Dark Night of the Soul for America

The phrase “The Dark Night of the Soul” originally came from 16th century Spanish poet and mystic St. John of the Cross.

These words capture and convey the spiritual experience that a soul undergoes as it strives to reach union with the Almighty, despite temporal discouragements.

The now-popularized expression has been referenced over the years by a diverse array of authors and artists, including poet T.S. Eliot, writer F. Scott Fitzgerald, and singer-songwriter Van Morrison.

There is an additional application of the phrase that has been adopted by the entertainment industry.

In his best-selling book, titled “Save the Cat,” author Blake Snyder divides the pacing of storytelling into structural components that take place over time. Snyder even pinpoints the specific page of a film script at which the appropriate dark night moment should take form.

The cinematic moment should materialize at the end of the second act of a story, the point of desperation at which the protagonist is in a hopeless situation and all appears to be lost.

I contend that at this present moment in time—those of us who have held fast to our founding documents, to the virtues and ideals that are embodied therein, and to the knowledge that we are entrusted with the responsibility to preserve for our families, friends, and loved ones the treasure we have been given in our beloved America—we are at the end of the second act of one of the most intense dramas our country has ever endured, and the stakes are monumental.

In the scenes that preceded this critical point, powerful interests worked in unison to engage in a wide variety of illicit activities, both in the lead-up to Election Day and in the days that would follow.

The chairman and CEO of a Big Tech company donated hundreds of millions of dollars to a non-profit organization, which represented that the money was intended to assist with the voter turnout effort.

However, activities of the entity appear to have favored the encouragement of the voter turnout of one party in particular, the Democratic Party. This entity appears to have also encroached upon the constitutional powers of state lawmakers, and may have used money to manipulate certain aspects of state elections, including the counting of ballots.

Additionally, some state officials appear to have changed ballot security rules on their own, discarding the notion that the power to do so is in the specific purview of state legislatures.

When it came to the content that was published and/or distributed in the lead-up to the election, Big Media and Big Tech at times distorted and at other times lied outright. Highly relevant news stories were never investigated, were completely ignored, or were censored altogether.

The polling industry, too, disgraced itself with exaggerated polls that were specifically designed to suppress voter participation of those with opposing ideas.

In essence, half the population is now being told to reject what they have seen with their own eyes, heard with their own ears, and know in their own hearts; that on election night, the vote counting of several states was halted, with no explanation given. When it once again commenced, suddenly there were massive quantities of votes that came in for the Democratic presidential candidate.

In congressional, state, and local races, voters turned away from Democratic candidates, yet they still managed to vote for the Democratic candidate for president.

In record numbers, African-Americans chose the Republican candidate. Nevertheless, the Democratic presidential candidate somehow received 11 million more votes than former President Barack Obama did in 2008.

Then there were observers who were not allowed to watch mail-in ballots being opened and counted. There were those who were dead but who came back to life to vote. And there were those who were outside their various jurisdictions but who were allowed to cast ballots anyway.

While feebly calling for unity, the Democratic candidate also established a sham entity that his campaign called “the office of president-elect.” And the same people who spread false information about Russia-gate and Ukraine-gate are now urging folks to move on, claiming that there is nothing to investigate and that the American people should graciously accept their candidate of choice.

That all of this might make the almost 74 million voters and supporters of President Donald Trump feel less than hopeful is an understatement.

But my admonition is simple. This is not the time to give up or even grow weak. Rather, it is the time to take heart.

In the “Save the Cat” pacing of storytelling, “The Dark Night of the Soul” leads to a conclusion that makes for an epic saga. What follows the lowest of low points is an unexpected breakthrough that enables the protagonist to overcome seemingly impossible odds and secure victory.

I like to think of it as “The Bright Light of the Spirit.”

Election Irregularities Call for a Full Investigation

The establishment media are ignoring, suppressing, and even dismissing altogether an enormous amount of evidence that indicates significant voting irregularities took place during the 2020 presidential election. Additionally, there are serious inferences of fraud as it relates to the counting of ballots.

