed from the culture. But once the BATNA of lawlfulness is eroded, things slide into the normal condition of government. Lawless oligarchy. Coming further back, it is a responsible and healthy state for the community to be aware of history and the dangers highlighted by Plato and for that matter, Luke. Politicians need to be held to tests of character, capability, soundness, prudence, lawfulness and more. Which, today, they will on the whole fail. Returning to focus, it is very clear that after warning, the US has destabilised the credibility of its electoral system through putting in place substantially equivalent mechanisms to Ukraine c 2004. If sober reform does not happen very soon, we will only be left to crisis, with sobering geostrategic consequences. KF PS, as for civil servants and the like, I have two phrases, regulatory capture and ideological blinkers. kairosfocus

Appreciate that analysis, PM. Makes me feel better about civil servants Alan Fox

@37

Beats me how judicial and administrative posts are political appointments in the US.

Briefly put, it's because the US was founded early on in the history of the modern bureaucratic state. In UK and Europe, centralized monarchy deprived regional lords of their power. This eventually got transformed into a powerful centralized administrative apparatus, which became progressively democratized in the 20th century, leading to the modern welfare state. In the US, the wealthy landowners and merchants took advantage of the distance from the UK to declare political independence. But since they didn't want to replicate in the US the same problem they had just escaped, they deliberately created a very weak state. The idea of "checks and balances" was that each branch of the government would so jealously guard its own power that the government would be permanently divided against itself. But then the economic incentives of the first, second, and now third Industrial Revolution necessitated a drastic expansion of the administrative state, far beyond what the Constitution allows for, and so the result is a chimera that grafts a 18th century political structure onto a 21st century bureaucracy. PyrrhoManiac1

Beats me how judicial and administrative posts are political appointments in the US. Alan Fox

Random forensic audits of elections by a trusted and independent body is not a bad idea.

A trusted and independent body? That would indeed be a good idea. That used to be said of the Supreme Court, but not now. Alan Fox

That’s kinda what’s been going on the past 2 years

Not hearing much in the way of evidence. Is Sidney Powell still defending her claims? The pillow guy? Alan Fox

2020 election was corrupted by widespread voter fraud then they should bring the evidence before the courts or provide it to law That’s kinda what’s been going on the past 2 years AaronS1978

William J Murray/20

If a major contingent of the US public believes – for whatever reason – that an election was not fair and call for forensic, investigatory audits to resolve the matter, any resistance to such audits should, IMO, be taken as a de facto admission of cheating

People hold all manner of beliefs. If some believe the 2020 election was corrupted by widespread voter fraud then they should bring the evidence before the courts or provide it to law enforcement Without such evidence there is no need for an investigation as they have not shown there is anything to investigate. Pandering to fantasists only encourages them.

Forensic audits of elections should be common, even routine, in order to assure the public of the validity of the election.

Random forensic audits of elections by a trusted and independent body is not a bad idea. Seversky

“KF reinforces my point.“ You have also done a pretty go job at reinforcing mine AaronS1978

@30

Mutiny and voyage of folly on the ship of state are serious things. That needs to be faced squarely, whatever one may think of philosopher kings.

I must say, I quite strongly disagree: Plato's metaphor is not separable from his critique of democracy. Plato envisions the polis as a unified, organic whole -- this is why the analogy between the polis and psyche works at all in the first place, and that's what structures the whole dialogue. The 'ship of state' is another way of impressing upon us the idea that the polis is a unified thing that has a unifying purpose (as ships do). The main problem that Plato sees with democracy is that the people are hugely vulnerable to charismatic demagogues (like Alcibiades): people who will lie to them, flatter them, tell them what they want to hear and not what is true or justified, indulge their fantasies of conquest and rule, stoke their hopes and fears, and use their adulation of him to enrich himself and the cronies that attach themselves to him. This is very much how Thucydides depicts people like Alcibiades and Creon. With that context in mind, Plato's project is this: how to describe what a society must be like if it is to be ensured against the kinds of charismatic demagogues whose war-mongering led Athens into humiliating defeat. It's a further question whether Plato's project succeeds. I myself think that Plato's project is a complete and utter failure and that Plato was too smart not to notice this, and that's why he restarts the entire project of political philosophy when he writes Laws. But that's a whole separate topic! PyrrhoManiac1

