WideNine

You may want to practice reading more before you launch your career as an author And do you really think it is just liberal snowflakes that wanted Trump out of office? You have heard of the Lincoln Project right? Also, the AOC crowd felt cheated that a centrist like Biden won the Democratic ticket. Your black and white takes on the multi-faceted nature of US politics along with the name-calling does not lend to your credibility, but I will give you points for trying the same tactic over and over.... I recently felt I lost debating a topic with another poster on this board yesterday and admitted as much. I had points and he (or she) had rebuttals. After looking at the information they sourced I felt that it supported their argument better than mine and told them that their point was valid. What some folks don't understand, and maybe it is this era of trying to undermine the person rather than their argument, is that you have more real credibility as someone who is willing to objectively look at information to not only form an initial opinion but also revise an opinion if you can actually demonstrate that capacity now and then.

But, but, but.... Rudy said they have PROOF in Arizona! The result is what I expected, although Kyle (whoever he is) needs grammar lessons. I believe he meant to say, "the audits have found no discrepancies" instead he said "found either no discrepencies or micro stuff that don't affect..." then he added the link. Sorry, but for me that was a painful collection of words to read but I get his point.

GA would recount any way as the margin dictates that they should to ensure there were no clerical errors. Otherwise your bet looks like a losing one if you look at the history of recounts. No worries here. I am not sure if I can flag all the posts where MAGA folks are telling me that they will find the alleged mass fraud in the swing states. I guess we can have one OP that basically says, "I was conned by Trump and the GOP that there was mass voting fraud" where the conspiracy-minded can admit to it. My wager is that they will stay true to form and just come up with a new conspiracy.

The myth of stale voters, deceased voters, and non-citizen voters promoted by Judicial Watch I addressed above. Misinformation dangerously parroted to cast our US elections as fraudulent. Political shenanigans aside our voting system is pretty resilient and resistant to systemic tampering of actual ballots as it is currently operated. As with any election that has millions of votes isolated incidents are inevitable, but I have yet to see an independent or GOP-funded study that leads to a conclusion of systemic voter fraud. It is the GOP-created myth around ballot integrity that is a dangerous effort to discourage voting and faith in our election commissions across the country. Close vote counts should be recounted to verify results, larger margins have the option for GOP-funded recounts, our elections work but I will never be convinced that there is an equal effort to disenfranchise voters between the GOP and the Dems. That is patently false. Only one of those groups has actually, factually been censured by our Supreme Court because of voter suppression tactics, the GOP. Background of the Concent Decree that was initiated to censor the RNC from suppression tactics included in a 2016 DNC court filing: Review the history of exactly what the GOP was censored from doing and ask yourself if they have not gone back to the same bag of tricks. https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/11-05-2016_Order.pdf I agree with your premise regarding gerrymandering - both sides have partaken in it and there needs to be a better solution that has the overall effect of first simply limiting redistricting activity in general and secondly removing it from the hands of political representatives in that state. Another idea is to come up with a computer model or system based on a states census data that everyone uses whether they like what it draws or not. What we have now, simply allows whatever party that is in control of the state's legislature to draw up ridiculous maps that favors their party and then leads to a myriad of lawsuits.

