The Most Beautiful Piece Of Music Ever...
Music0 min ago
Trump's Executive Order
115 Answers
I think we may be about to witness something extraordinary with regards to the USA election.
It would appear that two years ago, Trump declared a “national emergency” to deal with foreign and domestic election interference. It was enacted under an Executive Order called “Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election” and was signed by him on 12th September 2018:
https:/
In essence, this gives him unprecedented powers to investigate and prosecute electoral fraud.
There's a long and detailed article here that goes into much more depth about it:
https:/
It would appear that two years ago, Trump declared a “national emergency” to deal with foreign and domestic election interference. It was enacted under an Executive Order called “Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election” and was signed by him on 12th September 2018:
https:/
In essence, this gives him unprecedented powers to investigate and prosecute electoral fraud.
There's a long and detailed article here that goes into much more depth about it:
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by birdie1971. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
When, and only when, Trump starts winning the legal cases he's brought is there any cause for concern about the legitimacy of the election. That hasn't happened yet, and it's pretty clear that it isn't going to either. Even if that turns out to be premature, very often the complaints are over mere handfuls of ballots that have no standing on the result.
Trump has spent a great deal of time in the last four years also making unfounded allegations about the legitimacy of the 2016 election. He was wrong then, too.
Trump has spent a great deal of time in the last four years also making unfounded allegations about the legitimacy of the 2016 election. He was wrong then, too.
Jim - “... but Trump et al have to start producing that evidence and stop merely claiming its existence...”
Which is why there are many cases pending submission.
Given the timescales involved, they're doing their best to gather the evidence of wide scale electoral fraud. Normally, a prosecution has months or even years to gather evidence for their case. This is different. They're trying to undo a twisted ball of wool in an almost impossible time-frame.
I can't help but notice that you've completely failed to answer my very simple questions Jim. I'll repeat them again in case you missed them:
1. Are you in favour of free and fair elections?
2. Do you agree that literally hundreds of sworn witness statements constitutes copious amount of prima facie evidence of wide spread vote-count fraud?
3. Is eye-witness testimony evidence?
Which is why there are many cases pending submission.
Given the timescales involved, they're doing their best to gather the evidence of wide scale electoral fraud. Normally, a prosecution has months or even years to gather evidence for their case. This is different. They're trying to undo a twisted ball of wool in an almost impossible time-frame.
I can't help but notice that you've completely failed to answer my very simple questions Jim. I'll repeat them again in case you missed them:
1. Are you in favour of free and fair elections?
2. Do you agree that literally hundreds of sworn witness statements constitutes copious amount of prima facie evidence of wide spread vote-count fraud?
3. Is eye-witness testimony evidence?
Jim - “... Trump has spent a great deal of time in the last four years also making unfounded allegations about the legitimacy of the 2016 election. He was wrong then, too.”
Wow. Really?
If my recollection serves me well, it was the Democrats that have spent the last four years trying to overturn the 2016 election. They alleged Russian collusion, spent $40 million and found precisely nothing. Having found nothing, they then tried to remove him from office by impeaching him with.... zero evidence of Russian collusion.
To this day, Hilary Clinton still thinks she should have been the 45th President. She also told Biden, “... not to concede under any circumstances...” just before this election. If that advice is good for Biden, why does it not hold for Trump?
Any don't forget, Al Gore didn't concede until 13th December 2000. Delays and claims on both sides are hardly unusual.
Wow. Really?
If my recollection serves me well, it was the Democrats that have spent the last four years trying to overturn the 2016 election. They alleged Russian collusion, spent $40 million and found precisely nothing. Having found nothing, they then tried to remove him from office by impeaching him with.... zero evidence of Russian collusion.
To this day, Hilary Clinton still thinks she should have been the 45th President. She also told Biden, “... not to concede under any circumstances...” just before this election. If that advice is good for Biden, why does it not hold for Trump?
Any don't forget, Al Gore didn't concede until 13th December 2000. Delays and claims on both sides are hardly unusual.
I didn't miss them, but questions 1 and 3 aren't worth answering, and question 2 is a matter for courts to assess -- and, as I say, so far the assessments are that the evidence is not even close to how you are presenting it.
