leh-nerd skin-erd

Of course it’s a parody. And I don’t work for Noxema. Lighten up Francis.

Simply declaring “abuse of the legal process” does not make it so, that’s the beauty of the legal process. I offered no opinion on the righteousness of the decision, it’s irrelevant how I feel about that. I simply pointed out why it’s a relatively straight line transaction from election results to concerns of widespread and systemic problems of which you speak. I can understand why those on the left want Trump to stand down, but by flushing out these problems now, at a minimum we can fix them moving forward. Of course, that assumes there is any desire to actually fix the problems inherent in the system. In any given county for example, it seems perfectly acceptable to solicit feedback and clarity on ballots from a select group of voters. On top of that, having no guidelines about who(m) can/cannot be counted varies by county, so the process is there is no process. The potential for collusion among those responsible for ensuring accuracy county to county is substantial. It can be as simple as “call any potential Biden voters and disregard Trump voters, and next county over—don’t call anyone”. Does that make sense to you as a voter in 2020? Is this a really complicated issue, having one standard? It applies in every other aspect of life with the State. I guess what I’m saying is that when folks bemoan the assault on democracy as a campaign challenges results, it’s pretty easy to look at Pennsylvania and think “you people could &$@@ up a wet dream.”. Let’s get it all out there. There is no downside.

Not your concern boyo. Stay focused on things you have control over.

It’s interesting that two people can read the same document and come away with different conclusions. The first concerns I heard regarding Pennsylvania dealt with restricted access for poll watchers, undue limitations on accessibility and concerns about fairness. When speaking with a friend, he was quite animated about stories of poll watchers being kept 25 feet away from the “process”. Having been a more-than-casual observer of the NYS civil justice system for 30+ years, my first question was this: What are the rules established that dictate what a poll watchers can/cannot do, and what constitutes fair and reasonable access for a poll watcher? This document on an issue as simple as the activities of a poll watcher confirmed what I believed I already knew: It’s...whatever. 6’. 60’. Whatever. I’ll leave it to others to discuss and debate what’s fair or not, but this document states that voting laws and regulation in Pennsylvania amount to little more than ‘trust us, it’s fair’ while detailing that 67 different counties can choose 67 different methodologies within a broad framework of rules. A couple key points: 1. There really is no guideline for poll watching beyond the fact that they stay 6’ away from voters. So, some will be 6’, some could be 30. The law is set up to court controversy, and I’d hazard a guess that any campaign that thought they were on the wrong side of the fair access standard would have an issue with this. It’s absurd that there is not one standard established. 2. The 67 different counties have potentially 67 different standards for voter outreach in the event there are technical discrepancies in a mail in ballot. Some chose to contact voters. Some did not. The reality here is that not every county is built the same, has the same resources or the same capability for outreach. By extension a voter in one county is treated as if his vote really matters, another irrelevant. Again, how difficult is it to establish one standard instead of allowing 67? 3. The issue regarding timeliness of the amendment on page 10. The election was November 3rd, the case makes its way through the process with an amendment filed in November 15. The campaign filed the amended complaint on November 20. I thought this was interesting: It would have mooted the existing motions to dismiss and required new briefing, possibly new oral argument, and a reasoned judicial opinion within seventy-two hours over a weekend. I’m thinking that by applying that standard, the notion of a free and important election is vital to our country, but any discussion thereof certainly must be shelved on November 7,8,14,15, 21 and 22 when the justices are at fundraisers, or perhaps watching the Eagles play. What I see here is evidence of a system so &$#@ed up that it can only have been designed by public servants at the highest levels of government. It’s basically Electoral Thunderdome, and I’m not even debating the lawfulness of the ruling. What amazes me even more is that governmental agencies are famous for overreach. Virtually everything we do requires a form submitted with appropriate documentation in triplicate, and failure to properly submit results in immediate disqualification. I tried to get the enhanced Drivers License in NYS and was rejected because the DMV office didn’t like one of the forms of ID I submitted. I spoke with a supervisor, showed her the form listed on the website, she acknowledged it and said more or less “Too bad”. Where voting is concerned, as evidenced here, the proof that the process is fair lies in the fact that pretty much anyone can do anything they want. When all is said and done here, many millions of voters will be convinced that voter fraud was rampant here, and the sad fact is that in Pa, the foundation of the system was built on shifting sands just waiting to be debated.

