Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Meanwhile, this is a pretty good way to start the day. 

 

Not everyone is living in the same movie as President Trump.

 

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

 

The final run of scenarios at Fivethirtyeight (Nov. 3, 2020) are here, at least for now. If I scroll down to the map with the disks for the 100 samples from the 40,000 runs for that day, and run my cursor over the 10 disks for a Trump win, I notice that in each of those 10 maps that pop up, he needed to win Pennsylvania. The one scenario that was a tie 269-269 is a map showing him losing PA, but of course in the case of a tie, the election is decided by the House of Representatives. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

The AP/MSM calling the race has no legal bearing,  no official status, correct?

TG,

None whatsoever.

A tradition has evolved over the years where the projected loser in an election--as a private citizen, not as an authority--concedes the election. This simplifies the large number of formality steps since they become rubber stamping. That cuts down on a lot of work for everyone.

So the public became used to the media calling elections and the media, doing a hell of a lot of peacocking, started acting as if they were official authorities to call elections.

The very fact that you ask this question shows how deep this cultural brainwashing has gone. Well, maybe brainwashing is not quite accurate for all cases. So how about "epistemological bad habit"? 

That sounds about right.

Notice that even you are not sure of who calls the election. But that's not your fault and you are not alone. Up until this fraud happened, I, myself, did not know. So I did a quick dive into civics and discovered who does and here's the short answer: it's the Vice President in front of a special Senate meeting specifically charged for this in the Constitution. All the rest, including the steps before--and especially the big impostor trying to crash the party, the goddam media, only call unfinished assumptions.

 

Civics

So I suggest you go back to my post in this thread for a real quick overview that I am sure you will find relevant since it involves a Constitutional second form of presidential election when there are too many legal objections or a tie :) , then read the articles linked in that post. This is the best crash course in the election process I know of from scratch. There are most likely betters ones out there, but I put this together for my own clarification. 

It's not complete and it may have a dubious point on a detail here or there, but it provides a solid foundation. If you do that, the hoot and hollering right now will not affect you emotionally so much. You will have a proper bullshit meter. Knowledge is power.

In short, without those Constitutional steps being carried out correctly for the Presidential election, there is no winner. And the Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, included a way to contest the results, even if they are only some results, in each step.

So far, the first step hasn't even happened, meaning no State has yet certified the voting result of that respective State. No Governor has yet released a Certificate of Attainment to the Inspector of the United States.

And. to repeat, guess what?

No media organization is part of these steps.

No media company. No media celebrity. None. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

So why are they calling the election and acting as if this is official? For the same damn reason any bad guy has. Because they think they can get away with it.

So be calm and educate yourself on the civics mechanics. It's boring as hell and I certainly empathize with that, but knowledge is power.

 

The Randian way

To put it in a Randian frame:

A = The legal process in the Constitution.

B = The media pretending to be the legal process.

So "A is B" all of a sudden? 

Heh.

:)

If you don't know what A is, the saying "A is A" has no teeth. So you have to learn what A is. There's no way for someone to do that thinking for you if you really want the power that comes from knowledge.

 

Trusted sources of knowledge

And here's a final point on that. The opinion or conclusion of a person you trust is not the same thing as knowledge. It's a stand-in.

So why do we humans accept this as knowledge? Well, we all have mental shortcuts, our brains evolved to work that way, and establishing sources of information we trust to provide conclusions and summaries, etc., is one of those shortcuts.

Is that OK? You betcha.

Using our brains the way they exist is a good thing. And that means it is good and proper to accept the conclusions and opinions of people we trust for knowledge. This keeps us from overloading our brains.

But you have to add to that the Reagan qualification if you want knowledge that corresponds best to reality. When something seems off in what someone you trust says: Trust but verify. And, of course, your own verification with your own eyes and and experience and research takes precedence--or at least it should--over any trust you have for anyone or anything.

That's the best epistemological foundation I can think of to deal with the massive amount of information people have to process in modern society.

Verifying is a pain in the ass, but you gotta do it if you want the best.

 

The big question right now

Do you trust the media for your information? :evil: They're the ones hollering to the 4 winds that Biden won.

:) 

So about a little verification? 

And, surprise, surprise, that's what the courts are for.

:) 

Michael

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

"In 2019, the state of Georgia selected Dominion Voting Systems to provide its new statewide voting system for 2020 and beyond" (Wikipedia).

Can you identify the bug or human error that flipped Georgia from Trump leading to Biden leading?

Gwinnett County runs into another technical issue as Georgia vote count inches to completion

 

Merlin,

I can't because I'm not a techie and I am going on information from sources I trust.

