Trump Presidency

[Rocket89]

Charges aren't convictions, nobody was convicted of any Russian collusion, and no Russian collusion was shown to have happened. So yes, that WAS fake. Remember Adam Schiff telling us he'd seen the evidence? Remember it then not existing when Mueller looked for it and Schiff declining to comment when asked what that evidence had been that he'd seen? He lied, assuming such evidence would later be found. When it wasn't he was left exposed as having lied about it. The entire thing was fake and a misuse of power to handicap a duly elected president by falsely claiming his election wasn't legit. That your side did it shouldn't make it any less palatable to you. Again, you complained that cries of election tampering and fraud shouldn't be made without proof. I asked you why you hadn't been bothered by that the past four years when the Left did it and you've dodged the question yet again. Most of us hate intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy.

Trump welcomed Russian interference and then spent years whining about being investigated for it when the Russians then interfered in the election, per the Mueller report and Senate Report. That's what is real.

Collusion was always going to be difficult to prove--and especially enforce--when the President is the most powerful person on earth, he obstructs any investigation, and ultimately is protected by a Senate controlled by his own party with backup from his AG.

Proven collusion or not we didn't see Obama or Clinton refuse to acknowledge Trump's win, nor set about refusing a transition because of whacky conspiracy theories. This 2020 situation is far different.

 

[TorontoGold]

I agree overall. I do think it would be out of the norm of what we have seen in our lifetimes to see an election "overturned." The amount of evidence needed would need to be highly significant.

I guess that is where I differ from many on the conservative side. I think we have resolved that the best we can see is an election process clean up. I think there is more possible than that. And yes, it would be a new event for all of us to witness, but I do not think that makes it impossible, simply unseen in our lifetimes.

I edited my previous post to you, and included the content below. I think this is one of many forms of "overwhelming evidence" that is mounting to show widespread election fraud. In short, the widespread nature would have come largely through statistical manipulation of the Dominion voting systems and accompanying software.

Below is a link from an IT guy who dug into the details of the voting numbers in key swing states (and other states) that have been made public. His numbers match up with the verified Michigan county where 5,000 plus votes were switched from Trump to Biden, only to be given back to Trump.

The "glitch" was found by a clerk in a republican county (to my point above, only those looking for glitches/election fraud are finding it). She did then did a hand count to verify the glitch did indeed flip 5k plus votes from Trump to Biden. Once the changes were corrected, that county flipped from blue to red. It was called a "glitch" or clerk entry error.

Again, this guys work in the link below unveils a host of "glitches", including the verified one from the MI county which was corrected. Yet, none of the others have been corrected at the time of this post to my knowledge.

https://thedonald.win/p/11Q8O2wesk/h...very-pede-to-/

All due respect, the link is to a Trump reddit lite forum? Wouldn't Trump's own DHS Cybersecurity guy have a better understanding of this than a random guy on a Trump fan forum? Surely they have the same information that the public has.

 

[NorthDakota]

Trump welcomed Russian interference and then spent years whining about being investigated for it when the Russians then interfered in the election, per the Mueller report and Senate Report. That's what is real.

Collusion was always going to be difficult to prove--and especially enforce--when the President is the most powerful person on earth, he obstructs any investigation, and ultimately is protected by a Senate controlled by his own party with backup from his AG.

Proven collusion or not we didn't see Obama or Clinton refuse to acknowledge Trump's win, nor set about refusing a transition because of whacky conspiracy theories. This 2020 situation is far different.

Define acknowledge.

Conceding and giving a call is one thing. And that's good.

Following up by going on book tours claiming it was stolen and the President is illegitimate doesn't sound like acknowledging though.

Thats why it is very difficult to try to claim any sort of high ground here. Prominent Democrat politicians claimed it was a stolen election and an illegitimate presidency. I don't see a drastic difference here.

 

[bobbyok1]

All due respect, the link is to a Trump reddit lite forum? Wouldn't Trump's own DHS Cybersecurity guy have a better understanding of this than a random guy on a Trump fan forum? Surely they have the same information that the public has.

Yes, without question. I am not suggesting that this guy is "elite" in his info, rather, one of many examples of people crunching the numbers and seeing significant patterns that are not making sense of typical voter drops.

