Trump riot developments

mcmurtry66

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 14, 2019
9,692
7,705
113
Shouldn't the attorneys that filed those bogus lawsuits without evidence get sanctioned?

I believe I read that one state government that got dragged into one of these frivolous election suits initiated a proceeding to recover its attorneys (which is proper too), but I thought state bar associations take action directly against the attorneys who file such crap.
Attorneys fees are awarded by contract or statute. Most of the cases were dismissed early on. I trust the states counties courts involved will be fine
 

UncleMark

Hall of Famer
Sep 1, 2001
22,341
20,610
113
You dont and have, never had the stones to do anything in your life but be a worthless moderator on a sports message board and be a d*ck. I know tons of people that aspire to that lofty goal, not really

You should be glad I haven't achieved that lofty goal, yet.
 

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
8,685
3,828
113
Uh....it at least warrants inquiry. The chances of that happening are 1 in 1024. That definitely warrants inquiry imo. Js
Uh, no, actually, it's a recognized, legitimate possible outcome (as your post acknowledges). It can happen without fraud or cheating.

Without some evidence of fraud or cheating, a person has no reason to conduct an "inquiry" that isn't based on his disappointment with the result. Sound familiar?
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory

MyTeamIsOnTheFloor

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2001
47,693
20,821
113
Duckburg
Shouldn't the attorneys that filed those bogus lawsuits without evidence get sanctioned?

I believe I read that one state government that got dragged into one of these frivolous election suits initiated a proceeding to recover its attorneys (which is proper too), but I thought state bar associations take action directly against the attorneys who file such crap.
Check with your boy Goat. He’s all up to speed on how to threaten and file ethics charges with state bar associations.

But even though many cases are dismissed under Rule 12 (“even if you accept the plaintiff’s factual allegations as true, they fail to state a claim”) not every lawsuit that gets dismissed is “frivolous” or “bad faith” for purposes of sanctioning lawyers. Also, losers pay “costs” - not attorneys fees - routinely.

Lots of cases are filed based on “I FEEL I was done wrong” - but the lawyers are not sanctioned for giving voice to the wrong.

The policy decision was made hundreds of years ago - let them bitch at the courthouse so they don’t shoot it out in the street.

And if you need to use math and computer experts to “prove” a case is bullshit, no court is gonna sanction anybody.

“I didn’t get what I want” and “I don’t like them” isn’t going anywhere.
 

MyTeamIsOnTheFloor

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2001
47,693
20,821
113
Duckburg
Uh, no, actually, it's a recognized, legitimate possible outcome (as your post acknowledges). It can happen without fraud or cheating.

Without some evidence of fraud or cheating, a person has no reason to conduct an "inquiry" that isn't based on his disappointment with the result. Sound familiar?
If it’s more than 2 standard deviations from the 50-50, the courts will require evidence as to why - at least in cases like hiring/firing stats. Might even switch the burden of proof.

I don’t know if 10-0 qualifies. Probably too small a sample. And I ain’t doing the math. But for Bubba and them on the jury, it might not pass the smell test (juries hate math).
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,289
8,275
113
The states have different vote counting procedures. Trump clearly and legally lost the election. Once my fellow Republicans acknowledge that reality we could possibly regroup and rid the party of Trumpism. It’s badly needed.
Annoying superfluous bs aloha. The election challenges do us no good. The Jan 6 commission does us no good. Just get on with governance and let the stink of trump and all that attends wear off.

I knew this was going to linger once the lawsuits started piling up - lawsuits that had zero chance of ever having the relief sought granted.

Time to move on
The 2020 election could never be resolved by the courts. Trump and his advisors made a huge mistake by taking that route. He should never have gone there. There was simply no way for any court order a new election or meaningful recount.

But that isn’t to say that the 2020 election didn’t have issues that should be examined. I think Trump poisoned the well with his “stop the steal” B.S. We definitely need the type of voter integrity measures being considered in various GOP states. Nothing is more important than confidence in legit elections. We can never get rid of all election misconduct, bet we can at least make it more difficult and easier to discover. We all all over cyber security but don’t think security matters when it comes to elections? This is nuts.
 

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,992
8,790
113
The 2020 election could never be resolved by the courts. Trump and his advisors made a huge mistake by taking that route. He should never have gone there. There was simply no way for any court order a new election or meaningful recount.

