Trump demands that Georgia Secretary of State change votes so he wins.

[welch]

In a violation of a couple of election laws and of the cautions of the Framers and of US tradition, Trump can be heard alternately threatening the Secretary of State of Georgia unless Secretary Raffensberger "finds" enough votes to make Trump winner of Georgia's presidential election, or begging Raffensberger to do so. Raffensberger refuses, telling Trump that the votes have been counted honestly and legally, that recounts (three of them) have found the same result: Biden won by about 11,700 votes. Raffensberger replies to each of Trump's, and the Republicans', imaginary complaints. "No", that did not happen.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/d45acb92-4dc4-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html

Article includes part of the tape of the call.

[TSherbs]

Isn't that what democracy is?--if you don't like the result, just try to erase it?

Ethically craven.

[welch]

The Post has published the audio and a transcript of the entire Trump call to Raffensberger and to the legal counsel for the Georgia Secretary of State. Here it is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1HwuiVUN5klyLIB CLst-4sfrOhjc4w5-IpClF4OOOn_9g1TFbBmg_p1z4

[TSherbs]

The Post has published the audio and a transcript of the entire Trump call to Raffensberger and to the legal counsel for the Georgia Secretary of State. Here it is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html?fbclid=IwAR1HwuiVUN5klyLIB CLst-4sfrOhjc4w5-IpClF4OOOn_9g1TFbBmg_p1z4

That's behind a paywall.

But I have read excerpts elsewhere. What a scumbag chiseler Trump is.

from Yahoo news feed: >>Legal experts told the Post the phone call puts Trump in "legally questionable territory" since it could be construed as an attempt to get Raffensperger to doctor Georgia's election results, but ultimately they believe the "clearer transgression is a moral one." <<

Ha. The "clearer transgression is a moral one." But hey, it's his "right"! It's a "perfect" phone call.

Trump has a habit of making these "perfect" phone calls when he asserts his leverage to make legally questionable and morally reprehensible requests.

[dneal]

Here's the transcript of the phone call. Please cite where Trump is demanding the Georgia Sec o State "change" votes.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html

[welch]

Try considering the English language, dneal. Trump demands that Georgia, after three recounts, should FIND 12,000 extra votes for him. Do you really believe that Georgia misplaced 12,000 Trump votes?

Did you bother to read the transcript? Remember Trump's claim that Georgia hid hundreds of thousands of Trump votes? Did you read that without laughing at Trump?

[TSherbs]

Here's the transcript of the phone call. Please cite where Trump is demanding the Georgia Sec o State "change" votes.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html

Whom are you quoting with that word "change" referring to "votes"?

[TSherbs]

Try considering the English language, dneal. Trump demands that Georgia, after three recounts, should FIND 12,000 extra votes for him. Do you really believe that Georgia misplaced 12,000 Trump votes?...

What has been asserted above in this thread is that the possibility is so deeply ingrained in a sufficient number of citizens that the government should spend time and money beyond that already expended in multiple recounts and certifications and 60+ rejected legal filings and responses from the courts, all the way to the Supreme Court! There's the outrageousness in the request: make the effort cuz there's a conspiracy earworm circulating in Trumpville that 60+ court rejections has not been able to dispel. Spend more time on this lack-of-evidence case in order to disprove an already-discredited theory! Hop to it! And you had better have convincing evidence that this conspiracy does not exist (evidence of a negative) or the worm will dig deeper into my brain cuz Trump keeps pushing it further in!!!

[dneal]

Try considering the English language, dneal. Trump demands that Georgia, after three recounts, should FIND 12,000 extra votes for him. Do you really believe that Georgia misplaced 12,000 Trump votes?

Did you bother to read the transcript? Remember Trump's claim that Georgia hid hundreds of thousands of Trump votes? Did you read that without laughing at Trump?

I read it. I'm just asking for the specific cite that supports the claim. I see phrasing that (if you consider the English language) says (paraphrasing) "if you look, you'll find fraudulent votes". A specific example is: "We think that if you check the signatures — a real check of the signatures going back in Fulton County you'll find at least a couple of hundred thousand of forged signatures of people who have been forged."

or

"And you will find you will be at 11,779 within minutes, because Fulton County is totally corrupt and so is she, totally corrupt."

That's the context of Trump's comments. I think the verbiage that's being taken out of context is:

"And you are going to find that they are — which is totally illegal, it is more illegal for you than it is for them because, you know what they did and you're not reporting it. That's a criminal, that's a criminal offense. And you can't let that happen. That's a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. And that's a big risk. But they are shredding ballots, in my opinion, based on what I've heard. And they are removing machinery and they're moving it as fast as they can, both of which are criminal finds. And you can't let it happen and you are letting it happen. You know, I mean, I'm notifying you that you're letting it happen. So look. All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state."

That's not asking a fellow republican who has been hostile to the Trump position to change votes. He's communicating what he (as a candidate) wants to find, and assumes he will if the Sec State allows or conducts an investigation.




Whom are you quoting with that word "change" referring to "votes"?

The thread title.

[welch]

It's the English language, dneal. Try reading the transcript. If the votes are the votes, as three recounts and as Secretary of State Raffensberger kept telling Trump, then how can Raffensberger find 12,000 more Trump votes? The logic is clear and simple. Trump's demand is clear. And crazy.

The entire call is here for you: listen to Trump's insanity, to his opening howl that goes on so long that Mark Meadows is forced to interrupt. Note that Trump begins by insisting that he won Georgia because he had bigger rallies, the biggest, most beautiful rallies ever. And Biden had no rallies. Therefore, Trump won Georgia by hundreds of thousands of votes that he demands that Raffensberger find. Listen to Raffensberger and Germany tell him, patiently, that the votes have been counted and there are no more ballots hiding anywhere.

Read and listen to Trump threaten Raffensberger and Germany. Listen again. That is corruption.

Pull out you copy of Madison's Notes and your copy of the Federalist. Hunt down a copy of the Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution edited by John Kaminski. It is available on-line. In state after state, delegates to ratification conventions argued that the office of the chief executive, the President, might be corrupted by someone who used the central power to override an election. To retain power. The ratifiers seem to have forgotten to name Trump, but they described him.

[dneal]

I read the transcript. I posted a link to the entire transcript, not you. You said "Trump demands that Georgia Secretary of State change votes so he wins.", not me.

You're deflecting and insulting when you could just be backing up your (and the WashPost's) claim. So go ahead, use a ctrl-f function or read the doc and copy/paste it. You can't, and you know it.

I'm just pointing out that the WashPost is full of shit. I really don't know why you guys keep citing it when it hasn't had any credibility for the past decade. Bezos buying it just made it worse. For some reason you guys think pointing out Dem talking points makes me a Trump supporter, even though I point out that the conservative rags are full of shit too.

[dneal]

Let's just briefly peruse the record.

Inauguration Day, 2016. Liberals are smashing windows and burning stuff, screaming to the sky that Trump stole the election. They then lost their minds over a stupid comment about a crowd that the press secretary made. TRUMP'S A BIG FAT LIAR!!!

Then there was the story about Trump paying Russian hookers to pee on him.

That was followed by three years of "Russian Collusion". The left ate that up. Adam Schiff leaked like a sieve and claimed the intel community provided him with proof of it. That was a lie. The Muller investigation spent three years and 30 million dollars and couldn't prove anything, but liberals swore it did. The liberals still went ahead with impeachment proceedings. Turned out it was all based off a fake dossier Hillary paid for. An FBI lawyer is being sentenced right now for forging a document to get a FISA warrant.

Remember that poor Sandmann kid who The Washington Post had to settle with because of the lies they told about him? That's not even an integrity issue as much as an issue of decency. A major media outlet (several, actually) defamed an innocent teenager.

Hunter Biden? Russian disinformation, the liberal media told us. Now we know he's been under investigation since 2018.

The left has been pushing lies for four years. But now we should trust them when they immediately claim "nothing to see here" and social media tags or bans posts? What are they hiding? Who has a track record of being delusional?

Four democrat controlled cities in four swing states had the same series of events happen.

- Changed rules outside the legislature to expand mail-in ballots.
- Stopped counting votes around midnight, and started counting again in the wee hours of the morning.
- Trump's overwhelming lead turned into a marginal Biden lead at 4 o'clock in the morning.

That's an anomaly, and the first time I can recall that happening in an election. It's suspicious, and warrants looking into. The media screams louder that those people are delusional conspiracy theorists and block any look into public records that are required to be maintained for 22 months. Maricopa County is still fighting a legislative subpoena. Michigan Secretary of State fought to block examination of voting systems. The list goes on. If there's nothing to hide, and nothing nefarious; why not let people see? What do you have to hide? The denial strengthens the suspicion.

Over 17000 votes in Dougherty County, GA were deducted from Trump. The data was presented at a GA senate hearing on 30 December. No user input error. This is what came from the Scytl server (which is sent to the GA Secretary of State office and the Edison system that goes to news outlets). That's after counties submit their votes. At 2:34 AM, Trump had 20,189 votes in that county. At 2:40 AM he had 8,699. In Dodge County, he lost 7008 votes. In Putnam County he had 5935 votes go "poof". In eight minutes the Edison feed showed Trump losing 12,173 votes and Biden gaining that exact amount. That happens in Michigan? "User error". Exact same thing happens in multiple counties in Georgia? No wonder no one wants to look into potential problems. No wonder all we hear is deflection and lies about Trump losing 50 court cases. Yeah, people are just delusional conspiracy theorists... Maybe there's a plausible explanation, but you have to look into it to find out.

Pointing that out doesn't make me a Trump supporter. It makes me honest and objective.

p.s.: Lin Wood is bat-shit crazy, and he's an example of the looneys on the right. I can acknowledge that they exist on both sides. I think suing Pence or trying to get him to not acknowledge electoral votes is a bad precedent (even though curiously there's a lot of precedent for it, starting with John Adams). If this forum were full of Trump supporters, I would be contradicting their bias too.

[TSherbs]

Let's just briefly peruse the record.

Inauguration Day, 2016. Liberals are smashing windows and burning stuff, screaming to the sky that Trump stole the election. They then lost their minds over a stupid comment about a crowd that the press secretary made. TRUMP'S A BIG FAT LIAR!!! ....

Why should anyone continue reading this after *that* summary of "the record"? That summary is as biased as they come and does not represent any "record." You claim "objectivity," in bragging terms, but I call false.

Each matter that you point out has already been addressed by state officials. The officials certified the counts. The officials are from both parties.

Conspiracists love to make meaning in patterns; it gives them the dopamine hit that they are looking for.

[dneal]

Why should anyone continue reading this after *that* summary of "the record"? That summary is as biased as they come and does not represent any "record." You claim "objectivity," in bragging terms, but I call false.

Exactly, but that knife cuts both ways. You just can’t see, and/or won’t admit your own bias. Sometimes people call that denial, sometimes they call that delusional. Perhaps you’re unconsciously projecting in all your accusations...

[TSherbs]

Why should anyone continue reading this after *that* summary of "the record"? That summary is as biased as they come and does not represent any "record." You claim "objectivity," in bragging terms, but I call false.

Exactly, but that knife cuts both ways. You just can’t see, and/or won’t admit your own bias. Sometimes people call that denial, sometimes they call that delusional. Perhaps you’re unconsciously projecting in all your accusations...

I don't recall ever denying that I have bias. There is no person nor any publication without it. I have a long personal story (I am over 60 years old) with politics and voting and journalism (I have taught it).

I hate Trump, personally. I consider him despicable and craven. I consider his lawyers to be doing the worst of legal work: enabling moral evil. I have not denied any of this, so I am not "projecting" anything on you. It's just so easy to recognize *your* bias, even while you deny having it (which tends to call even more attention to it).

Now, back to the election results, the legal cases, and recent news.

Trump's phone call was an attempt to "change the vote" as in vote outcome and, in some cases, to review actual individual votes and invalidate them or to "find" stray or missing Trump votes and validate them. It strikes me as a fair representation to say that he is attempting to change the credit or worthiness of some actual individual votes. Yes. You took that thread title and read it in the most narrow way in order to criticize a point that no one in the thread was actually claiming.

I, for one, am very glad that Raffensberger taped that call. Everyone should record every dealing that they have with that crazy snake.

[welch]

“The people of Georgia are angry, the people of the country are angry. And there’s nothing wrong with saying that, you know, um, that you’ve recalculated.”

So, um, Trump demands that the State of Georgia "recalculate" the votes to "find" an extra 12,000 votes for Trump. That is nazi-talk, an attempt by Trump, the ex-president, to overturn a US election that was tested in court 60 times and found to be sound and honest. It happens that Secretary of State Raffensberger and his legal council refuted every one of Trump's laughable claims. You, dneal, keep repeating garbage from conspiracy websites that ignore every single explanation by the Republican election officials in Georgia.

Your charges get sicker and sicker. Trump led in votes counted the evening of election day? So what? Many people voted by mail. Democrats tended to vote by mail, as every single scrap of evidence suggested long before the election. Trump badgered his voters to vote in person, for the same reason he demanded that his True Believers show their "manhood" by refusing to wear masks, just as he encouraged his deluded followers to jam together without masks at his rallies.

Many states counted mail-in votes only AFTER counting in-person votes. Why is it surprising that votes counted later tended toward Biden?

Further, we know that about half of all Georgians live in Atlanta and its suburbs? Why are you surprised that the Atlanta votes shifted the total count toward Joe Biden??

We know that most states are that way: New York County, which is Manhattan, has more voters than Delaware County, a dying ex-farm county upstate. Chicago carries more weight that Downstate. Baltimore, its suburbs, and the Maryland suburbs of DC have far more people than the counties west of the Catoctin Mountains. What's the surprise?

Do you claim that it is illegal for Americans to vote? Or to vote against your wishes? That is Trump's argument and the argument of the Trumpists who now dominate the Republican Party. Trump spits his fantasy into the phone, and we hear him threatening Raffensberger with some sort of Federal arrest unless Raffensberger submits to Trump's imaginary claim that hundreds of thousands of Trump votes vanished on election day.

Then there is your nonsense claim that "liberals" broke windows in Washington when Trump was inaugurated. Check the news, including the Washington Post -- the local newspaper -- and the Times. About two dozen kids dressed in black hoodies ran down a block breaking car windows, some store windows maybe, and setting fire to trashcans. They were arrested. In your even-steven wacky telling, that equals a calculated effort by the defeated President of the United States to overturn the US election so he can remain in power indefinitely. The black bloc is minor street crime. Trump's is treason by making war on the Constitution of the United States.

That's Trump. dneal, you are arguing against reality.

[dneal]

And you take the quote out of the context of the paragraph (and indeed the entire conversation) to convince yourself Trump is pressuring a hostile Sec State he has no authority over. What's Trump's leverage to get the guy to do anything?

That's some seriously blue Kool-aide you're swallowing.


And so I just don't know, you know, Mark, I don't know what's the purpose. I won't give Dominion a pass because we found too many bad things. But we don't need Dominion or anything else. We have won this election in Georgia based on all of this. And there's nothing wrong with saying that, Brad. You know I mean, having the correct — the people of Georgia are angry. And these numbers are going to be repeated on Monday night. Along with others that we're going to have by that time which are much more substantial even. And the people of Georgia are angry, the people of the country are angry. And there's nothing wrong with saying, you know, um, that you've recalculated. Because the 2,236 in absentee ballots. I mean, they're all exact numbers that were done by accounting firms law firms, etc. and even if you cut 'em in half, cut 'em in half and cut 'em in half, again, it's more votes than we need.

Trump didn't demand anything you're suggesting. If you want to talk about "charges getting sicker and sicker", one only needs to look at the title of this thread.

[dneal]

I don't recall ever denying that I have bias. There is no person nor any publication without it. I have a long personal story (I am over 60 years old) with politics and voting and journalism (I have taught it).

I hate Trump, personally. I consider him despicable and craven. I consider his lawyers to be doing the worst of legal work: enabling moral evil. I have not denied any of this, so I am not "projecting" anything on you. It's just so easy to recognize *your* bias, even while you deny having it (which tends to call even more attention to it).

Now, back to the election results, the legal cases, and recent news.

Trump's phone call was an attempt to "change the vote" as in vote outcome and, in some cases, to review actual individual votes and invalidate them or to "find" stray or missing Trump votes and validate them. It strikes me as a fair representation to say that he is attempting to change the credit or worthiness of some actual individual votes. Yes. You took that thread title and read it in the most narrow way in order to criticize a point that no one in the thread was actually claiming.

I, for one, am very glad that Raffensberger taped that call. Everyone should record every dealing that they have with that crazy snake.

Fair enough. I'll be happy to criticize the conservative side if you like. Where would you like me to start? I already noted Lin Wood was bat-shit crazy, and that the suit against Pence was ridiculous.

I am curious if you think there is anything about the election that could give an objective observer a modicum of a reason for suspicion?

