Forum menu
Yep - so far he’s raised $220,000,000 of which $8mill has paid for legal cases and the rest goes to paying his campaign debts.
Right wing media, FB etc are all staying it’s been accepted by the SC. Don’t think it has.
According to more reputable lawyer-types I've seen (admittedly on Twitter and TikTok): the case is "on the docket". That literally just means they have correctly filed their request that the case is heard. It doesn't mean the SCOTUS have agreed to hear it.
Press Secretary was on TV yesterday claiming one in quadrillion chance of Bidden win in those states was fact.
Legal types also point out that court isn't a stats class. They need evidence not extremely dubious probabilities.
Matt from Stand Up Maths did a great couple of videos explaining why Benford's Law and scatter plots are not mathematically useful here:
I’m no mathematician.
That “1 in 4 Quadrillion chance Biden wins all 4 swing states” is based in him getting the same votes as Clinton in 2016.
No s@@t sherlock!! If only the votes from the last election matter, why bother holding another??
Trump can’t even get his head around the fact that people who voted for him then might switch to Biden 🤷🏻🤦🏽
I get the impression that these laws suits are being filed by people more interested in ingratiating themselves with Trump and his 2024 election run, and picks for cabinet posts should he win
Been a while since I did the grauniad cryptic – is “poor Melania” the letters of Melania without the first and last?
here = in
old pence = d from lsd (pounds shillings pence)
poor = anagram
essentially = centre of the word 'elani'
I get the impression that these laws suits are being filed by people more interested in ingratiating themselves with Trump and his 2024 election run, and picks for cabinet posts should he win
aye, the jigs up
Trump might be too narcissistic to believe he lost, but up for grabs for everyone else was playing for promotions and raising some $$$ to pay back the shitshow campaign debts.
Trump can’t even get his head around the fact that people who voted for him then might switch
True. Trump's main argument is literally "I was winning and then they counted more and I started losing." 🤷♂️
True. Trump’s main argument is literally “I was winning and then they counted more and I started losing.” 🤷♂️
That's an abridged version. A slightly fuller one would be...
“I was winning and then they expelled the observers, brought out the boxes of ballots from under the table then counted them. Then counted them again. Then counted them again and I started losing. As you can see in the video...”
I get the impression that these laws suits are being filed by people more interested in ingratiating themselves with Trump and his 2024 election run, and picks for cabinet posts should he win
Also, pardons for stuff they are being investigated for.
Texas AG Ken Paxton, Under FBI Investigation, Asks SCOTUS to Overturn the Election
Except none of that actually happened @5thElefant and has been repeatedly debunked by election officials, including Republican ones.
I get the impression that these laws suits are being filed by people more interested in ingratiating themselves with Trump and his 2024 election run, and picks for cabinet posts should he win
I don't think it's to ingratiate themselves with Trump specifically, more to demonstrate their usefulness to the wider Alt-right/Far-right/popularist grifter cause.
What did Tony call it? "Conviction Politics" effectively doing the mental gymnastics and forcing yourself to believe in something, that might not be completely true, in order to more effectively campaign for it. Turning one's political instincts into articles of blind faith...
When 2024 rolls round and a new GOP lead-puppet has been nominated (it won't be Trump) this crop of fervent ****wits will be in the running for a spot on the team. Having proved their general ability to steamroll logic, invent arguments and spin bullshit in the service of a narcissist who will discard and/or throw them under a bus if it is politically expedient...
True. Trump’s main argument is literally “I was winning and then they counted more and I started losing.” 🤷♂️
Trump is also planning to retrospectively correct the result of the 2005 Champions League final, and the 1981 Ashes series.
Can a presidential pardon be overturned?
Fascinating that a Brit would support Trump when he doesn't even have a stake in it.
$8mill has paid for legal cases and the rest goes to paying his campaign debts.
The rest is going somewhere. Its not clear whether its paying his debts though. Several cities, for example, are chasing him for money owed.
it won’t be Trump.
if he’s still alive, it’s almost certain that it will be
Fascinating that a Brit would support Trump when he doesn’t even have a stake in it.