It bears repeating, again, that Trump has always been more unpopular than popular throughout his presidency, that Republicans made gains in the elections away from the White House, and that Trump spent months explaining that this election would be fraudulent before it even happened, for this precise purpose: it allows him to paint his defeat as illegitimate, a defeat that was clearly far from inevitable; and it has clearly sown enough doubt to sucker some into believing him. Maybe if he hadn't come out so strongly against postal voting, he might even have won. Nationwide, Biden has around a 6 million-vote lead, but in various key states the margins are narrow enough that he could have overcome it with relatively minor swings.
It bears repeating, again, that Trump has always been more unpopular than popular throughout his presidency, that Republicans made gains in the elections away from the White House, and that Trump spent months explaining that this election would be fraudulent before it even happened, for this precise purpose: it allows him to paint his defeat as illegitimate, a defeat that was clearly far from inevitable; and it has clearly sown enough doubt to sucker some into believing him. Maybe if he hadn't come out so strongly against postal voting, he might even have won. Nationwide, Biden has around a 6 million-vote lead, but in various key states the margins are narrow enough that he could have overcome it with relatively minor swings.
> Some people deny the existence of gravity or the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.
For the purposes of this argument, we can discount those people. They tend to be a small, irrational minority.
It is not a small, irrational minority that accepts the result of the US elections though. It's a majority, including many senior Republicans.
Now, you can read distributednews.com and whatever you like in order to draw your own conclusions and put yourself in that minority that believes that one of the world's great democracies has run a rigged election ... but I have to ask why you'd do that? What you appear to have done is formed an opinion, sought backing for that opinion, and discounted everything that doesn't agree with it, in order to conclude that the USA failed to run a fair election.
For the purposes of this argument, we can discount those people. They tend to be a small, irrational minority.
It is not a small, irrational minority that accepts the result of the US elections though. It's a majority, including many senior Republicans.
Now, you can read distributednews.com and whatever you like in order to draw your own conclusions and put yourself in that minority that believes that one of the world's great democracies has run a rigged election ... but I have to ask why you'd do that? What you appear to have done is formed an opinion, sought backing for that opinion, and discounted everything that doesn't agree with it, in order to conclude that the USA failed to run a fair election.
The 2000 election is clearly an anomaly, though -- it hinged on a couple of hundred votes in one state. In 2020, we are talking about tens of thousands of votes across several states.
Your version of the narrative since 2016 misses a few key points: the first and most obvious is that Clinton conceded the election the morning after, whereas you may recall that Trump refused to confirm if he would have done the same. Obama also helped ensure a smooth transition, something that Trump has so far refused to do, and clearly has no intention of doing even when, eventually, he'll have no choice.
The second regards to the investigations about Russian interference, and links between the Trump campaign and Russia. Trump's screams of "no collusion!" clearly achieved what they set out to achieve, as they've given the impression that this was the only focus. It was not. It is, for example, now accepted that Russian interests interfered in many ways in the election, by spreading misinformation in a manner that "favoured" Trump over Clinton.
The Mueller Report also *did* find links between members of the Trump campaign and the Russian Government. That report stopped short of establishing a conspiracy, but makes clear that this was at least in part because key witnesses provided incomplete (or even false) testimony, and key evidence was not made available.
Your version of the narrative since 2016 misses a few key points: the first and most obvious is that Clinton conceded the election the morning after, whereas you may recall that Trump refused to confirm if he would have done the same. Obama also helped ensure a smooth transition, something that Trump has so far refused to do, and clearly has no intention of doing even when, eventually, he'll have no choice.
The second regards to the investigations about Russian interference, and links between the Trump campaign and Russia. Trump's screams of "no collusion!" clearly achieved what they set out to achieve, as they've given the impression that this was the only focus. It was not. It is, for example, now accepted that Russian interests interfered in many ways in the election, by spreading misinformation in a manner that "favoured" Trump over Clinton.
The Mueller Report also *did* find links between members of the Trump campaign and the Russian Government. That report stopped short of establishing a conspiracy, but makes clear that this was at least in part because key witnesses provided incomplete (or even false) testimony, and key evidence was not made available.
