Theme: Deception

  • THE LIMITS OF THE MONOMYTH – ENDING DECEIT BY MYTHOS BY ENDING ABRAHAMISM (more

    THE LIMITS OF THE MONOMYTH – ENDING DECEIT BY MYTHOS BY ENDING ABRAHAMISM

    (more on extending – or limiting – Peterson’s thesis)

    Whereas:

    It is very hard to create a fiction (myth) that fails to ‘ring true’ because it makes use of the Monomyth, Limited Plots, the Archetypes, and the Virtues – and these categories reflect the methods of acquisition of methods of transcendence available to our psychology.

    It is very easy to create fictions in western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy by (a) the use of hyperbole (illustration by magnification), while avoiding idealism and supernaturalism, (b) the only difference between men, heroes, demigods, and gods, is the degree of their mortality or immortality, and the degree of hyperbolic exaggeration of their abilities, (c) men, heroes, demigods, and gods, are all bound by the forces of nature (d) the gods and demigods are flawed and capricious members of extended families (e) men, heroes and demigods can defeat the flaws and capriciousness of the gods, demigods, the heroes of our enemies, and our enemies by means of courage, wit, discipline, and sacrifice – “man can defeat evil men, the god and nature” (e)

    It is very easy to create fictions that are incompatible with western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy by means of inserting deceptions in the form of (a)idealism, (b)supernaturalism, (c)the power of gods over the forces of nature (d) contriving man’s inability to defeat gods (e) misrepresenting the will and intention of gods (f) demanding submission to gods, (g) directing protagonists to submit to this world of the gods rather than to transform it for the betterment of man. (h) directing we circumvent the costs of changing the world for the better because of its hopelessness.

    It is very easy to create fictions that are critical of western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy, by lionizing protagonists that defeat it. (marxist, and postmodern myths and pseudo-histories)

    It is very easy to create many trivial ‘essays’ rather than narratives outside of the monomyth in order to communicate experiences not lessons – as a means of criticizing the ‘meaningful’ monomyths and its Transcendence. (Postmodern literature)

    It is all too easy to create pseudoscience – Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor – (marxists), by overloading the knowledge and reasoning of people thereby forcing appeal to intuition rather than reason.

    It is all too easy to create pseudo-rationlism (pretense of philosophy) by loading, framing, overloading the rather limited abilities of people to reason thereby forcing appeal to intuition instead of reason – yet calling it philosophy (reason).

    It is all too easy to outright lie and chant propaganda (political correctness), thereby overloading their ability, desire, and NEED to reason, thereby forcing appeal to intuition instead of reason – yet calling it philosophy rather than simply propaganda, falsehood, and lie.

    It is all too easy for humans to fall prey to comforting lies, just as they fall prey to alcohol and drugs and gambling and a hundred other destructive vices. And that some myths *are designed precisely to do that*. After all, what is the difference between pedagogical myth for the purpose of transcendence so that one can succeed in the ‘market’ we call reality, and deceptive myth for the purpose of containment so that one can merely survive in a reality absent a market for transcendence because it is either impossible or one has been deluded that it is not desirable?

    Therefore:

    (1) the monomyth/archetype/plot/virtue structure is not enough to teach the virtues because it is not enough to defend against entrapment in deceit that counters the virtues. We can teach with the myths, but we can also DECEIVE with the myths. Because both teaching and deception require the use of ‘suggestion’ which provokes free association, which results in meaning. So we can either create true and good or false and bad meaning.

    (2) the *limits of myths* are just as necessary as the contents of those myths. In particular there is a vast difference between history, fiction, hyperbolic myth, idealism and supernaturalism. And a vast difference between submission and transcendence through action. So the myths constructed from the monomyth architecture can use good or bad virtues, good or bad limits, and good or bad methods of discourse. The good: historical, fictional, and hyperbolic, or the bad: ideal and supernatural and fictionalism.

    (3) myths can be used to harm mankind – and abrahamism in the form of judaism, christianity and islam have been used to harm mankind. In the case of judaism, the most literate people contributed nothing until converted to Aristotelianism; the christian dark ages were not exited until the reassertion of aristotelianism, and islam destroyed four ancient civilizations during their period of expansion, caused the majority of the european dark age, caused more death than the black plagues, and has caused ignorance, dysgenia, and poverty wherever it has gone. The the german abrahamists tried kantian idealism (pseudo-rationalism), the Jewish abrahamists tried pseudoscience via marx, freud and boaz; the french abrahamists tried postmodernism(anti reason, anti-logic, anti-truth, anti-science), and now the islamists have doubled-down on fundamentalism (anti-reason), raiding (terrorism), and dysgenia (overpopulation), and invasion (immigration) and propaganda (conversion).

    Summation:

    Reality is difficult. The universe is hostile to us. Other peoples are hostile to us. the west, the iranian branch, and the vedic branch created aristocracy

    The western group evolutionary strategy is profoundly expensive. We must act heroically. We must suppress our impulses. We must speak the truth regardless of its costs to the dominance hierarchy. We must participate in a militia. We can only gain the franchise through demonstrated sacrifice for the polity.

    The enemy of Aristocracy (meritocracy, truth, heroism, eugenics, excellence) is abrahamism (equality, dysgenia, falsehood, submission, subsistence).

    This battle has raged at least since 500bc. Arguably it has raged since the invention of fictionalism by Zoroaster: Zoroaster > Abrahamism > Judaism > the heresy of christianity > The heresy of Islam > the french, german, jewish and russian counter-enlightenments.

    REMEDY

    Today we will either end the second conquest of the west by waves of abrahamism, using a demand for (scientific) truth, goodness(heroism), and beauty(excellence), or we will collapse again into a dark age from which man may never recover – abrahamism is a desirable cancer of the mind, just as much as alcohol and opiates and religions are a desirable cancer of the mind.

    Acquisitionism, Propertarianism, and Testimonialism provide a method for the value neutral, loading neutral, framing neutral, analysis of the truth and falsehood, good and bad, of all human expression – including that of the Myths: Monomyth > Plots > Archetypes > and Virtues.

    End abrahamism, and end idealism, and require truth in matters of politics and thereby limit all actions and speech to fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary transfers of goods, services, and information, free of imposition by externality of costs upon the investments of others.

    It’s trivial. But we must abandon convenient habitual lies just as we have abandoned the convenience of fraud, the convenience of theft, and the convenience of violence, and the convenience of murder.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 08:25:00 UTC

  • THE MONOMYTH, ITS LIMITS, AND THE ENDING OF ABRAHAMISM It is very hard to create

    THE MONOMYTH, ITS LIMITS, AND THE ENDING OF ABRAHAMISM

    It is very hard to create a fiction (myth) that fails to ‘ring true’ because it makes use of the Monomyth, Limited Plots, the Archetypes, and the Virtues – and these categories reflect the methods of acquisition of methods of transcendence available to our psychology.

    It is very easy to create fictions in western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy by (a) the use of hyperbole (illustration by magnification), while avoiding idealism and supernaturalism, (b) the only difference between men, heroes, demigods, and gods, is the degree of their mortality or immortality, and the degree of hyperbolic exaggeration of their abilities, (c) men, heroes, demigods, and gods, are all bound by the forces of nature (d) the gods and demigods are flawed and capricious members of extended families (e) men, heroes and demigods can defeat the flaws and capriciousness of the gods, demigods, the heroes of our enemies, and our enemies by means of courage, wit, discipline, and sacrifice – “man can defeat evil men, the god and nature” (e)

    It is very easy to create fictions that are incompatible with western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy by means of inserting deceptions in the form of (a)idealism, (b)supernaturalism, (c)the power of gods over the forces of nature (d) contriving man’s inability to defeat gods (e) misrepresenting the will and intention of gods (f) demanding submission to gods, (g) directing protagonists to submit to this world of the gods rather than to transform it for the betterment of man. (h) directing we circumvent the costs of changing the world for the better because of its hopelessness.