F/N: Plato's critique of democracies has sobering points, which is why the project to create modern constitutional government was so hard. Here is what I am specifically pointing out:

It is not too hard to figure out that our civilisation is in deep trouble and is most likely headed for shipwreck. (And of course, that sort of concern is dismissed as “apocalyptic,” or neurotic pessimism that refuses to pause and smell the roses.) Plato’s Socrates spoke to this sort of situation, long since, in the ship of state parable in The Republic, Bk VI:

>>[Soc.] I perceive, I said, that you are vastly amused at having plunged me into such a hopeless discussion; but now hear the parable, and then you will be still more amused at the meagreness of my imagination: for the manner in which the best men are treated in their own States is so grievous that no single thing on earth is comparable to it; and therefore, if I am to plead their cause, I must have recourse to fiction, and put together a figure made up of many things, like the fabulous unions of goats and stags which are found in pictures. Imagine then a fleet or a ship in which there is a captain [–> often interpreted, ship’s owner] who is taller and stronger than any of the crew, but he is a little deaf and has a similar infirmity in sight, and his knowledge of navigation is not much better. [= The people own the community and in the mass are overwhelmingly strong, but are ill equipped on the whole to guide, guard and lead it] The sailors are quarrelling with one another about the steering – every one is of opinion that he has a right to steer [= selfish ambition to rule and dominate], though he has never learned the art of navigation and cannot tell who taught him or when he learned, and will further assert that it cannot be taught, and they are ready to cut in pieces any one who says the contrary. They throng about the captain, begging and praying him to commit the helm to them [–> kubernetes, steersman, from which both cybernetics and government come in English]; and if at any time they do not prevail, but others are preferred to them, they kill the others or throw them overboard [ = ruthless contest for domination of the community], and having first chained up the noble captain’s senses with drink or some narcotic drug [ = manipulation and befuddlement, cf. the parable of the cave], they mutiny and take possession of the ship and make free with the stores; thus, eating and drinking, they proceed on their voyage in such a manner as might be expected of them [–> Cf here Luke’s subtle case study in Ac 27]. Him who is their partisan and cleverly aids them in their plot for getting the ship out of the captain’s hands into their own whether by force or persuasion [–> Nihilistic will to power on the premise of might and manipulation making ‘right’ ‘truth’ ‘justice’ ‘rights’ etc], they compliment with the name of sailor, pilot, able seaman, and abuse the other sort of man, whom they call a good-for-nothing; but that the true pilot must pay attention to the year and seasons and sky and stars and winds, and whatever else belongs to his art, if he intends to be really qualified for the command of a ship, and that he must and will be the steerer, whether other people like or not-the possibility of this union of authority with the steerer’s art has never seriously entered into their thoughts or been made part of their calling. Now in vessels which are in a state of mutiny and by sailors who are mutineers, how will the true pilot be regarded? Will he not be called by them a prater, a star-gazer, a good-for-nothing? [Ad.] Of course, said Adeimantus. [Soc.] Then you will hardly need, I said, to hear the interpretation of the figure, which describes the true philosopher in his relation to the State [ --> here we see Plato's philosopher-king emerging]; for you understand already. [Ad.] Certainly. [Soc.] Then suppose you now take this parable to the gentleman who is surprised at finding that philosophers have no honour in their cities; explain it to him and try to convince him that their having honour would be far more extraordinary. [Ad.] I will. [Soc.] Say to him, that, in deeming the best votaries of philosophy to be useless to the rest of the world, he is right; but also tell him to attribute their uselessness to the fault of those who will not use them, and not to themselves. The pilot should not humbly beg the sailors to be commanded by him –that is not the order of nature; neither are ‘the wise to go to the doors of the rich’ –the ingenious author of this saying told a lie –but the truth is, that, when a man is ill, whether he be rich or poor, to the physician he must go, and he who wants to be governed, to him who is able to govern. [--> the issue of competence and character as qualifications to rule] The ruler who is good for anything ought not to beg his subjects to be ruled by him [ --> down this road lies the modern solution: a sound, well informed people will seek sound leaders, who will not need to manipulate or bribe or worse, and such a ruler will in turn be checked by the soundness of the people, cf. US DoI, 1776]; although the present governors of mankind are of a different stamp; they may be justly compared to the mutinous sailors, and the true helmsmen to those who are called by them good-for-nothings and star-gazers. [Ad.] Precisely so, he said. [Soc] For these reasons, and among men like these, philosophy, the noblest pursuit of all, is not likely to be much esteemed by those of the opposite faction [--> the sophists, the Demagogues, Alcibiades and co, etc]; not that the greatest and most lasting injury is done to her by her opponents, but by her own professing followers, the same of whom you suppose the accuser to say, that the greater number of them are arrant rogues, and the best are useless; in which opinion I agreed [--> even among the students of the sound state (here, political philosophy and likely history etc.), many are of unsound motivation and intent, so mere education is not enough, character transformation is critical]. [Ad.] Yes. [Soc.] And the reason why the good are useless has now been explained? [Ad.] True. [Soc.] Then shall we proceed to show that the corruption of the majority is also unavoidable [--> implies a need for a corruption-restraining minority providing proverbial salt and light, cf. Ac 27, as well as justifying a governing structure turning on separation of powers, checks and balances], and that this is not to be laid to the charge of philosophy any more than the other? [Ad.] By all means. [Soc.] And let us ask and answer in turn, first going back to the description of the gentle and noble nature.[ -- > note the character issue] Truth, as you will remember, was his leader, whom he followed always and in all things [ --> The spirit of truth as a marker]; failing in this, he was an impostor, and had no part or lot in true philosophy [--> the spirit of truth is a marker, for good or ill] . . . >>