She best be hitting that t zone with the oxy. It’s like an oil slick on an angry Amazon.

This is the problem with the little people dealing with career politicians and having short memories. Exhibit A: Eliot Spitzer; Exhibit B: Eric Schneiderman; Exhibit Cuomo: Joseph Percoco Exhibit D Joe Bruno; Exhibit E: Sheldon Silver; Exhibit F: Hillary Clinton The decisions surrounding who gets prosecuted and who does not is often purely political, with fall guys strewn about and powerful yet corrupt figures remaining untouched. There is no mythical place where the powerful are treated as average citizens. It doesn’t exist. So, if they think they can get Trump and destroy the spirit of the base and impact walk-away Dems and independents, they’ll pursue it like it was true. They’d Kavanaugh him, they’d Mike Flynn him, and I personally think some would go much further than that (the infamous “six ways to Sunday” offering by the senior senator from NY). The trade off is that Trump most definitely knows where the bodies are buried, and I think we would all agree he’s not the gentleman Willard Romney is (and by gentleman, I mean nutless weasel) where he’ll take his $$$-🤬 and ask for more. There’s also the needle to thread on when too much is too much. For all the posturing here about bogus claims of obstruction, the flip side is the AG said it never happened. In fact, he said the treatment of DJT in this sham was quite horrific, though oddly that didn’t get a lot of play in typical msm outlets. Trump supporters certain believe that by the tens of millions. Partisan lefties like W9, SoT and the like see it the other way, which sets the stage for a very interesting battle for the hearts and minds of the middle. Part of me would like to see the battle play out. I’d love to see DJT giving us access to the inner workings of the govt, the CIA, to hear stories of what folks like Brennan do when they’re not trying to manipulate our own elections. I say it doesn’t happen, or at most, happens on the basis of lots of fireworks but no real pop.

We’re getting nowhere and we should be trying to heal. Happy Thanksgiving!

Nothing changes just because you want it to, brother.

You can hide under the covers all you want, you can imagine folks on the street screaming at the moon over DJTs ongoing legal fight. You can pretend you’re correct about every single court battle being lost, you can pretend that Trump supporters are fleeing en masse as the process moves on. You can characterize me as an extremist and to be fair, I really think you think that. I can tell you 100 times that I support the process, support his right to pursue justice, and that I think ultimately Biden is the president. I can’t help you with that, you’re a product of whatever experience and traina brought you to the point where supporting the rule of law is extreme and advocating the surrender and submitting because you disagree is the middle. Nothing changes anything just because you want it to. Regards from the center right-

Maybe. And yet the battle continues. Let’s just be sure that when 1/20 comes and goes, the nation can feel comfortable with the process. Then...we start anew one way or the other.

Normally, when I encounter a poster who reveals a complete intolerance for the opinions of others I put them on ignore and move on. Normally, when a poster claims to have the deep dark goods on something as important as The Muëller Reportenstrasse, I’m willing to play it out even though any reasonable analysis must include that Mueller spent, Mueller investigated, Mueller he extraordinary police powers, and in the end Mueller rode off into his fading sunset and Trump remained exactly where he was, undaunted, ever forward on to the next ginned up scandal. I don’t know Ja, have never engaged to any great extent, but I am mildly, mildly curious as to why you even bother attempting to engage when you always end up at the same point- outraged that someone doesn’t think like you do. The other day, you played yourself off as a quasi conservative. Personably, I think you’re full of crap but if you see yourself as such, good for you. There are thousands of stories of Walk Away Dems —moderates who saw something untoward about accusing a president of something and then screwing the pooch when it came to proving nothing. To feign ignorance on this subject means you’re truly, well, ignorant, or you’re full of it (again) I love the reference to “We do play along...”. That speaks volumes about the communal approach to engaging with posters you and yours take.

Yes, I support what he’s doing as you likely already know. How is he destroying the country? Please be specific so I can understand what you mean.