And to your point, I think the average IT finding these things only shows how much further evidence the Trump team likely has on these matters. Which is part of the reason I suspect widespread election fraud is likely to be uncovered, and swiftly in my view.

 

[Blazers46]

Trump welcomed Russian interference and then spent years whining about being investigated for it when the Russians then interfered in the election, per the Mueller report and Senate Report. That's what is real.

Collusion was always going to be difficult to prove--and especially enforce--when the President is the most powerful person on earth, he obstructs any investigation, and ultimately is protected by a Senate controlled by his own party with backup from his AG.

Proven collusion or not we didn't see Obama or Clinton refuse to acknowledge Trump's win, nor set about refusing a transition because of whacky conspiracy theories. This 2020 situation is far different.

Speaking of Obama and Clinton... The CIA reported to the FBI about Hilary's plan to connect Russia and Trump. FBI did nothing. Not only that but Obama and Biden were briefed on Hilarys plan... and crickets.

Trump had access to the once classified origins of his own investigation and knew the whole thing was phony. This phony invetsigtion is still citied amongst most MSM outlets and when they are caught up in something... like this alleged laptop... their best argument is its Russian disinformation.

How can you keep going to same well (Russia) when it has been proven to be false time and time again? The simple answer is because the MSM still wants us to think Russia investigation was legit and most ignorant peeps still think link Russia to Trump. which is why most refused to air the recent questioning of McCabe on the origins of the Russia investigation.

 

[sharksamardzija8345]

Thanks for your form of mocking "you don't seriously believe that do you?" Another form of "no serious minded/thinking person believes Trump won."

Yes I do. And yes, many highly intelligent people believe the same. So, your veiled attempt to shame/mock people you disagree with as unintelligent fails flat with me.

Like I said, for those who don't believe what many are saying (which I summed up in the post you're replying to), I'll see you in few weeks.

You’re acting like it’s totally fishy that the guy with a 45% approval rating and 250k+ bodies on his watch somehow lost an election lol. Like it makes no sense how he could possibly lose. As if the last four years didn’t happen and he’s loved across the isle by the whole country. It’s just funny.

 

[TorontoGold]

Yes, without question. I am not suggesting that this guy is "elite" in his info, rather, one of many examples of people crunching the numbers and seeing significant patterns that are not making sense of typical voter drops.

And to your point, I think the average IT finding these things only shows how much further evidence the Trump team likely has on these matters. Which is part of the reason I suspect widespread election fraud is likely to be uncovered, and swiftly in my view.

Wouldn't logic lead us to believe that if the average IT guy finding this would mean a more skilled person could have surefire evidence ready to go by now? It seems like the ship is sailing on the public perception that there was manipulation in the software. World leaders are already calling Biden to congratulate him, if there were questions of the software used, wouldn't they hold off?

 

[arahop]

Lol this is why we make fun of you, you know that right?

I'm good with being made fun of by you and trumpers on here.
I just like to point out all of your wild comments.
You fit the radical side of the right wing perfect.
Best of luck to you.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Trump welcomed Russian interference and then spent years whining about being investigated for it when the Russians then interfered in the election, per the Mueller report and Senate Report. That's what is real.

Collusion was always going to be difficult to prove--and especially enforce--when the President is the most powerful person on earth, he obstructs any investigation, and ultimately is protected by a Senate controlled by his own party with backup from his AG.

Proven collusion or not we didn't see Obama or Clinton refuse to acknowledge Trump's win, nor set about refusing a transition because of whacky conspiracy theories. This 2020 situation is far different.

Ahh, so it happened, but Mueller and Schiff and Pelosi and all the gang just couldn't "prove" it. Oh boy. You're mad because Trump has spent two weeks claiming election fraud, but can't prove it. You don't mind the Dems spending FOUR YEARS claiming election fraud and spending millions investigating something they KNEW hadn't happened, just for political gain. Got it. Do you see why those of us on the Right find the hypocrisy and faux outrage from your side so off-putting? It's a constant stream of misinformation from the MSM on your behalf, no accountability when caught at it, and a LOT of camel swallowing and gnat gagging from most on your side.

 

[arahop]

How does Trump outperform relative to 2016 in every major metro EXCEPT Philly, Milwaukee, Detroit and Atlanta? The data is freaking obvious that the fix was in.