But that isn’t to say that the 2020 election didn’t have issues that should be examined. I think Trump poisoned the well with his “stop the steal” B.S. We definitely need the type of voter integrity measures being considered in various GOP states. Nothing is more important than confidence in legit elections. We can never get rid of all election misconduct, bet we can at least make it more difficult and easier to discover. We all all over cyber security but don’t think security matters when it comes to elections? This is nuts.
It didn't need to be resolved by the courts because it was a free and fair election, devoid of widespread fraud (as per Attorney General Barr) and not particularly close. Trump and his team went the litigation route because they were hoping for at least a couple of wins that they could then leverage to cast doubt on the entire process and the ultimate outcome. The strategy backfired as they went 0 for 40. Maybe, in his retirement, Trump could host a reboot of "The Biggest Loser."
 

Cortez88

All-Big Ten
Jan 7, 2017
3,521
4,095
113
The 2020 election could never be resolved by the courts. Trump and his advisors made a huge mistake by taking that route. He should never have gone there. There was simply no way for any court order a new election or meaningful recount.

But that isn’t to say that the 2020 election didn’t have issues that should be examined. I think Trump poisoned the well with his “stop the steal” B.S. We definitely need the type of voter integrity measures being considered in various GOP states. Nothing is more important than confidence in legit elections. We can never get rid of all election misconduct, bet we can at least make it more difficult and easier to discover. We all all over cyber security but don’t think security matters when it comes to elections? This is nuts.
Election security and integrity are very important. However, few if any of the measures enacted by GOP led states after 2020 seek to actually address those issues. If security and integrity were so important to those efforts, shouldn’t they be looking at states like your Colorado that does secure and inclusive elections? Simply restricting who votes does almost nothing for actual security.
 

MyTeamIsOnTheFloor

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2001
47,693
20,821
113
Duckburg
It didn't need to be resolved by the courts because it was a free and fair election, devoid of widespread fraud (as per Attorney General Barr) and not particularly close. Trump and his team went the litigation route because they were hoping for at least a couple of wins that they could then leverage to cast doubt on the entire process and the ultimate outcome. The strategy backfired as they went 0 for 40. Maybe, in his retirement, Trump could host a reboot of "The Biggest Loser."
As a Libertarian outsider, who looked at more than Trump/anti-Trump issues, it seemed to me that “the election” was decided by one state - Georgia. So it was very close.

The nation needs people to stop lying to themselves first, then stop lying to others. Be a leader. Start the stop.
 

TommyCracker

Hall of Famer
Mar 18, 2004
13,656
10,100
113
As a Libertarian outsider, who looked at more than Trump/anti-Trump issues, it seemed to me that “the election” was decided by one state - Georgia. So it was very close.

The nation needs people to stop lying to themselves first, then stop lying to others. Be a leader. Start the stop.

Georgia has 16 electoral votes.

Even if Georgia was red, Biden still has 290 (20 more than needed).

So no, Georgia didn't make or break the election. The election wasn't that close by the electoral college and definitely by the popular vote, which is where the stop the steal conspiracies turn into clown shows since every state is its own entity with its own voting procedures.

For the conspiracy to work you need a constant, which you have none.

You tried with the Dominion nonsense but yeah, they are just counting machines. When paper ballots were audited in recounts, nothing changed.

As far as reestablishing voter integrity, of course everyone is for that.

Problem is again, you're using that blanket statement as a shield to pass voter restriction laws. There's very little 'voter integrity' in what's being proposed.

Texas includes stuff like restricted hours, no carpooling or busing...dumb stuff like that.

Ya see, Houston is a very blue and very diverse population. If we can restrict mail in voting on top of lessoning the hours that polls are open while restricting carpooling and bussing.....well that doesn't impact people that live in bum f ville, TX, but it hinders a major metropolitan area like Houston.

So just stop pissing on our backs and telling us it's raining.

Everyone who follows this knows exactly what the intention is.

If you want to build more credibility in elections the first step is to stop lying to your constituents.

I will add, it's going to crack me up Trumpicans stop voting because of republican voting conspiracies.

That's on you.
 

MyTeamIsOnTheFloor

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2001
47,693
20,821
113
Duckburg
Georgia has 16 electoral votes.

Even if Georgia was red, Biden still has 290 (20 more than needed).

So no, Georgia didn't make or break the election. The election wasn't that close by the electoral college and definitely by the popular vote, which is where the stop the steal conspiracies turn into clown shows since every state is its own entity with its own voting procedures.

For the conspiracy to work you need a constant, which you have none.

You tried with the Dominion nonsense but yeah, they are just counting machines. When paper ballots were audited in recounts, nothing changed.

As far as reestablishing voter integrity, of course everyone is for that.

Problem is again, you're using that blanket statement as a shield to pass voter restriction laws. There's very little 'voter integrity' in what's being proposed.

