Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

Chronicles of a stable genius - all the biggliest stuff

Interesting that Fact and Evidence feature so highly in a discussion against someone else's feelings, intuition and disbelief when the basis of the argument is one of faith in the first place.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with an opinion that is not supported by fact and evidence if it is a genuine belief formed by observation and thought.

Big Picture or Small Picture is irrelevant if you require facts and evidence to either support or oppose but then also call on your own personal faith and beliefs as of equal merit. There is no Babel Fish here.

Trump calling it an act of God is like Abraham Lincoln calling a sheep's tail a leg (lucky I paved the way for that reference in another thread).

Bottom line is, the idea that a person who supports an idea, belief or person has to agree with every aspect and facet of that idea, belief or person is one of the most blinkered and damaging thought processes there is. There is a lot more credibility in the opinions of any person, for example, supporting and believing in the positive impact of Trump whilst also saying 'that comment about being an act of god is obviously a load of sh!t'.

I don't care either way - I have an unshakeable belief that Trump is both a lunatic and a liar - yet I have never met the man. He is the only other person with you in the lift and he is saying that you were the one who farted when you both know that you both know it was him. Cunning enough to know that there are no repercussions for lying in his world. He is not alone in that particular principle either.
 
johnsmith said:
I gave an AI-generated summary of assertions in this thread - see post No.#142 - Tuesday at 2:30 PM. To make it easy for you, here is the link and then just scroll to post #142.

https://greenandgoldfc.com/threads/chronicles-of-a-stable-genius-all-the-biggliest-stuff.49/page-8

Note that those are assertions.

e.g. to say that the voter rolls in so many states are crammed with inaccurate entries. That is an ASSERTION. To prove that assertion, we have to see what evidence has been gathered to prove that.

All the points in my thread No.#142. Each point needs to be tested by evidence to see if it is fact.

But one thing that is NOT an assertion is the legal definition of "lack of standing". That comes down to a legal dictionary definition. It's like a dentist telling you the definitions of molar, canine, incisor teeth - and you laugh it off as nonsense.

If a person has zero idea of what "lack of standing" means, in terms of basic legal definitions, they cannot discuss this issue of voter fraud.

Show me any person who spouts whether the voter fraud was true or not -- and if they cannot tell you precisely the definition of "lack of standing" -- they're a moron that's remote-controlled by corporate media, who merely parrots what they read in the newspaper/nightly news.

As I said in my post #164 in this thread, I've made it easy for you. Just enter the following question into several AI websites, such as perplexity.ai, chatgpt.com - and see the definition of "lack of standing". Go ahead, don't fear gaining knowledge:

If you suddenly see a burglar breaking into your neighbour's house - and you use your phone to video the whole thing - from the burglar breaking the window, and later carrying off your neighbour's valuables. And, what's more, you instantly recognise the burglar by name. And you have all that on video. i.e. you do have evidence. Now, you file a court action against the burglar. And the court throws out your case due to you having "lack of standing" - please explain what "lack of standing" means - and does a plaintiff having lack of standing automatically mean that the plaintiff's evidence was either non-existent or weak evidence? Please provide your answer in very simple language that even simple people can understand.​
Click to expand...

Wow, go and take your meds, you're babbling. Or if you have taken them, then either you have taken too many or the dosage is wrong.
 
Monoethnic Social Club said:
??? So you dont agree that Elon Musk spent millions to make billions from this election????
Click to expand...

Musk's business model is grifting from multiple governments. He's been making millions from the US government for some time. In return he provides Starlink to continue the Ukraine war effort.

Has no significant bearing on election outcome.
 
As you grow older, you'll discover that very few of the people you hang with for fun - are actually fair-minded people.

e.g. the accusation of Trump being a racist - many years ago I gave these videos to a friend who called Trump a racist, and he refused to see these videos.







The above videos are several years ago, but recently even Snopes admitted it was a total lie that Trump supported the white supremacists at Charlottesville. In the above videos, you can see Trump's compete statement on white supremacists in Charlottesville, not just the snippet isolated by Mainstream Media to slander Trump as a racist.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

But if you had been people who stand for fairness and justice, you would have reached that conclusion all by yourself, by listening to the entire Trump statement on Charlottesville, rather than being a gump who follows and swallows everything you hear in the Media.

