quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:. . .

1. I believe fraud did happen, just not on the "massive" scale Trump's team claimed but, just enough in a select few areas.

2. The limited amount of time prevented his team from gathering enough of the right evidence to make a convincing case to SCOTUS.

3. Trump's actions is likely to bring out the fringe elements - on both sides - for 2024.

4. Biden’s actions (and possibly his removal for mental incapacity) will bring out core Republicans in force along with moderate Democrats who just want a job (ie., union members and others who are about to go on unemployment in the next two years.

5. If the first two weeks of Biden are any indication of the next 18 months, there'll be a Republican tidal wave in 2022 just like 1994.

The biggest, I hope, will be tidal wave followed by changes (for 2024) with regards to how the federal elections (legislative and executives branches) which will ensure only those legally allowed to vote do and, an openess of the counting process to possibly include a requirement for live streaming of ALL counting.

I might suggest there will also be increasing fractures in our society caused by political and economic turmoils.

quote:

2. The limited amount of time prevented his team from gathering enough of the right evidence to make a convincing case to SCOTUS

This point is worth elaborating on because it comes up often. SCOTUS is not a trial court except in a few very specific situations - it is an appellate court so the "case" one makes to the SCOTUS is that a lower court got something wrong that the SCOTUS should correct. Cases are made in the trial courts and work their way up. The case that people focus on in this context is Texas v. Pennsylvania where one state sued another, which is one of the few cases where a case can be filed and tried in the SCOTUS. That case was dismissed because the court found that Texas did not have standing to challenge Pennsylvania's election process. The basis for this decision has drawn a lot of criticism because it sounds like a hyper-technical way to dodge the issue but it isn't -- standing is a very real and very important doctrine, and based on my reading of the cases it was correct.

That does not mean there isn't a way for SCOTUS to address the issue: one candidate can sue the other. That is what we saw in Bush v. Gore, which challenged how Florida was applying its laws in the 2000 election and that case made it to the SCOTUS in short order. I haven't heard any cogent explanation why Trump did not sue Biden in Pennsylvania on the same grounds as Texas (and other states) tried to, which would have made sense because there is precedent for doing so and it cures the standing issue.

The point here is that the judicial system is equipped to deal with these issues. I can't say whether they failed because of bad tactical decisions, an absence of proof, or because they were baseless. I have not, however, seen any instance where a meritorious claim was rejected by the court due to politics or corruption.

The system is imperfect and there is fraud in every election, no doubt, and we should address those issues head on. But we will never have zero issues and zero fraud so getting enough votes to overcome those things seems like the highest priority. As long as we have elections with razor-thin margins people will have legitimate concerns about their integrity. It's like holding in football - it happens on virtually every play and that isn't going to change. You can complain about it all you want but if you score enough points it doesn't matter.

Holy Schnike

Even the New York Times is begging Dictator Biden to stop it already with all the executive orders:

Ease Up on the Executive Actions, Joe

I’m wondering if they are already starting to get nervous about this causing them to lose the House and Senate in two years?

quote:

Originally posted by Pyker:

quote:

If you read the indictment, the Agent goes on and on about her vast investigative experience. Of 3 years! When I had 3 years on the job, I did not even rate driving a new patrol car.

I had more time on the station toilet than that in my career.

Genius! Getting paid to do your business at work.

quote:

I’m wondering if they are already starting to get nervous about this causing them to lose the House and Senate in two years?

Whether Trump used EOs or not, this many EOs looks like an admission of weakness. After all, if these are such good ideas, why not go to Congress and get them transformed into legislation? Legislation should be more permanent and indicates that there's broad support among the voters, right?

somebody please hide his pen

They are weak. This is how an illegitimate ruler behaves.

That doesn’t bother me. What bothers me is when Trump signed an EO, the ink wasn’t wet on it by the time the first lawsuit already had an injunction attached. Bidet is seemingly going unchecked and ruling like a third world potentate.

I saw Mick Mulvaney on FOX yesterday. If I understood correctly, there are Executive Orders & then there are Executive Memos. The first carries an obligation by the affected agency/department to act upon it while the Memo is an “expression” of a wish by the Executive. Since we know that most of the agencies/departments are filled with swamp creatures, his wish is their command for the most part. Again if I understood him correctly, no one is advertising what Biden is doing with Memos, but he’s churning them out at roughly the same rate as the Orders. His example was a Memo sent to the OMB letting them know that most of the bills they would be analyzing would contain “climate change” or “equity” items. They were directed to consider that either of these type items would be a wash. Whatever expense was involved would be offset by some “benefit” from the bill.

After I read the referenced NYT article, I made the mistake of reading some of the comments. Most of the commenters want more EOs, not less.
Nauseating. Full on support for a dictatorship.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
After I read the referenced NYT article, I made the mistake of reading some of the comments. Most of the commenters want more EOs, not less.
Nauseating. Full on support for a dictatorship.

Dictatorships are good . . . as long as you are part of the "in crowd". Problem is, it takes only a hiccup to become part of the "out crowd".

That is why there is no reasoning with someone who doesn’t realize this.

A long while back (during the O'Zippy days) I had been reminded that executive orders were written to prioritize or clarify how the administration wanted to carry out existing laws , and NOT intended to subvert, reverse, or create new laws around congress. HUGE difference. This is why we were upset back in 2008-16.

No one pressed the issue then, and congress does not seem to have any appetite to contest this now

Are you kidding? Congressweasels love EOs. Come election time they can run as cheerleaders for the EOs that accomplish what congressweasels can't accomplish in Congress OR they can run against whatever the EO says. Either way, the only person actually taking responsibility for what an EO does is whoever issues the EO.

Seems Biden’s mouthpiece wants questions provided in advance of press briefings to avoid having to “circle back”.

Report: Biden’s Comms Team Asked Reporters For Questions In Advance

The Circle Woman: Report Shows Biden Staff Prescreening Psaki Press Briefing Questions

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
Seems Biden’s mouthpiece wants questions provided in advance of press briefings to avoid having to “circle back”.

Can you just imagine if that were a Trump press secretary trying that?

From David Horowitz at Frontpagemag.com --


The Biggest and Nastiest White House Liar – Ever

Yes, Joe Biden – and it isn’t even close. Of course, Biden is widely regarded as an endangered species, a status that serves to protect him from criticism that would be directed at a younger, more mentally stable individual. Even his political opponents are somewhat wary of saying what a catastrophe and menace Biden and his presidency represent. Meanwhile, the whoring intellectual left at the Times and the Washington Post fawn all over this empty suit almost to the same degree that they have slandered Donald Trump for four years as an unrivaled serial liar...

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
Seems Biden’s mouthpiece wants questions provided in advance of press briefings to avoid having to “circle back”.

Report: Biden’s Comms Team Asked Reporters For Questions In Advance. . .

quote:

Originally posted by Ripley:
From David Horowitz at Frontpagemag.com -- . . . The Biggest and Nastiest White House Liar – Ever

Goebbels lives.

quote:

From David Horowitz at Frontpagemag.com --

Good article. Thanks for posting.

I can’t see this Jen Psaki lasting very long, she seems totally unprepared for answering much of anything, AND IT’S A FRIENDLY AUDIENCE!

She seems in over her head.

LMAO!

Now that China Joe is safely elected, He and the Dems are ALREADY waffling on this $1,400 stimulus thing and indicating that it may be lower (if at all) and the previous income cutoffs will be revised downwards.