Texas includes stuff like restricted hours, no carpooling or busing...dumb stuff like that.

Ya see, Houston is a very blue and very diverse population. If we can restrict mail in voting on top of lessoning the hours that polls are open while restricting carpooling and bussing.....well that doesn't impact people that live in bum f ville, TX, but it hinders a major metropolitan area like Houston.

So just stop pissing on our backs and telling us it's raining.

Everyone who follows this knows exactly what the intention is.

If you want to build more credibility in elections the first step is to stop lying to your constituents.

I will add, it's going to crack me up Trumpicans stop voting because of republican voting conspiracies.

That's on you.
House
Senate

you people are addicted to Trump
 

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,992
8,790
113
As a Libertarian outsider, who looked at more than Trump/anti-Trump issues, it seemed to me that “the election” was decided by one state - Georgia. So it was very close.

The nation needs people to stop lying to themselves first, then stop lying to others. Be a leader. Start the stop.
The Electoral College vote tally was Biden 306, Trump 232. That's not particularly close (in fact, Trump referred to that same split - - when he won in 2016 - - as a "landslide"), and it didn't come down to Georgia (with 16 electoral votes) or any other single swing state.

Maybe you're thinking of control of the Senate. That came down to Georgia and the special election that was held there in early January.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TommyCracker

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
9,010
4,657
113
Why am I not surprised?
Surprised that DANC didn't grasp Steve's sarcasm, or Steve just making a backhanded compliment on the entertainment value DANC provides? DANC even "liked" the post, and clearly, he doesn't know the significance of Steve using "morans"...
So what was it that he said?
Well for starters, standing in front of the WH, he told the crowd he would go with them to the Capitol. Though to be fair, we do have video showing the extremists (Proud boys, Oathkeepers etc...) sending people to the Capitol before Trump mentioned it. But that's because they had already planned on doing so...
 

LifeLong_IU77

Benchwarmer
Silver Member
May 16, 2021
257
181
43
Surprised that DANC didn't grasp Steve's sarcasm, or Steve just making a backhanded compliment on the entertainment value DANC provides? DANC even "liked" the post, and clearly, he doesn't know the significance of Steve using "morans"...

Well for starters, standing in front of the WH, he told the crowd he would go with them to the Capitol. Though to be fair, we do have video showing the extremists (Proud boys, Oathkeepers etc...) sending people to the Capitol before Trump mentioned it. But that's because they had already planned on doing so...
Oh....so it was happening before "Trump incited" them to do so?...hmm. I believe I also remember him saying they should go home. Like I said....just more democratic party bs to keep what they perceive to be a threat to their way of life,on the sidelines.
 

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
9,010
4,657
113
That's the case when it comes to Trump. All he's doing is questioning how the election was conducted by stopping the vote count when he's ahead and then the tranches of votes release miraculously are nearly all for Biden.

In your world, that's not challenging the election - it's only questioning how it was conducted.

'crazy liberal commie bedwetter'. That's a pretty accurate description.
At some point just repeating nonsense already refuted by facts just makes you look ridiculous...

No one "stopped" counting votes because Trump was ahead. That was the plan from team Trump all along, to make that bogus claim and it's why he made that ridiculous foray into the East Room at 3 am to claim victory. Their game plan was to claim victory before mail-in ballots were counted in states like PA, AZ, and MI where GOP Legislatures INSISTED that mail-in ballots be counted last...

Each state KNEW how many early votes/mail-in votes they had received. The mail/early votes in FL where votes were tabulated daily and showed Biden had a huge lead gave Team Trump a very solid indication on how that vote would go in states like MI, WI, PA, and even a state like AZ. If early vote put Biden ahead in a reliable state like FL, Team Trump knew they would be behind in those other 4 states (and possibly GA as well) if early vote results were released first.

We've repeatedly shown you that Dems wanted mail/early ballots counted first, because they knew that would give Biden an insurmountable lead with Trump hopelessly playing catch up. But Trump knew that as well, that's why in certain states he demanded his GOP Legislators to ensure he had the lead before mail votes could be counted.

Stupid and or gullible people claiming ad nauseum that it was somehow "illegal" to count votes that were mailed in before the election because they don't grasp the difference between voting and counting votes already submitted is exactly what Trump counted on. You're coming thru for them like a Champ, making the same ridiculous argument over 6 mos following the end of the election. Congrats?

