Patterico's Pontifications

12/7/2020

Election Soup

Filed under: General — Dana @ 4:54 pm



[guest post by Dana]

Today it was announced that after three recounts, Georgia re-certified the election results:

Georgia election officials announced Monday the results of the state’s presidential race will be re-certified after yet another recount to reaffirm President-elect Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump. “We have now counted legally cast ballots three times, and the results remain unchanged,” Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said during a Monday press conference, marking the latest blow in the president’s attempts to change the election results in Georgia. Raffensperger’s announcement comes after three counts in the state.

“Today the Secretary of State’s office will be re-certifying our state’s election results,” Raffensperger said. “Then the safe harbor under the United States Code to name electors is tomorrow, and then they will meet on December 14th to officially elect the next president.”

So far, no new reports of death threats to Raffesnperger or his family, or to election workers. But give it time…

President Trump certainly had Georgia on his mind today:

What a peach.

In the meantime, House conservatives are shamefully pushing Trump not to concede the election and to take the fight to the floor. Because this is Trump’s Republican Party:

President Donald Trump’s staunchest defenders on Capitol Hill are urging him not to concede even after President-elect Joe Biden wins the Electoral College vote next week, calling on their party’s leader to battle it out all the way to the House floor in January as he makes unsubstantiated claims of widespread election fraud.

[C]onservative House Republicans argue that next week doesn’t mark the end of Trump’s desperate efforts to overturn the election results, which he has failed to do through scores of fruitless lawsuits and brazen efforts to pressure state and local leaders to subvert the will of voters and appoint new slates of electors to the Electoral College. They said that Congress should engage in a full-throated debate over the results in key states because of their allegations of fraud, which have yet to be borne out in court.

This is the look of desperation:

Asked if Trump should concede next Monday, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio said bluntly: “No. No way, no way, no way.”

“We should still try to figure out exactly what took place here. And as I said that includes, I think, debates on the House floor — potentially on January 6,” Jordan, a trusted Trump confidant, told CNN.

“That’s a ways away,” Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican another close Trump ally, said when asked if Trump should concede after next week. “There are members who believe there could be value in having substantive debate of what occurred in states with substantial irregularities,” he said. “I don’t believe that 10 hours of debate on that subject would impair the union.”

Asked if he considers the election over on December 14, Rep. Andy Biggs, who chairs the House Freedom Caucus, said: “I’m exhausting every option before I consider that.”

… “I dispute the presidential election results,” arguing it’s “almost inexplainable” since Republicans were successful in key races across the board in Arizona other than for the White House, though they lost a Senate race too.

“What you have is the very top of the ticket — that’s where the problems were,” he said.

“What I’ve said all along is there’s a legal process that President Trump has been following, and that’s what the law allows and let’s let the process run through,” said Rep. Steve Scalise, the House GOP whip, sidestepping questions on whether Republicans should challenge state election results on the House floor.

Asked if he views December 14 as the end of the race, Scalise said: “Let’s let the legal process work through.”

Asked last week if he considers Biden the President-elect, Sen. Chuck Grassley, the most senior Republican in the chamber, said: “Two weeks from today he will be,” referring to December 14.

“It’ll all be decided on the 14th,” said Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who sits on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s leadership team.

The report notes:

It is not unusual for a losing candidate’s most fervent supporters to take their case to the House floor — something that occurred after the 2016, 2004 and 2000 presidential races. But it is unusual for the losing candidate to mount a weeks-long public campaign aimed at sowing discord and distrust over a pillar of democracy, something that Trump has done relentlessly since losing the race.

Anyway, I don’t think Republicans are going to have to work too hard to convince the President. Not when one considers today’s comments about the election:

For the record, as of two days ago, only 27 Congressional Republicans have acknowledged that Joe Biden won the election.

–Dana

133 Responses to “Election Soup”

  1. The never-ending election…

    Dana (cc9481)

  2. This is so shameful. My professor of German history at BYU warned about cults of personality. He got into trouble when he said he saw trappings of it in the leadership of the Mormon church.

    I never thought I’d live to see it in the U.S. Presidency.

    norcal (a5428a)

  3. Trump asks Pennsylvania House speaker for help overturning election results, personally intervening in a third state
    …….
    The calls, confirmed by House Speaker Bryan Cutler’s office, make Pennsylvania the third state where Trump has directly attempted to overturn a result since he lost the election to President-elect Joe Biden. He previously reached out to Republicans in Michigan, and on Saturday he pressured Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) in a call to try to replace that state’s electors.
    ……
    …..[L]ate last week, the House speaker was among about 60 Republican state lawmakers who sent a letter to Pennsylvania’s congressional representatives urging them to object to the state’s electoral slate on Jan. 6, when Congress is set to formally accept the results.

    Although such a move is highly unlikely to gain traction, at least one Pennsylvania Republican, Rep. Scott Perry, said in an interview Monday that he will heed the request and dispute the state’s electors.
    …..
    “My concerns are that we don’t know if this was a fair and free election and that we don’t know if fraud was committed,” he said.
    …….
    Straub, the spokesman for Cutler, said the letter to the congressional delegation had been in the works before the calls he received from Trump. He said Trump wanted to know what the state legislature could do to overturn the result, and Cutler spent both calls explaining that the legislature has no power to intervene.

    Under rules set out in the Pennsylvania Constitution, the General Assembly is not currently in session. Only Gov. Tom Wolf — a Democrat — or a court has the power to order a special session, Cutler explained to the president.
    …….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  4. Donald J. Trump
    @realDonaldTrump

    The Republican Governor of Georgia refuses to do signature verification, which would give us an easy win. What’s wrong with this guy? What is he hiding?

    Governor Brian Kemp has said he has no special authority to do this, but he’s called for more examination of signature verification three times. Furthermore when it comes to mail-in ballots there was signature matching (good or bad) two times: When the ballot was requested, and when it was sent back)

    https://www.cbs46.com/news/governor-kemp-calls-on-ga-sos-to-conduct-signature-audit-of-ballots/article_d6ab0aba-35f0-11eb-8713-834ffd0b8200.html

    Of course, there’s a general problem with signature matching. A genuine signature can be rejected.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/katiejennings/2020/11/06/georgia-requires-signature-matching-on-mail-in-ballots-but-the-science-is-dubious/?sh=781e151c7680

    Some people can imitate other people’s signatures. But no one can make a plausible forgery without seeing the way a genuine signature of that person looks like. That’s a substantial preventative against mass producing them.

    Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f)

  5. 3. Mark Levin says the entire election system of Pennsylvania violates the Pennsylvania constitution because it required a state constitutional amendment to make these changes.

    Mark Levin’s presentation on TV is embedded on this web page:

    https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/292639

    Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f)

  6. 24-
    Also the absentee ballot sleeves with the signatures are trash.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  7. @4 not 24. Gotta hit that caps key.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  8. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger seems to say that, in some respects, this is actually deja vu.

    He says that Stacey Abrams also complained after she lost the election for Governor in 2018, except there the margin she lost by was four times that of Trump.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-runs-the-stacey-abrams-playbook-11607295416

    Establishing a playbook that President Trump is following to the letter now, Ms. Abrams refused to concede, announced that she would launch major litigation against Georgia’s election system, and began collecting hundreds of millions of dollars from donors convinced the election had been stolen from her….

    …Many media outlets have rightly highlighted that the Trump campaign has provided precious little proof of its voter-fraud allegations. Yet for two years, few asked the same of Stacey Abrams..

    I think one difference is that Stacey Abrams claims people were prevented from voting …

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/30/18118264/georgia-election-lawsuit-voter-suppression-abrams-kemp-race

    While Trump claims votes were added to the total (or possibly counted for the wrong person.)

    Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f)

  9. Sooo:

    Following state law, Georgia @GovKemp has re-certified the state’s 16 Democratic electors.

    Dana (cc9481)

  10. Steve Vladeck has a great thread on Ted Cruz’s cynical effort to argue the PA case before the USSC, along with a 14-point analysis of the case’s merits (not good).
    And speaking of GA, the state has a really good takedown on QAnon Powell’s “experts”. Here’s how it starts…

    In an attempt to support their claims of a multi-national conspiracy to rig the results of the presidential election for President-Elect Joseph R. Biden, Jr.—which Plaintiffs allege was accomplished by methods ranging from “ballot stuffing” at voting machines via a hidden software algorithm to illegally processing tens of thousands of absentee ballots—Plaintiffs have filed multiple “expert” declarations and reports. But the individuals put forward by Plaintiffs as “experts” are wildly unqualified. For example, a former Trump staffer who has publicly stated that he is working hand in glove with the Trump campaign to get the election overturned and delivered to the President purports to offer a statistical analysis of election data despite having had no relevant training, skill, or experience. Others’ grounding in their claimed areas of expertise is equally suspect. The analyses they offer rely on patently incomplete or faulty data. Over and over, the reports fail to disclose the methods employed by their authors, error rates, or even how underlying data was obtained. Where their methodology is discernable, Plaintiffs’ “experts” regularly use methods that are not at all standard or trusted in the relevant field, and draw conclusions that are nothing more than speculation.

    The brief piqued my interest because one of the “experts” was Shiva Ayyadurai, self-proclaimed inventor of email, because so many devoted Trump true believers kept referencing his “analysis”, that his numbers meant fraud. The critique of his work was withering.
    Ms. Powell’s work was no better in WI.

    Wisconsin’s response to Sidney Powell’s lawsuit points out that the Dominion voting machine she says were part of a big election-rigging plot weren’t used in most of the counties she’s complaining about, and in the two that did use them, Trump won.

    To date, Trump’s win-loss record is 1-48, a batting average of 0.020, which is an order of magnitude below the Mendoza Line.

    Paul Montagu (77c694)

  11. “as of two days ago, only 27 Congressional Republicans have acknowledged that Joe Biden won the election.”

    As the evidence comes in, that number should go down.

    “Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger seems to say”

    He, his lieutenants, cohorts, and underlings have already lied, ‘complied’ in ways not demanded and unlikely to catch any fraud, and failed to substantively address the facts that observers were prevented from observing (without lying some more!)

