A blunt message about who is conning whom in the aftermath of the 2020 elections.

Kevin Williamson has some great thoughts on this also. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-dumbest-coup/

This is not coming from mainstream media.

This raises some uncomfortable questions for conservatives. One of those questions is: How long are we going to keep pretending that this madness isn’t madness? Another is: How long will we continue to pretend that what’s being broadcast by Fox News and talk radio is political commentary rather than the most shameful, irresponsible, and unpatriotic kind of sycophantic for-profit propaganda? A third is: What exactly is the benefit — for our ideas, and for the country — of making common cause with these lunatics and hucksters?

Just from someone who has opposed Trump since he was running in 2016. Check Jim Geraghty’s tweets from back then.

Conning, if it is being practiced by Trump (doing so requires knowledge of motive - a most tricky thing), is not his exclusive domain.

If you believe that there was nothing wrong with the election, then there should be no reason not to audit all the allegations. Why are people who hate Trump so resistant to look into these matters? If Biden won legitimately, then we should have total transparency. A lot of people including 1/3 of democrats believe that the election was stolen. Whether it was or not, we need to have transparency and safeguards for any future elections. This is a bigger issue than Trump. It is about whether or not we want to give up the right to elect our leaders and let a few key cities vote without oversight. Even the chairman of the Federal Election Commission has concerns. I do not want to ignore those concerns regardless of who ends up being the next president. I am also very concerned about those who are willing to to ignore violations of the election law and do not want any reforms to protect the integrity of our elections.

Yesterday, as I drove through the small, rural WA town where I live, I came upon several crazed individuals gathered at a main intersection, at each corner. They waved signs about stolen elections. They even went so far as to claim the GOP challenger for Governor was defrauded out of an election win. The challenger lost by 13 points, and was the hapless Chief of a one man police department (he being the only officer) in rural WA. The city fired him a day or so after the election.

There is a special kind of lunacy animating these folks on street corners. It’s not far off from Giuliani’s crazed presser during which hair dye melted in rivulets down his face, giving him a passing resemblance to a mis-gendered Tammy Bakker.

I watched Candice Owens attempt to defend this madness under questioning from British journalist Andrew Neil just this past Thursday. It was pitiful. You can see the gleam in her eyes; that sheen that marks a true believer. She couldn’t answer Neil’s questions, and her stock rantings against “the mainstream media” had little punch while speaking to an amused British journalist who conducted the interview from his home in France …

I’ve read it suggested that Trump’s defeat will become a latter day “lost cause;” a hagiographic myth that inspires those who seek inspiration and soothes the consciences of those who want convenient explanations for their own misguided loyalties. I suspect this is correct.

And, to conclude, I remind everyone Trump lost.

Yes, there are loonies on the Right, and loonies on the Left. But we still need to investigate all reasonable claims of voter fraud. They don’t look very likely just now, but let’s wait until they all play out. I’m intrigued by the Nevada claim posted earlier in SI. If true, that should be easily investigated. Either there were, or were not more votes cast for President in Nevada than total votes cast. Does anyone know the answer to this one?

Just saw the update on a different thread. The original claim proves to be untrue. There were Not more votes cast for President in Nevada than total votes cast. Another claim laid to rest. That’s what must be done. Deal with them one by one until they are either substantiated or falsified. When the claims have all been properly investigated, we can all breath a sigh of relief, and get on with life after the election.

[G. N. Barkman]

Yes, there are loonies on the Right, and loonies on the Left. But we still need to investigate all reasonable claims of voter fraud. They don’t look very likely just now, but let’s wait until they all play out. I’m intrigued by the Nevada claim posted earlier in SI. If true, that should be easily investigated. Either there were, or were not more votes cast for President in Nevada than total votes cast. Does anyone know the answer to this one?

I mean no disrespect, but did you watch the whole Giuliani press conference or are you just reporting what you have heard about it? It noticed that it was really long and the link we had to it was really glitchy and broken up. I am wondering if anyone has a link to the whole thing that is not so glitchy.

Watched Rudy’s whole thing. Turned it off when Powell’s turn came. Saw Jenna “JMac” Ellis smirking behind him all the while.

Watched Rudy’s whole thing. Turned it off when Powell’s turn came. Saw Jenna “JMac” Ellis smirking behind him all the while.

What is the “JMac” comment about and how does your repeated mocking of people build your credibility? I hope you don’t do that to people in your congregation. Let us deal with the substance of the statements rather than name calling and making fun of peoples appearances.

The JMac comment is because JMac retained her (and others) to defend him in his lawsuit. Trump’s absurd arguments do not deserve respect. He is attempting to influence States to appoint electors who will do his bidding. His actions are beyond the pale, and he must go. He is a cancer on this country, and it’s a shame so much of the American Church has married itself to him.

I suspect the “lost cause” explanation will indeed take effect, and it will be a false rallying cry for many people for a very long time. I’ve no doubt Trump himself will trumpet this to the heavens regularly once he eventually leaves office. That is quite sad. What’s perhaps sadder is the number of evangelicals who will continue to follow him with stars in their eyes.

