|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 26 OF 426 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Dec-04-20
 | | FSR: Trump is furious at Barr for rejecting his claims of fraud, as well as his earlier failure to produce anti-Biden dirt, and is talking about firing Barr. His aides are reportedly trying to talk him out of it. I hope he ignores their advice. It would be hilarious if he fired Barr for not being sycophantic enough. Much the same way Fox isn't wingnutty enough for him, and he now prefers OANN. |
|
Dec-04-20
 | | perfidious: <FSR>, it has been a big hoot watching the Tinpot Despot as he careers completely off the rails, but he has the capacity to do some damage with his attitude of 'I lost? Bleep you! I'm gonna fix your wagon! Nyah nyah!', as he pursues what appears to be a scorched earth policy against anyone who does not bow the knee. |
|
Dec-04-20
 | | chancho: <Republican Sen. Mitt Romney on Thursday blasted President Donald Trump's leadership -- or lack thereof -- during the deadly coronavirus pandemic as "a great human tragedy." "Well, this hasn't been the focus of his rhetoric, apparently, and I think it's a great human tragedy, without question," Romney told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room" when asked where Trump's leadership is as the President focuses on other issues amid the worsening pandemic. "The extraordinary loss of life is heartbreaking -- and in some respects unnecessary. Not all respects, but we've relaxed our standards as individuals," added Romney, who represents Utah. "Some states haven't had mask mandates, and from Washington we have not had a constant, consistent plan and plea for people to wear masks, to social-distance, to take all the measures that would reduce the spread of this disease."> source: CNN.
Trump said we're rounding the corner, but once he lost the election, he went off the radar as people kept on dying. His leadership has been an epic failure, and what's worse, he doesn't care. He only sees the world in terms of what matters only to him. Trump's presidency.
A period in time that will easily go down as one of the greatest of tragedies. |
|
| Dec-04-20 | | morfishine: <perfidious> I hope you won't allow <chancho> to spread his BS Liberalism around these pages Common sense negates all Socialistic and Liberalism based views, with regards to politics Of course, you may do as you please in your own forum I will say I abhor Liberalism: its the cancer of an incentive driven capitalist state. Anybody knows that |
|
Dec-04-20
| | FSR: <morfishine> No, we don't know that. And if you think Trump is what a President should be, you're very, very sadly mistaken. There is no doubt that he will be remembered as the worst President in history: a corrupt, grotesquely incompetent, narcissistic sociopath who is responsible for the needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans. |
|
Dec-04-20
| | chancho: <The refusal by Republicans to acknowledge President-elect Joe Biden’s election victory is remarkable in its contempt for democracy and defiance of reality. But while much time has been spent trying to get Republicans to admit that Biden won, very little time has been spent impressing upon them the magnitude of the victory. That matters as we begin Biden’s presidency. Biden not only received a majority of the popular vote, but also cleared 51 percent — the largest vote percentage obtained against an incumbent president since 1932 and a bigger percentage of the popular vote than any Republican president since George H.W. Bush in 1988, when Bush was essentially running for a third Ronald Reagan term. In the process, Biden amassed the largest total number of ballots in U.S. history. He pummeled Trump by more than 7 million votes (and exceeded Barack Obama’s 2008 vote total by more than 11 million). That margin is bigger than Massachusetts’ entire population; in fact, only 14 states have a population of more than 7 million. Biden’s popular vote margin by percentage (4.4 percent) far surpasses Obama’s 2012 victory over Mitt Romney. Why is it important to emphasize the magnitude of Biden’s victory? Because, far from narrow, it represents the overwhelming verdict of the voters. If there is such a thing as a mandate, Biden has one. He has been explicit about the things he intends to do: preserve and expand Obamacare, pass child-care and sick-leave legislation, pursue police reform, push through a massive infrastructure bill and tackle climate change. Of course, if his margin of victory was a single vote or single elector, he would still be entitled to exercise all the powers of the presidency. That it is of such an enormous magnitude should earn at the very least a measure of consideration and deference from senators who were given their seats by a comparatively tiny portion of the electorate. Treating Biden as anything but the president-elect and denying him ample latitude to compile the Cabinet and senior staff of his choosing represents an outlandish attempt to preempt the will of more than 80 million Americans.> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin... |
|
Dec-04-20
| | perfidious: <FSR....There is no doubt that (Trump) will be remembered as the worst President in history: a corrupt, grotesquely incompetent, narcissistic sociopath who is responsible for the needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans....> Not that I am a huge fan of Biden, but I'll sign that. |