    “To date, Trump’s win-loss record is 1-48”

    Only one court’s opinion has final jurisdiction, and the quickest way to get there is to get otherwise strong cases dismissed on spurious grounds. I’d almost think some of those judgs are doing him a favor, truthfully.

    “Wisconsin’s response to Sidney Powell’s lawsuit points out that the Dominion voting machine she says were part of a big election-rigging plot weren’t used in most of the counties she’s complaining about, and in the two that did use them, Trump won.”

    Irrelevant. The race was statewide. Biden votes could have been stolen up to the 49% level even in traditionally 75% counties. Fraud in one or two counties can turn the elections of the entire state

    Georgia Coincidence (536c42)

  12. It’s going to be a long slog persuading people to get off the Trump Train. I know some of you commenters prefer to ridicule Trump supporters, but I’m not sure that is the most effective method. Sure, it’s amusing to make fun of them, but the goal is to win them over. To that end, listening to their concerns and disagreeing in a civil manner might yield better results.

    “A soft answer turneth away wrath” and “You can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar” seem to apply here.

    norcal (a5428a)

  13. @11 How do you explain all the Republicans who won down-ballot races? I know how I explain them. I think there were many people like me who voted Republican in every race but the Presidential one.

    norcal (a5428a)

  14. There;s real problem with an Arizona election.

    A ballot initiative, Proposition 208, that passed with 51.7% of the vote, glaringly violated the state constitution, or won;t accomplish its stated purpose/

    It imposed a new 3.5% tax surcharge to raise an estimated $827 million for education.

    There are only three possible problems with that:

    1) Article XXII, Section 14 of the Arizona constitution states: “Any law which may not be enacted by the Legislature under this Constitution shall not be enacted by the people.”

    2) There’s another constitutional provision that requires a two-thirds majority of the Legislature to approve a tax increase. [Q. But does that only apply to taxes voted by the legislature?]

    3) A third constitutional provision puts a cap on the amount of revenue provided to school districts each year. [But maybe they could use the new tax for old spending, and free up the money for other purposes]

    Item 3 is the greatest weakness of the initiative. The initiative purports to exempt the new the money raised from the cap.

    There seems to have been a different claim in alawsuit filed to stop the proposition – that it unconstitutionally curtailed the Legislature’s authority, but the state Supreme Court said it couldn’t consider the issue until it passed.

    Everyone admits this would have worked as a state constitutional amendment, but doing this as a statute required fewer signatures to qualify than a measure for a constitutional amendment.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-other-arizona-election-challenge-11607294632

    Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f)

  15. 13. norcal (a5428a) — 12/7/2020 @ 6:32 pm

    How do you explain all the Republicans who won down-ballot races? I know how I explain them. I think there were many people like me who voted Republican in every race but the Presidential one.

    Sidney Powell had an explanation (which won’t check out)

    She took all the ballots which had only a vote for president (which you see in every election) and said they were fake, and said the Democrats were surprised by the margin by which Trump won, and had to hastily fake ballots and didn’t have time to fill them out also for the down ballot races. Or anyway that’s what Rudy Giuliani was saying at one point, before he broke from Sidney Powell.

    Sammy Finkelman (a1f34f)

  16. “It’s going to be a long slog persuading people to get off the Trump Train. I know some of you commenters prefer to ridicule Trump supporters, but I’m not sure that is the most effective method. Sure, it’s amusing to make fun of them, but the goal is to win them over. To that end, listening to their concerns and disagreeing in a civil manner might yield better results.

    “A soft answer turneth away wrath” and “You can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar” seem to apply here.”

    Poor advice. Inadvisable advice. We’re dealing with widespread election fraud against popular sentiment, with its most egregious examples caught on tape, and mysterious car explosions of people closely related to the steal.

    Your honorable role on the right, if any, will be to fall in line as people with more motivation and skill do the job you refused to do for the past few decades. I would not recommend playing the ‘devil’s advocate’, and softly repeating the other side’s lies is more likely to inflame than quench popular anger.

    “How do you explain all the Republicans who won down-ballot races? I know how I explain them. I think there were many people like me who voted Republican in every race but the Presidential one.”

    No, there were not. The gains among R’s were dependent on Trump’s willingness to bravely take popular positions ignored by the uniparty, not your willingness to take cowardly and self-serving ones that benefit the antisocial and marginal libertarian personality. Your gains have ever and always been from exploiting divisions and securing extremely marginal territory, not building a united coalition whose needs you then fulfill. You did not suddenly, without either effort or visibility, [b]suddenly become the cool people everyone respected.[/b]

    Krackenologist (da063c)

  17. To that end, listening to their concerns and disagreeing in a civil manner might yield better results.

    https://i.imgur.com/F1uOUMS.png

    Davethulhu (496a10)

  18. “We’re dealing with widespread election fraud against popular sentiment, with its most egregious examples caught on tape, and mysterious car explosions of people closely related to the steal.”

    No we’re not.

    Davethulhu (496a10)

  19. As the evidence comes in, that number should go down.

    What evidence? I brought up the 48 losses out of 49 tries because there hasn’t been evidence. Trump is lying to you. It’s a Big Con.

    Paul Montagu (6102a8)

  20. We’re dealing with widespread election fraud against popular sentiment, with its most egregious examples caught on tape, and mysterious car explosions of people closely related to the steal.

    What “widespread election fraud”? Where’s the evidence?
    What “mysterious car explosions”? Who were the victims? Who blew them up? What was the motive?

    Paul Montagu (6102a8)

  21. norcal, how are you going to reason with Trump supporters who believe that every Republican in office is there because of Trump’s coattails? It’s like trying to tell the 9/11 hijackers that there are not 70 virgins waiting for them in Paradise all slathered in milk and honey.

    nk (1d9030)

  22. So much easier to just use the existing government to leak fraudulent documents against the incoming administration then get the head of the FBI to brief the incoming President on those fake docs and tell the press he’d done so.

    And that would work if the media was as partisan for the right as it is for the left.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  23. I know some of you commenters prefer to ridicule Trump supporters, but I’m not sure that is the most effective method. Sure, it’s amusing to make fun of them,

    I can understand why you say this, since you’re denying the obvious information that Trump was clobbered badly in the election. Seems that the never trumper movement was extremely successful. We got everything we asked for, enough conservative judges, a divided government to limit the leftward possibilities, and of course Trump lost.

    Your honorable role on the right, if any, will be to fall in line as people with more motivation and skill do the job you refused to do for the past few decades.

    This idea that Trump got anything done is very amusing. All those executive orders won’t last to February. He needed to get legislation done. At the end of the day Bush got the job done by making deals. Obama struggled there but did get his healthcare fiasco passed. and Trump failed to get that kind of thing done.

    Which makes sense. Getting things done was never a priority for Trump.

    We’re dealing with widespread election fraud against popular sentiment, with its most egregious examples caught on tape, and mysterious car explosions of people closely related to the steal.

    It’s sad that you’ve been manipulated to thing there was egregious election fraud in some tape that was sold to you as showing something it doesn’t. I’m not familiar with this car bomb conspiracy but you should be very skeptical of new sources that just cheerlead for Trump. If they weren’t able to condemn the Proud Boys they aren’t your friend.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  24. ……. but the goal is to win them over.

    No, it’s not.

    Rip Murdock (ca74e6)

  25. I can understand why you say this, since you’re denying the obvious information that Trump was clobbered badly in the election.

    What made you think I’m denying this?

    norcal (a5428a)

  26. @16 Are you saying it’s better to ridicule you than listen to your concerns?

    norcal (a5428a)

  27. nk,

    As to the people whose Trump support borders on religious zeal, I probably don’t stand a chance, but I would point out that Republicans have won roughly half the Presidential elections in the past century, and Trump had nothing to do with it.

    norcal (a5428a)

  28. What made you think I’m denying this?

    norcal (a5428a) — 12/7/2020 @ 7:38 pm

    I was talking to the other guy.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  29. @24 By “winning them over”, I mean helping them see the error of supporting Trump. How is that wrong?

    norcal (a5428a)

  30. I expect that norcal, like me, knows Trump supporters (and I don’t mean just Trump voters) who in better days sat on his lap and drank from the same glass while listening to classic jazz (metaphorically speaking of course). 😉

    nk (1d9030)

  31. @28 I was confused because right above your comment was a quote from me.

    norcal (a5428a)

  32. @28 I was confused because right above your comment was a quote from me.

    norcal (a5428a) — 12/7/2020 @ 7:50 pm

    Oh yeah it’s my mistake. I pulled that from the Krack guy’s comment.

    Dustin (4237e0)

  33. In the real world, the new Attorney General from Los Angeles said he’s going to end all bail on January 1st. Who would’ve thought Kurt Russell’s sequel would’ve happened before the original though DeBlasio is trying hard.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  34. @30 I do, nk. All of my siblings and their spouses are Trump supporters. They are honest, upright people who mean well. I’m saddened when I see what Trump has done to them.

    Alas, people should never fall in love with a politician, or approach politics with a religious zeal. It just doesn’t end well.

    norcal (a5428a)

  35. @16

    against popular sentiment

    Well, no. Trump lost the popular vote twice and never polled above 50%. He has also never shown an approval rating above 50% The popular sentiment has always been against Trump. It may be different in your state or in your social group, but it hasn’t been the case nationally throughout Trump’s entire term.

    Nic (896fdf)

  36. “What “widespread election fraud”? Where’s the evidence?”

    You should have watched the public hearing in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia for the past week. Many faces behind the affadavits testified, much evidence has already been presented, none of it has been properly answered…yet.

    “Trump was clobbered badly in the election.”

    And will those who supposedly ‘clobbered’ him in the election show up in person to clobber his supporters in the streets if that election is disputed? Dead people and P.O. Box Gnomes may be able to vote, but they can’t fight in person very well.

    “What evidence? I brought up the 48 losses out of 49 tries”

    What exactly do you mean by ‘losses’ and ‘tries’? Dismissing a case without hearing its evidence isn’t a ‘try’, it’s a ‘bye’ at best. That’s why the evidence was brought before the state legislatures, you know, the people who’ll actually be making the decisions.

    “LALALA I DIDN’T LISTEN SO YOU LOSE BY DEFAULT” sorry, that’s not going to work.

