My small community certainly wouldn’t feel comfortable with more illegal wanderers butting their way in. Policy decisions make me feel more uncomfortable than personalities. A POTUS who campaigned on bringing the feeling of joy (her party in charge 16 of last 20 years) isn’t going to unite our country without universally accepted joyful policies.
I’ve changed my mind.
- Thread starter snarlcakes
- Start date
The ONLY reason they signed that letter was to influence public opinion prior to the election.
They were afraid of the damage the story was doing to Biden.
Even if they genuinely believed the laptop was Russian disinformation, they had no evidence of that and therefore no reason to publicly say so.
Unless they were attempting to influence the election.
I’ve said it before but that letter arguably did more to influence the election than the Russians could ever have dreamed of doing.
So you’re a mind reader. None of them have said anything of the kind. These were serious people, Republican and Democrat.
I still would like to know what you think would have happened if reported on by more than the NYP, Fox News and social media. Four years later and they’ve found nothing criminal on Joe Biden from it. What could they have done in two weeks or so? This is a serious question. How, exactly, did it influence the election?
Should Trump win it will be quite gratifying to see all 51 have their security clearance’s revoked. Quite satisfying.
Couldn’t happen to a better batch of pieces of shit.
That would never happen. Trump shouldn't have a clearance because he's shown he doesn't give a shit about protecting national security information. In fact, he couldn't get a clearance now, but unfortunately, it comes with the job. If he happened to be elected I'd guarantee he'll get only the access he needs and they'll take all classified documents back from him after briefings. He can't be trusted with them. What a POS.
Vivec won’t ever win a republican primary.
I’d be fine with Haley but she probably wouldn’t do as good against Harris as Trump.
As I said in another thread. I think Republicans are screwed for a long time.
Trump did it to John Brennan and he can do it to the other pieces of filth up to and including Dana Bash’s husband.
I don’t need to be a mind reader, as I explained. There was no physical evidence at all which linked the laptop to the Russians. The only thing they had AT ALL was a belief that it was something the Russians might do. Thats nothing at all. Certainly not a reason to sign a letter saying basically that “it’s Russian disinformation”. They had no way of knowing that.
Look, I’m not saying they shouldn’t have been allowed to do it. I’m just saying let’s see it for what it really was.
It was 51 Washington bureaucrats panicking because the story was damaging to the guy the wanted to win the election.
It was their way of influencing the election.
Irrelevant.
Who is “they” by the way? Trump would be President and Commander in Chief. There is no “they” that should have authority to withhold or determine the manner in which Trump receives information.
Your view of the government is precisely the problem with the executive branch. A shadowy “they” who can undermine a president. It’s unAmerican horseshit. What is your malfunction, “patriot”?
Wrong about what? Not a chance in the world he’d qualify for a security clearance for a government job now.
His staff. Trump is not to be trusted with highly classified information. He can see it, but I guarantee they’ll keep close track of every document. He can’t protect classified information and he’s proven it. We can’t let him put human sources and methods in danger. He’s an untrustworthy POS.
Ah. I am confident Trump will bring in staff as to not undermine him.
Your suggestion reminds me of old Mark Milley. When he went on record saying he called up his Chinese counterpart and said “Don’t worry I’ll give you a heads up should Ol’ Donny get a little crazy”
People have been hung for less. I’m not saying Milley should be hung necessarily. But certainly we can all agree he should spend the rest of his days experiencing the world from the inside of a prison cell. Get him the one next to Fauci so they can engage in their ass play between the bars.
It’s not undermining him. It’s actually following military procedures for classified information. We get briefed or read and then we’re done. The documents are collected and accounted for.
No, I don’t agree with you on Milley, and neither would any jury, military or civilian. What you’re missing from this is that Trump was the loose wire.
If he wins the election he will have access to everything and if anyone withholds info I’d think that’s a huge problem.
He’d get access but that puts sources and methods at risk, to include death. He’s not capable of protecting information like he should be.
Maybe I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant military, CIA, FBI and others would withhold information from Trump if he wins. That sounded like possible criminal offense to me. I didn’t think Alohas of the Military could decide the president couldn’t have sensitive information.
Very tight races, because both platforms were aligned with the countries core values yet just very slightly different would be a great thing for the USA.
The reason for such a tight race in the current environment, is totally different and terrible for the country. It will lead to civil war.
Other than the first 4 years that he did it all perfectly. otherwise I would totally agree with you so we could bo0th be wrong.
No. He’d obviously have access. He wouldn’t if not President, but it comes with the job.
Priceless propaganda. Is that you, is that you Joy Reid? Why are you not stomping the guts out of donald trump? ***full metal jacket credit
Alhoahickory in full force. They must be out of wings today. good god man!
There IS a way to KNOW it. It didn’t happen, genius. If there were ANY evidence or even hint of impropriety, Barr would’ve been all about that $hit. You guys are delusional. There is zero evidence. None. Nada. This has played out in literally dozens of trials and they all ended the same way. Barr has said repeatedly that there is no evidence to support that claim. The state officials of both parties, many of whom are Republicans who themselves voted for Trump and were singled out with praise at his rallies, certified the elections in those states. Trump, Meadows, and others are currently being prosecuted in Arizona state court. They will face the same in GA state court. In ALL of those states, there are members of BOTH parties that count and certify the votes and tallies. You believe things that simply aren’t based in or supported by facts. None of it. Get. A. Grip. He. Lost.