I've been watching various lawyers on YouTube offer their opinions, mainly because I find the legal wranglings and historical precedents interesting. YouTube suggested one who is Canadian (and therefore presumably free of interest in either party's success). He comments on many things going on, from lockdowns to Ghislane Maxwell's case; and often has American attorneys as guests to explain U.S. law. Even he sees the legal merits of the Trump "election was stolen" claims and that the courts have not truly addressed the claims.

That's most in line with my perspective. I don't love Trump, and I don't hate him. I didn't love or hate Clinton, Bush or Obama. Army officers had a tradition of neutrality, which I try to maintain and wish some of our more recent generals would remember. General Dempsey is probably the last one who reminded his peers of their moral obligation to shut the f*ck up. I've never been a fan of General Flynn. I hated that he was picked for a position (because of what I know about him through the Army and won't go into here). I also thought his case was prosecutorial misconduct. His comments on seizing machines is reprehensible, and if I were king for a day I'd prosecute him under the UCMJ (which retired officers are still subject to) for conduct unbecoming (for starters).

[TSherbs]

And you take the quote out of the context of the paragraph (and indeed the entire conversation) to convince yourself Trump is pressuring a hostile Sec State he has no authority over.

What do you mean by the word in red? All I saw Raffensberger do was defend the conclusions of his state's procedures (and his own personal and professional integrity) and deny the insinuations of the president. Why are you calling him "hostile"? Is this your idea of lack of bias?


What's Trump's leverage to get the guy to do anything?
Is this a serious question? You don't seem naive, so I am flummoxed by this question. Maybe you are being sarcastic.

dneal, you should drop this pretense of being a middle-of-the-roader with an objective point of view

[dneal]

There are plenty of Republicans that are anti-Trump. Not all are as obvious as Romney is or McCain was. Raffensberger would have been all over an investigation if he were a ‘Trumpist’, or an opportunist like Lindsay Graham.

Yes, I’m serious about what leverage does a sitting President have on a sitting Secretary of State. You like to dismiss questions when the answer doesn’t favor your argument. At best, Trump can wage a publicity campaign against him. He has done that for a month, and also against Governor Kemp. If it didn’t sway them at this point, some phone call of Trump complaining isn’t either - and that’s incidentally why the accusation of Trump pressuring him to change votes is so ridiculous.

There’s no pretense about being objective. You just can’t see it through the lens of your TDS. Name one Trump policy you agree with, and I’ll name one (or several if you like) that I don’t.

[TSherbs]

There are plenty of Republicans that are anti-Trump. Not all are as obvious as Romney is or McCain was. Raffensberger would have been all over an investigation if he were a ‘Trumpist’, or an opportunist like Lindsay Graham...

This isn't a meaningful statement. Your reasoning posits only this: one is a "Trumpist" or one is "hostile."

I asked you why you used the word "hostile." Like, if I object to my employer cutting my wages, and he calls my position "hostile." The term seems neither fair nor credible. dneal, you have your own forms of slander built into your language, your own forms of biased, limited reasoning that reveal themselves in these sentences. Here, you try to limit the possible motivations for Raffensberger's refusal to agree and/or consent to only two, but that is a fallacy of logic (false dilemma) used mainly to manipulate and obfuscate (to hide other possible motivations for non-compliance that do not serve your purpose).

Again, it is not "hostile" to defend the accuracy and certitude and procedures of the Georgia vote, particularly in light of the extremely high likelihood of another Biden win if another recount were done (after three have already been completed). It's being professional and showing integrity. "Hostile" is a biased and demeaning word for this situation. It is not "hostile," even, to tell the POTUS to bugger-off from legal business that is not his to command, rule, influence, or otherwise leverage. Raffensberger's words are incredibly measured and non-hostile for the position that this POTUS snakoid was putting him in. He simply stood his ground. When a jackass bully is trying to lean on a target, it is not "hostile" to resist. It is brave and principled, especially when done in level-headed language.

Despite your statements to the contrary, you seem a Trumper to me. I respect my family members and neighbors who voted for Trump. But this post-election wrangle is a morally craven grab for power and disrespect of the will of a clear majority. Trump has lost two national popular votes in a row; the only difference is that this time around it was by a wider margin. He needs to pack his bags and get the hell out of the WH. And desist from this cynical, craven attack on certain states and the votes of their citizens.

[welch]

Trump to Raffensberger:


“That’s a criminal offense,” he said. “And you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer.”

That is a threat. Unless Raffensberger "finds" 12,000 votes, says Trump, bad things will happen to him and to the legal council for the Georgia Secretary of State. Who has an honest defense of Trump?

Raffensberger answered every one of Trump's increasingly hysterical -- nearly psychotic -- complaints. Trump's deranged threats fit with the attacks on a democratic system by Putin or Hitler, but look nothing like an American President. He belongs in a mental hospital. Or jail.

[dneal]

Trump to Raffensberger:


“That’s a criminal offense,” he said. “And you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer.”

That is a threat. Unless Raffensberger "finds" 12,000 votes, says Trump, bad things will happen to him and to the legal council for the Georgia Secretary of State. Who has an honest defense of Trump?

Raffensberger answered every one of Trump's increasingly hysterical -- nearly psychotic -- complaints. Trump's deranged threats fit with the attacks on a democratic system by Putin or Hitler, but look nothing like an American President. He belongs in a mental hospital. Or jail.

That's a threat? How exactly is a President with less than two weeks in office is going to carry out this "threat"?

And you think the Trumpists are "delusional"...

Keep grasping.

[dneal]

There are plenty of Republicans that are anti-Trump. Not all are as obvious as Romney is or McCain was. Raffensberger would have been all over an investigation if he were a ‘Trumpist’, or an opportunist like Lindsay Graham...

This isn't a meaningful statement. Your reasoning posits only this: one is a "Trumpist" or one is "hostile."

I asked you why you used the word "hostile." Like, if I object to my employer cutting my wages, and he calls my position "hostile." The term seems neither fair nor credible. dneal, you have your own forms of slander built into your language, your own forms of biased, limited reasoning that reveal themselves in these sentences. Here, you try to limit the possible motivations for Raffensberger's refusal to agree and/or consent to only two, but that is a fallacy of logic (false dilemma) used mainly to manipulate and obfuscate (to hide other possible motivations for non-compliance that do not serve your purpose).

Again, it is not "hostile" to defend the accuracy and certitude and procedures of the Georgia vote, particularly in light of the extremely high likelihood of another Biden win if another recount were done (after three have already been completed). It's being professional and showing integrity. "Hostile" is a biased and demeaning word for this situation. It is not "hostile," even, to tell the POTUS to bugger-off from legal business that is not his to command, rule, influence, or otherwise leverage. Raffensberger's words are incredibly measured and non-hostile for the position that this POTUS snakoid was putting him in. He simply stood his ground. When a jackass bully is trying to lean on a target, it is not "hostile" to resist. It is brave and principled, especially when done in level-headed language.

Despite your statements to the contrary, you seem a Trumper to me. I respect my family members and neighbors who voted for Trump. But this post-election wrangle is a morally craven grab for power and disrespect of the will of a clear majority. Trump has lost two national popular votes in a row; the only difference is that this time around it was by a wider margin. He needs to pack his bags and get the hell out of the WH. And desist from this cynical, craven attack on certain states and the votes of their citizens.

How persuasive do you think I would be if I just quoted selections of your posts and said "This isn't a meaningful statement"?

Anyway..

Definition of hostile
1a: of or relating to an enemy
hostile fire
b: marked by malevolence : having or showing unfriendly feelings
a hostile act
c: openly opposed or resisting
a hostile critic
hostile to new ideas
d(1): not hospitable
plants growing in a hostile environment
(2): having an intimidating, antagonistic, or offensive nature
a hostile workplace
2a: of or relating to the opposing party in a legal controversy
a hostile witness
b: adverse to the interests of a property owner or corporation management
a hostile takeover

The dude taped the conversation and released it to the media. That's not a friendly party. It's a hostile one.

p.s.: The list of things you are ignoring is steadily growing. You're certainly not obliged to address them, but the fact that you don't is telling.

- I'll be happy to criticize the conservative side if you like. Where would you like me to start?
- I am curious if you think there is anything about the election that could give an objective observer a modicum of a reason for suspicion?
- Name one Trump policy you agree with, and I’ll name one (or several if you like) that I don’t.

[TSherbs]

If you're done talking about this election, then I can stop reading your posts. I am not interested in otherwise discussing politics and policies on this thread, nor am I interested in what you think about other policies.

I wonder if you thought that Raffensberger's fact board was a "hostile" act? It clearly refuted several claims being made about the Georgia count. I call it principled and true.

Again, to stand up to lies about your state's election process is not a "hostile" act in any objective sense. Of course, to a narcissistic egomaniac (and his followers) it *might* seem that way.

[dneal]

Buddy, you’re the one that’s questioning my integrity or motive. If you want to throw that out there, let’s go there. I’m not going to give you a free pass.

I’m just as honest about it as you are when you admit your bias (although I think you underestimate it).

[TSherbs]

The fact board?

[dneal]

If this were global warming data, based on models, liberals would be nodding sagely. When it’s election data taken directly from a State’s data feed, it’s a bunch of delusional conspiracy theorists. I don’t know if it’s true. It seems plausible. It deserves investigation.

Feel free to post the court record where the judge considered this (that was just posted 3 hours ago). It takes time to do analysis. It took Mueller 3 years. But Dems say “nothing to see here”...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EM8pC1pAizc

[welch]

WATCH: Georgia election officials reject Trump call to ‘find’ more votes

Politics Updated on Jan 4, 2021 3:46 PM EST — Published on Jan 4, 2021 2:41 PM EST
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump pressured Georgia’s Republican secretary of state to “find” enough votes to overturn Joe Biden’s win in the state’s presidential election, repeatedly citing disproven claims of fraud and raising the prospect of a “criminal offense” if officials did not change the vote count, according to a recording of the conversation.

Watch the press conference in the player above.

The phone call with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger on Saturday was the latest step in an unprecedented effort by a sitting president to press a state official to reverse the outcome of a free and fair election that he lost. The Republican president, who has refused to accept his loss to Democratic President-elect Biden, repeatedly argued that Raffensperger could change the certified results.

“I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have,” Trump said. “Because we won the state.”

Georgia counted its votes three times before certifying Biden’s win by a 11,779-vote margin, Raffensperger noted.

“President Trump, we’ve had several lawsuits, and we’ve had to respond in court to the lawsuits and the contentions,” he said on the call. “We don’t agree that you have won.”

Audio snippets of the conversation were first posted online by The Washington Post. The Associated Press obtained the full audio of Trump’s conversation with Georgia officials from a person on the call. The AP has a policy of not amplifying disinformation and unproven allegations. The AP plans to post the full audio as it annotates a transcript with fact check material.

Trump’s renewed intervention and the persistent and unfounded claims of fraud came nearly two weeks before he leaves office and two days before twin runoff elections in Georgia that will determine political control of the U.S. Senate.

It also added a level of further intrigue to Trump’s rally in Georgia on Monday night — likely the last of his term — in which he is supposed to boost the two Republican candidates. In a rage after the Raffensperger call, Trump floated the idea of pulling out of the rally, which would have potentially devastated the GOP chances in what is expected to be a pair of razor-thin races.

But Trump was persuaded to go ahead with the rally as a stage from which to reiterate his claims of election fraud and to present, as he tweeted Monday, the “real numbers” from the race. Republicans, though, were wary as to whether Trump would focus only on himself and potentially depress turnout by undermining faith in the runoff elections and not promoting the two GOP candidates.

The president used Saturday’s hourlong phone conversation to tick through a list of claims about the election in Georgia, including that hundreds of thousands of ballots mysteriously appeared in Fulton County, which includes Atlanta. Officials have said there is no evidence of that happening.

The Georgia officials on the call are heard repeatedly pushing back against the president’s assertions, telling him that he’s relying on debunked theories and, in one case, selectively edited video.

“It was pretty obvious pretty early on that we’d debunked every one of those theories early on,” Raffensperger told ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Monday, “but President Trump continues to believe them.”

Also during the conversation, Trump appeared to threaten Raffensperger and Ryan Germany, the secretary of state’s legal counsel, by suggesting both could be criminally liable if they failed to find that thousands of ballots in Fulton County had been illegally destroyed. There is no evidence to support Trump’s claim.

“That’s a criminal offense,” Trump says. “And you can’t let that happen.”

Others on the call included Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, and attorneys assisting Trump, including Washington lawyer Cleta Mitchell. Trump lost the Electoral College to Biden by 74 votes, and even if Georgia, with its 16 votes, were to end up in his column, it would have no impact on the result of the election.

The call was the first time Raffensperger and Trump spoke, though the White House had tried 18 previous times to set up a conversation, according to officials.

Democrats and a few Republicans condemned Trump’s actions, including Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, a member of the GOP House leadership team who deemed the call “deeply troubling.” And Democratic Reps. Ted Lieu of California and Kathleen Rice of New York made a criminal referral to FBI Director Christopher Wray and called for an investigation into the president.

Legal experts said Trump’s behavior raised questions about possible election law violations.

Biden senior adviser Bob Bauer called the recording “irrefutable proof” of Trump threatening an official in his own party to “rescind a state’s lawful, certified vote count and fabricate another in its place.”

“It captures the whole, disgraceful story about Donald Trump’s assault on American democracy,” Bauer said.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in that chamber, said Trump’s conduct “merits nothing less than a criminal investigation.”

Trump said in a tweet earlier Sunday that he had spoken with Raffensperger. He attacked how Raffensperger conducted Georgia’s elections, tweeting, “He has no clue!” and he said the state official “was unwilling, or unable” to answer questions.

Raffensperger’s Twitter response: “Respectfully, President Trump: What you’re saying is not true. The truth will come out.”

Various election officials across the country and Trump’s former attorney general, William Barr, have said there was no widespread fraud in the election. Republican governors in Arizona and Georgia, key battleground states crucial to Biden’s victory, have also vouched for the integrity of their state elections. Nearly all the legal challenges from Trump and his allies have been dismissed by judges, including two tossed by the Supreme Court, which has three Trump-nominated justices.

Still, Trump has publicly disparaged the election, raising concerns among Republicans that GOP voters may be discouraged from participating in Tuesday’s runoffs pitting Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler against Democrat Raphael Warnock and Republican David Perdue against Democrat Jon Ossoff.

Rebecca Green, who helps direct the election law program at William and Mary Law School, said that while it is appropriate for a candidate to question the outcome of an election, the processes for doing so for the presidential election have run their course. States have certified their votes.

Green said Trump had raised “lots of questions” about whether he violated any election laws.

Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, said Trump has shown “reprehensible and, possibly illegal, conduct.”

Trump noted on the call that he intended to repeat his claims about fraud at Monday night’s rally in Dalton, a heavily Republican area in north Georgia.

“The people of Georgia are angry. The people of the country are angry,” he says on the recording.

Biden is also due to campaign in Georgia on Monday. Vice President-elect Kamala Harris stumped in Garden City, Georgia, on Sunday, slamming Trump for the call.

“It was a bald, bald-faced, bold abuse of power by the president of the United States,” she said.

Loeffler and Perdue have largely backed Trump in his attempts to overturn election results. But on Sunday, Loeffler said she hadn’t decided whether to join her Republican colleagues in challenging the legitimacy of Biden’s victory over Trump when Congress meets Wednesday to affirm Biden’s 306-232 win in the Electoral College.

Perdue, who was quarantining after being exposed to the coronavirus, said he supports the challenge, though he will not be a sitting senator when the vote happens because his term has expired. Still, he told Fox News Channel he was encouraging his colleagues to object, saying it’s “something that the American people demand right now.”

Amy reported from Atlanta. Lemire reported from New York. Additional reporting contributed by Associated Press writers Kate Brumback in Atlanta, Russ Bynum in Garden City, Ga., and Zeke Miller in Washington.

Notice that Lynn Cheney called Trump's demands "deeply troubling". Seems to have borrowed that phrase from Susan Collins.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-live-georgia-secretary-of-states-office-holds-press-conference?fbclid=IwAR05r5h-qekfaQPY-dRcsovS4ZKBU9WtOIt7oyHfwPABDvTNuom1Qe9LVUo

[dneal]

I’m missing why Lynn Cheney’s opinion is relevant, let alone authoritative...

-edit-

p.s.: Trump’s strategy is to convince legislatures, not election officials. If he does that (and I don’t think he will with 2 days left) he could still win.

I think a rally in DC on the 6th is pointless. At best it’s an attempt to put political pressure on vulnerable Dems if there are electoral challenges (which I also think is stupid).

From a historical and constitutional perspective, what would be really interesting is if fraud is proven after the inauguration. There’s no clear process to deal with that. You should go back and look at the shenanigans that have gone on in previous elections. 1876, for example. I think this is where Ted Cruz’s “appoint a commission to investigate” comes from. I don’t see that being successful either, but maybe that’s the reason for the rally...

[TSherbs]

Here are the "reasons" for all of this election wrangling:

1) Trump's ego and inability to accept this loss, and his predilection for litigation.

2) a deep populist narrative of victim-hood in Trump world as the culture and the economy and demographics make large shifts over these last 10-20 years. This victim-hood fuels the energy of acceptance of conspiracy theories ("the greater culture is out to get us").

3) GOP fear of Trump's populist base, and their willingness to use that energy in the base to get out the vote.

4) a general erosion of faith in the center-right and center-left news sources as they all drift more into entertainment/media channels with target audiences.

5) the rise of alt-right outlets and forums where the disaffected and anonymous can vent their frustrations and circulate content posing as "research" and "data" and receive its own amplification, most recently also through the president's twitter account and public remarks. Here the disempowered can feel the reward of seeing "patterns" and "knowing what is really going on."

[dneal]

Yeah, it couldn’t possibly be that reasonable people have reasonable suspicions. It couldn’t possibly be that 74 million voters support him. It’s curious how you can be so cocksure what Trump supporters think, when you’re not one and ignore everything they actually say. I’ve been paying attention. I suspect you didn’t have the massive Trump rallies and parades (prior to the election) up there in New England. Here in the Midwest, I saw them frequently. There is a lot of passionate support for him, uncouth behavior and all. That’s probably why you think these delusional conspiracy theorists should be ignored. You haven’t seen the crowds in person. They need to be persuaded the election was legitimate. Again, ignore them at your peril. The people Hillary thinks are a “basket of deplorables”, and (like you) treats with disdain; are generally hardworking, decent people. I trust in their decency. I fear what happens when they decide they’ve been pushed too far. We’ve had a year of COVID and lockdowns, partisan hyperbole spewed daily, and their faith in institutions damaged. Tensions are high.

In other news, Congress Approves Rules Regulating Jan. 6 Electoral Vote Count (https://www.theepochtimes.com/congress-approves-rules-regulating-jan-6-electoral-vote-count_3642381.html). What’s strange (aside from the fact that they don’t get to make rules on this - the Vice President presides - is that their vote wasn’t recorded. That’s the morally craven behavior I expect from politicians.

[TSherbs]

I wasn't explaining why people vote for him. I was explaining why a smaller group is pushing to rescind the EC affirmed results. For example, if Trump said "I accept these results," this whole thing would end.

Stop picking fights so often, dneal. You chirp and chirp at me and decry the superiority of others in the most superior of tones yourself. You're making my point about a sense of victim-hood. That post wasn't about you.

If it is any interest, I know why people vote for the GOP and for Trump. That is a whole different conversation, and not what these lawsuits are about.

[dneal]

Let me simplify.


Here are the "reasons" for all of this election wrangling


Yeah, it couldn’t possibly be that reasonable people have reasonable suspicions. It couldn’t possibly be that 74 million voters support him.

Trump believes he won (right or wrong). I agree he has a thin skin.
You talk of people believing conspiracy theories, I think they have reasonable grounds to believe (at this time).
Trump’s base. We’re in agreement, 74 million supporters.
Erosion in faith of center right/left media. I don’t disagree, but that’s not why there’s “election wrangling”
Rise of alt-right outlets. I’ve said this many times. There are alt-left outlets too (although “alt” terminology is stupid).

[TSherbs]

Trumpers are not "being pushed too far." They lost an election. That is all. We've all been through this. The game is over. It was not rigged. It's time to leave the field. Yes, there will be more games, but this one is over. Accepting the loss is not "being pushed too far." All those who lose should take the loss, reflect, learn, adjust, and try to win again in the next game. Losing in the contest is not "being pushed too far" unless the players have a distorted set of expectations about how tough it is to win.

[dneal]

You keep asserting that. Fine. That's one point of view and there are others that believe theirs is equally compelling. That's what I've been trying to get you to understand all along. You have consistently dismissed them with derogatory, insulting language.

I truly believe you do not understand middle America. "Trump country", as it were. I listen to them every day on local talk radio (with a Libertarian host). I hear their conversations at the grocery store and the barber shop. They've watched GOP politicians cower for decades. Think of Bob Dole - a perfect example if a milquetoast Republican. They've felt betrayed by "RINO's" like McCain and Romney (there are others). Trump comes along and he isn't afraid to scrap - and he's going to do it to their benefit. He's not an unknown. They've all watched him for decades. Affairs, bankruptcies, "you're fired" reality TV... all of it. They don't care about that.
They're willing to overlook it (they're that desperate). They like what he says, and are more passionate in support of him than any candidate I've ever seen. Including Reagan.

Go back and look at Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) when he predicts Trump will win in 2016, and why. Trump was a bull in a china shop, and "Trump country" delighted in his smashing of all the things they hated. Trump wasn't just a blowhard either. He cut their taxes and increased their wages. He would have gotten them out of Obamacare, which they realized was a financial disaster, if it weren't for McCain's pettiness. They love Trump demolishing the media (and he's done that, journalist's opinions of themselves be damned).

I fully expect that Biden will be inaugurated. You can not imagine the amount of people who still fervently believe Trump will be successful, two days before the electoral count when he essentially has no chance other than some bizarre "hail mary" event.

Go and watch some of Doug TenNaple's videos on Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/c/DougTennapel/videos The guy gets more than 500k views in 8 hours. I think he's wrong, but he's representative of what tens of millions of people still believe.

I hope to god they go home on Jan 6th (or the 20th), with the normal dejection and bitter feelings that are associated with say, their football team losing the Superbowl. I believe they will, but I'm not 100% confident in that (and I can't believe I'm saying that).

I've been posting their point of view not because I believe the same, but because it's important to know what they're thinking (and what they're being told). It's the same reason I check out Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, and other morons on the left. I want to know what the radicals are thinking, and what they're telling people. You should stop reading the Washington Post, and start listening to what Steve Bannon or Newsmax is saying, for example. The first just confirms your worldview, and is therefore unnecessary. The other tells you what the other side believes.

[TSherbs]

I do understand the Trump anger and discontent. I have said so repeatedly. And I live in a poor, less populous state (Maine). In my state, I am on the losing side of elections and referendums about 50% of the time. Which means that those who disagree with me are on the losing side about half the time. In this state, we all get over it and move on. We DO understand each other. And, thank God, there is very little of this conspiracy hysteria here. Yes, we have had Trump rallies here and Trump truck parades. So what? No one bothered them and I certainly didn't begrudge their interest in demonstrating their political enthusiasm for a candidate. We all should! But this election challenging in 60+ cases, these conspiracy theories, and this recent phone call is just madness, delusion, cynical cravenness. It is misguided and injurious to democracy. It's a group of discontents, led by an egomaniac, sore over losing, and desperate to hold onto power and some psychological sense of legitimacy. Our country AlWAYS swings back and forth between the rule of these two parties. In this case, with Covid and social unrest and Trump's own poor leadership style, the swing back to Dems came after one term instead of two. Big deal! It's no surprise! Trump hasn't won the popular vote either time! He was lucky that he won the EC the first time.

There is no steal in the vote counting! Get over it, Trumpers. It's for your own good, your party's own good, and democracy's own good.

[Chuck Naill]

While I realize the stakes are much different, imagine a baseball hitter arguing two months out that had he not been called out on strike three, he would have hit a home run, that the umpire was fraudulent and out to take away his HR or better, that he actually did hit a home run, that the fans are upset, and for the baseball commissioner to find a way to show he hit a home run.

[TSherbs]

While I realize the stakes are much different, imagine a baseball hitter arguing two months out that had he not been called out on strike three, he would have hit a home run, that the umpire was fraudulent and out to take away his HR or better, that he actually did hit a home run, that the fans are upset, and for the baseball commissioner to find a way to show he hit a home run.

word

[dneal]

While I realize the stakes are much different, imagine a baseball hitter arguing two months out that had he not been called out on strike three, he would have hit a home run, that the umpire was fraudulent and out to take away his HR or better, that he actually did hit a home run, that the fans are upset, and for the baseball commissioner to find a way to show he hit a home run.

Not a bad analogy, but it could be argued that we’re still in extra innings.

[dneal]

I do understand the Trump anger and discontent. I have said so repeatedly. And I live in a poor, less populous state (Maine). In my state, I am on the losing side of elections and referendums about 50% of the time. Which means that those who disagree with me are on the losing side about half the time. In this state, we all get over it and move on. We DO understand each other. And, thank God, there is very little of this conspiracy hysteria here. Yes, we have had Trump rallies here and Trump truck parades. So what? No one bothered them and I certainly didn't begrudge their interest in demonstrating their political enthusiasm for a candidate. We all should! But this election challenging in 60+ cases, these conspiracy theories, and this recent phone call is just madness, delusion, cynical cravenness. It is misguided and injurious to democracy. It's a group of discontents, led by an egomaniac, sore over losing, and desperate to hold onto power and some psychological sense of legitimacy. Our country AlWAYS swings back and forth between the rule of these two parties. In this case, with Covid and social unrest and Trump's own poor leadership style, the swing back to Dems came after one term instead of two. Big deal! It's no surprise! Trump hasn't won the popular vote either time! He was lucky that he won the EC the first time.

There is no steal in the vote counting! Get over it, Trumpers. It's for your own good, your party's own good, and democracy's own good.

Yes, you have said repeatedly that you understand the anger and discontent. But when I read "there is very little of this conspiracy hysteria here" and what follows, I don't think you do understand. Maine is rural and centrist. Vermont is rural and left leaning. It's not just a matter of being rural. Once you get outside of Baltimore, you'll find as many rednecks with deer on the hoods of their trucks as you'll see in Arkansas. But they're New England states that don't have large scale industry or farming, like "Trump country". How many auto factories do you have? How many bushels of corn do you grow? Michigan has more in common with Texas than Maine does with Missouri.

[TSherbs]

While I realize the stakes are much different, imagine a baseball hitter arguing two months out that had he not been called out on strike three, he would have hit a home run, that the umpire was fraudulent and out to take away his HR or better, that he actually did hit a home run, that the fans are upset, and for the baseball commissioner to find a way to show he hit a home run.

Not a bad analogy, but it could be argued that we’re still in extra innings.

The game was not tied at the end of nine innings, not even close. There was a winner after the first count finished. After recounts finished. After all the states certified. After the EC finished. And after 60+ court cases. Two states had close finishes and performed recounts and the same person won each time (no ties). The same person (team) has won the national election at the end of each of these stages.

It's not extra innings. It's just certifying and recording the score. The contest was won two months ago.

[TSherbs]

I do understand the Trump anger and discontent. I have said so repeatedly. And I live in a poor, less populous state (Maine). In my state, I am on the losing side of elections and referendums about 50% of the time. Which means that those who disagree with me are on the losing side about half the time. In this state, we all get over it and move on. We DO understand each other. And, thank God, there is very little of this conspiracy hysteria here. Yes, we have had Trump rallies here and Trump truck parades. So what? No one bothered them and I certainly didn't begrudge their interest in demonstrating their political enthusiasm for a candidate. We all should! But this election challenging in 60+ cases, these conspiracy theories, and this recent phone call is just madness, delusion, cynical cravenness. It is misguided and injurious to democracy. It's a group of discontents, led by an egomaniac, sore over losing, and desperate to hold onto power and some psychological sense of legitimacy. Our country AlWAYS swings back and forth between the rule of these two parties. In this case, with Covid and social unrest and Trump's own poor leadership style, the swing back to Dems came after one term instead of two. Big deal! It's no surprise! Trump hasn't won the popular vote either time! He was lucky that he won the EC the first time.

There is no steal in the vote counting! Get over it, Trumpers. It's for your own good, your party's own good, and democracy's own good.

Yes, you have said repeatedly that you understand the anger and discontent. But when I read "there is very little of this conspiracy hysteria here" and what follows, I don't think you do understand. Maine is rural and centrist. Vermont is rural and left leaning. It's not just a matter of being rural. Once you get outside of Baltimore, you'll find as many rednecks with deer on the hoods of their trucks as you'll see in Arkansas. But they're New England states that don't have large scale industry or farming, like "Trump country". How many auto factories do you have? How many bushels of corn do you grow? Michigan has more in common with Texas than Maine does with Missouri.

What, the Trump supporters here aren't legit? What is your point? My point is that I live among many people who voted for Trump and we get along and do not engage in conspiracy hysteria and protests and marches, etc.

If your point is that I don't understand people who support Trump, that is false. If your point is that I do not understand why people believe in these theories, that is false, too. If your point is that I lack empathy, that is false also. I actually feel bad for them because they are suffering, and, I feel, being taken advantage of by their ego-maniacal and craven leader.

The GOP has a LOT of work to do. I feel genuinely bad for what Trump and his populist energy has done to that party and to those people. It's good and right to fight for progress through politics. But hitching the wagon of hope to Trump was a grave error, and this election result is an attempt to fix that mistake through the contest. The 2016 slate of GOP candidates was a shit-show of weak, uninspiring candidates except for Trump's wrecking-ball appeal. Well, wreck it he has. Turns out he had no idea how to lead a nation. And the times asked for more of him than he was able or willing to give. So he is done.

Get a better candidate in 2024.

[Chuck Naill]

I’ve also considered that Trump’s approval was pretty low during his tenure, if the percentages are to be believed and in neither election did he win the popular vote.

Trump also had an overarching strategy of wooing his base which is clearing not a representation of the majority. So, it’s not only plausible that he would loose, it’s truly what one would expect.

The baseball analogy intentionally was focused on the batter and not the outcome of the game, but either way, the point was that the event is over and the ruling made. Most of us would initially laugh at a person protesting for two months, but with Trump it’s being treating as a rational thing to do and now to the point where actually suggesting the “umpire” cheat and call the strike a hit (home run).

Maybe some do, but I never exemplified someone who felt cheating to win had any bragging rights, nor was it something I condoned as a parent or coach or corporate team member. I doubt you folks have either, but some of you have a double standard for Trump. It just looks so totally irrational.

[dneal]

TSherbs - Nope. Trump support in Maine isn't anything like it is in Texas, Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky, Michigan (yes, Michigan), etc... My point is that when you demonize people who support Trump the way you have in this and the other thread, it's clear you don't understand them. The "empathy" comment you missed too. It's "strategic empathy", and I've brought it up more than once. It gets tedious clarifying what you make no attempt to understand. Hey, at least you asked for some clarity this time though. And the last isn't worth addressing, because it's just your TDS blather.

Chuck - Trump got more votes in this election than Obama did in his first. That's more than just his base. His minority numbers were record setting. You assume Trump is trying to cheat, I suppose. Trump supporters think Biden cheated. They're just as sure of their position as you are of yours. I'm in neither camp, and both sides look irrational to me. One is convinced their evidence is proof. The other says there is no evidence. Two echo chambers shouting at each other.

[dneal]

Trump supporters in Portland, Maine.

58149

Trump supporters in Dallas, Texas.

58150

Trump supporters in Springfield, Missouri

58151


Yeah, I guess you're right and it's the same thing.

[dneal]

Trump Parade in O'Connor Texas

58152

Maine managed a reported "up to 50 boats"

58153

Sparsely populated North Dakota had 850

58154


Yep, Maine is clearly deep red Trump country.

[TSherbs]

dear lord

I no longer know what you are going on about in these state comparisons.

Nevermind.

[dneal]

58158

[Chuck Naill]

Did Trump supporters condone the Houston Astro’s cheating to win the Series?

[dneal]

Nope, just like they don’t condone Democrats cheating to win the Presidency.

Which party has a long history of election fraud? Which party has a long list of political “machines” in metro cities?

[kazoolaw]

dear lord

I no longer know what you are going on about in these state comparisons.

Nevermind.

dneal-
Appreciate your ongoing responses to TS: I grew weary of trying to explain in a way that he could understand.

His last word sounded familiar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjYoNL4g5Vg

[dneal]

Try considering the English language, dneal. Trump demands that Georgia, after three recounts, should FIND 12,000 extra votes for him. Do you really believe that Georgia misplaced 12,000 Trump votes?

Did you bother to read the transcript? Remember Trump's claim that Georgia hid hundreds of thousands of Trump votes? Did you read that without laughing at Trump?



dear lord

I no longer know what you are going on about in these state comparisons.

Nevermind.

dneal-
Appreciate your ongoing responses to TS: I grew weary of trying to explain in a way that he could understand.

His last word sounded familiar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjYoNL4g5Vg



I thought the pictures would help. He's an English teacher, so maybe the online Shakespeare translator will make things more clear.

D'nealio: Lief sir, i feareth thee doth not und'rstand these Trump vot'rs. The Washington Posteth is cunning and tells thee lies about those folk.

TSherbus: I has't seen these Trump scoundrels in p'rson. I knoweth those folk well.

D'nealio: Aye, but thee has't not obs'rv'd those folk en masse. Maine is not liketh Texas.

TSherbus: Wherefore doth thee p'rsist in these state comparisons? One Trump'r is liketh anoth'r.

