Yesterday, Nov 26th, Trump spoke to reporters after participating in a Thanksgiving teleconference with members of the United States Military, at the White House.
He said he would leave the White House when the time came, after the electoral college votes for President-elect Joe Biden.
“Certainly I will, and you know that,” he said when asked directly about what he will do. It wasn’t quite a concession of defeat but it was the closest to that for a president who had not explicitly said he was going to leave on Jan. 20. Making it clear that his statement didn’t represent a massive change in tone though, Trump immediately continued to say he would keep doubting the results of the election with baseless claims of voter fraud. “I think that there will be a lot of things happening between now and the 20th of January, a lot of things. Massive fraud has been found,” he insisted without providing evidence.
Trump said he would leave the White House after he repeatedly danced around the question of whether he would concede to Biden once the electoral college votes. “It’s going to be a very hard thing to concede because we know there was massive fraud,” Trump said without evidence. Pressed on the issue, Trump said that if the electoral college votes for Biden “they made a mistake, because this election was a fraud” and repeatedly said that the United States was “like a third world country.”
There are of course several massive lies in these two paragraphs, and they are ignore only because Trump has shown himself to be a massive, rotten, comical liar all throughout his term who isn't even smart enough to call wolf -- he just half-barks and then staggers down to the village seemingly drunk.
But repeatedly saying the United States is "like a third world country?"
Are the 70+M people who voted for him going to accept that? Or will they just fall down in obedience to whatever their godlike idiot says?
Has Trump ever even been in a third world country? (Which now, by the way, are called developing countries.)
Which? These are the ones he calls "shithole countries," right?
Are his voters going to stand for that, for being told they live in a shithole country?
Of course they will. Because they have no self-pride -- look at all they have accepted the last four years. Clearly there isn't anything they won't swallow for Trump's fascism, for thinking they are part of his us versus them.
As for the rest of us, we are only too glad to ignore this ignorant, derelict, cretin made impotent and are counting the days until he fades from view. He won't be back in 2024. Even the deplorables will eventually realize they're glad to see him gone, and will soon be on to the next wanna-be fascist.
42 comments:
Notice the spin in the words "without providing evidence". Trump didn't have to do that, because there is a lot of evidence in the sworn affidavits accompanying the legal work submitted by Sidney Powell. I don't think there's enough evidence for a court to overturn the election, However, I think there is plenty of evidence of substantial, widespread fraud. There is also massive media bias in favor of the Democrats. In those ways, the US sadly does resemble a banana republic.
Cheers
Affidavits aren’t evidence until they are accepted into a court of law
Courts are not subject to media bias. Stop whining and present some evidence finally. Judges are dismissing you with extreme evidence. You should be extremely embarrassed.
*extreme prejudice
Trump fired Powell, remember?
Sorry for the multiple replies; I’m typing in the dark
because there is a lot of evidence in the sworn affidavits accompanying the legal work submitted by Sidney Powell. I don't think there's enough evidence for a court to overturn the election, However, I think there is plenty of evidence ofsubstantial, widespread fraud
You've come perilously close to jumping the shark many times DiC and now you have. There really is no point reasoning with you is there? Pointing out to you that Trump always cries foul when he doesn't get what he wants and even signals beforehand that he's going to do it, that even Guliani won't use the word fraud in court because there are consequences for lying to the Judge, that they've lost every case in court, that even Tucker Carlson distanced himself from Qanon supporter Sidney Powell, in spite of all that and more you still believe this insane conspiracy.
If there really were evidence of "substantial, widespread fraud" then they could prove it. If they can't prove it then they are pulling it out of their ass.
"There is also massive media bias in favor of the Democrats. "
I think not. Plenty of media supporting the Right.
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart
David in Cal
Perhaps your problem is that you regard any media to the Left of your own position as biased towards the Democrats.
Since you seem to regard Newsmax and the Daily Caller as a bit blue, that means that in your view almost every US news source is biased against you.
Hat tip to Barry at Roy Spencer's blog.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/us-election-republican-judges-deny-pennsylvania-appeal-trump-to-try-supreme-court/2ASHOKIC5D2VZR57DWBMUYA6ZM/
Even a broken clock. There are third world countries that can handle an election better than USA. If you look at the food insucurity and general standard of living in the poorer parts of USA those are like a third world country. In this case I would have to say that Trump is tellng the truth.
As for David in Cal, soon he will go openly Qanon at this rate.
Entropic Man - you're almost right. I regard every media source in American as biased, period. I don't trust any of them.
Cheers
I don't trust any of them.
DiC: You think that but your posts suggest otherwise. You should always bear in mind that well known quote,
“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.” Richard Feynman
For instance,
However, I think there is plenty of evidence ofsubstantial, widespread fraud
Nobody but conspiracy theorists and those who have fallen for the lies of someone who is obviously a pathological liar believe that.
