Recommended Posts

Michael wrote:  As to the Supreme Court, a motion has to first be filed in a state court, go up to the appeals court, then it can go federal or get judged at the State Supreme Court. From either place, it can go up to the Supreme Court. At your service. end quote

Thank you Michael. I know I am repeating myself but still up for grabs, leaning Republican states are shown in pink on Bing. Why is Alaska up for grabs with 62 percent, so far, for Trump? And who knew? Jesse Ventura now lives in Alaska and almost got one percent of the vote.

Let’s all chant RE-VOTE. RE-COUNT, boys and girls, and not just RECOUNT. It is around 1:27 am EST, November 6th 2020, and the Electoral College Map on Microsoft Bing has the vote at 264 for Biden and 214 for President Trump.

Pink, leaning towards Trump states, are Alaska with only 3 electoral college votes, (but only 58 percent of the vote counted there,) Georgia 16, North Carolina 15, and Pennsylvania, 20.

The one light blue leaning Democratic state is Nevada with 6 electoral college votes..

Pink 54 plus 214 equals 268 for Trump.

264 plus Nevada’s 6 gives Biden the Presidency at 270.

Please correct my math if I am wrong, but that is why we need a revote and then a recount in several states. So, on to the Supremes. Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

"Don't worry; we'll pick up the slack." It's...strange. When Trump first ran, I was not a fan of his, for a few reasons. But then I saw the over-reactions from others turn into TDS. I started to se

Have you guys been watching the press trying to frame President Trump with the white supremacy thing? Let's start with the end first, then look at the idiot press. Here is just one compilation am

Damn! So, something is finally going to be confronted and fixed? 

Posted Images

From NYT Exit Polls

They confirm the usual expectation that poorer and more educated people voted for the Democrat than for the Republican in the 2020 Presidential election.

People who have served in the military voted heavily for the Republican. That is only about 17% of the voters. I notice, however, that only 7% of possible voters have served in the military: so this group votes a good deal.

People who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender voted heavily for the Democrat. It’s those first two groups that are the preponderance of the population of this American subset. This subset summed to around 7% of the total vote in this election. That makes sense, as I recall estimates of US gay population being 10% of men, lesbian population being 5% of women.

Referendums on Increasing Taxes

The voters have declined these. So even though a majority have evidently voted for the Democratic ticket, they seem overall to not favor increased taxes that that ticket has been proposing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Peter said:

Why is Alaska up for grabs with 62 percent, so far, for Trump?

Peter,

I hate to tell you, but the people who tried to pull this caper off are cheating.

:)

They are probably waiting to see if they need the Alaska's electoral votes to get Biden over 270, and if they do, magically they will find a trove of mail-in ballots in Alaska that "somebody forgot to report" or were "misplaced" some other half-assed reason, but piously, we have to guarantee that everyone gets to vote, so they will start counting while denying Republican observers and, surprise, surprise, all of the votes will be for Biden and there will be just enough to put Biden ahead of Trump.

I think that's why they haven't called it yet. This is their last ace up their sleeves.

 

Unconstitutionality

On another point:

7 hours ago, Peter said:

So, on to the Supremes.

I forgot to mention the critical factor for taking a case up to the Supreme Court. In Trump's case, an action that damages the integrity of the election has to be committed by the Biden side that is unconstitutional. That is critical.

If, say, a Republican observer is shot dead within the polling place, that is not unconstitutional in terms of the process. That's a local crime, not a constitutional infringement committed by the institution counting the votes.

By denying the Republican observers during vote counting, thus denying equal treatment under the law, the Dems fucked up. Voting is a legal procedure, thus there has to be equal treatment. There wasn't.

Even the literacy tests they used to use on illiterate blacks way back when did not fuck up in this manner. They could apply their literacy tests to whites and blacks. Legally, that was considered equal treatment at the time. 

So there is at least one constitutional infringement premise that the Dems performed and I am certain Rudy and Trump's crack team of lawyers will find others that can be argued. That argument is what goes to the Supreme Court.

 

Fixing the system

And, oddly enough, once President Trump gets through this ordeal, there will be a lot more legal clarity on voting, enough so that the Democrats, and Republicans for that matter, will not be able to game the voting system in this manner anymore. Due to this mess and upcoming Supreme Court rulings (if any cases go there), I even see the possibility of a new Amendment to the Constitution coming that establishes standardized voting conditions and procedures for all elected federal officials.