Jim - “I didn't miss them, but questions 1 and 3 aren't worth answering..”
No, they are. They really are. They're also incredibly simple questions to answer. Both require a “yes” or “no” answer. So why not do it now?
You further say, “... question 2 is a matter for courts to assess...”
Indeed it is. But I'm asking for your opinion. Why are you apparently unwilling to share it?
You assert, “... Nationwide, Biden has around a 6 million-vote lead, but in various key states the margins are narrow enough that he could have overcome it with relatively minor swings.”
Again, if the vote count is illegitimate – which based on the prima facie evidence seems to be the case – your statement is baseless. Tainted evidence (ie. fraudulent electoral votes) cannot be the basis on which to conclude facts. Your assertion of a 6 million vote lead, is at the very least, hypothetical.
Just out of interest and to satisfy my curiosity, what evidence would be sufficient for you to conclude possible vote-count fraud?
No, they are. They really are. They're also incredibly simple questions to answer. Both require a “yes” or “no” answer. So why not do it now?
You further say, “... question 2 is a matter for courts to assess...”
Indeed it is. But I'm asking for your opinion. Why are you apparently unwilling to share it?
You assert, “... Nationwide, Biden has around a 6 million-vote lead, but in various key states the margins are narrow enough that he could have overcome it with relatively minor swings.”
Again, if the vote count is illegitimate – which based on the prima facie evidence seems to be the case – your statement is baseless. Tainted evidence (ie. fraudulent electoral votes) cannot be the basis on which to conclude facts. Your assertion of a 6 million vote lead, is at the very least, hypothetical.
Just out of interest and to satisfy my curiosity, what evidence would be sufficient for you to conclude possible vote-count fraud?
Ellipses - “... What you appear to have done is formed an opinion, sought backing for that opinion, and discounted everything that doesn't agree with it, in order to conclude that the USA failed to run a fair election.”
Not so.
That's a straw-man argument. What evidence do you have that I (someone who dislikes Trump) has, “... sought backing for [your] opinion, and discounted everything that doesn't agree with it...”?
Sorry, but that line of reasoning is deeply flawed.
What I have done is listened to both sides and concluded that there is a case to answer for electoral vote-count fraud. Nothing more.
Not so.
That's a straw-man argument. What evidence do you have that I (someone who dislikes Trump) has, “... sought backing for [your] opinion, and discounted everything that doesn't agree with it...”?
Sorry, but that line of reasoning is deeply flawed.
What I have done is listened to both sides and concluded that there is a case to answer for electoral vote-count fraud. Nothing more.
I'll say it again, birdie - if you're going to compare anyone to flat earthers, the more accurate comparison is with the minority who reject the election results, not the majority who accept them.
But let Trump plough on, and let's see what happens. In a way, it's better that his presidency goes through a slow and tortured end... it gives his supporters time to come to terms with it.
But let Trump plough on, and let's see what happens. In a way, it's better that his presidency goes through a slow and tortured end... it gives his supporters time to come to terms with it.
I think I've made my opinion clear that, as far as I'm concerned, what evidence that's been referred to is flimsy, fabricated, exaggerated, taken out of context, or at least certainly not enough to imply a nationwide conspiracy.
Question 1 belongs to the same category as "do you believe murder is wrong?" It's up to you to recognise, then, that it's not a question worth asking, and that asking it is frankly offensive. It's like Trump's spokespeople's continued rhetoric that "every legal vote should be counted", making the needless and baseless implication that anybody else ever thought otherwise.
Question 1 belongs to the same category as "do you believe murder is wrong?" It's up to you to recognise, then, that it's not a question worth asking, and that asking it is frankly offensive. It's like Trump's spokespeople's continued rhetoric that "every legal vote should be counted", making the needless and baseless implication that anybody else ever thought otherwise.
Jim
The Muller Report was an expensive pile of crap. You know it and so does every other person who isn't ideologically opposed to Trump. If it had any substance whatsoever, Trump would have been impeached and removed from office. It didn't and he wasn't. The entire case was predicated on a fake dossier complied by an ex MI6 operative – Christopher Steel – and was bought and paid for by Fusion GPS which was paid by the DNC (ie. the Hilary Clinton campaign) in order to get illegal surveillance deployed on Trump via the FISA Courts.
