Article on How Depraved Bergoglio Is, and His End Game, by Henry Sire

Amici,

So, now we know. It was all a gambit to change the method the College of Cardinal elects a holder of the papal office. No more Josef Ratzingers or Karol Wojtyłas. Just either ogres like Bergoglio or wimps like Paul VI from now on out.

Friends, with the whole Bergoglio freak show is reaching its apex; Henry Sire, the Church historian, has an article at OnePeterFive published that is truly, really, and most sincerely a "must read" for Catholics. 

It reveals much about how unscrupulous a Machiavellian politician Bergoglio is now and in fact has always been, and how simply ruthless and wildly dangerous the man is to the Catholic Church, and to anyone, really, who gets in his way. Read the article for details. 

Lots and lots of details and particulars to be reflected upon, but wow: Sire reveals the end-goal, what all the pain Bergoglio has put us through is about: and that is to change the way popes are elected. Excerpt:

This was the disclosure of a plan to change the rules for the papal conclaves so as to introduce the participation of lay people, including women. What this showed us was that the point of the preceding Synod had not been the document to emerge from it, but the process itself. It was designed to soften up the Church for a revolution in the papal election. Thus we had had bishops making declarations like: “It will be impossible from now on to hold a Synod without lay participation.”

Popes elected by laity mixed with cardinals? Women? And you know it would be "Catholic" women equivalent to Harvard's president, Claudine Gay (important news regarding here).

Sire makes no predictions except to say it will only get worse. I myself, for whatever it is worth, would say that should this actually eventuate, the Schism in the Church will be finally formalized; i.e. a good number of Cardinals will not participate, or conclave among themselves and elect a pope that way, one against the mainstream Church. Think about it. Who in the Church would accept a "Bergoglio-pope" imposed without the smoke and mirrors, all the chaff and counter-measures veiled via a traditional "election"? This would be truly slapping Catholics "in your face" and smashing them into "shut up and take it" territory. 

Such a carefully lavender Mafia groomed individual would be naturally very naive and pliable, or easily blackmailable, or yet another "modernist" like Bergoglio, and probably callous and shallow in the extreme. It's one thing to argue Bergoglio was – or was not – validly elected. It's another to change the election process of a thousand years and simply install someone no one can trust to do anything but wreak more havoc. It would be like the Deep State cockroaches running Joe Biden suspending the Electoral College and just declaring Biden re-elected. (They're actually close to this now, trying to install illegal aliens into the U.S. military and allowing them to vote in federal elections.)

This rebellion against such an "election" would include more than Traditional Catholics, but we Trads are the tip of the halberd here. As Sire writes:

A corollary of this is (Bergoglio's) drive against tradition. Pope Francis realises perfectly well that the only real obstacle to his revolution comes from traditionalists in the Catholic Church, the only element with any backbone prepared to recognise that the emperor has no clothes. Hence the campaign he has waged throughout his pontificate against so-called “rigid” and “backward” Catholics, whom he derides at every opportunity.

So, there you have it, my friends. The Church's eleven Purgatorial years of this buffoon blatantly imposing ecclesiastical Hell-on-Earth finally making sense: it was all a gambit to change the method the College of Cardinal elects a holder of the papal office. A method to establish the "Ape of the Church" forever.

One thing would be true, at least. The "Conservative" Catholics and "mainstream Trads" won't be throwing the words sedevacantism/sedevacantist and schism/schismatic around as bombs at  those of us who have seen this fiasco from the get-go.

           AnP

Reflections on the "Ineptocrats", the Electoral College, and "The Democrats have gone full crazy..."

Amici, a Chairde,

Can the American political scene get any stranger? While of course many of "usual suspects" of global punditry continue to excoriate Donald Trump and those uncouth "deplorables" who elected him, still, its the Democrats who have gone mad. Many articles are out there now demonstrating how insane the Democrats have gone. "Insane" in the sense of pushing crazed sexual confusion and dysphoria while concurrently exalting infanticide, promoting a rabidly pro-Muslim position, and to top it off: Socialism; that is, dumping all these full-force on an American public that historically repudiates Socialism, finds the sexual stuff utter madness, and is repulsed by Islam.

• This is quite amazing and indicative of the divide between American "elites", who often have a more "European"-based education, and the non-elites, who are more "American". While the American elites constantly compare themselves to the rest of the world – and most often, they do so from a sense of cultural inferiority and envy – "real" Americans (like "real" Germans and "real" Frenchmen, working class and middle class people slaving away at life) traditionally are not that interested in the rest of the world; we simply don't give a damn what European or Asian elites think of us. The idea that any part of the world is "culturally superior" is an absurdity to them. (That's as true to "average" Americans as it is to "average" Europeans.)
• This opens up another idea: Germans upper classes were, by and large, more or less, far "culturally superior" to the English throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, and into the 20th. Robert (von Ranke) Graves, the British author known mostly for "I, Claudius" today, if he's remembered at all, had written in 1929 a biography titled "Good-bye to All That" about his life, and I actually read part of it at one point. He grew up half in England and half in Germany (pre-WWI Germany) and it was clear the Germans were FAR more "culturally advanced" than the English, and Graves English school mates teased him mercilessly about it – for example, his taste in classical music. Yet ironically enough, it wasn't the English didn't sent six million Jews to the gas chambers, and they would never have thought of such a thing. Clearly, "cultural superiority" is not what it is cracked up to be.

