Welcome to Sott.net
Wed, 02 Dec 2020
The World for People who Think

Puppet Masters
Map

Snakes in Suits

California Governor excludes Hollywood from lockdown but can't explain why

hollywood
© Global Look Press/ Hans Blossey
Hollywood's film and production crews won't have to be inconvenienced by California's new Covid-19 curfew rule because Governor Gavin Newsom reportedly excluded them from having to follow his latest pandemic lockdown order.

The month-long curfew requirement, which was announced on Thursday and runs from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. each day, excludes television and movie crews, as well as other entertainment industry workers, a representative of Newsom's office told media outlet Deadline. Unlike when the governor imposed a statewide lockdown in March, entertainment industry employees are exempted as "essential" workers.

The curfew, which takes effect on Saturday, applies to the 40 California counties that are categorized in the state's highest tier for infection rates, purple, amid a surge in new Covid-19 cases. The purple tier currently covers 94 percent of the state's population, including all of Southern California.

Eye 1

DHS plans to begin collecting eye scans and DNA with the help of defense contractors

Biometric scanner
© AP/Denis Poroy
Biometric Kiosk at pedestrian crossing from Mexico-USA Otay Mesa Port of Entry
Through a little-discussed potential bureaucratic rule change, the Department of Homeland Security is planning to collect unprecedented levels of biometric information from immigration applicants and their sponsors — including U.S. citizens. While some types of applicants have long been required to submit photographs and fingerprints, a rule currently under consideration would require practically everyone applying for any kind of status, or detained by immigration enforcement agents, to provide iris scans, voiceprints and palmprints, and, in some cases, DNA samples. A tangled web of defense and surveillance contractors, which operate with little public oversight, have already begun to build the infrastructure that would be needed to store these records.

Mail

Interesting new lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania State Court by Pennsylvania GOP challenging legality of vote-by-mail

Voter puzzle pieces
© Matt Williams/NBC News
Yesterday several Pennsylvania Republican Party officials and individual Republican voters filed a lawsuit in state court seeking to obtain declaratory and injunctive relief based on a claim that the legislation which adopted "no excuse" eligibility for absentee voting was an illegitimate amendment of the Pennsylvania State Constitution.

The Plaintiffs are Mike Kelly, a GOP member of the U.S. House of Representatives from the extreme northwest corner of Pennsylvania; Sean Parnell, a GOP politician who lost his race for the US House in a suburban Pittsburg District; Wanda Logan, a GOP politician who lost her race for Pennsylvania State House in Philadelphia County; and five other individual voters from various Pennsylvania counties. The defendants are the State of Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania General Assembly, Tom Wolfe, the Governor of Pennsylvania, and Katherine Boockvar, the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
The Pennsylvania Legislature passed, and Gov. Wolf signed, Act 77 which included amendments to Pennsylvania election laws — including a provision that expanded the availability of absentee voting on a "no excuse" basis.
Here is the issue as presented by the Complaint — the Pennsylvania Constitution sets forth the basis upon which voters ("electors") may cast an absentee ballot, and Act 77 did not "amend" the State Constitution as has been done in the past when changes were made to the Absentee Ballot provisions.

Comment: Supreme Court has declined to hear Trump's lawsuit to disqualify late-arriving Pennsylvania mail-in votes:
Republicans argued before the election that Pennsylvania's decision to allow the counting of ballots received after election day violated the state's constitution.

In a 4-4 decision in October, the US Supreme Court allowed these late-arriving ballots to be counted and, in a follow-up order, asked that they be segregated from the rest. The Trump campaign hoped that this order would pave the way for these ballots to be discounted, but when the nation's highest court met on Monday, it decided not to take action on the case.

The court's order list on Monday made no mention of the case. While the court could hear it when its justices meet again in December, Pennsylvania's counties must certify the results of the election on Monday. States must certify their vote tallies by December 8, before the Electoral College votes a week later.


Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis, Trump's attorneys, wrote that they would seek an "expedited appeal" with 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, which has a conservative majority. Should the 3rd Circuit fail them, Giuliani and Ellis still have options, with Giuliani writing on Saturday that the Pennsylvania defeat helps the campaign "in our strategy to get expeditiously to the US Supreme Court."




Hiliter

Trump may sign Executive Order to end birthright citizenship before first term ends

Trump/document
© Anna Moneymaker/New York Times
President Trump and White House personnel are evaluating the possibility of signing an executive order to terminate birthright citizenship in the United States before his first term ends, the Hill reported on Friday. The White House has evaluated legal options to do away with the longstanding policy which hands out American citizenship to any individual born in the United States.

Jus soli, or birthright citizenship, is an increasingly antiquated citizenship policy long since abolished by many major countries throughout the world, including India, Great Britain, Australia and France. The United States is one of only a handful of major nations that provide free citizenship to anyone who happens to be born in the country, including the children of illegal immigrants and so-called "birth tourists" who wish to obtain free American citizenship for their children with no real connection to the United States.

Trump himself has criticized the policy for years, which stems from a dubious legal understanding of the 14th Amendment, which was enacted to provide citizenship for freed slaves after the Civil War. Sources familiar with the matter expect a Trump administration action to end birthright citizenship to be challenged by progressive activists determined to deputize hundreds of millions of immigrants as new Democrat voters, but a ruling from the Supreme Court could conceivably end birthright citizenship for good.

Stop

Iran hopes US 'psychopaths' won't sell weapons to Saudi Arabia under Biden

Khatibzadeh
© Tehran Times
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said on Monday that the U.S. election carries a "great message" for the region - that message being to recognize the power of Iran and avoid doing business with the United States.