The problem is, even if they can prove it, it will be too late to do anything about it. Best I am hoping for is comprehensive process reform that allows these areas to get fixed like Florida did after the Broward county fiasco of 2000.

There is no evidence that a "fix" was in.
These "Hail Mary" Lawsuits are getting tossed rather quickly.

 

[arahop]

Yes, without question. I am not suggesting that this guy is "elite" in his info, rather, one of many examples of people crunching the numbers and seeing significant patterns that are not making sense of typical voter drops.

And to your point, I think the average IT finding these things only shows how much further evidence the Trump team likely has on these matters. Which is part of the reason I suspect widespread election fraud is likely to be uncovered, and swiftly in my view.

Is your "Source"
don trump
don jr
eric trump
or Rudy Giuliani?

 

[sharksamardzija8345]

Ahh, so it happened, but Mueller and Schiff and Pelosi and all the gang just couldn't "prove" it. Oh boy. You're mad because Trump has spent two weeks claiming election fraud, but can't prove it. You don't mind the Dems spending FOUR YEARS claiming election fraud and spending millions investigating something they KNEW hadn't happened, just for political gain. Got it. Do you see why those of us on the Right find the hypocrisy and faux outrage from your side so off-putting? It's a constant stream of misinformation from the MSM on your behalf, no accountability when caught at it, and a LOT of camel swallowing and gnat gagging from most on your side.

Weren’t there over 30 indictments due to the Mueller investigation? Trump was not indicted, which may or may not have to do with the argument that a sitting president cannot be indicted, in this case likely for obstruction of justice, but the Mueller report did conclude Russia interfered in our election and 30+ people were indicted. I mean it’s apples and oranges to compare Russian election interference to whatever Trump is going on about.

 

[Blazers46]

Weren’t there over 30 indictments due to the Mueller investigation? Trump was not indicted, which may or may not have to do with the argument that a sitting president cannot be indicted, in this case likely for obstruction of justice, but the Mueller report did conclude Russia interfered in our election and 30+ people were indicted. I mean it’s apples and oranges to compare Russian election interference to whatever Trump is going on about.

Dear lord, policing 101 is to take down who ever you can to press them to talk more. IF you look at the indictments some of them turned against Trump but still had nothing criminal to say His Lawyer turned on him and they still had nothing. There was a whole Mueller report with ZERO evidence to indict. If there were a smidge of evidence to indict the dems would have taken that used it to impeach. You do not need an indictment to impeach and they still did not with what they had. Trump was impeached on hearsay about a phone call. To be honest there is more evidence about a possible Hunter Biden Laptop than there ever was or will be that got Trump impeached.

Wasn't the only Russian interference paid advertisements on FB? I could be wrong.

 

[Rocket89]

Define acknowledge.

Conceding and giving a call is one thing. And that's good.

Following up by going on book tours claiming it was stolen and the President is illegitimate doesn't sound like acknowledging though.

Thats why it is very difficult to try to claim any sort of high ground here. Prominent Democrat politicians claimed it was a stolen election and an illegitimate presidency. I don't see a drastic difference here.

I can't think of anything more normal in American politics than Democrats being salty about losing an incredibly close election while Russia interfered. That's a million miles away from Trump trying to con America into thinking he won 2020.

 

[NorthDakota]

I can't think of anything more normal in American politics than Democrats being salty about losing an incredibly close election while Russia interfered. That's a million miles away from Trump trying to con America into thinking he won 2020.

They didn't just say "Russia made Facebook memes" ot "We are pretty sure Russia hacked some emails" though. They said the election was stolen and the President was illegitimate.

Those are two very different things.

 

[Rocket89]

Speaking of Obama and Clinton... The CIA reported to the FBI about Hilary's plan to connect Russia and Trump. FBI did nothing. Not only that but Obama and Biden were briefed on Hilarys plan... and crickets.

Trump had access to the once classified origins of his own investigation and knew the whole thing was phony. This phony invetsigtion is still citied amongst most MSM outlets and when they are caught up in something... like this alleged laptop... their best argument is its Russian disinformation.

How can you keep going to same well (Russia) when it has been proven to be false time and time again? The simple answer is because the MSM still wants us to think Russia investigation was legit and most ignorant peeps still think link Russia to Trump. which is why most refused to air the recent questioning of McCabe on the origins of the Russia investigation.