Using the coronavirus as justification, prior to the election the Democratic Party pushed through a voting procedure that had never been used before. This resulted in an unparalleled number of mail-in, absentee, and provisional ballots pouring into the system.

This would not be the only segment of the voting process that would earn the label of “unprecedented.” Last minute rule changes, software glitches, count halts, ballot dumps, and statistical anomalies made their ugly appearances this election-go-round, all to the benefit of one Party only.

Make no mistake, though, this election is in no way over. In football terminology, it may be that we are still in the third quarter, with lots of big plays to come.

The mounting evidence that continues to surface presents a pressing need for a complete investigation and judicially supervised remedies, including recounts, audits, and even election do-overs.

The term used in the law of negligence, res ipsa loquitur, has a counterpart appropriateness here. The Latin term, which means “the thing speaks for itself,” stems from its use in Roman trials. In tort law, it provides elements of a cause of action, when a tortious injury would not ordinarily occur without negligence.

In the case of this election, there are results that would not ordinarily occur without fraud.

In Democrat-run swing states, where on election eve President Donald Trump was leading over Democratic challenger Joe Biden, ballot counting inexplicably came to a screeching halt.

A few hours later, massive amounts of ballots suddenly appeared. Few, if any of the votes, went in President Trump’s favor.

The Numbers Story

In Michigan, Democratic presidential candidate Biden at one point received a block of 138,000 votes. Nearly all of the votes added to his tally. This is a statistical impossibility.

Data scientists have noticed other mathematical patterns that raise serious inferences of election fraud. Benford’s law is a forensic tool that is commonly used to detect potential fraud in accounting and vote tallies.

The Benford principle dictates a specific distribution of digits in data to determine whether such data are random and natural.

The digits of the vote counts are expected to follow an exponential distribution across the integers. When the analysis of numerical data samples indicates that the samples are not actually random, i.e., a numerical violation of Benford’s law, an inference of fraud is produced and has been used to detect fraud in elections. Numerical data that deviate from Benford’s law have been admitted in court as evidence of vote fraud.

Informal analyses of Trump’s numbers show no violations of Benford’s law; however, candidate Biden’s numbers do show violations that indicate fraud.

There are other ways that numbers become indicators of election fraud, including the vote total differential between candidate Biden and other down ballot candidates as well as precincts that have more than 100% voter participation.

As of this writing, the GOP has not lost a single seat in the House. Instead the Party has picked up several new House members and added at least three state legislatures, a result that appears highly inconsistent with a win by candidate Biden, who experienced record low enthusiasm across his entire campaign.

In Pennsylvania, due to a lack of signature verification, the rate of rejected mail-in ballots is almost 30 times lower this year than it was in the 2016 presidential election; this is yet another statistical anomaly.

During the inevitable coming litigation, based on claims of irregular voting and election fraud, data from Democrat-controlled swing states will be analyzed, and statistical anomalies and violations of Benford’s law will be presented to the courts.

The Software Story

Dominion Democracy Suite software was used for tabulating ballots in Michigan’s Antrim County. A reported “glitch” caused at least 6,000 Republican votes to be counted as Democrat votes, according to Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox.

When corrected, the miscalculation, which was first reported by a county clerk, changed the results of the county from candidate Biden to President Trump.

Forty-seven other counties in Michigan may also have suffered a similar glitch, due to the same software. If each of these counties, when corrected, were to have a switch-over of 6,000 votes, it would result in President Trump receiving 282,000 additional votes, likely changing Michigan’s election results.

Dominion Democracy Suite software is reportedly used in 30 other states, including all of the other swing states.

The Election Law Story

Election rules in the United States are made by the state legislature. In order to be counted, election law in Pennsylvania requires ballots to be received by November 3.

The state legislature in Pennsylvania turned down the governor’s request to allow ballots to be counted that were postmarked by November 3, but not actually received until November 5.

The governor then went to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to obtain a court order to continue counting the ballots. It was an illicit move and merely a way in which to circumvent the state legislature. The Democrat-controlled court issued the illegal order, one that violated state law.

