Article: Washington State Democrats Screw Up and Expose their Secret Tax Scam

Seattle, WA In Washington's 36th District, which is one of forty nine districts in the Washington State Legislature that encompasses part of North Seattle, Ballard, Magnolia and Queen Anne. In this district there is a state Senator named Noel Frame and two state representatives Julia Reed and Liz Berry, which all of them are Democrats who represent this area.

We here at Peer Reviewed Politics are bringing up the subject of the 36th legislative district, because the 36th legislative district Senator Noel Frame, open up her mouth and inserted her foot.  Its not uncommon for everyone to mistakes from time to time, but Senator Frame, well she let the cat out of the bag and it was the Democrats scam game plan.  If you want to know what type of scam game plan it was, we don't think it would be that hard to guess what it was.  Democrats are very commonly known for either their spending and their taxes.  Their game plans never solve the problems, but they usually only make the problem worse with their spending, so they can tax you even more.

In this case, Senator Frame accidentally sent e-mail out, not just her fellow Democrats, but ended up sending it to Republicans too, Oops...  Maybe, we probably shouldn't say accidentally sent it, because it might imply she knows how use e-mail.  Anyhow, in this secret PowerPoint plan, Democrats were trying to brainstorm and justify a $15 billion spending tax scheme after they just had squandered billions in surplus funds, beside money they received from tobacco companies, which was supposed to be used for those with tobacco related illnesses.  Well, the e-mail that Senator Frame sent out, ended up getting sent to Republicans, because instead of sending it to Democrats, she replied all, which included her Republican colleagues.

So as you might imagine, the Republicans ended up getting the propaganda talking points on the scam that they planned on sending to the corrupt media here in Washington State in order to spread and push out the propaganda talking points to Washington State low information viewers/voters.

Do to the fact that the it was e-mailed to Republicans, the Democrats plan did not work out so well, but you know how low information voters are, they only get their news from the main stream media and social media sites.  Luckily most of Democtats probably don't even realized that Republicans know about the tax scam and that these low info voters are likely still unaware of the scam and what had happened in the first place.  Guess the Democrat party is lucky to have those type of voters.  To bad, some of these folks can't wake up, because if these low info voters did, we could clean up this state from all the corruption.

'We The Governed' ended up doing almost a nineteen minute video on the scam and we thought we would share it with our readers, because its very informative and it just goes to show what Democrats are willing to do with their smoke and mirrors.

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Media Attribution:  | Author(s): @Teapartier_Al on X.com - We The Governed  | Date: February 21, 2025 | Duration: 00:18:24 | Photo/Video Credit: Video - We The Governed

Article: "Election Round Table 2024" on Liberty News Radio

AMERICAN FORK, UT Nationwide Broadcast Liberty News Radio and the Big Mig Show on Rumble are proud to announce a captivating live event, "Election Round Table 2024," to be held on November 5, 2024.

This broadcast will be hosted by Sam Bushman, James Edwards, Dr. Scott Bradley, and Lance Migliaccio.  The forum will feature a panel of notable experts including Sheriff Richard Mack, Alex Newman, George Balloutine, Lew Moore, Lowell Nelson, Dave Krieger, Peter Scoop Stanton, and others.

This Event Highlights Include:

• In-depth Analysis: Deep dive into election dynamics, key issues, and candidate strategies.
• Fraud Watch: Commitment to election integrity and transparency.
• Stop The Steal: Emphasis on safeguarding voter rights and the sanctity of elections.
• Rule of Law: Focus on the legal frameworks essential for fair and free elections.

This pivotal forum is set to be a key resource for political enthusiasts and voters across the nation, providing a comprehensive look at the elements shaping the future of our Constitutional Republic.  Tune in live to this crucial discussion on the future of our nation via LibertyNewsRadio.com or video stream at TheBigMigShow on Rumble.

