Trump is the Perfect Sore Loser

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Bill Huffman, Nov 7, 2020.

Loading...
  1. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    You are confusing me or confused.
    CNN and others called/accused President Trump as Russian Spy, I provided a few examples out of many.
    What was the purpose of this accusations?To unseat President Trump. To show that he didn't win elections fairly because of Russians. I do agree with you on one comment you made that Comey helped Trump.
    Comey called the event a ‘nightmare I can’t awaken from’ “I knew I was totally screwed,” he said of his decision. “Personally, it was disastrous for me. "A lot of people don’t like me."
    Undeniably
    we had 4 years of countless attacks by the left on president Trump.

    Lets hope 2021 will be a year of health, peace and prosperity to all.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2020
  2. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Yes, it's true that Trump was attacked. It is also true that for every attack on Trump he gave back double.

    My comment was referring to your comment, "Yet the left for four years been telling that the 1. last election was fake and that 2. Donald Trump really wasn’t elected." I stated that the statement was false. At least I had never heard such a thing being said. Your response was to say that it was said hundreds if not thousands of times by the left and I needed to just look it up. Well I've followed a lot of news over the past few years, mostly CBS, CNN, BBC, and MSNBC which I think you'd consider all to be left media, I had never heard that and didn't believe it was true. I tried to find something on Google and couldn't find any statements that supported your claim. When I posted that fact you provided references to people on the right telling the same lie, specifically Hannity and Republican Senator Josh Hawley. When it was pointed out that this was not an example of someone on the left saying 1. last election was fake and that 2. Donald Trump really wasn’t elected you countered that Trump was accused of being a Russian spy. This didn't make any sense to me. Being a spy or not has nothing to do with saying that 1. last election was fake and that 2. Donald Trump really wasn’t elected. You then said it was a summary and you would not discuss it further.

    I thought you were admitting that your statement was false. That "Yet the left for four years been telling that the 1. last election was fake and that 2. Donald Trump really wasn’t elected." was a false statement. Then in this thread you said
    "I didn't admit it, its your words you putting in my mouth.
    The examples were provided, especially the ones about calling Trump a Russian Spy."

    So if the statement is true "Yet the left for four years been telling that the 1. last election was fake and that 2. Donald Trump really wasn’t elected." then you should prove it to be true. It shouldn't be hard since you claim that it was said hundreds if not thousands of times. It is not true though.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2020
  3. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Missouri Senator (since 2018) Josh Hawley will join Rep. Mo Brooks' baseless objections to electoral votes. He should know better. Just goes to show that a Yale law degree doesn't guarantee common sense.

    I'll get the popcorn ready.
     
  4. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    I'm sure he knows better. I think he's just playing a part in political kabuki theater.
     
  5. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Indeed, as do so many. There's good reason for the saying that "Politics is just show business for ugly people."
     
    Bill Huffman likes this.
  6. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Bill,
    I thought I explained, that I meant "indirectly saying" While I quoted a republican source. I didn't say literally election was fake, the reason this is indirectly implied by the Dem's I also explained, if Dem's saying Trump is Russian Spy and Russians helped him to steal elections then its the same as to say elections was fake. So yest it has to do with saying what Republicans are saying. Left accused fake news for electing Trump in 2016, so this is why elections are fake.
    That all were widely disseminated through social media and spread by mainstream and partisan news outlets.
    Fake news is a growing threat to democratic elections in the USA and other democracies by relentless targeting of hyper-partisan views.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2020
  7. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Since this is going to be televised, I assume that partially creating these debates on Jan 6th is important for public opinion.
    While I'm sure that biased reporting outlets will talk over to control the damage, or go to commercials and find other ways to control the damage.
    Since many people by now know that there are other sources that will broadcast without interruptions or injecting "expert" opinions the slowly dying partizan media
    will be dealing with loss of ratings and revenue.
    Listening to the subjective, degrading image rich, manipulative language the left media is using, tell me that they are seriously using "slight of hand speak" (miss direction).
    They are concerned that they are loosing control of the message- no facts, subjective name calling is like kid's argument.
    Republican Reps are using facts, the old facts are being replaced with new facts. I think the left is being pressed to match the Reps new facts with new Dems lies.
    The alternate news sources are growing in viewers fast.
    Among people I know increasing % of Dems think elections was stolen. They don't dismiss some of the allegations.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2020
  8. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Oh, Lerner, I ASSURE you there will be EXTENSIVE coverage of the debates in both Houses of Congress. That's EXACTLY why Mitch McConnell DID NOT WANT this vote. He was hoping that he and his fellow Republican Senators could just stroll away from the Trump electoral train wreck and pretend that it didn't happen or that they had nothing to do with it. No dice, boys. You're going to have to stand up and be counted one way or the other and for no good reason since neither the Senate nor especially the House is likely to sustain any objection.
     