By going whole hog this go around, the Dems drew their pistol, it got stuck in the holster and they pulled the trigger anyway. They shot themselves in the foot.

 

Voter fraud

As to voter fraud, this is a federal crime and there will be a barrage of cases attacking each fraud, one by one. Infringing federal law does not necessarily made an act unconstitutional, though. But, in my view, it will be hard to get any judgment by a lower federal court concerning a duly proven act of fraud past a Circuit of Appeals court, if the case should miraculously be permitted to ascend. I am unsure of what the constitutional reasoning would be if the election results were proven to be based on fraud, but I am sure that Rudy's Dudes will find the reasoning if they need it.

 

Right to vote

I've read a lot of nonsense about there not being a right to vote in the Constitution. But voting is specifically mentioned and treated in several Amendments to the Constitution (like the 26th, which lowered the voting age for all elections to 18), and this implies a constitutional right to vote for all people considered citizens of the US (which, today, essentially means all adults over 18 who were born here or immigrated and satisfied the citizenship process, as opposed to before when only males were considered citizens with voting rights, or denying that blacks and Indians were citizens and so forth).

I mean, if SCOTUS discovered an implied right to privacy, which is the grounds for legalizing abortion, an implied right to vote is a no-brainer.

 

Legal strategies

Besides, I am not a legal scholar. The legal aces will be all over this. The Dems will argue all this stuff for this particular election based on legal technicalities and precedents for this detail or that in other court decisions. But so long as an opposing underlying constitutional premise is clear on the Trump side, they will get nowhere on their technicalities in the Supreme Court. Maybe not even from the super-liberals President Obama put there.

And once the Supreme Court acknowledges that the election process in any given state was contaminated by unconstitutionality, the election results for that state will have to be declared legally null and void.

 

Back to the state

And then, my guess is that the matter for that state will be turned over to that state's legislature. The good news for Republicans (and President Trump) is that most of the state legislatures are majority Republican.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

btw - Once mail-in votes that are illegal are discounted, don't forget that this will strongly impact the election down-ballot candidates for the Senate and House.

Not in many troves, which were filled out only with votes for President, but in the cases where votes were cast down-ballot.

So I not only expect a Trump win in the end, I expect Republican gains in the House and Senate, at least I see the potential for this.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Guyau said:

People who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender voted heavily for the Democrat. It’s those first two groups that are the preponderance of the population of this American subset. This subset summed to around 7% of the total vote in this election. That makes sense, as I recall estimates of US gay population being 10% of men, lesbian population being 5% of women.

Stephen,

All citizens have the right to vote and have their preferences. I, personally, will defend this against any and all who think differently.

With one caveat:

You left out the dead people subset. As time will show, this subset is huge and they voted Democrat in this election.

I'm not gung ho on their right to vote.

:) 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, I'm not worried about the outcome.

I am 100% certain President Trump will win in the courts.

I'm posting a lot about this because right now we are in an information war and it has to be fought to be won.

But, I admit, I don't look forward to the coming shit-show when the media crowns Biden.

:)

For those who get caught up in it, never forget that the media is not an election official. And there are deadly skilled warriors (metaphorically, of course) on Trump's side. Election officials will be forced to contend with the outcomes of their actions, not the crowing and bluster in the media.

And never forget, a crime cannot be prosecuted until it is committed. We have to let the Dems commit the crime to win. Happily, they are hell-bent on complying with that and are so satisfied, they are leaving proof all over the place.

:) 

Michael

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now for something different.

Michigan AG asks residents to stop telling staff to shove Sharpies up their butts

Quote

The Michigan attorney general pleaded with residents of the state on Thursday to stop telling her staff to shove Sharpies up their butts.

Attorney General Dana Nessel made the plea in a tweet Thursday after a state judge tossed a lawsuit by the Trump campaign that sought to suspend ballot counting in the state.

“Dear members of the public: Please stop making harassing & threatening calls to my staff,” Nessel wrote.

“They are kind, hardworking public servants just doing their job. Asking them to shove sharpies in uncomfortable places is never appropriate & is a sad commentary on the state of our nation,” she added.

:)

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael wrote: But, I admit, I don't look forward to the coming shit-show when the media crowns Biden. end quote

Biden can say what he will, and the progressive press can claim what they wish but the Electoral College does not vote until December 14, 2020. There is no official winner until then. And it doesn't appear that President Trump will concede. So, America has a little over a month to fix this "glitch" and possible theft.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael: "You left out the dead people subset. As time will show, this subset is huge and they voted Democrat in this election. I'm not gung ho on their right to vote."