I doubt if instapundit and the othert sources you read really believe it either.
David in Cal
We got sidetracked into red v blue or right v left bias.
Below the veneer of democracy wealthy families control power in the UK and the US.
I doubt it is a coincidence that the The Prime Minister of The UK is a millionaire and The POTUS is a billionaire.
The media are mostly owned by elites and tell us what their owners want us to hear.
We in the population get fooled into supporting one faction or another among the elites.
https://the-free-press.co.uk/media-bias-explained/
J.D. - you offered no evidence to show that there is not plenty of evidence of substantial, widespread fraud. Instead you offered an insult.
Cheers
David in Cal
"you offered no evidence to show that there is not plenty of evidence of substantial, widespread fraud. "
In logic and legal practice it is generally recognised that it is extremely difficult to prove a negative.
Asking J.D. to prove that there is not evidence of widespread fraud is rather like asking him to prove that a UFO did not land in your garden last night.
E.M. - Are you arguing that widespread fraud is as implausible as UFO's?
cheers
David in Cal.
I'm not discussing implausibilty, I'm discussing the burden of proof.
When Giuliani and his lawyers go into court seeking to invalidate votes, the burden of proof is on them to show that fraud took place. If fraud were widespread they would have brought evidence; CCTV and mobile phone video, plus poll observers describing what they saw under oath.
Consider the ex-military man telling a Republican party meeting about USB ports.
If it were genuine, he would have been telling a judge under oath. The fact that neither he or any other witnesses have done so is revealing. Lying to reporters is normal politics. Lying to a judge is perjury, which carries a much higher penalty.
Entropic Man - You raise some excellent points. My response is in two general areas
1. The suits filed by Guiliani and by Sidney Powell are "place holders". Their purpose is to gain time to more fully investigate.
2. It may well be the case that fraud can be deduced as highly likely based on statistical patterns, but not proved sufficiently for a court of law to reverse the election.
BTW, there are actually many affidavits by people who say they saw fraud. These are under oath. A false affidavit is perjury.
Cheers
"Statistical patterns. "
The main pattern is not fraud but came from the way the marginal states ran their elections.
1) The Trump campaign encouraged in-person voting on the day.
2) The Biden campaign encouraged mail-in voting to avoid Covid.
3) Republican controlled states (most of the marginals) preferred to count in-person votes before mail-in votes.
Given these starting conditions one can project the pattern of vote reporting when the result is close.
a) With in-person votes counted first, the in-person total counting would show an initial lead for Trump because of 1) and 2) above, which lead to a higher proportion of in-person Republican votes.
b) When the mail-in ballots are counted, Biden would start to catch up as the mail-in ballots would have a higher proportion of Democrats.
c) When the count is complete, the final result is the sum of all votes cast.In marginal states; if Trump wins, the Biden catch-up does not reach parity. If Biden wins he overtakes Trump near the end of the count.
In summary, the pattern of an initial Trump lead followed by a Biden catch-up is an artefact of the way the campaigns and counts were run. Nothing to do with fraud.
Entropic Man - yes, fraud cannot be proved from statistical patterns. However, there are other suggestive statistics:
1. Trump won more counties than in 2016
2. Down-ticket Republicans did very well - Representatives, Senators and in-state offices
3. Trump did better with minorities, according to exit polls
Cheers
These three are interesting, but not one of them is "suggestive" of fraud.
Sworn testimony, under oath.
A witness at the Michigan election integrity hearing alleged that all the military ballots she observed looked like "xerox copies" of each other. The witness said that none of ballots were from registered voters and all were for Democratic nominee Joe Biden.
"Not one of the military ballots was a registered voter and the ballots looked like they were all exactly the same xerox copies of the ballot," the witness testified to the state's Senate Oversight Committee at the Binsing Office Building in Lansing, Mich.
This testimony on the absentee ballot counting process at the TCF Center in Detroit came approximately a month after the Senate and House Oversight Committees first approved subpoenas related to Michigan’s general election.
She continued: "They were all for Biden across the board. There wasn't a single Trump vote. And none of the voters were registered."
"They had to manually enter the names and addresses and the birth date of 1-1-2020, which would override the system," the witness stated.
"And a lot of them had to enter non-registered voters, which I saw several that day. Throughout the day, that's how they would override voters that were neither in electronic poll book or the supplemental updated poll book."
https://thepostmillennial.com/michigan-witness-alleges-ballots-were-counted-that-looked-like-photocopies
DiC That kind of fraud would leave a trail a mile wide. Has anyone else actually seen all those votes registred 1-1-2020? It's not as if they would be hard to find.