    “What “mysterious car explosions”? Who were the victims? Who blew them up? What was the motive?”

    His name was Harrison Deal, he was the boyfriend of Brian Kemp’s daughter, his car blew up in a magnificent fireball on the Georgia freeway in a manner normally only tolerated as the result of a car accident in movies, and if you can’t figure out a motive by the behavior of those related to him, then you have too little imagination to ever be a decent lawyer, or comment on matters of law.

    Krackenologist (e6cd9a)

  37. “That’s why the evidence was brought before the state legislatures, you know, the people who’ll actually be making the decisions.”

    What do you think the state legislatures are going to do?

    Davethulhu (496a10)

  38. Getting things done was never a priority for Trump.

    His top priority, obviously, is getting praise and evading blame.
    His supporters’ top priority is giving Trump credit for anything good, painting anything bad as a plot against him, and denying that his GOP predecessors ever did an ounce of good.

    Radegunda (b63b53)

  39. Krackenologist, it appears that you cling to Trump like he’s some kind of Messiah. That’s misguided.

    Your zeal seems in line with Muslim extremists.

    norcal (a5428a)

  40. RIP Chuck Yeager (97). The man with the real right stuff.

    Rip Murdock (ca74e6)

  41. RIP -Chuck Yeager
    _

    JC Hayes
    @JHayes531

    @GenChuckYeager on the day of reckoning, what do you want written on your epitaph?
    Oct 21, 2016
    __ _

    Chuck Yeager
    @GenChuckYeager

    Who cares? I’ll be dead anyway so won’t know anything about it.
    _

    harkin (8fadc8)

  42. Icy used to be Johnny-on-the-spot with the death notices. His name even fit the role. I hope he’s okay.

    norcal (a5428a)

  43. His top priority, obviously, is getting praise and evading blame.
    His supporters’ top priority is giving Trump credit for anything good, painting anything bad as a plot against him, and denying that his GOP predecessors ever did an ounce of good.

    I would add that one of Trump’s main priorities, both before and during his presidency, has been to grow the Trump Brand, whenever and however he can. Everything is viewed through a lens of opportunity.

    Dana (cc9481)

  44. If you haven’t read Yeager’s autobiography it’s a hoot.

    The story of him flying a delegation to Russia.

    He’s appears to be just a flunky to the Soviet big brass till at some dinner somebody says ‘hey Yeager, pass the salt’.

    They said every head on the Russki side of the table spun round.

    harkin (8fadc8)

  45. You should have watched the public hearing in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia for the past week. Many faces behind the affadavits testified, much evidence has already been presented, none of it has been properly answered…yet.

    Oh, you mean the ballroom “testimony” and what occurred in political venues, not actual courts of law where evidence is either validated or tossed. You mean the words of Melissa Carone in a legislative hearing, who sat next to Giuliani and told a tale about ballots, but whose actual testimony in Wayne County was thrown out by a judge because her allegations “simply are not credible.”
    Bottom line, Krackenologist, you don’t have the first clue as to what information in those “hearings” is legitimate or not. What has been put forward in courts of law–where it counts because attorneys are officers of the court and witnesses are under oath–has been rebuffed. Emphatically.
    Even Giuliani did not allege fraud in his PA court appearances.
    So I’ll ask again: Do have have any specific verified evidence of this “widespread election fraud”? Don’t just wave at affidavits and such. Lay out the case.
    As for Harrison Deal, I’ll just note that all you have is speculation, no facts. But if you do have facts, please spill.

    Paul Montagu (1dc88f)

  46. “What do you think the state legislatures are going to do?”

    What are they constitutionally authorized to do?

    “His top priority, obviously, is getting praise and evading blame.”

    The all-too-typical projection of one whose own life has been lived precisely for that purpose.

    Trump’s top general priority, for anyone who bothered to watch, is starting a bunch of fights, and then using the confusion to easily win the ones he can win. Under such tactics have we seen more judges than ever before appointed, greater economic expansion than ever before, and greater foreign policy successes in US interests (as opposed to the narrow interests of US foreign offices) than ever before. Those who can deal with that style can make great gains, those who can’t will take it personally and snipe forever from the sidelines.

    “Your zeal seems in line with Muslim extremists.”

    Which we haven’t heard about since Trump came into office (another win!) Extremists are on the margins. This is the zeal of a populist movement, motivated by the destruction of the middle classes, the city centers, and small businesses from the Covid excuse and its lefty political opportunists. The anger is real, the anger is deep, and the anger is righteous. Woe betide anyone who attempts to minimize its justifications!

    Krackenologist (638b63)

  47. Oh my.

    Dana (cc9481)

  48. “Oh, you mean the ballroom “testimony” and what occurred in political venues, not actual courts of law”

    Are elections decided in political venues, or “actual courts of law?”

    “You mean the words of Melissa Carone in a legislative hearing, who sat next to Giuliani and told a tale about ballots, but whose actual testimony in Wayne County was thrown out by a judge because her allegations “simply are not credible.””

    What was the judge’s justification other than ‘not credible’? By all accounts, Dominion seems to hire a whole lot of people with criminal records. A quite convenient practice for shady companies, as it enables them to blame everything on the underlings in case one tries to blow the whistle. But they’ve told enough lies and avoided enough testimony for that excuse to wear thin.

    “Bottom line, Krackenologist, you don’t have the first clue as to what information in those “hearings” is legitimate or not.”

    Yes, that’s what “discovery” is for. What do you suppose might be found if a judge grants it?

    “What has been put forward in courts of law–where it counts because attorneys are officers of the court and witnesses are under oath–has been rebuffed. Emphatically.”

    I see you again fail to use the word “refute”. Very telling. Are you constitutionally incapable of doing so? Are the “officers of the court” equally inable?

    Krackenologist (85228f)

  49. Please let Krackenologist be a moby.

    lurker (d8c5bc)

  50. “As for Harrison Deal, I’ll just note that all you have is speculation, no facts. But if you do have facts, please spill.”

    His car exploded on the highway in full view of the other cars, which all had drivers who chose to mention the explosion they heard. That’s the type of rather not-often-happening thing that warrants an investigation to find the facts.

    Krackenologist (182865)

  51. @48 They’ve run Dominion counts with pretest counts and post-test counts and hand counted the paper ballots that are in the process, none of which showed any inconsistency. There was no issue with the Dominion machines.

    Also, just so you are aware, there are several law-type people on this site (I am not one of them) who are probably not all mistaken on the legal process and how it works. You could probably ask them if you are interested in clarifying what is or is not a reasonable legal result and how the process works.

    Nic (896fdf)

  52. The anger is real, the anger is deep, and the anger is righteous. Woe betide anyone who attempts to minimize its justifications!

    If this isn’t evidence of extreme religious zeal, I don’t know what is.

    norcal (a5428a)

  53. Sheriff who suggested Whitmer kidnapping could be ‘citizen’s arrest’ sues over election
    ……..
    The day after 13 men were charged Oct. 8 in connection with a plot to kidnap Whitmer and other unlawful activities, Leaf gave an interview to Battle Creek television station Fox 17 News. Many viewed his comments in that interview as a defense of the men charged in the plot.

    “A lot of people are angry with the governor and they want her arrested,” Leaf said in the interview. “So were they trying to arrest, or was it a kidnap attempt? Because you can still, in Michigan, if it’s a felony, you can make a felony arrest.”

    Leaf said the law doesn’t exempt elected officials from being the subject of a citizen’s arrest.
    …….
    “The only thing missing from this post-election circus was a lawsuit from Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf,” Attorney General Dana Nessel said on Twitter Monday. “Until now, of course. Because 2020 is still happening.”
    ……..
    The suit seeks to block directions in a memo to local clerks from Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, telling them to delete electronic poll book software and associated files from the Nov. 3 vote “unless a petition for recount has been filed and the recount has not been completed, a post-election audit is planned but has not yet been completed, or the deletion of the data has been stayed by an order of the court or the Secretary of State.”

    Records show it is standard procedure after an election in Michigan — a request sent for years to clerks under Republican and Democratic secretaries that is intended to keep voter records secure.
    ………
    Among the concerns Leaf cites is election workers allegedly giving voters “disposable pens” with which to cast their ballots.

    One affidavit is from a Barry County woman who said she was concerned because she was given a Sharpie to use to mark her ballot. Conspiracy theories about Sharpies appeared nationwide soon after the election and have been debunked.
    ………..

    Rip Murdock (ca74e6)

  54. Krackenologist reminds me of a guy who has fallen in love with a crazy woman. Everybody points out how crazy she is, but he just can’t see it because love is blind.

    Never, ever fall in love with a politician.

    norcal (a5428a)

  55. @50 The car didn’t just explode randomly on the freeway. Deal was in a 3 car crash and the police do, in fact, report they are investigating.

    Nic (896fdf)

  56. It’s going to be a long slog persuading people to get off the Trump Train. I know some of you commenters prefer to ridicule Trump supporters, but I’m not sure that is the most effective method. Sure, it’s amusing to make fun of them, but the goal is to win them over. To that end, listening to their concerns and disagreeing in a civil manner might yield better results.

    Sorry I am late to this fine post but this is an excellent comment, norcal.

    JVW (ee64e4)

  57. “If this isn’t evidence of extreme religious zeal, I don’t know what is.”

    Religion? This is nothing but a well-studied recommendation based on the most developed of the social sciences. Using language that you’re likely to understand, since you intellectual types tend to be terrible at both reading human emotions and studying the issues important to people you consider test subjects.

    “Never, ever fall in love with a politician.”

    No one ever fell in love with Trump the politician. Trump the hero, Trump the fighter, Trump the berserker, on the other hand, now that’s something to not only hitch your own wagon to but actually consider helping out in his time of trouble, for reasons of mutual respect if not loyalty! And I’ve always had a soft spot for people who make petty tyrants squeal.

    Krackenologist (c3a213)

  58. And I’ve always had a soft spot for people who make petty tyrants squeal.

    So that’s what Trump did to make Kim Jong Un fall in love with him.

    Rip Murdock (ca74e6)

  59. “They’ve run Dominion counts with pretest counts and post-test counts and hand counted the paper ballots that are in the process, none of which showed any inconsistency. There was no issue with the Dominion machines.”