 

TommyCracker

Hall of Famer
Mar 18, 2004
13,656
10,100
113
Oh....so it was happening before "Trump incited" them to do so?...hmm. I believe I also remember him saying they should go home. Like I said....just more democratic party bs to keep what they perceive to be a threat to their way of life,on the sidelines.
Curious, what is the democrat way of life that is on the sidelines?

Cuz I'm a Dem and I have no plans or desires to turn us into a communistic state economy. I'm pretty down with capitalism in general matter of fact along with that whole life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I just think we should take a little better care of our own (ya know like not having to file for bankruptcy because of a major health crisis) and stop imposing and taking advantage of others.

You know that whole life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness thingy.

But continue on being scared by whatever crazy ass media you turn too since we all know you aren't a sheep that falls for the so called fake news. You get yours from the dark parts of the web which is much more legitimate right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bowlmania

IU_Hickory

Senior
Aug 29, 2017
2,677
2,424
113
Oh....so it was happening before "Trump incited" them to do so?...hmm. I believe I also remember him saying they should go home. Like I said....just more democratic party bs to keep what they perceive to be a threat to their way of life,on the sidelines.

Yea, he told them to go home reluctantly after many people had been telling him to do so for a while. That was well after the attack on the Capital began.

Better than nothing I guess but too late.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,289
8,275
113
Election security and integrity are very important. However, few if any of the measures enacted by GOP led states after 2020 seek to actually address those issues. If security and integrity were so important to those efforts, shouldn’t they be looking at states like your Colorado that does secure and inclusive elections? Simply restricting who votes does almost nothing for actual security.
I have no idea what you are talking about.

Managing the restrictions about who votes is absolutely a security measure. Not everyone who lives here has the right to vote.
 

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
9,010
4,657
113
Oh....so it was happening before "Trump incited" them to do so?...hmm. I believe I also remember him saying they should go home. Like I said....just more democratic party bs to keep what they perceive to be a threat to their way of life,on the sidelines.
He said they should go home hours AFTER they were at the Capitol, after much cajoling from saner voices. He certainly urged them to walk to the Capitol after his speech...

My point is that the true insurrectionists were already intent on heading to the Capitol. It was the mob that Trump further incited, the people that largely did NOT come to DC with plans to attack the Capitol but were just swept up in the fervor of the moment, including Trump's speech... No one's accusing him of Planning it...

If you think that Trump was not indirectly involved then you should be in favor of a bipartisan Commission with equal representation (something Benghazi could have only wished for) to determine what he said publicly and privately. In other words a chance to vindicate himself...Trump's always been about Trump- Jan 6 was no different...

Let's let McCarthy swear that what he told Rep Beutler about Trump's indifference towards the riot is a lie. McCarthy said one thing to Beutler in Jan/Feb and Beutler went public. Now after talking with Trump McCarthy wants to claim the conversation never occurred. So lets have an impartial commission take testimony from the two GOP Reps from CA and WA respectively, and see which one sticks to their story under penalty of perjury. My $$ is on Herrera Beutler

"In recent tweets and a statement, Herrera Beutler said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., spoke with Trump as a mob of his supporters was storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 and that the president not only seemed unconcerned about the riot but refused to do anything to stop the siege."

Herrera Beutler, 42, one of 10 House Republicans to vote for Trump's impeachment on a charge of inciting the attack, said in a statement that McCarthy had told her that when he reached Trump by phone as the Capitol was breached, McCarthy "asked him to publicly and forcefully call off the riot."

"According to the six-term congresswoman, Trump initially tried to blame the attack on leftist members of antifa. When McCarthy insisted the mob was comprised of the president supporters, Trump told the top House Republican, "Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are."


Are you telling us you really don't think we need to know whether it's Beutler or McCarthy who is lying?
 

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,992
8,790
113
Yea, he told them to go home reluctantly after many people had been telling him to do so for a while. That was well after the attack on the Capital began.

Better than nothing I guess but too late.
"So go home. We love you. You're very special."

And, yeah, this was at 5:00 or so, way after the fact, if I remember correctly.
 

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,992
8,790
113
He said they should go home hours AFTER they were at the Capitol, after much cajoling from saner voices. He certainly urged them to walk to the Capitol after his speech...

My point is that the true insurrectionists were already intent on heading to the Capitol. It was the mob that Trump further incited, the people that largely did NOT come to DC with plans to attack the Capitol but were just swept up in the fervor of the moment, including Trump's speech... No one's accusing him of Planning it...

If you think that Trump was not indirectly involved then you should be in favor of a bipartisan Commission with equal representation (something Benghazi could have only wished for) to determine what he said publicly and privately. In other words a chance to vindicate himself...Trump's always been about Trump- Jan 6 was no different...

