by Patrick ➕follow (60) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 11 - 33 of 33 Search these comments
Did the Senate ever vote on the HEROES Act? The bill does not become law until the Senate also passes it.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/05/supreme-court-tackles-biden-student-loan-plan.html
Supreme Court likely to rule that Biden student loan plan is illegal, experts say. Here’s what that means for borrowers
I would not trust a MSM expert. The media is simply against the student loan cancellation because for a change it benefits the little people instead of the elite. They are trying to sway the court opinion with all their negative press.
The whole point of federalizing student loans, was a scam.
The media is simply against the student loan cancellation because for a change it benefits the little people instead of the elite.
Misc says
The media is simply against the student loan cancellation because for a change it benefits the little people instead of the elite.
It benefits the colleges. If the degrees were worth their cost, the kids could pay off the loans with the resulting high paying jobs.
HeadSet says
Misc says
The media is simply against the student loan cancellation because for a change it benefits the little people instead of the elite.
It benefits the colleges. If the degrees were worth their cost, the kids could pay off the loans with the resulting high paying jobs.
No, the colleges are not the ones doing the loans. The Federal government is. The colleges have already been paid, by the federal government.
There is NO RISK at all by the colleges making a student pay $200,000 for a degree in anything.
Well, when these findings were starting to be reported in the press (yes, crookedness was once exposed by the press), the Federal Government stepped in with the current student loan programs.
That the regime has long existed in a state of tension with the Constitution is obvious to everyone, but their impatience with the restrictions the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments place on their tyrannical impulses is increasingly leading them to drop the pretense of Constitutional loyalty. The New York Times just published a piece openly discussing eliminating the Constitution entirely, in order to replace it with something that gives them a free hand to reshape society without having their equitable hands tied by obsolete conceptions of liberty.
The Times only employs persons, both birthing and other, of the subtlest minds. You can tell because they are credentialed by our country’s finest institutions of educational credentialing.
They come to The Times fully equipped with the armamentarium of advanced, progressive, innovative, nuanced, cutting-edge modes of understanding our world — which, you’ll agree, is a pretty goshdurned complex place, and rather niggardly in yielding its secret workings. Hence, The Times has concluded that the Constitution is flawed, perhaps fatally, because it allowed for the election of Donald Trump once, and now, possibly, a second time:
"It’s no surprise, then, that liberals charge Trump with being a menace to the Constitution. But his presidency and the prospect of his re-election have also generated another, very different, argument: that Trump owes his political ascent to the Constitution, making him a beneficiary of a document that is essentially antidemocratic and, in this day and age, increasingly dysfunctional.”
The Constitution does not stipulate a particular election day, but subsequent US law established the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November as the day for federal elections (the states can establish their own election dates for state and local offices). This changed beginning in the year 2000, when Oregon legislated to conduct all elections by mail-in ballot and other states followed with alterations to voting methods beyond a single election day. The Covid-19 pandemic prompted states to permanently relax rules on absentee ballots and expand mail-in voting, under guidance from the federal agencies such as the CDC, while the CARES Act of 2020 provided emergency funding to implement procedures for mail-in voting in order to reduce in-person voting that might enable the spread of Covid-19.
All of that followed orderly legislative procedure. The result was widespread ballot fraud, especially in crucial swing voting districts, much of it arrant. Contrary to official narratives out of the “Joe Biden” administration and the salient organs of corporate news, the allegations of widespread fraud were not “baseless” nor were they “conspiracy theories.” Subtle minds schooled in nuanced, cutting-age modes of analysis agreed to ignore documentary evidence of ballot fraud because it disfavored their preferred candidate, “Joe Biden.” Subtler judicial minds subsequently dismissed challenges to official tallies.
Other shenanigans such as the $400-million that Mark Zuckerberg (Meta and Facebook) injected into swing districts for “election administration and voter turn-out,” via his Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), was not adjudicated in any court. The upshot of the “Zuckerbucks” prank was that polling offiicials in many precincts were replaced by Democratic Party activists who ended up counting the votes. The Federal Election Commission (after “Joe Biden” became president) decided that under federal campaign finance law, the contributions were not seen as illegal — though the “Zuckerbucks” scandal did lead to legislative reform in several states.
You might suppose in the years since the 2020 election that opportunity would be seized to materially correct the weaknesses of mail-in ballots, early voting, ballot “harvesting” practices, giant “balloting centers,” and the use of vote-tallying machines (Dominion, etc.) with modems allowing for Internet hackery. The best and simplest reform would be a return to paper ballots cast only on one election day, with voter ID and proof of citizenship (accomplished prior in voter registration), conducted in smaller, distributed precinct polling places that make hand-counting of ballots practical. Alas, this was too difficult for Congress, while the subtle, nuanced, cutting-edge minds working in news media were not interested in such straightforward reform and did not advocate for it.
Rather, the news media advocated for further laxity in voting rules. And so, now they are actually arguing about whether it is desirable for non-citizens to vote. The “Joe Biden” administration allowed at least 10-million people to enter the country illegally since 2021 and have gotten a million or more of them registered to vote via motor-voter laws — automatic registration when an illegal alien gets a driver’s license, and ditto when they apply for various social services. Alejandro Mayorkas’s Department of Homeland Security has shrewdly distributed large numbers of these illegal aliens into swing districts of states crucial to the Democratic Party’s election chances.
The inquiring mind is prompted to wonder whether it is the US Constitution that is a “menace to democracy” or the Democratic Party. Mr. Trump is issuing communiqués on “X” (Twitter) that his party is paying special attention to voting fraud in the current election, with imputations of very severe punishment to cheaters and fraudsters. You might think that the Kamala Harris campaign would declare likewise. I expect Mr. Trump will put the proposition to her in their Tuesday debate.
Bob
3 hrs ago
I have to laught at all this corruption in U.S. voting. I live in Mexico. Here, a Mexican citizen must have a voter ID card. To obtain one, a person must submit a certified copy of their birth certificate. The voter ID card must be presented on election day in order to vote. All ballots are paper. No mail-in voting allowed. On the most recent election day, my wife, a Mexican citizen, informed me of the results around 9 pm in the evening. But hey, it's Mexico, right??????????
A permanent ban on any mandated medical treatment, especially vaccines and masks.
https://jameshowardkunstler.substack.com/p/the-votes-and-who-counts-them/comments
Bob
3 hrs ago
I have to laught at all this corruption in U.S. voting. I live in Mexico. Here, a Mexican citizen must have a voter ID card. To obtain one, a person must submit a certified copy of their birth certificate. The voter ID card must be presented on election day in order to vote. All ballots are paper. No mail-in voting allowed. On the most recent election day, my wife, a Mexican citizen, informed me of the results around 9 pm in the evening. But hey, it's Mexico, right??????????
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,261,325 comments by 15,059 users - Misc online now