    What sort of use is hand-counting paper ballots from the final total after large sacks of mail-ins were dumped in the middle of the night? It’s almost like you’re certifying the fraud after you’ve already spoiled the evidence! Why, if I were in on it, I might insist on repeated ‘recounts’ of an already tainted total just to make sure!

    “Also, just so you are aware, there are several law-type people on this site (I am not one of them) who are probably not all mistaken on the legal process and how it works. You could probably ask them if you are interested in clarifying what is or is not a reasonable legal result and how the process works.”

    Yes, yes, a ‘reasonable’ legal result is one which fits with the personal prejudices of a particular lawyer, and an ‘unreasonable’ one is one which doesn’t. Whether they manage to be persuasive or convincing is a different matter.

    Krackenologist (73e47f)

  60. Are elections decided in political venues, or “actual courts of law?”

    The election was already decided, Krack.
    Biden won a constitutional and popular majority. In order to reverse the outcome, the burden is on you to prove this “widespread election fraud” and/or “rigging” that would take electoral votes from Biden and given them to Trump. Because you (collectively) have failed at delivering any serious evidence, your last gasp is to persuade Trump-friendly state legislatures to swap electoral votes in Trump’s favor, thus thwarting the will of The People in at least three states, but maybe you could get a leg up in PA with a favorable USSC decision (actually, that’s highly doubtful). All I see is a losing proposition, but you can always prove me wrong if you step up with some real evidence.

    Yes, that’s what “discovery” is for. What do you suppose might be found if a judge grants it?

    Ah, never mind, you don’t have evidence, so you’re angling for a fishing expedition to find some through discovery. Thanks for the confirmation that you got nuthin’.
    But I did find some information about the late Harrison Deal.

    Was a fatal car crash a message for Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp “to get back in line”? No, there’s no evidence that’s true: Although the cause of the crash, which killed an aide to Georgia Sen. Kelly Loeffler, remains under investigation, a police spokeswoman told Lead Stories the accident involved a collision. “We’ve gotten the calls about possible bombings and all that — that is not even on our radar,” she said.

    Your story about it being a “mysterious car explosion” is a load of hogwash. Maybe you should give some thought about your selection of news sources, maybe take a break from Facebook.

    Paul Montagu (1dc88f)

  61. “Conspiracy theories about Sharpies appeared nationwide soon after the election and have been debunked.”

    To add to norcals’s point, the first and last words of that sentence are words you should NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER use.

    “Erick Erickson
    @EWErickson
    The FEMA camps weren’t real. Jade Helm wasn’t real. The stolen election is not real. You people who believe this stuff and then want to try to convince people Jesus is real are undermining your ability to witness. Thank God the Holy Spirit can work without you.”

    “@j_arthur_bloom
    The deep state drug trafficking operations were/are real, the great reset is real, Epstein was real, deep state involvement with literal Third-Reich Nazis was real, FDR’s coverup of Stalin’s atrocities was real, we really did have something close to a police state in 1918-1919.”

    Krackenologist (b50580)

  62. Never, ever fall in love with a politician.

    You never know whom Canadian neo-Nazis will fall in love with, norcal. Not that I’m accusing Krackenologist of being just today’s nom du jour of a Canadian neo-Nazi who has been stalking this site for many years under by now hundreds of pseudonyms. No, not me, I’m not saying that at all.

    nk (1d9030)

  63. norcal @29-

    @24 By “winning them over”, I mean helping them see the error of supporting Trump. How is that wrong?

    I have no interest in “winning them over”. I want a Conservative party of limited government, and Trump supporters need to find their own way back without my help.

    Rip Murdock (ca74e6)

  64. “Was a fatal car crash a message for Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp “to get back in line”? No, there’s no evidence that’s true”

    “Translation: ‘we never looked'”

    “Although the cause of the crash, which killed an aide to Georgia Sen. Kelly Loeffler, remains under investigation, a police spokeswoman told Lead Stories the accident involved a collision.

    something which explodes on the highway while going at high speed can also crash into other cars after the fact, yes. Though big booms and fireballs are considerably more rare.

    ““We’ve gotten the calls about possible bombings and all that — that is not even on our radar,””

    Of course it isn’t-that’s something that belongs to intelligence!

    “Your story about it being a “mysterious car explosion” is a load of hogwash.”

    How did the testimony ‘debunk’ mine in any way? It looks more like an assertion of disbelief coupled with a few basic facts that don’t prove anything one way or another.

    “Maybe you should give some thought about your selection of news sources, maybe take a break from Facebook.”

    Never got one.

    Anyway, this lazy-ass non-response is precisely the caliber of ‘debunking’ that you’re applying to election evidence-blandly asserting that you don’t believe it, blandly asserting one or two irrelevant facts, blandly asserting that ‘we’re not looking into it’ or ‘not our jurisdiction’ covers everything.

    Krackenologist (826cc7)

  65. Although nom de la minute might be more apt since he’ll also use several different ones at the same time to sockpuppet himself from thread to thread.

    nk (1d9030)

  66. What sort of use is hand-counting paper ballots from the final total after large sacks of mail-ins were dumped in the middle of the night?

    If you’re talking about Fulton County, debunked, debunked, debunked. There were no chain-of-custody issues.

    Paul Montagu (1dc88f)

  67. “I want a Conservative party of limited government, and Trump supporters need to find their own way back without my help.”

    Who specifically does that want help? Are there enough of them to vote you or your people in? What’s your political coalition for winning this goal in a democracy? Who are your allies in the democratic coalition necessary to achieve that goal? What other issues animate that coalition? Who’s funding it? What interests will you crush to achieve this goal?

    Ideology is the opiate of the born political losers.

    Krackenologist (15e6fb)

  68. Anyway, this lazy-ass non-response is precisely the caliber of ‘debunking’ that you’re applying to election evidence-blandly asserting that you don’t believe it, blandly asserting one or two irrelevant facts, blandly asserting that ‘we’re not looking into it’ or ‘not our jurisdiction’ covers everything.

    That’s called burden-shifting, Krack. If you make an allegation, it’s on you to back it up. That’s how it works. And you haven’t backed up a single thing.
    As Chris Hitchens said, that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. You’re dismissed.

    Paul Montagu (1dc88f)

  69. “If you’re talking about Fulton County, debunked, debunked, debunked. There were no chain-of-custody issues.”

    I reject your debunking and substitute my own. Maybe the next ‘debunking’ will involve affadavits that include clear and unambiguous statements relevant to the inquiry at hand, details pertinent to the testimony, and not lying about matters of public record.

    Krackenologist (62e901)

  70. @59 Then it doesn’t matter if Dominion hired criminals or not because by your most recent (though not earlier) argument, Dominion wasn’t the problem. As for “dumping votes”, do you understand what they were talking about? They were counting votes in batches and then sending the results out to the media which were calling that a vote dump. Counting millions of votes takes time and they were doing it throughout election night.

    Unless you are a lawyer, you probably don’t know as much about the law as a lawyer does. In my experience, most lawyers can look at the reasonable arguments for several different results, even their non-preferred results, and generally know appropriate procedures as well.

    Nic (896fdf)

  71. Ms. Hemingway is not intellectually honest, grasping for sources to maintain her dishonest storyline. Multiple election officials and media folks who saw hours of closed-circuit tape before and after the 96-second snippet that blew up on right-wing media. There were no chain-of-custody issues, and supervisors were present virtually the whole time.
    The two affidavits from observers stated that “they eventually followed those workers out, but they never claimed they were told to go, prevented from staying, or banned from returning,” which is consistent with what the chief investigator said. You got nuthin’, Krack.

    Paul Montagu (1dc88f)

  72. The idea is to sow confusion such that what is real and what is a lie seem only opinion.

    “Deceive, inveigle, and obfuscate.”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  73. “What are they constitutionally authorized to do?”

    You tell me.

    However I will tell you this. If the states submit a slate of electors that doesn’t match the election results, and the Senate tries to roll with it, you will have Acting President Pelosi on Jan 20.

    Davethulhu (496a10)

  74. The Fake News and your lying eyes want you to think the NY Jets are a bad football team. Don’t believe them. There are two informed schools of thought on why the Jets are 0-12. The first is that the games are rigged. And yes, the elites and their lackey NFL referees do obviously have it in for the Jets, who are after all owned by Trump donor and Ambassador to the UK, Woody Johnson. But that’s not why. The actual reason is that the Jets aren’t playing football, per se. They’re playing some kind of strategic multi-dimensional chess I’m not smart enough to understand. All I know for sure is that the Jets have the Chiefs and Steelers exactly where they want them.

    lurker (d8c5bc)

  75. In other news, Mr. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Fifth Avenue), who wishes everybody would believe him when he asks them to stop undressing him with their eyes, has offered his life to the gods in exchange for the Emperor’s.

    nk (1d9030)

  76. Lurker,

    the Jets threw their last game. Probably not the best example, but it is a fantastic example of Don Quixote.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  77. I have no interest in “winning them over”. I want a Conservative party of limited government, and Trump supporters need to find their own way back without my help.

    Rip Murdock (ca74e6) — 12/7/2020 @ 9:24 pm

    Ah, but there’s the rub. To have a Conservative party of limited government, it is necessary to create a climate of political opinion that will support one. This climate is created everyday in the millions of conversations that Americans have with each other.

    Politics is downstream from culture. Helping others to see the light redounds to your benefit. Don’t discount the Butterfly Effect.

    norcal (a5428a)

  78. Sorry I am late to this fine post but this is an excellent comment, norcal.

    JVW (ee64e4) — 12/7/2020 @ 9:04 pm

    Thank you, JVW. Praise from you is an honor.

    norcal (a5428a)

  79. @75 It’s obvious that the NFL referees are part of the deep state. The Jets should file lawsuits in every jurisdiction in which they have played. If that doesn’t work, take it to the streets!

    norcal (a5428a)

  80. The “experts” that Trump’s mental midget legal team continues to use are…wait for it…not in any way experts. They’re morons and conmen (conpeople?).

    Shiva Ayyadurai invented email when he was in high school in 1982…according it him. More than a decade after people had been using since before he was born. You could send email with AUTODIN in the DoD in the early 60’s. Unix had a mail feature built into the platform in early 70’s. SNDMSG had file attachments in…the mid 70’s.

    When these are the people claiming a thing happened (when it’s obvious that it didn’t) you need something besides these “experts” saying it happened.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (1367c0)

  81. Also Shiva Ayyadurai has been spreading Covid misinformation.

    And he has a personal reason to push the voting conspiracies.

    Ayyadurai ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination in the 2020 U.S. Senate election in Massachusetts. After having been defeated by 104,782 votes to 158,590, Ayyadurai alleged that over one million ballots had been destroyed and that the state committed election fraud. He alleged that ballot images had to be preserved for 22 months but that they did not exist, however the professor of political science Charles Stewart stated that federal law only requires that physical ballots are stored. Harvard law professor Nicholas Stephanopoulos disputed Ayyadurai’s allegation of fraud and a spokesperson for the state accused him of spreading misinformation. Fact checkers at Reuters and The Associated Press labelled the allegations as false.

    The worst part is that he isn’t dumb, he’s smart, very smart, so he knows that he’s lying but he still does it, but he’s been full of absolute poop for so long it’s just habit, odd that he’s for Trump.

    The first time I met him was at MIT, when he was getting not-quite-yelled at by Lee Todd for trying to tell people that he invented email at an event at the Media Lab.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (1367c0)

  82. All of my siblings and their spouses are Trump supporters. They are honest, upright people who mean well.

    And IIRC they used to be Birchers. Likewise, the people closest to me are honest, upright, well-meaning, and well-educated. And their views split between 9/11 Truthers and Trumpists who thought the Clintons murdered Vince Foster. I love them dearly, and would never want them to feel ridiculed, but any attempt to reason with them is an exercise in futility. So I don’t. Conspiracy theories are like crack. Nobody ever stopped consuming one because somebody showed them a power-point presentation on the virtues and demerits of addiction.

    lurker (d8c5bc)

  83. I read here except for trump, republicans did pretty well in the 2020 election. Mostly republican women and minority men who fully supported trump’s agenda. The people of this country support trump’s polices. They like the message not the messenger. Never trumpers and their donor class free trade corporatists can no longer buy there way into power over the republican base. A few old corporate stooges like mitch mcconnell desperately hang onto to power as best they can ;but newer members coming up support trump’s agenda.

    asset (31eea5)

  84. Never trumpers and their donor class free trade corporatists can no longer buy there way into power over the republican base.

    Do you think it’s better if some government bureaucrat “manages” trade, or America would be prosperous if we could just get high enough tariffs on all imported goods? That’s like saying if the government would just institute a $100 per hour minimum wage, we would all be better off.

    norcal (a5428a)

  85. @83 My mom has been a dues-paying Bircher since the 60s. She’s even leaving them something in her estate! I’ve been trying (mostly in vain) to get her to focus on issues instead of conspiracies.

    norcal (a5428a)

  86. In addition to Stacy Abrams, as noted up-threat, keep in mind that some Democrats did their best to de legitimize Trump’s election, with the likes or Ron Wyden in 2017 believing Russia had tampered with the vote count, even though no such evidence existed. Clinton was a bit more guarded, but still insinuated that she questioned the legitimacy of Trump’s victory and was prepared to contest the election – even as late as 2017.

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6)

  87. Do you see a distinction between “delegitimizing” an election by claiming that it was won by unfair means or problematic actions of officials (e.g. Comey) and claiming that an election is invalid because of massive electoral fraud and calling for state legislatures to ignore votes and install its own electors?

    No difference really?

    Victor (4959fb)

  88. I don’t know if what many Republicans are doing now is shameless, but it is shameful. It’s detrimental to American democracy.

    https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-trumps-pathetic-endgame-20201207-wty4ityz6napdnpzf36tj733qq-story.html

    I’ve long admired Gary Kasparov. An elite grandmaster and former world chess champion, he fled the Soviet Union, moved to New York and founded the Renew Democracy Initiative. (Kasparov also defeated Deep Blue, the chess supercomputer, another of his many accomplishments.) He didn’t become an insane anti-Semite, living in exclusion like Bobby Fischer (who was the prodigy that inspired the chess craze when he defeated Spassky in the world chess championship in 1972–there’s a great movie about that match, Pawn Sacrifice, by the way.) Instead, Kasparov devoted his time and money to promoting democracy around the globe, and he’s a very succinct and persuasive writer. “A pathetic, failed coup attempt is still a coup attempt.” That speaks volumes.

    Kasparov saw Trump for what he is from the beginning, a total fraud, a faux populist, and a weak wannabe dictator. I admire him because that exactly how I saw Trump, from the beginning. The opening is over, the middle game is complete, not it’s all about the end game.

    What Trump is attempting now is not a coup. It’s sedition. And the Republicans who remain silent or are unwilling to call him out on it are complicit. The old saying is, lies, lies, lies, and damned statistics. Well, the damned statistics prove that Biden won the election overwhelmingly.

    All that’s left now is denial and lies, lies, lies. Unfounded and unprovable accusations of voter fraud, election theft, rigged voting machines, mysterious ballots appearing out of nowhere, even claims that a dead South American dictator influenced the election, how, from the grave? It would be ridiculous, if it wasn’t so pitiful.

    I have to remain optimistic about American democracy. We are a resilient people. We’ve been through worse, a Civil War, two World Wars, an influenza pandemic, and a Great Depression. Yet somehow we managed to make it through it all. As Winston Churchill once famously said, “The American people will always do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other options.”

    The right thing now is to repudiate Trumpism. He never wanted to be president in the first place; he merely wanted to use the office to enrich himself, because he’s in a whole lot of debt. The idiots who are donating to his so-called election defense fund don’t realize that most of that money–somewhat near $170 million so far–will go to paying off his campaign debt and funding his defense in state courts.

    This is insane. I don’t know what to make of it. What happened to the America I grew up in?

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  89. Today it was announced that after three recounts, Georgia re-certified the election results

    In other news, General Francisco Franco is still dead.

    Dave (1bb933)

  90. Do you see a distinction between “delegitimizing” an election by claiming that it was won by unfair means or problematic actions of officials (e.g. Comey) and claiming that an election is invalid because of massive electoral fraud and calling for state legislatures to ignore votes and install its own electors?

    No difference really?
    Victor (4959fb) — 12/8/2020 @ 5:01 am

    There is a difference but the desired result is the same.

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6)

  91. Do you see a distinction between “delegitimizing” an election by claiming that it was won by unfair means or problematic actions of officials (e.g. Comey) and claiming that an election is invalid because of massive electoral fraud and calling for state legislatures to ignore votes and install its own electors?

    Isn’t the truly important distinction that there is ample evidence that the Trump campaign actively sought, and received, campaign assistance from Russian intelligence operatives in 2016, ignored campaign finance laws to conceal hush money payments, and that Comey’s gratuitous announcement 10 days before the election was clearly irregular; whereas nobody has been able to articulate a single fact that stands up to even the barest scrutiny to justify Trump’s attempted coup d’etat?

    Dave (1bb933)

  92. “But it is unusual for the losing candidate to mount a weeks-long public campaign aimed at sowing discord and distrust over a pillar of democracy,”

    Right.

    The standard set in 2016 was not weeks, but 4 years and counting.

    Mike S (4125f8)

  93. Do you see a distinction between “delegitimizing” an election by claiming that it was won by unfair means or problematic actions of officials (e.g. Comey) and claiming that an election is invalid because of massive electoral fraud and calling for state legislatures to ignore votes and install its own electors?

    No difference really?
    Victor (4959fb) — 12/8/2020 @ 5:01 am

    There is a difference but the desired result is the same.

    Hoi Polloi (139bf6) — 12/8/2020 @ 5:32 am

    Hillary Conceded the next day.
    The Russia investigation, that Trump tried to end by firing Comey was properly predicated and did in fact find evidence that Russia committed crimes against US citizens in an effort to influence our presidential election. The difference between talking about the impact of Comey’s statment/the Russian hack of the DNC and what the GOP is doing right now is massive enough that the difference in degree is a difference in kind.

    Trump and his dishonest sycophants have been attacking our democracy for weeks. He’s raised hundreds of millions of dollars and produced no evidence compelling enough to keep a court from dismissing his claims. In forums where there are penalties for lying and the ability to closely examine the evidence most of the lawyers have been careful not to actually allege fraud. At this point I just assume that people like the Kracken imbecile up thread are either ardent conspiracy theorists or utterly unpatriotic.

    This noise may do lasting damage to our country. It’s failing here because Trump lost so completely. He lost by millions of popular votes and many tens of thousands of votes in key states. The evidence of wide spread fraud or errors is non-existent at this point. But people I once respected like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are playing into this and validating a baseless conspiracy theory. I hope the next few elections are clear enough that no single state legislature is given the pretext and opportunity to swing the presidential election.

    The GOP and the Dems will use this as justification to try and people like the Trump supporters who care more about their team then our country will cheer them on.

    Time123 (b0628d)

  94. “But it is unusual for the losing candidate to mount a weeks-long public campaign aimed at sowing discord and distrust over a pillar of democracy,”

    Right.

    The standard set in 2016 was not weeks, but 4 years and counting.

    Mike S (4125f8) — 12/8/2020 @ 6:19 am

    Here’s a great example of a Trump supporting using something they think is wrong to justify doing wrong. I wish fewer people had Mike S’s contempt for our country. If there were more patriots we wouldn’t be having this problem.

    Time123 (b0628d)

  95. I know that few here need convincing that Trump’s efforts are dangerous, but since I’ve seen a minority of commenters here insisting that the continuing cascade of misinformation, bad faith, and insinuations are all okay because it’s acceptable to “look for evidence” or what have you, I thought I’d offer a personal story that left me feeling dismayed.

    I’m from Johnstown, PA and my brother still lives there. Over the years, I’ve seen him slowly morph into a huge Trump fan, which was a surprise in that he was never overtly political before. About a year and a half ago he handed me his phone so that I could see some photos. I accidentally hit home and saw the OANN news app icon. I didn’t say anything but thought, “Oh, come on.”