(There is more than an echo of this in Acts 27, a real world case study. [Luke, a physician, was an educated Greek with a taste for subtle references.] This blog post, on soundness in policy, will also help)

Mutiny and voyage of folly on the ship of state are serious things. That needs to be faced squarely, whatever one may think of philosopher kings. kairosfocus

PM1, they played games with audits. A forensic audit by people qualified to investigate in ways that produce evidence that is court-worthy is a whole 'nother animal than in effect a half baked recount that implicitly assumes no material wrongdoing happened. KF kairosfocus

@20

If a major contingent of the US public believes – for whatever reason – that an election was not fair and call for forensic, investigatory audits to resolve the matter, any resistance to such audits should, IMO, be taken as a de facto admission of cheating.

I think this "for whatever reason" needs to be a bit more nuanced. Suppose that a sizeable contingent of the electorate believes that the election was unfair because they have been lied to. Suppose, further, that attempts to debunk the lie are ignored. (This is quite easy to do, given how polarized we are with regard to the sources of information we consume.) Under those conditions, would you still content that a refusal to conduct an audit is an implicit admission of guilt? @27

This is the precise problem highlighted by Plato in his ship of state parable.

Plato's main point in that parable is that democracy is a terrible form of government (indeed, the second-to-worst): the ignorant, uneducated masses lack knowledge of the Good, insist on their own opinions, are unable to cooperate because they cannot agree on what is good, and refuse to acknowledge the presence of knowledge of the Good in their midst (the navigator, who represents the properly educated philosopher-king). But unless you are endorsing Plato's criticism of democracy, I'm not sure why Plato is relevant to the discussion of what can go amiss in modern elections. PyrrhoManiac1

AF, instead, you reinforce my point by your willful blindness in the face of concrete historical case which BTW is also key background to the current flare up in Ukraine. This is the precise problem highlighted by Plato in his ship of state parable. Which of course you and others have refused to take to heart. There is no responsible doubt that powerful factions in the US willfully put in place changes to elections they could not not have known are conducive to fraud, and what is more now the pandemic excuse is fading they are trying to make them permanent. It is time to draw due, harsh conclusions in defence of civilisation. That includes recognising that those who refuse to recognise danger are making themselves part of the danger. KF kairosfocus

DUPLICATE Alan Fox

And, it is a clear, documented case that highlights that something went very wrong in 2020.