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Media Attribution: Liberty News Radio | Author(s): @Teapartier_Al on X.com - Formatting-Editing / Press Release - Liberty New Radio  | Date: October 27, 2024 | Duration: 00:00:00 | Photo/Video Credit: Logo Photo - Liberty New Radio

Article: Slash Down in Pensacola, FL

Pensacola, Florida - Three NASA astronauts and a Russian cosmonaut were returned to Earth early Friday morning at 3:29 EDT in the SpaceX Dragon capsule, splashing down in the Gulf of Mexico.

NASA’s SpaceX Crew-8, three astronauts and one cosmonaut returned aboard Elon Musk's SpaceX capsule.  NASA astronauts Matthew Dominick, Michael Barratt, and Jeanette Epps, and Cosmonaut Alexander Grebenkin were among the crew aboard the capsule which had spent 232 days in space orbiting the Earth 3,760 times or about 100 million miles aboard the IIS space station according to NASA.

The crew conducted research on low Earth orbit, stem cell research to study degenerative diseases, how fuel temperature affects material flammability, and how spaceflights can affect immune function in humans.

The SpaceX-8 team had a gentle splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico, South of Pensacola, Florida. The capsule was hauled aboard a nearby recovery ship that was waiting in the Gulf for the capsule.  On board the ship, were surgeons and other support personnel to claim the capsule and welcome aboard the crew to do initial medical checks and allow the astronauts and cosmonaut to make phone calls to their family and friends.  The crew was then taken to local medical facility for evaluation.

The two test pilots/astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore who flew the Boeing Starliner spacecraft, which left had left Earth for the International Space Station to be on IIS for one week are still stranded on the IIS space station.  According to NASA, Williams and Wilmore were not assigned to return with Crew-8.

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Media Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ / NASA | Author(s): @Teapartier_Al on X.com  | Date: October 25, 2024 | Duration: 00:00:00 | Photo/Video Credit: Nasa.gov

Classified Documents Case Against Trump has been Dismissed

Fort Pierce, Florida: 🚨 BREAKING 🚨 NEWS:

Peer Reviewed Politics: On July 15, 2024, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon’s ruled in 93-page document that Special Counsel Jack Smith was improperly appointed by the DOJ and so the court has rightfully dismissed the case against Former President Trump.

According to the courts legal ruling, the order granting dismissal cites that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s appointment was in violation of the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution.  Also under the U.S. Constitution, Article II § 2, clause 2, Special Counsel Jack Smith’s use of a permanent indefinite appropriation violates the Appropriations Clause, U.S. Constitution, Article I § 9, clause 7.  The court noted that court did not need to address the proper remedy for that funding violation given the dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.

The ruling outlined, the first challenge to Jack Smith's appointment under the Appointments Clause, which provides the exclusive means for appointing “Officers of the United States,” (SEE Article II, § 2, cl. 2.)  The Appointments Clause sets as a default rule that all “Officers of the United States” whether “inferior” or “principal” must be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

In the second challenge, rooted in the Appropriations Clause, also prohibits any money from being “drawn from the Treasury” unless such funding has been appropriated by an act of Congress under Article I § 9, clause 7, (“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law. . . .”).  According to the ruling DOJ just can't appropriate money on its own.  The House of Representatives hold the purse for this type of funding.

On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled against decades of ambiguous federal regulatory law by bureaucracies, making it far more difficult for federal agencies to issue rules, regulations, and try to appropriate money for themselves without an act of congress.  According to Chief Justice Roberts, this was pointed out in a famous 1803 decision of Marbury v. Madison, whereas Chief Justice Roberts stated it means that courts, not agencies, decide what the law is, and if Congress wants to do something different, it should say so explicitly.

