There is nothing on this earth of greater wealth than this. Absolutely no other form of wealth is even real. Only this is true wealth. The wealth of a family, of a community, the true wealth of an entire people. https://t.co/yVPinBYc7C
— EM Burlingame - 蒲 奕 言 (@EMBurlingame) January 4, 2026
Monday, January 5, 2026
EM BURLINGAME: There is nothing on this earth of greater wealth than this. Absolutely no other form of wealth is even real. Only this is true wealth. The wealth of a family, of a community, the true wealth of an entire people
🔴 LIVE: Arizona State Legislature Holds Public Hearing on 2020 Election. Election Integrity Hearing With Select Members of Arizona's Legislature
7 hours of examination.
Jan Bryant is a real American hero.
Elections were held in the United States on November 3, 2020. The Democratic Party's nominee, former vice president Joe Biden, defeated incumbent Republican president Donald Trump in the presidential election.
HOLD ON TO YOUR HATS: Maduro allows himself to be ‘captured’ and spills the beans on how Venezuela helped the US Democrats steal the 2020 election… Then Trump will pardon him and his wife and go after the Democrats. 2026 will be lit yall
Jan Bryant, a Maricopa County election worker, is a real American hero. Emulate her. Do as she does, do as she did.
Yes. If Trump wanted Maduro dead why do you think he wouldn't just vaporize him? Maduro had value as a witness. He's going to pay for his crimes, but not all of them to the max.
— Tom Luongo (Head Sneetch) (@TFL1728) January 5, 2026
He will get a chance to redeem himself. https://t.co/HvbFztLte2
Grok explains that,
The two speakers in this cross-examination clip from the November 30, 2020 Arizona election integrity hearing are witness Jan Bryant (a Maricopa County election worker) and Arizona State Representative Mark Finchem (the primary questioner in the exchange).
Runbeck. ballots that came in from military and overseas.
00:00 So there were trucks that showed up on the 3rd and then the 4th, and then the 5th, and how long did that go on, how many days . . .
Well, I wasn't there the whole last week . . .
For as long as you can recall how many days?
00:15. My last day was the 10th, and they were still coming in [trucks] and they were coming from a company called Runbeck that does the high speed scanning and printing of duplications and I think the military ballots . . . I'm getting out of my comfort level here talking about this. I don't know what they're doing, but those ballots were coming in from a high speed scanning company called Runbeck that . . . apparently, you haven't heard of Runbeck . . . .
No, I've heard of Runbeck ma'am but what I'm trying to figure out is whether they printed them or they scanned them and if they scanned them off-site, to what purpose?
I can't tell you that.
Because it wasn't that your job to scan them? I mean not your job, but
Yeah, no all the high-speed scanning happens at Runbeck, so those ballots go to Runbeck. As far as I know, there were no observers there. I don't know. I never got called to work at Runbeck. That's all I can tell you.
Okay, with all due respect, Mr. Cook, now we've opened up a whole new can of worms.
And again I don't know enough about it to be the witness.
No, that's fine your observation is useful here. So what you're telling me . . . I'm going to play this back to you a second. The scanning was wasn't actually done on-site at a Maricopa County structure. It was done some place else.
. . . where they're very high speed scanners, yeah.
Well, right now I really don't care what the speed is. I want to know were they Dominion scanners?
No, no, I don't think it has anything to do with Dominion.
So I'm trying to understand, what was the purpose of scanning them in advance of them being tabulated on the Dominion equipment?
They were duplications, the ballots that wouldn't read through the tabulation machines. They were ballots that came in from military and overseas, but there were more ballots than that. So I don't know where the rest of them were coming from because they kept bringing trays of them in. So I don't know where they were coming from. That's a question for the County Employees to explain to you where are those ballots came from . . .
BREAKING - Communist agitator and leader of “The People’s Forum,” Manolo De Los Santos, who has received $20 million from CCP affiliated Marxist billionaire Roy Singham, has been identified as the leader of yesterday’s “protest” to free Maduro in NYC.