D'nealio: Behold at these illustrations. A picture is w'rth one thousand w'rds.

TSherbus: These pictures art m're confusing

[TSherbs]

...I doubt you folks have either, but some of you have a double standard for Trump. It just looks so totally irrational. Conspiracy thinking always has a "rationality" (a pattern of thinking) of its own: fear, rumor, a few "patterns," and the unknown (unknowable) get mixed into into "possibilities" which then concretize into "truth" ("convince me that this isn't true.")

In Trump's case, in the phone call to Raffensberger, he does exactly that: He asks Raffensberger if it is "possible" that ballots were shredded in Fulton county. Then he immediately continues with "Do you know anything about that?" which concretizes the theoretical "possibility" into an actuality that he asks Raffensberger if he knows about. Raffensberger says "No." Trump then states, "You know what they did and you're not reporting it," again, turning a rumored hypothetical into a concrete factual claim, and an accusation of criminal conduct against Raffensberger. He accuses Raffensberger of criminally certifying election results that Raffensberger knows are false because of a theoretical "possibility" of votes being shredded.

Classic conspiracy thinking there, in just a few sentences. It has its own "logic".

Trump is addicted to this kind of stuff. He did it back with the Obama birtherism conspiracy theory, too. Often, conspiracy theories grow up in response (as a counter measure to) to other conspiracies that they sense in the world. A few people on the fringe make some weird claim out in the realm of mysterious possibility, and Trump's mental maw latches on and won't let go, partly because the "certitude" and feeling of insider knowledge and wisdom it gives him pumps up his weak sense of intellectual legitimacy (thus his bragging about his vocabulary, for example).

[Chuck Naill]

Not sure I would agree that he is addicted, or not after reading Mary Trump's book. There is a family pathology where rules are meant for others. Plus, there is some anti social narcissistic personality traits on constant display. Perhaps he cannot help it and if so that's sad. My point is that you cannot have a person like this in a place where he or she has untethered power. Only a ralative few loose if he goes backrupt 4-5 times.

It is interseting how otherwise smart, well educated people can be influenced to believe this person is a self made success.

[dneal]

...I doubt you folks have either, but some of you have a double standard for Trump. It just looks so totally irrational. Conspiracy thinking always has a "rationality" (a pattern of thinking) of its own: fear, rumor, a few "patterns," and the unknown (unknowable) get mixed into into "possibilities" which then concretize into "truth" ("convince me that this isn't true.")

In Trump's case, in the phone call to Raffensberger, he does exactly that: He asks Raffensberger if it is "possible" that ballots were shredded in Fulton county. Then he immediately continues with "Do you know anything about that?" which concretizes the theoretical "possibility" into an actuality that he asks Raffensberger if he knows about. Raffensberger says "No." Trump then states, "You know what they did and you're not reporting it," again, turning a rumored hypothetical into a concrete factual claim, and an accusation of criminal conduct against Raffensberger. He accuses Raffensberger of criminally certifying election results that Raffensberger knows are false because of a theoretical "possibility" of votes being shredded.

Classic conspiracy thinking there, in just a few sentences. It has its own "logic".

Trump is addicted to this kind of stuff. He did it back with the Obama birtherism conspiracy theory, too. Often, conspiracy theories grow up in response (as a counter measure to) to other conspiracies that they sense in the world. A few people on the fringe make some weird claim out in the realm of mysterious possibility, and Trump's mental maw latches on and won't let go, partly because the "certitude" and feeling of insider knowledge and wisdom it gives him pumps up his weak sense of intellectual legitimacy (thus his bragging about his vocabulary, for example).

The amount of speculation about Trump masquerading as fact is entertaining. What makes you such an expert? How many times have you met him?

You call other people delusional as you invent a narrative about Trump, and believe your narrative completely. There’s more proof for election fraud than your assertions.

[Freddie]

dneal: After readin' all your posts ... You are not the Devil's Advocate ... A Rabble Rouser, yes that's the ticket.

Of course this is my personal opinion ... Take no offence ... 'Tis just business.....

Fred

[TSherbs]

I just realized that I have been misspelling Georgia's Secretary of State Raffensperger's name. It's a "p," not a "b."

on topic: It looks like Trump's work (and that of the people who spoke on his behalf) against the presidential result may have cost the the GOP control of the Senate. We'll see. Some counting still pending. But it's looking like a double Dem win to me (6:30AM EST).

[Chuck Naill]

...I doubt you folks have either, but some of you have a double standard for Trump. It just looks so totally irrational. Conspiracy thinking always has a "rationality" (a pattern of thinking) of its own: fear, rumor, a few "patterns," and the unknown (unknowable) get mixed into into "possibilities" which then concretize into "truth" ("convince me that this isn't true.")

In Trump's case, in the phone call to Raffensberger, he does exactly that: He asks Raffensberger if it is "possible" that ballots were shredded in Fulton county. Then he immediately continues with "Do you know anything about that?" which concretizes the theoretical "possibility" into an actuality that he asks Raffensberger if he knows about. Raffensberger says "No." Trump then states, "You know what they did and you're not reporting it," again, turning a rumored hypothetical into a concrete factual claim, and an accusation of criminal conduct against Raffensberger. He accuses Raffensberger of criminally certifying election results that Raffensberger knows are false because of a theoretical "possibility" of votes being shredded.

Classic conspiracy thinking there, in just a few sentences. It has its own "logic".

Trump is addicted to this kind of stuff. He did it back with the Obama birtherism conspiracy theory, too. Often, conspiracy theories grow up in response (as a counter measure to) to other conspiracies that they sense in the world. A few people on the fringe make some weird claim out in the realm of mysterious possibility, and Trump's mental maw latches on and won't let go, partly because the "certitude" and feeling of insider knowledge and wisdom it gives him pumps up his weak sense of intellectual legitimacy (thus his bragging about his vocabulary, for example).

The amount of speculation about Trump masquerading as fact is entertaining. What makes you such an expert? How many times have you met him?

You call other people delusional as you invent a narrative about Trump, and believe your narrative completely. There’s more proof for election fraud than your assertions.

There are ample resources that would allow any interested, objective person to make an accessment of the Donald J. Trump's life. Using his actions since the election in November 2020, his use of letigation and making unsubstantiated, and attempt to intimidate are consistant with what his neice wrote and what John Bolton and John Woodward reported in their respective books. So, you have a relative, a former member of his administration, and a respected journalist to consider, whether you agree with their summations, at least you have to find other information that is in contrast in order to dismiss outright.

What I am noticing from your posts is a complete lack of critical thinking in this matter. Trump's life is well documented as is his business failures after his father thorouhly honed the boy into what he has become.

[dneal]

dneal: After readin' all your posts ... You are not the Devil's Advocate ... A Rabble Rouser, yes that's the ticket.

Of course this is my personal opinion ... Take no offence ... 'Tis just business.....

Fred

I confess to being a little bit of a rabble rouser, but there's only so much "orange man bad" (as if it's a valid argument) I can stomach.

[dneal]

There are ample resources that would allow any interested, objective person to make an accessment of the Donald J. Trump's life. Using his actions since the election in November 2020, his use of letigation and making unsubstantiated, and attempt to intimidate are consistant with what his neice wrote and what John Bolton and John Woodward reported in their respective books. So, you have a relative, a former member of his administration, and a respected journalist to consider, whether you agree with their summations, at least you have to find other information that is in contrast in order to dismiss outright.

What I am noticing from your posts is a complete lack of critical thinking in this matter. Trump's life is well documented as is his business failures after his father thorouhly honed the boy into what he has become.

It's the lack of critical thinking from so many "orange man bad" posts that leads me to only posting the counter-argument. None of the "anti-Trump" posters give him any credit for anything. I also think Trump is an obnoxious, narcissistic prick. There are simply too many opinionated rants and cherry-picked accusations to deal with in detail. I'm essentially the only person not on the "Trump is the devil!" bandwagon here...

Me in the FPG politics forum:

58166

p.s.: any argument that uses Bolton as an authoritarian source is a failed argument, IMHO. That guy is a snake. He was when Bush brought him on, and I think Trump briefly hiring him was one of Trump's worst decisions.

[Chuck Naill]

There are ample resources that would allow any interested, objective person to make an accessment of the Donald J. Trump's life. Using his actions since the election in November 2020, his use of letigation and making unsubstantiated, and attempt to intimidate are consistant with what his neice wrote and what John Bolton and John Woodward reported in their respective books. So, you have a relative, a former member of his administration, and a respected journalist to consider, whether you agree with their summations, at least you have to find other information that is in contrast in order to dismiss outright.

What I am noticing from your posts is a complete lack of critical thinking in this matter. Trump's life is well documented as is his business failures after his father thorouhly honed the boy into what he has become.

It's the lack of critical thinking from so many "orange man bad" posts that leads me to only posting the counter-argument. None of the "anti-Trump" posters give him any credit for anything. I also think Trump is an obnoxious, narcissistic prick. There are simply too many opinionated rants and cherry-picked accusations to deal with in detail. I'm essentially the only person not on the "Trump is the devil!" bandwagon here...

Me in the FPG politics forum:

58166

p.s.: any argument that uses Bolton as an authoritarian source is a failed argument, IMHO. That guy is a snake. He was when Bush brought him on, and I think Trump briefly hiring him was one of Trump's worst decisions.

I can see my attempt to have a rational discussion has failed. 🤭😞

[Chuck Naill]

Back you go on my ignore list . 😉

[dneal]

Back you go on my ignore list . 😉

Sorry that you have no sense of humor. ;)

I suspect you never were interested in a rational discussion though. It’s certainly hard to initiate one when it begins with:

“What I am noticing from your posts is a complete lack of critical thinking in this matter.”

Your pettiness in needing to announce that I’m back on your ignore list is telling though.

[TSherbs]

Warnock has won. Ossoff is ahead by 15,800 votes.

[Chuck Naill]

Back you go on my ignore list . 😉

Sorry that you have no sense of humor. ;)

I suspect you never were interested in a rational discussion though. It’s certainly hard to initiate one when it begins with:

“What I am noticing from your posts is a complete lack of critical thinking in this matter.”

Your pettiness in needing to announce that I’m back on your ignore list is telling though.

I’ll have to wait to get to my computer to put you back on my ignore list.

If I were after humor, it wouldn’t be what you posted. For me, this is not something I think is humorous. Too many Trumpians have died screaming it isn’t real.

You’ve had ample opportunity to provide some critical reasonings, but have decided to do otherwise. Why wouldn’t a rational person see you as either lacking, intentionally avoiding posting a reply that shows you are thinking, or simply being obtuse.

[TSherbs]

Ossoff lead is at 17,000

[dneal]

Back you go on my ignore list . 😉

Sorry that you have no sense of humor. ;)

I suspect you never were interested in a rational discussion though. It’s certainly hard to initiate one when it begins with:

“What I am noticing from your posts is a complete lack of critical thinking in this matter.”

Your pettiness in needing to announce that I’m back on your ignore list is telling though.

I’ll have to wait to get to my computer to put you back on my ignore list.

If I were after humor, it wouldn’t be what you posted. For me, this is not something I think is humorous. Too many Trumpians have died screaming it isn’t real.

You’ve had ample opportunity to provide some critical reasonings, but have decided to do otherwise. Why wouldn’t a rational person see you as either lacking, intentionally avoiding posting a reply that shows you are thinking, or simply being obtuse.

Chuck - simply declaring me not rational, and therefore going back on your ignore list is actually non-rational behavior. I have no idea what "critical reasonings" you are wanting. Agreement with some aspect of Trump's personality or history? When you and others list it, and then employ it as justification for no need of any further discussion as relates to Trump; what rational conservation can possibly result?

Go back and look at the "I can't fathom this election" thread. Start from the beginning. Objectively assess who began rationally and who didn't. Weigh the numbers of posters on either side. Buddy, I've tried to be rational many times on this forum, only to watch the hyperbolic responses follow. Here, they are predominately liberal. On other forums I frequent, they are predominately conservative. I tolerate it to a certain extent, and sometimes I just have fun with it.

The real problem is that a bunch of you are simply hypocrites - to the point that you're hypocritical about even acknowledging the hypocrisy.

p.s.: Rational adults don't need "ignore lists".

p.p.s.: And what in the hell does "Too many Trumpians have died screaming it isn’t real." mean? Talk about irrational...

[Chuck Naill]

Back you go on my ignore list . 😉

Sorry that you have no sense of humor. ;)

I suspect you never were interested in a rational discussion though. It’s certainly hard to initiate one when it begins with:

“What I am noticing from your posts is a complete lack of critical thinking in this matter.”

Your pettiness in needing to announce that I’m back on your ignore list is telling though.

I’ll have to wait to get to my computer to put you back on my ignore list.

If I were after humor, it wouldn’t be what you posted. For me, this is not something I think is humorous. Too many Trumpians have died screaming it isn’t real.

You’ve had ample opportunity to provide some critical reasonings, but have decided to do otherwise. Why wouldn’t a rational person see you as either lacking, intentionally avoiding posting a reply that shows you are thinking, or simply being obtuse.

Chuck - simply declaring me not rational, and therefore going back on your ignore list is actually non-rational behavior. I have no idea what "critical reasonings" you are wanting. Agreement with some aspect of Trump's personality or history? When you and others list it, and then employ it as justification for no need of any further discussion as relates to Trump; what rational conservation can possibly result?

Go back and look at the "I can't fathom this election" thread. Start from the beginning. Objectively assess who began rationally and who didn't. Weigh the numbers of posters on either side. Buddy, I've tried to be rational many times on this forum, only to watch the hyperbolic responses follow. Here, they are predominately liberal. On other forums I frequent, they are predominately conservative. I tolerate it to a certain extent, and sometimes I just have fun with it.

The real problem is that a bunch of you are simply hypocrites - to the point that you're hypocritical about even acknowledging the hypocrisy.

p.s.: Rational adults don't need "ignore lists".

p.p.s.: And what in the hell does "Too many Trumpians have died screaming it isn’t real." mean? Talk about irrational...

To respond to your question.

[Chuck Naill]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/south-dakota-emergency-room-nurse-says-some-patients-insist-covid-19-isnt-real-even-as-theyre-dying-from-it-2020-11-16

[dneal]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/south-dakota-emergency-room-nurse-says-some-patients-insist-covid-19-isnt-real-even-as-theyre-dying-from-it-2020-11-16

Ok, but let's be rational. Sure there are people who probably believe covid is a "hoax". There are people who believe all sorts of things. Ghosts, psychics, aliens, illuminati, global warming (heh, heh, just kidding), bigfoot, etc... None of those constitute a representative majority of any significant block of the public, and I'm not sure why this is even a point you are making.

Trump did not call the virus a hoax. Here are two left-leaning sources that admit that (Snopes (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/) and MSN sharing a CNN article (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fact-check-biden-ad-misleadingly-suggests-trump-called-covid-19-a-hoax/ar-BB199rpw)) The severity is debatable, but let's leave that for the covid threads.

There are plenty of credible medical experts that disagree with the response to covid. See Barrington Declaration (https://gbdeclaration.org/). Science isn't done by touting one voice and shutting down other equally credible voices (and in the case of social media, literally shutting down).

[Chuck Naill]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/south-dakota-emergency-room-nurse-says-some-patients-insist-covid-19-isnt-real-even-as-theyre-dying-from-it-2020-11-16

Ok, but let's be rational. Sure there are people who probably believe covid is a "hoax". There are people who believe all sorts of things. Ghosts, psychics, aliens, illuminati, global warming (heh, heh, just kidding), bigfoot, etc... None of those constitute a representative majority of any significant block of the public, and I'm not sure why this is even a point you are making.

Trump did not call the virus a hoax. Here are two left-leaning sources that admit that (Snopes (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/) and MSN sharing a CNN article (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fact-check-biden-ad-misleadingly-suggests-trump-called-covid-19-a-hoax/ar-BB199rpw)) The severity is debatable, but let's leave that for the covid threads.

There are plenty of credible medical experts that disagree with the response to covid. See Barrington Declaration (https://gbdeclaration.org/). Science isn't done by touting one voice and shutting down other equally credible voices (and in the case of social media, literally shutting down).

Right out of the blocks, "let be rational". The rational response would have been to consider what the nurse was reporting. The first step in critical thinking is not to jump to defend your biases, but consider all perspectives. Did you even take the time to read what the nurse said? Did you verify?

Lets fact check your opinion. Here is a direct quote,
"One of my people came up to me and said, ‘Mr. President, they tried to beat you on Russia, Russia, Russia.’ That didn’t work out too well. They couldn’t do it. They tried the impeachment hoax. That was not a perfect conversation. They tried anything. They tried it over and over. They’d been doing it since you got in. It’s all turning. They lost. It’s all turning. Think of it. Think of it. And this is their new hoax."

Then in March he compared it to influenza. Then he said we are turning the corner and said the experts were wrong. Well, now history shows they were not wrong at all. He was wrong. I am not quoting journalists or liberal newspapers. Why, I don't have to. I have the person's direct quote.