|
Dec-05-20
| | perfidious: Everyone is entitled to their day in court, but one citizen is not faring so well: <President Donald Trump and his legal allies earned a platinum sombrero Friday, striking out five times in a matter of hours in states pivotal to the president’s push to overturn the election results — and losing a sixth in Minnesota for good measure.It was another harsh milestone in a monthlong run of legal futility, accompanied by sharp rebukes from county, state and federal judges who continue to express shock at the Trump team’s effort to simply scrap the results of an election he lost. Several of the most devastating opinions, both Friday and in recent weeks, have come from conservative judges and, in some federal cases, Trump appointees. The losses included a rejection in Wisconsin from the state Supreme Court, where the majority was gobsmacked at the effort by a conservative group to invalidate the entire election without any compelling evidence of voter fraud or misconduct. “The relief being sought by the petitioners is the most dramatic invocation of judicial power I have ever seen,” said Brian Hagedorn, a conservative elected justice, in a concurring opinion. “Judicial acquiescence to such entreaties built on so flimsy a foundation would do indelible damage to every future election. Once the door is opened to judicial invalidation of presidential election results, it will be awfully hard to close that door again. This is a dangerous path we are being asked to tread.” An Arizona county judge, similarly, tossed a suit brought by state GOP chairwoman Kelli Ward. "The court finds no misconduct, no fraud and no effect on the outcome of the election." Ward has vowed to appeal that ruling. A Nevada judge issued a point-by-point rejection of every claim lodged by the Trump team, emphasizing that the facts they presented were sparse and unpersuasive. Carson City District Judge James Russell’s opinion repeatedly emphasized their case would not have succeeded “under any standard of proof.” “There is no credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 General Election in Nevada was affected by fraud,” Russell wrote. Jesse Binnall, the lead lawyer in the challenge brought by would-be Trump electors in Nevada, said: “We disagree with the order. The case and evidence we presented was compelling and overwhelming. We have noted our appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court.” In one of the most prominent cases — a suit in Georgia brought by controversial lawyers Sidney Powell and Lin Wood — a federal appeals court dismissed an appeal seeking to expand a restraining order a district court judge issued Sunday barring any alterations to voting machines in three Georgia counties. A unanimous three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the appeal without even hearing oral arguments from the litigants. Judge Andrew Brasher, a Trump appointee, suggested the appeal was a strategic mistake because the lower-court judge was on the verge of holding a hearing that might have resulted in Powell and Wood being able to designate experts to inspect voting machines in some Georgia counties. “The plaintiffs would not take the district court’s ‘yes’ for an answer. They appealed instead. And, because they appealed, the evidentiary hearing has been stayed and the case considerably delayed,” wrote Brasher, in an opinion joined by Clinton-appointed Judge Charles Wilson and Obama-appointed Judge Robin Rosenbaum....> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli... To be continued.... |
|
Dec-05-20
| | perfidious: Next chapter:
<....Brasher also suggested the matter wasn’t quite as urgent as some of the cases the GOP lawyers cited. “The plaintiffs here are not in the same position as an inmate about to be executed or a patient removed from life support,” he wrote.The appeals judges did not knock the Powell-led challenge out altogether, but the result of the detour to the appeals court is that the Trump backers have lost a week when they might have been inspecting voting equipment or trying to convince the district court judge to freeze more of the state’s voting gear. Shortly after the appeals court ruling emerged, Judge Timothy Batten set a hearing for Monday morning on the GOP's request to inspect machines in 10 Georgia counties. Powell and Wood did not respond to a request for comment. In Michigan, a state appeals court tossed an effort by the Trump campaign to block certification of Michigan’s results. The judges who issued the 2-1 ruling noted that while the Trump lawyers delayed their latest round of filings for weeks, the state had gone ahead and certified the election, making the legal challenge moot. And in Minnesota, a state Biden won easily but that had been on Trump’s radar ahead of Nov. 3, the state Supreme Court rejected Republicans’ proposal for a full statewide recount and chided them for failing to serve their complaint on the county officials they called out in their filings.> |
|
Dec-05-20
