Here's a brilliant exposition of the notion of "Radical Transparency" applied to the high speed rail project. Information is power. Give the information to the voters, given them the power. californiaradicaltransparenc…

Two zingers for the price of one.

Good question. Why?

Very well received in San Diego!

This is gonna be fascinating. We are through the looking glass, in uncharted territory.

Hummmm……

Frederick Madison Roberts, the first known man of African-American descent elected to the California State Assembly. He served there for 16 years and became known as "dean of the assembly." He was a Republican.

The Teachers Union puppet scores another loss. "The ruling is the latest in ongoing fallout from the county’s most expensive and politically focused school board race of 2024 — one in which Sabellico raised more than $100,000 and Allman more than $50,000." sandiegouniontribune.com/202…

Hard to know whether this makes China more or less dangerous in the short term.

Bill Essayli and Harmeet Dhillon are on the case.

What follows is the text of a Facebook post by "Wallace L. Garneau". (A link to the post is included below the text.): Let's talk about the LA mayor race. I ran the math on this. The statistical likelihood of Nithya Raman going from 18% of the vote on election day and early on June 3-4, to 58% of ballots from June 4-5, is essentially zero. For a result to be THREE sigma off the mean you are looking at a one in a million chance. This is 380 sigma. The likelihood of that happening randomly is one chance in ten with 31,358 zeros after the ten. It's statistically impossible by a margin that I can't even write. That's not one in 31,358. It is one in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 - and keep adding more zeros until you have 31,358 of them. If we were talking about one box of ballots, you might argue that Raman did very well in a particular neighborhood. Maybe it was the neighborhood she lives in. But we are not talking about one box of ballots. We are talking about every single ballot that arrived over that 24 hour window. Those ballots are coming from all over the city, so this should be pretty close to a random distribution. Now, there is an important caveat. My statistical conclusion, while accurate, depends on the assumption that the June 4-5 ballots came from the same underlying voter population as the earlier ballots. What exactly were those ballots? Where did they come from? What was the voting population and why was it so radically different from the rest of Los Angeles, when the differentiator is only the date they arrived? The magnitude of the shift is so large that it cannot reasonably be explained as ordinary statistical variation. Either the later ballots came from a dramatically different voter population, or something else occurred that requires explanation. One obvious hypothesis for why those ballots could look like a completely separate population is that there could be a lot of fraudulent ballots mixed in - roughly 2.5 times as many fraudulent ballots for Raman as legitimate ones. If you take the exact same numbers for Pratt and Bass, and divide Raman's totals for that period by 2.5, suddenly the statistical variation goes away. It does not just narrow. It closes entirely. This makes it look like someone did the math, saw how many ballots had to be stuffed in for Raman to guarantee her a spot in the runoff, and stuffed that number of ballots into the mix. Does anyone have any other possible explanations? If so, I'm all ears, because it does not look like California is even trying to hide it anymore. This looks painfully obvious. A few days before the election, Gavin Newsome told the press to calm down, as he has a 'break the glass scenario' he can employ if necessary. This looks a lot like a 'break the glass' scenario, and all it implies. Before dismissing questions about the results, election officials need to explain why one reporting period looked so radically different from the ballots counted before it, or after it, because it looks to me like Karen Bass did not want to run head-to-head against Spencer Pratt after being destroyed by him on a debate stage so savagely as to not show up for the next debate. m.facebook.com/story.php?sto…

It seems Karoline Leavitt is back on the job.

Skid Row junkies in Los Angeles don’t need a drivers license or social security number to register to vote. All they need is a prescription bottle. We have a right and a duty to call out election fraud in California. We won’t be silenced.

It's shocking, but not surprising.

“The war? That was no part of the Revolution; it was only an effect and consequence of it. The Revolution was in the minds of the people . . . fifteen years before a drop of blood was shed at Lexington.” city-journal.org/article/wal…

Well said.

He's right. So good! Elect MICHAEL GATES, California Attorney General.