Socialism

But even though "average" Americans aren't interested in the world, even still, a great many "American" Americans know Socialism is a fake thing, a fig-leaf for grabbing power, a sort of pied piper leading the ignorant to slavery: https://amgreatness.com/2019/03/17/socialists-dont-really-believe-in-socialism/

Yet the Democrats embrace Socialism, openly. "Out and Proud," now, as it were. They got Bill Clinton elected in 1992 because Ross Perot split the Republican vote, and they got Obama elected in 2008 because, as Joe Biden himself once said, Obama was a "clean" Black, but their Party has no new ideas. Until this sudden turn toward the Far Left, the Dems were talking like it was 1932 still. Then along came the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez generation. As these began to get elected, things began to change rapidly. From that moment on, commentators have been suggesting that the Democratic Party leadership seems to be surrendering to their radical "base". For example:

https://illinoisfamilyaction.org/2019/02/aoc-is-no-outlier/

Excerpt:

The party’s ostensible centrists are panicking, realizing that unless they can successfully cast AOC et al. as outliers, the party faces an electoral bloodbath in 2020. But there are few remaining Democratic centrists.

In fact, of course, the Party bigwigs (all old, rich, and very white people -- see below about the millionaires in New York City) fully intend on pushing the radicals to the side and inserting in an establishment presidential candidate when the time comes. For example: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/03/19/cnn-interviews-brad-parscale-then-accidentally-notes-the-dnc-2020-strategy/

Excerpt:

What Tapper notes as the urgent data collection priority of the DNC is specifically the reason why the club has enlisted Beto to draw-in the community they need to harvest.  The Democrats, specifically young democrats, have no idea how the ‘club’ plans to use them.

It is important to remember the DNC and RNC are private clubs. The club rules and processes have have no direct connection to the administration of government.

The DNC and RNC are completely private organizations with the ability to make their own rules, membership terms, conditions and agendas. You’d be surprised how many people do not know that simple point.

Indeed. People are being played. It's an old, old game, but the gamesters are doddering idiots today. Trump outplayed – massively so – the "GOPe" (Republican Party elites) establishment, and ultimately the Democratic establishment. They really, really didn't like that. Hence the endless effort to get Trump thrown out.

However, if this "bait and switch" is indeed the Democrat game, they'll be damned by their "base" on the one hand, and on the other, Trump will eat their establishment candidate alive, like he did GOPe scion Jeb! Bush and the rest of the "Club Men".

Otherwise, to phrase it in a calm, historical-based understanding, one can say the Democrats are trying to recreate the 1972 election for 2020. They went too far Left in 1972 and it cost them. Nixon won big. So they took out Nixon.

They've been desperately trying to take out Trump since 2016. But the more they attack him the more his base solidifies -- because the more desperate the Dems get, the more crazy they get, and we can all see what choice they're giving us. This cartoon below is an instant classic.

This is found at http://allnewspipeline.com/Cortez_Officially_The_Face_Of_Ineptocrats.php, which has the smarts to quote people who live in the U.S. now but who grew up under Communist regimes, people like my wife. These sorts think the U.S. has gone full bonkers. (My wife sure does.)

People who haven't "drunk the cool-aid" understand very well where this is heading, of course. For example, this Comment at: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/03/20/president-trump-notes-strange-candidate-platform-lower-voting-age-eliminate-electoral-college-increase-scotus-justices/#more-161448

trapper says:

March 20, 2019 at 1:15 am

In your wildest imaginings, think up the ideas that could do the most damage to America. Then wait for them to be proposed by the Democrats. Infanticide? Just wait for the maximum age proposal, because that is what they are going for. Banning meat. Rationing food. Severe restrictions on domestic travel. Mandatory gun turn-ins. Mandatory re-education. Total control over every aspect of everyone’s lives. By those who know best. To save the planet. Wait for it.

That's exactly where this is going. It comes down to a cadre of people who think they know how the rest of us should -- indeed, must -- live, and they're going to see we do as they command or else.

Weirdly, this has happened before in the United States. In 1861, Democrat-controlled satrapies in the American South voted to leave the Union rather than accept the election of a Republican. And notice how, after that upstart Republican had the effrontery to be re-elected, he was assassinated. (I pray the Secret Service is guarding Trump very closely!) Truly, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

That or else today doesn't (yet) involve secession (or, thank God, assassination), of course, but it does involve changing the Constitution to "stack" the Supreme Court https://pjmedia.com/video/three-ways-2020-dems-want-to-remake-the-supreme-court/ and removing the Electoral College.

Importance of the Electoral College

The U.S. wouldn't exist today had it not been for the Electoral College. It would have broken up long ago.