Most people act like "most people" - and if you think the whole world is going crazy, it's because at base level, most people are behaving like you.
 
Last edited:
T_S_F said:
No we don't. I don't need the big philosophical reason. Just give me the motivation for this act - and he didn't just 'allow the death', he really took it to the next level with the execution of this act.

Apologies for using the 'he' pronoun for God. I obviously don't know what God's pronouns are.
Click to expand...

Still waitiing my man - any chance I could get an answer. I'd genuinely like to know to get some clarity
 
T_S_F said:
Still waitiing my man - any chance I could get an answer. I'd genuinely like to know to get some clarity
Click to expand...

But I've found that if one just gives a short answer - and even a small essay on this forum would be just a short answer -- it merely suffices to trigger people, but does not answer their deepest inquiry.

For the Christian gospel - just like politics, health, vaccines and everything else - for any given topic, you have opinions from multiple directions. For instance, any comment I make about the gospel, our fellow pundit 'Monoethnic Social Club' attacks me from his framework of Greek orthodox.

And so, to establish the truth about the gospel, one has to go to the most definitive and detailed exposition in Paul's book of Romans - and then correlate that with what Jesus said, and what the other apostles said. And then show how that correlates with the Old Testament and New Testament being read in their interconnection, as defined in the gospels and epistles. (That is also how to refute MSC's Orthodox). That's not going to fit into a short reply on social media.

In contrast, I have given 3 hour presentations to many skeptics -- and once they see a glimpse of the full picture, while they might not immediately give their life to Christ, nevertheless, all the usual mocking evaporates, because they see the rationale, reasoning and evidence that undergirds the message of Jesus Christ.

As I said, I am capable of writing a few-sentence summary - but that's brevity will not be sufficient to defend and refute against antagonists like the said MSC. Indeed, on the former forum, I did provide such a summary. And hence my reticence to re-submit a similar response comes from many years of seeing mockers make fun of non-comprehensive replies. Trouble is, the same mockers won't bother with more substantial detail. The mockers just want something to mock at.

Turning back to Trump, he's learned his lesson from his 1st term.

The Media mocks him for having such a high turnaround of staff. But let's bookmark this post, to predict that won't be the case, to such a degree, in his 2nd term. If you see Joe Rogan's 3 hour interview with Trump, you'll see Trump's explanation.
 
image.webp

The above graph comes from this article:
truthovernews.org

2020 Election Fraud Exposed?

The 2024 Election is casting some unexpected light on Democrats use of mail-in ballots in 2020
truthovernews.org truthovernews.org

For those curious, here's a summary of how the U.S. 2020 Election was stolen. Emphasise that this is not EVIDENCE, but rather a summary of points. There is evidence for each point. Stick around for the next 4 years. It's going to come out.

So many people could not bring themselves to support Trump because "he tried to steal an election". But if it will be established that the Democrats stole 2020, then Trump was a hero-patriot standing against the Democrat Media-Political machine who did steal the election. The J6 prisoners would be the ultimate patriots.

SUMMARY:

1) Tens of thousands of illegal illegitimate names on the Voter Rolls, e.g. deceased people, fake names, people not resident in the state etc.

2) Creating fake ballots for each of these illegal names

3) Governors and Secretaries of States in the battleground states, months before the 2020 election, illegally changing the voting regulations to allow things that facilitate cheating, e.g. ballot harvesting. The fact is, the U.S. Constitution gives the State legislatures the power to create voting laws - hence, many of the Court cases were arguing that these last-minute regulations by the Governors were un-constitutional.

4) Using the greater flexibility of the illegal voting laws, before Election Day, using "mules" to carry in hundreds of fake ballots into Dropboxes.

5) On election day, bringing in truckloads of fake ballots. These were caught on CCTV video.

6) On election day, Democrat poll counters physically barring Republican poll watchers from being close enough to observe the counting.

7) On election day, running fake ballots multiple times through the scanning machines. This was caught on video, particularly in Georgia.

8) Poll counters testifying to ballots made from a different type of paper-stock.

9) Poll counters testifying to hundreds of ballots having the same signature, i.e. these were created using printers, rather than hand-marked by voters.

10) The evidence of same-signatures came from computer-image analysis.

11) The evidence of fake ballots printed on non-authorised paper stock came from the Arizona audit which used microscopic analysis to compare the paper stock of the fake ballots with authorised ballots.

12) None of the courts were willing to review evidence, which requires calling in the witnesses for cross-examination. None of the courts wanted to be seen as overturning a Federal Election, so they refused to subject the evidence to cross-examination. e.g. the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case on the basis of "lack of standing". Laypeople think this means the case was weak, but it is actually a technicality where the Court thinks the person, bringing the case, is not a party aggrieved by the crime.

13) Evidence of the Dominion voting machines.

14) Evidence of mathematical impossibility

15) The never-before occurrence of the handful of battleground states shutting down their counting all around 2 a.m. and then, after the counting started again, the tally had shifted from Trump to Biden. The timing of this coincided with Democrat vote counters - who, on false pretext, sent everyone home because of a pipe leak. And then, when no one else was around, were caught on video running batches of fake ballots several times through the counting machines. The timing of this coincided with massive mathematically-impossible jumps in the Democrat voting tallies.

16) There were several "mistakes" in the counting, but ALL of them went in favour of the Democrats. The suspicious thing is, if these mistakes were random, how come ALL of them went in favour of the Democrats?

17) The evidence of the vote machines being connected to the internet, when this is forbidden.


What was different in 2024? The Republicans largely were aware of the Democrats' playbook. Before the election, there were numerous court cases where the Republicans fought to stop many of the above mechanisms of cheating. And in 2024, there was no Covid to act as an excuse of distancing poll watchers so far away that they could not see what was going on.
 
johnsmith said:
. If you see Joe Rogan's 3 hour interview with Trump, you'll see Trump's explanation.
Click to expand...

Ok, so I need to listen to a 3-hour podcast of Joe Rogan to get an explanation for why god saved the adulterer serial bankruptee and decided instead to blow the head off the man who dedicated himself to his community and spray it all over his family. Got it.

Do you just play Joe Rogan podcasts to the flock now?
 
T_S_F said:
Ok, so I need to listen to a 3-hour podcast of Joe Rogan to get an explanation for why god saved the adulterer serial bankruptee and decided instead to blow the head off the man who dedicated himself to his community and spray it all over his family. Got it.

Do you just play Joe Rogan podcasts to the flock now?
Click to expand...


No. What I meant is, in the first few minutes of Rogan's interview, Trump explains how the first task of a new President is to select people for several hundreds positions. Trump is probably the first President who was neither a politician or a military general. Moreover, Trump never was part of the Washington D.C. establishment, so Trump didn't know the people in the system. He had to rely on people, who were part of the establishment, to recommend people.

e.g. Chris Christie recommended Christopher Wray to Donald Trump for the position of FBI director, which turned out to be a disaster - and Chris Christie himself later down the track proved unreliable.

Hence it's totally different 2nd time around. Trump is not relying on Washington insiders to make recommendations. You see the poll results for Washington D.C. - about 92.5% of the D.C. population voted for Democrats. He's relying on outsiders like Elon Musk to make major decisions. For example, today's news of Trump having a first telephone conversation as president-elect with Ukraine's Zelensky, he had Elon Musk in on the conversation.

You've heard Trump say he's going to set Robert F. Kennedy Jr onto the corrupt Pharmaceutical industry. RFKJr has spent decades as a litigation lawyer fighting corruption in government and particularly the Pharmaceutical industry - for example, FDA officials going straight into jobs in the Pharma companies - and thus having a conflict of interest to approve new drugs. Maybe that explains why (to quote), "nearly 1 In 3 Recent FDA Drug Approvals Followed by Major Safety Actions".

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...g-approvals-followed-by-major-safety-actions/

And we live in a brain-washed society where, in spite of this 1 in 3 problem, when the news tells the people that a new drug is "safe and effective", doctors have lost their licences if they challenge that with data and evidence. And the average person unthinkingly follows everything the nightly news tells them about the drugs.
 
The following is how the Media fools you. For example, this article throws an insult:

"One does wonder why the Democrats forgot to rig this year’s [2024] election. They had a lot on, maybe?"​

Loading…

www.news.com.au

No, it's because after 4 years of experience, the Republicans came to a good understanding of the cheating methods used by the Left. Before the 2024 election, I saw numerous reports of court cases where the Republicans resisted the efforts of the Left to replicate their cheating methods. e.g. in 2020, after midnight, ALL the BATTLEGROUND States stopped the counting in the middle of the night. And it is during that night time pause that they shipping in truck loads of fake ballots.

This time in 2024, the Republican lawyers forced the Left from stopping the counting, forcing them to keep going:

www.thegatewaypundit.com

RNC Forces Centre County, PA to Keep Counting Ballots All Night After Officials Planned to Stop | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft

The Republican National Committee (RNC) forced officials in Centre County, Pennsylvania, to continue counting ballots throughout the night, countering a plan by local election officials to halt the count, a move some feared could mirror the late-night disruptions seen during the controversial...
www.thegatewaypundit.com www.thegatewaypundit.com

But this is just an example of how the average Aussie reader of news shows zero discernment. The bulk of people, when the read the first-mentioned article, will follow along with the sentiment of the article, saying that the Republican win of 2024 proves there was no cheating in 2020.

Most people are like "most people" - they think they're different from most people.
 
this is entertaining... a lot of Aussie mainstream media cites Rachel Maddow as a reliable trusted source

I suspect Muz is a fan too, but we'll get to late night comedians later

 
Lupi said:
this is entertaining... a lot of Aussie mainstream media cites Rachel Maddow as a reliable trusted source

I suspect Muz is a fan too, but we'll get to late night comedians later

Click to expand...


Conservatives would put more reliance on poll data from Rasmussen - (quote) "Only two polls called the popular vote nearly exactly: Rasmussen Reports and the Wall Street Journal."

www.washingtonexaminer.com

2024 polling champ: Rasmussen Reports - Washington Examiner

“This is my first presidential cycle. So I guess an untrained, non-statistics person can come in and school all these clowns,” he told Secrets.
www.washingtonexaminer.com www.washingtonexaminer.com
 
Democrats got what they deserved. They stood for everything and stood for nothing. They communicated their achievements poorly despite the economy being extremely good. Trump played on fears with the mega-rich elite in his pocket and by his side.

Now there is an Epstein fan in the WH.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tsf
TheSelectFew said:
Democrats got what they deserved. They stood for everything and stood for nothing. They communicated their achievements poorly despite the economy being extremely good. Trump played on fears with the mega-rich elite in his pocket and by his side.

Now there is an Epstein fan in the WH.
Click to expand...

Are you the type of person that would adjust your viewpoint based on incoming evidence?

Trump's ally, Kash Patel, said Trump is going to de-classify the Epstein list, the Puff Diddy list, and the remaining John F. Kennedy assassination files that were previously left classified.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Kash Patel Announces Massive Declassification Will Occur Under Trump's Administration from Epstein Files to 'Diddy List' and More | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft

In a recent interview, former Trump administration official Kash Patel announced that under President Donald Trump’s second administration, Americans should brace for unprecedented government transparency.
www.thegatewaypundit.com www.thegatewaypundit.com


What you're incorrectly suggesting is that, if only the Democrats communicated better, they'd have done better. You don't seem to see that most conservatives are already fully aware of the Democrats' agenda.

Hence, when Harris refused to enunciate her agenda, it's not that conservatives were left without information on her. Her decades-long track record is a matter of public record. Because conservatives already knew her agenda, her skirting the questions was just political entertainment.
 
johnsmith said:
Are you the type of person that would adjust your viewpoint based on incoming evidence?

Trump's ally, Kash Patel, said Trump is going to de-classify the Epstein list, the Puff Diddy list, and the remaining John F. Kennedy assassination files that were previously left classified.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Kash Patel Announces Massive Declassification Will Occur Under Trump's Administration from Epstein Files to 'Diddy List' and More | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft

In a recent interview, former Trump administration official Kash Patel announced that under President Donald Trump’s second administration, Americans should brace for unprecedented government transparency.
www.thegatewaypundit.com www.thegatewaypundit.com


What you're incorrectly suggesting is that, if only the Democrats communicated better, they'd have done better. You don't seem to see that most conservatives are already fully aware of the Democrats' agenda.

Hence, when Harris refused to enunciate her agenda, it's not that conservatives were left without information on her. Her decades-long track record is a matter of public record. Because conservatives already knew her agenda, her skirting the questions was just political entertainment.
Click to expand...
Hey cheers for your 100th post on this, I've decided to change who I vote for in the country I don't live in
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top