Although the precincts have been counting late-received ballots, the U.S. Supreme Court via Justice Samuel Alito issued Pennsylvania an order to segregate the late-received votes and remove them from the counted totals.

The validity of late-received votes will almost inevitably end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the ballots received after November 3 are thrown out for violating Pennsylvania election law, the result of the election in that state will likely change.

The Coming Story

President Trump and the GOP have obtained sworn witness testimony that alleges poll watchers were denied entry to the polls, election officials took actions that were not authorized by the state legislature, a post office manager ordered postal workers to back-date ballots to November 3, and election workers illegally created new voter files; all this, in order to create more ballots for candidate Biden.

These claims must be fully examined and litigated. Getting to the bottom of all of it is not just about the 2020 election. Rather, it is about all future elections in America and whether representative democracy survives.

The Role of Projection in Democrat Politics

Back in the 19th century, famed Austrian neurologist and founder of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud identified a psychological defense mechanism in human beings that he termed “projection.”

Freud’s concept of projection encompasses the notion that in order to avoid facing uncomfortable feelings about themselves, individuals will impose the same negative characteristics upon another person.

In my assessment, which results from my academic coursework, professional background, and ethics studies, there is another kind of projection that exists, which takes place within the moral realm of human consciousness, one that I term “moral projection.”

Moral projection occurs when an individual experiences feelings of guilt over acts that he or she has committed or omitted. This individual may subsequently find the uncomfortable feelings difficult to confront and/or manage. The conduct, or lack thereof, which evoked the feelings of guilt, also frequently becomes very difficult for an individual to own.

Using the defense mechanism concept, an individual may assign to another individual or group the same attitude and behavior that initially generated his or her own attendant guilt.

In other words, take your blame and pin it on another.

Moral projection has been used extensively by Democrats in their ongoing war against anyone who would get in the way of their agenda du jour. It continues to be wielded as one of their main political and propaganda weapons.

The idea that the concepts of good and evil are mere opinions, which have an elasticity in application that is dependent upon a situation, is often referred to as “moral relativism.”

The infiltration of conceptual moral relativism into our schools has degraded the consciences of generations of students at every educational level.

Simultaneously, it tilled the soil of young minds into fertile fields that were susceptible to the planting of left-wing doctrine. This was one of the ways in which the Judeo-Christian principles upon which our American Republic depends were supplanted.

A significant portion of young people who were infected with the poisonous weeds of moral relativism now endorse the ideas and actions of hate-based radical organizations and violent anti-American groups.

Saul Alinsky, an icon of liberals and leftist extremists, once wrote, “To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles. The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play his mother off against his father in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life.”

The resultant loss of a shared moral sense has enabled and even encouraged the use of political tactics that are devoid of conscience. Moral projection is one of the most blatant.

It is a horrible experience to be accused. For those who adhere to an ethical code, it is what keeps many in check from too freely accusing others.

Here are but a few examples of the moral projection arrows that the Democrats have recently pulled from their quiver and shot at adversaries:

-In order to deflect from the fact that the Democrats and their media allies have for months enabled violence in cities across the country, they falsely claim that the violence was caused by, as Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden recently said, “white supremacist groups menacing our communities.”

-In order to distract from candidate Biden’s numerous mental lapses, Democrats publicly accused President Donald Trump of having mental focus issues following his medical treatment for Covid 19.

-Democrats and the complicit media are fomenting fears over whether President Trump will accept the results of the upcoming election, while former 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton publicly advises Biden not to do so “under any circumstances” and the campaign hires hundreds of lawyers to go to court to contest election results.

I am not sure where the Democrats and their media cohorts can go to get their consciences back. But I do know where the American people can go to get their country back.

Democrats Lose Their Humanity

Human beings generally have a characteristic response when made aware that a fellow human being, be it a loved one, friend, or stranger, has succumbed to a serious illness or has received an ominous medical diagnosis.

Responses tend to reflect a deep-seated empathy and understanding that are innate in people who maintain a well-balanced psychological, emotional, and spiritual equilibrium. If direct or indirect interaction occurs with a suffering person, encouragement and well-wishes typically flow.