A matter of scope - your example appears to be a schism in the ranks of the Dems that focused on purging a NYC DB of Dem votes that may have not been for Clinton. Not sure if I would call that systemic, but it was definitely wrong. The same way the DNC emails outlined overt attempts to sideline Sanders during their primaries. The dilemma that the DNC found itself in back then, and continues through today, is that their far-left representatives or candidates from the Metro areas don't have a snowball's chance in hell challenging a GOP or moderate candidate's broader national base. But what they can do is essentially split or water down the DNC overall vote turnout for their primary winner. Regarding systemic voter registration purging as a suppression mechanism: The GOP has been partaking in Registration purges across the nation in more of an organized systemic fashion - not just an isolated schism within their own ranks. Georgia - purging nearly 200,000 valid voters from their registries. Sued Michigan to purge their voter registration DBs Sued to remove over 130,000 registered voters in Wisconsin Judicial Watch - A GOP legal effort towards registration purges across several Dem and swing states has wrongly misrepresented registration irregularities for most of the year citing more registered voters than those living in various areas as proof of fraud or allowing for voter fraud. Trump and other propaganda outlets have recycled that misinformation. Judicial Watch’s claim rests on its inclusion of “inactive voters” – people who have been removed from active rolls after a mail ballot, voter guide or other official document was returned as undeliverable – usually as a result of moving. In most states including California they aren’t reflected in turnout tallies or signature-gathering requirements, don’t receive election materials, and are ignored by campaigns. Inactive voters nevertheless underline Judicial Watch’s math suggesting that places like Los Angeles County has a registration rate of 112 percent, for example, or Stanislaus County has a registration rate of 102 percent. Their legal communication cites a “failure to maintain accurate, up-to-date voter registration lists. Bob Popper, director of Judicial Watch’s election integrity project, said California has failed to report its inactive voter data to the federal government as required by the National Voter Registration Act. Counties should be doing more to cull their inactive voter lists, he said. “What we identified is a red flag, a sign of smoke,” he said, saying people could be voting multiple times or in more than one state. His premise is that inactive voters would receive a ballot and then be able to vote. I have heard this same premise taking Tweets and running with them on this board several times myself. First - In fact, California did report the data. Its inactive voter tally of 5,065,746 at the time of last fall’s election is part of the most recent election administration and voting survey published by the federal Election Assistance Commission. Also, in the case of California, their National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) regulations state that although inactive voters remain on the rolls as registered voters who are eligible to vote, they do not receive “mailed election materials” (including mail-in ballots) and must “confirm residency at the polling place” in person in order to vote — standards that would severely limit or eliminate double-voting or the ability of third parties to fraudulently use inactive registrations to cast ballots. Re: Judicial Watch WIKI - Summary Judicial Watch (JW) is an American conservative activist group[1] that files Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits to investigate claimed misconduct by government officials. Founded in 1994, JW has primarily targeted Democrats, in particular the Presidency of Bill Clinton, the Presidency of Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. The organization has described climate science as "fraud science" and has filed lawsuits against government climate scientists. JW has made numerous false and unsubstantiated claims that have been picked up by right-wing news outlets and promoted by conservative figures. President Donald Trump has repeatedly cited false claims by Judicial Watch about voter fraud. Courts have dismissed the vast majority of its lawsuits.[2]

Dude. I have come to the conclusion that you REALLY just need to read more. Tweets or YouTube clips are not facts. Read the bi-partisan Senate Intelligence summary of the Mueller report, not just the redacted cliff notes from Barr, or Tweets from Donald, or the first page GOP summary. I believed it is linked to in this FoxNews article: https://www.foxcarolina.com/bipartisan-senate-report-details-trump-campaign-contacts-with-russia-in-2016-adding-to-mueller-findings/article_9f20a595-b302-5e73-9592-d7693fe08c44.html Read at least some of the history regarding elections and recounts. How they work, what has been the historic results of those efforts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_recount Find one real peer-reviewed study that lends any credibility to the myth of systemic or meaningful US Election voting fraud and post it. The Brennan Center for Justice provides links to several studies from a variety of sources including GOP backed studies that show statistically meaningless amounts of voter fraud in US Elections. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/debunking-voter-fraud-myth

He is a sharp dude, a legit talent, a positive influence, and pushes guys around him to up their game. I never realized just how tough he is as a player - I have seen several teams really go out of their way to lay some shots on him. I know that a lot of those shots had to hurt, but Diggs grits it out and pops back up to burn them again. He just wants to win and I am more than willing to forgive a player that cares enough about winning to sometimes show that he hates that they are losing. I think teams have to have some really competitive players to succeed, not just athletically gifted players. He treats this team and his teammates as family. Not sure what the deal was in MN and frankly I don't really care, I just know that he is a good fit here and I am glad we have him on our team.