Why are people who hate Trump so resistant to look into these matters?

I haven’t seen reluctance to look into specifics. The way the law works, you make specific charges and back them with evidence. This has been happening every day since election day.

Similarly, where there are irregularities short of illegality, there are officials with the job of examining them, figuring out what happened, maybe auditing, maybe recounting, based on legal requirements.

This has also been going on pretty much every day since election day.

So we have the real things going on and we have various versions of a Big Story being told. The Big Story is the absurdity. “Reluctance” is more than it deserves.

Meanwhile, some real stuff going on in Wis… From state Senator Kathy Bernier (11/20 update email).

Since my last Update, President Donald Trump’s Campaign has requested a recount of all ballots cast in both Dane and Milwaukee Counties. Those efforts are getting underway today and will continue until completed, likely pausing only on Thanksgiving Day. The deadline for completion is noon on December 1st. The President’s Campaign has indicated that a number of lawsuits could result from this partial recount.
The Dane County recount will run daily from 8:00am to 8:30pm and can be viewed online here. The Milwaukee County recount will run daily from 9:00am to 5:00pm and can be viewed online here.
Because of the ongoing recount and anticipated court cases to follow, we are postponing our Elections Committee Hearing until a later date. A dedicated inbox has been created for residents state-wide to report potential election-related issues or discrepancies. Before sending a report, please keep the following in mind:

• The information regarding potential fraud or irregularities should be first-hand and specific. Hearsay, non-specific events and news reports are unlikely to be useful.
• Include as many details of the incident in your report as possible (who, what, where and when).
• Include available supporting materials that would be helpful in supporting the allegation. This could include photos or names of witnesses.
• Include personal contact information when possible. Anonymous submissions will be accepted, but it may limit the value of the provided information.

Please submit information to: election.complaints@legis.wi.gov.

“Unlikely to be useful” and “limit the value” are very gracious ways to say “a complete and total waste of time.” :-D

Mostly election officials and workers take their work very seriously and have done their jobs… Or are still doing their jobs.

So I watched a video the other day of the judge talking to the Trump campaign. I will try to find out. But here is what the judge said.

“So you brought me all of these affidavits as evidence. Let me get it right. You received a lot of affidavits through your website. Some you were able to prove as false. The other ones you could not definitely prove were false. The ones that you could not definitively prove were false, you threw into this court case as the basis of this filing?”

Trump’s lawyers said yes.

“The judge said that is not how this works. You need to bring affidavits that are true.”

This is just typical of all of the cases being brought forward.

The longer this goes on, the more it appears that Trump’s team is unable to provide evidence of fraud, or even evidence that demands further investigation. This is, in one sense, disappointing, given the many serious charges that have been made. It is, on the other hand, encouraging, that apparently there has not been widespread fraud, and that the election was clean and fair. That would not be clear if these charges were not allowed to be presented. If Trump had simply conceded, suspicions aroused by these charges would not die. Perhaps now, they can be laid to rest. Although some will never believe the evidence, I’m confident a strong majority will. That can only happen if the precess is allowed to run its course.

It’s over generous to credit Trump for pursuing charges he mostly ginned up himself by telegraph ahead of time that if he didn’t win it would be a defacto stolen election, that mailed ballots can’t be trusted, that the system is rigged, etc.

And then immediately following not winning, he started encouraging his fan base to report any and all hints of irregularity, whether they were factual or not. He didn’t care. If he did care, he didn’t breathe the vaguest hint of caring and gave every indication that he wanted election officials to be flooded with reports.

Why this strategy? Lots of theories, but there’s no way to be sure. Maybe he fundamentally misunderstands how the legal system works and thinks that if you have a huge enough pile of claims it doesn’t matter if none of them are true. I’ve met plenty of people who think, in a debate, that a large quantity of bad arguments somehow adds up to a good case. So that wouldn’t surprise me.

Maybe he just intends to shore up his Big Story that he was robbed of the election because he believes this narrative will make him more powerful in his post-presidential career: since he’ll have a vast mob of conspiracy theorists adoring him.

So the piles of nonfactual allegations feed the conspiracy narrative.

Now, I know, I’m going to hear “your subjective judgment, Aaron.” But it’s not that easy. There’s this thing called inductive reasoning, where accumulated evidence (not accumulated groundless claims) support a generalization with a high level of probability. (e.g. I’ve seen fire burn wood many times, ergo, wood is flammable.) The evidence that Trump is the sort of person to do just what I’ve described is mountainous.

The conclusion is not subjective. It’s level of probability is debatable but it’s an objective assessment of evidence.

So… no, I don’t give him credit for all this silly legal nonsense.

Yes, I do give credit to local investigators who have looked into claims, being faithful in doing their jobs. I’m not against all the followup. I don’t credit Trump for taking legal action on a deluge of unsupportable claims he greatly encouraged.