On the other hand, if individuals seem to be indifferent to another’s suffering, in common parlance they are likely to be described as cold, heartless, and/or lacking in compassion. Response to news of another’s misfortunes on the part of these individuals is quite the opposite and may generally fall within the category of psychological dysfunction.

In my assessment, this second description is a wholly appropriate way to characterize the insensitive, uncompassionate, and outright cruel remarks that have been made by several Democrats and their allies in the news media and Hollywood regarding President Donald Trump’s positive COVID-19 test and his subsequent illness.

To put it bluntly, a lack of basic human decency has been on display by many on the left. Since the news first hit that President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump had tested positive for COVID-19 and the president was hospitalized, numerous Democrats and their media mouthpieces actually expressed wishes that the president would depart this life.

“It’s been against my moral identity to tweet this for the past four years, but, I hope he dies,” tweeted Zara Rahim, a former national spokesperson for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and a staffer in the White House of then-President Barack Obama.

Rahim subsequently ended up deleting the message.

Steve Cox, an Independent congressional candidate running in California’s 39th District, expressed his hope that President Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden would both die.

The content of statements made by many of President Trump’s political opponents was so heinous Twitter had to issue a warning that the platform would take action against users for tweets that were rooting for the president’s demise. Facebook and other social media platforms followed suit.

Twitter’s announcement was met with immediate criticism from two Democratic congresswomen who are part of a congressional cluster known as “The Squad.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., complained that this policy had not been applied to herself and her colleagues, tweeting the following: “you mean to tell us you could’ve done this the whole time?”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., tweeted, “This is messed up. The death threats towards us should have been taking more seriously by [Twitter].”

Twitter vowed to rectify matters.

“We hear the voices who feel that we’re enforcing some policies inconsistently,” Twitter stated in a post. “We agree we must do better, and we are working together inside to do so.”

Meanwhile other Trump-haters went about claiming that the president’s diagnosis was not real.

In a Facebook post, documentary film-maker Michael Moore opined that the president could be lying about having coronavirus as an opportunity “TO PUSH FOR DELAYING/POSTPONING THE ELECTION.”

Moore also used his Twitter account to snidely state, “My thoughts and prayers, too, are with Covid-19.”

At the top of his opening monologue on “Saturday Night Live,” comedian Chris Rock said something similar to Moore.

“President Trump’s in the hospital from COVID, and I just want to say my heart goes out to COVID,” Rock said.

Joy Reid of MSNBC suggested that the president was pretending to be infected so he would be able to “get out of the debates.”

“Here’s how wrecked Trump’s credibility is at this point: I’ve got a cellphone full of texts from people who aren’t sure whether to believe Trump actually has covid,” Reid tweeted.

Other questionable posts by Bette Midler, Patricia Arquette, Kathy Griffin, Rob Reiner, and Michael Rappaport made their way to the social media.

To their credit, Rachel Maddow, Alyssa Milano, Jamie Lee Curtis, and the Biden campaign responded appropriately.

Not so with other high-profile individuals, including a couple of top Democrat political leaders.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., hit a new low. She actually blamed the president for getting sick and then tried to soften her comments by tacking on her usual disclaimer: “I’m praying for him.”

And Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., carped in a statement that President Trump’s diagnosis is what happens “when you ignore science.”

It is difficult to find words to describe or ways to explain the all-consuming hatred that the left continues to spew out against the president. The 90 percent-plus derogatory coverage he has received from the lopsided media is no doubt a factor.

Human beings are capable of being programmed to hate.

The Democratic Party has spent every day for the past five years devising schemes, first to undermine his candidacy and then to undermine his presidency.

Human beings are capable of being programmed to be distrustful.

The complicit media have name-called, derided, maligned, and outright lied about the president’s person and policies.

Human beings are capable of being programmed to be cynical.

There is a domino effect that can occur when negative emotions are continuously teed up and then given a solid nudge. Discontent can tip into arrogance, arrogance into anger, and anger into vengefulness.

This is the way humanity is lost.

The question is whether Democrats even care.