I'll give the same answer as I use when the Trumpers say to me: "Why do you care who the president is? You're a Brit, it's none of your business."
America tells us it is a world-leading superpower and that the president is the "leader of the free world". If that is the case then surely the whole world has a stake in this and should care who the president is.
And one of his final acts is to rush through federal executions. What a truly pathetic excuse for a human being he is.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55236260
The fund raising appeals emanating from team trump are going into a super PAC;
donations > $5k are divided between trump's 2024 campaign and the slush fund.
All donations upto $5k go into the slush fund and trump has absolute discretion about how to spend that.
I see melania has been asking about how much she is entitled to after donny leaves office to set up an office and how many staff etc; the answer is a former first lady is entitled to anything at all - unless former president dies in which case she gets $20k pa as a pension.
That wouldn't keep her in designer clothes and handbags.
Well she be going for a big divorce settlement then.
I’m struggling to remember the last time ANYBODY from Trumps WH team said anything truthful.
They just lie constantly about ridiculously pointless things.
It must just be part of the strategy to trash the press. Deny any truths written in the real media.
I can’t find the quote, but I was reading an interview with an old lawyer of Trumps who stated “Donald believes in the Art of te Lie. Tell a big enough lie, often enough & loud enough and stupid people will believe you”
He has never cared about what the media or educated liberals think. He has persuaded the bottom half of US society that only he will tell them the truth.
Well she be going for a big divorce settlement then.
If she's asking about office support, that suggests the NYT reports about the extent of his wealth were pretty accurate.
They just lie constantly about ridiculously pointless things.
I think that has been a tactic right from start with the 2016 inauguration crowd size lies.
If they just lie about everything, all the time, eventually people get tired of hearing the corrections. The darn librul media gets cast as "Well actually..." whiners.
It's the same modern problem in all politics actually: people want strong binary choices and easy three word solutions they can support on social media. Nuance and detail is seen as a weakness.
Well, it seems as though the lack of evidence about the Dems cheating is irrelevant, because they made voting rules so lax that any cheating is undetectable. Or something.
But a funny thing happened a few hours later. After publishing a tweet in the morning about the "massive evidence of widespread fraud," the president and his controversial lawyer released a court filing making largely the opposite point:
"Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable."
Oh. So the initial claim was Team Trump has evidence of fraud, but the new claim is that the evidence is "undetectable," which is why no one can see it.
To be fair, the Dems say Coronavirus is real but you can't see that.
Well it worked for WMDs
Just to save anyone the trouble of googling it:
18 U.S. Code § 2384: Seditious conspiracy
If I were Biden, I'd let Trump play out his games until Jan 20th then throw the book at him and his cronies when he no longer has the ability to grant pardons...
throw the book at him and his cronies when he no longer has the ability to grant pardons…
The President isn't a law enforcement officer and doesn't direct investigations. He mostly just needs to let the FBI and other agencies do their jobs. Setting up public inquiries to document what happened makes a lot more sense to me than setting out to put people in jail (and yes, I agree, a bunch of Trumpists deserve jail time).
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/01/how-biden-should-investigate-trump/617260/
For Biden personally, as president, the best thing he can do for most of the needed inquiries is simply get out of the way. He has too many other things to contend with. Criminal proceedings require neither his instigation nor his help. There are two tasks, however, where his involvement is essential. One is stemming, and then beginning to reverse, the corrosion of the executive branch. The methodical destruction of the government’s competence and integrity has been nearly invisible but is one of Trump’s most consequential legacies. The second task is launching—but not running or controlling—independent investigations into three national catastrophes: the mismanagement of the coronavirus pandemic, whose toll continues to rise; border policies under which U.S. officials intentionally separated children from their parents, and in more than 600 cases have not been able to reunite them; and purposeful or negligent destruction of the norms of government, the most important being the electoral process, pushing a diverse democracy close to the breaking point.