Here's me and Walter keeping an eye on things at the Old Cemetery here in Lynchburg---Confederate soldiers and all. In this election, Lynchburg voted Democratic for President, and that has not happened since 1948. (In that year, my older sister had favored Dewey, as that guy had a mustache, and she was an eight-year-old fan of Clark Gable.) I'm going downtown in a minute to get some Christian coffee beans---the best roast in town---but at my age, I'll have to leave it to the officials and all the law to keep an eye on whether any dead people have been recorded as having voted without ever leaving the cemetery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen wrote: . . .  I'll have to leave it to the officials and all the law to keep an eye on whether any dead people have been recorded as having voted without ever leaving the cemetery. end quote

I briefly watched an unofficial filming of a poll worker doing mail in voting and it appears they never check to see if the named person on the voting sheet is alive or dead, or if it is a duplicate or a forgery. They simply put the sheet in the counting machine. Perhaps the machine “somehow knows” if it is legitimate but I doubt it. If it looks Ok, in it goes.

“In person voting” requires two people checking your ID and checking your name off a voting list and only then does the voter get near a ballot which they fill in and then cast the ballot into a locked bin for later counting. I don't guarantee I saw the whole process but something definitely appeared off.  

On the Bing Electoral College map Pennsylvania and Georgia have changed to blue leaning Democratic states and Nevada remains blue leaning.

That only leaves North Carolina undecided, leaning red and Republican. As time goes by will more malfeasance occur? It may very well be happening, and North Carolina may suddenly lean Democratic too if my suspicion becomes fact. Yet, Biden does not need to win NC to win the Electoral College vote so the “plot” may allow NC to remain Republican.

Is this a national plot? Is it multiple, localized plots where Trump haters use their local abilities to shift and change the “honestly made vote count?” Both contingencies are worth investigating but I am leaning towards the localized scheming where a poll worker or a post office worker sees a chance to cheat OR simply turns their backs on cheating.

Something is rotten in America, and we may always be left wondering. Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Peter said:

Biden can say what he will, and the progressive press can claim what they wish but the Electoral College does not vote until December 14, 2020. There is no official winner until then.

Peter,

Your post coincided with one I am writing and provided a perfect introduction.

Actually, there is no official winner even after the Electoral College votes. There is an extensive process that ends in the Senate and presided over by the Vice President for the newly elected President to be officially declared winner and eligible for being sworn in.

(Fun fact. VP Gore had to preside over this ceremony for Bush and VP Biden had to preside over it for Trump. Heh. :evil: )

But first, let me say, I am not big on civics because this was taught poorly by my high school way back when and my own independent study since then has been targeted to my interests, not targeted to getting the whole picture. So I am playing catch up ball right now. That means I might make an error here or there on a point simply because I haven't learned it or understood it correctly yet. However, I have learned enough to believe anything I say in error will be a detail, not a fundamental screw-up.

 

A path to victory

With that said, here is another path for President Trump to win.

President Trump could (and probably will) jam up the State and Federal court systems with so many lawsuits of voter fraud and election irregularities that it will be impossible for all the State Governors to issue a Certificate of Attainment and send it to the Archivist of the United States in time for the meeting of the Electoral College, which this year is December 14.

If completion of the lawsuits is projected for beyond the time necessary to complete election formalities, including if there are, or it it looks like there will be, too many valid formal objections to a State's outcome under different formal election scenarios, this could go up to the Supreme Court (and note, someone has to submit it--the Supreme Court does not decide things on its own).

If SCOTUS decides it is impossible to complete election formalities in time for Inauguration Day, it might simply decide a Contingent Election must be called (which is normally used for Electoral College voting ties and formal objections during other election formalities).

A Contingent Election means the President will get elected by the House of Representatives and the Vice President will be elected by the Senate. But with this stipulation: each Senator will get one vote (for VP), but the House has to vote by State Delegation, meaning each State will get one vote only (for President). 

btw - The Contingent Election process is written into the Constitution (Article Two, Section 1, Clause 3) and modified by an Amendment (12th).

 

How the House looks

It so happens in the current House composition there are 26 States with Republican majorities versus 22 Democrat. (The other 2 are essentially ties.)