The Muller Report was an expensive pile of crap. You know it and so does every other person who isn't ideologically opposed to Trump. If it had any substance whatsoever, Trump would have been impeached and removed from office. It didn't and he wasn't. The entire case was predicated on a fake dossier complied by an ex MI6 operative – Christopher Steel – and was bought and paid for by Fusion GPS which was paid by the DNC (ie. the Hilary Clinton campaign) in order to get illegal surveillance deployed on Trump via the FISA Courts.
Jim - “Question 1 belongs to the same category as "do you believe murder is wrong?””
Does it? That depends on whether you're ideologically opposed to democracy. Some people appear to be. Communists for example. And some socialists as well. We've seen this very recently with some people saying that the Brexit vote was illegitimate because there was only 4% difference between the 52% leave and the 48% remain.
Vote-count fraud is rife in many countries. Why is it so difficult to imagine that this has happened in the USA? I want the truth and nothing but. Ideology has no place in elections when it comes to counting legally cast votes - in any nation.
Does it? That depends on whether you're ideologically opposed to democracy. Some people appear to be. Communists for example. And some socialists as well. We've seen this very recently with some people saying that the Brexit vote was illegitimate because there was only 4% difference between the 52% leave and the 48% remain.
Vote-count fraud is rife in many countries. Why is it so difficult to imagine that this has happened in the USA? I want the truth and nothing but. Ideology has no place in elections when it comes to counting legally cast votes - in any nation.
Ellipses - “... it's better that his presidency goes through a slow and tortured end... it gives his supporters time to come to terms with it...”
In that post you've exposed your ideologically driven hated of Trump and his supporters. How contemptuous and hypocritical. Clearly, you're incapable of giving Trump a fair hearing and of accepting that there is evidence of vote-count fraud.
If I rephrase your comment to read, “It's better that Obama's presidency goes through a slow and tortured end... it gives his supporters time to come to terms with it...” - how does that sound?
In that post you've exposed your ideologically driven hated of Trump and his supporters. How contemptuous and hypocritical. Clearly, you're incapable of giving Trump a fair hearing and of accepting that there is evidence of vote-count fraud.
If I rephrase your comment to read, “It's better that Obama's presidency goes through a slow and tortured end... it gives his supporters time to come to terms with it...” - how does that sound?
The whole issue, both in the US & on this thread remains as it has always been, whether you like or loath Trump. It is sad for the people & sad for politics that this is so, what these candidates stand for is continually brushed aside.
In my opinion Trump has been a great president, look at his record. He has stood up to China, kept America out of new wars, solidified ties with Israel, overturned the disastrous Iran deal and obliterated Isis. Domestically, he removed handicapping regulations to American economic growth, rebuilt a depleted military, brought back manufacturing and revamped dying industries by renegotiating trade deals and cutting taxes; he has achieved energy independence, curbed immigration — all of which contributed to setting record unemployment rates. He has tackled neglected issues such as human trafficking and unjust incarceration — and given America a chance at restoring her principles & pride, but none of this enters into the argument. If anyone is worthy of a Nobel peace prize it would be him, but would it happen - what do you think?
Nobody cares for Biden - look at the attendance of his rallies - he gets the vote simply because he isn't Trump, he will, if he gets to hold office, I predict be a disaster for the US & the world, a glove-puppet manipulated by some pretty sinister people waiting to undo, for self- serving ends, all that Trump has achieved.
In my opinion Trump has been a great president, look at his record. He has stood up to China, kept America out of new wars, solidified ties with Israel, overturned the disastrous Iran deal and obliterated Isis. Domestically, he removed handicapping regulations to American economic growth, rebuilt a depleted military, brought back manufacturing and revamped dying industries by renegotiating trade deals and cutting taxes; he has achieved energy independence, curbed immigration — all of which contributed to setting record unemployment rates. He has tackled neglected issues such as human trafficking and unjust incarceration — and given America a chance at restoring her principles & pride, but none of this enters into the argument. If anyone is worthy of a Nobel peace prize it would be him, but would it happen - what do you think?