The United States isn't a democracy – "democracy" is just mob rule and it's never worked (or not outside of Switzerland). It has a history. A baleful history. But the American educational system is a Leftist production factory of homo ignorans maximands. This below is a great article on how the Electoral College works, and why: http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/16/the-electoral-college-still-makes-sense-because-were-not-a-democracy/

An excerpt (highlights/boldface mine):

The purpose of the Electoral College is to balance voting power across states so no one region of the country can gain too much control. If a president is elected by a simple majority of votes, a candidate who is wildly popular in one region (e.g., Ted Cruz in Texas, Mitt Romney in Utah) can ignore smaller regions and campaign only where large majorities are possible. Or a candidate who kills in California and New York can write off “flyover country” completely.

If, however, the Electoral College elects a president, a candidate who is wildly popular in one region must also prevail in a number of sub-elections to win. The Electoral College ensures a better result for the country as a whole than the democratic power play wherein 51 percent of us matter and 49 percent of us don’t.

Think of the Electoral College like the World Series. One person-one vote equates to the World Series Champions being determined by total number of runs scored. If the Dodgers win the first game 10-0, and the Yankees win the next four games 1-0, the Dodgers win the series. Even though the Yankees bested the Dodgers in four games, it doesn’t matter because the Dodgers scored 10 runs to their 4. One anomalous game decides the whole series. Without the Electoral College, a few heavily populated states decide the whole election.

So, the poor Electoral College sits condemned before its last meal because its power is misunderstood. How ironic—and tragic if no stay-of-execution arrives—that those who clamor for “one person-one vote” are seeking more power at the expense of power they already have.

What about Hillary winning the popular vote by three million votes?

According to Snopes (which may or may not be telling the truth, depending on which way the pixie dust is blowing), it says of how many counties Trump won vs Hillary: "Vote tallies by county differ depending on the standards used, but an Associated Press tally of the actual ratio pegged it at 2,626 to 487, not 3084 to 57" (Notice that "Vote tallies ... differ depending on the standards used...". I'm sure they do. /sarc)

But the obvious point remains the same: a huge section of the country would be discarded in dumping the Electoral College system for a popular vote. Hillary Clinton had 3 million total more votes than Trump but these came from the Democrat Party-controlled "asphalt plantation" Hell-holes – which is, increasingly, what the entire state of California is. Check this article out: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/03/the_financial_collapse_of_the_democratic_mayors.html

These big cesspool metropolises that are totally controlled by Democrats are bankrupt. (California itself is in meltdown: https://amgreatness.com/2019/03/09/video-victor-davis-hanson-on-california-in-collapse/)

An excerpt from the American Thinker article (highlights and boldface mine):

Recently, non-government organization Truth in Accounting published a report about the financial condition of the 75 largest cities of America.  As it turns out, 63 out of 75 cities in America were not able to pay bills at the end of the fiscal year of 2017.

The final result of this study was the calculation of the burden borne by taxpayers in these American cities.  The formula is simple: the financial balance of the city (positive or negative) is divided by the number of inhabitants.  The result is a good assessment of how effectively the city authorities work, depending on the positive or negative financial balance of the city per capita.

First, it is easy to see that the negative balance of cities at the bottom of a financial abyss exceeds the positive balance of those cities at the top of financial well-being by an order of magnitude.  Secondly, the political preferences of the inhabitants of these cities are quite unambiguous: they prefer almost exclusively Democrats.

For example, in San Francisco (California), the last Republican mayor was elected in 1964, in Honolulu (Hawaii) in 1994, in Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) in 1954, and in Chicago (Illinois) in 1931.  In New York, America's city in the most dramatic financial hole, the last real Republican mayor left the office in 2001.  Republican Rudy Giuliani was replaced by pseudo-Republican Michael Bloomberg, who eventually left the Republican Party.  Since 2014, the mayor of New York has been the communist Bill de Blasio, who methodically injects socialism into the city.

Ron again:

And just remember, friends, that New York boasts more millionaires than any other city in the world: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/18/new-york-city-has-more-millionaires-than-any-other-city-in-the-world.html

These are the places that voted for Hillary. They're the places driving the young generation of Socialists taking over the Democratic Party. They disaster twilight zones, bankrupt, failing, miserable. And their elites do not care. https://amgreatness.com/2019/03/18/the-elite-pulls-up-the-ladders-behind-them/

And the "young Turk" Socialists would turn the whole country into Chicago or Detroit. Or in a word, Venezuela.

And also, we see in California that "vote harvesting" is an outrageous fraud. Even a conservative estimate (by the cautious Tom Fitton, of Judicial Watch) has 900,000 non-citizens voting in the 2018 election. If 2020 turns out to be an electoral jungle "red in tooth and claw" you can expect a full-blown Revolution. There won't be any choice except to "Cry havoc! And let slip the dogs of war". Elections simply must be "purer than Caesar's wife" or ballots will be replaced by bullets.

And Trump is going to win in 2020 because, simply put, he puts "America First" and "rank and file" Americans like that. So, he'll win, unless they take him out by voter fraud or literally take him out. I fervently hope his Secret Service protection is first-rate.

An Préachán

PS Oh, and this: