Scraps

1. Jerome Powell said so on 60 Minutes. 2. Then you do not have free markets. 3. https://www.fool.com/knowledge-center/5-bond-market-facts-you-need-to-know.aspx

There is no reason for Biden to sink to Trump's level. 306 Electoral votes is sufficient. There are more important things for the incoming administration to focus on than contributing to the circus.

1) You don't think that the ability to print and endless amount of money and buy bonds doesn't create a bubble? 2) The market should be set by buyers and sellers that are putting money at risk. The Fed risks nothing. Benn Bernanke, Janet Yellen and Jerome Powell have no skin in the game yet controlled markets with made up money. 3) The fixed income market is much larger than the stock market, If fixed income investors can't get a return in bonds, they are forced to take more risk, which bubbles up stock prices. Again, this is happening because of the Fed, which isn't taking any real risk to the Fed Chairman or the Governors.

Bad policy? Yes. A Ponzi scheme, that it was not.

The process has played itself out. Trump L-L-LOST. Pressuring governors or legislatures to disenfranchise their citizens is not part of the process. The Republicons are reducing our country to a Banana Republic.

Because if the Thief in Chief hasn't limited himself to embarrassing court appearances that have been routinely denied with prejudice. He tried to stop counting of ballots, sought to disenfranchise entire cities and states and tried to get state legislatures and governors to go against the voted results in their states to install him illegally.

I'm talking about the bubble in bonds caused by the Federal Reserve printing money then using that money to buy bonds. This has caused interest rates to fall to artificially low levels. Fixed income investors can't get a return on their investments and are forced to take greater risks, which has led to a bubble in stocks as well. I would stipulate that if inflation rises, the game the Fed has been playing will come to an end. Large investors will short bonds and stocks and this bubble will burst badly. How was the housing bubble a Ponzi scheme? It was bad lending. These risky mortgages were backed by insurance that was insufficient to cover the losses when adjustable rate mortgages went up in response to the Fed raising short term rates. That's not a Ponzi scheme as I understand it.

My grandfather was a fire fighter in Honolulu. They ended up fighting fires for 3 days at Hickam Field. One of his company was killed in a strafing attack.

Today the Thief in Chief said "Let's see whether or not somebody has the courage, whether it's legislators or legislatures or a justice of the Supreme Court or a number of justices of the Supreme Court," Trump said. "Let's see if they have the courage to do what everybody in this country knows is right." Today the Supreme Court answered. They did have the courage to do what everybody in this country knows is right. They denied a request from Pennsylvania Republicons to block certification of the Pennsylvania election results. There were no dissents. It is over.

Well, he could have avoided all this by not lying. If he really did nothing, he shouldn't have accepted the pardon. The man has no honor.

Flynn controlled what Flynn did, including admitting to the charges 3 times now. He has no one to blame but himself.

To me, this is all courtesy of a Federal Reserve that is printing money and using it to buy bonds, crowding out private investors. This is a bigger bubble to solve the last bubble. When this bubble bursts, it ain't gonna be pretty.

Again? Where did I ever paint Gore as some heroic figure before? What does that say about Trump? Gore was behind by 1784 votes on election night. The margin was so close that it generated an automatic recounts and the margin dropped to 327. If that was a Hail Mary or swinging for the fences, Trump must be trying to jump the Pacific on a Harley. Oh wait, the cancel culturalist in chief canceled Harley Davidson, a Confederate suites him better. Trump is behind by 10,457 in Arizona, 11,779 in Georgia, 154,188 in Michigan, 33,596 in Nevada, 81,660 in Pennsylvania and 20,682 in Wisconsin.. He lost by larger margins than he Hillary in 2016. Recounts have reaffirmed Trumps losses. He has taken the extraordinary step of asking courts to disenfranchise cities and legislatures to set aside the vote and seat electors for him. Gore came nowhere close to anything like that undemocratic behavior. Let's face it, Trump is a partisan looking to overturn the election. He lost the election. It is done. He lost because his argument is weak, regardless of it was 11,779 votes or 7,061,839. He lost because he is wrong.

If you believe there is evidence, I am asking you to provide said evidence. The fact that you can't do so speaks volumes. Bush vs Gore involved 1 state and 537 votes. Given the exceedingly slim margin, (0.009%) recounts were reasonable. At the end, Gore did what was good for the country and conceded, graciously, with a call for unity. Trump has to flip multiple states. Trump lost all these by far greater margins than Gore did in Florida in 2000, hasn't produced any evidence that any judge found remotely convincing and every recount has reaffirmed the original result. Trump lost. Never did Gore remotely suggest that the voters in entire cities or entire states should be disenfranchised and the election thrown to state legislators. There is a wide chasm between these two cases.

I will ask again, what evidence? The problem is that elections are the backbone of a democracy. When you call into question the very basis the republic is built upon with no substantive reason, you are damaging the republic. Trump's only reason for doing this is to damage Biden's presidency and to fleece his supporters wallets. Either that or his is insane.

What evidence has been submitted? And if you admit that there is a lack thereof, is there anything to consider? It just keeps coming back to the same conclusion. Trump lost.

Sure. What evidence?

If they have evidence, it hasn't been presented in any court in any way that it was considered credible.

Its funny how whatever Team Trump is accusing you of is exactly what they are trying to do themselves.

Actually, it would be a farce for anything other than the 1 suit about Pennsylvania receiving and counting votes after election day made it to the Supreme Court. Team Trump hasn't provided evidence that would overturn any state, let alone multiple states. And as for the 1 case in Pennsylvania, that wouldn't change the results either.

No, They know that many of his followers live in the hermetically sealed Fox/OAN/Newsmax/Trump circular reinforcement loop and don't believe anything outside of that circle. They just keep deceiving so they can keep grifting. Do you know that you have to give $5001 to the recount fund he has been touting before $1 goes to the actual recount? The rest goes to a Super Pac for him, to retire his campaign's debt and to the RNC. This is nothing but a con by the conman in chief.

If the Georgia recounts are inconsistent, you provide the proof. Trump lost Georgia 3 times.

Exactly how is Dominion unreliable? It produces a paper ballot that can and has been audited. There have been 3 counts, one of which was a hand recount, and they are all consistent. Trump has lost 3 times.

Given our federalized system where states and counties choose how to conduct elections, it is extremely difficult to have systemic fraud. If there was fraud on the part of a Dominion voting system, why would a hand recount and another machine recount produce basically identical results to the original count? Here is an analysis that breaks it down better. Oh and let's not forget that Bill Barr said the only thing that could be large enough to change the outcome of the election was Dominion voting, that both the DOJ and DHS looked at it and said there is nothing there. And keep in mind that Chris Krebs (Republican and a Trump appointee), Gabriel Sterling, Brad Raffensperger and Brian Kemp, republicans all who ran and certified the election, all say there is nothing there. Why is is so hard to believe the simple explanation that Trump lost?

I tend to believe that if there was indeed fraud and these lawyers did indeed believe they were fighting for free and fair elections unblemished by fraud, the very core of democracy, they would not have backed out. Indeed, they would have been duty bound to continue. However, given the scarcity of evidence of fraud, they were in fact working to undermine the election, the core of democracy, all for some money. It simply wasn't worth it to be on the wrong side and assist in a coup.