Sworn testimony doesn't mean you are sane or know what you are talking about.
A witness who? What is her name? What was her role in the election process?
"Looked like" xerox copies? What does that mean? From what distance? How did she make that determination?
How did she know "none of ballots were from registered voters and all were for Democratic nominee Joe Biden." How many ballots is she talking about? How did she compare to registered voters? Is it different for military voters -- are they on the same list as regular in-state voters?
Was she cross-examined?
And on and on. Nobody here is an expert, or you or I, and it's all a bunch of loose speculation and shady facts and testimony that Trump, Trumpists and people like you, David, are praying for long after the election, praying for a scrap of anything, while nothing as held up in court and judges are in effect laughing out at Trump's attornies, who aren't allowed to bring junk like the above to court or they risk disbarment.
You are damaging American democracy and you don't even seem to care.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55153366
And Barr is a tool of Trump.
Barr's exact quote: "To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election" This statement acknowledges the possibilities that
1. Barr may have already seen a lot of fraud, but not enough to change the election
2. Barr leaves open the possibility that he might yet see more fraud, and it might be enough to change the election.
David - there's every indication that there was a lot of fraud. I have no hope that the election will be overturned, whether it deserves to be or not. I do hope that many steps are taken to prevent this kind of fraud in the future.
I don't think that worrying about fraud, and doing something about it, damage democracy. On the contrary, I think less dishonest elections are better for democracy.
Cheers
Barr also leaves open the possibility Trump is a lizard in a human suit.
David - there's every indication that there was a lot of fraud.
David, you have absolutely no evidence of this. No one does. It does not seem to matter how many officials, of both parties, announce it. Or how many rational arguments are presented against you, or how flimsy your arguments are pointed out to be.
Honestly, it is very sad to see an intelligent person like you go down this ridiculous path of self-deception and fall for the mad rantings of a psychopath. Very sad. I can't begin to understand it.
David, I’m sorry, I regret sounding patronizing.
you offered no evidence to show that there is not plenty of evidence of substantial, widespread fraud. Instead you offered an insult.
I'm not the one making incredible claims about "substantial, widespread fraud". It's been pointed out to you that court case after court case has been thrown out. You then handwave this away by saying that unfortunately the evidence won't stand up in court but then they've got all those signed affadavits and they wouldn't lie would they. They don't have to lie although some of them might be. Lots of the claims are vague and some boil down to a matter of opinion like the woman saying some of the ballots looked like xerox copies to her.
Many of them could just have thought something looked suspicious because they had been primed beforehand to think that fraud was occurring. This is from the local newspaper,
More than five hours into the meeting, Bill Schmidt of Livonia, who described himself as a lifelong Republican before this year's election, said he served as a poll challenger at TCF Center, where Detroit's absentee ballots were counted. Schmidt said he saw mistakes but not fraud.
There was a lot of confusion at TCF Center, and people who were told there would be fraud occurring were predisposed to see it, he said.
"Evil can be seen by evil people," Schmidt said after he testified.
"Good people see goodness. What I saw is, I saw hardworking people working hard," he continued. "That’s what I saw. That’s America. That’s democracy.”...Biden, the Democratic former vice president, won Michigan by 154,000 votes, 14 times Trump's margin of victory in 2016. And there hasn't been evidence presented yet that throws that result into legal question. Tallies have been certified by bipartisan boards of canvassers in all 83 counties and by the Board of State Canvassers.
We know that Republicans at the count were making a nuisance of themselves from reports at the time banging on windows and chanting stop the vote etc. They are the ones, along with their dear leader, who are having a negative effect on election integrity. Trump was never going to accept the vote if he lost and now he is raking in money from gullible rubes who actually believe what he says.
I forgot to link to the article I quoted from, https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/12/01/michigan-hearing-puts-spotlight-unproven-claims-election-fraud/6475762002/
Barr also leaves open the possibility Trump is a lizard in a human suit
You joke, but these folks are not far behind:
https://www.wired.com/2013/03/secret-service-reptile-aliens/
Their minds are in a loop.
"Georgia's Fulton County, the most populous in the state, claimed that it needed to stop absentee ballot overnight on November 3–4 because of a burst pipe. That was a lie. There was no burst pipe, and the counting didn't stop. At a hearing on Thursday, surveillance footage emerged showing that the ballots being secretly counted came from suitcases hidden under a table."
You can watch the video at the link. https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/12/does_a_surveillance_video_prove_georgia_election_fraud.html
Cheers
Thoroughly debunked in the Washington Post:
"Surveillance tape breeds false fraud claims in Georgia," 12/4/20
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/surveillance-tape-breeds-false-fraud-claims-in-georgia/2020/12/04/8e203752-3686-11eb-9699-00d311f13d2d_story.html
"Surveillance footage of ballot processing on election night in Atlanta is fueling a false social media narrative of “suitcases filled with ballots” hidden under a cloth-covered table and tallied without supervision, even as top state officials confirm election workers followed standard procedure.