Assuming it’s resolved by January 20th, it’s just another day. It’s the end of one thing, the beginning of another any way you cut it. Had DJT prevailed decisively at the ballot box, the battle to unseat him and nullify the votes cast for him would not have been over. It would be silly to think that. If Biden prevails, your thinking that it’s over is just as silly. The numbers suggest many Americans think there was fraud in play during the election, and that’s likely to get worse as any but the hard core lefty’s see that time after time the argument is “Yeah, that’s bad, but it wasn’t enough...” or “but what about a NY?”. In the end, this robust debate is good for your side as well as ours. To look at a world where virtually every walk of life has been hacked or corrupted, it’s the height of naïveté to presume our incredibly complex and diverse election laws are above reproach. Using the broken bone analogy, one cannot heal without identifying and addressing the fracture first.

Not really. The DOJ took a second look, offered an alternative as to whether or not the charges should have been filed, and wanted the case dropped. It didn’t happen, the only way to pursue without the potential extended political persecution was to pardon him. Everybody wins (except General Flynn, of course). As you said, he opted to plead guilty based on his view of the situation he faced. When he realized things were hinky, he attempted to undue what had been done. It’s a cautionary tale. General Flynn is an American hero. He served with honor, ended up on the wrong side of the wrong administration, and assumed everybody was playing above board. He was wrong. Now, it’s time to heal.

The simple answer is it’s good political business to pursue endless investigations. Money is made, “journalists” can report for the good of the party, and nitwits can run about complaining about a person complaining about being targeted by his political rivals. I think what’s typically prevented this sort of thing is the concept of mutually assured destruction as the target has access to all sorts of details about the government and it’s activities many citizens might find unsavory. We’ll see if that continues, but it would be a heck of a spectacle. I’d bet a high percentage of Biden voters would tell you that the Pelosi Impeachment gambit would have ended with Trump being escorted from office in cuffs. I’d bet a higher per engage would tell you it occurred over Trump’s role as a special envoy for the KGB. Most of us walk by the National Enquirer rack at the local food store, but far too many glance back and wonder if Elvis and Jim Morrison really are alive and well in an outpost at the Arctic Circle.

He’ll be pleased, time for him to move on as well.

Amen. It would have been nice to see it close out with the charges dismissed but the system is what it is. An American hero can get on with his life.

Very nicely done Ja. Exceptional recap. Btw I obtained a copy of the 1956 Newsweek celebrating Ike’s victory over Adlai Stevenson. Looking through it, there are more than a few recognizable names..Prescott Bush and Al Gore Sr to name two. In another issue, Richard Nixon goes full “red scourge” in describing Adlai Stevenson. Interestingly, you could change a couple names, change a couple words and you’ve got the Trump = Russian story. There are no new ideas, only new people to be duped.

The only thing I find telling is the liberal white vote for a Biden presidency. Beyond that, it seems likely that Donald Trump’s supporters have to acknowledge Biden is the president of the United States. That time is drawing closer, but thank goodness to day is not that day. Such is life.

I'll check that out. Thanks. Everything involves bias, I'm afraid, so I'll proceed with caution.

I'm really just speaking about entry level civics issues. I'm amazed that I've been criticized for my position multiple times, when it's really pretty simple: DJT should be afforded the right to see things through. I find it the least controversial thing written on this board. For that, I've been accused of being unpatriotic (1x), treasonous behavior (1x), condescending (multiple), of applying circular logic (1x), of deflection (multiple times) of having limited intellect (multiple), attempting character assassination (1x), gift-wrapping horse poop and running some odd science experiment where I can't see water draining from a tub after I removed a plug. The point on Sidney Powell was an honest response to an honest question (I've been accused of not answering questions-multiple times). It may not matter at all, and I concur wholeheartedly with @shoshin that Sidney Powell was front and center at Trump Fight 2020 Pressers, but it is quite odd that multiple news sources referenced her as a member of the team multiple times over an extended period of time. At a minimum, that's sloppy journalism in an era of sloppy and imo partsan journalism. Such is life for a simple conservative soldier amongst the tolerant left.