BREAKING - Communist agitator and leader of “The People’s Forum,” Manolo De Los Santos, who has received $20 million from CCP affiliated Marxist billionaire Roy Singham, has been identified as the leader of yesterday’s “protest” to free Maduro in NYC. pic.twitter.com/bDuCI3v5nM
— Right Angle News Network (@Rightanglenews) January 4, 2026
$20 million? Wouldn't his bank flag that amount of deposit, direct deposit?
Nick Shirley has really launched an army of young citizen journalists. But I'll betcha that the fraud train keeps rolling.
J. MICHAEL WALLER: Solid, sharp explanation of why Greenland is becoming more and more vital to US defense and security, and possible solutions. It has nothing to do with mining.
Solid, sharp explanation of why Greenland is becoming more and more vital to US defense and security, and possible solutions. It has nothing to do with mining. https://t.co/h2XDTm11Rp
— J Michael Waller (@JMichaelWaller) January 5, 2026
The most honest explanation for Greenland’s immediate strategic relevance has little to do with critical minerals or Arctic trade routes. Yes, Greenland has mineral deposits. But they are largely located in brutal environments that are politically and economically difficult to exploit. Kvanefjeld — the flagship rare earth project most often cited — illustrates the problem: rare earths are tightly entangled with uranium, making the project environmentally controversial, politically toxic locally, and expensive to permit and finance. Russia derives ~20% of its GDP from Arctic activity because it has to. The United States does not. We have cheaper, more accessible resource bases that dominate on cost and reliability. Greenland is not a decisive solution to US resource security. Arctic trade routes are similarly overstated. Yes, sea ice is melting, and traffic is increasing, but today that traffic overwhelmingly serves one purpose: moving Russian hydrocarbons and minerals to market (mostly China). The Northern Sea Route remains constrained by seasonal variability, insurance risk, limited SAR infra, weak comms, and dependence on icebreakers. For most container shipping, speed is not the binding constraint anyway. Ships deliberately travel slowly to conserve fuel and often wait days for port access on arrival. On many major routes — Rotterdam to Hong Kong, for example — Suez remains faster, cheaper, and more predictable than any Arctic alternative. The Arctic is becoming usable, but it will not reshape global trade anytime soon. China’s interest in Greenland over the past decade —airport financing, port proposals, mining projects, etc. — reflects this reality. These efforts were not about immediate economic returns, but long-term alignment and leverage. To Denmark’s credit, many of these initiatives were blocked or replaced with state funding (with the prodding of the US & EXIM). That response highlights the real strategic issue: who Greenland aligns with, not what it extracts. Denmark has increased financial support, but this hasn't stopped a growing independence movement. From a US defense perspective, the core concern is the Arctic as a strike vector toward CONUS. Pituffik Base already plays a central role in early warning/missile defense. We could see that extend to maritime monitoring of the North Atlantic (if it isn't already). But, critically, that mission does not require Greenland to become a US state. If the risk is that an independent Greenland might be pulled into alignment with unfriendly powers, the cleaner approach is not annexation but a Compact of Free Association — modeled on US agreements with the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau. Under COFA, sovereign states receive US funding, defense guarantees, and market access, while granting basing rights and strategic alignment. Applied to Greenland, this would allow them legal independence from Denmark and let them achieve a domestic political victory, while also deepening ties to the United States — all without the political, legal, or cultural costs of statehood. And those costs are not trivial. Greenland faces real social challenges — public health, economic dependency, limited administrative capacity— that would become US domestic issues overnight if Greenland were a state. Quietly but realistically, this is not something our political system is well-equipped or particularly eager to absorb. Alignment is far easier than integration. A good deal, as they say. Finally, Greenland matters in the context of Arctic seabed claims. In 2007, Russia’s decision to plant a flag on the seafloor at the North Pole was symbolic, but not meaningless. Control and alignment influence future legal claims over extended continental shelves, vast undersea resources, and maritime rights. These are slow, technical, legal contests, but they are precisely where long-term strategic positioning matters. Maybe not today, but in 50 years. In short, I think Greenland is uniquely important for America. Just not for the reasons I hear most people repeat. The case is about security, alignment, and law — not minerals or trade routes. At least not yet.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)