    It is very easy to create fictions that are critical of western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy, by lionizing protagonists that defeat it. (marxist, and postmodern myths and pseudo-histories)

    It is very easy to create many trivial ‘essays’ rather than narratives outside of the monomyth in order to communicate experiences not lessons – as a means of criticizing the ‘meaningful’ monomyths and its Transcendence. (Postmodern literature)

    It is all too easy to create pseudoscience – Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor – (marxists), by overloading the knowledge and reasoning of people thereby forcing appeal to intuition rather than reason.

    It is all too easy to create pseudo-rationlism (pretense of philosophy) by loading, framing, overloading the rather limited abilities of people to reason thereby forcing appeal to intuition instead of reason – yet calling it philosophy (reason).

    It is all too easy to outright lie and chant propaganda (political correctness), thereby overloading their ability, desire, and NEED to reason, thereby forcing appeal to intuition instead of reason – yet calling it philosophy rather than simply propaganda, falsehood, and lie.

    It is all too easy for humans to fall prey to comforting lies, just as they fall prey to alcohol and drugs and gambling and a hundred other destructive vices. And that some myths *are designed precisely to do that*. After all, what is the difference between pedagogical myth for the purpose of transcendence so that one can succeed in the ‘market’ we call reality, and deceptive myth for the purpose of containment so that one can merely survive in a reality absent a market for transcendence because it is either impossible or one has been deluded that it is not desirable?

    THEREFORE

    (1) the monomyth/archetype/plot/virtue structure is not enough to teach the virtues because it is not enough to defend against entrapment in deceit that counters the virtues. We can teach with the myths, but we can also DECEIVE with the myths. Because both teaching and deception require the use of ‘suggestion’ which provokes free association, which results in meaning. So we can either create true and good or false and bad meaning.

    (2) the *limits of myths* are just as necessary as the contents of those myths. In particular there is a vast difference between history, fiction, hyperbolic myth, idealism and supernaturalism. And a vast difference between submission and transcendence through action. So the myths constructed from the monomyth architecture can use good or bad virtues, good or bad limits, and good or bad methods of discourse. The good: historical, fictional, and hyperbolic, or the bad: ideal and supernatural and fictionalism.

    (3) myths can be used to harm mankind – and abrahamism in the form of judaism, christianity and islam have been used to harm mankind. In the case of judaism, the most literate people contributed nothing until converted to Aristotelianism; the christian dark ages were not exited until the reassertion of aristotelianism, and islam destroyed four ancient civilizations during their period of expansion, caused the majority of the european dark age, caused more death than the black plagues, and has caused ignorance, dysgenia, and poverty wherever it has gone. The the german abrahamists tried kantian idealism (pseudo-rationalism), the Jewish abrahamists tried pseudoscience via marx, freud and boaz; the french abrahamists tried postmodernism(anti reason, anti-logic, anti-truth, anti-science), and now the islamists have doubled-down on fundamentalism (anti-reason), raiding (terrorism), and dysgenia (overpopulation), and invasion (immigration) and propaganda (conversion).

    SUMMATION

    Reality is difficult. The universe is hostile to us. Other peoples are hostile to us. the west, the iranian branch, and the vedic branch created aristocracy

    The western group evolutionary strategy is profoundly expensive. We must act heroically. We must suppress our impulses. We must speak the truth regardless of its costs to the dominance hierarchy. We must participate in a militia. We can only gain the franchise through demonstrated sacrifice for the polity.

    The enemy of Aristocracy (meritocracy, truth, heroism, eugenics, excellence) is abrahamism (equality, dysgenia, falsehood, submission, subsistence).

    This battle has raged at least since 500bc. Arguably it has raged since the invention of fictionalism by Zoroaster: Zoroaster > Abrahamism > Judaism > the heresy of christianity > The heresy of Islam > the french, german, jewish and russian counter-enlightenments.

    REMEDY

    Today we will either end the second conquest of the west by waves of abrahamism, using a demand for (scientific) truth, goodness(heroism), and beauty(excellence), or we will collapse again into a dark age from which man may never recover – abrahamism is a desirable cancer of the mind, just as much as alcohol and opiates and religions are a desirable cancer of the mind.