  9. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

  10. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    To get the Reps to share their facts not only in both houses but with the viewers, the public is highly important. Even if objections are not sustained.
    Seeds are being planted and captivated. Exposure, visibility and message transmission.
    We will know after the debates how successful the debates were for each side.
    There are multiple goals for the reps. I will be working so will record this historical debates, as I mentioned earlier third such occurrence if it happens since 1887.

    BTW there is new KRAKEN revealed by SP.
     
  11. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    This is not correct.

    First, that is not what Hannity and Republican Senator Josh Hawley said. What they said was very close to Yet the left for four years been telling that the 1. last election was fake and that 2. Donald Trump really wasn’t elected.

    Second, I haven't heard any reports on the left even saying what you claim NOW. That is that the Russians stole the 2016 election. You are once again putting false statements into the mouths of the left. You say this because of the web of lies spun by Donald Trump. I am not calling you a liar. I am saying that Donald Trump and his parrots like Hannity and Republican Senator Josh Hawley are telling a lie. You are just a firm believer in Trump lies. What the left actually says is summarized very well by an article in the New Yorker.

    It first describes the false scenario put forth by Trump in the opening paragraph.

    Donald Trump has adopted many contradictory positions since taking office, but he has been unwavering on one point: that Russia played no role in putting him in the Oval Office. Trump dismisses the idea that Russian interference affected the outcome of the 2016 election, calling it a “made-up story,” “ridiculous,” and “a hoax.” He finds the subject so threatening to his legitimacy that—according to “The Perfect Weapon,” a recent book on cyber sabotage by David Sanger, of the Times—aides say he refuses even to discuss it. In public, Trump has characterized all efforts to investigate the foreign attacks on American democracy during the campaign as a “witch hunt”; in March, he insisted that “the Russians had no impact on our votes whatsoever.”

    Then the article explains what the left actually says instead of the lies above that you believe and the right falsely asserts.

    Few people, including Trump’s opponents, have publicly challenged the widespread belief that no obtainable evidence can prove that Russian interference changed any votes. Democrats, for the most part, have avoided attributing Hillary Clinton’s defeat directly to Russian machinations. They have more readily blamed James Comey, the former F.B.I. director, for reversing Clinton’s thin lead in the final days of the campaign by reopening a criminal investigation into her mishandling of classified e-mails. Many have also expressed frustration with Clinton’s weak performance as a candidate, and with her campaign’s tactical errors. Instead of investigating whether Russia tipped the electoral scales on its own, they’ve focussed on the possibility that Trump colluded with Russia, and that this, along with other crimes, might be exposed by the probe being conducted by the special counsel, Robert Mueller.
    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/01/how-russia-helped-to-swing-the-election-for-trump

    The bottom line is that all evidence indicates that, contrary to Trump lies, Russia did interfere in the 2016 election to try to help Trump. That does not mean that Russia stole the election. It does not mean that Trump was not elected President. It does not even mean that Trump would have lost without Russia's help. The level of the impact that Russia had on the 2016 election is something that we will just never know. I believe that Comey's little announcement of reopening the investigation on the eve of the election probably had a much greater impact on the election than did the Russians, for example.
     