"The video showed regular ballot containers on wheels — not suitcases — and both a state investigator and an independent monitor observed counting until it was done for the night, finding no evidence of improper ballots, state and county officials said on Friday...."
DiC: quoting your link,
Forgetting about the surveillance cameras was a mistake, and it is to be hoped that every intelligent American who is not a partisan media hack — i.e., members of the public, politicians, and judges alike — understands that we're seeing something better than a smoking gun. In those surveillance videos, we're actually watching in real time the gun being used to commit the biggest crime in American history.
So there you have it. Well done!
The biggest crime in American history and they would have got away with it if only they hadn't been so stupid as to forget all those surveillance cameras. And of course they hadn't realised that brilliant sleuth Rudy Giuliani would be on the case.
Not to worry though. Those poll workers have already been named online and I'm sure that all of those threatening retribution don't really mean it.
OTOH there is this,
That interpretation is wrong, however. The footage doesn’t show any wrongdoing, said Gabriel Sterling, a Republican and Georgia’s voting system implementation manager, in a Dec. 4 tweet.
"The 90 second video of election workers at State Farm arena, purporting to show fraud was watched in its entirety (hours) by @GaSecofState investigators," Sterling wrote, linking to a fact-check from Lead Stories. "Shows normal ballot processing."
Thanks for sharing a conspiracy theory from another of your credible sources. Apparently Joe Biden is still President elect though and I'm sure that Trump, being such a sane well balanced person who always puts the interests of the country first, is on the phone at this very moment congratulating him.
Sources:
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/04/facebook-posts/no-georgia-election-workers-didnt-kick-out-observe/
and
https://www.wsbtv.com/news/politics/georgia-election-officials-show-frame-by-frame-what-really-happened-fulton-surveillance-video/T5M3PYIBYFHFFOD3CIB2ULDVDE/?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot
You beat me too it David A.
DiC: Regarding the credibility of signed affadavits that you mentioned above. I don't know whether you seen the testimony of Giuliani's "star witness" in Michigan the other day. She kept saying she had signed an affadavit. If you did see her did you find her credible?
She had witnessed fraud all over the place. They were double counting ballots, bringing fraudulent votes by the van load at night, dead people were voting, the poll turn out was 120% and when a Republican state representative asked her why the poll log appeared to contradict her claims she accused him of tampering with it. She had told her boss about the double counting she said but he didn't want to know. She then realized he was part of the conspiracy.
Democrats tried to object that if they were going to make these accusations about named people they should be under oath but were shut down by the Republican chairman. The woman had already been deemed not credible by a judge. I'm just wondering how long this has to go on before you realize that it's these people who are trying to commit the crime of the century?
Thanks for the links, J.D.
BTW my source was fully credible. It accurately reported the claims made by the President's lawyer.
Cheers
It's the president's lawyer who isn't credible. And The American Thinker passed that on without vetting them or investigating. That's not what a credible outlet does. For years The American Thinker published Fred Singer's trash on climate science. I don't think they're credible at all -- they publish only what a certain niche wants to hear.
BTW my source was fully credible.
I'm not sure what your definition of credible is. It seems to be someone who twists evidence to suit a particular agenda. This is part of what you quoted,
At a hearing on Thursday, surveillance footage emerged showing that the ballots being secretly counted came from suitcases hidden under a table.
Note that they leave no doubt that something neferious was going on. Here again is their final paragraph,
Forgetting about the surveillance cameras was a mistake, and it is to be hoped that every intelligent American who is not a partisan media hack — i.e., members of the public, politicians, and judges alike — understands that we're seeing something better than a smoking gun. In those surveillance videos, we're actually watching in real time the gun being used to commit the biggest crime in American history.
No doubt there either. "We are watching the biggest crime in American history" as "every intelligent American" would realize. They also state as fact that they had forgotten about the surveillance cameras, something they would have to be psychic to know.
The thing is as well is that this isn't a fictional TV program. Those are real people that they have accused of being guilty of the biggest crime in American history and a lot of the people who believe this crap are crazy people with firearms. The names of the poll workers who were just doing a job are all over the internet with people speculating what they would like to happen to them and referring to them as n*****s.
I don't think the Daily Caller is either credible or responsible. I don't know anyone who does.
Correction: I confused Daily Caller with American Thinker in my last post although they are much the same IMO.
“BTW my source was fully credible. It accurately reported the claims made by the President's lawyer.”
:%s/credible/predictable/g
:%s/accurately/credulously/g
Fixed that for ya.
Post a Comment