But this guy is likely a good start. It involves Dominion Voting Systems tabulation software.

and

Here is the information in those tweets should Twitter remove them.

Quote

Nate Cain (Parler: NateCain) @cain_nate - Nov 6, 2020

The Gateway Pundit article: HUGE! Corrupted Software Used in Michigan County that Stole 6,000 Votes from Trump — Is Also Used in ALL SWING STATES — PA, GA, NV, MI, WI, AZ, MN!

Text of tweets:

In 2017 I handed over 450+ pages of documents from the the FBI's database to the HPSCI. Included in those documents was one that identified a common tabulation software by Dominion Voting Systems.

It was being integrated into all electronic voting machines. The owner was the former chairman of the George Soros Foundation. I saw the potential for exactly what we are seeing today. An intentionally altered tabulation from the vote count.

What was worse was the FBI's assessment that everything was safe. They completely ignored the monopoly by a partisan company to control the tabulation software for almost all electronic voting machines. Of all the documents I handed over, this was the one document that was Unclassified.

FOIA the hell out of everything the FBI knew about this. There is not much for they can redact on UNCLAS.

Michael

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

The very fact that you ask this question shows how deep this cultural brainwashing has gone. Well, maybe brainwashing is not quite accurate for all cases. So how about "epistemological bad habit"? 

That sounds about right.

Notice that even you are not sure of who calls the election. But that's not your fault and you are not alone. Up until this fraud happened, I, myself, did not know.

You know, I want to argue that, that I already knew the answer. But the truth is that while I knew that intellectually, I was thrown into doubt not by the facts, but by the premature celebrating (edit: and premature surrender from others) being done by those who accept the call as fact. (It didn't help that it was the first thing I saw upon waking up, today.) I chalk it up to gaslighting, and there's been an awful lot of that going around. Not that I know it all, but I find I'm constantly having to remind myself of what I DO know.
I like to think I'm pretty aware of it when it's happening, but I know that I am still susceptible to it, at least in strong doses like we've been getting.

But that said, thanks for the additional intellectual ammo. Gonna need it.

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

And here's a final point on that. The opinion or conclusion of a person you trust is not the same thing as knowledge. It's a stand-in

Related to this...The celebrating, while bothersome, isn't even what bothers me most. It's the premature surrender of people I trust, or at least, those I see fighting for the same goals. For me, it's easier to overcome the celebrating by looking at the facts; that's the "A is A" part. It's harder to deal with the early surrender, because...I don't even know how to describe it succinctly. Maybe it's because gloom is contagious. I guess it requires patience with them while not allowing them to undermine one's own resolve.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A Hollywood movie predicted the current debacle about vote counting machines ages ago: Man of the Year.

"The perception of legitimacy is more important than legitimacy itself."

The Delacroy voting machine company in the movie is very similar to Dominion Voting Systems. Except the glitch in Dominion is not a mnemonic device as in the fictions Delacroy.

 

Dominion

These two tweets below show that the main issue is in some of the hardware in the voting machines being able to be connected to the Internet. From that point, it's a piece of cake for hackers to covertly control the machines.

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

Related to this...The celebrating, while bothersome, isn't even what bothers me most. It's the premature surrender of people I trust, or at least, those I see fighting for the same goals. For me, it's easier to overcome the celebrating by looking at the facts, it's harder to deal with the early surrender, because...I don't even know how to describe it succinctly.

 

TG,

Use this information to adjust the standards you employ for trusting people, especially trusting what they say.

You can still trust someone, and even love them deeply, and yet know you can't count on them in specific situations.

How?

Your own experience and observation: The best validator of all.

You are an extremely intelligent person. Once you get over the shock of seeing premature surrender in people you thought would never do that, you can easily see both what they've done that is wonderful and this crap, too. Just sort it out despite how painful that is.

That's the system I use.

I, myself, like and love some people who are quite flawed in specific areas.

Hell, even Howard Roark did. :) 

I would kill for some of them, too, if someone threatened them for real.

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a piece of advice for anyone who will listen during this shit-storm stage.

Do not try to argue with anyone who is celebrating or gloating.

You will not change their minds on anything right now. Not even on things they see with their own eyes.

Also, take note of all "pro-Trump" people who are now celebrating a media call against Trump. They are celebrating a friggin' media call, the doofuses, not an election result. :) 

So just let the system work--the American system of government is a great system of checks and balances--and, if you can get over any doubts caused by the massive bandwagon effect in the culture right now, get amused at all the bluster.

You can't do anything about it, but you can laugh at it.

:)

President Trump will be sworn in for a second term. I have no doubt of this.