Thank you.

None this explains why you advocate suppressing information with another poster. Information is not your enemy, nor is it necessarily my ally, it's just information. If you believe in the law, kindly refrain from attempting to dictate what is shared and in what capacity it it shared. It's presumptuous. If you do not, carry on.

I keep mentioning Dominion because there seems to be bilateral agreement that there was a problem with the system. I simply want the outcome to be correct. You seem to be fighting against shining a light in the corners for fear of what you might find. Besides, why would it bother you that I shared it with a guy named JaCrispy on the internet?? He asked questions, I provided food for thought. He may have some additional information from another source suggesting former Democratic Presidential Candidate Warren owned stock in a competing firm, or used to date a the CEO and they had a messy breakup, or that the problems she and others were addressed with a software patch. Internet democracy dies in internet darkness. You literally have nothing to fear on this issue, yet...

Unfortunately, the declaration about mail-in ballots lacks detail and assumes things are the way they always were (and interestingly, a quick google search of concerns about the legitimacy of mail-in voting yields hundreds of results from media sources far and wide, yet since 11/3 we've been told "OMG it's a perfect system!) . There is a difference between absentee ballots and mail-in ballots, and more importantly, there were "emergency measures' installed in many states under the guise of keeping people safe during the era of COVID. Here's a link that hilites some of the changes: https://ballotpedia.org/Changes_to_absentee/mail-in_voting_procedures_in_response_to_the_coronavirus_(COVID-19)_pandemic,_2020 In some cases, there are questions about the legalities of the changes, and by extension, whether or not the changes were appropriate. Here's a decent summary of the concern from one perspective: Adam Brandon, FreedomWorks (USA Today): "We have always had absentee voting, but it has always come with a tried and true validation process to ward off controversy. The system only works if we keep the same processes in place throughout. By changing the laws for how mail-in ballots are counted, states are paving the way for chaos and uncertainty in the weeks after Nov. 3. To change election laws this late in the game puts partisan legal teams in charge of determining the results of an election, rather than American voters." - "Don't change election laws this late: Anthony Fauci says in-person voting is safe with precautions. And widespread voting by mail could be dangerous to election integrity.," September 24, 2020. Another opinion piece on the sliding scale of authentication between in-person voting and voting by mail in an era where the rules changed very close to election: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/11/to_restore_election_integrity_end_mailin_vote_fraud.html The interesting part about all this is how quickly some folks want to move past these issues by removing DJTs lawful right to challenge the results as he sees fit. Very few on this site are suggesting that this ongoing matter be resolved for the greater good, the mantra seems to simply be "They need to stop". It really doesn't matter how many uncounted ballots are found, or irregularities pointed out--it's the very thought that a Presidential candidate other than the one they wanted chose to initiate the action. To draw a parallel, when our local DMV partially reopened after the lockdown, a friend of mine waited at the local office for 7 hours to complete a needed change. The government is not particularly adept at providing quality levels of service to begin with, and throwing a gigantic wrench in the monkeyworks just prior to the election certainly is problematic. As it relates to Dominion Software, issues have plagued the company for some time. Two former D Presidential nominees--one a long time front runner, expressed the very same types of concerns about Dominion in 2018: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democratic-senators-warned-of-potential-vote-switching-by-dominion-voting-machines-prior-to-2020-election/ar-BB1aZAYf The letter continued: “These problems threaten the integrity of our elections and demonstrate the importance of election systems that are strong, durable, and not vulnerable to attack.” I inquired about this very Trump-esque concern raised by the other side less than 12 months ago, looking for dialogue and common ground. The response can best be summarized as no response at all. Here's the question--if former Presidential frontrunner Liz Warren was extremely concerned about it, as kinda-sort-maybe Presidential Candidate Amy Klobuchaer was very concerned about it---why the rush to close it out? Gore/Bush took 58 days to resolve, and Gore really never had a chance. It wasn't close. The established rules were followed, he took a flyer and lost. The world did not end, the sun rose and set, and we moved on. If, as they say, there is nothing to worry about, then by extension there is nothing to fear from seeing it through.