What You Need to Know about the Heads of Social Media and Big Tech

untitled-5-6

In an unprecedented move by the head honchos of social media, President Donald Trump had several posts on his Twitter account slapped with “fact check” disclaimer labels.

When internet companies were in their infancy back in the 1990s, Congress, via legislation, provided them with immunity from certain civil lawsuits in order to encourage the development of “platforms,” i.e., digital places for users to share user-created content.

Similar to bookstores that are not in the business of creating, editing, or publishing the material contained on the shelves of their stores, companies such as Twitter were granted special protection from lawsuits so that digital platforms that merely host media content created by third parties (their users) would be able to operate unhindered by the threat of legal action.

Companies with very large social media platforms have been acting as if they merely provide space for third parties to share, when in actuality it is just that, acting. Based on the same premise, they additionally continue to maintain that they should not be held liable for what their users post.

Twitter’s decision to fact check in such a high profile and subjective manner stands as a watershed moment in the relationship between government and social media.

By fact checking the President of the United States on, of all things, an issue related to potential election fraud, Twitter tossed its identity of being a platform out into the ethersphere. But it also let the cat out of the bag as to its real present status, that of full-fledged publisher.

Twitter expressed a political opinion when it engaged in its fact checking. The issue was a mega-politically charged one involving mass mail-in voting and whether such a process is ripe for fraud.

President Trump’s tweet was evaluated by the overseers at Twitter, and users were prompted to “Get the facts about mail-in ballots.” Upon clicking a link, users were subsequently instructed that “experts say mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud,” an unmistakable political statement that also happens to be false.

If one is willing to dig a little deeper, what is discovered is that Twitter has implemented a policy that currently seems to apply to a single user—President Trump.

When a social media company engages in the same activities as a publication, it must be treated as if it were one. Newspapers, magazines, etc., fall under the umbrella of conventional publishers that create and edit their own content and are not exempt from liability.

Twitter has not been considered a publisher, despite the fact that it has been acting like one. But to exacerbate the situation, it has increasingly become a publisher of the most highly partisan kind. And it just so happens that, as of this writing, we are less than six months away from a presidential election.

Some big tech companies have also demonstrated a political bias in giving liberals a pass while engaging in an all-out targeting of conservatives.

–PragerU’s Facebook page was marked with a virtual branding iron as containing “false news” and was demonetized as well.

–A study from NYU on the addition of zinc to a hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin treatment was removed by YouTube.

–A hydroxychloroquine video by Sharyl Attkisson was also removed, although it was subsequently reinstated.

–A contrarian Michael Moore-produced documentary, “Planet of the Humans,” was yanked from YouTube.

As reported by Vox, a number of top Silicon Valley figures appear to be working behind the scenes in a concerted effort to get presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden elected. Big tech names include LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz, Apple founder Steve Job’s widow Laurene Powell Jobs, and ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt.

Twitter’s own Yoel Roth, who presently holds the title “Head of Site Integrity,” has referred to President Trump and his team as “actual Nazis.” Roth has additionally mocked Trump supporters, insulted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and provided campaign donations to former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

President Trump recently signed an executive order that sets in motion a potentially costly change for Twitter with respect to the company’s civil liability exposure. The order directs all executive departments and agencies to ensure that their application of Section 230(c), the law that limits liability, falls within “the narrow purpose of the section.”

The executive order cites the legislative purpose of the law to maintain the internet as a “forum for a true diversity of political discourse.” The departments and agencies are instructed to “take all appropriate actions in this regard.”

The heads of departments and agencies must also review advertising and marketing expenses that are paid to Twitter and other online platforms. This includes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and the Department of Justice (DOJ), as well as other parts of the executive branch.

With regard to Twitter, Google, Facebook, YouTube, and others, it is possible that some of the personnel of these departments and agencies will be looking into the practice of the gathering of information about virtually everything users do and then selling the data for billions of dollars.

U.S. Attorney General William Barr has already indicated that the DOJ will begin drafting legislation to regulate social media companies.

President Trump’s executive order may have an immediate limiting effect on social media and big tech’s future editorial actions.