Cite one credible medical expert. I'll list some: Michael Osterholm, Rick Bright, David Kessler, and Anthony Fauci. Cite anyone close to their creditials that disagree with their evidenced based position on infectious disease management.

[dneal]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/south-dakota-emergency-room-nurse-says-some-patients-insist-covid-19-isnt-real-even-as-theyre-dying-from-it-2020-11-16

Ok, but let's be rational. Sure there are people who probably believe covid is a "hoax". There are people who believe all sorts of things. Ghosts, psychics, aliens, illuminati, global warming (heh, heh, just kidding), bigfoot, etc... None of those constitute a representative majority of any significant block of the public, and I'm not sure why this is even a point you are making.

Trump did not call the virus a hoax. Here are two left-leaning sources that admit that (Snopes (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/) and MSN sharing a CNN article (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fact-check-biden-ad-misleadingly-suggests-trump-called-covid-19-a-hoax/ar-BB199rpw)) The severity is debatable, but let's leave that for the covid threads.

There are plenty of credible medical experts that disagree with the response to covid. See Barrington Declaration (https://gbdeclaration.org/). Science isn't done by touting one voice and shutting down other equally credible voices (and in the case of social media, literally shutting down).

Right out of the blocks, "let be rational". The rational response would have been to consider what the nurse was reporting. The first step in critical thinking is not to jump to defend your biases, but consider all perspectives. Did you even take the time to read what the nurse said? Did you verify?

Lets fact check your opinion. Here is a direct quote,
"One of my people came up to me and said, ‘Mr. President, they tried to beat you on Russia, Russia, Russia.’ That didn’t work out too well. They couldn’t do it. They tried the impeachment hoax. That was not a perfect conversation. They tried anything. They tried it over and over. They’d been doing it since you got in. It’s all turning. They lost. It’s all turning. Think of it. Think of it. And this is their new hoax."

Then in March he compared it to influenza. Then he said we are turning the corner and said the experts were wrong. Well, now history shows they were not wrong at all. He was wrong. I am not quoting journalists or liberal newspapers. Why, I don't have to. I have the person's direct quote.

Cite one credible medical expert. I'll list some: Michael Osterholm, Rick Bright, David Kessler, and Anthony Fauci. Cite anyone close to their creditials that disagree with their evidenced based position on infectious disease management.

So do you want a rational conversation, or not? I don't do passive-aggressive bullshit like you. I'm happy to be cordial, and I'm an expert at being an asshole. Makes no difference to me.

Yes, I read your link. Let's examine it since you're so hung up on the opinion of one nurse. First, whoever wrote that piece needs some remedial work. It's a mess. They talk about Jodi Doering's interview after her tweets, and then depict Jodi Orth's tweets. Are those the same people? "Some patients are so convinced the virus does not exist that, when they test positive, they insist it must be flu, pneumonia or even lung cancer, said Doering." Uh, ok. I believe you. What's the point? The article goes on to say the Dakotas are currently the epicenter of the pandemic. Really? The Dakotas? I could refer you to The COVID Tracking Project (https://covidtracking.com/) for actual data as opposed to a nurse's or journalist's opinion. But hey, Gov Kristi Noem said no big deal. That's the way we decide things, right? A government official makes a statement and we're done? That's what we did for the election issues. Anyway, you seem to be extrapolating the opinion of one nurse to a fact about all Trump supporters. I don't know why you think I'm supposed to take that seriously.

Next, I posted two "fact checks". That's not my opinion, it's theirs. CNN says you're wrong. Snopes says you're wrong. You persist in your claim and say I'm biased for citing liberal sources.

So Trump was wrong in March. Fine. Should I post how many times Fauci was wrong (or contradicted himself)? Was Trump right when he stopped travel? If yes, why do you ignore that? You want to talk about bias?

Cite one credible medical expert? Really? I'll entertain this one more time, but you're going to need to go to the Covid thread (https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/31087-Post-your-Contentious-Virus-Posts-Here) if you want to pursue it further. While you're there, note how rational discussion is possible when the usual suspects stay out of it (although they tried). But for the experts you want: How about Dr. Jay Bhattacharya? How about Dr. Johan Giesecke? How about the 15,000 experts that signed the Barrington Declaration?

[Chuck Naill]

You mean the Barrington Declaration that suggested the least vulnerable and most vulnerable be allowed to resume their normal lives, which essentially occured over the Summer months. Those least vulnerable visited those most vulnerable, including the holidays, which exaccerbated the transmission of the virus. Which is exactly what Fauci said could occur and did, in fact, happen. I am reminded of the saying, "hows that working for you".

We can discuss Fauci if you want. I think an objective appraisal will show he has been a champion for science based leadership.

Trump's travel ban was actually porus and allowed 8000 Chinese to come to the US and 27,000 Americans to travel back.

[dneal]

You mean the Barrington Declaration that suggested the least vulnerable and most vulnerable be allowed to resume their normal lives, which essentially occured over the Summer months. Those least vulnerable visited those most vulnerable, including the holidays, which exaccerbated the transmission of the virus. Which is exactly what Fauci said could occur and did, in fact, happen. I am reminded of the saying, "hows that working for you".

We can discuss Fauci if you want. I think an objective appraisal will show he has been a champion for science based leadership.

Trump's travel ban was actually porus and allowed 8000 Chinese to come to the US and 27,000 Americans to travel back.

Fauci is still advocating lockdowns.

Trump's travel ban was criticized as "xenophobic", only later to be admitted to have worked. Demanding perfection is irrational.

[dneal]

This one is for the libs. The Babylon Bee is an equal opportunity offender!


58170

Trump Seen Hanging 'Missing: 11,787 Votes' Signs Around Georgia (https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-seen-hanging-missing-11787-votes-signs-around-georgia/?utm_content=buffer21c3d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer&fbclid=IwAR2ratupLvyMk31XZkqWe03-yJE9I43jlbfKE2eclwclpleStJo--WKrdtM)

ATLANTA, GA—Critics are calling for a second Trump impeachment after he was seen by witnesses sneaking through neighborhoods in Atlanta hanging up "MISSING" posters for his lost 11,787 votes.

According to sources, Trump was last seen on the corner of Peach Tea Drive and Peach Pie Road nailing a sign to a telephone pole that read: "MISSING! : ( 11,787 Trump Votes!!!!!!! Have you seen them? REWARD!!!"

"This vicious criminal monster is an existential threat to our democracy," said NBC Anchor Chuck Todd upon hearing the news. "This is like Hiroshima on steroids. Never has there been a worse disaster in all of American history. God help us all."

Other witnesses saw Trump at the local library rummaging through the lost and found for his missing votes. After coming up empty-handed he tweeted out: "I'm calling on the good people of Georgia to help me find my missing votes! Have you seen them anywhere? Please check under your couch cushions. DM if you find them, THX!"

Lawyer Lin Wood later reported he has uncovered 12 billion missing votes in an underground alien lab and human sacrifice site used by Atlanta's elite. He will soon be delivering the votes to Trump on an encrypted thumb drive via carrier pigeon.

[silverlifter]

How about the 15,000 experts that signed the Barrington Declaration?

Lol. "Experts" like homeopaths, Dr Johnny Bananas and Professor Cominic Dummings (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid)?

The spiralling death count in the US gives the lie to the Barrington Declaration, and the bozos that support it.

[TSherbs]

Ossoff has been declared the victor.

[dneal]

How about the 15,000 experts that signed the Barrington Declaration?

Lol. "Experts" like homeopaths, Dr Johnny Bananas and Professor Cominic Dummings (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid)?

The spiralling death count in the US gives the lie to the Barrington Declaration, and the bozos that support it.

Wow, internet trolls being able to sign an online document voids everything else?

You must have missed this text on their site:

"This is a publicly available form however all false, unverifiable, or questionable signatures will be removed", and "We will continue to update this page with verified, approved, and vetted signatures as time allows."

Nice try. Juvenile, Reddit level criticism, but nice try nonetheless.

[silverlifter]

How about the 15,000 experts that signed the Barrington Declaration?

Lol. "Experts" like homeopaths, Dr Johnny Bananas and Professor Cominic Dummings (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid)?

The spiralling death count in the US gives the lie to the Barrington Declaration, and the bozos that support it.

Wow, internet trolls being able to sign an online document voids everything else?

You must have missed this text on their site:

"This is a publicly available form however all false, unverifiable, or questionable signatures will be removed", and "We will continue to update this page with verified, approved, and vetted signatures as time allows."

Nice try. Juvenile, Reddit level criticism, but nice try nonetheless.

400,000 and counting. Your insults mean nothing in that context.

[dneal]

Your insults mean nothing in that context.

Cool. Your drive-by snipes don't mean anything to me. I'm just wondering how long it takes you to get triggered again.

The primary signers are still a hell of a lot more than Fauci and the others you worship. (https://gbdeclaration.org/#read)

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.
Dr. Alexander Walker, principal at World Health Information Science Consultants, former Chair of Epidemiology, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, USA
Dr. Andrius Kavaliunas, epidemiologist and assistant professor at Karolinska Institute, Sweden
Dr. Angus Dalgleish, oncologist, infectious disease expert and professor, St. George’s Hospital Medical School, University of London, England
Dr. Anthony J Brookes, professor of genetics, University of Leicester, England
Dr. Annie Janvier, professor of pediatrics and clinical ethics, Université de Montréal and Sainte-Justine University Medical Centre, Canada
Dr. Ariel Munitz, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Boris Kotchoubey, Institute for Medical Psychology, University of Tübingen, Germany
Dr. Cody Meissner, professor of pediatrics, expert on vaccine development, efficacy, and safety. Tufts University School of Medicine, USA
Dr. David Katz, physician and president, True Health Initiative, and founder of the Yale University Prevention Research Center, USA
Dr. David Livermore, microbiologist, infectious disease epidemiologist and professor, University of East Anglia, England
Dr. Eitan Friedman, professor of medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Ellen Townsend, professor of psychology, head of the Self-Harm Research Group, University of Nottingham, England
Dr. Eyal Shahar, physician, epidemiologist and professor (emeritus) of public health, University of Arizona, USA
Dr. Florian Limbourg, physician and hypertension researcher, professor at Hannover Medical School, Germany
Dr. Gabriela Gomes, mathematician studying infectious disease epidemiology, professor, University of Strathclyde, Scotland
Dr. Gerhard Krönke, physician and professor of translational immunology, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany
Dr. Gesine Weckmann, professor of health education and prevention, Europäische Fachhochschule, Rostock, Germany
Dr. Günter Kampf, associate professor, Institute for Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Greifswald University, Germany
Dr. Helen Colhoun, professor of medical informatics and epidemiology, and public health physician, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Dr. Jonas Ludvigsson, pediatrician, epidemiologist and professor at Karolinska Institute and senior physician at Örebro University Hospital, Sweden
Dr. Karol Sikora, physician, oncologist, and professor of medicine at the University of Buckingham, England
Dr. Laura Lazzeroni, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and of biomedical data science, Stanford University Medical School, USA
Dr. Lisa White, professor of modelling and epidemiology, Oxford University, England
Dr. Mario Recker, malaria researcher and associate professor, University of Exeter, England
Dr. Matthew Ratcliffe, professor of philosophy, specializing in philosophy of mental health, University of York, England
Dr. Matthew Strauss, critical care physician and assistant professor of medicine, Queen’s University, Canada
Dr. Michael Jackson, research fellow, School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, New Zealand
Dr. Michael Levitt, biophysicist and professor of structural biology, Stanford University, USA. Recipient of the 2013 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.
Dr. Mike Hulme, professor of human geography, University of Cambridge, England
Dr. Motti Gerlic, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Partha P. Majumder, professor and founder of the National Institute of Biomedical Genomics, Kalyani, India
Dr. Paul McKeigue, physician, disease modeler and professor of epidemiology and public health, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Dr. Rajiv Bhatia, physician, epidemiologist and public policy expert at the Veterans Administration, USA
Dr. Rodney Sturdivant, infectious disease scientist and associate professor of biostatistics, Baylor University, USA
Dr. Salmaan Keshavjee, professor of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School, USA
Dr. Simon Thornley, epidemiologist and biostatistician, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Dr. Simon Wood, biostatistician and professor, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Dr. Stephen Bremner,professor of medical statistics, University of Sussex, England
Dr. Sylvia Fogel, autism provider and psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital and instructor at Harvard Medical School, USA
Tom Nicholson, Associate in Research, Duke Center for International Development, Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, USA
Dr. Udi Qimron, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer, professor and expert in virology, immunology and cell biology, University of Würzburg, Germany
Dr. Uri Gavish, biomedical consultant, Israel
Dr. Yaz Gulnur Muradoglu, professor of finance, director of the Behavioural Finance Working Group, Queen Mary University of London, England

[Lloyd]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrington_Declaration

[TSherbs]

Kelly Loeffler, of Georgia, redeemed herself a bit in my eyes by standing up and withdrawing her objection to Arizona after the events of yesterday. She did no grandstanding. I don't know if she spoke later on Pennsylvania, because I was asleep by then.

[welch]

The day after Trump's brownshirts attempted to capture the Capitol:


Nothing can stop what’s coming’: Far-right forums that fomented Capitol riots voice glee in aftermath
Online rage and real-world violence collided in the siege, with deadly consequences: “It’s a new age of terrorism that can’t exist without the Internet.”
Trump supporters gather Wednesday at the Capitol.
Trump supporters gather Wednesday at the Capitol. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)
By
Craig Timberg,
Drew Harwell,
Razzan Nakhlawi and
Harrison Smith

Jan. 7, 2021 at 3:05 p.m. EST

Men wearing camouflage shirts began building a makeshift defensive camp outside the Capitol on Wednesday afternoon. They moved barricades and green fencing into a circle, and then pulled helmets from a crate and donned goggles in preparation for a clash that had been brewing for weeks and, arguably, for years on far-right forums devoted to President Trump.

“TheDonald.win, that’s where it’s at,” said one of the men, referring to the website where defiant talk, conspiracy theories and tips on how best to lay siege to Washington have grown since Trump lost the Nov. 3 election.

Violent scene unfolds as pro-Trump mob storms Capitol
Trump supporters overtook Capitol Police officers to enter the building as lawmakers attempted to count the electoral college votes on Jan. 6. (The Washington Post)
The comment underscored the potent, interactive role between the online and offline worlds in Wednesday’s breach of the Capitol. Violent talk on far-right forums fomented violent real-world action, which was then captured by smartphones, uploaded and celebrated on the same forums. The boundaries between the digital and analog all but disappeared as rage, provocation and gloating bounced back and forth, again and again.

Facebook bans President Trump indefinitely, CEO Mark Zuckerberg says

TheDonald, as the camouflaged men at the Capitol suggested, offered a particularly vivid view of this combustible dynamic. The forum, banned last year from Reddit for hate speech and violent talk and now turned into a website, had been one of many online staging grounds for Wednesday’s riot, and the success of the takeover of the Capitol spurred celebration and calls for further action, including the execution of leading Democrats. For days before, the forum had featured advice on how best to sneak guns into Washington, despite its strict weapons laws.

By Thursday morning, though, different moods had set in on this and other pro-Trump forums. Anger and gloating were still there, but so was unease at the furious public and political backlash against the events of the day before, which led to dozens of arrests and left one person fatally shot by police and three people dead after medical emergencies. Some posters worried their favorite forums, including TheDonald, would get knocked offline by chastened Internet service providers. There also was a pitched effort to redirect blame against left-wing activists, such as antifa, for somehow dressing up as marauding Trump supporters — a claim that was obviously ridiculous to anyone who watched the events unfold on their televisions, computers or smartphones.

Pro-Trump forums erupt with violent threats ahead of Wednesday’s rally against the 2020 election

On TheDonald, as users argued that the removal of some violent comments suggested the site’s leaders had been “compromised,” one moderator wrote, “What do you want? Us to try to lead a [expletive] revolution … from a forum on the internet, which ends up getting the site shut down in a matter of days and all of us sent to the gulag?”

Many things born on the darkest corners of the Internet found their way to the heart of American democracy on Wednesday. Ludicrous claims among adherents of the QAnon conspiracy theory — including that leading Democrats are satanic pedophiles — got shouted by the mobs taking over the Capitol. The emerging garb of the far-right — camouflage, goggles, American flags draped as shawls — leaped directly from the far-right memeworld into the nation’s capital.

Years of social media comments about “lynching” political leaders opposed to Trump, meanwhile, manifested themselves as an actual noose, hanging from a makeshift gallows on the Mall. Someone wrote “BIDEN,” in reference to President-elect Joe Biden, on the wooden structure, with an arrow pointing toward the noose.

It was not clear if TheDonald or any similar pro-Trump forum directly coordinated the takeover of the Capitol, or if posters simply shared general advice, promotion and celebration of the idea of thronging to Washington in support of the president. Much of that was included in a popular thread called “PATRIOTS STORM THE CAPITOL | WATCH PARTY.”