The President isn’t a law enforcement officer and doesn’t direct investigations.
Agreed, but he can be an enabler by making sure the right people are in charge of the right department(s), either directly or indirectly.
woody2000
Full Member
And one of his final acts is to rush through federal executions. What a truly pathetic excuse for a human being he is.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55236260/blockquote >
I read that and also thought how appalling it was. It also goes against convention apparently, when death penalties are deferred until a new president is installed.
Of all the things you would want to cram into the drying days of your presidency (during a pandemic no less!) his is to kill even more of his own citizens.
It's f****** grotesque.
He should be made to attend and witness every one of those executions
It’s f****** grotesque.
But so very telling of the man's character*, there's a famous case from the late 80's where a group of young balck men were arrested and charged for a grotesque rape in central park, they served something like 30 years each for the crime that it was revealed that they didn't commit. Trump (at the time) released a full page ad in a national newspaper calling for their executions. Only later to be President as they were being released and compensated for wrongful arrest. He refused to apologize for the advert (obviously) saying somewhat lamely in his usual dismissive style "You have people on both sides of that" (whatever that means)
* to the extent that he has one, and a not a loose collection of character flaws
central park five - new york times
It’s the same modern problem in all politics actually: people want strong binary choices and easy three word solutions they can support on social media. Nuance and detail is seen as a weakness.
has this ever not been a problem in politics?
has this ever not been a problem in politics?
I think so. It’s definitely something I’ve noticed has become more pronounced over my lifetime.
No one* wants to read long form in-depth nuanced discussions of a topic any more.
They want short punchy headlines that they can retweet to prove they are right and the other side is wrong.
.
* (see I’m guilty of doing it right here! Obviously it’s not really “no one”. There is still demand but that demand seems to have diminished)
Politics has to compete with a gazillion channels of lowbrow crap broadcast 24hrs a day, and that's just the tellybox; beyond that there are a million distractions in life that are way more exciting than reading detail discussion on policy differences.
And perhaps more problematically, many who would read in some detail are being fed their "news" from some very poisonous opinion mouthpiece outlets. The drop in quality from traditional media outlets is noticable.
But I think people have always wanted easy answers to stuff they don't understand.
@nickc - There is a Netflix dramatisation of this, a harrowing but worthwhile watch. 'When they see us'
I read that and also thought how appalling it was. It also goes against convention apparently, when death penalties are deferred until a new president is installed.
Its partly an aspect of trump's cruel streak - he's genuinely thrilled by the idea of people being harmed or killed at his behest.
But its also part of the republican rhetoric that started with Newt Gingrich.
At a time when Reagan would tell his campaign teams the 'We don't have enemies, only opponents' Gingrich would stand in front of C-Span cameras in an otherwise empty Congress and launch lengthy tirades at democrat opponents - accusing any of all of, basically - treason. Viewers wouldn't know the person he was attacking wasn't in the room because the C-SPAN feed only broadcast the person talking. Gingrich would effectively provide all new republican congressmen with a vocabulary book - ways to frame all discussion and debate as the other side being enemies, unpatriotic, traitors, communists and so on.
Trump hasn't only started rushing through executions he's trying to instate death by firing squad. This is about the story that the other side are traitors. While these aren't people being executed for their political beliefs but the signal that people should be.
Really hope we get that SC decision today. 'Much easier'?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1337385736530780161
Still, another admission that Biden is taking over in January- "the biden administration WILL BE"
Still, another admission that Biden is taking over in January- “the biden administration WILL BE”
Yes, it's interesting that, isn't it? Particularly in relation to this previous comment on here.
“Conviction Politics” effectively doing the mental gymnastics and forcing yourself to believe in something
Seems like he's not fully down to drink his own Kool-Aid. Like... almost as if... he knows it's all nonsense.
Its partly an aspect of trump’s cruel streak – he’s genuinely thrilled by the idea of people being harmed or killed at his behest.
I'm wondering how you know this?