    Like a lot of you, I’m an ex-Republican who is appalled by everything Trump stands for. My brother of course knows my political leanings and, while not forceful on the topic, he’s expressed dismay that I’d vote for Biden especially since I live in an important electoral college state like Pennsylvania. “How can you vote for a socalist,” etc. etc.

    Two nights ago, we discussed what to buy our mom for Christmas. We hadn’t really talked about the election but when he shared pictures of his holiday decorations about a week ago the Trump 2020 sign was still flying. I didn’t comment on it but I thought it was rather sad. Out of nowhere, he asked me what’s going on with Justice Alito changing the date for replies.

    I should add here that I’m a lawyer and exclusively do appellate work. I assumed he was just genuinely curious, and I told him it meant absolutely nothing. I explained that the original deadline was too late and it seemed like an administrative oversight. Testing the waters, I concluded by saying, “Hopefully that’s the last thing we’ll see with these ridiculous efforts to steal the election.”

    He went into a frenzy, full of all the whataboutisms you see from dishonest hacks. What about Dominion hacking? What about the Dominion server being stolen overseas? What about the USB drives being stolen in Philadelphia? Why did Georgia and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and Arizona all shut down counting overnight on election night at the same time? What about the Georgia water break that didn’t actually happen? Trump’s rallies are huge, Biden’s were small. “There’s no way Biden won the election. No way.” He asked why I don’t care about any of these things.

    I attempted to redirect the outburst, and said that I do care if those things were actually true and, being a lawyer I am receptive to evidence and not claims. He said Trump has 1,000 affidavits. He was almost screaming at me at that point. “That’s evidence. That’s evidence!” I held my tongue and said something like, “Well, it’s a matter for the history books, now. It’s over. Judges spanning the political spectrum have all uniformly rejected all of the lawsuits. Doesn’t that tell you something?”

    He then told me that when Alito changed the deadline it was a signal and he insisted “it’s not over.” I emphasized the fact that I do appellate work for a living that the Trump campaign presented no evidence whatsoever and there is, as a matter of law, nothing the Supreme Court could do as new evidence can’t be presented on appeal. His next few responses chilled me. He just repeated “whatever” about seven times in a row. He then segued into a closing rant that I’ve abandoned everything I’ve ever said about not trusting the media, and that I’m now completely buying into what CNN and MSNBC say. When I pointed out that even a lot of FOX News personalities say it’s over he said, “FOX News is dead to me.”

    The entire thing left me quite sad. That last line was straight out of 1984’s demonstration of how easily things can switch despite the cognitive whiplash. He’s mentioned here and there that I should watch FOX News more, presumably in an effort to dissuade me from voting for Biden and convince me to come back to the fold. In the blink of the eye, they’ve become the enemy. And while I don’t know if anything would change if the Republican party grew a backbone and called out Trump’s BS in public, it certainly doesn’t help things. But at the end of the day, Trump is the source of all this.

    JohnnyAgreeable (c49787)

  96. #95

    There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with disputing the election at this point in time. There is a legal process that is playing out.

    There are a lot of anomalies and unusual activity in this election. Very unfortunately, we are running out of time to get to the bottom of this mess. And that is the nature of elections – they need to be settled in a short amount of time. It was always going to be difficult because there are roughly an equal number of voters on the other side who would feel disenfranchised if the news media called it their way, and recounts changed the result.

    It’s not a good look to question the patriotism of someone you know nothing about except for a 14 word disagreement with a comment that disparages his side of the political divide.

    Mike S (4125f8)

  97. Post-script:

    My brother is not named Mike S.

    JohnnyAgreeable (c49787)

  98. Mr. Agreeable, you’re not the only one who’s witnessed this business among Trump supporters. Multiple friends of ours went down that rabbit hole, and we’re gobsmacked that they fell for it.

    Paul Montagu (77c694)

  99. #95

    There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with disputing the election at this point in time. There is a legal process that is playing out.

    Yes, and the results of that legal process (40+ cases) is that there’s no compelling evidence of fraud or wide spread errors.

    There are a lot of anomalies and unusual activity in this election. Very unfortunately, we are running out of time to get to the bottom of this mess. And that is the nature of elections – they need to be settled in a short amount of time. It was always going to be difficult because there are roughly an equal number of voters on the other side who would feel disenfranchised if the news media called it their way, and recounts changed the result.

    The public claims are nothing like what you wrote there. The public claims are that this election is being stolen, and then a whole bunch of nonsense about how.

    It’s not a good look to question the patriotism of someone you know nothing about except for a 14 word disagreement with a comment that disparages his side of the political divide.

    Your initial 14 word comments wasn’t this process summary. If was that the widespread lies about his election are justified because of things the Dems did. I find the position that it’s OK to lie and sow distrust about the US to be completely unpatriotic. If you don’t want to come across as someone who has contempt for our system of government you should be more nuanced in your comment.

    Time123 (457a1d)

  100. @96, Johnnyagreeable, that was an interesting comment. Thank you for sharing. I have a friend that feels similar to your brother.

    Here’s a good article about how the Qanon conspiracy grows on people.

    Key Points
    -Guided Apophenia; “the tendency to perceive a connection or meaningful pattern between unrelated or random things (such as objects or ideas)”
    -Game play that makes conspiracy theories fun and gives people a sense of belonging by participating in them.
    -How people use things they don’t know as evidence that something they already believe happened is true.

    Sounds like your brother’s comments hit the 1st and 3rd points.

    Time123 (b0628d)

  101. @Krackenologist Is the argument that Dominion machines miscounted votes (which it is not equipped to do and anyway that was checked out in Georgia in two recounts) or that ballots were added?

    But the total number of ballots much match with those recorded on Election Day, precinct by precinct, and each must be accompanied by a name of a registered voter, registered at that precinct, and a signature that doesn’t look grossly different from the one on file for that voter. There are cross-checks. You can’t just stuff the “ballot box” without immediate detection.

    Is there even any coherent alleged fraud scheme or schemes? Not, I mean, allegations that there was a loophole here or a loophole there in the chain of custody.

    Sammy Finkelman (63d78b)

  102. Here’s a good article about how the Qanon conspiracy grows on people.

    That was an interesting read, thanks. I never asked if he’s a Qanon believer but I agree there are certainly aspects of his belief that align with those things.

    JohnnyAgreeable (c49787)

  103. Time123 (b0628d) — 12/8/2020 @ 7:23 am

    -Guided Apophenia; “the tendency to perceive a connection or meaningful pattern between unrelated or random things (such as objects or ideas)”

    People don;t hae agood understanding of the laws of probability. If you have enough things to connect, you can make connections. Just like you can memorize telephone numbers.

    There are a lot of amazing anagrams.

    WASHINGTON CROSSING THE DELAWARE

    Equals:

    1. HE SAW HIS RAGGED CONTINENTALS ROW.

    2. A HARD, HOWLING, TOSSING WATER SCENE.

    3. THE COLD WATERS SWASHING ON IN RAGE.

    4. A WET CREW GAIN HESSIAN STRONGHOLD.

    5. AND SO THIS GENERAL WATCHES ROWING.

    -Game play that makes conspiracy theories fun and gives people a sense of belonging by participating in them.

    You mean: Give them puzzles to solve? Or things to do?

    -How people use things they don’t know as evidence that something they already believe happened is true.

    This is so abstract I can’t figure out what you are talking about.

    Do you mean they take an earlier conclusion, which is wrong, as part of the evidence that a further claim is true?

    Sounds like your brother’s comments hit the 1st and 3rd points.

    Sammy Finkelman (63d78b)

  104. @76

    In other news, Mr. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Fifth Avenue), who wishes everybody would believe him when he asks them to stop undressing him with their eyes, has offered his life to the gods in exchange for the Emperor’s.

    nk (1d9030) — 12/7/2020 @ 10:09 pm

    He’s arguing for the law.

    Look, I don’t know if fraud/malfeasance/misfeasance had any meaningful impact to the election.

    But, we cannot say that HOW the elections were handled, especially in PA and WI, were handled in manner that gives that “warm and fuzzies” that everything was on the up & up.

    Particularly in WI, where the actual law doesn’t allow for folks to use the pandemic as the rationale to use the absentee voting process. The problem here, is that the government told the voters that they COULD use it and even advertised it…even though the law doesn’t give the government that power. So, what’s the remedy? I don’t know… these voters were following their government’s direction.

    I don’t think throwing out those absentee votes is the remedy as it was literally not their fault. The fault lies with the government officials.

    whembly (c30c83)

  105. Sounds like your brother’s comments hit the 1st and 3rd points

    I couldn;t see what fit the third point.

    Sammy Finkelman (63d78b)

  106. I couldn;t see what fit the third point.

    I took it to mean that the things he doesn’t know are true, i.e. all the whataboutisms and things that may appear sinister but have ready explanations, are evidence that Biden didn’t really win the election.

    It doesn’t matter if it’s provable that Georgia’s results are fraudulent or Pennsylvania’s results are fraudulent etc. because he knows it to be true that fraud occurred. He is 100% convinced that things like the attendance of Biden’s rallies versus Trump’s rallies show that Biden has little support while Trump has a lot. There is nothing that would ever convince my brother that Biden won the election, because in his mind there’s just no way it could have occurred.

    JohnnyAgreeable (c49787)

  107. -Game play that makes conspiracy theories fun and gives people a sense of belonging by participating in them.

    There’s also a wish to consider themselves more astute and clear-eyed and independent-minded than other people, with a special insight into truths that bad people are trying to conceal, and an ability to pierce through the “media narratives” that others (e.g. Trump critics) have supposedly fallen for.

    Radegunda (20775b)

  108. Technically what Cruz would be arguing for is that the United States Supreme Court ignore a statute written by the Pennsylvania state legislature and the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court interpreting the Pennsylvania statute and also ignore Pennsylvania’s interpretation of state laws of laches and instead substitute the Supreme Court’s own interpretation of the state constitution in its stead and throw out a bunch of ballots by people who were valid voters and who thought they could rely on the Pennsylvania legislature and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

    If you want to call that claim the “law” then I am reminded of Charles Dickens.