Let's let McCarthy swear that what he told Rep Beutler about Trump's indifference towards the riot is a lie. McCarthy said one thing to Beutler in Jan/Feb and Beutler went public. Now after talking with Trump McCarthy wants to claim the conversation never occurred. So lets have an impartial commission take testimony from the two GOP Reps from CA and WA respectively, and see which one sticks to their story under penalty of perjury. My $$ is on Herrera Beutler

"In recent tweets and a statement, Herrera Beutler said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., spoke with Trump as a mob of his supporters was storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 and that the president not only seemed unconcerned about the riot but refused to do anything to stop the siege."

Herrera Beutler, 42, one of 10 House Republicans to vote for Trump's impeachment on a charge of inciting the attack, said in a statement that McCarthy had told her that when he reached Trump by phone as the Capitol was breached, McCarthy "asked him to publicly and forcefully call off the riot."

"According to the six-term congresswoman, Trump initially tried to blame the attack on leftist members of antifa. When McCarthy insisted the mob was comprised of the president supporters, Trump told the top House Republican, "Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are."


Are you telling us you really don't think we need to know whether it's Beutler or McCarthy who is lying?
The two leading congressional Republicans, McConnell and McCarthy, said in January that Trump was responsible for what happened on January 6. (They actually had balls for a few days). There's no way for the Trump apologists to sugarcoat that.

Then there's this from Trump: "Big protest in DC on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!"
And this (on 1/6): "It's time to take back our country, and you'll never take back our country with weakness!"
And, of course, this - - on 1/6 and countless times before and since: "You don't concede when there's theft involved. The election was stolen from me! We will not take it anymore!"
 

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
8,685
3,828
113
The 2020 election could never be resolved by the courts. Trump and his advisors made a huge mistake by taking that route. He should never have gone there. There was simply no way for any court order a new election or meaningful recount.

But that isn’t to say that the 2020 election didn’t have issues that should be examined. I think Trump poisoned the well with his “stop the steal” B.S. We definitely need the type of voter integrity measures being considered in various GOP states. Nothing is more important than confidence in legit elections. We can never get rid of all election misconduct, bet we can at least make it more difficult and easier to discover. We all all over cyber security but don’t think security matters when it comes to elections? This is nuts.​
This part of your post is something I agree with and tried to describe yesterday:

"The 2020 election could never be resolved by the courts. Trump and his advisors made a huge mistake by taking that route. He should never have gone there. There was simply no way for any court order a new election or meaningful recount."​

The Trump election challenges in various courts (without evidence and with no apparent effort to obtain any) were intentionally doomed to failure; courts like to see actual evidence, and there wasn't any then (there may never be). Although the several states each have different procedures for recounts, it looked like the Trump campaign skipped the recount procedures right off the bat and fast-forwarded immediately to claim "fraud" in court filings with no evidence. Who knows -- maybe the Trump campaign didn't have the right to seek recounts in all those states, but it never explained this. Still, the Trump campaign claimed to be the only knowledgable on this subject and really hasn't flipped a Royal Flush to prove its point.

Surprise, surprise. (Psst -- it's Republicans).
 

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
8,685
3,828
113
It didn't need to be resolved by the courts because it was a free and fair election, devoid of widespread fraud (as per Attorney General Barr) and not particularly close. Trump and his team went the litigation route because they were hoping for at least a couple of wins that they could then leverage to cast doubt on the entire process and the ultimate outcome. The strategy backfired as they went 0 for 40. Maybe, in his retirement, Trump could host a reboot of "The Biggest Loser."
Plus, the elections in several of those key states were administered by (wait for it) Republicans !!

Almost all the statewide officials in Georgia are (hmmm, let me think).Republicans !!

Trumpies are claiming that all those Republican Georgia state officials stole the election from Republican Trump and handed it to Democrat Biden. Sounds like reality, right?
 

LifeLong_IU77

Benchwarmer
Silver Member
May 16, 2021
257
181
43
Yea, he told them to go home reluctantly after many people had been telling him to do so for a while. That was well after the attack on the Capital began.

Better than nothing I guess but too late.
Agreed,but the fact that it was happening before the comments were made that supposedly "incited" the crowd,just shows that it's more bs.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: IU_Hickory

IU_Hickory

Senior
Aug 29, 2017
2,677
2,424
113
Agreed,but the fact that it was happening before the comments were made that supposedly "incited" the crowd,just shows that it's more bs.

He incited it, they marched on the Capital while trump watched gleefully on tv and hours later finally told them to go home.

