Yes, my family has been well for the most part. I have a sister in Louisiana who contracted the v***s and was hospitalized for two weeks. I have known a few others that have had the v***s - most survived. Yes, the impact of the v***s continues to blunt most recreational activity in my area also. Camping out, hiking, etc., seem to be the most popular things to do. Sitting around the house is dreadful - but I am not one of those who believes it all to be a h**x - I believe in science and I believe in spirituality.

In regards to Trump, I now realize that how his administration turned out could have been predicted all along. Our country has always been based on a great experiment to determine if the freedom to choose what we believe -while respecting what others believe and peacefully coexisting could be achieved; under a banner of e******y for all. In my personal opinion, Trump and many others, sought to change the experiment to one in which only those with particular beliefs of superiority and privilege could attain the "dream" offered by the great experiment - even at the expense and well being of others. This has been tried and repeated throughout the history of the world - even before the time of Adam. I have little doubt that as there will most likely always be those who choose chaos and disruption over peace, more Trumps will bloom as the days go by.

Well, the experiment continues much to the chagrin and dismay of those who desire to usurp freedom and disengage e******y. We will monitor closely to see how this all plays out.

Are you speaking of the actual evidence seen in all the videos of Trump encouraging and inciting his supporters? Or are you speaking of the "invisible evidence" Trump and his minions claim to have regarding massive v***r f***d? Trump has claimed "r****d e******n" even when he (c***ted) won. So what is your point? And what do you say to those republicans who "won" their respective e******ns and still claimed that "the v****g was r****d?"

It appears that most republicans believe they can "have their cake and eat it too." sad.

I would agree with you if everyone living in the United States was a legal v**er. They are not, so, some means of securing the accuracy of the v**e must be in place. Why should someone who came here for access to the benefits afforded by the country but whose loyalty remains where they call home, have any claim on a v**e.

Gerrymandering suppresses no ones v**es. All it does is create advantages and disadvantages for the political parties involved. It doesn't impede or prohibit a single v**e.

BTW - Please use quote reply, not just reply. It is nice to be certain to whom you are addressing your posts.

If the case is "thrown out" that means it didn't have the merit to stand in the first place - hence the term "frivolous lawsuits" was coined. You really need to brush up on basic law. When you bring a case, but have no credible evidence (just because Trump "said" there was rampant fraud) then your case has "no legs" and cannot stand. The thing that is really sad is Trump and his cohorts knew their cases had no merit and it was largely Trump appointed "republican" judges who threw the cases out - obviously cases that should have never even been entertained, wasting taxpayer money.
It usually takes about 50 years before the government releases the "true" facts around such controversial issues. What do you suppose the "real t***h" will reveal about Trump and the complicit republicans?

I strongly believe the "real t***h" will reveal that Trump had serious dirt on those who refused to acknowledge the t***h and continued to support him - the type of dirt that would destroy their political careers and possibly end in jail time.
I suspect one such "real t***h" will show groups like the NRA were used to siphon illegal campaign money from Russia to republicans, and being the 'ring leader' Trump knows who got what - so they continue to support him no matter what foolishness he engages in. sad.

Yourr perception of what being "thrown out" means is not correct but I don't feel like explaining it to you. Most of the cases were "thrown out" due to procedural issues, ie-loop holes. It's is almost like not holding your mouth right, if that saying is familiar to you. And add to your legal incompetence, you still think Russia was the reason T***p w*n in 2016. For 4 years you have denied T***p w*n the e******n fairly and yet Trump questions this one for only a brief time and you get your panties all in a wad. I find your hypocrisy to be an overwhelming stink of a very fowl nature!

No matter - I know that nearly 60 fraudulent cases brought by Trump's lawyers were tossed because they had no merit - period. Here's a question for you: Trump claimed before the 2016 e******n that if he lost the e******n was r****d. Well it was r****d and he was appointed president - so why did Trump accept the presidency from a "r****d e******n?"
Here's another: republicans overwhelmingly supported Trump in 2020 -while Trump continued to claim if he lost the e******n was r****d. Why did those republicans accept their "wins" if the e******n was r****d?

I know you won't have an intelligent response because its a Catch-22. But t***h is; "you can't have your cake and eat it too."

No matter - I know that nearly 60 fraudulent cases brought by Trump's lawyers were tossed because they had no merit - period. Here's a question for you: Trump claimed before the 2016 e******n that if he lost the e******n was r****d. Well it was r****d and he was appointed president - so why did Trump accept the presidency from a "r****d e******n?"
Here's another: republicans overwhelmingly supported Trump in 2020 -while Trump continued to claim if he lost the e******n was r****d. Why did those republicans accept their "wins" if the e******n was r****d?

I know you won't have an intelligent response because its a Catch-22. But t***h is; "you can't have your cake and eat it too."

Here's the thing JW: per our law, if you are living here you are a citizen - look up the difference between "citizen" and "sovereign citizen" if you must. As far as having a claim on a v**e I don't see what the fuss is about. If a person, any person, is v****g for the candidate they believe will best serve their needs -which is really what the candidates are supposed to be running for in the first place -then who cares whether they are a citizen or sovereign? T***h is; republicans show no difference between refusing to allow immigrants to v**e than refusing to allow minorities in the south who can't read a v**e because they can't sign their names. Which of the two is more wrong - and if the candidates were truly about "serving the people" why should one's education level or skin color impede the right to v**e?
When you visit a foreign country isn't it nice to know that you are afforded the same rights and protections as that country's citizens even though you are not one of their citizens? Bottom line, to me, if a person lives and works in the US, obeys the laws and pays their taxes I couldn't care less where they came from nor the color of their skin. After all, lest we forget, the Pilgrims were immigrants too.