    If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, “the law is a ass — a idiot.

    Victor (4959fb)

  109. He’s arguing for the law.

    Heh! He’s sucking up, knowing he won’t have to put up. Sucking up to whom? Who knows? He’s his biggest fan.

    nk (1d9030)

  110. Sammy,
    You’re the most thorough and detail oriented commenter here. I strongly encourage you to read the article since it does a much better job at explaining things then I did with my 3 point summary.

    JohhnyAgreeble,

    -How people use things they don’t know as evidence that something they already believe happened is true.

    What I mean is this: What many conspiracy theorists do is take holes in the known facts and explain them with actions/motives that support their conspiracy. In your example your brother didn’t know the actual implications of the change in timing by Justice Alito. So he may have assigned meaning to it that fit within the framework he’d constructed.

    To expand a little based on the article, he may have been passionate about it because things we believe strongly are part of our identity, they’re part of who we are. So when you brought details that invalidated part of the theory; that the SC would give the presidency to Trump because of fraud, he might have felt personally attacked instead of just in error about the meaning.

    Time123 (b0628d)

  111. @105-
    In other news, Mr. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Fifth Avenue), who wishes everybody would believe him when he asks them to stop undressing him with their eyes, has offered his life to the gods in exchange for the Emperor’s.
    nk (1d9030) — 12/7/2020 @ 10:09 pm

    He’s arguing for the law.

    Actually he’s campaigning for the 2024 presidential nomination.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  112. 92. Dave (1bb933) — 12/8/2020 @ 5:55 am

    Isn’t the truly important distinction that there is ample evidence that the Trump campaign actively sought, and received, campaign assistance from Russian intelligence operatives in 2016,

    They didn’t seek it – it was offered, and it wasn’t openly described as Russian assistance, and they didn’t turn it away, and they got nothing.

    Now Trump didn’t seem to want to alienate Vladimir Putin if Putin was in the mood to praise him or maybe even try to help him. Neither did Paul MAnafort, who strung Russian intelligence along, giving it only internal polls (maybe so that Putin would think Trump could win) He knew Russia wanted to turn him into an agent of influence or a spy but he had no intention of doing that but he let them think so because he was deeply in debt. Now Mike Flynn we don’t know.

    One day, at a press conference, when he was being badgered by the press, Trump said Russia if you’re listening, find Hillary’s deleted emails, and you’ll be greatly rewarded (by the press)

    (These deleted emails were thought to no longer exist, and certainly not available through the Internet, but that could be said to include emails they already had. Russia did not have them, because there never was an email system as secure as that as clintonemail.com – it was not only invulnerable to all the traditional methods of hacking, but it was impervious to subpoenas as well, although the emails, or many of them, turned out to be preserved on Anthony Weiner’s laptop but the FBI deliberately avoided having any human being search through them, where they might have stumbled on evidence of a RICO conspiracy, although they legally could have, since they had access to it since he’d been using that laptop to sext with a 15 year old girl in North Carolina and they had to authority to check her emails.)

    ignored campaign finance laws to conceal hush money payments,

    That’s not what happened. If he’d run it through the campaign (hew was substantially self funding) he’d have been justly accused of using campaign money for his own personal benefit. It would not have been disclosded before the election. The money was spent without consulting him. One of the payments was possibly an illegal campaign contribution by the parent of the National Enquirer, because it didn;t really have abusiness reason for doing that, and the other was maybe an illegal unsecured loan to Donald Trump made by Michael Cohen. He didn’t have any personal reasons for doing that. I mean, even to keep his job. We think.

    and that Comey’s gratuitous announcement 10 days before the election was clearly irregular

    It wasn’t gratuitious. He had to say that because he promised that if the investigation was re-opened he’d tell Congress. What they did wrong was doing an automated search of the Hillary email files on Anthony Weiner’s laptop and then clearing Hillary again. Three days before the election (we are pretending here there is no significant early voting) he announced that they’d closed it again.

    Senate Democratic Leader (probably speaking for the Clinton campaign) Harry Reid didn’t like that the FBI didn’t start spying on the Trump campaign. The FBI compromised by getting a FISA warrant against Carter Page, who was no longer associated with the campaign. After Comey announced a re-opening of the Hillary email investigation, Harry Reid wanted a public announcement (or permission to leak?) an FBI counter-intelligence investigation into links between Russia and the Trump campaign so that there would be a whatabout.

    Sammy Finkelman (63d78b)

  113. @109

    Technically what Cruz would be arguing for is that the United States Supreme Court ignore a statute written by the Pennsylvania state legislature and the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court interpreting the Pennsylvania statute and also ignore Pennsylvania’s interpretation of state laws of laches and instead substitute the Supreme Court’s own interpretation of the state constitution in its stead and throw out a bunch of ballots by people who were valid voters and who thought they could rely on the Pennsylvania legislature and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

    If you want to call that claim the “law” then I am reminded of Charles Dickens.

    If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, “the law is a ass — a idiot.

    Victor (4959fb) — 12/8/2020 @ 9:06 am

    Maybe I’m totally misunderstanding what’s happening here and I’m asking for clarification.

    But, I understood that the absentee ballots WAS challenged prior to the elections, and the PA courts dismissed the case because of standing issue. (as in, the injury hasn’t occurred yet).

    And, now that PA courts is dismissing the same challenge due to the state laws of laches.

    Right?

    If so, then how could anyone challenge it?

    whembly (c30c83)

  114. Texas sues four battleground states in Supreme Court over ‘unlawful election results’ in 2020 presidential race
    Texas’ Republican attorney general, Ken Paxton, on Tuesday announced a lawsuit in the U.S. Supreme Court to invalidate presidential election results in four key swing states that helped secure Democrat Joe Biden’s victory over President Donald Trump.

    The unusual lawsuit, which was filed directly to the Supreme Court, asserts that “unlawful election results” in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin and Michigan — all of which Biden won — should be declared unconstitutional. Legal experts quickly dismissed it as primarily a political document.

    The filing argues that those states used the coronavirus pandemic as an excuse to unlawfully change their election rules “through executive fiat or friendly lawsuits, thereby weakening ballot integrity.”

    “Any electoral college votes cast by such presidential electors appointed” in those states “cannot be counted,” Texas asks the high court to rule.
    ……
    The claims in Texas’ lawsuit “are false and irresponsible,” Georgia’s deputy secretary of state, Jordan Fuchs, said in a fiery statement shortly after Paxton announced the legal action.

    “Texas alleges that there are 80,000 forged signatures on absentee ballots in Georgia, but they don’t bring forward a single person who this happened to. That’s because it didn’t happen,” Fuchs’ statement said.

    Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel called the suit a “publicity stunt” and “beneath the dignity” of Paxton’s office.

    Experts in election law were also quick to dismiss the likelihood of the nine Supreme Court justices taking the case. Paul Smith, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center who has argued voting rights cases at the Supreme Court, said the case was “wacko.”
    ……
    Rick Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Irvine, wrote on his popular legal blog that the suit was “utter garbage” and also disputed the idea that Texas had standing, noting that “it has no say over how other states choose electors.”

    Paxton wrote in the brief that Texas has standing because of its interest in which party controls the Senate, which it says “represents the States.”
    ……

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  115. Maybe I’m totally misunderstanding what’s happening here and I’m asking for clarification.

    No federal question raised in the state court proceedings being appealed from.

    nk (1d9030)

  116. @114, It might be an interesting legal question. (No opinion) but the numbers of votes that came in after without a post mark, or after the election are too small to impact the the outcome. It’s dishonest of Cruz to state otherwise. He’s too smart for it to just be an oversight.

    Time123 (457a1d)

  117. Arizona Republican Party Now Calling on Voters to Fight and Die For Trump’s Election War
    The Arizona Republican Party escalated its rhetoric by urging people to fight to the death on behalf of President Donald Trump’s attempts to dispute the 2020 Election.
    …..
    On Tuesday, the Arizona Republican Party cranked things up a few notches when they retweeted “Stop the Steal” advocate Ali Akbar for saying “I am willing to give my life for this fight.”

    “He is. Are you?” The party asked.

    Akbar earned notoriety as an alt-right Trump supporter with a history of anti-Semitic comments.

    That wasn’t the only tweet the Party issued so far on Tuesday. It has since been deleted, but the Party tweeted a clip from Rambo with the caption, “This is what we do, who we are. Live for nothing, or die for something.”

    And if you were wondering how this is going over, well, the response from Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman should give you an idea.

    John Fetterman
    @JohnFetterman
    The AZ GOP put out a casting call for martyrs over Twitter.

    This is truly bonkers and unbelievably dangerous.

    I’ve been saying all along about how *punitive* it is to be a Republican who just simply acknowledges electoral *reality*.
    Quote Tweet
    Arizona Republican Party
    @AZGOP
    · 12h
    He is. Are you? twitter.com/ali/status/133…
    5:28 AM · Dec 8, 2020 from Munhall, PA·Twitter for iPhone
    …….
    John Fetterman
    @JohnFetterman
    ·
    4h
    Replying to
    @JohnFetterman
    If this isn’t full-on death cult rhetoric, what’s left?
    John Fetterman
    @JohnFetterman
    ·
    4h
    Merit-less lawsuits and snake handling revivals in a Ramada ballroom is one thing but openly asking if you’re willing to die for someone who lost a fair election is full-on cult.


    ……..

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  118. 105. whembly (c30c83) — 12/8/2020 @ 8:43 am

    Particularly in WI, where the actual law doesn’t allow for folks to use the pandemic as the rationale to use the absentee voting process. The problem here, is that the government told the voters that they COULD use it and even advertised it…even though the law doesn’t give the government that power.

    The same thing happened in New York, where the Governor stated that the Covid situation would be considered a temporary disability. I don’t know the exact law in Wisconsin

    They want to change the state constitution to allow no excuses absentee voting, and at the same time there’s a separate legislative proposal that would eliminate the priority currently given to in person voting.

    Right now asking for an absentee ballot does not take you off the poll list, and absentee ballots are only counted after the polls have closed – in New York City starting a week after the polls have closed – with all absentee ballots being checked first against the list of people who voted. And then representatives from the two major parties can scrutinize and object to each ballot, so it takes time.