KF reinforces my point. Alan Fox

AS78, there has always been fraud, but the issue is breakdown of the integrity of the system. If the US could survive 1876, it can survive this, but they/you need to fix the flaws. Ukraine 2004 is no model for any sane political system. And, it is a clear, documented case that highlights that something went very wrong in 2020. Which, was debated live here at UD; indeed, the two main diagrams put up for record were created at that time. The Russian General Staff's view on colour revolutions as in effect 4th gen war operations also should be pondered. KF kairosfocus

WJM, I agree. KF kairosfocus

AF, fail, I have lived long enough to observe the ebb and flow of elections under responsible and irresponsible management in several jurisdictions. I have seen spoiler candidates trigger a split vote loss, I have seen elections won on hope and lost on dissatisfaction, I have even seen loss of a winnable election by party split just before the vote leading to suppression of supporter turnout. All of these were legitimate outcomes as is the ongoing drama in the UK that saw resignation of a PM, royal reception of a new one two days before HM died (I suspect she had a booster blood transfusion, judging by a blue hand), then a fresh resignation and new prime minister six weeks or so later. That too is a legitimate process in the Westminster system. What is described for Ukraine 2004 is different, a mass use of lower integrity voting systems opened up material fraud and caused chaos. BTW, a material contributory cause to the Russian incursions since 2014. The US Congress was advised of same in testimony and went ahead with setting up the same low integrity systems. As for the notion that proper ID cards should be presented before voting is racist, that's rubbish, highly suspicious rubbish. In my region, it is standard to have id's, and there are even specific voter ID cards. The Afro-Caribbean belt, FYI. The patterns I see in the US point to willful intent to enable material fraud and to marginalise calls or evidence to reform what is wrong. The result is erosion of the credibility of the system, now compounded by obvious reichstag fire incident lawfare. The only thing that will really restore integrity and confidence is photo id cards backed, in person voting using paper ballots with close scrutineering and open hand counts also closely scrutineered. Voter registration should also be scrutineered. A truth and reconciliation commission might allow for resolving major wrongdoing, backed by court cases. And, more. KF kairosfocus

My side wins: an honest election. My side loses: it was stolen. Democracy (if it ever existed for the majority of citizens in the US) is doomed. Doomed, I tells ya! Alan Fox

If a major contingent of the US public believes - for whatever reason - that an election was not fair and call for forensic, investigatory audits to resolve the matter, any resistance to such audits should, IMO, be taken as a de facto admission of cheating. Forensic audits of elections should be common, even routine, in order to assure the public of the validity of the election. William J Murray

I don’t really think there’s ever been honest election at anytime of my life, and the people that think this previous election was honest are completely insane. It’s almost a matter of what presidential hopeful cheats better Nixon got caught but I guarantee you people have been cheating far before that Ross Perot was the whole reason George W. Bush Senior didn’t win the election and we got that bullshit President Clinton, I doubt this was just coincidence It is highly likely that G-DUBS, George W. Bush son won through dishonest electoral college shenanigans. Brobama conveniently ran against two crap quality presidential hopefuls which is was probably staged Similar to G-DUBs and Slobama Trump got in through electoral vote shenanigans and well, he was running up against an evil pile of crap And Joebama (literally the worst of the 5 mentioned) magically acquired an enormous number of votes that came out of nowhere that managed to help him win, and more people voted in this election and they were actual voters….. If you really believe that, this particular liberal win in 2020 was honest then: 1.) you are a liberal 2.) you are biased 3.) you’re insane 4.) you are drinking the koolaid We have progressively gotten worse and worse presidents since George W Senior, and I don’t think a single one of them got in honestly AaronS1978

Relatd, refusal to attend to relevant cases and lessons bought at horrible cost has a name. Folly. Here, compounded by the presentation of testimony to the US Congress, so they were duty bound to know and act better. KF kairosfocus