I was trying to explain mostly how the lag was manufactured. The GOP has always been about vote suppression. The GOP has spent millions looking for systemic voting fraud and have come up empty handed. Why do they tout the fraud they can never prove? Forty years ago Paul Weyrich, the influential conservative strategist who founded the Heritage Foundation told evangelical leaders, “As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.” In 1982, the Republican National Committee came under a court-ordered consent decree prohibiting it from engaging in voter-intimidation tactics aimed at communities of color—tactics designed to deprive Blacks of their right to vote. The decree was updated after further attempts at intimidation in 1987, and again in 1990. Despite more violations in 2004, federal courts let the decree expire in 2017. Freed from the decree, the RNC has plans to recruit up to 15,000 poll watchers in key states to challenge voters they deem suspicious, precisely the tactics that led to the original court order. True, intimidation in an of itself even with folks surrounding polling centers sometimes carrying guns is not really denying people their right to vote; it merely scares them from doing so. The same way when Trump was linking delays in mail-in ballots to fraud. If Trump supporters were smart enough to read more than Tweets they would see more clearly how politics work. It was clear to many in politics early on how the GOP was playing 3-D chess and working to stack the deck so they could falsely link mail-in voting as somehow fraught with fraud. This is misinformation to suppress the normal legitimate process of mail-in voting, but how to make it seem more real to their base? Cripple the USPS prior to the election. Obama's attempts to fill the many vacant USPS board positions were blocked for years by McConnell and the GOP Senate. As soon as Trump was elected they installed 5 GOP puppets into the USPS board - it was fast-tracked and the Deputy Postmaster General was forced out as they bypassed the government-approved process for interviewing and hiring a new Postmaster General and instead shoe-horned DeJoy into the role - an avid Trump supporter and mega-campaign donor. DeJoy immediately set out to knee-cap the USPS prior to the election. First, creating a backlog of mail to be delivered by eliminating overtime and any extra routes while at the same time claiming in legal filings that leadership at the USPS were unable to meet the operational demands required by judges concerned about election mail impacts because they were more short-staffed due to Covid-19. So eliminate overtime and extra routes when you are short-staffed. It defies logic. At the same time they fast-tracked the removal of mail sorting machines from collection centers that were disproportionately located in districts that voted for Clinton in 2016. Many of the USPS workers acted in defiance of clear mandates that were illegal, they ran extra routes, they put in extra personal time to make up the difference. This is why they were being cheered by crowds. They stood up to protect the vote, they stood up against GOP vote suppression machinations removing ballot drop boxes, requiring third-party signature verifications, feckless lawsuits to have mailed in votes thrown out. If the GOP want a recount in PA, they will likely have to pay for it out of pocket and they will find a few ballots that need to be tossed, out of millions of ballots cast this happens for both major parties every election, but they will not find enough to sway the results.

They actually do have machines that tally the ballots. Had them since midterms, and spent a million on installing more for the election. What the man overseeing election preparation in PA was not given was the ability to begin processing the mail-in ballots early. The state GOP legislature blocked those requests. Hence the prediction of mail processing lag which Trump tried to crudely link to fraud was in fact manufactured by the GOP.

Trump is guilty of a lot of criminal acts and folks will find out more once the shield of his office is removed. We can shelve that argument for later. How many of his close associates have to be indicted by juries before folks understand the kind of people who are Trump associates? The only reason Trump himself has not been likewise indicted is that he is a sitting president and he coopted the DOJ with that swamp creature and career fixer Barr. "Barr’s March 24 letter stated accurately that “the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government” with regard to proven Russian efforts to hack computers and influence the election." However: "He has since repeatedly misstated this conclusion as a finding of “no collusion,” which it is not. Mueller documented plenty of collusion between Russians and Trump’s campaign associates, even as he failed to find evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of a conspiracy (meaning agreement) to disrupt the election. Just parroting witch hunt or other words Trump puts in your mouth does not make them true. Trump will attempt to pardon himself and his family from the non-crimes as he leaves office...it will be something pretty far out there.

You are right. As I mentioned in another post recounts are betting on a horse that does not come in...regardless of which side pushes for them. They will fill the GOP coffers because it is always a golden opportunity to fleece the emotions and dollars of those whose candidate lost.

Yeah, as far as the messaging from the Clinton campaign itself, but there were riots and a great deal of protests. Either way, let the recount efforts play out and see where it all leads. There is a deadline to certification that they will have to honor. As they had to wrap up objections in 2016.

Fair enough I did not follow that Jill Stein green party efforts to have recounts done and now see that Hillary supported that effort. Very political to hide behind some other org doing the dirty work. Sounds like they all fizzled out in court, but concede your argument that this happens from both sides. Well played sir. That was a sound rebuttal.

Where are those clear facts that she challenged his election results? She emphasized there was no legal recourse to challenge the election results several times. She did support a review of how those in the Trump campaign circle may have coordinated on those DNC email releases with Russia. Basically Stone's role with Don Jr. https://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/18/hillary-clinton-trump-challenge-2016-election-legitimacy-242848

Hillary Clinton conceded the election on Nov. 9th and called Trump to congratulate him. Article from the way back machine. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/hillary-clinton-concedes-election-donald-trump-speech

The electoral college came under scrutiny andin 2020 the Supreme Court backed the concept of "faithless Elector" and States ability to enforce an Elector to vote the will of the people represented. It was the right call and was a good thing for democracy. In 2016 Trump won. That being said we need to not confuse the difference between accepting a Presidential election win, and accepting the man's character and policies. Most folks on the Left that I talk to accepted Trump's win in 2016, but did not like it, thought folks were pretty dumb for voting him in, and were motivated to have his tenure be one and done after 4 years.

This. It was rather a round-about way of justifying recounts that really does not align with the rules for each state regarding that process. Basically it is a flawed premise. Most states automatically do a recount if the margin between the number of votes is low enough. Demanding a recount as many ignorant people have done in those situations is dumb. It happens any way without the hysterics. For most of the swing states that Trump lost the margins do not justify an auto recount. If he wants one the GOP has to find evidence of wide spread ballot fraud to justify it (looking like needles in haystacks), OR the GOP does have the option to pay out of pocket to fund a recount. Historically these are several decades of bets on a horse that does not come in. The GOP will gladly take your money though and flush much of it down the drain of a hopeless cause and pocket the rest. They are duplicitous not dumb.

I usually vote Independant and Dem or GOP if I think the candidate will earn that vote. Democratic (as in the process) norms do not hold to litigating a voting loss in this many swing states by this much margin. If it were one state with a small margin then I would expect litigation from the losing party. These attacks on our Postal Service knee-capping their operational efficiency prior to the election, then on mail-in voting itself as a practice during a pandemic stink to high heaven as the very fraud and election fixing the GOP is alleging Dems partake in. One side clearly lost the Presidency, and the other side lost House seats and needs to rethink their populist/socialist rhetoric and how that plays outside of the metro areas.

Well Trump is Putin's dog (actually Russian media gleefully referred to him as Putin's lovable piglet after he lost his first debate - Russian humor I guess).

Well you have to consider how the conservative media reacted pushing for concession in a far closer election than the quixotic effort we see from Trump and his followers to disqualify the margin Trump lost by this time around - the meltdown ironic phrasing is hilarious.

I feel like you are trying to take a reasonable approach to an absurd comparison. Hunter-to-Joe compared to Trump Org-to-Trump. It is not like I need to dumpster-dive for a broken laptop to try to dig up dirt in regards to Trump family business conflicts.... Trump did not sell his Trump Org businesses, he just stepped back and let his family run it by proxy, so he still has clear ties to his business holdings. The president held onto ownership of his assets after taking office, ensuring that he would continue to generate money while serving in the White House. From 2017 to 2019, the president’s businesses raked in an estimated $1.9 billion of revenue. Despite Trump's protests to the contrary, his Trump Org revenues have increased over the tenure of his term in office as he has directed political and official business to his many real estate holdings: It is public knowledge that Trump Org's is run in proxy by his family - this is no secret and I have linked to the Trump family members and friends that run Trump Org: https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-organization-executives-and-top-employees-2018-3?op=1#donald-trump-jr-1 Trump’s stake in his many businesses has led him to amass more than 3,200 conflicts of interest since taking office. The Need for Financial Transparency from the President of the United States One of the biggest issues with the Trump Org is the overall lack of transparency regarding money flowing into the Organization from unknown sources. This is not always a crime, but having many LLCs setup within other LLCs with dubious corporate ownership is one of those smoke-probably-fire things that attracts the attention of law enforcement to very real and potential money laundering and/or illegal payoffs - a few examples of how this works for Trump Org and likely why the Manhattan DA is allowing feckless appeals to slow-walk any indictments; He is waiting for Trump to exit office before he jumps all over these financials. Trump received nearly $12 million for condo sales in buildings he owns and co-owns. A large portion of this sum came from anonymous LLCs. In fact, all of the $7.4 million paid to Trump for condo sales in Trump Parc were from unknown buyers. For example, in October 2019, a Wyoming-based company called Art Gardens LLC paid $2.4 million for a unit. The LLC was formed months before the purchase and has a generic registered agent. The true source of the funds are unknown. Trump also disclosed two payments for “other contract payments” related to international properties that are not operational. He reported receiving $750,000 from Trump Marks Puerto Rico I LLC, an entity whose underlying asset is a license deal associated with a former Trump-branded golf course in Puerto Rico that declared bankruptcy in 2015. He reported getting another $275,000 from an entity associated with a hotel in Panama that severed its ties to the Trump Organization in 2018. Neither source of revenue was disclosed as having any value on Trump’s previous disclosure. More than anything, President Trump’s annual disclosure is a reminder that a president who routinely promotes his businesses in an official capacity while they haul in hundreds of millions of dollars from mostly unknown sources. A snapshot of the dizzying array of Trump Organization LLC's from his 2019 financial disclosure forms - these are not detailed tax forms, but gets the point across. https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/legacy/2020/07/Trump-Donald-J.-2020Annual-278-1.pdf Why is having money flowing into the Presidency of the United States from unknown sources an issue? I should not have to point this out, but... Why is it an issue for an acting President (and his children) to receive hidden payments or to profit from the office? Because it makes it easy for foreign actors or special interest businesses to curry favor with the President of the United States - essentially they can buy him. See the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution. It is ironic, considering the Trump Org, that this is the kind of dirt that Trump was directing Rudy to dig up in Ukraine with Hunter Biden when he directed his lackeys to withhold aid to the Ukrainian government that Congress had already approved. I expect that Trump, upon his exit from office, will likely seek to pardon/shield himself and his family from pending lawsuits involving his violations of the emoluments clause, as well as many violations of the Hatch Act. Folks don't have to believe me, we can just wait and see what transpires. The emoluments clause, also called the foreign emoluments clause, is a provision of the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 😎 that generally prohibits federal officeholders from receiving any gift, payment, or other thing of value from a foreign state or its rulers, officers, or representatives. The clause provides that:No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State. The Constitution also contains a “domestic emoluments clause” (Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 7), which prohibits the president from receiving any “Emolument” from the federal government or the states beyond “a Compensation” for his “Services” as chief executive.