Last edited:
You mean more national intelligence information than he already has? Like the Iran classified materials? The ones that the Saudis wanted to see so badly? The same Saudis that paid $2 BILLION to Kushner less than 2 months after Trump left office? With said documents.
He’s not just a nut. He’s a con man nut who’s beholden to Putin amd would sell anything to anybody. He’s all about himself and nobody but himself. But these geniuses can’t see what’s right in front of them.
But they’ll ignore Comey saying Clinton was under investigation prior to 2016, even while Trump himself (and Paul Manafort) was under investigation as well. How much did that obviously influence that election?As well they should have been. But nobody here read any of Mueller’s report or that there was a ton of smoke (but they used encrypted apps) and that Trump did commit obstruction, but because of DoJ policy, they couldn’t charge him.
It's no mystery why the working class supports Trump - life was much better for them under his Presidency - lowered their taxes, increased their income, kept inflation (and gas prices) low, kept unemployment down, didn't get us into any new wars, etc., etc., etc. And he calls out the nepotism and corruption of the bureaucrats in DC.
Jesus, stop whining. If Kamala is elected, it's on people like you who won't support a Republican nominee who has proven he is good for the country as President.
You guys act like he doesn't have a past record. It's not 2016.
I posted this a couple days ago and got no response from Marv.
Detecting Anomalies in the 2020 US Presidential Election Votes with Benford’s Law
This study applies Benford’s law to detect anomalies in county-level vote data for the 2020 US presidential election. Most prominent distribution violations are
papers.ssrn.com
3. ResultsTables 1 and 2 below present the estimation results for the whole sample and across subsamples based on current election outcome (Democratic and Republican wins) and state category (blue,red, and swing states). In the baseline results for the first-digit test, there are multiple anomalies seemingly detected. For example, all vote counts significantly deviate from Benford’s law in the whole sample and in states won by Democrats. However, only a few are consistent across all estimations and robustness checks. Statistically significant irregularities are observed in all five tests for Democratic vote counts in states won by the Democratic candidate, for Republican vote patterns in safely blue states (such as Massachusetts or California), and, perhaps most importantly, for Democratic votes in key battleground states. Notably, no anomalies are detected for any of the tests in states won by the Republican candidate, and only one out of 15 estimations is significant in safely red states.
4. Conclusion
This study has applied Benford’s law to detect irregularities in county-level voting data for the
2020 US Presidential election. The distribution of digits for voting counts is consistently
anomalous across all estimations and robustness checks for Democrats in states their candidate
has won, including key swing states, and for Republicans in safely blue states. The observed
voting patterns are significantly different from first-digit and two-digit Benford’s law, the
empirical distribution observed in past elections, and Monte Carlo simulated distributions.
The contribution of this piece of research is two-fold. First, it evidences the applicability
of Benford’s law to election analysis and develops a set of novel robustness tests that can be
applied in future studies on the topic. Second, it provides some consistent evidence for
anomalous behaviour of vote counts in the 2020 US Presidential election, most importantly in
key swing states, which potentially warrants further research and academic investigation.
What does the amount of support KH had in the 2020 Presidential primary have to do with the her victories prior to that in California politics? I'll help you out - nothing (which is the same answer to the question "How much does CoH know about California politics?")
You are a moron.I posted this a couple days ago and got no response from Marv.
Detecting Anomalies in the 2020 US Presidential Election Votes with Benford’s Law
This study applies Benford’s law to detect anomalies in county-level vote data for the 2020 US presidential election. Most prominent distribution violations arepapers.ssrn.com
3. ResultsTables 1 and 2 below present the estimation results for the whole sample and across subsamples based on current election outcome (Democratic and Republican wins) and state category (blue,red, and swing states). In the baseline results for the first-digit test, there are multiple anomalies seemingly detected. For example, all vote counts significantly deviate from Benford’s law in the whole sample and in states won by Democrats. However, only a few are consistent across all estimations and robustness checks. Statistically significant irregularities are observed in all five tests for Democratic vote counts in states won by the Democratic candidate, for Republican vote patterns in safely blue states (such as Massachusetts or California), and, perhaps most importantly, for Democratic votes in key battleground states. Notably, no anomalies are detected for any of the tests in states won by the Republican candidate, and only one out of 15 estimations is significant in safely red states.
4. Conclusion
This study has applied Benford’s law to detect irregularities in county-level voting data for the
2020 US Presidential election. The distribution of digits for voting counts is consistently
anomalous across all estimations and robustness checks for Democrats in states their candidate
has won, including key swing states, and for Republicans in safely blue states. The observed
voting patterns are significantly different from first-digit and two-digit Benford’s law, the
empirical distribution observed in past elections, and Monte Carlo simulated distributions.
The contribution of this piece of research is two-fold. First, it evidences the applicability
of Benford’s law to election analysis and develops a set of novel robustness tests that can be
applied in future studies on the topic. Second, it provides some consistent evidence for
anomalous behaviour of vote counts in the 2020 US Presidential election, most importantly in
key swing states, which potentially warrants further research and academic investigation.