    Acquisitionism, Propertarianism, and Testimonialism provide a method for the value neutral, loading neutral, framing neutral, analysis of the truth and falsehood, good and bad, of all human expression – including that of the Myths: Monomyth > Plots > Archetypes > and Virtues.

    End abrahamism, and end idealism, and require truth in matters of politics and thereby limit all actions and speech to fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary transfers of goods, services, and information, free of imposition by externality of costs upon the investments of others.

    It’s trivial. But we must abandon convenient habitual lies just as we have abandoned the convenience of fraud, the convenience of theft, and the convenience of violence, and the convenience of murder.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 08:21:00 UTC

  • “Pilpul offends me. The fact that we’re not allowed to simply kill such creature

    —“Pilpul offends me. The fact that we’re not allowed to simply kill such creatures offends me. The fact that there is an entire people/culture/religion based around psychopathy as a group evolutionary strategy, offends me. Wasting a minute of my time slogging through that dreck, when it’s obvious someone is motivated to their core, by malice and duplicity, and will never even state a plain fact unless pinned down, with all alternatives denied, offends me to my core. It’s cognitively, and emotionally draining dealing with them. And they don’t even seem human. It’s like a malignant, unfathomable, hostile, alien, entity, with a human mask. And the damage it’s done, down through the years. It’s worth a lot of false positives to avoid false negatives in the identification and elimination of such evil.”—- Eli Harman


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-22 22:17:00 UTC

  • The problem is that while our hard sciences produce scientific statements irrele

    The problem is that while our hard sciences produce scientific statements irrelevant to the state, our social sciences produce pseudoscientific content in furtherance of the state, and our economic and financial system is structurally unscientific in furtherance of the state.

    So the means by which conservatives resist the pseudosciences of the state is to resist the sciences at all, as an opposition strategy, the same way that the marxists, postmodernists, and other pseudoscientists attack the civilization.

    So the only way we solve this problem is FULLY SCIENTIFIC including the social economic and political sciences or we continue to practice ‘cherry picking’ in the sciences.

    It’s that simple.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-22 18:22:00 UTC

  • THE TENETS OF POSTMODERNISM (“ANTI-LAW: WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH”) (‘the min

    THE TENETS OF POSTMODERNISM (“ANTI-LAW: WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH”)

    (‘the mind of the woman’)

    THE FALSE PROMISE OF ENLIGHTENMENT EQUALITY – Disillusionment with modernism – Postmodernists rue the unfulfilled promises of science, technology, government, and religion. DESPITE ITS MATERIAL ACHIEVEMENTS.

    WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH – There is no absolute truth – Postmodernists believe that the notion of truth is a contrived illusion, misused by people and special interest groups to gain power over others.

    WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH – Truth and error are synonymous – Facts, postmodernists claim, are too limiting to determine anything. Changing erratically, what is fact today can be false tomorrow.

    WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH – Rationalization – Traditional logic and objectivity are spurned by postmodernists. Preferring to rely on opinions rather than embrace facts, postmodernist spurn the scientific method.

    WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH: Traditional authority is false and corrupt – Postmodernists speak out against the constraints of religious morals and secular authority. They wage intellectual revolution to voice their concerns about traditional establishment.

    WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH: Collective Ownership – They claim that collective ownership would most fairly administrate goods and services.

    WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH – Morality is personal – Believing ethics to be relative, postmodernists subject morality to personal opinion. They define morality as each person’s private code of ethics without the need to follow traditional values and rules.

    WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH – Globalization – Many postmodernists claim that national boundaries are a hindrance to human communication. Nationalism, they believe, causes wars. Therefore, postmodernists often propose internationalism and uniting separate countries.

    WHATEVER I CAN GET AWAY WITH – All religions are valid – Valuing inclusive faiths, postmodernists gravitate towards New Age religion. They denounce the exclusive claims of Jesus Christ as being the only way to God.