The resulting mayhem appeared to proceed without obvious leaders, a common feature of political action developed and coordinated online, said Rita Katz, executive director of SITE Intelligence Group, which tracks political extremism.

“It’s a new age of terrorism that can’t exist without the Internet,” Katz said. “Having said that, the movement has a spiritual leader, which is Trump.”

Advance Democracy, a group headed by former FBI analyst and Senate investigator Daniel J. Jones, who led the review of the CIA’s torture program, also was tracking pro-Trump forums as they built toward Wednesday’s assault.

“In the lead-up to yesterday’s violence, the Capitol rioters needed a place to plan for how the violence would unfold. They found this on unmoderated pro-Trump forums such as TheDonald.win,” Jones said. “There, they posted their plans to take matters into their own hands and literally threatened to kill lawmakers. They encouraged each other to bring illegal weapons. When this came to fruition, the real-life actions provided fodder for those on the forum.”

As QAnon grew, Facebook and Twitter missed years of warning signs about the conspiracy theory’s violent nature

In the aftermath, pro-Trump forums wavered between glee, deflection and recrimination, shunting blame for the chaos onto a mass of scapegoats. They blamed Vice President Pence, for not subverting the reality of Trump’s loss, and old foes like Democrats, the media and the “deep state.” They also blamed the Capitol Police and other members of law enforcement.

Some pro-Trump posters conjured new conspiracy theories to explain away the damage: “Does anyone else feel like this was all a complete setup?” conservative commentator Evan Kilgore tweeted late Wednesday, in a message that was “liked” more than 114,000 times.

Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter worked belatedly to tamp down some of the fervor. Facebook indefinitely suspended Trump‘s accounts Thursday, while Twitter blocked him from tweeting for 12 hours. A number of less-moderated alternatives offered refuge for Trump supporters eager to egg the chaos on.

The pro-Trump attorney L. Lin Wood, whose Twitter account was suspended Wednesday after he baselessly accused Pence of being a “child molester,” leaped quickly to the alternative social network Parler, where he urged Trump-supporting “patriots” to keep fighting, saying, “Almighty God is with you. TODAY IS OUR DAY.”

“Get the firing squads ready. Pence goes FIRST.” Wood wrote in a Parler post that has been directed toward user feeds nearly 3 million times.

TheDonald, Wood and Parler did not respond to requests for comment.

Why Parler has seen a surge in followers during the 2020 election
Parler positions itself as the "free speech" alternative to Twitter and Facebook. And after the 2020 election, conservatives welcome that. (The Washington Post)
Seeing the chaos as a marketing opportunity, extreme right-wing groups used encrypted messaging services to coach their followers on recruitment strategies for winning newly disillusioned Trump supporters to their cause.

One self-identified neo-Nazi account wrote to more than 7,000 followers on Telegram, advising them that many people normally averse to a violent ideology could now be more vulnerable to radicalization.

“It will soon be the time to start individually reaching out to Rightwing types and spreading our ‘There is No Political Solution’ message,” the account said.

Reddit closes long-running forum supporting President Trump after years of policy violations

Another white supremacist “fraternity” discussed the possibility of a White-led uprising after Wednesday’s attempted insurrection. “Your mission is to invite [Trump supporters] into our spaces. Tell them there is a solution to their problem. Invite them to telegram. Seize the opportunity,” the administrator posted. “I’m sure a lot of them lost faith with [Trump] today,” one commenter responded.

AD

On TheDonald, where users had proudly shared their travel itineraries for Wednesday’s demonstrations and planned meetups at hotels and restaurants near the White House, the triumphant mood quickly soured after Pence refused to intervene, with thousands of commenters labeling him a criminal traitor compromised by the “swamp.”

Even as they posted, their real-world compatriots tore through the Capitol building voicing the same anger. “Where's Pence, show yourself!” one rioter said after barging onto the Senate floor.

When Trump tweeted a video asking protesters to return home, a barrage of posts ripped through the forum expressing a mix of disbelief and frustration.

“HE ASKED US TO COME. ‘JAn 6 WILL BE WILD,’ ” wrote the user “RiverFenix” in a post quoting Trump’s tweet from last month. “IM AM SO CONFUSED SOMEONE SHAKE ME AWAKE,” the account added.

While some posters expressed continued allegiance to the president, many others responded with cynicism. “Let’s move on to someone that will actually fight and isn’t afraid of scrutiny,” one user commented. “He led us to slaughter,” said another.

Still, a contingent of Trump supporters and believers in the QAnon conspiracy theory voiced the belief that the siege was all part of a plan to keep Trump in power — and that more tumult would come in the days ahead.

“Sleep well tonight patriots. … You are going to love how this movie ends,” wrote “StormIsUponUs,” a QAnon-espousing account with more than 450,000 followers on Parler. “'Nothing can stop what’s coming’ wasn’t just a catch-phrase.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/07/trump-online-siege/

[TSherbs]

The way these idiots stormed the building (some of them merely walking forward) and then sat around as interlopers taking selfies and putting their dirty feet on the furniture (forgetting, for now, the beatings, bombs, and guns that they also distributed) and shouting QAnon inanity just shows how lame the whole movement is. What a grab-bag of fools, slavishly following the goadings of America's two greatest current losers: Trump and Giuliani

[Chrissy]

I've avoided responding here because I'm not American and am just an outsider viewing what's happening from another country.
However I, probably along with most of the world, was really shocked to see this, but not actually 100% surprised that it happened at this time with Trump supporters who were actually incited by the man himself.
As of today's news he seems to be backtracking, probably in order that he will not be found unfit, and in hopes that he can continue to be free to spread his goadings when he leaves the White House. Whether or not America does anything about this remains to be seen.
The world can only hold it's collective breath for the next 4 years and hope and pray that the Republican party can find someone worthy of running for President who is not necessarily Trump who can just afford to put his hands in his pocket. If they don't, I believe that, in the words of Arnie, he will be back.
Come on America. You can do so much better than this.

[TSherbs]

Both parties have to constantly work hard to be recruiting enough young people with the intelligence, good character, charisma, strength, and ambition to run for national office AND be equal to the task should they win. Tough combo , though!

[welch]

I've avoided responding here because I'm not American and am just an outsider viewing what's happening from another country.
However I, probably along with most of the world, was really shocked to see this, but not actually 100% surprised that it happened at this time with Trump supporters who were actually incited by the man himself.
As of today's news he seems to be backtracking, probably in order that he will not be found unfit, and in hopes that he can continue to be free to spread his goadings when he leaves the White House. Whether or not America does anything about this remains to be seen.
The world can only hold it's collective breath for the next 4 years and hope and pray that the Republican party can find someone worthy of running for President who is not necessarily Trump who can just afford to put his hands in his pocket. If they don't, I believe that, in the words of Arnie, he will be back.
Come on America. You can do so much better than this.

Than you, Chrissy.

Here in the US, the Republican Party seems shaken up, with many elected officials beginning to pretend that they don't really know this Donald Trump guy, and many Republican voters waving Confederate flags and threatening to attack the capitol again, if they can just get then chance. Notice: all but a half-dozen Republican senators voted to uphold the US election, and half the Republican member of the House insist that the election was stolen from dear Leader -- Al Hail -- Trump. The Wall Street Journal --owned by the right-wing fanatic Rupert Murdoch -- has called for Trump to resign. Now that it no longer matters, Nikki Haley says, maybe, um, sort of, um, Trump is dangerous.

Only took them four years.

Luckily, two Democrats beat two trumpist brownshirts in election for Senate from Georgia. People might have missed it because the brownshirts followed Trump's request to attack the Capitol on Tuesday. They failed and he failed.

Incidentally, the last time an army with foreign allegiance captured the White House, in August, 1814, the British government expected that this would be like beheading the US government. US negotiator at Ghent shrugged, knowing that a building or two is just a symbol. They continued until both sides agreed to the Treaty of Ghent, ending what Americans call the War of 1812. So, failed again.

Perhaps more dishonest conspiracy theories will be spread that Trump won by a landslide. Perhaps someone will pick out the lies hat spread through Trump Media...Trump won Georgia!!! The Georgia officials conspired with the Democratic Party to hide thousands of Trump votes! Leftists, say the neo-nazi pseudo-representative Matt Gaetz, captured the Capitol to make Trump look bad. With luck, some of that will sink back into the swamp of deplorable white supremacists that emitted it. Sadly, some won't.

Only eleven days until the treasonous Trump is tossed from office. Then we see what's next.

[welch]

Reporting from an actual newspaper:


Did you see the law enforcement response to the rioters taking over the Capitol? This is what White privilege looks like.
How a pro-Trump mob was able to breach security and storm the Capitol

Capitol Police were unable to stop a breach of the Capitol. Washington Post reporter Carol Leonnig and a former Senate Sergeant at Arms describe the events. (The Washington Post)

By
Petula Dvorak
Columnist
Jan. 7, 2021 at 10:15 a.m. EST
Add to list
Everyone — millions of people — saw this coming.

President Trump invited his followers to D.C. a month ago, promising them it’s “gonna be wild.”

They planned the riots openly on social media for weeks, bragging about how many guns they’d bring and the mayhem they’d set off.

They came by the thousands, and outside the White House, Trump rallied them to march on the Capitol on Wednesday, reassuring them that “after this, we’re going to walk down there, and I’ll be there with you.” (He wasn’t.)

“ ’Scuse me, ma’am,” the Trumpers said to me and everyone else they jostled as they rammed ahead, an army of Carhartt and camo, to storm the Capitol on their hero’s orders.

In June, civil rights demonstrators hand flowers to D.C. Air National Guard Staff Sgt. Paul James as he sits on a military vehicle on Vermont Avenue NW in D.C. while people gather in several spots in the city to protest the killing of George Floyd.

In June, civil rights demonstrators hand flowers to D.C. Air National Guard Staff Sgt. Paul James as he sits on a military vehicle on Vermont Avenue NW in D.C. while people gather in several spots in the city to protest the killing of George Floyd. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)
“They have the House. They have the Senate. They have the presidency,” a guy in body armor and a barn coat told the man marching with him. “This is the only thing left to do.”

Heck, you can say we’ve seen it coming for all four years that Trump’s been in office — the incitement, the rallying, the lies. Y’all know his words and actions just about lit every one of those torches of hate in Charlottesville.

And still, even though we all saw it coming, the headquarters of our government was literally invaded by loud, vaping fools in flannel, surplus-store body armor, animal pelts and face paint. Police seemed powerless to stop it.


Supporters of President Trump take over parts of the Capitol on Jan. 6. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)
After 21 years of covering protests in this town, I have never seen such a flaccid and disinterested preparation by law enforcement as what happened Wednesday.

Trump’s unhinged commands to the people who call themselves “Donald’s Army” led to this riot — and to the death of 35-year-old Ashli Babbitt, a California native and Air Force veteran who jumped into the Capitol through a broken window, Trump flag tied around her waist, and was fatally shot by a law enforcement officer, according to a Washington Post article citing her family and law enforcement.

Were the people in charge of stopping this blinded by the White, perhaps?

Imagine if all those people were Black. Oh, wait, we don’t need to imagine. When thousands of demonstrators, largely African Americans, came to the nation’s capital in the summer to protest the killing of unarmed Black people, D.C. looked like Kandahar under occupation.

Trump’s militarization of D.C. is nothing but stagecraft

For a few thrown water bottles, a blaze that was about the size of my high school’s homecoming bonfire, and some stores looted by folks who came in cars and appeared to have little to do with the demonstrations for racial justice, the entire city was encircled by armored Humvees, and columns of soldiers were positioned on city streets around the White House, which became a fortress wreathed in several walls all summer long.

In one span of four days, D.C. police arrested more than 400 protesters.

So what happened this time? Did someone in charge just figure, “Oh, they’re patriots. They’re harmless.”?

Or: “These are good people; give all the officers the day off.”

Or: “Hey, let’s show America what White privilege looks like.”

Because that’s how it felt.

Trump lit those torches of White supremacy in Charlottesville

This is the same police force that swarmed me and my sons when we kicked a yellow and green bouncy ball around near the Capitol Visitor Center years ago. The same police who stared at me steely eyed when they found goldfish crackers in my son’s backpack. The same officers who kicked my husband out of the building when he went into the speaker’s lobby without a tie.

“The keys are in there!” someone in the crowd yelled.

And a young man in a hoodie and ridiculous body armor jumped into an articulating jib lift — a cherry picker — parked by the inauguration construction on the west side of the Capitol, turned it on and took people with Trump flags on rides 60 feet in the sky.

I watched a man in an orange hunting hoodie simply take a barricade apart, letting more of the mob pour onto the grounds. No police around.

The rioters climbed the inaugural scaffolding and waved Confederate battle flags. They swarmed steps and terraces that have been closed to the public for years.

Right in front of the Capitol steps, the place where my kids were kicked out years ago for sledding, someone set off a flare that flew in an arc, burning bright red, toward the dome.

“The Civil War is starting tonight!” a woman with salt-and-pepper hair and a lavender parka declared, waving her mittened hands in the air, giddy.

“Oh, it already started,” her partner said.

It was pure chaos and emotion with no plan, no mission and no reason.

A man with a megaphone verified that.

“People keep asking us, ‘What’s your plan?” he said. “I don’t have a plan, but I have a reason.”

After the stun grenades went off, after the phones all buzzed with the alert that D.C.’s mayor had set a curfew, they simply walked back to their cars and hotel rooms, regaling each other with stories of their glorious day trying to take down democracy.

That’s right. While a few dozen arrests were made, most just got to go back. I was surprised the police also didn’t hand them burgers on their way home.

This is the two Americas we need to be talking about.

[dneal]

Both parties have to constantly work hard to be recruiting enough young people with the intelligence, good character, charisma, strength, and ambition to run for national office AND be equal to the task should they win. Tough combo , though!

Like Tulsi Gabbard?

[dneal]

Reporting from an actual newspaper:


The Ministry of Truth Daily
Breaking News: Orange Man Bad

What's bizarre (and I'm being facetious, because it's just hypocritical) is that what happened on Jan 6 was a "riot" and "insurrection", as reported by the same people who called a summer of burning cities, the occupation of the Hart Senate building and pounding on the doors of the Supreme Court "protesting".

There was more rioting on Trump's Inauguration Day than we saw on Jan 6.


If you buy into the full-scary narratives promoted by either the political left or the political right, you’re probably experiencing loserthink. A more useful way to think of the political news is that nearly every major story is exaggerated to the point of falsehood, with the intention of scaring the public. If you think the frightened feeling you are getting from the news is legitimate and appropriate, you probably don’t understand how the business model of the news has changed.


58198

[welch]

dneal, on Tuesday, Trump requested that his mob storm the Capitol to stop the counting of votes for President of the United States. They were all white people. They follow a bigot who got his start by claiming that President Barack Obama was an African socialist and muslim born in Kenya. They carried confederate an neo-nazi flags.

For some reason, the Capitol Police chose not to deploy riot police from Washington DC to guard the Capitol, chose not to activate the Metropolitan Police quick reaction force, chose to deploy only 500 Capitol Police -- out of 2,000 -- and those without riot gear, and chose to allow the Mayor of Washington to activate only 350 DC National Guard members. The DC Guard were ordered to direct traffic miles from the Capitol, without riot armor and without humvees. That allowed thousands of maniacal trumpists to capture and hold the Capitol for hours, proclaiming all the psychotic conspiracy crap that the trumpist brownshirts have come to swear: Trump won by a landslide, election officials in six states stole Trump's election, election machines magically stole or changed Trump votes, Trump lawyers were not allowed to present evidence to judges.

Now you are posting racist photos from your Daily Stormer, or some equally bigoted and insane Q-loving web-site. You lost. Your perfect and Beloved Leader lost. The US remains a democratic republic, and the US Constitution remains. Tough. Go away.

[TSherbs]

dneal loves to make comparisons in an effort to deflect by stating "the left does it too" when no one here is stating that the left does NOT riot. Of course they have. Of course there are bigots on both sides. That a bigot lives next door to me does not make or unmake me as a bigot. The terms have their own definitions and objective standards.

The QAnon and other radical Trumpists are laced with racists. They speak their racism openly and defiantly and proudly. They wore their racism and antisemitism openly in this "march" that turned into a "riot" that resulted in much felonious behavior and at least one homicide (if the fire extinguisher report is accurate). Trump himself has engaged openly in racist behavior, and a spokesperson of one white supremicist group (I can't now remember which one) expressed his glee to the press when Trump made his "good people on both sides" remark after they marched at night with torches, not even any longer bothering with the hoods. Those people cheered at the legitimacy they heard spoken from the most powerful person on the planet.

It's not "hypocrisy" not to include comments about my racist neighbor while deploring the racist behavior and energy in the Trump world.

Trump and many of his hard core followers are some of the most racist persons in America. And they are nearly all white. That's what they mean by "we" are taking back America. This is why Trump told the Fab Five to "go back to where they came from" if they did not like America. This is what was meant by Trump's "America First" revitalization and his anti-Muslim policies.