Granted, the House of the incoming Congress will get this vote after the Jan 3 swearing in ceremony, not the outgoing Congress. But since Pelosi lost seats in the election, even with massive voter fraud, the Republican majority will prevail. That would mean President Trump would be elected by a vote of 26 (or maybe more) to whatever is left--in other words, he would be elected by the majority of States.

 

Past Presidents elected by Contingent Election

There have been three Presidents in the past elected by a Contingent Election: Thomas Jefferson, John Quincy Adams and Rutherford B Hayes (although Hayes's case was a bit more complicated). So based on written law and precedent, this is a perfectly logical and legal path to victory for President Trump.

Michael

 

EDIT: Incidentally, here are a few places I consulted (but I looked at a lot more) to write the above. I recommend you read them if you are interested in this topic. I just learned a whole lot doing so. But if you read them, you will notice that none of them really give a great picture of all the essential facts. Together, it is a different matter. When you add things from here and things from there, it all starts making sense.

Who formally declares the winner of the US presidential election? (The Conversation)

Contingent election (Wikipedia)

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution--Electoral College (The Heritage Foundation)

Electoral College Fast Facts (US House of Representatives)

Here’s How The House Could Decide The Presidential Election—And Its Democratic Majority Wouldn’t Matter (Forbes)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peter said:

Michael wrote: But, I admit, I don't look forward to the coming shit-show when the media crowns Biden. end quote

Biden can say what he will, and the progressive press can claim what they wish but the Electoral College does not vote until December 14, 2020. There is no official winner until then. And it doesn't appear that President Trump will concede. So, America has a little over a month to fix this "glitch" and possible theft.   

There is no official winner until Jan 6 as the EC has to meet twice. Any state can then object and the House and Senate get together to consider the objection. If that state's electors are withdrawn from Biden . . . Trump could win a second term in a legal coup.

Why could thus happen? Joe Biden gets criminally indicted.

--Brant

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the things I have talked about, it looks like Rudy's Dudes are going to first try to annul ballots at the SCOTUS level.

and 

Wow.

Unconstitutional misconduct by Governor Wolf and the State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is going to be the constitutional grounds for taking this to the Supreme Court.

I like it.

:)

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.

This process is going to be death by a thousand cuts.

From Breitbart.

Lawsuit: At Least 21K Dead People on Pennsylvania Voter Rolls

image.png

Quote

There are at least 21,000 dead people on the state of Pennsylvania’s voter rolls, according to an amended lawsuit filed on Thursday.

A lawsuit filed by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) alleges that there are at least 21,000 dead people on Pennsylvania’s voter rolls. The lawsuit claims that Pennsylvania failed to “reasonably maintain” their voter registration records under federal and state law in time for the 2020 presidential election.

“As of October 7, 2020, at least 9,212 registrants have been dead for at least five years, at least 1,990 registrants have been dead for at least ten years, and at least 197 registrants have been dead for at least twenty years,” the lawsuit states.

“Pennsylvania still left the names of more than 21,000 dead individuals on the voter rolls less than a month before one of the most consequential general elections for federal officeholders in many years,” the lawsuit continues.

According to the lawsuit, about 92 percent of the 21,000 dead people on Pennsylvania’s voter rolls died sometime before October 2019. About 216 dead people show voting credits after federally listed dates of death in 2016 and 2018, the lawsuit alleges.

Notice that this lawsuit is not from the Trump campaign, but instead a foundation, and Rudy Giuliani tweeted this article out.

I think that's a signal.

 

On another note, Mitch McConnell weighed in on general terms.

And that's how this is going to play out.

(But, man, is the anti-Trump gloating right now is so loud and obnoxious, I want to spit :) .)

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Notes on Alaska, among the very slowest counting states, according to the Anchorage Daily News.

11 hours ago, Peter said:

Why is Alaska up for grabs with 62 percent, so far, for Trump?

Alaska is not 'up for grabs,' Peter. It is a thoroughly Republican state. 

If you are curious about why Alaska counts slowly, it is mostly because the vast majority of votes are cast by hand-marked paper ballots. According to VerifiedVoting.org, votes are counted by hand and tabulated by machine. 

Each state has very particular rules and procedures that cannot easily be generalized. Alaska has been 'called' by "decision desks" because the outcome is not in much doubt.  See Ballotpedia's extensive page for further Alaska information.

It looks like DecisionDeskHQ has 'called' the election. This is either meaningless, premature, or a harbinger, I think.