Nobody cares for Biden - look at the attendance of his rallies - he gets the vote simply because he isn't Trump, he will, if he gets to hold office, I predict be a disaster for the US & the world, a glove-puppet manipulated by some pretty sinister people waiting to undo, for self- serving ends, all that Trump has achieved.
1. yes
2. no - this evidence has not been examined
and 3 - yes ish - remind me - eye witness testimony is evidence but does NOT steam roller everything else
and today I think we HAVE seen something remarkable
Republicans outside the washington bubble ( Michigan but so what ) saying mr president you have lost the election
[michigan legislators decline to substitute college electors]
and Mr Trump said as an aside
I didnt lose the election
and i think people will start chanting - oh yes you have
2. no - this evidence has not been examined
and 3 - yes ish - remind me - eye witness testimony is evidence but does NOT steam roller everything else
and today I think we HAVE seen something remarkable
Republicans outside the washington bubble ( Michigan but so what ) saying mr president you have lost the election
[michigan legislators decline to substitute college electors]
and Mr Trump said as an aside
I didnt lose the election
and i think people will start chanting - oh yes you have
// That hasn't happened yet, and it's pretty clear that it isn't going to either.//
the state papers are worf a read
judges have started asking the Trump lawyers - is this true?
During one case of no observers, a judge asked the lawyer "are they observing now?" and the lawyer said 'yes' and then contintued with the blah de blah of "my client says they do this and they do that...."
trump is on his third set of lawyers now headed by Rudy
the state papers are worf a read
judges have started asking the Trump lawyers - is this true?
During one case of no observers, a judge asked the lawyer "are they observing now?" and the lawyer said 'yes' and then contintued with the blah de blah of "my client says they do this and they do that...."
trump is on his third set of lawyers now headed by Rudy
Khandro has repeated the same mantra several times now.
The truth is that yes Trump is divisive. Always has been. He may end up with one or two positive achievements to his presidency, but I’d suggest they may be largely accidental.
I’ve always tried to be restrained in my posts about Trump here, but now that we are seeing him in his true colours, I think the time for holding back is over.
The man no more stands for the values of America than Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot.
He’s a narcissist, a racist, a fascist, a fraudster and a liar.
He has poisoned US politics and the recovery may be slow.
I hope Biden’s administration leaves him alone: they’ll have enough to do.
But he probably belongs in jail, and if so I hope that is where he ends up.
The truth is that yes Trump is divisive. Always has been. He may end up with one or two positive achievements to his presidency, but I’d suggest they may be largely accidental.
I’ve always tried to be restrained in my posts about Trump here, but now that we are seeing him in his true colours, I think the time for holding back is over.
The man no more stands for the values of America than Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot.
He’s a narcissist, a racist, a fascist, a fraudster and a liar.
He has poisoned US politics and the recovery may be slow.
I hope Biden’s administration leaves him alone: they’ll have enough to do.
But he probably belongs in jail, and if so I hope that is where he ends up.
Nice to see Jim back to his absolutely positive, bullish best.
He put a brave face on it on election night but one could tell he was thoroughly deflated, like all Biden supporters, as he wearily wended his way to bed.
And then a miracle happened. Hundreds of thousands of Biden votes turned up in the middle of the night. Although the Democrats covered the windows so no-one could see what was going on, it must have been like the courtroom scene in Miracle on 34th Street when all the letters to Santa turned up.
And when Jim saw the 'new' result in the morning, he skipped around the living room spilling muesli everywhere, shouting 'I do believe'.
He put a brave face on it on election night but one could tell he was thoroughly deflated, like all Biden supporters, as he wearily wended his way to bed.
And then a miracle happened. Hundreds of thousands of Biden votes turned up in the middle of the night. Although the Democrats covered the windows so no-one could see what was going on, it must have been like the courtroom scene in Miracle on 34th Street when all the letters to Santa turned up.
And when Jim saw the 'new' result in the morning, he skipped around the living room spilling muesli everywhere, shouting 'I do believe'.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Cuddling A Cow Could Give You Bird Flu!
News4 mins ago
Crosswords9 mins ago
My Dearest Friend Ducksie - R I P
ChatterBank12 mins ago
News17 mins ago