    OPPOSITION ETHICS (Liberal ethics) – Postmodernists defend the cause of feminists and homosexuals. (Females defend children and weak regardless of merit)

    FEAR OF BEING LEFT BEHIND: Pro-environmentalism – Defending “Mother Earth,” postmodernists blame Western society for its destruction.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-22 12:56:00 UTC

  • “Crocodile Tears” (slang) noun Theatrical expressions of sorrow that are insince

    “Crocodile Tears” (slang) noun

    Theatrical expressions of sorrow that are insincere.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-22 11:54:00 UTC

  • The amount of rationalization of one stupid thing or another by some subset of t

    The amount of rationalization of one stupid thing or another by some subset of the right never ceases to amaze me. Monkeys on the Left. Monkeys on the Right. Makes no difference.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-22 10:09:00 UTC

  • POSTMODERNISM IS LYING ABOUT THIS WORLD, LIKE CHRISTIANITY THE NEXT – BUT POSTMO

    POSTMODERNISM IS LYING ABOUT THIS WORLD, LIKE CHRISTIANITY THE NEXT – BUT POSTMODERNISM’S JUST CHRISTIANITY V2.

    What is postmodernism but christianity by secular means? Outright lying about this world, rather than outright lying about a life after death?

    LYING.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-22 07:45:00 UTC

  • PETERSON’S POSTMODERNISM Peterson is in part a postmodernist because he relies u

    PETERSON’S POSTMODERNISM

    Peterson is in part a postmodernist because he relies upon a postmodern (utilitarian) definition of truth – as if the purpose of truth was choice of good or preference when we are cooperating, rather than decidability in matters of conflict when cooperation fails.

    The more complex the division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, negotiation, and advocacy, the greater requirement for decidability.

    Peterson (I assume) preserves this postmodernism, in order to preserve his fondness for literature, idealism, and supernaturalism, and especially conflationary idealism and supernaturalism (Fictionalism).

    I can understand why he needs this ‘crutch’ because the monomyth, the list of plots, the archetypes, and the virtues provide our best historical (empirically devolved) and most enduring analysis of psychology, and method of pedagogy.

    However, there is a very great difference between the teaching of meaning so that we may discover and seize opportunities in reality, and the teaching of law so that we may decide conflicts without provoking retaliation cycles.

    So while Peterson COULD say “truth is truth” and “wisdom is wisdom”, and while we can CHOOSE with wisdom, we can only DECIDE with Truth – he doesn’t. Instead, he conflates the personally preferable the common good and the necessarily true.

    Otherwise, Peterson is on the way to restoring our ancient literary ‘Religion’, but he seems bent on preserving the ‘fictionalism’ (lies) of Abrahamism.

    My question is, why preserve the lies of Abrahamism, if is is the use of the techniques of Abrahamism – fictionalism as a means of deception by suggestion – that the marxists (pseudo-science) and postmodernists (pseudorationalism) used to defeat the west in both the ancient (Forcible christianization) and modern (forcible marxism and postmodernism) eras.

    Once Peterson resolves this one question I think he’s not just telling the conservatives what they want to hear. Until then, that’s all he is doing.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    ===RESPONSE TO CRITICISM===

    —“You seem to equate fictionalism, i.e. system that deals in fictitious, imaginary semi-abstract universe and the lies….”—

    No. FIction vs Fictionalism. Fictionalism is a technical term. It means misrepresenting a fiction as existential or true.

    a) Historicize: deflate myth into history and literature for the purpose of decidability in matters of dispute.

    b) Fictionalize: convert into monomyth, plot, archetype, virtues for the purpose of meaning for the self.

    c) Fictionalism: conflate myth, history, literature, law, science, real and ideal for the purpose of deception for political ends.

    Compare 1) Science(measurements that remove error,bias,deceit), Common Law: empirical evidence of disputes. Economics: empirical record of demonstrated preferences. History (narrative of cause and effect), Literature(Fiction), Myth (hyperbole), under anthropomorphic gods, demigods, heroes all subject to the laws of the universe, who represent portfolios of virtues and sins for personal ends with 2) idealism supernaturalism, and conflation: supernatural authoritarianism, for the purpose of communicating POLITICAL ends, in which history, myth, laws, archetypes, ideals, utopias, and false promises of paradise in the present or after death are conflated. The most common examples are monotheistic religion (pseudo-myth) and mathematical platonism, marxist pseudoscience, and postmodern pseudo-rationalism.