In Judge Cannon's ruling she stated, "Both the Appointments and Appropriations challenges as framed in the Motion raise the following threshold question: is there a statute in the United States Code that authorizes the appointment of Special Counsel Smith to conduct this prosecution?  After careful study of this seminal issue, the answer is no.  None of the statutes cited as legal authority for the appointment, (SEE 28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, 515, 533) gives the Attorney General broad inferior-officer appointing power or bestows upon him the right to appoint a federal officer with the kind of prosecutorial power wielded by Special Counsel Smith.  Nor do the Special Counsel’s strained statutory arguments, appeals to inconsistent history, or reliance on out-of-circuit authority persuade otherwise.

Looking at the law and the past arguments before the Supreme Court, including the most recent argument, Judge Cannon is on sound ground in her ruling in this case, and its very unlikely that an appeal by the government would be successful, if Judge Cannon ruling was challenged by the government.

We have posted the 93-page ruling below.  Click on the picture to read the full document.

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Story Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics Article - @Teapartier_Al on X.com | Peer Reviewed Politics Article Author: @TeaPartier_Al on X.com | Date: July 15, 2024 | Video Clip Duration: 00:00:00 | Photos and Video Credit: Photo of Judge Aileen M. Cannon - en.wikipedia.org / Legal decision documents - U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida

Video: Dr. Anthony Fauci, Former Director of the NIAID, Testified before Congress on Monday, June 03, 2024

Washington D.C - Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Chief of the NIAID Laboratory of Immunoregulation, as well as having a position of Chief Medical Advisor to President Joe Biden, testified on Monday June 03, 2024, before House of Representatives at the Committee on Oversight and Accountability.

Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared before the House Oversight Committee and was his first testimony since his retirement on December 01, 2022, as the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

Dr. Anthony Fauci was sworn in at the hearing an provided about a roughly a 6 minute opening statement and then he took questions.  We did not review the whole testimony of Dr. Fauci, but within 15 minutes Dr. Fauci appeared to have lied and/or changed his story several times.

Dr. Fauci stated that he worked had worked at the National Institute of Health (NIH) for 54 years and been a director at NIAID for more that 38 years.  Dr. Fauci stated during his tenure he had dealt with and was deeply involved in scientific and public health responses of several infectious disease outbreaks, whereas he claimed his involvement in government service to include AIDs, Ebola HIV, Pandemic Flu, and the Zika virus, (a mosquito-borne infection).

Dr. Anthony Fauci continued to state, that under his leadership, NIAID and he were well positioned to respond to the Covid-19 virus. Dr. Anthony Fauci then claimed that NIAID had invested billions of dollars on mRNA technology and imaging design for nearly two decades, whereas Fauci stated both of these things had lead us to the swift development of vaccines for Covid-19.  Dr. Anthony Fauci stated in less than 11 months after the identification of novel virus (Covid-19), a safe and highly effective vaccines were widely available for Covid-19.

We here at Peer Reviewed Politics disagree with what Dr. Anthony Fauci is claiming at this hearing about the vaccines being safe and highly effective.  There are now tons of research up to now, which shows the novel vaccine may have likely done way more harm, then it did good.  Even Doctor Robert Malone, who help develop this vaccine, was worried about its efficacy and its affects on humans.  Even the in CDC in internal documents reveals and found evidence in late 2021 that Covid-19 vaccines were causing multiple deaths.

Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared to be postulating in his opening statement and complaining about how his actions had been distorted.  Dr. Fauci then spoke about the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 had resulted from a lab leak.  Dr. Anthony Fauci stated that he was alerted by a phone call from some several highly respected health and scientific professionals on January 31, 2020 and he provided the names of the officials in his testimony.  Dr. Fauci stated that these officials were all concerned about the SARS-CoV-2 Gnome sequence, which he stated the Gnome Sequence had suggested that the virus may have been manipulated in a lab.

Dr. Anthony Fauci then states that he had participated in a conference call the next day with about a dozen international virologists to discussed this possibility vs. a spill over from an animal reservoir.  Dr. Anthony Fauci stated that the discussions were lively, and Dr. Fauci stated that there were an arguments for both possibilities.  Dr. Fauci then claimed that two participants who supposedly testified in a hearing, stated that Dr. Fauci did not try to stir the discussion in any one direction.  It should be noted here, Dr. Fauci did not in this oversight hearing elaborate on who brought up the idea of a spill over analogy during this conference call, either.