  12. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Right alleges that the evidence has never been refuted, just ignored.
     
  13. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    I guess you're saying that all of the lawyers working on the almost 60 court cases alleging election fraud were so incompetent that they ignored the evidence for their cases! o_O

    Oh crap, I knew I forgot something when preparing my case! Hmm sounds very unlikely Lerner but, I'm not a lawyer. Maybe that is more common than I imagine?

    I predict that January 6 will be very anti climatic for you. The only real purpose of the kabuki theater planned for Jan 6 is to rip off the Trump base for more donations.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2020
  14. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Actually, as Attorney General Barr himself admitted, there's no evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 election. That's just a Trump lie, retold over and over to his die hard supporters. But in a sense, Lerner is not entirely wrong. Lack of evidence was only one of the fatal defects in the dozens of Trump campaign and related lawsuits. The other fatal defect is that the plaintiffs always sought the same remedy for their imagined injuries, that of disenfranchising hundreds of thousands or millions of legitimate voters. No court is going to do that. No court has authority to do that. Such an act would constitute a veto over our democratic process and is utterly opposed to the basic principles of American democracy.
     
  15. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Incidentally, the vice president also has no veto power nor do the Houses of Congress. The text of the Constitution states that the vice president will open and count ALL of the CERTIFIED votes and announce them for counting and the candidate with the majority of votes wins.
     
  16. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Thinking about McConnell's Dilemma, I realized that he might be able to restrict Senator Hawley's theater performance to two hours. All states but Wisconsin got their electoral votes in and certified before the so-called Safe Harbor date. Under the statute as it stands, none but Wisconsin is up for challenge. That's what the Safe Harbor date does.
     
  17. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Lerner is expecting "this historical debates". As if two hours of political posturing theater could somehow expose the evidence when days spent in a court room on almost 60 cases with a judge and two litigates couldn't. It is mind blowing the desperation and detachment from reality that is going on in our country right now!

    Here's a bit of sanity on this coming from GOP lawmaker Adam Kinzinger who chooses to speak the truth. (Hint: President Trump has sent 554 fund raising emails since the November 3rd election)
    https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/12/30/adam-kinzinger-trump-gop-loyalty-newday-vpx.cnn
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2020
  18. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Jan 6th for me will be a working day so I most likely will miss most of the events . The pressure within GOP not to object may prevail and there may not be any debates.
    Jan 6th will be interesting for GA runoff results.
    There is no desperation on the right and never was, this is another miss-characterization by the left. There is anger for ignoring the people and evidence.
    For the voters this was never about the money , this was about saving the USA as we know from falling in to the hands of left that will destroy it beyond recognition.
    This about anti globalism and Chinese sellout.
    Ukraine is increasing the demand including in international EU courts to bring the people who allowed money laundering and escaped, they was 3 billion $$$ back.
    You know who is implicated. They are releasing additional evidence of systematic money laundering by previous Ukrainian president and companies such as Borisma and official communications with the Big guy.
    Here the left press will suppress the international criminal charge, but I guess we will see.
    Radical Dems will fight from within. Maybe this is a show or Saga for you, but people who protest asking questions and why their evidence is ignored.
    Many question if B will survive the rebellion within once criminal charges brought. And if Radical leftist leadership replace the current.
    We see what is happening with de fund police and how NY, SF, Seattle and other cities are deteriorating. The radical left policies are mostly to blame.
     
  19. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    I wonder how it would work, though. Say Michigan is the target. Hawley and Brooks have filed their written objection timely so it gets to the floor and the Houses separate for the two hour debate. I'm no parliamentarian. Would some member or Senator raise a point of order before the debate begins?
     
  20. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Now I read that Senator Hawley intends to challenge one state. That would be Wisconsin then I suppose.
     

Share This Page