dogbert27 wrote: » It's been said on here that Trump often accuses others of what he is guilty of himself. Because he lost the election nobody is saying to dig in to his votes but for him to win 70 million maybe someone should turn the tables and start investigating voter fraud for Trump votes.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Trump needs to take his tablets along with many of his MAGA supporters with baseball caps and low loader trucks. Worrying in a way that 70 or so million voted for this moron. Will the frenzy dissipate I wonder.
Headshot wrote: » Anyone know how the George races are going at the moment? Be interesting to know do the Dems have any chance?
Water John wrote: » When people find that their generation and the next one will be less well off than the previous one, they are open to be preyed upon.
hirondelle wrote: » Also, I know it isn't at the forefront of people's minds, but the fact that life expectancy in the US is decreasing is another indicator of things not being right in society. A problem his ex-mate Vlad shares with Trump.
mcmoustache wrote: » No. There's a huge segment of the population that's been disinformed by unscrupulous types for decades. Gullibility is a huge problem over there. That crowd will blindly follow the next "cause" that the angry white-grievance media and personalities cook up for them. They went whole hog for an incompetent shyster like Trump. The next one will be a lot smarter.
feargale wrote: » A question for all of you: Suppose Trump were found guilty of serious crimes and his defence pleaded insanity - would you accept the plea?
duploelabs wrote: » Accredited by which exactly doctor, bearing in mind his loose familiarity with the truth. Especially when it comes medical reports
seamus wrote: » Only if independent and qualified medical professionals assessed him fully and agreed with it. You don't just get to plead insanity because you feel like it. It's also not consequence-free. It's basically a plea that "yes, I did these things but I'm not capable of consent or understanding". That typically leads to the individual being held without their consent, and will also allow family members and creditors to start proceedings to take control of their estate on the basis that he's incapable of managing his own affairs. Not only would such a plea end up with Trump under house arrest, he would also find himself shoved into a medium-luxury mental facility somewhere without access to Twitter and unable to hold rallies or media interviews while his "doting" children take control of his empire and his creditors collect on their debts.
Tell me how wrote: » Barr will never run politically. He has zero charisma and seemed to hate being on camera.
Inquitus wrote: » Mitch has about as much Charisma as a month dead dog at the side of the road but it doesn't seem to have hampered his chances!
Nody wrote: » Remember the story making the rounds about Trump's twitter account password being hacked? Well it was true... He used MAGA2020! as the password...
Despite protests and counter-protests, and lawsuits and counterlawsuits—each side accusing the other of attempting to steal an election that is rightfully theirs—Pennsylvania’s election officials certify the result as a miniscule [theoretical in this case] 2,500-vote victory for [Biden], based on the strength of the “overtime” votes counted during the canvassing process. This official certification, of course, is not technically that [Biden] has won Pennsylvania’s electoral votes, but rather than the slate of presidential electors pledged to [Biden] have won, based on the popular vote, the right to serve as the state’s electors. Pennsylvania’s governor so certifies pursuant to state law.15 Also, as required by Congress, the governor sends this “certificate of ascertainment” to the National Archives, thereby notifying the federal government who has been officially appointed the state’s electors.16 These electors then meet on the day appointed by Congress (Monday, December 14) and indeed cast their 20 electoral votes for Warren. These electors then dutifully transmit a certificate of their votes to “the President of the Senate,” as well as sending a copy to the National Archives, both submissions as specified by Congress.17 But this is not all that happens in Pennsylvania during this time. At Trump’s urging, the state’s legislature—where Republicans have majorities in both houses—purports to exercise its authority under Article II of the Constitution to appoint the state’s presidential electors directly. Taking their cue from Trump, both legislative chambers claim that the certified popular vote cannot be trusted because of the blue shift that occurred in overtime. Therefore, the two chambers claim to have the constitutional right to supersede the popular vote and assert direct authority to appoint the state’s presidential electors, so that this appointment is in line with the popular vote tally as it existed on Election Night, which Trump continues to claim is the “true” outcome. The state’s Democratic governor refuses to assent to this assertion of authority by the state’s legislature, but the legislature’s two chambers proclaim that the governor’s assent is unnecessary. They cite early historical practices in which state legislatures appointed presidential electors without any involvement of the state’s governor. 18 They argue that like constitutional amendments, and unlike ordinary legislation, the appointment of presidential electors when undertaken directly by a state legislature is not subject to a gubernatorial veto.19* *19. One could consider the possibility that Pennsylvania’s governor, or judiciary, might attempt to prevent the two chambers of the state’s legislature meeting for this purpose. For this analysis, I shall assume that any such attempt would either not occur or not be successful. At the extreme, the Republican members of the state legislature would likely be able to find a place to assemble, even if it were not the official statehouse even if their meeting otherwise lacked the appearance of an official session of the state’s legislative chambers. Even so, these Republican members of the state legislature could purport to be engaged in an official legislative session, even if meeting in unusual circumstances, and thus could purport to be appointing the state’s presidential electors pursuant to the state legislature’s constitutional authority to do so. The Trump-pledged Republican electors then could assert that they were meeting pursuant to this purported legislative appointment. (Moreover, even if these irregular legislative sessions never occurred, the Trump-pledgedRepublican electors might themselves meet, saying that they would have been appointed by the state’s legislature if the legislature had not unlawfully been denied the opportunity to assemble, and thus their electoral votes should be considered by Congress as valid as if the legislature has successfully met to appoint them.)
TomOnBoard wrote: » The same guy also cracked Trump's password 6 years ago.. At that time, it was "yourefired".. It seems to me he could legitimately re-use that old one now....
Christy42 wrote: » Like with Trump's random cases I would go want proof before deciding this is a story.