That phone in your pocket is a spy and a tattle tale. The goobermint has long known, and long used this knowledge for its own purposes. The demonscraps are so stupid,  they think we’re so stupid, they can sell their BS as fresh clean cattle fodder.

‘Inorganic’ – GPS Data Reveals Bernie Sanders, AOC Anti-Oligarchy Rally Was Full Of Serial Protesters

The Democratic Party launched a full-scale propaganda blitz in a desperate attempt to sway public opinion as its favorability ratings plunged to record lows. True to form, the party of leftist radicals prefers to bend reality—relying on rent-a-protesters or, in this case, inorganic crowds—to create a false perception of popularity. And that’s exactly what unfolded on Friday in Denver.

Drone footage shows a large crowd as U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, spoke at Denver’s Civic Center. The outspoken socialist wrote on X: “34,000 people out in Denver. Largest political rally there since 2008.” 

Sanders attempted to explain that the large turnout reflected what voters are saying: “No to authoritarianism. No to oligarchy. No to Trumpism.”

However, leftist corporate media failed to fact-check the socialist for misinformation or disinformation. Others did—using a sophisticated algorithm to analyze data from all smartphone devices at the event—and found the numbers were severely overinflated. 

Many of the attendees were probably bussed in and had a history of participating in Antifa/BLM, pro-Hamas, and pro-Palestinian protests. The Democratic Party is known for bussing activists through NGO networks to events to fill seats—a tactic repeatedly used throughout Kamala Harris’ 2024 presidential campaign trail to create fake hype.

Data analyst Tony Seruga exposed just how staged the latest Democratic Party rally was, revealing their ongoing attempts to manipulate public perception with inorganic crowds made up mainly of DEI activists rather than genuine grassroots supporters:

GPS—Here we go again, there were 20,189 devices. Still a large crowd but not even close to the 30,000 quoted in Denver newspapers nor the 34,000 quoted by Bernie Sanders and AOC.

84% of the devices present had attended 9 or more Kamala Harris rallies, antifa/blm, pro-Hamas, pro-Palestinian protests, 31% had attended over 20.

For more insight into what data we also look at in addition to GPS location data would be demographic and psychographic data using over 6,000 different databases, i.e., like the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Pew Research Center, market research firms like YouGov, Experian, specialized tools like ESRI’s Tapestry Segmentation, consumer surveys, social media platforms like 𝕏, Facebook, Linkedin.

Demographic data includes basic characteristics like age, gender, income, education level, occupation, marital status, family size, ethnicity, and where people live (e.g., city, state).

Psychographic data dives deeper into people’s lifestyles, values, attitudes, interests, personality traits, social class, activities, and how they make purchasing decisions. For example, it might show if someone values sustainability, enjoys outdoor activities, participates in community activism.

While demographic data is straightforward, psychographic data can reveal sensitive personal details, like beliefs even life goals.

Additionally, by cross pollinating each device with other devices regularly within close proximity to the target device we are able to build a detailed profile for each target.

90% of those in the above 84% were likely working with one of these five groups and is the reason for their presence.

Once again, this is based a very sophisticated algorithm that looks at the behavioral metrics for each device, including the physical 1:1 proximity to leaders and paymasters from these groups in the past.

Disruption Project, Rise & Resist, Indivisible Project, Troublemakers and the Democratic Socialists of America.

Each receives money from ActBlue and at least three, via USAID.

Disruption Project: Legal status is unclear, likely operating illegally. Rise & Resist: 501c4 non-profit Indivisible Project: 501c4 non-profit Troublemakers: Legal status is for profit. Democratic Socialists of America: 501c4 non-profit

Continue reading “”

Q:
Why do the demoncraps suddenly hate Elon Musk so much?

A:
It’s not so much Musk personally, but what DOGE represents; The exposing and dismantling of the corrupt bureaucrap state and the hog trough on the goobermint gravy train that corrupt politicans and their lackeys have used to graft literally trillions of dollars into their pockets with little to no way to track most of it.