Nope.

https://apnews.com/article/election...bert-mueller-ff0eb1a6bc10a0b4f894602cdeb84d6b

Trump uses the same playbook over and over. This is yet again another debunked far right fever dream. The GREATEST CRIME IN AMERICAN HISTORY, yeah nice try.

 

[Rocket89]

Ahh, so it happened, but Mueller and Schiff and Pelosi and all the gang just couldn't "prove" it. Oh boy. You're mad because Trump has spent two weeks claiming election fraud, but can't prove it. You don't mind the Dems spending FOUR YEARS claiming election fraud and spending millions investigating something they KNEW hadn't happened, just for political gain. Got it. Do you see why those of us on the Right find the hypocrisy and faux outrage from your side so off-putting? It's a constant stream of misinformation from the MSM on your behalf, no accountability when caught at it, and a LOT of camel swallowing and gnat gagging from most on your side.

The Special Investigation dealt very little with voter fraud. The small amount that it did noted that Russia tried and (thankfully) wasn't particularly successful accessing voter registrations and other voting systems.

So, the Dems weren't focused on investigating voter fraud, and the Mueller Report didn't show they "knew" that didn't happen.

Actually, the biggest person screaming about voter fraud in 2016 was...Donald Trump. Like is his want, he's going back to that well again.

 

[ulukinatme]

That's okay, Russia influenced the election in 2016, China bought Biden the election in 2020.

 

[Rocket89]

If that's your view, stick with it brother

Just a few legal updates this evening:

*The Supreme Court of the United States refused to take up the case of blocking absentee ballots that arrived after Election Day in Pennsylvania.

*A few days after the law firm Porter Wright withdrew from Trump's Pennsylvania case, attorney Linda Kerns withdrew after admitting in court today that there were "no fraud or eligibility concerns" in the Philadelphia case.

*SharpieGate in Arizona has been dropped officially.

*A common scene across the country, yet again Republican attorneys were rebuked by a judge in Clark County, Nevada for scaling back their complaint to hearsay. "At what point does this get ridiculous?" the judge asked.

*Republican attorneys were chastised yet again in Michigan by the judge, surrounding the case of the sworn affidavit of mishandling ballots. From the judge: "What I have, at best, is a hearsay affidavit...If there is something in that affidavit that would indicate that the [witness] observed activity that would be a depravation of the rights of poll watchers, I want you to please focus my attention on that. 'I heard somebody else say something.' Tell me why that's not hearsay. Come on now."

 

[Rocket89]

Dear lord, policing 101 is to take down who ever you can to press them to talk more. IF you look at the indictments some of them turned against Trump but still had nothing criminal to say His Lawyer turned on him and they still had nothing. There was a whole Mueller report with ZERO evidence to indict. If there were a smidge of evidence to indict the dems would have taken that used it to impeach. You do not need an indictment to impeach and they still did not with what they had. Trump was impeached on hearsay about a phone call. To be honest there is more evidence about a possible Hunter Biden Laptop than there ever was or will be that got Trump impeached.

Wasn't the only Russian interference paid advertisements on FB? I could be wrong.

Well, Paul Manafort isn't currently in federal prison because Russia just paid for some Facebook advertising. So yes, you'd be wrong.

Here's the best analogy for the Russia investigation:

It'd be like if numerous college football writers reported that Alabama had massive recruiting violations and widespread academic fraud. An investigation was launched by the NCAA who has some Alabama alums doing the investigating. And no one in the Alabama athletic department cooperated with the investigation.

Then when the investigation was completed it came to another part of the NCAA for review and that body, controlled by Bama alums, decided there wasn't much wrongdoing at all. Now, throw in if it's even possible to indict a current college football program and you've got an analogy for the Mueller Investigation.

 

[Blazers46]

Well, Paul Manafort isn't currently in federal prison because Russia just paid for some Facebook advertising. So yes, you'd be wrong.

Here's the best analogy for the Russia investigation:

It'd be like if numerous college football writers reported that Alabama had massive recruiting violations and widespread academic fraud. An investigation was launched by the NCAA who has some Alabama alums doing the investigating. And no one in the Alabama athletic department cooperated with the investigation.