Iran's PressTV quoted Khatibzadeh and his superior, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, hoping the results of the American election would prove devastating to Iran's regional rivals in Saudi Arabia.

[Khatibzadeh] cited Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif as warning regional countries against "taking the gamble to buy security from psychopaths, who only think of money and arms." Khatibzadeh then reminded how Zarif had also warned that taking such a risk was like "placing one's eggs in an unsafe basket."

In 2017, Trump signed a whopping $110-billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia during his maiden foreign visit. Two years later, the US State Department approved weapons sales to Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, Riyadh's dedicated regional allies, worth almost $6 billion.

Observers say Trump's loss in the polls has likely given rise to some questions about the future of these agreements and the quality of the regional countries' US ties under his successor Joe Biden.

Bullseye

Election hot take: 5 reasons pardoning Assange could drastically enhance Trump's legacy

Trump hypothetical
© tweet #Gamechanger.
Trump's hypothetical announcement
Even though we are all still recovering from the election (and there are still some pending legal challenges to consider), we thought we'd take a few minutes to unpack an idea that many people have floated on social media and opinion columns.

Here's one example, from Thomas Knapp, the director of the the Garrison Center, writing at Counterpunch:
Headline: America in Transition: Two Things Donald Trump Can Do to Burnish His Legacy

Trump has the power to pardon. He should use that power in unprecedented fashion, emptying the federal prisons of non-violent drug offenders and other assorted victims of a "justice" system gone haywire.

In particular, he should pardon (in alphabetical order) Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, and Ross Ulbricht.

Assange and Snowden have been charged, but not yet tried, with telling the American people the truth about their government's crimes. Manning has been convicted for the same heroic acts. President Obama commuted her sentence, but it's time to restore her rights and recognize her service to her country.
Knapp isn't the only one floating the possibility of a pardon for Assange. So let's break down why this might be a great idea for Assange, for Trump, and for America:

Airplane

Qantas airline to mandate COVID-19 vaccine for international flights

qantas airlines
© Getty Images
No shot, no service.

Australian airline Qantas will require travelers on international flights to be jabbed with a coronavirus vaccine once an inoculation is ready, CEO Alan Joyce said.

"Whether you need that domestically, we'll have to see what happens with COVID-19 in the market, but certainly for international visitors coming out and people leaving the country, we think that's a necessity," Joyce said in a Monday interview with the Australian news program "A Current Affair."

Comment: See also:


Footprints

"The chips will fall where they may": Sidney Powell responds to Trump distancing, will forge ahead with Dominion lawsuit

Powell Giuliani Ellis diGenova
© Twitter
Attorneys: Sydney Powell • Rudy Giuliani • Jenna Ellis • Joseph diGenova
Republican National Committee Headquarters • November 19, 2020
Update: Sidney Powell has responded to the Trump Campaign's Sunday night announcement that she was not part of their legal team, telling CBS News:
"I understand today's press release. I will continue to represent #WeThePeople who had their votes for Trump and other Republicans stolen by massive fraud through Dominion and Smarmatic, and we will be filing suit soon.

"The chips will fall where they may, and we will defend the foundations of this great Republic."
and ends with the hashtag #KrakenOnSteroids.

The Trump Campaign issued a Sunday evening statement to clarify that attorney Sidney Powell, who has promised to unleash a 'biblical' election lawsuit in Georgia, is not part of the campaign's legal team.

Trump Campaign general counsel Jenna Ellis tweeted a joint statement with Rudy Giuliani which reads:
"Sidney Powell is practicing law on her own. She is not a member of the Trump Legal team. She is also not a lawyer for the President in his personal capacity."

Comment: There may be legal and optic advantages in Powell remaining a singularity. We shall see.
See also:


Attention

Pennsylvania Secretary of State allegedly allowed special interests to alter voter rolls resulting in false Biden lead

Kathy Boockvar
A national conservative organization, The Amistad Project, today filed a motion to intervene in a lawsuit filed for President Trump in Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar actually documented her interactions with the Pennsylvania Democratic Party.

The motion says:

"Defendant Kathy Boockvar, without statutory authorization or legal authority, provided select organizations that have close ties to the Democrat Party and common goals, to directly access the Commonwealth's SURE system."

Attention

Common Sense - How to save the world

Save the World
© Corbett Report
Pop quiz: What's the most powerful weapon ever invented?

The MOAB? you ask, quizzically. No, I respond authoritatively.

The H-bomb? Of course not. The A-bomb, then. Wrong again. The neutron bomb? No.

I'll give you a hint: it's not a bomb at all.

Ahhh, the Rods from God! No.

The mysterious new Chinese microwave weapons? Directed energy weapons generally? Whatever world-destroying technology that DARPA is playing with in Area 51?

The DoD and their MIC brethren in China, Russia and elsewhere are doubtless in possession of weaponry that would boggle our minds if it were revealed to the public, but without even knowing what those weapons are I can unequivocally tell you that none of them qualify as the most powerful weapon ever invented.

OK, last guess: F — I. W.

What a fantastic guess. You get bonus points for a very apt FLNWO callback if nothing else. And, as it turns out, you're almost right. Or, at least, you're on the right track.

Certainly the most powerful weapon ever invented is not traditionally viewed as a weapon at all. In fact, it is almost completely overlooked by everyone — even by the savvy sort that have found their way to The Corbett Report. Nevertheless, we don't stand a chance of stopping the Great Reset, ending the COVID scam, halting the erection of the biosecurity state or de-throning the powers that shouldn't be without it.

Do you give up? Alright, I'll tell you. The most powerful weapon ever invented is . . .

Wait. Hold on. Rather than answering right away, let me tell you a story instead.