Dr, Fauci stated that it was decided in the conference call, that several participants would more carefully study the Gnome sequence, but again Dr. Fauci did not elaborate on who these so-called participants were in his testimony at this oversight hearing.

Dr. Fauci then stated that several of these participants who studied the Gnome sequence, which were original concerned about the Gnome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 of being manipulated had later changed their minds and concluded that most likely the outcome was from a spill over.  Dr. Fauci continued to state the participants did kept an open mind, but again Dr. Fauci didn't elaborate who these participants were.  Dr. Fauci did say that these participants did appropriately published their opinions in peer reviewed literature.

Dr. Fauci contended and maintained that he never tried to influence or get these scientist to change their minds by bribing them with millions of dollars of grant money.  Dr. Fauci said he had no input into the content being published in papers, (The peer reviewed literature).  Dr. Fauci also denies that he had tried to cover up the possibility that this virus was from a lab.

Dr. Fauci then stated it was inconceivable that any who reads his e-mail could conclude that he was trying to cover up the possibility of a lab leak.  Dr. Fauci again stated that he was keeping an open mind to the cause.  Dr Fauci then denied that he had anything to do with Senior Advisor Dr. David Morens because of Dr. Morens' title.  Dr. Fauci also claimed that he was never advised or knew of any actions by Dr. Morens related to Dr. Peter Daszak, Ecohealth or Dr. Morens' e-mails.

We here at Peer Review Politics noted Dr. Fauci made a lot of what you would call, "straw man claims" by like using the term "they", except in this case, Fauci called them "participants", which is basically a no name blame game.  Dr. Fauci never names the people he is referring to, the exception when he does is when its is to his benefit or he is trying to avoid being tied into that person.  In his opening statement Dr. Fauci names of several people who believed there was Gnome manipulation, but later in his testimony Dr. Fauci doesn't name the individuals in the phone conference, which the participants supposedly talked about the spill over effect.

Dr. Fauci does not have a problem naming Dr. Morens, Ecohealth, and Dr. Peter Daszak, since it appears Dr. Fauci is trying to dissociate himself from Dr. Morens by saying he was not an advisor on institute policies or to other substantive issues.  Dr. Fauci only stated that had Dr. Morens helped Dr. Fauci in writing some scientific papers.  Dr, Fauci went on to tell the oversight committee that he had never conducted official business by personal e-mail, either.  We here at Peer Reviewed Politics do remember that Dr. Fauci originally denied the lab leak, but for some reason now he acts like he said nothing like this at all.

The Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz questioned and defended Dr. Fauci after Chairman Dr. Wenstrup had questioned Dr. Fauci after Dr. Fauci made his opening statement.  Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then tried to make it appear Chairman Dr. Wenstrup and Republicans were on a witch hunt and were vilifying Dr. Fauci.  The Ranking member then tried to inject that Republicans came up empty handed in the subcommittee about Dr. Fauci having knowledge or that Republican can't prove Fauci was behind the funding of the 'Gain of Function' research that was being done in Wuhan, China.

Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then stated that the subcommittee has heard three different definitions of 'Gain of Function' research. Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz continued to claim that Republicans had relied heavily on an overly broad definition that had no regulatory significance.  Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz even tries to claim that the Republican definition is so broad that the definition of 'Gain of Function' research even includes the manufacture of flu vaccines.  Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then claims that NIH uses the definition provided in regulations to determine if it is or is not 'Gain of Function' research and then Dr. Ruiz stated that witness after witness has reminded the subcommittee that NIH refers to regulations for the definition of 'Gain of Function' research.

Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then proceeds to then ask Dr. Fauci about the regulatory definition of 'Gain of Function' research according to the 'P3CO' policy and then asks Dr. Fauci according to the regulatory definitions in P3CO, did NIH ever fund 'Gain of Function' research in Wuhan, China?

Dr. Fauci started to answers Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz question, but then started stuttering, then state as you said congressman.  Dr. Fauci then elaborated, "According to regulatory and operative definition of P3CO, NIH did not fund 'Gain of Function' research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology."

Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then thanks Dr. Fauci for repeating the so-called NIH P3CO policy definition for the committee to hear.  Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then referencing that Dr. Fauci had been consistent about this since the beginning of the pandemic and that Dr. Fauci had spoke about applying a definition found in the regulation of the P3CO frame work.  Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then asked Dr. Fauci if this was correct.  Dr. Fauci replied, "That is Correct."  Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then said that Dr. Fauci had made this clear his 2021 Senate testimony.

For some reason this rang a bell in our memories, so we did some research here at Peer Reviewed Politics on the P3CO framework and we found an NSABB Meeting Minutes from September 21, 2022, which talks about the definition of 'Gain of Function' research was not well defined.

Just so everyone knows what these acronyms like P3CO mean, we have checked the definitions within the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) Meeting Minutes; it means Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight (P3CO) and the acronym (PPP) means Potential Pandemic Pathogen and (ePPP) means enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogen.

As stated, these acronyms were taken for the NSABB Meeting Minutes and so was this Paragraph 'Finding 3', which clearly states the current P3CO policy does not adequately incorporate the local review and oversight roles played by investigators and institutions in the development, review, and ongoing oversight of research.

These NSABB Meeting Minute's go on to make recommendations under 'Recommendation 3'., which again clearly states the USG P3CO framework should be revised to articulate specific roles, responsibilities, and expectations for investigators and institutions for or evaluation of research for potential involvement of ePPP's.  Local compliance procedures should be better harmonized, strengthened where needed and resourced.  A USG contact entity should be designated to assist investigators and institutions in the review process and to provide oversight to ensure adequate evaluation.

Note: the date of these NSABB Meeting Minutes at the bottom of page 5.  Clearly the date is September 21, 2022 for these meeting minutes and Dr. Fauci testified before the Senate on November 4, 2021.  This is almost a year after Fauci had testified, and supposedly made it clear to the Senate, but here in the Meeting Minutes of the NSABB, the P3CO was not clear as Dr, Fauci and Dr. Ruiz both have claimed.  Remember, Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz had just thanked Dr. Fauci for repeating the so-called NIH P3CO framework, which Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz then said Dr. Fauci had made the definition clear.  Both Dr. Fauci and Ranking Member Dr. Ruiz have made a false claim about Fauci's testimony in the Senate on November 04, 2021.  There was not a clear policy or framework for the definition of 'Gain of Function' research.  Its very clear in the NSABB Meeting Minutes that the P3CO framework were not clear.

The picture below is part of the outline of the NSABB Meeting Minutes document which is the minutes of National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB).  You can click on the picture to see the full NSABB Meeting Minutes document, which discusses the flaws in the definition of the P3CO framework, whereas these minutes were done virtually on September 21, 2022, well after the pandemic, after the Senate hearing, and well after the investigations had started to take place in to the 'Gain of Function' research.

Its clear Dr. Fauci also had changed his response about this being a lab leak too, when responded to Rep. Morgan Griffith’s (R-VA) questions related to the possibility of this being a lab leak, Dr. Fauci now states that he thought it was possible, but not with NIH funding because they had nothing to do with the lab leak. 

You can watch the hearing on June 03, 2024, where Dr. Fauci gets grilled by the Oversight Committee.  Its apparent that Dr. Fauci is lying and has changed his story from the Senate hearing on November 04, 2021 from not being a lab leak, to its possible it may have been a lab leak, but the NIH had nothing to do with it.

Watch the June 03, 2024 oversight hearing here, its called A Hearing with Dr. Anthony Fauci.