Michael

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

Also, take note of all "pro-Trump" people who are now celebrating a media call against Trump. They are celebrating a friggin' media call, the doofuses, not an election result. :) 

Yeah, I hadn't mentioned them, because I put them in a special "rung of hell" of their own...

That said, there's 2 passages spoken by Dagny in Atlas Shrugged playing through my head, at the moment, when I think about early surrender, because I feel for Dagny's attempts to keep up the spirits of everyone around her:

Quote

“Who is John Galt?”

Dr. Stadler winced. They had gone past the men, when he said, “I don’t like that expression.”

“I don’t, either,” she answered.

and

Quote

 

“I kept seeing you as you were. I couldn’t forget it. And that you should have become what you are—that does not belong in a rational universe.”

“No? And the world as you see it around you does?”

“You were not the kind of man who gets broken by any kind of world.”

“True.”

“Then—why?”

He shrugged. “Who is John Galt?”

“Oh, don’t use gutter language!”

 

"Oh, don't use gutter language!" That line is the one I initially though of today. But when I looked it up, it almost startled me, because it's been so long since I read it. But I had forgot who she was speaking to when said it, the one who said that phrase in this passage...Francisco D'anconia.

That made me smile.

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

 

President Trump will be sworn in for a second term. I have no doubt of this.

Michael

In 2025?

--Brant

couldn't help myself

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody remember this?

image.png

That was the media back then. 

The Chicago political machine's press.

Guess who we had as president for 8 years who came from the Chicago political machine?

What could the press be saying now?...

image.png

Oops, that was the last one...

:)

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Linked to in this post of Michael's:

—-

Nate Cain (Parler: NateCain) @cain_nate - Nov 6, 2020

The Gateway Pundit article: HUGE! Corrupted Software Used in Michigan County that Stole 6,000 Votes from Trump — Is Also Used in ALL SWING STATES — PA, GA, NV, MI, WI, AZ, MN!
 

—-

If that's true, it provides a mechanism for implementing the game plan I suspect, as I indicated previously here.

"Methinks the (supposed) end tally was planned in advance to mirror reverse 2016."

Ellen

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The news organizations declaring victory for Biden today occupied all the news media.

Surprise, surprise.

So the following did not get through very much.

And Twaddle didn't even think to figure out a way to downplay President Trump's announcement. 

The following is the video of that press conference, which was with Rudy, not President Trump. Sorry to use BitChute as the only video, but we all know there is a high risk of YouTube screwing with this. Besides, why link to YouTube anyway if other, more trustable, alternatives are available?

TRUMP'S LAWYER RUDY GIULLIANI'S PRESSER ON BRAZEN ELECTION FRAUD IN PENNSYLVANIA(NOV. 7, 2020)

image.png

 

Rudy and civil rights

I keep saying I would not want to be on the other side of Rudy in a lawsuit. He's brutal, but not in a tidal wave way. He's like a big super-organism all by himself collecting legally relevant facts that zero in on the kill spot on his target, eliminating all excess fat and irrelevant things, for as interesting as they may be, avoiding projections for the future, describing contexts that even his harshest opposition cannot deny, and fashioning a case that OJ's Dream Team would find impossible to debunk, even on the tiniest of minutia.

Here's an example. Rudy is not making, at root, an election fraud case for the Republican observers who were denied access to the ballot counting areas for the mail-in ballots. He is making a civil rights case for President Trump's Campaign, which was denied civil rights in this vote counting issue.

Since a civil rights crime is a federal crime, this is going straight into Federal Court, which, I imagine, has a fast track to the Supreme Court if challenged due to the urgency of the election process deadlines.

In this one case, Rudy is asking for an initial remedy of eliminating all non-observed ballots from the tallies. He's also making the case open-ended so it will become huge by allowing other states with the same complaint to be added to it. 

As of now, he has sifted through observers reporting fraud to date and come up with, if I remember what I just heard correctly, about 50 to 60 poll watchers he finds credible who will testify in court. When this is over, there will be many, many more. That's not his only evidence, either.

This one case, when it gets done, will probably determine the election in favor of Trump by the normal count of legal votes. After all, in Pittsburgh, there are 300,000 mail-in ballots that fall under this crime and about 150,000 to 200,000 in Philadelphia. In fact, there are about 600,000 mail-in ballots all told in Pennsylvania that are affected by this single illegitimate process. Those same ballots may have other fraud issues, too. And that's just Pennsylvania.

 

The death by a thousand cuts

This will probably change the elections of several members of Congress as gravy. (Rudy didn't mention this last since he is laser-targeted on one highly vulnerable kill-spot--President Trump's Campaign's civil rights.)