Apparently, tech CEOs, including Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, have already heard the footsteps of the federal government. Zuckerberg recently distanced himself from Twitter when he told Fox News that the social media platform had, in his opinion, made a mistake, and that no social media platform should be the “arbiter of truth.”

The bottom line is that social media and big tech companies can’t have it both ways. And hopefully, in the very near future, they won’t.

President Trump Emphasizes Reopening the U.S.

ap_20079605172866-1500x1000-1

As a nation we are all sacrificing to achieve a victory over the invisible enemy. However, we have another threat to with which to deal that involves an essential part of the American fabric, gainful employment.

President Donald Trump touched upon our need for honest and productive work in a recent briefing when he spoke about the importance of restarting the U.S. economic engine.

“Let me be extremely clear about one point. We will move Heaven and Earth to safeguard our great American citizens,” the president said. “We will continue to use every power, every authority, every single resource we’ve got to keep our people healthy, safe, secure and to get this thing over with.”

“We want to finish this war. We have to get back to work.”

This is a message we have heard from the president before. Rightly so because a shut down nation is not only unsustainable but actually poses a clear and present danger to all of us. The reality is that financial health has a great deal to do with the physical and psychological well being of the nation. For those who understand the risks economic damage is posing via a self induced-economic sleep, especially President Trump, the objective of getting the economy up and running as soon as possible is paramount.

The president indicated he had hoped to open up businesses by Easter, April 12, but he made an adjustment to the original time frame, extending our national social distancing effort to the end of April on the advice of his task force members.

President Trump also said he’s “thinking about” forming a panel to examine how best to restart the country’s economy, which he called a “good idea.”

“I’m thinking about it,” President Trump said at a White House Press briefing. “I continue to say, the cure cannot be worse than the problem itself.”

The president tweeted an endorsement of a such a plan offered by Dana Perino, former press secretary to President George W. Bush, and now a commentator on Fox News, among other public figures.

She had suggested putting together a group of experts well suited to advise the president about dealing with the economic ramifications resulting from the economic shutdown created by the coronavirus pandemic.

Perino said this group would complement the team led by Vice President Mike Pence, “Let 1st task force focus on crisis at the moment,” Perino tweeted.

Reopening the businesses of the country would be the focus of such a task force. As the president has emphasized the shutdown of our enterprises goes against our nature. “The U.S. economy wasn’t meant to be closed as it is…We’re not going to have separation for the rest of our time on the planet,” he said.

President Trump hinted only a couple of weeks ago that he was thinking about balancing public-health restrictions with economic concerns.

“WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF,” he tweeted and was predictably attacked by the media and craven politicians for the idea.

It is clear that the cure has already cost millions of Americans their jobs. The leisure and hospitality sectors have been decimated.

The fact is that we can plan for our nation to go back to work and we can do it while simultaneously protecting those most likely to harmed by exposure to coronavirus infection, those immunologically compromised, those with chronic diseases, and the elderly.

Younger people without complicating medical conditions who have recovered from the virus and have demonstrable immunity could be allowed to return to work.

At an appropriate time, we also can reopen businesses with social distancing limitations and restart a significant part of our economic engine.

Retailers that have been allowed to operate because they sell groceries have already shown the way by establishing new procedures to sanitize shelves and shopping carts, and regulate the number of shoppers present in the store aisles.

A host of retail uses such as clothing, furniture, and jewelry, etc. should be allowed to innovate and reopen following the same kinds of safeguards that grocery and drug chains have implemented. If Walmart, Target, and CVS can be open during a pandemic so can a long list of other retail chains and small shops.

Two sectors that employ even more people in the nation than leisure and hospitality are manufacturing and construction.

Workers in these sectors do not normally interface with the general public and could be allowed to start again with safe operating practices and with workers practicing social distancing.

Getting factories and construction sites back online would bring back needed jobs and move the country further along the road toward a total economic restart.

Seeing these sectors open up again would remove some of the uncertainty, instill hope, and allow a significant number of Americans to engage in gainful employment, the productive pastime our people love.