Then when the investigation was completed it came to another part of the NCAA for review and that body, controlled by Bama alums, decided there wasn't much wrongdoing at all. Now, throw in if it's even possible to indict a current college football program and you've got an analogy for the Mueller Investigation.

So long story short... since you and the Democratic Party did not get the outcome you wanted, the conclusion is still the same no matter proved or not.

You could use the same logic for the angst and lack of cooperation with the tallying of votes. Because the dems are pushing back like they have something to hide (dems would call that obstruction) then by your logic they must 100% be hiding widespread voter fraud.

 

[Irish YJ]

Well, Paul Manafort isn't currently in federal prison because Russia just paid for some Facebook advertising. So yes, you'd be wrong.

Here's the best analogy for the Russia investigation:

It'd be like if numerous college football writers reported that Alabama had massive recruiting violations and widespread academic fraud. An investigation was launched by the NCAA who has some Alabama alums doing the investigating. And no one in the Alabama athletic department cooperated with the investigation.

Then when the investigation was completed it came to another part of the NCAA for review and that body, controlled by Bama alums, decided there wasn't much wrongdoing at all. Now, throw in if it's even possible to indict a current college football program and you've got an analogy for the Mueller Investigation.

Dude, you're stretching here. Process and financial crimes are the only thing the Mueller investigation was successful in proving. Bama alums? LOL. The FBI was clearly stacked with anti-Trumpers.

Now add in the FISA abuses, the fact we now know Flynn was clearly targeted even after the people investigating him said there was nothing there, the fact we know HRC's dossier came from a subsource who he himself said was unverified bar talk, the fact we know the investigation into Page was completely bogus, and lastly, that the everyone, and I mean everyone (FBI, CIA, Biden, Obama, Brennan) all knew HRC was trying to link Trump to Russians as part of an election strategy. It was in Brennan's own hand... Even McCabe just admitted knowing what he knows now, he wouldn't have proceeded.

It's all laughable. We have more "actual" evidence on a laptop that folks want to ignore.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Weren’t there over 30 indictments due to the Mueller investigation? Trump was not indicted, which may or may not have to do with the argument that a sitting president cannot be indicted, in this case likely for obstruction of justice, but the Mueller report did conclude Russia interfered in our election and 30+ people were indicted. I mean it’s apples and oranges to compare Russian election interference to whatever Trump is going on about.

There were indictments, but none were about colluding with the Russians, which was the main accusation. Most were false testimony, hindering prosecution stuff to leverage cooperation. Nobody on either side has denied the Russians interfered with the 2016 election. They, the Chinese, the Iranians, the N. Koreans, and probably a few others have interfered in our elections multiple times. We've done it to other countries. It's SOP in geopolitics and has been for generations. The issue was whether Trump and his campaign colluded with them and there was never any evidence of that, and the Mueller investigation found none. That's why neither Trump nor anyone else was indicted for colluding with the Russians in 2016.

It's been very clear that the Dem leadership who spent 4 years and millions of dollars pushing this idea and investigating it absolutely KNEW from the beginning that there was nothing there. They did it to hinder a Trump administration and rally their base. Even if you hate Trump and are the most hard core Dem on the planet, this should bother you and be alarming. This was, by any definition, an intentional misleading of the public by the Democratic party and a gross abuse of power and waste of public resources.

As for apples and oranges to compare what happened in 2016 to Trump today isn't what my back & forth with Rocket89 is about. A page or two back he griped about Trump contesting the 2020 election and claiming voter fraud, saying nobody should claim an election wasn't legit without backing that up with evidence. I made the point that he hadn't minded the Dems and the MSM spending the last 4 years ranting about the illegitimacy of Trump's 2016 election with absolutely zero evidence to back it up. IOW, the argument and comparison wasn't about the actual elections, but the hypocritical reaction to the past two weeks while ignoring the past four years.

 

[Bishop2b5]

The Special Investigation dealt very little with voter fraud. The small amount that it did noted that Russia tried and (thankfully) wasn't particularly successful accessing voter registrations and other voting systems.

So, the Dems weren't focused on investigating voter fraud, and the Mueller Report didn't show they "knew" that didn't happen.

Actually, the biggest person screaming about voter fraud in 2016 was...Donald Trump. Like is his want, he's going back to that well again.