Sev, my general opinion of the reliability of the media if fully stated would likely get me sued and these days with out of control juries assessed for hundreds of millions or more, possibly swatted and subjected to kill zone ambush 5 am arrest. Rather than trying to derail into side discussions on what you think of Gateway Pundit or Alex Jones, there is a horrific, sobering reality on the table anchored on a telling historic case and testimony to Congress. Deal with it. KF PS, here is the underlying document on PA, https://www.scribd.com/document/602969873/PA-Officials-Sent-Out-240-000-Ballots-to-Unverified-Voters#from_embed kairosfocus

Seversky at 15, Alex Jones is a non-entity to me. As far as I'm concerned, he doesn't exist, along with a bunch of similar commentators. relatd

Relatd/12

Cut the crap, OK? Armed and masked vigilantes? Wow. If I was on the ‘other side,’ I’d hire armed and masked vigilantes to make my opponents look bad. This is the usual mud slinging before any election. The tactics change, that’s all.

So, did you agree with Alex Jones when he claimed the Sandy Hook shooting was faked? Seversky

Kairosfocus/13

F/N: Looks like troubles with correspondence voting are turning up currently:

Do you regard The Gateway Pundit as a reliable source? Seversky

F/N: Looks like troubles with correspondence voting are turning up currently: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/new-numbers-released-pennsylvania-indicate-massive-ballot-fraud-255000-unverified-voters-candidates-demand-decertification-immediately/ KF kairosfocus

Seversky at 11, Cut the crap, OK? Armed and masked vigilantes? Wow. If I was on the 'other side,' I'd hire armed and masked vigilantes to make my opponents look bad. This is the usual mud slinging before any election. The tactics change, that's all. relatd

Kairosfocus/4

F/N: In recent days, there has been commentary here that reflects the nothing to see move on line on US election integrity. I have now put up State Department testimony and record showing the dangers as known from sad experience in Ukraine in 2004. I hoped that those raising talking points would pause, consider, respond. In any case, this is headlined record for reference — and there is much more that can be brought to the table. The US electoral system has been willfully brought to a fraud-conducive state and those pointing out the dangers are being marginalised. Those are sobering warning signs. KF

The sobering warning sign is the continued promotion of the totally unsubstantiated allegation that the 2020 election was wrongly decided due to voter fraud. Proponents of this claim have had multiple opportunities to present evidence for it in court or to bring it to the attention of the authorities but have signally failed to do so. The continued irresponsible advocacy of "The Big Lie" underlay the failed insurrection attempt of Jan 6 and is almost certainly behind recent reports of voter intimidation by armed vigilantes:

ARMED AND MASKED VIGILANTES ARE STAKING OUT ARIZONA BALLOT BOXES WITH THE GOP’S BLESSING […] With exactly two weeks to go until the midterm elections, Democrats and Republicans are out here making their respective cases re: why voters should allow them to either hold on to their majority in Congress or retake power. One way the two parties have diverged on tactics? Well, the GOP appears to be the only one openly encouraging its base to stake out ballot boxes and intimidate would-be voters. With guns. On Monday, Paul Penzone, the sheriff for Arizona’s Maricopa County, said he had to increase security at ballot drop boxes following a number of incidents involving individuals “keeping watch on the boxes and taking video of voters,” according to the Associated Press. On Friday, Penzone’s deputies responded after two people carrying guns and wearing masks and bulletproof vests appeared at a drop box in the Phoenix suburb of Mesa. The following day, per HuffPost, four people, two of whom reportedly also had guns, “got into a confrontation at the same drop box” when another person showed up and attempted to take down their license plate information, which was obstructed. “Every day I’m dedicating a considerable amount of resources just to give people confidence that they can cast a vote safely, and that is absurd,” Penzone said during a news conference. He added that his office had referred two voting-related incidents to prosecutors for possible criminal charges. Last week two Maricopa County officials issued a joint statement saying: “We are deeply concerned about the safety of individuals who are exercising their constitutional right to vote and who are lawfully taking their early ballot to a drop box. Uninformed vigilantes outside Maricopa County’s drop boxes are not increasing election integrity. Instead, they are leading to voter-intimidation complaints.”