That timeline is not bs. Trump inciting it and trump trying to get them to go home were 2 different events.
 

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
9,010
4,657
113
First of all,I'm not a Trump supporter. I am however,100% against all this fake politically correct bs,and the stupid people who believe what the TV tells them instead of being able to think and deduce the relevant information for themselves. I'm a supporter of holding people responsible for their actions,instead of making them a victim and status symbols for other morons who think everything should be given to them instead of getting up and busting their ass everyday to achieve something for themselves. People supporting the democratic party are helping to destroy this country. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Think sheep.
For not being a "trump supporter" you certainly have every false stereotype and Trumpist talking point down cold. And you managed to include them all in a single post. I'm impressed...
Oh....so it was happening before "Trump incited" them to do so?...hmm. I believe I also remember him saying they should go home. Like I said....just more democratic party bs to keep what they perceive to be a threat to their way of life,on the sidelines.
Agreed,but the fact that it was happening before the comments were made that supposedly "incited" the crowd,just shows that it's more bs.
No, it shows that even normal folks can get swept up in a maelstrom of frenzy when they resort to cult status. There was definitely a dedicated cadre of extremists that had a plan and agenda which preceded events of Jan 6. But if that had remained the story of Jan 6, then we'd likely be looking at 50 or so arrests, not 500+...

But the fact that the plotters actually moved towards the Capitol an hour or two before the main group arrived does NOT absolve Trump of stirring up the main group who likely had not been privy to the actual planning of the incident...

Jordan Klepper captured both the spontaneous nature of the event from the main mob sparked by Trump, Rudy, Jr, and others as well as the early movement from groups who had planned a much more violent show of force at the Capitol from the outset. Here is his footage from the riot, which occurred when the emboldened mob arrived at the Capitol following the end of the "official event...


But here is the background video which he shot at the Capitol earlier prior to the mob arriving. When he noticed the Proud Boys marching en masse as the "official" rally was still ongoing, he followed them. That meant he was in the perfect position to be outside the Capitol with the early birds between 10:30-11 am and be able to witness the arrival of the mob from the official rally which occurred more after the noon hour...

Trump clearly didn't incite the Proud Boys to march to the Capitol and break-in that was preplanned, and they left on that mission while the official rally was going on. But he is responsible for whipping the mob that was not part of the planned operation into a spontaneous frenzy which resulted in many of these people joining in on Trump's plea to walk to the Capitol, and in fact, ending up inside and in jail...

Had the scene at the Capitol remained isolated to extremists like the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers, who had a clear agenda that would have been one thing. As you can see from the video the early crowd at the Capitol is loud but manageable.

But as the official rally ended and frenzied people from there joined the growing group at the Capitol, that is when the situation that resulted in 500 arrests became a reality. Klepper was right there and he does a great job of documenting how much more unruly things got as the whipped-up mob arrived...
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,371
15,740
113
Math classes taught me if you flip a coin that comes up heads 10 times in a row, it may be unusual but there's no reason to call it an "anomaly" and suggest it's suspicious.
Yeah, well, voting is not flipping a coin.

You really can't be this ignorant, can you?

How many times did you take M118 before you passed? Of did you pass?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,371
15,740
113
The states have different vote counting procedures. Trump clearly and legally lost the election. Once my fellow Republicans acknowledge that reality we could possibly regroup and rid the party of Trumpism. It’s badly needed.
Yes, the ones with the voting anomolies have different procedures. The ones with no report anomolies counted votes as they came in.

Trump is the reason the party is as strong as it is. After over 3 decades of Neo-Cons running the show, there was little difference between Democrats and Republicans.

What don't you like about Trump, other than he sends out mean tweets after midnight? His arrogance? How is he any more arrogant than any other politician in DC? Is he crude and chases women? Again, welcome to DC.

On the other hand, he did what he said he was going to do and didn't need speechwriters to help him craft his policies. He got the economy roaring, raised real wages for the middle class, brought black unemployment to a record low, shut down an endless war in Afghanistan, checked the Russians in Syria and stopped their aggression in Ukraine, and punished China for patent and copywright theft. I'd say the the 4 years from 2017 to 2021 were better than the Obama years, by far.

But yeah, he sends mean tweets.

If you're waiting for Republicans to dump Trump, you'll be waiting a mighty long time.
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,371
15,740
113
He said they should go home hours AFTER they were at the Capitol, after much cajoling from saner voices. He certainly urged them to walk to the Capitol after his speech...

My point is that the true insurrectionists were already intent on heading to the Capitol. It was the mob that Trump further incited, the people that largely did NOT come to DC with plans to attack the Capitol but were just swept up in the fervor of the moment, including Trump's speech... No one's accusing him of Planning it...