See also Ballotpedia's page for certification deadlines (Alaska is expected to certify by November 25, for example).

For even more detail from the Alaska Division of Elections, the state's responsible agency:

alaskasVotingSystem.png

Edited by william.scherk
Added Ballotpedia 'Certification' deadlines; image-link to the 'ballot counting process' page at Alaska's DoE
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Guyau said:

... but at my age, I'll have to leave it to the officials and all the law to keep an eye on whether any dead people have been recorded as having voted without ever leaving the cemetery.

Stephen,

Age is not an excuse to shrug off your civic duties.

:) 

But I will take some of that coffee.

btw - You and Walter look adorable as a couple. I'm not sure adorable the best word, but that accurately describes my feeling on seeing pictures of you two. Also, I get vibes of good people emanating from them.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

Why could thus happen? Joe Biden gets criminally indicted.

Brant,

I didn't like your post for the word "coup" until you later put the above sentence in.

Now I like the post and "coup" is just fine.

It's a metaphor, right?

:)

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned yesterday I contributed $25 to donaldjtrump.com. The President is definitely fighting and asking us to help him. I received a thank you from the site “winred” today.

Today, I also received from the President, the following from the (legitimate) site: 

contact@victory.donaldtrump.com

Peter, Did you see my press conference from the White House last night?
 

If you count the LEGAL votes, I easily win the Election. If you count the ILLEGAL and LATE votes, the Radical Left can steal this Election from us.


I've won many critical states, despite historic interference from Big Media, Big Money, and Big Tech. Democrat-run cities, like Detroit and Philadelphia, two of the most politically corrupt places in America, cannot be responsible for deciding the outcome of this race.
 

They’re trying to STEAL this Election.
 

Remember, Peter, they’re not only trying to STEAL the Election from me - they’re also trying to steal it from YOU. I promise you my team is fighting around the clock to DEFEND the integrity of this Election, but we cannot do it alone. We need EVERY Patriot, like YOU, to step up and make sure we have the resources to keep going. We can’t let America be disgraced by this. I need YOU to FIGHT BACK!
 

Please contribute ANY AMOUNT RIGHT NOW to DEFEND the Election and to increase your impact by 1000%. >>

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

[Quoting Breitbart]: There are at least 21,000 dead people on the state of Pennsylvania’s voter rolls...

I forgot to mention the religious implications.

This is proof positive that there is life after death.

:)

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump could win 2020 election through court challenge: Rutgers Law professor Kristin Myers Thu, November 5, 2020, 6:28 AM EST

With the presidential election still undecided and former Vice President Joe Biden inching closer to victory, the Trump campaign has already moved to challenge the voting count in the states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia, setting the stage for the election to be decided in the courts.

“It is a very likely possibility,” that President Trump could win the election in the court, Rutgers Law Professor Stacy Hawkins told Yahoo Finance Live on Wednesday. “We have lots of indicators of what the justices might do — particularly if the challenge is around Pennsylvania, and the challenged ballots that might come in the day after the election and Friday.”

“Three justices, Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch, have already expressed a willingness to disallow the counting of those ballots. It is expected that Amy Coney Barrett might join them in that,” Hawkins explained. “You have what you need for the makings of the Supreme Court deciding the outcome of the election.”

The campaign has filed lawsuits in Michigan, Georgia, and Pennsylvania. Michigan’s race has been called for Biden with less than 1% of the lead, while Georgia and Pennsylvania remain undecided.

In a statement, Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien said “President Trump’s campaign has not been provided with meaningful access to numerous counting locations to observe the opening of ballots and the counting process, as guaranteed by Michigan law. We have filed suit today in the Michigan Court of Claims to halt counting until meaningful access has been granted.”

The campaign is also demanding the right to “review” all opened ballots from polling places where they weren’t granted access. With the presidential race so close, the Trump campaign is entitled to challenge the results in some states. Trump’s campaign has already demanded a recount in the state of Wisconsin, which went to Biden with less than a 1% lead, according to the Associated Press.

“And it seems as though in all of these key battleground states, as it was last year, these margins are razor thin,” said Hawkins, adding that Wisconsin is “within the margin” for a recount. “We know, at least based on 2016 and based on existing modeling for how close the margins are in each of these states, Michigan and Pennsylvania, in particular, that they are likely to be within the margin for the recount as well.”