Such incidents are warning signs that this continued promotion of "The Big Lie" concerning electoral integrity now amounts to incitement of seditious and potentially armed insurrection against the lawful government of the United States. If we want to continue to enjoy the benefits of democracy, imperfect as it undoubtedly is, we must take a stand against those who would bring it down. Seversky

I think people understand what is happening in the Ukraine in direct relation to the distance. In the U.S., the Ukraine is just a place on a map with little, if any, significance, unless your family is Ukrainian. In Western Europe, again distance is a primary factor. In the UK, the Ukraine is a faraway place. In Western Europe, the same. Only in Eastern Europe, especially in Slavic countries like Poland, is there a great concern. In Belarus, or Bia?y Rus in Polish, or White Russia. How many people in the U.S. know that Poland shares a border with White Russia? They might as well be on two separate planets. Or the difference between Slovenia and Slovakia? Election fraud is old news. A U.S. military presence in the Ukraine goes back some years. relatd

Relatd, did you observe the date of the election and the testimony? 2004. At that time, there was a dubious election in Ukraine, with fraud conducive patterns and actions as outlined. An officer of the US State Dept testified as above, which is now archived as noted. This means the US Congress knew 16 years ahead of what was done in 2020 that such changes to an electoral system are conducive to fraud and discredit of the election system. There was no defence for what they did, indeed to proceed willfully as they did is tantamount to admission of willful intent to defraud the American electorate and to subvert lawful government. The media, likewise, were duty bound to know and report this in good time. They are an enabling party to the fraud and subversion, by way of a colour revolution, complete with red guards. Now it has gone further to a Reichstag fire incident with abusive lawfare. This is now a legitimacy crisis, beyond a mere constitutional crisis. KF PS, for what it's worth, Wikipedia confesses:

Presidential elections were held in Ukraine on 31 October, 21 November and 26 December 2004. The election was the fourth presidential election to take place in Ukraine following independence from the Soviet Union. The last stages of the election were contested between the opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko and incumbent Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych from the Party of Regions. It was later determined by the Ukrainian Supreme Court that the election was plagued by widespread falsification of the results in favour of Yanukovych.[1][2] According to Ukraine's electoral law, a two-round system is used to elect the president in which a candidate must win a majority (50% or more) of all ballots cast. The first round of voting was held on 31 October. As no candidate had 50% or more of the votes cast a run-off ballot between the two-highest polling candidates, Yushchenko and Yanukovych, was held on 21 November. According to official Central Election Commission results announced on 23 November, the run-off election was won by Yanukovych. The election results were challenged by Yushchenko and his supporters, with many international observers claiming that the election was rigged.[1][2] The subsequent events led to a political crisis in Ukraine, with widespread peaceful protesters, dubbed the "Orange Revolution", calling for a re-run second round election. The Ukrainian Supreme Court annulled the official run-off results and ordered a repeat of second round ballot.[1][2] The final re-run ballot was held on 26 December. Viktor Yushchenko was declared the winner with 52 percent of the vote to Yanukovych's 44 percent. Western observers reported that the re-run ballot was considered overall fairer than the previous ballots.[1][2] . . . . Following the November 21 run-off ballot, Ukraine's electoral commission declared Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych with 49.42% of the vote the winner with Viktor Yushchenko receiving 46.69% of the ballots cast.[5] Observers for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) said the run-off vote "did not meet international standards" and U.S. senior election observer, Senator Richard Lugar, called it a "concerted and forceful program of election day fraud" . . . . Between the two rounds of the election, dramatic increases in turnout were recorded in Yanukovych-supporting regions, while Yushchenko-supporting regions recorded the same turnout or lower than recorded in the first round. This effect was most marked in eastern Ukraine and especially in Yanukovych's stronghold of Donetsk Oblast, where a turnout of 98.5% was reportedly claimed—more than 40% up from the first round.[1][2] In some districts, turnout was recorded to be more than 100%, with one district reported by observers to have recorded a 127% turnout.[1][2] According to election observers and post-election investigations, pro-Yanukovych activists traveled around the country and voted many times as absentees.[1][2] Some groups dependent on government assistance, such as students, hospital patients and prisoners, were told to vote for the government candidate.[6] Many other alleged irregularities were reported, including ballot stuffing, intimidation at voting booths and huge numbers of new voters appearing on the electoral rolls—in Donetsk alone, half a million more voters were registered for the runoff election. Yanukovych won all but one of the regions where significant increases in turnout were noted. It was later determined by the Ukrainian Supreme Court that this was in fact due to widespread falsification of the results.[1][2] . . . . The United States government also decided not to recognize the election, and expressed dissatisfaction with the results; the outgoing US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, unequivocally stated that the result announced could not be accepted as legitimate by the United States. President George W. Bush and various members of Congress made statements disclosing their concern over the legitimacy of the polling . . . . he final results of the rerun ballot recorded Viktor Yushchenko receiving 52.00% of the votes, with Viktor Yanukovych on 44.19% which represented a change in the vote by +5.39% to Yushchenko and -5.27% from Yanukovych. Viktor Yanukovych conceded defeat on December 31, 2004, and subsequently resigned as Ukraine's Prime Minister the same day. Despite Yushchenko's victory in the second round of voting, the regional voting patterns remained largely unchanged between each round, with many southern and eastern provinces supporting Yanukovych, with the west and central regions favoring Yushchenko. Ukraine's supreme court rejected an appeal lodged by Viktor Yanukovych against the electoral commission's conduct of the election on January 6. On January 10 the Ukrainian Electoral Commission officially declared Viktor Yushchenko the winner and on January 11 published the final election results,[18] clearing the way for Yushchenko to be inaugurated as Ukraine's third President. The official ceremonies took place on Sunday, January 23 at about noon, when Yushchenko undertook the constitutional oath was sworn in as president . . .