If you think that Trump was not indirectly involved then you should be in favor of a bipartisan Commission with equal representation (something Benghazi could have only wished for) to determine what he said publicly and privately. In other words a chance to vindicate himself...Trump's always been about Trump- Jan 6 was no different...

Let's let McCarthy swear that what he told Rep Beutler about Trump's indifference towards the riot is a lie. McCarthy said one thing to Beutler in Jan/Feb and Beutler went public. Now after talking with Trump McCarthy wants to claim the conversation never occurred. So lets have an impartial commission take testimony from the two GOP Reps from CA and WA respectively, and see which one sticks to their story under penalty of perjury. My $$ is on Herrera Beutler

"In recent tweets and a statement, Herrera Beutler said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., spoke with Trump as a mob of his supporters was storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 and that the president not only seemed unconcerned about the riot but refused to do anything to stop the siege."

Herrera Beutler, 42, one of 10 House Republicans to vote for Trump's impeachment on a charge of inciting the attack, said in a statement that McCarthy had told her that when he reached Trump by phone as the Capitol was breached, McCarthy "asked him to publicly and forcefully call off the riot."
S
"According to the six-term congresswoman, Trump initially tried to blame the attack on leftist members of antifa. When McCarthy insisted the mob was comprised of the president supporters, Trump told the top House Republican, "Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are."


Are you telling us you really don't think we need to know whether it's Beutler or McCarthy who is lying?
Serious question - do you think anyone actually reads your posts past the 3rd or 4th line?
 

cosmickid

All-American
Oct 23, 2009
9,010
4,657
113
And I've posted this before. But you don't want to read what I post because it goes against your little fantasy world. You think a court of appeals is ruling on the huge statistical improbabilites that occurred? You have no idea how the legal system works.

  1. An update in Michigan listed as of 6:31AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 141,258 votes for Joe Biden and 5,968 votes for Donald Trump
  2. An update in Wisconsin listed as 3:42AM Central Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 143,379 votes for Joe Biden and 25,163 votes for Donald Trump
  3. A vote update in Georgia listed at 1:34AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump
  4. An update in Michigan listed as of 3:50AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 54,497 votes for Joe Biden and 4,718 votes for Donald Trump


I realize math is hard for leftists and drama queens.
And I've posted this before. But you don't want to read what I post because it goes against your little fantasy world. You think a court of appeals is ruling on the huge statistical improbabilites that occurred? You have no idea how the legal system works.

  1. An update in Michigan listed as of 6:31AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 141,258 votes for Joe Biden and 5,968 votes for Donald Trump
  2. An update in Wisconsin listed as 3:42AM Central Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 143,379 votes for Joe Biden and 25,163 votes for Donald Trump
  3. A vote update in Georgia listed at 1:34AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump
  4. An update in Michigan listed as of 3:50AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 54,497 votes for Joe Biden and 4,718 votes for Donald Trump


I realize math is hard for leftists and drama queens.
This is truly a bizarre post. First off if you go to the link you see that the whole thing is a blog post from some guy connected with something called the vote integrity project. While that's a nice, non-partisan name, it actually appears to be connected with the Heritage Foundation. Not just a wacky right-wing media site, but an actual organ of the GOP the Heritage Foundation. So I'm not sure how much weight any of us should attribute to it's non-partisan nature...

And here's the thing the piece only got 72 likes (people who strongly agreed with the premise), but also inspired 2500 comments, which indicates the "factual conclusions" it seeks to draw are far from factual to most people. A lot of the comments pointed out that the math is extremely suspect, and that in a place like MI (for example) the Detroit dump reflected in the numbers is actually higher than Trump received in 2016, and exceeds how well Romney and McCain did in Detroit as well...

I don't even understand the point you're trying to make, and there is no context for what the various updates mean or why you feel they're unusual. Again the votes counted on Nov 4th are for the most part going to represent mail/early voting, and that OVERWHELMINGLY favored Biden almost universally. For example in PA for example Biden won 75% of the votes cast by mail, and that is irrespective of whether a particular County voted overall for Biden or Trump. So the type of margins provided by these updates are well in keeping with overall trends... Here is an analysis from 538, on exactly how MANY people voted by mail...

"We may have seen it coming, but now we know for sure: The coronavirus pandemic made the 2020 election look different from any other election in recent memory. Due to the massive expansion of mail voting, a staggering number of Americans cast their ballots before Election Day. And due to then-President Donald Trump’s false claims that mail voting would lead to election fraud, a huge partisan gap emerged between ballots cast by mail and ballots cast on Election Day.