Are there other racists in my town, my state, and my country. Well, yeah. No shit.

Regardless, these nasty fools have racism and delusion at the core of the movement.

[dneal]

dneal, on Tuesday, Trump requested that his mob storm the Capitol to stop the counting of votes for President of the United States. They were all white people. They follow a bigot who got his start by claiming that President Barack Obama was an African socialist and muslim born in Kenya. They carried confederate an neo-nazi flags.

For some reason, the Capitol Police chose not to deploy riot police from Washington DC to guard the Capitol, chose not to activate the Metropolitan Police quick reaction force, chose to deploy only 500 Capitol Police -- out of 2,000 -- and those without riot gear, and chose to allow the Mayor of Washington to activate only 350 DC National Guard members. The DC Guard were ordered to direct traffic miles from the Capitol, without riot armor and without humvees. That allowed thousands of maniacal trumpists to capture and hold the Capitol for hours, proclaiming all the psychotic conspiracy crap that the trumpist brownshirts have come to swear: Trump won by a landslide, election officials in six states stole Trump's election, election machines magically stole or changed Trump votes, Trump lawyers were not allowed to present evidence to judges.

Now you are posting racist photos from your Daily Stormer, or some equally bigoted and insane Q-loving web-site. You lost. Your perfect and Beloved Leader lost. The US remains a democratic republic, and the US Constitution remains. Tough. Go away.

As usual, and just like the title of this thread, your diatribe begins with a lie. Trump did not request that his "mob" "storm" the Capitol.

I didn't lose. I'm not a Trump supporter. You are losing as long as you let politics live in your head. Your (and TSherbs, but I'll get to him in a second), inability to post anything but vitriol is amusing to me.

"Go away"? Great, another hall monitor who thinks they can dictate the terms of the forum. Maybe you should take your own advice since you clearly let your emotion override your reason.

[Freddie]

Yo Dude lifting photos off Parler {the place is a cesspool} Go and crawl back under your rock.....Capisce!

Fred

[dneal]

dneal loves to make comparisons in an effort to deflect by stating "the left does it too" when no one here is stating that the left does NOT riot. Of course they have. Of course there are bigots on both sides. That a bigot lives next door to me does not make or unmake me as a bigot. The terms have their own definitions and objective standards.

The QAnon and other radical Trumpists are laced with racists. They speak their racism openly and defiantly and proudly. They wore their racism and antisemitism openly in this "march" that turned into a "riot" that resulted in much felonious behavior and at least one homicide (if the fire extinguisher report is accurate). Trump himself has engaged openly in racist behavior, and a spokesperson of one white supremicist group (I can't now remember which one) expressed his glee to the press when Trump made his "good people on both sides" remark after they marched at night with torches, not even any longer bothering with the hoods. Those people cheered at the legitimacy they heard spoken from the most powerful person on the planet.

It's not "hypocrisy" not to include comments about my racist neighbor while deploring the racist behavior and energy in the Trump world.

Trump and many of his hard core followers are some of the most racist persons in America. And they are nearly all white. That's what they mean by "we" are taking back America. This is why Trump told the Fab Five to "go back to where they came from" if they did not like America. This is what was meant by Trump's "America First" revitalization and his anti-Muslim policies.

Are there other racists in my town, my state, and my country. Well, yeah. No shit.

Regardless, these nasty fools have racism and delusion at the core of the movement.

I don't make comparisons. I point out liberal hypocrisy. Oh, you guys have plenty of excuses ranging from "the left does it too" and "whataboutism"; but that's because you can't consider anything without the filter of your echo-chamber.

Silly accusations of racism, nazism, totalitarianism, etc... exemplify the weakness of your argument. "People who have good arguments use them. People who do not have good arguments try to win by labeling". Scott Adams has you (and Welch's) number. Another applicable quote from him? "Mental Prison: The illusions and unproductive thinking that limits ability to see the world clearly and act upon it rationally".

All politics sway with the prevailing winds, but nothing compares to the doublethink of liberals. Yes, an Orwell reference. That's how ridiculous you guys are to the objective observer. The way you make QAnon and other "radicals" into your bogeymen is Orwellian too. Both sides have their radicals, and neither side should be characterized by the fringe. That's just another hypocritical stance you libs take though.

This showed up in my YouTube feed today. The hypocrisy is delicious, on so many levels. The Washington Post decrying Biden's policy and Kamala's attacks on it when hers was just the same. I'm sure the WP will maintain it's journalistic credibility by remaining consistent in their criticisms, now that Biden and Harris will be in the whitehouse.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xpa3qryTOLU


The fact remains that rabid liberals rioted during Trump's inauguration. Conservatives decried it and liberals justified it. This theme continued throughout the Trump presidency. Kavanaugh's hearings, BLM riots, all of it. "Peaceful protesting" with flames in the background is precisely Orwellian. What was different on 6 Jan? Nothing was burned and liberals decided "protests" were a bad thing. Conservatives remained consistent in their condemnation.

[dneal]

Yo Dude lifting photos off Parler {the place is a cesspool} Go and crawl back under your rock.....Capisce!

Fred

Go rub salt in your ass, Fred. You contribute nothing to these threads other than one more echo from the chamber - and a barely intelligible one at that.

Try full sentences with an attempt at grammar. Then with a little practice maybe you can work your way up to a paragraph or two.

[Freddie]

Yo Dude lifting photos off Parler {the place is a cesspool} Go and crawl back under your rock.....Capisce!

Fred

Go rub salt in your ass, Fred. You contribute nothing to these threads other than one more echo from the chamber - and a barely intelligible one at that.

Try full sentences with an attempt at grammar. Then with a little practice maybe you can work your way up to a paragraph or two.

Yo Deadwood Foxtrot Oscar Understand Jack Good luck in the real world kid.......

Fred

[dneal]

Yo Dude lifting photos off Parler {the place is a cesspool} Go and crawl back under your rock.....Capisce!

Fred

Go rub salt in your ass, Fred. You contribute nothing to these threads other than one more echo from the chamber - and a barely intelligible one at that.

Try full sentences with an attempt at grammar. Then with a little practice maybe you can work your way up to a paragraph or two.

Yo Deadwood Foxtrot Oscar Understand Jack Good luck in the real world kid.......

Fred

You should post before you start drinking.

[dneal]

"Too many see the protests as the problem. No, the problem is what forced your fellow citizens to take the streets. Persistent and poisonous inequities and injustice."

Hmmm.

"Please, show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful. Because I can show you that outraged citizens are what made the country what she is and led to any major milestone. To be honest, this is not a tranquil time."

I wonder who said this, and who (if anyone) called them out on it.

Fuggin' liberal hypocrisy.

[dneal]

Not sure who this Steve Deace guy is, but based on the Blaze logo I assume it's conservative.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHsjtzjkPAk

[welch]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/pelosi-trump-nuclear-codes/2021/01/08/032d95ac-51e0-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html


Speaker Nancy Pelosi told her House colleagues Friday that she had spoken to the Pentagon’s top general about keeping an “unstable president” from accessing the nuclear codes, as Democrats openly considered impeaching the commander in chief for the second time in just over a year.

The discussion with Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, came after President Trump directed thousands of angry supporters to the Capitol on Wednesday as he refused to concede his election defeat. The crowds broke into the building in an insurrection now linked to the deaths of five people, including a Capitol police officer.

“The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous, and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy,” Pelosi (D-Calif.) wrote in a letter, in which she renewed the threat of impeaching Trump if Vice President Pence did not initiate proceedings for the Cabinet to remove the president under the 25th Amendment.

Army Col. Dave Butler, a spokesman for Milley, confirmed that a conversation with Pelosi did take place but offered little elaboration.

“Speaker Pelosi initiated a call with the Chairman,” he said in a statement. “He answered her questions regarding the process of nuclear command authority.”

[welch]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/politics/trump-georgia-capitol-racism.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage


America in 2021: Racial Progress in the South, a White Mob in the Capitol
A jarring juxtaposition is forcing a 244-year-old nation to contend with its original conundrum: Whose democracy is it?


540

One of the rioters carried a Confederate battle flag near the Senate chamber in the Capitol on Wednesday.
One of the rioters carried a Confederate battle flag near the Senate chamber in the Capitol on Wednesday.Credit...Erin Schaff/The New York Times
Astead W. Herndon
By Astead W. Herndon
Jan. 8, 2021
Updated 6:43 p.m. ET

ATLANTA — The day after Georgia elected a Black descendant of sharecroppers and a young Jewish filmmaker to be U.S. senators, underscoring the rising political power of racial and religious minorities, the forces of white grievance politics struck back.

At the “People’s House” in Washington, a predominantly white mob in support of President Trump’s attempts to overturn the election overtook the Capitol building by brute force. Confederate flags flew at the seat of American democracy. A gallows was erected, with a noose hanging in the air. It was as stark a contrast as any, one day that illustrated the nation’s original paradox: a commitment to democracy in a country with a legacy of racial exclusion.

The seeds that led to the insurrection were hidden in plain sight. At Mr. Trump’s rallies, where his supporters set up open-air markets of hate and conspiracy, selling Confederate flags and T-shirts that mock his opponents and the media. In conservative news outlets, where the language of revolution and civil war is commonplace. On Mr. Trump’s Twitter feed, which has amplified white supremacists, anti-Semites and anti-Muslim extremists.

On Thursday night, he took to that Twitter feed again to post a video message condemning the mob while taking no responsibility for inviting it to Washington or inspiring its actions. “You do not represent our country,” he said to the rioters, before moments later nodding to “all of our wonderful supporters.” On Friday night, Twitter permanently suspended Mr. Trump’s account “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”

Whether the mob represents a fringe of the American political spectrum or a growing movement increasingly opposed to democratic norms is an essential question at the end of the Trump era, when it is clear that progress to some is seen as an affront to others.

“It’s not surprising to see insurrectionists swarm the Capitol when the federal government is run by people who have made it the project of the Republican Party to dismantle the federal government,” said Representative Mondaire Jones, a newly sworn-in Democrat from New York. He added that these leaders “articulated this false narrative of a federal government that seeks to oppress the rights of the American people.”

Like other lawmakers on Thursday, Mr. Jones acknowledged that it was easier to diagnose the causes of the chaos than to craft solutions. The forces that helped Democrats send Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Kamala Harris to the White House are real. So is a widening gap between liberal and conservative movements, and the fact that as the United States has increasingly incorporated Black Americans, people of color, immigrants and Native Americans into the democratic fabric, it has come at a cost.

Mr. Biden addressed the fallout as he introduced his designees for the Justice Department on Thursday afternoon.

He framed it as a wake-up call to a country that has at times feigned ignorance of this reality: The most ardent portions of Mr. Trump’s white base are engulfed by a toxic mix of conspiracy theories and racism

“No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protesters yesterday that they wouldn’t have been treated very differently than the mob that stormed the Capitol,” Mr. Biden said.

[TSherbs]

"Too many see the protests as the problem. No, the problem is what forced your fellow citizens to take the streets. Persistent and poisonous inequities and injustice."

Hmmm.

"Please, show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful. Because I can show you that outraged citizens are what made the country what she is and led to any major milestone. To be honest, this is not a tranquil time."

I wonder who said this, and who (if anyone) called them out on it.

Fuggin' liberal hypocrisy.

>>>Back on the topic of the thread: Trump has dropped his pressure on Georgia and (sort of) conceded. It's Perdue's turn to concede. Georgia has been through a lot, and his loss margin is something like 41,000 votes at this point. He's done.

[dneal]

I thought he dropped all his cases.

[TSherbs]

oops, I missed it

He conceded a few hours ago

<check>

[TSherbs]

Now, if Trump and his cadre had only behaved with the dignity and respect for the will of the people ("people" as in the collective constituency) that Loeffler and Perdue did, both of whom were incumbents who lost in a bitter races. Yet both of them respectfully bowed out when their state counted the votes and the margin was clear.

Yeah, well, Trump lacks exactly that level of character, and his latest statement was clearly not written by him, does not mention losing or Biden winning, still does not accept the validity of the state results, and basically insinuates that he'll be back. Fuck you, petty tyrant.

[welch]

Yet another bit where Trump tries to force Georgia officials to "recalculate" votes from the winning presidential candidate, Joe Biden. Yet more deplorable conduct better fitted to a Nazi gauleiter than a President of the United States.


‘Find the fraud’: Trump pressured a Georgia elections investigator in a separate call legal experts say could amount to obstruction

By
Amy Gardner
Jan. 9, 2021 at 12:20 p.m. EST

President Trump urged Georgia’s lead elections investigator to “find the fraud” in a lengthy December phone call, saying the official would be a “national hero,” according to an individual familiar with the call who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the conversation.

Trump placed the call to the investigations chief for the Georgia secretary of state’s office shortly before Christmas — while the individual was leading an inquiry into allegations of ballot fraud in Cobb County, in the suburbs of Atlanta, according to people familiar with the episode.

The president’s attempts to intervene in an ongoing investigation could amount to obstruction of justice or other criminal violations, legal experts said, though they cautioned a case could be difficult to prove.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger had launched the inquiry following allegations that Cobb election officials had improperly accepted mail ballots with signatures that did not match those on file — claims that state officials ultimately concluded had no merit.

In an interview with The Washington Post on Friday, Raffensperger confirmed that Trump had placed the Dec. 23 call. He said he was not familiar with the specifics of what the president said in the conversation with his chief investigator, but said it was inappropriate for Trump to have tried to intervene in the case.

“That was an ongoing investigation,” Raffensperger said. “I don’t believe that an elected official should be involved in that process.”

The Post is withholding the name of the investigator, who did not respond to repeated requests for comment, because of the risk of threats and harassment directed at election officials.

The White House did not respond to requests for comment.

Since Election Day, Trump has made at least three calls to government officials in Georgia in an attempt to subvert President-elect Joe Biden’s victory, beginning with a conversation with Gov. Brian Kemp (R) in early December to berate him for certifying the state’s election results.

The president is furious with both Raffensperger and Kemp, who have refused to echo his claims that the election was rigged. He has complained that they betrayed him after he endorsed both of their 2018 elections. At a rally Wednesday in Washington, shortly before his supporters ransacked the Capitol, he attacked them personally onstage, calling the two men “corrupt.”

Trump’s call to the chief investigator occurred more than a week before he spent an hour on the phone with Raffensperger, pushing him to overturn the vote. In that Jan. 2 conversation, the president alternately berated the secretary of state, tried to flatter him, begged him to act and threatened him with vague criminal consequences if the fellow Republican refused to pursue his false claims, at one point warning that he was taking “a big risk.”

‘I just want to find 11,780 votes’: In extraordinary hour-long call, Trump pressures Georgia secretary of state to recalculate the vote in his favor

Legal experts said Trump’s call to the secretary of state may have broken state or federal laws that bar the solicitation of election fraud or prohibit participating in a conspiracy against people exercising their civil rights.

Trump’s earlier call to the chief investigator could also carry serious criminal implications, according to several former prosecutors, who said that the president may have violated laws against bribery or interfering with an ongoing probe.

“Oh my god, of course that’s obstruction — any way you cut it,” said Nick Akerman, a former federal prosecutor in New York and a onetime member of the Watergate prosecution team, responding to a description of Trump’s conversation with the investigator.

Akerman said he would be “shocked” if Trump didn’t commit a crime of obstruction under the Georgia statutes. He said the fact that the president took the time to identify the investigator, obtain a phone number and then call “shows that he’s trying to influence the outcome of what’s going on.”

However, such cases can be difficult to prove, and legal experts said the decision to prosecute Trump — even after he leaves office — would be a politically fraught one.

Robert James, a former prosecutor in DeKalb County, Ga., said that proving obstruction would hinge on what Trump said and the tone he used, as well as whether the president’s intentions were clear.

Without the audio of the call, it would be more difficult to prove wrongdoing, he said. The later call with Raffensperger is more damning, he said, because of the power of the audio that was made public.

“He says, ‘Go find me some votes.’ That can clearly be interpreted as asking someone to break the law,” James said.

In the wake of the Capitol siege by Trump supporters, Democratic House leaders said Friday they were preparing articles of impeachment that they planned to vote on as soon as early next week. While they were focused primarily on Trump’s role in inciting a violent mob to storm the Capitol, an early draft circulated Friday also mentioned Trump’s call to Raffensperger as an example of “prior efforts to subvert and obstruct” the certification of the 2020 election.

Raffensperger briefly mentioned Trump’s December call to the chief investigator in an interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America” earlier this week. But the details of the conversation had not been previously reported.

On the call, Trump sounded much like he did while talking to Raffensperger, according to the person familiar with the discussion — meandering from flattery to frustration and back again.

It was one in a series of personal interventions by Trump and his allies in Georgia since the November election. The president has obsessed about his defeat in the state and expressed disbelief to aides that he could have lost while other Republicans won.