kairosfocus

Seversky at 6, All I know for certain is that there are Russian troops in the Ukraine. I am seeing photo and video manipulation as well, and just plain lies. I have access to some sources outside of the Abnormal Media channels. No one, except those who need to know, and people in the Ukraine, know what's happening there. Take the Antonov 225. Is it still there? Was it damaged? Even the owners of this aircraft are not accepting still images or video as evidence. Don't worry Seversky. I don't need to know who you "really" are. I just read your posts which provide all the details anyone would need. relatd

@6:

if want to be skeptical to that extent, there is also zero credible evidence you are who you claim to be or that I or anyone else here is who they claim to be.

Given that we all post under pseudonyms, no one here can verify claims that anyone else makes about what they've said or done. Which is, of course, part of the fun of it all: without the ability to determine who we are in real life, all we can respond to are the specific arguments being made. But I certainly don't accept at face value any claims made here about what someone has said, done, or seen. PyrrhoManiac1

There is credible evidence Russian troops are on Ukrainian territory, not the other way round. Also, if want to be skeptical to that extent, there is also zero credible evidence you are who you claim to be or that I or anyone else here is who they claim to be. Seversky

This is all baloney. There is zero credible information about the Ukraine being published by The Media. I have no reason to believe any of it. Where I live in the United States, I am watching ads that are lies being aired. Manipulation? Nothing new. Nothing new. relatd

F/N: In recent days, there has been commentary here that reflects the nothing to see move on line on US election integrity. I have now put up State Department testimony and record showing the dangers as known from sad experience in Ukraine in 2004. I hoped that those raising talking points would pause, consider, respond. In any case, this is headlined record for reference -- and there is much more that can be brought to the table. The US electoral system has been willfully brought to a fraud-conducive state and those pointing out the dangers are being marginalised. Those are sobering warning signs. KF kairosfocus

The obvious theme colour for the US case? Look at antifa clothing, black of course. kairosfocus

The smoking gun on election fraud, from Congressional testimony, regarding Ukraine, in US State Dept archives, and with blatant direct reference to colour revolutions etc, including ongoing events in the US. kairosfocus

That inconvenient US State Dept memo on mass correspondence voting — in Ukraine kairosfocus