I can’t say if Woodrow Wilson had it planned this way, but his ‘progressive’ state laid the foundation for the bureaucrap goobermint of Roosevelt’s welfare state, and later the military industrial complex formed to fight World War 2, that provided the ways and the means for those with corrupt intent to scam the system for their own benefit.

Those people are now the ones we see screaming their heads off, accusing Trump and Musk of everything they can think of to stir the low IQ mob into insanity.

It pays to remember that the insane can be quite dangerous, and as an acquaintance says often enough: “Prepare Accordingly”

March 23, 1775 St. John’s Church, Richmond, Virginia
During the Second Virginia Revolutionary Convention

Delegate Patrick Henry;

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.

This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?

For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House.

Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort.

I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain.

Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne!

In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power.

The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

Sam Corcos and the IRS Mess

I’ve been writing about the government’s data processing troubles for quite awhile now, and particularly since DOGE started to find where the bodies — well, I was going to say “bodies were buried” but that’s wrong. The government’s data processing corpses aren’t buried. They’re stinking shambling zombie bodies shuffling through the corridors seeking brains.

Of course, as wild wastes of money are uncovered, everyone and their aforementioned brothers, brothers-in-law, and politically connected people outside government have been screaming, while we regular old taxpayers are saying “God oh God, how did we get in this mess?”

So, Sam Corcos, CEO of Levels, a health startup, and Scott Bessent, secretary of the Treasury, were on Laura Ingraham’s show on March 20, talking about data processing at the IRS in particular.

The IRS has come up before — for example, when Musk and the DOGE boys discovered there were people up to almost 400 years old still active in the Social Security records, which are closely tied to the IRS records ever since the IRS declared that line on the Social Security Card about “not to be used for identification” was no longer operative.

Corcos was brought in to work for the Treasury to look at the IRS modernization program and its operations and maintenance budget. Now, the modernization program is new development — they’re attempting to build a more modern system and infrastructure to handle what the Social Security Administration does, while maintenance and operations is the budget that pays for just keeping the existing system running.

Corcos is running a successful startup — have a look at its website. So he has some expertise in software development. He started looking at the IRS systems.

It was interesting, if by interesting you mean “enraging” and “obscene.” The IRS has had this ongoing modernization program in operation since 1990 — that after a previous modernization program called Tax Systems Modernization (TSM), which started in 1986 and was finally declared a failure in 1997. Then there was the Customer Account Data Engine (CADE), which was launched in 2001 and terminated as a failure in 2009, having delivered about 15 percent of its planned function.

The existing system, as I’ve written about before, is based on IBM mainframes and written in COBOL and Assembler — that is, directly as machine instructions.

The current modernization program, according to Corcos, is currently 30 years behind schedule and $15 billion over budget. It’s been 35 years in development, and is now “five years away” from completion. And has been since 1996.

According to Secretary Bessent, the hangup is “entrenched interests” like consultants and contractors. Eighty percent of the IRS’s $3.5 billion budget goes to outsiders. Bessent says, “That’s not efficiency — that’s a racket.”

Corcos says the top priority is to turn this around. “The IRS spends way more than any private company would on a program like this. We’ve cut about $1.5 billion from the modernization budget. … It’s about asking tough questions and trimming the fat.”

It’s easy to blame the government developers, but Corcos says the developers are excellent — it’s management that’s the issue. “You see contracts — $10 million, $20 million, $50 million — and ask ‘Why are we doing this?’ Everyone shrugs. … You cancel it and nothing breaks. Inertia’s running the show — it just takes someone who cares to start asking questions.”

Dad spent nearly 2 years stationed on Guam between WW2 and the Korean War.

AG: Self-defense is ‘inherent right’

There are many scenarios that can justify the use of deadly force, for instance, a home invasion or a person carrying a machete while aggressively approaching you on your property. Both could be arguments for the castle doctrine law on Guam, but as Attorney General Douglas Moylan stressed, the facts must support that an imminent threat of death or serious injury was present.