Would you please stop moving the goalposts and being intentionally dishonest and conflating terms? The Dem rant and endless investigations over the past four years weren't about voter fraud. They were about the election of 2016 being illegitimate because they claimed Trump colluded with a foreign power, Russia, to steal the election. That has been shown to be false, and the overwhelming evidence indicates they knew from the beginning that it was false. Stop trying to conflate voter fraud with Russian collusion. The Mueller report found no evidence of Russian collusion on the part of Trump or his campaign. When pressed to tell us what evidence they'd once claimed to have seen, Schiff and others declined. In other words, they'd lied to you, me and the rest of the American public about having any such evidence. There never was any. They never had any.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Here's the best analogy for the Russia investigation:

It'd be like if numerous college football writers reported that Alabama had massive recruiting violations and widespread academic fraud. An investigation was launched by the NCAA who has some Alabama alums doing the investigating. And no one in the Alabama athletic department cooperated with the investigation.

Then when the investigation was completed it came to another part of the NCAA for review and that body, controlled by Bama alums, decided there wasn't much wrongdoing at all. Now, throw in if it's even possible to indict a current college football program and you've got an analogy for the Mueller Investigation.

Your analogy is waaaay off and inaccurate. The leadership at the FBI was strongly anti-Trump. Congress, pushing for the investigations, was controlled by the Democrats. Mueller, who led the special investigation, was a registered Republican nearly 20 years ago, but hasn't been since, and seems to be more a Dem in recent years. He certainly hasn't been a fan of Trump's and most of his staff and investigators were Dems. More like a team of Auburn and LSU grads investigating Bama.

 

[Rocket89]

.You could use the same logic for the angst and lack of cooperation with the tallying of votes. Because the dems are pushing back like they have something to hide (dems would call that obstruction) then by your logic they must 100% be hiding widespread voter fraud.

Please provide evidence, particularly from the American legal system, where Democrats have been lacking cooperation or obstructing.

 

[Rocket89]

It's all laughable. We have more "actual" evidence on a laptop that folks want to ignore.

Speaking of laughing, you're the second poster in a matter of hours (must be all the rage on r/Conservative) to say Hunter's laptop has more evidence than the Special Counsel and Senate Reports. My side is going to hurt all day laughing at this.

 

[Rocket89]

Would you please stop moving the goalposts and being intentionally dishonest and conflating terms? The Dem rant and endless investigations over the past four years weren't about voter fraud. They were about the election of 2016 being illegitimate because they claimed Trump colluded with a foreign power, Russia, to steal the election. That has been shown to be false, and the overwhelming evidence indicates they knew from the beginning that it was false. Stop trying to conflate voter fraud with Russian collusion. The Mueller report found no evidence of Russian collusion on the part of Trump or his campaign. When pressed to tell us what evidence they'd once claimed to have seen, Schiff and others declined. In other words, they'd lied to you, me and the rest of the American public about having any such evidence. There never was any. They never had any.

You...brought up voter fraud in 2016 and conflated terms.

Look, it's obvious we aren't going to agree on the Mueller report which stated pretty clearly that it did not exonerate Trump and that he was immune from prosecution within the scope of the investigation.

 

[Irish#1]

Dude, you're stretching here. Process and financial crimes are the only thing the Mueller investigation was successful in proving. Bama alums? LOL. The FBI was clearly stacked with anti-Trumpers.

Now add in the FISA abuses, the fact we now know Flynn was clearly targeted even after the people investigating him said there was nothing there, the fact we know HRC's dossier came from a subsource who he himself said was unverified bar talk, the fact we know the investigation into Page was completely bogus, and lastly, that the everyone, and I mean everyone (FBI, CIA, Biden, Obama, Brennan) all knew HRC was trying to link Trump to Russians as part of an election strategy. It was in Brennan's own hand... Even McCabe just admitted knowing what he knows now, he wouldn't have proceeded.

It's all laughable. We have more "actual" evidence on a laptop that folks want to ignore.

Yoga every morning.

 

[Bluto]

If an election could be so easily “rigged” don’t you think the guy who had a bunch of his 2016 campaign team land in jail and has engaged in nefarious behavior as related to his business dealings throughout his entire career would rig it?

Trump supporters are quickly becoming the new Clinton supporters.

Thinking of printing up some “I’m with him” t shirts. Lol.