| | chancho: <On Wednesday, more than three thousand Americans died because of the coronavirus, the nation’s deadliest day yet during the pandemic. The same day, the President of the United States chose to release, on social media, a forty-six-minute videotaped address from the White House. He called it possibly “the most important speech I’ve ever made.” The pandemic’s grim toll was never mentioned. What was? The “tremendous vote fraud and irregularities” in last month’s election, the results of which the President still refuses to accept. The “statistically impossible” victory of Joe Biden, and the idea that the Democrats had so “rigged” the election that “they already knew” the outcome in advance. It was all “corrupt,” “shocking,” “constitutionally absolutely incorrect,” and “so illegal.” The President said he knew full well that he would be “demeaned and disparaged” for continuing to speak out, especially now that even some of his advisers have “disappeared” or, as he claimed, been bullied into silence. But he would do so anyway. Donald Trump in defeat, it turns out, <<<is even more>>> whiny, dishonest, and self-absorbed than he was before his decisive loss to Biden a month ago.> https://www.newyorker.com/news/lett... His psyche cannot handle defeat.
There are millions upon millions of Americans who have handled their own adversity far... far better than him and who have shown graciousness in losing. Everyone loses, that's just a fact of life!
But Trump's like a child who screams as a Doctor is about to give him an injection. The injection being r-e-a-l-i-t-y in his case. |
|
Dec-05-20
| | perfidious: Credit where it is due: he knows all about bullying. |
|
Dec-05-20
| | perfidious: From a few moons ago:
<....There is no leadership, no one in charge. In Trump we have perhaps the weakest President in history, mouthy, preening, ineffectual, much talk and no action. He did nothing while the rioters looted, burned, and vandalized, then disengaged himself from the pandemic, leaving decisions to the states. Much cawing and gaudy feathers, but no bird inside.> |
|
Dec-06-20
| | chancho: Lame-O... Lame-O Duck:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asQ... |
|
| Dec-06-20 | | morfishine: <FSR: <morfishine> No, we don't know that. And if you think Trump is what a President should be, you're very, very sadly mistaken> I didn't say that. Do not try to put words in my mouth. My comment was strictly anti-liberalism, plain and simple, very short and to the point. No mention of Trump whatever Anybody that can read knows that |
|
| Dec-06-20 | | morfishine: <perfidious> I will not make political posts here going forward |
|
| Dec-06-20 | | rbhgroup: Perhaps a few observations on the 2020 election may be useful to some. 1. Biden is not yet the "President elect". That is determined by the meeting of the electoral college, scheduled for December 14th. 2. Barr said he has not "seen" enough evidence (etc..) . This is not a surprise because much of it has not been provided to DOJ... it is being handled in state courts.. Barr also said he has investigations underway... most pundits seem to ignore the nuances here... not sure why... 3. There are a number of serious issues with a great number of the elections held in the various states. Statistical analysis indicates that the odds of Biden winning this election fairly are essentially zero. The Supreme Court has used this type of analysis in court cases before... 4. The State Legistatures are empowered by the US constitution to set-aside any state election that violates the 14th amendment. This is a real possibility. 5. Several states had more votes than actual voters in one or more districts. That is very hard to achieve in a fair election. Just saying... please don't shoot the messenger. |
|
| Dec-06-20 | | rbhgroup: Almost forgot... we have a republic, not a democracy. People who watch only YouTube and CNN may not know this. |
|
Dec-06-20
 | | saffuna: <1. Biden is not yet the "President elect". That is determined by the meeting of the electoral college, scheduled for December 14th.> Trump was consistently referred to as president-elect from the day after the election. <2. Barr said he has not "seen" enough evidence (etc..) . This is not a surprise because much of it has not been provided to DOJ... it is being handled in state courts.. Barr also said he has investigations underway... most pundits seem to ignore the nuances here... not sure why...> Where Trump should be presenting evidence is in court. Yet he consistently fails to do so. <3. There are a number of serious issues with a great number of the elections held in the various states. Statistical analysis indicates that the odds of Biden winning this election fairly are essentially zero. The Supreme Court has used this type of analysis in court cases before...> That is simply false. The reason Trump was leading on election night and then fell behind later is that more Biden voters voted by mail. Those votes were counted afterward in many states. <4. The State Legistatures are empowered by the US constitution to set-aside any state election that violates the 14th amendment. This is a real possibility.> Most states have laws stating that their electoral votes must go to the candidate who received the most votes. <5. Several states had more votes than actual voters in one or more districts. That is very hard to achieve in a fair election.> False. |
|
| Dec-06-20 | | rbhgroup: Haha... I see the comments are rolling in... to saffuna... re comment 1 - so what? it was wrong then, and is wrong now... what don't you understand about that? re comment 2 - my comment was about Barr... you are changing the subject .. but you are ignorant of the facts.. Trump is presenting evidence is various courts...