On Saturday, the Francisco C. Chargualaf Gymnasium filled with residents of Malesso’ and the surrounding southern villages. All wanted to learn more about the laws in place that allow them to protect themselves and others through deadly force on their property and curtilage.

Moylan explained that through the castle doctrine, Guam law provides homeowners the right to use deadly force to defend their homes or vehicles with protection from prosecution when acting against threats such as home invaders and burglars.

“This isn’t just about firearms, OK? This is about any weapon that you use. The focus of the law is a right to self-defense and the right to use deadly force, and there is a presumption that if, in certain areas, that you’re threatened, you have a right to use deadly force. Whether you’re using a machete, a knife, a bow and arrow, anything that causes the potential injury or death to another person, that is what the castle doctrine speaks to,” Moylan told the audience in attendance.

Moylan referenced the recent amendment to the castle doctrine, which extends those “certain areas” to curtilage.

Curtilage legally refers to the immediate land and buildings surrounding a home. An example would be the yard between the front door and public easement, where children may play or an area where one can expect to have reasonable privacy from government intrusion, like a shed at the back of a home.

“There is an inherent right for everybody to be able to protect themselves and to protect their loved ones and to protect one another,” Moylan said.

Several southern residents who spoke presented scenarios like a homeowner catching a thief stealing a lawn mower as the suspect turns to get away. Or an individual trespassing on property and taking produce and firing a warning shot. They all questioned how to know if the requirements of the castle doctrine are met in different scenarios.

“No. 1 is, whenever you’re confronted with a situation, always try to think when is the last moment can I use deadly force? If you do that, and … if you have the presence of mind to be able to think, I’m not going to, for instance, if you have a gun, I’m not going to immediately shoot what I’m seeing in my house, which the castle doctrine, I think, was originally designed for. But I (the homeowner) want to figure out (how) not to harm somebody as much as possible until they become that clear and present danger to you. Because if you use that type of rule, you’re probably going to be able to get through our AG’s office analysis when the police come there and do the police report and then send it up to our office so that we don’t charge you,” Moylan said.

However, Moylan cautioned against pulling the trigger on a retreating culprit.

“And just to jump to the front of the line here, if you guys see the guy that came into your house at 2 o’clock at night, turn around and then try to get out of the house because he saw you, you guys made eye contact. Please don’t shoot him,” Moylan said.

While Moylan was not advocating for shooting another person, recognizing that many crimes committed in Guam are fueled by methamphetamine addiction, he did support the right to defend oneself as allowed in the castle doctrine law.

“You can use deadly force if the person is using a weapon against you. You have to use nondeadly force if the person is coming to just fight you,” Moylan said. “You can’t just pull out the firearm and shoot him in the street.”

Application of the castle doctrine law comes down to the “fact patterns” of the case and whether the AG green lights the prosecution.

“So, you literally can have somebody killed by you, the police officer would put together the report, what they’re seeing, different statements, and then it would come up to the AG’s office. My first group would be looking at it and, especially if it caught my attention, it would be brought to me, or they would have the sense of mind to bring it to me, and then I would sit down with them and then go over the facts on what happened,” Moylan said noting the need for the facts to justify the use of deadly force.

Moylan referenced the Dave Barber Shop shooting, where the shop owner shot a burglar in the leg as the suspect entered their private living quarters. He noted the shop owner was afforded criminal and civil protections of the castle doctrine law and not charged.

Moylan encouraged residents, if faced with the need to use deadly force against an aggressor at home or in a vehicle, to aim for the leg or fire a warning shot.

“When you shoot somebody, you don’t need to hit them between the eyes. You don’t need to hit them necessarily in the heart. You can hit him in the leg. You can hit him in the kneecap,” Moylan said.

Moylan repeatedly stressed that castle doctrine law does not protect one’s property from theft or damage. For the doctrine to apply, the threat of imminent loss of life or serious bodily injury must be present to respond with deadly force.