    That didn’t use to affect the election results except in very close races because it used to be only 4% of the ballots were cast absentee – this year it was around 20% and the party ratio wasn’t the same or almost the same as that with in person voting.

    Another issue:

    Ranked choice voting with no runoffs is scheduled to go into effect next year for New York City elections. It applies only to city offices. Probably just those created by the City Charter.

    Now you have a Councilwoman complaining that voters weren’t educated (and I suppose minority candidates might do poorer or the second choices would) The Board of Elections said it didn’t advertise that before November because that might confuse people.

    Sammy Finkelman (63d78b)

  119. Is fomenting civil insurrection a crime? Because it is increasingly looking like that. That bit from AZ, for example.

    The federal law against seditious conspiracy can be found in Title 18 of the U.S. Code (which includes treason, rebellion, and similar offenses), specifically 18 U.S.C. § 2384. According to the statutory definition of sedition, it is a crime for two or more people within the jurisdiction of the United States:

    To conspire to overthrow or destroy by force the government of the United States or to level war against them;
    To oppose by force the authority of the United States government; to prevent, hinder, or delay by force the execution of any law of the United States; or
    To take, seize, or possess by force any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof.

    https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/sedition.html

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  120. “Panic In The West Wing”? Ellis Tests Positive For COVID After White House Christmas Party On Friday
    …….
    According to ABC News, Jenna Ellis has informed people that she has now tested positive for COVID-19, shortly after Donald Trump revealed the same diagnosis for Rudy Giuliani. Ellis attended a White House Christmas party on Friday, though, which now has touched off a “panic in the West Wing,” according to ABC’s sources……
    ……
    Panic there may or may not be, but anger? Most definitely. Axios’ Jonathan Swan reported that his sources are worried that a maskless Ellis has created another super-spreader event at the White House, and put their families at risk all over again…..
    ……
    Er … what? People brought families to the White House knowing the lax attitude toward masks and social distancing in this administration? I get the anger, but caveat emptor, dude. What did they think would happen when they played COVID-19 Russian roulette?

    They’re angry enough at this point, Swan reports, that they’re beginning to lash out at Ellis for her legal challenges to the election. One “senior administration official” blamed her for pushing Trump into conspiracy theories about the election. The skepticism over Trump’s claims about the election is coming from within the (White) House, and it’s about to burst forth…..
    ……
    Just a few minutes ago, Ellis tweeted out a criticism of the media for running with anonymous sourcing … but which also doesn’t include a denial…..

    Jenna Ellis
    @JennaEllisEsq
    Funny how MSM is quick to believe one or two unnamed “sources” every time, and yet refuses to acknowledge hundreds of eye witnesses across six states who signed affidavits under oath.

    Well, the judges aren’t buying the affidavits either in cases where they have commented on the merits of claims. Affidavits aren’t automatically “believed” (and neither are “sources”); their claims are tested in court to see whether they are material, provable, and applicable to the complaint. That’s why it makes sense to wait for hearings rather than just embrace “affidavits” as a standard of proof.
    ……
    ……Perhaps this will be a good lesson to everyone that this pandemic is no joke, and that maybe this isn’t the time to bring families to large Christmas parties.
    >>>>>>>>>>

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  121. Whembly,

    I’m not sure about the standing issue prior to the election. But I doubt Cruz is saying he’s an expert on Pennsylvania standing law, and I don’t know why the Supreme Court would care about it either. The substantive issue is whether federal courts are going to interpret state constitutions to overrule state supreme courts and state legislature’s interpretations of that constitution. I also don’t know why the Court would even consider touching the question absent a determination by Five of them to screw with the election.

    Victor (4959fb)

  122. “But, I understood that the absentee ballots WAS challenged prior to the elections, and the PA courts dismissed the case because of standing issue. (as in, the injury hasn’t occurred yet).”

    It was not challenged prior to the elections. The “standing” argument is a red herring, “imminent” harm can be used for standing.

    Davethulhu (496a10)

  123. 111. Time123 (b0628d) — 12/8/2020 @ 9:23 am

    I strongly encourage you to read the article since it does a much better job at explaining things then I did with my 3 point summary.

    That will be hard to do. That medium.com article won’t load. They want me to sign in. And it’s not anywhere else on the Internet in full. Maybe I could get by email – I’m not sure.

    O seem to have stopped receiving the Medium Daily Digest on July 17. Maybe it went to spam then and later I got unsubscribed.

    In your example your brother didn’t know the actual implications of the change in timing by Justice Alito. So he may have assigned meaning to it that fit within the framework he’d constructed.

    More likely, the alleged reason he gave may have been supplied to him, or supplied to the world at large. Ultimately, by someone who knew it was a lie.

    In some kinds of propaganda things are often not asserted outright. Rather Y is said and it said it is proven by X. It’s not just right-wing; Jimmy Carter was adept at this. (in his case when he wanted to assert X he often used it as an argument that Y was true. He didn’t even care about Y so much. It was using X as an argument made too someone who didn’t know anything that conveyed the impression that X was true. (In this case they are more interested in Y., Y being that the Supreme Court might overturn the election results.

    To expand a little based on the article, he may have been passionate about it because things we believe strongly are part of our identity, they’re part of who we are. So when you brought details that invalidated part of the theory; that the SC would give the presidency to Trump because of fraud, he might have felt personally attacked instead of just in error about the meaning.

    Alito was not the last straw;it was the first straw for JohnnyAgreeable’s brother. And JohnnyAgreeable was not familiar with all the details about all of this stuff, or much of it.

    Why did he suddenly go global on his brother? That is, saying everything he had heard about election rigging was wrong? Should he accept that at one fell swoop? So of course he came out with a list. You;d hope an appelate lawyer would understand what’s going on here, but I guess the difference is, in legal work, he knows what arguments a judge has already been exposed to – here he didn’t.

    And there’s hope his guy will still yet win the election, and there’s also having to say you were conned. A person doesn’t say that until actually they see it. Or see something’s very wrong with what’s being said.

    Sammy Finkelman (63d78b)

  124. Is fomenting civil insurrection a crime? Because it is increasingly looking like that.

    “Fomenting” sedition is constitutionally protected speech unless it meets the carve out for incitement, i.e., speech that’s intended and likely to cause imminent lawless action. Highly unlikely here.

    That bit from AZ, for example.

    The federal law against seditious conspiracy can be found in Title 18 of the U.S. Code (which includes treason, rebellion, and similar offenses), specifically 18 U.S.C. § 2384. According to the statutory definition of sedition, it is a crime for two or more people within the jurisdiction of the United States:

    To conspire to overthrow or destroy by force the government of the United States or to level war against them;
    To oppose by force the authority of the United States government; to prevent, hinder, or delay by force the execution of any law of the United States; or
    To take, seize, or possess by force any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof.

    Is it “conspir[ing] to overthrow or destroy…”? Could there be a conspiracy of which there’s currently undisclosed evidence? Sure, that’s always possible. On the evidence we do know about, unlikely.

    Is it “oppos[ing] by force the authority of the United States government…”? What force?

    Is it “tak[ing], seiz[ing], or possess[ing] by force any property of the United States…”? What taking, what property, and again, what force?

    Like DiGenova’s behavior toward Krebbs, this is despicable but unlikely criminal.

    lurker (d8c5bc)

  125. Good article that makes clear that Trump and his Supporters hate the USA. I like that it builds off a very apt comparison between Trump and Islamic terrorists.

    I have as much contempt for the people that fail to stand up to Trump’s attempt to subvert democracy as I do for leftists that tried to excuse the horrible violence of Islamic terrorism. In both cases I can see a clear difference between anti-American’s (such as Ted Cruz and Rudy) and people who share some of their policy preferences. Not every Muslim is a terrorist, and not every conservative is working to destroy democracy in the US. I’m not trying to say they are, and not every conservative needs to speak up. But the ones who have sought positions of leadership have an obligation to make the distinction clear and to push back hard on the extremists on their ‘side’. If there’s clear evidence of electoral error or fraud on a scale sufficient to effect the outcome that needs to be brought forward. Absent that, encouraging this effort to subvert the results of a fair election is akin to asking me to think about the good points Islamic terrorists have.

    Time123 (af99e9)

  126. @127: All the lawfare nonsense of the past four years and I failed to connect the dots to Islamic terrorism like this guy has. This is why I’ll never get a Bulwark gig.

    beer ‘n pretzels (042d67)

  127. #127

    The people detailed in that article are not going away. They will be the faces of the Republican party until natural attrition removes them.

    The GOP, immediately before Trump was an ungainly beast, unable to untie its House majority behind anything, unable to advance an agenda that its base could really stand. After Trump, things got real peaceful for those leaders. Budgets got passed. Checks got written. And the purity tests (unless generated by a Trump tweet) did not get flung at GOP politicians.

    Trump has been awful for the country. Even now, he has not been bad for GOP officeholders and donors.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  128. @127: All the lawfare nonsense of the past four years and I failed to connect the dots to Islamic terrorism like this guy has. This is why I’ll never get a Bulwark gig.

    beer ‘n pretzels (042d67) — 12/9/2020 @ 6:16 am

    By lawfare, do you mean the investigation that your link said the FBI was justified in pursing?

    Because the FBI executing a properly predicated investigation isn’t the same things and trying to destroy public faith in our system of government.

    I suspect your lack of affinity for the US makes it hard for you to see the difference.

    Time123 (89dfb2)

  129. The people detailed in that article are not going away. They will be the faces of the Republican party until natural attrition removes them

    .

    I think the GOP leadership just doesn’t place much value on the US, our system of government, or our people. At least not in comparison to other things.

    Time123 (89dfb2)

  130. I suspect your lack of affinity for the US

    Revealing.

    beer ‘n pretzels (042d67)

  131. I can go with Trump being an Enemy of Democracy, because he is, and so are his enablers who are actively subverting our democracy by trying to thwart the will of the people. So are his enablers who know that Trump is telling a Big Lie about fraud yet are still claiming there’s rigging and large-scale fraud. In many respects, I hate my party for falling in with this unfit unstable clown.

    Paul Montagu (77c694)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2915 secs.