So this guy is credible because he has MIT next to his name? If this is the same guy, let's unpack some of his quackery shall we? He also claims to have invented email, believes in the Deep State conspiracy, is trying to get into a GOP office, etc... https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2020/04/fact-check-biological-engineer-did-not-offer-medically-supported-information-in-viral-video.html Regarding his made up claims of voting fraud: https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2020/09/fact-check-shiva-ayyadurais-claim-that-massachussetts-election-officials-destroyed-over-1-million-republican-primary-ballots-is-not-true.html I wish folks would just fact-check these stories... my sister does the same thing to me. Just like a freaking troll-bot just sends all this nonsense my way and I have to knock each one down with facts. She finally got frustrated and kicked me out of her echo chamber - thank god. Her big one was that Gates and MIT were working on putting chips on everyone under the guise of 3rd-world healthcare so they could monitor the public. I asked her, "Do you have a mobile phone?", "Does it have GPS?", "Does it gather information on who your friends are, where you shop, what you buy, your professional connections"? Yes? So why on earth would someone spend time and resources building something to monitor your private life when you have already given all that privacy away and paid them for the privilege?

What is laughable in regards to your laptop reference, is that Trump and his cult-like followers that spend most of their time in the far-right echo chambers like Fox News think they can credibly criticize those who listen to liberal news outlets as biased. I don't even have very strong feelings for Joe Biden, but I would vote for a turnip if it was opposite the ticket from Trump. His followers are in disbelief when Trump's Hail Mary smear attacks on Joe Biden via Hunter basically went from their echo-chamber shouts of injustice in their far-right circus stages to a whimper when scrutinized outside of those forums. Are all those liberal voters that "un-American" they ask in disbelief? Or could it just be that voters like to actually think past the thin veil of Trump and GOP rhetoric, and saw one clumsy attempt to smear Joe Biden after another using serial clowns like Rudy working tirelessly to come up with any kind of tentative links between Hunter's business dealings and Joe? What they miss. In saying Hunter Biden profited off his father's name and position in government, they miss that those accusations rang exceptionally hypocritical for the rest of the "thinking public" when held up to the light of all the Trump clan members of Trump Org who have benefited financially over the course of his presidency by leveraging his position and influence. Trump's rampant and overt nepotism, his retribution against anyone who defies his poor choices, etc... It did little to move the vote needle for the GOP because for most folks that take the time to deliberate and think about a topic, rather than have a knee-jerk reaction based upon their political bias, they found the arguments lacked any merit when considering the two candidates and voted for Biden any ways.

Wow....talk about literally flipping the script. I guess anything passes for "News" there. If they had a shred of dignity (Chris Wallace excluded) they would crawl under a rock in embarrassment.

This guy sounds like the definition of an unreliable witness, but he has stepped in it now. Got caught lying, and signed a sworn affidavit, later recanted; I imagine he received a call from a someone on Trumps election attack team that said we know a guy who can pardon anyone...double-down and say you were coerced, so he flops the other way. Whatever.