But Rudy's not done. Like I said in an earlier post, he's going for death by a thousand cuts. He mentioned that in Pennsylvania, there are other premises for other suits he is preparing. Cases both big and small. Dead people voting. Ballots found on Nov. 4 or later fraudulently postmarked by backdate to Nov. 3. And so on. That's only Pennsylvania.

I speculate that this is because Pennsylvania is the easiest target of several easy targets :) . Rudy is going after other the problem States--Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina and others. He is making lawsuits on as many grounds as he can find evidence.

The court filing process starts Monday. At that point, you will probably see the media start to tone down the celebration a bit and start getting testy at times. It's going to be fun to watch as this gets worse. :) 

 

Moments in the press conference

One reporter, whose comments I could not make out too clearly, questioned the integrity of the poll watchers. Rudy asked if the reporter can produce a person to testify to the contrary or at least sign an affidavit under penalty of perjury. Rudy said he couldn't find one. There was some back-and-forth after that, but the fire had gone out of the reporter. :) 

Two of the of more satisfying moments in the video.

1. At 27:54, Rudy said:

Quote

There's also a very strange thing that happened which will be part of our case. At some point during the process when the lead of President Trump reduced from something like 50,000 to 30,000, at the time it was at 50,000, 94% of the vote had been cast. And when we got to 30,000, there was only 90% of the vote cast. 

Now, I can get experts to tell you how that happens. That happens because, think about it, you increase the denominator. What you increase the denominator with? New ballots. Nobody was informed of new ballots unless people were writing them up.

This will be a very, very strong case. And I know you won't accept it because of your hateful biases, but see if you can try thinking rationally.

Boom!

:)

2. Immediately thereafter (28:49), a reporter asked him why he thinks his efforts are going to overturn the call for Joe Biden. At first Rudy was stupefied with the sheer dumbness of this question. Then he asked, "Who called it?" The lady said: "All the networks." Then Rudy mercilessly mocked the person while making worshiping gestures toward the sky. "Oh my goodness. All the networks. Woooow. All the networks! We have to forget about the law..." and on and on... :) 

Watch this video. It will help with the shit-storm when the weight of the mockery and pontification gets too heavy. 

:)

These fools have no idea about the size o the monster they just unleashed on themselves. And that's just Rudy. Imagine a team of people like that. All being led by one super-competent and really pissed off President Trump.

Michael

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

2. Immediately thereafter (28:49), a reporter asked him why he thinks his efforts are going to overturn the call for Joe Biden. At first Rudy was stupefied with the sheer dumbness of this question. Then he asked, "Who called it?" The lady said: "All the networks." Then Rudy mercilessly mocked the person while making worshiping gestures toward the sky. "Oh my goodness. All the networks. Woooow. All the networks! We have to forget about the law..." and on and on... :) 

Priceless. :D That alone, right there, just made my night.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ThatGuy said:

Priceless. :D That alone, right there, just made my night.

 

TG,

Did you notice that Rudy is not angry?

If fact, he looks like he is having fun.

But not ha ha kind of fun. He's in a state of super focused fun--flow in the Csikszentmihalyi sense.

He's a badass.

:)

Michael

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

TG,

Did you notice that Rudy is not angry?

If fact, he looks like he is having fun.

But not ha ha kind of fun. He's in a state of super focused fun--flow in the Csikszentmihalyi sense.

He's a badass.

:)

Michael


"Csikszentmihalyi"...guess I should go look that up...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihaly_Csikszentmihalyi

Ah, got it.


 

Flow

Main article: Flow (psychology)
 
Mental state in terms of challenge level and skill level, according to Csikszentmihalyi's flow model.[13] (Click on a fragment of the image to go to the appropriate article)

In his seminal work, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, Csíkszentmihályi outlines his theory that people are happiest when they are in a state of flow—a state of concentration or complete absorption with the activity at hand and the situation. It is a state in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter.[14][page needed] The idea of flow is identical to the feeling of being in the zone or in the groove. The flow state is an optimal state of intrinsic motivation, where the person is fully immersed in what they are doing. This is a feeling everyone has at times, characterized by a feeling of great absorption, engagement, fulfillment, and skill—and during which temporal concerns (time, food, ego-self, etc.) are typically ignored.[

Quote

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Anybody remember this?

image.png

That was the media back then. 

The Chicago political machine's press.

Guess who we had as president for 8 years who came from the Chicago political machine?

What could the press be saying now?...

image.png

Oops, that was the last one...

:)

Michael

Michael, it appears you need to review your civics lessons...
😉
 

 

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