It is unclear how the president tracked down the chief elections investigator. Before his Jan. 2 call to Raffensperger, Trump had tried to reach the secretary of state at least 18 times, but the calls were patched to interns in the press office who thought it was a prank and did not realize the president was on the line, as The Post previously reported. White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows ultimately arranged the conference call between Trump, Raffensperger and their aides.

That conversation followed previous inquiries to state officials by Trump allies.

In mid-November, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) reached out to Raffensperger to inquire about whether entire counties’ mail ballots could be tossed if an audit found high rates of mismatched signatures in those jurisdictions.

Raffensperger told The Post at the time that Graham appeared to be suggesting that he find a way to toss legally cast ballots. Graham denied that, calling that characterization “ridiculous.”

Then in late December, Meadows traveled to Cobb County to see for himself how the ballot-signature audit was proceeding.

Meadows said he was not trying to interfere with the investigation but just wanted to “talk outside of the tweets,” Jordan Fuchs, the deputy secretary of state, said at the time.

Meadows was not allowed in the room where the audit was occurring, Fuchs said, but he was able to peer through the window of the door.

Trump called the chief investigator the following day.

Raffensperger announced the audit on Dec. 14 after allegations surfaced that ballots were accepted in Cobb County without proper verification of voter signatures on the envelopes.

No evidence has emerged of widespread signature-matching anomalies in Cobb or elsewhere in Georgia. Raffensperger ordered the audit, he said, because his office pursues all allegations of election irregularities.

“Conducting this audit does not in any way suggest that Cobb County was not properly following election procedures or properly conducting signature matching,” Chris Harvey, Raffensperger’s director of elections, said at the time. “We chose Cobb County for this audit because they are well known to have one of the best election offices in the state, and starting in Cobb will help us as we embark on a statewide signature audit.”

If large numbers of mismatched envelope signatures had been discovered, it would have been impossible to pair those envelopes with the ballots they contained, which are separated to protect voter privacy as required in the Georgia Constitution.

In the end, Raffensperger’s investigations team, working alongside the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, found just two nonmatching signatures among more than 15,000 examined during the audit in Cobb County. The audit concluded on Dec. 29, six days after the president called the chief investigator.

Trump was steaming about the outcome of the inquiry when he spoke to Raffensperger on Jan. 2.

“Why can’t we have professionals do it instead of rank amateurs who will never find anything and don’t want to find anything?” the president said, according to audio obtained by The Post. “They don’t want to find, you know they don’t want to find anything. Someday you’ll tell me the reason why, because I don’t understand your reasoning, but someday you’ll tell me the reason why.”

[TSherbs]

Classic Trump modus operandi.

[Chuck Naill]

I have read that some of those thugs breaking into the capital actually believed the vice president could overturn the will of the American voter. Apparently Mitt Romney and Linsay Graham were called traitors at the airports. It would be easy to learn, if you didn't already know, that the certification is largely symbolic.

That Trump was caught on tape asking Georgia to find votes and find fraud is readily available.

So, how do we become radicalized in a nation where there is a free press. I understand that you can decide the press is corrupt, but researching is no longer a trip to the library or accumulating daily newspapers. It is definatley something we should guard ourselves from conspiracies.

THat said, I am reminded of something my favorite pundit wrote last year. Coastal elites have looked down upon the masses for years. President Obama famously spoke of bitter Americans clinging to their bibles and guns.

[welch]

I have read that some of those thugs breaking into the capital actually believed the vice president could overturn the will of the American voter. Apparently Mitt Romney and Linsay Graham were called traitors at the airports. It would be easy to learn, if you didn't already know, that the certification is largely symbolic.

That Trump was caught on tape asking Georgia to find votes and find fraud is readily available.

So, how do we become radicalized in a nation where there is a free press. I understand that you can decide the press is corrupt, but researching is no longer a trip to the library or accumulating daily newspapers. It is definatley something we should guard ourselves from conspiracies.

THat said, I am reminded of something my favorite pundit wrote last year. Coastal elites have looked down upon the masses for years. President Obama famously spoke of bitter Americans clinging to their bibles and guns.

I doubt that "coastal elites" myth. It argues that some people can call themselves "middle America" and then claim to speak for this "middle America".

[TSherbs]

I recognize the frustration and anger of the great swaths of people whom the cultural and economic shifts are leaving behind. That is very difficult. But there is no stopping these shifts, and having voted Trump in as a remedy for that was an enormous mistake, one that was clear and vocalized by many persons on the right and the left. That is part of the giant con that Trump pulled. He has never "loved" those people (contrary to what he said the other day). What he has "loved" is the fact that they followed him, and to some degree worshipped him. He loved their love. And as soon as their behavior threatened possible jail time for him, he threw them under the bus. And Mick Mulvaney said, "I never thought that they would take him [Trump] literally." How stupid could Mulvaney be (or he is a liar).

[welch]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/15/us/politics/atlanta-prosecutor-trump-election.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage


Atlanta Prosecutor Appears to Move Closer to Trump Inquiry

The Fulton County district attorney is weighing an inquiry into possible election interference and is said to be considering hiring an outside counsel.

By Richard Fausset and Danny Hakim

Jan. 15, 2021

ATLANTA — Prosecutors in Georgia appear increasingly likely to open a criminal investigation of President Trump over his attempts to overturn the results of the state’s 2020 election, an inquiry into offenses that would be beyond his federal pardon power.

The new Fulton County district attorney, Fani Willis, is already weighing whether to proceed, and among the options she is considering is the hiring of a special assistant from outside to oversee the investigation, according to people familiar with her office’s deliberations.

At the same time, David Worley, the lone Democrat on Georgia’s five-member election board, said this week that he would ask the board to make a referral to the Fulton County district attorney by next month. Among the matters he will ask prosecutors to investigate is a phone call Mr. Trump made in which he pressured Georgia’s secretary of state to overturn the state’s election results.

Jeff DiSantis, a district attorney spokesman, said the office had not taken any action to hire outside counsel and declined to comment further on the case.

Some veteran Georgia prosecutors said they believed Mr. Trump had clearly violated state law.

“If you took the fact out that he is the president of the United States and look at the conduct of the call, it tracks the communication you might see in any drug case or organized crime case,” said Michael J. Moore, the former United States attorney for the Middle District of Georgia. “It’s full of threatening undertone and strong-arm tactics.”

He said he believed there had been “a clear attempt to influence the conduct of the secretary of state, and to commit election fraud, or to solicit the commission of election fraud.”

The White House declined to comment.

Mr. Worley said in an interview that if no investigation had been announced by Feb. 10, the day of the election board’s next scheduled meeting he would make a motion for the board to refer the matter of Mr. Trump’s phone calls to Ms. Willis’s office. Mr. Worley, a lawyer, believes that such a referral should, under Georgia law, automatically prompt an investigation.

If the board declines to make a referral, Mr. Worley said he would ask Ms. Willis’s office himself to start an inquiry.

Brad Raffensperger, the secretary of state, is one of the members of the board and has said that he might have a conflict of interest in the matter, as Mr. Trump called him to exert pressure. That could lead him to recuse himself from any decisions on a referral by the board.

Mr. Worley said he would introduce the motion based on an outside complaint filed with the state election board by John F. Banzhaf III, a George Washington University law professor.

Mr. Banzhaf and other legal experts say Mr. Trump’s calls may run afoul of at least three state criminal laws. One is criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, which can be either a felony or a misdemeanor.

There is also a related conspiracy charge, which can be prosecuted either as a misdemeanor or a felony. A third law, a misdemeanor offense, bars “intentional interference” with another person’s “performance of election duties.”

“My feeling based on listening to the phone call is that they probably will see if they can get it past a grand jury,” said Joshua Morrison, a former senior assistant district attorney in Fulton County who once worked closely with Ms. Willis. “It seems clearly there was a crime committed.”

[Chuck Naill]

I recognize the frustration and anger of the great swaths of people whom the cultural and economic shifts are leaving behind. That is very difficult. But there is no stopping these shifts, and having voted Trump in as a remedy for that was an enormous mistake, one that was clear and vocalized by many persons on the right and the left. That is part of the giant con that Trump pulled. He has never "loved" those people (contrary to what he said the other day). What he has "loved" is the fact that they followed him, and to some degree worshipped him. He loved their love. And as soon as their behavior threatened possible jail time for him, he threw them under the bus. And Mick Mulvaney said, "I never thought that they would take him [Trump] literally." How stupid could Mulvaney be (or he is a liar).

He figured out what they wanted and pretended to give it to them.

BTW, he was not with them when they stormed the capital as he said he would.

[welch]

A bit more of Trump's effort to change votes in Georgia:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/22/president-joe-biden-live-updates/#link-HMXJWH657BDQHG6MP7W262D6RE


The Justice Department inspector general has begun examining the abrupt departure this month of the U.S. attorney in Atlanta after then-President Donald Trump complained officials in Georgia were not doing enough to find election fraud, according to people familiar with the matter.

The investigation into the sudden resignation of Byung J. “BJay” Pak by Inspector General Michael Horowitz appears to be in its early stages. Investigators have not yet talked to Pak, and it is unclear how broad their inquiry will be, the people familiar with the matter said. Like others, they spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing probe.

Pak unexpectedly announced Jan. 4 that he was stepping down that day as the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, surprising many in his office. Trump then bypassed Pak’s top deputy in selecting a temporary replacement, raising questions among legal observers about the possibility of political interference in law enforcement work.

Pak’s resignation came a day after The Washington Post reported on an extraordinary call in which Trump urged Republican Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia secretary of state, to “find” enough votes to overturn his election defeat in that state. Legal scholars said the request from Trump was an obvious abuse of power that might warrant criminal investigation. In the same conversation, Trump cited a “never-Trumper U.S. attorney” in Georgia — seemingly a reference to Pak — and hinted vaguely and baselessly that Raffensperger’s refusal to act on his unfounded fraud claims constituted a “criminal offense.”


The circumstances of Pak’s departure remain something of a mystery. Two people familiar with the matter said Pak received a call from a senior Justice Department official in Washington that led him to believe he should resign. Trump had been upset with what he perceived as the agency’s lack of action on his unfounded claims in Georgia and across the country, people familiar with the matter said at the time.


If Christine intended to make some move to support Trump’s claims of voter fraud, though, that effort appears to have petered out. According to an audio recording obtained by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, he declared on a call with his staff before Trump left office that “there’s just nothing to” the few claims of fraud the office was examining.

U.S. attorney in Georgia: ‘There’s just nothing to’ claims of election fraud

“Quite frankly, just watching television, you would assume that you got election cases stacked from the floor to the ceiling,” Christine said, according to the Atlanta newspaper. “I am so happy to find out that’s not the case, but I didn’t know coming in.”

[kazoolaw]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/15/us/politics/atlanta-prosecutor-trump-election.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage


Atlanta Prosecutor Appears to Move Closer to Trump Inquiry

The Fulton County district attorney is weighing an inquiry into possible election interference and is said to be considering hiring an outside counsel.

By Richard Fausset and Danny Hakim

Jan. 15, 2021

ATLANTA — Prosecutors in Georgia appear increasingly likely to open a criminal investigation of President Trump over his attempts to overturn the results of the state’s 2020 election, an inquiry into offenses that would be beyond his federal pardon power.

The new Fulton County district attorney, Fani Willis, is already weighing whether to proceed, and among the options she is considering is the hiring of a special assistant from outside to oversee the investigation, according to people familiar with her office’s deliberations.

At the same time, David Worley, the lone Democrat on Georgia’s five-member election board, said this week that he would ask the board to make a referral to the Fulton County district attorney by next month. Among the matters he will ask prosecutors to investigate is a phone call Mr. Trump made in which he pressured Georgia’s secretary of state to overturn the state’s election results.

Jeff DiSantis, a district attorney spokesman, said the office had not taken any action to hire outside counsel and declined to comment further on the case.

Some veteran Georgia prosecutors said they believed Mr. Trump had clearly violated state law.

“If you took the fact out that he is the president of the United States and look at the conduct of the call, it tracks the communication you might see in any drug case or organized crime case,” said Michael J. Moore, the former United States attorney for the Middle District of Georgia. “It’s full of threatening undertone and strong-arm tactics.”

He said he believed there had been “a clear attempt to influence the conduct of the secretary of state, and to commit election fraud, or to solicit the commission of election fraud.”

The White House declined to comment.

Mr. Worley said in an interview that if no investigation had been announced by Feb. 10, the day of the election board’s next scheduled meeting he would make a motion for the board to refer the matter of Mr. Trump’s phone calls to Ms. Willis’s office. Mr. Worley, a lawyer, believes that such a referral should, under Georgia law, automatically prompt an investigation.

If the board declines to make a referral, Mr. Worley said he would ask Ms. Willis’s office himself to start an inquiry.

Brad Raffensperger, the secretary of state, is one of the members of the board and has said that he might have a conflict of interest in the matter, as Mr. Trump called him to exert pressure. That could lead him to recuse himself from any decisions on a referral by the board.

Mr. Worley said he would introduce the motion based on an outside complaint filed with the state election board by John F. Banzhaf III, a George Washington University law professor.

Mr. Banzhaf and other legal experts say Mr. Trump’s calls may run afoul of at least three state criminal laws. One is criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, which can be either a felony or a misdemeanor.

There is also a related conspiracy charge, which can be prosecuted either as a misdemeanor or a felony. A third law, a misdemeanor offense, bars “intentional interference” with another person’s “performance of election duties.”

“My feeling based on listening to the phone call is that they probably will see if they can get it past a grand jury,” said Joshua Morrison, a former senior assistant district attorney in Fulton County who once worked closely with Ms. Willis. “It seems clearly there was a crime committed.”

Nothing to see here, just move along...
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/audio-shows-the-media-got-the-trump-georgia-story-all-wrong

[dneal]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/15/us/politics/atlanta-prosecutor-trump-election.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage


Atlanta Prosecutor Appears to Move Closer to Trump Inquiry

The Fulton County district attorney is weighing an inquiry into possible election interference and is said to be considering hiring an outside counsel.

By Richard Fausset and Danny Hakim

Jan. 15, 2021

ATLANTA — Prosecutors in Georgia appear increasingly likely to open a criminal investigation of President Trump over his attempts to overturn the results of the state’s 2020 election, an inquiry into offenses that would be beyond his federal pardon power.

The new Fulton County district attorney, Fani Willis, is already weighing whether to proceed, and among the options she is considering is the hiring of a special assistant from outside to oversee the investigation, according to people familiar with her office’s deliberations.

At the same time, David Worley, the lone Democrat on Georgia’s five-member election board, said this week that he would ask the board to make a referral to the Fulton County district attorney by next month. Among the matters he will ask prosecutors to investigate is a phone call Mr. Trump made in which he pressured Georgia’s secretary of state to overturn the state’s election results.

Jeff DiSantis, a district attorney spokesman, said the office had not taken any action to hire outside counsel and declined to comment further on the case.

Some veteran Georgia prosecutors said they believed Mr. Trump had clearly violated state law.

“If you took the fact out that he is the president of the United States and look at the conduct of the call, it tracks the communication you might see in any drug case or organized crime case,” said Michael J. Moore, the former United States attorney for the Middle District of Georgia. “It’s full of threatening undertone and strong-arm tactics.”

He said he believed there had been “a clear attempt to influence the conduct of the secretary of state, and to commit election fraud, or to solicit the commission of election fraud.”

The White House declined to comment.

Mr. Worley said in an interview that if no investigation had been announced by Feb. 10, the day of the election board’s next scheduled meeting he would make a motion for the board to refer the matter of Mr. Trump’s phone calls to Ms. Willis’s office. Mr. Worley, a lawyer, believes that such a referral should, under Georgia law, automatically prompt an investigation.

If the board declines to make a referral, Mr. Worley said he would ask Ms. Willis’s office himself to start an inquiry.

Brad Raffensperger, the secretary of state, is one of the members of the board and has said that he might have a conflict of interest in the matter, as Mr. Trump called him to exert pressure. That could lead him to recuse himself from any decisions on a referral by the board.

Mr. Worley said he would introduce the motion based on an outside complaint filed with the state election board by John F. Banzhaf III, a George Washington University law professor.

Mr. Banzhaf and other legal experts say Mr. Trump’s calls may run afoul of at least three state criminal laws. One is criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, which can be either a felony or a misdemeanor.

There is also a related conspiracy charge, which can be prosecuted either as a misdemeanor or a felony. A third law, a misdemeanor offense, bars “intentional interference” with another person’s “performance of election duties.”

“My feeling based on listening to the phone call is that they probably will see if they can get it past a grand jury,” said Joshua Morrison, a former senior assistant district attorney in Fulton County who once worked closely with Ms. Willis. “It seems clearly there was a crime committed.”

Nothing to see here, just move along...
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/audio-shows-the-media-got-the-trump-georgia-story-all-wrong


It’s almost like there’s a pattern. Weird.