and he has lost most of the rulings so far...
however, the Supreme Court is the one court that could overturn the entire election. re comment 3 - a number of statistical studies have been conducted... what I said is true... you have misunderstood the basic point.. it is not about when votes were counted... re comment 4 - that is true.. again, it is a different issue... those laws can be set aside by the State Legislatures... re comment 5 - this is the finding of the states themselves... ii is true in more than one state... obviously, in a fair election it is impossible to have more votes cast than voters... perhaps you missed the sarcasm... |
|
Dec-06-20
| | saffuna: < re comment 1 - so what? it was wrong then, and is wrong now... what don't you understand about that?> In every election that I remember since 1960 the winner was referred to as the president-elect right after the winner was determined. Except when the president was re-elected, of course. <re comment 4 - that is true.. again, it is a different issue... those laws can be set aside by the State Legislatures...> Yes, they could. But it would not be simple. Little to no chance of it happening. <re comment 3 - a number of statistical studies have been conducted... what I said is true... you have misunderstood the basic point.. it is not about when votes were counted...> There is no reason the vote totals could not have occurred. Totally normal. <re comment 5 - this is the finding of the states themselves... ii is true in more than one state... obviously, in a fair election it is impossible to have more votes cast than voters... perhaps you missed the sarcasm...> Did not happen. As one of the judges ruled, "Calling an election unfair does not make it so." <Trump is presenting evidence is various courts> What evidence? What court? |
|
Dec-07-20
| | perfidious: <morf>, you are free to post here on whatever you wish, whenever you desire; this is no 'elite posters' salon. |
|
| Dec-07-20 | | wtpy: Rbh, Point 3: So you have a president who has never been above 50% favorability who is trailing in every national preelection poll, which despite being tarnished a bit have at least some utility as a predictors, and you say the chance of Biden winning this election fairly is zero. Either show your work on how you calculated this or post the published studies you read so we evaluate them. 5. And if there are districts where more people voted than are registered in the district, name those districts. There is a point where vague assertions are no longer sufficient and we have long since passed that point.
. |
|
Dec-07-20
| | chancho: Tomorrow is the presidential safe-harbor deadline. <Federal law (3 U.S. Code § 5) frees a state from further challenge if it settles legal disputes and certifies its results at least six days before the Electoral College meeting, which occurs this year on Dec. 14.> |
|
Dec-07-20
| | perfidious: <We will still win it.> Does the Tinpot Despot propose to litigate this in perpetuity? |
|
| Dec-07-20 | | rbhgroup: sigh.. saffuna...
comment 1 - so what...
comment 2 - my comment was about Barr.. you changed the subject... I did not say it was likely... Trump's team has submitted evidence in various court cases around the country. Just Google it... as I said, he has rulings against him in most or almost all of the cases... (the court cases have been about different points of law...) comment 3 - you know little or nothing about statistical analysis or elections... there are some very unusual results in this election... mathmatically impossible essentially, without cheating of some sort. comment 4 - yes, we agree... my guess is that ony the Supreme Court is going to make a significant ruling.. comment 5 - it did happen... it was documented by the states themselves... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 26 OF 426 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