First, the share of voters casting mail ballots far exceeded that of any other recent national election, and the share of voters who reported going to a polling place on Election Day dropped to its lowest point in at least 30 years.
According to preliminary findings from the 2020 Survey on the Performance of American Elections, a poll of 18,200 registered voters run by MIT political scientist Charles Stewart III, 46 percent of 2020 voters voted by mail or absentee — up from 21 percent in 2016, which at the time was considered high. Only 28 percent of people reported voting on Election Day — less than half of the 60 percent who did so in 2016. In-person early voting also reached a modern high (26 percent), although the change from 2016 (when it was 19 percent) was less dramatic."

I'd have to do more research to confirm it for sure, but I'm pretty confident that NONE of the 4 examples of "questionable updates" you referenced contained anything other than early/mail vote results. We've pointed out repeatedly that Trump was DESPERATE not to have those votes counted first, and the sheer disparity in the respective Biden/Trump totals tells you WHY that was.

There was no way Trump could carry on the facade of being ahead or even having a shot if the full extent of how badly he lost the early/mail vote was public knowledge while he was trying to convince his followers that he won. He was beaten BEFORE election day because the turnout on election day was at near-record lows and he needed the exact oppsite to occur...
 

DANC

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
11,371
15,740
113
This is truly a bizarre post. First off if you go to the link you see that the whole thing is a blog post from some guy connected with something called the vote integrity project. While that's a nice, non-partisan name, it actually appears to be connected with the Heritage Foundation. Not just a wacky right-wing media site, but an actual organ of the GOP the Heritage Foundation. So I'm not sure how much weight any of us should attribute to it's non-partisan nature...

And here's the thing the piece only got 72 likes (people who strongly agreed with the premise), but also inspired 2500 comments, which indicates the "factual conclusions" it seeks to draw are far from factual to most people. A lot of the comments pointed out that the math is extremely suspect, and that in a place like MI (for example) the Detroit dump reflected in the numbers is actually higher than Trump received in 2016, and exceeds how well Romney and McCain did in Detroit as well...

I don't even understand the point you're trying to make, and there is no context for what the various updates mean or why you feel they're unusual. Again the votes counted on Nov 4th are for the most part going to represent mail/early voting, and that OVERWHELMINGLY favored Biden almost universally. For example in PA for example Biden won 75% of the votes cast by mail, and that is irrespective of whether a particular County voted overall for Biden or Trump. So the type of margins provided by these updates are well in keeping with overall trends... Here is an analysis from 538, on exactly how MANY people voted by mail...

"We may have seen it coming, but now we know for sure: The coronavirus pandemic made the 2020 election look different from any other election in recent memory. Due to the massive expansion of mail voting, a staggering number of Americans cast their ballots before Election Day. And due to then-President Donald Trump’s false claims that mail voting would lead to election fraud, a huge partisan gap emerged between ballots cast by mail and ballots cast on Election Day.

First, the share of voters casting mail ballots far exceeded that of any other recent national election, and the share of voters who reported going to a polling place on Election Day dropped to its lowest point in at least 30 years.
According to preliminary findings from the 2020 Survey on the Performance of American Elections, a poll of 18,200 registered voters run by MIT political scientist Charles Stewart III, 46 percent of 2020 voters voted by mail or absentee — up from 21 percent in 2016, which at the time was considered high. Only 28 percent of people reported voting on Election Day — less than half of the 60 percent who did so in 2016. In-person early voting also reached a modern high (26 percent), although the change from 2016 (when it was 19 percent) was less dramatic."

I'd have to do more research to confirm it for sure, but I'm pretty confident that NONE of the 4 examples of "questionable updates" you referenced contained anything other than early/mail vote results. We've pointed out repeatedly that Trump was DESPERATE not to have those votes counted first, and the sheer disparity in the respective Biden/Trump totals tells you WHY that was.

There was no way Trump could carry on the facade of being ahead or even having a shot if the full extent of how badly he lost the early/mail vote was public knowledge while he was trying to convince his followers that he won. He was beaten BEFORE election day because the turnout on election day was at near-record lows and he needed the exact oppsite to occur...
ZZZZZzzzzzzzz........ oh, sorry - were you posting something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
8,685
3,828
113
Yeah, well, voting is not flipping a coin.

You really can't be this ignorant, can you?

How many times did you take M118 before you passed? Of did you pass?
Thank you for the silly personal attack.

It shows that I'm doing something right and that you don't have anything important to say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory