As I said previously, Trump won’t be there and he shouldn’t be. I’m not sure when he plans to have his counter programming with Tucker but I’m sure it will be more interesting than the GOP debate.

Contrary to all you are hearing, there are only two people on that stage that have any chance of beating Trump in the primary — RDS and Vivek. Everyone else is delusional and really just auditioning for a slot on CNN or MSNBC or maybe a VP nod.

Christie will continue to be a failed politician and failed person who will explode like a caught blowfish. He has nothing. Tim Scott is not a conservative. He recently jumped on the bogus bandwagon that Florida is saying that slavery was good and he also supported Murkowski who is just another Bush neocon globalist who will support any war.

Nikki Haley is more of the same and both her and Scott are way behind Trump in their home state of South Carolina. Don’t waste your breath and Trump will never make you VP. He learned last time.

So that leaves us to the only two people that can really benefit from the debate — RDS and Vivek. I think it’s a make or break situation for RDS. He needs to defend himself against all the bogus attacks that will come but also come across as a likeable person. His lack there of has been responsible for his drop in the polls. He just comes across as a robotic automaton. He can’t respond on the fly but needs talking points. If he can actually appear to be capable of thinking on his feet then he may resuscitate his campaign.

So that leaves Vivek. He is by far the most articulate and loquacious person on the stage. He has made a point of saying he wasn’t rehearsing because wants to be spontaneous. Listen if you prepare and practice extensively for the debate you can only come across as a robot. When you get challenged outside your talking points you fold like Rubio in 2016. You can’t read off prepared statements even when they don’t respond to the question. And that’s why I think Vivek will have a breakout moment and RDS will slowly fade away. Now don’t think that means that Vivek will win the primary. He won’t and he could never win the general and even if he did he could never deliver on his promises. He just doesn’t know how impossible his plans to destroy the swamp are. I know and he couldn’t do what he says he will do in two terms. It sounds great but he has no idea how the government actually works and how impossible it would be to get the left to remove rights from federal employees. They take too much money from their unions to ever let it happen.

Anyway, I didn’t know where this was going when I started and hopefully it made some sense.

As you know I enjoy Jeopardy, particularly when it’s the tournament of champions, and it has both men and women. No discrimination. So why would any competition involving knowledge and or intelligence not be open to both sexes?

First since some of you may have missed it, Trump has cancelled his Monday expose on the fraud in Georgia based on his advice from his attorneys. I can’t deny the wisdom of this because if I was his attorney I would recommend the same.

Now for the purpose of this rant. The World Chess Federation or some such thing has temporarily banned trans women from competing in female chess competitions until they can study the effects. I think this is ridiculous and can only be justified if you think women are inherently mentally inferior to men. I don’t.

There is no physical component to chess unless you consider the requirement to fight off boredom for hours on end., which is the reason I only played chess for a little while in my youth. I have zero tolerance for boredom.

I did play bridge for several years including tournaments with masters points available. I haven’t played in at least 25 years but I know that when I did men and women competed together. Neither sex has an inherent advantage unless you consider one intellectually inferior. Again I don’t.

So what are these chess gurus studying?

The first is a Tucker video about the State Farm Center fraud.

The second is an update on the climate hypocrisy.

https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/20/nolte-climate-experts-are-0-41-with-their-doomsday-predictions/

I’m not going to talk about the bogus Georgia indictments until after Trump supposedly destroys it all on Monday. Instead the purpose of this rant is to consider the wisdom of this. Listen, I could destroy the Georgia election fraud and I don’t have nearly the access to information that Trump has. However the question is is this wise?

By putting forth his case now he gives Fani the chance to doctor evidence and come up with bogus witnesses to counter his claims. On the other hand he can take his case to the voters and show the fraud that was the Georgia election.

It is important to remember that this is not about Fani versus Trump. It is about Trump against Kemp and Raffensperger. Trump criticized Kemp for reopening too soon and he was wrong and there has been animosity between them ever since. He also criticized Raffensperger for allowing unconstitutional changes to Georgia voting laws. So when the election appeared to be fraudulent, they both went into cya mode and denied reality. They wanted Trump to lose and tried to cover up the fraud that had occurred. If Trump comes out and demonstrates the easily demonstrable fraud, they both will be exposed for the coverup of their malfeasance. And their lights will be seriously dimmed.

I am not sure which path is better, but considering that the case could not reasonably be brought until after the election and the fact that he won’t be constrained at this point by some bogus gag order, I say lay it all out there but stick to demonstrable facts not speculation or opinion. You can destroy them with the State Farm video alone. There were way more illegal votes than needed to change the outcome of the election.

Merrick Garland doesn’t tap one of his US Attorneys on the shoulder and say now you’re special. Here’s your helmet and the yellow bus is over there. That’s not how the process works under the applicable regulations. Garland as is his wont and that of the entire Magoo administration ignored the law. A special counsel must be someone outside the federal government. I have linked the applicable regulation below. Read it.

I https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.3

Now some of you, actually none of you, but some on the left will say why is this any different than when Barr appointed Durham? They are totally different. Barr appointed Durham after Magoo had ‘won’ the election and Durham subsequently resigned his position as USA for Connecticut leaving him outside the government. Garland made clear that Weiss would remain USA for Delaware.

Now this will probably get a little into the weeds. I heard Andy McCarthy today and he said Hunter was never indicted and that struck me as strange until I realized that under the constitution and federal law, only persons charged with felonies require a grand jury indictment. For misdemeanors people can simply be charged. Now why is this important. Because as Andy said today, the statute of limitations is only tolled by an indictment and I will certainly take his word on that. Thus, since there was no indictment, Weiss can do what he did with the most serious tax fraud charges and investigate until after the statute of limitations expires.

One last thing I will cover is the republicans wailing that the appointment now allows DOJ to dodge all congressional requests for documents and witnesses. However that’s only true if they don’t do what they should do and appoint a Select Committee like the J6 Committee which courts said could get access to anything. Or they could get off their asses and initiate an impeachment inquiry which clearly gives them access to everything. Whining may get you tv time but grow a pair and put yourselves in the dominant position.

He blew it tonight. He had Christie on tonight and failed to ask him if he would sign the pledge and support trump when he wins the primary. I don’t believe he will sign the pledge, and if he does he won’t honor it.

I just watched Trump being interviewed by Bolling and he was as usual great. But the one thing he said was that he would not sign the RNC required pledge to support whoever gets the republican nomination. And he shouldn’t! Why would he ever support an idiot like Christie? I am sure that Christie would never support him and I don’t know if Christie has signed that pledge and so his fat ass may not be on the stage anyway. As I’m aware the only two people who have actually checked the all the boxes to be on the debate stage are RDS and Ramaswamy.

Trump is the Republican Party and they need to understand that. He doesn’t need them they need him.

Although he declined to definitively say whether or not he will participate, his firm declaration that he would not sign the pledge tells you all you need to know.

I think that it’s possible that the RNC will change its mind on the pledge because if they don’t it will be a very small debate and both the RNC and Fox will be embarrassed.

I was listening to him today and he once again used his SS expertise to enlighten us all on the fact that the SS under the law can say that Trump will not be put in a prison and no one, judge, jury warden or anyone else could interfere with their decision without committing a felony! I was driving so couldn’t write down the criminal statute cites but Bongino knows what he is talking about in this area.

These people keep demonstrating that they have no clue what they are talking about when it comes to televising the Trump J6 trial.

HFJ apparently thinks justice should be hidden from us mere mortals.

The blonde munchkin thinks it would be a mistake to allow cameras into a courtroom in spite of the fact that it did not affect the OJ trial or the Kenosha trial and literally hundreds of other televised trials. Dana’s evidence was look what happened when White House briefings were televised and Jim Acosta acted the fool. Guess what munchkin, if Acosta did that in a courtroom his ass would be in jail and fined and could lose his license. Judges don’t have to put up with shit and they don’t.

Jesse had maybe the stupidest solution. He suggested that they should do like the Supreme Court and allow audio only. Guess what moron, oral arguments in the Supreme Court are just that. Lawyers argue their case and respond orally to questions from the justices. In a trial court there are exhibits and documents and charts and videos that would be lost in audio only.

The other thing that they seem to miss is that if it’s not televised than all the low knowledge voters will only get what the deranged msm tells them happened. If it’s all on live many might watch and make it much harder for the left to pretend what happened didn’t.