People with "Count the Votes" signs are seen during a protest in support of the vote counting in the US presidential election, at McPherson Square after the 2020 US Election Day. Trump's election campaign team has filed a lawsuit trying to stop the counting of all outstanding ballots in Michigan claiming that the campaign team have not been provided with meaningful access to numerous counting locations to observe the opening of ballots and the vote counting. But thin margins aren't the only legal ground for Trump’s challenge. The campaign has also challenged the validity of ballots received and counted after Election Day.

“He is expected to continue to challenge that. In fact, the petition is currently before the Supreme Court to rehear that case. And so there are lots of grounds on which the Trump campaign is expected to be able to challenge the election results,” she said.

According to Hawkins, history can provide clues as to how several Supreme Court Justices will rule if they must make a decision on the election, pointing to the Bush v. Gore case in 2000, where the court ruled in Bush’s favor with a 5-4 Republican majority.

“We know that three of the justices on the Court — Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kavanaugh, and now Justice Amy Coney Barrett, were all part of that ‘Bush v. Gore’ case on behalf of George Bush,” Hawkins pointed out. “We know about their willingness to have the Supreme Court step in, override decisions of the state, and declare the victor of a presidential election in favor of one candidate over the other. And I don't think it's any mystery what candidate that might be.”

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Wow.

This process is going to be death by a thousand cuts.

From Breitbart.

Lawsuit: At Least 21K Dead People on Pennsylvania Voter Rolls

If all 21K dead people "voted" for Biden, that would more than eliminate Biden's current (98% counted, AP figures) 13.6K* lead in Pennsylvania right there.

Ellen

* 3,311,673 Biden; 3,298,011 Trump

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

If all 21K dead people "voted" for Biden, that would more than eliminate Biden's current (98% counted, AP figures) 13.6K* lead in Pennsylvania right there.

Ellen

* 3,311,673 Biden; 3,298,011 Trump

Ellen,

You ain't seen nothing yet.

I heard someone say, I forgot where, that the fat lady hasn't even burbed yet to clean her airways, much less started singing.

A bit colorful, but one hell of an accurate metaphor for what's about to come.

:) 

President Trump is allergic to losing, I think it gives him a rash in delicate places on his body, so he simply outworks everyone to keep from getting it.

With as many legal paths as he has to victory, I don't see how he can't win. (For those who think that sounds weird, it means I don't see how he can lose. :) 

Hang in there...

Incidentally, when President Trump made his announcement at the press conference, many people commented on how down he seemed. Anderson Cooper disgustingly gloated and said he was an "obese turtle on his back flailing in the hot sun, realizing his time is over, but he just hasn’t accepted it."

Those who have a "Trump resonance" (for lack of a better term) like I do, know he actually was sad. But he wasn't sad for himself or from being beaten down by the outcome, or even for realizing the intensity of the upcoming fistfight of governing with a hostile opposition after January 20.

He was sad for the country and deeply hurt to see it damaged by such a blatant attempt at cheating on such a large scale, and sad knowing he is going to do what he has to do. He loves the USA more than almost any person I know and he doesn't want to destroy the people who did this, but he sees he is going to have to do it.

That's what made him sad.

From everything I know and feel about Trump, I know that.

(And he might have been physically recovering a little from all those rallies.)

But the greatest epic battle of his life doesn't make him sad. He thrives on that. He loves it.

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

He was sad for the country and deeply hurt to see it damaged by such a blatant attempt at cheating on such a large scale, and sad knowing he is going to do what he has to do. He loves the USA more than almost any person I know and he doesn't want to destroy the people who did this, but he sees he is going to have to do it.

That's what made him sad.

From everything I know and feel about Trump, I know that.

Bombard, the body language lady, sees what I see, except she adds an element that I wish I had mentioned. I knew it, but the words weren't there yet. So I'm glad she provided them.

Seething controlled fury.

Body Language - President Trump Election Legal Action

image.png

She noted that President Trump was totally on script reading from his paper with no eye contact in the beginning. Tense and under stress. Then he started going going off script and relaxing as he explained the situation. Then he started looking like he wanted to get this over with and get back to planning the destruction of his enemies. Then he would get suddenly calm. Way too calm.

Let me add that he was the tensest when he was talking about the fraudulent acts that damaged the USA the most, not so much him.

She said seeing Trump like this scares her. Her exact quote at the end:

Quote

Diablo Trump. "Actually we're appealing." And he's so calm about it as he says this.

Diablo Trump. He's coming for ya'. You watch. Hell has no fury like God's elect.

:) 

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now