    There is a difference between use of deflation by monomyth, plot, archetype and virtue, and use of conflation in matters of wisdom of the self, and the use of deceit in politics. Virtues assist us in maximizing opportunities while limiting negative consequences to ourselves and the polity. The individual can enact his own compromises and exchanges, but politics is not but a proxy for violence and is not a matter of wisdom but DECIDABILITY. If not, then it is not a matter for politics which can only be decidable if it is empirical.

    THis is how the left works: to circumvent the compromises of exchange necessary for the political to consist of moral actions (non parasitism).

    —“The fairy tale – is it a lie to be exterminated? It seems to be an idea so grotesque, that only the complete anti-humanist would dwell on it.”—

    A fairy tale consists of fiction (myth) not fictionalism (virgin birth of a savior).

    —“Well, it does. Because decidability in real world situation has nothing to do in general with verifiable truth in Popperian sense nor with falsifiability of the hypothetical proposition.”–

    Personal decidability does not, But POLITICAL decidability DOES. Because personal choice requires non-imposition, and political decidability requires imposition..

    There is a very good reason why the west, using common law, deflationary truth, deflated institutions, maintained the separation of religion(wisdom) and state(law). And that reason is largely responsible for western rates of development versus their nearest competitor the chinese who also avoided conflation.

    —“Now, I totally open to the idea that the scientific truth one day may tell me a good answer to that dilemma, but I am dealing with not a fictional proposal of a complete ULTIMATE science, but with a real and extremely limited science that does not know much about how an individual functions, nor how the society functions in a sense relevant to a question at hand.”—

    The fact that you cannot imagine that it is possible to create tests of dimensions in natural language the same way we create tests of dimensions in mathematical language is simply due to the very recent solutions to questions of language in philosophy, the development of algorithmic language in computer science, and the scientific method’s inversion of justificationism (intent) with criticism (darwinian survival of ideas in the market for application), and the very recent confirmation of stoic acquisitionism, which I’ve expressed as propertarianism. In other words, locke was close to the stoics: we can in fact reduce not only all moral action to statements of property, but all of psychology and sociology as statements of property – thus, providing the social sciences with the final unit of commensurability: property.

    So the fact that you don’t know those things is simply because it’s taken us from 300AD to the present to vacate enough of Abrahamic Fictionalism to restore our thought to it’s deflationary state 1700 years ago.

    Now if that loss of 1700 years, and the rather obvious fact that by Archimedes greece had started the industrial revolution, is not enough of a criticism of immigration of non-european underclasses, and the cancer of abrahamic fictionalism, I don’t know what is.

    We lost four great civilizations to Abrahamism in the form of judaism, christianity, and islam, and we are currently in the process of being forced into another migratory dark age by the fact that Abrahamic deceptions are so appealing to women and the underclasses.

    Is there a greater moral crime in all of history than Abrahamic Fictionalism? I don’t think anything comes close. Abrahamic fictionalism has no equivalent. It destroyed the ancient world, and it is in the process of destroying the modern.

    1) Zoroastrianism > Judaism > Christianity > Islamism defeated Greek and Roman Reason and destroyed north african, levantine, persian, byzantine and roman civilizations, and brought about the dark age through continuous raiding of the west.

    2) German Rationalism > Jewish Marxism > French Postmodernism > Puritan Feminism are defeating the anglo germanic enlightenment. The same process is being repeated. The only people to resist the abrahamic deceits were the north sea peoples who ‘saved themselves’ from Christianity, and the Chinese who built a wall to keep out the barbarians and preserved their kinship purity even at economic cost to them.

    So there is a very great difference between decidable literature of history, law, and science, and wisdom literature in the form of fiction, and fictionalism, in the form of abrahamic conflation and deception by suggestion.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 15:51:00 UTC

  • RT @RedNationRising: It wasn’t the Russians! Study reveals up to 5.7 Million ill

    RT @RedNationRising: It wasn’t the Russians! Study reveals up to 5.7 Million illegals voted in election. Is Anyone Surprised? https://t.co/…


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-21 03:14:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/877364132780965888