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Media Attribution:  | Author(s): @Teapartier_Al on X.com - Oversight and Accountability Hearing | Date: Hearing on June 03, 2024 and Article Post on June 7, 2024 | Duration: 03:47:25 / 00:02:17 | Photo/Video Credit: Committee on Oversight and Accountability

District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, Aileen Cannon Order DOJ to Show Justification and to Unseal Documents.

Breaking News: U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon for the Southern District of Florida issued an order today demanding the Department of Justice (DOJ) show the reason and justification for their conduct and to Unseal Documents in former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case.

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Media Attribution: Southern U.S. District Court of Florida - Judge Aileen Cannon | Article Author: @TeaPartier_Al on Twitter | Date: August 07, 2023 | Video Clip Duration: 00:00:00 | Photo/Video Credit: Snapshot of a PDF from the Southern U.S. District Court of Florida

Video: Landlord Found Dismembered In Freezer.

CHICAGO, IL - A woman on who lives on the Chicago’s North Side noticed that her landlord was missing ended up calling the police, which led to the body of Frances Walker.

"When the police arrived, that individual told the police there was another suspect who lived in the residence who the other tenants were afraid of.  And that suspect had recently called a tow truck and carried a heavy bag out to the tow truck," said Brendan Deenihan, CPD Chief of Detectives...

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Media Attribution:  | Author(s): Dane Placko - News Report -  FOX 32 Chicago | Date: October 12, 2022 | Duration: 00:01:48 / 00:02:17 | Photo/Video Credit: FOX 32 Chicago

Video: Wisconsin Voter: Mandela Barnes Is Now Changing His Tune, Saying He Is for Police

Transcript:

Lawrence Jones: “Why are we just now finding out that Mandela Barnes the Lieutenant Governor’s for defund the police and now seems like he’s changing his tune, now that is a dead heat?” Unknown Female: “Yeah, he’s really changing his tone.  He — he used to say that letting prisoners out was sexy.  And now he’s trying to come across as a regular guy who’s for the police and that’s just not true.  And crime is a huge issue here.”

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Media Attribution:  | Author(s): Lawrence Jones, unknown female - Wisconsin, Mandela Barnes - Fox and Friends | Date: October 12, 2022 | Duration: 00:00:25 | Photo/Video Credit: Fox News Channel (FNC)

Video: Tiffany Smiley Is Asking If Patty Murray Is Afraid of Debating a Farm Girl?

TRANSCRIPT:

Steve Hilton: I love it.  You put that so well.  But what I really noticed is the emotion when you have these attacks I didn’t realize she was saying that about you, but it is so disgusting and insulting.  How dare they do that?

Washington State - Tiffany Smiley: You are so right, because if democracy really mattered to Patty Murray she would have no problem debating me prior to the ballots being dropped.  For the people of Washington State they deserve to know what’s on the ballot prior to voting and this was wrong with her country across the board these are not Democrat or Republican issues, Steve.  These are American issues, this is about giving us the quality of life that immigrants are coming here to get this is what my husband sacrificed for what our family sacrificed in the American dream for all of us, that is why we are standing up and fighting even in the press say I am a hand-picked candidate, someone picked me to get into the race.  Our family got into this race, because it was the right thing to do.  If the average American cannot stand up and be a voice then who are we anymore?  We are standing up for the American dream for our children, for your children, for all of Washington for generations to come.  I was 11 years old when Patty Murray was first elected.  I don’t know is she's afraid to debate a farm girl from Pasco Washington or is she afraid of her 30 year record as the entrenched Washington D.C. bureaucrat?  That is the question at hand.

Steve: That’s one of the most important points..

• Attribution: Peer Reviewed Politics™ | Media Attribution: Air.TV | Author(s): Steve Hilton, Tiffany Smiley - Interview - The Next Revolution With Steve Hilton | Date: September 18, 2022 | Duration: 00:02:03 | Photo/Video Credit: Fox News Channel (FNC)