• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: 2020 Presidential Election part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trebuchet said:
False dicotomy. He's lying AND crazy.






Apparently not, since he re-tweeted the fake account. I wonder how long it's been since he's seen her?
Click to expand...

He'd know that his own sister always goes by Elizabeth and not Betty as she is 4 years older than he is. He grew up with her.
 
Ha ha! I found this compilation of Dave Rubin - before, during and after election.

He was someone who had attempted to look like a "libertarian" merely concerned with allowing "free speech" and yet pretty quickly became a very obviously reactionary right-wing figure railing against the "regressive left". I haven't paid any attention to him since he went full "red pill" but had heard he traded in his "classical liberalism" (that even Joe Rogan thought was completely nuts) for going full-throated Trump fan.

Not only is he a Trump fan, but also a MAGA hat-carrying, conspiraloon:

 
SezMe said:
322 pages!! MegaLunacy. (or maybe MAGALunacy)
Click to expand...

Is that a real court pleading or something mocked up? I'm guessing the former only because the Judge in his opinion today rejected a Trump lawsuit with scathing language declaring not only did the plaintiffs fail to prove any claims they also requested a ridiculous remedy.
 
angrysoba said:
Ha ha! I found this compilation of Dave Rubin - before, during and after election.

He was someone who had attempted to look like a "libertarian" merely concerned with allowing "free speech" and yet pretty quickly became a very obviously reactionary right-wing figure railing against the "regressive left". I haven't paid any attention to him since he went full "red pill" but had heard he traded in his "classical liberalism" (that even Joe Rogan thought was completely nuts) for going full-throated Trump fan.

Not only is he a Trump fan, but also a MAGA hat-carrying, conspiraloon:

Click to expand...
How big is this guy's following? On Nov 6 he said no one he knows or who contacts him via the show voted for Biden ergo Trump must have won, or something like that.

I wasn't going to watch at first but it turned out to be pretty funny.
 
acbytesla said:
It might get interesting on Monday. The Michigan GOP party chairman wrote a letter to the Canvassing Board which is made up of two Republicans and two Democrats to delay certification for 14 days so an audit of Wayne County can be conducted. The problem is that all Michigan county boards including Wayne County certified the election results. Michigan law says they "shall" certify the election results.

I'm guessing the Biden campaign will have a request for an emergency writ of mandamus ready the moment the canvassers might refuse certification. Legally speaking, the board has no choice.
Click to expand...

[An aside]If an action by an authority or a political body is required by law, then why create a law that necessitates that action?[/An aside]
 
SezMe said:
322 pages!! MegaLunacy. (or maybe MAGALunacy)
Click to expand...

This is just awesome.

Jeffrey Cutler filed motion to intervene in Rudy's case that was just tossed out is 27 pages (of 322 for some reason) rambling on about the Ku Klux Klan committing murder aided by the [[FBI]]. Executive orders issued by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1942. The short baseball season as a violation of the Declaration of Independence. The translation of Hungarian words. Tigers not practicing social distancing. Bill Cosby stealing art work.

The complaint includes some things in [[brackets]] for some reason. And <ref> HTML tags for some reason. And a good mix of all caps, underlining, and bold text with many cases of ALL THREE because judges love it when you help point things out like that.

You may be surprised to learn that this was file pro se. Shocking, I know.

Cutler was previously elected tax collector of East Lampeter Township. By one vote. No, no, no. I don't mean he got one more vote than his competitor. mean he only got one vote. His own.

Cutler wasn't even running for the office. He voted for himself as a write-in candidate. Tax collector used to be a common elected office. Most of that work got turned over to the counties. But some places still had elected tax collectors, so they technically still had to put it on the ballot. But usually nobody ran. Even if somebody did get elected, they resigned when they found out that it would actually be a lot of work for very little money.

There were 17 people who got one write-in vote. So it went to a drawing by lot. Cutler won.

You can expect how that turned out. He didn't timely turn over the money he collected, billed people twice, people who owed money were updated as fully paid, people fully paid were listed as delinquent and sent to collection agencies, etc. When people went to the office address on the notices to resolve these issues they found themselves talking to a confused storage facility manager who wasn't aware that this guy had set up his tax collection office in one of the storage units.

Cutler was eventually kicked out of office, which was followed by a never-ending flurry of lawsuits. He was successfully sued by the city for legal costs and lost revenue, which he refuses to pay.

To prevent something like this from happening again, the Republican party decide to put up an actual candidate for tax collector, who would then turn over responsibilities to the county. He easily won. But there were some write-in votes, including one for Bernie Sanders and one for Hillary Clinton...and one for Jeffrey Cutler.
 
SezMe said:
[An aside]If an action by an authority or a political body is required by law, then why create a law that necessitates that action?[/An aside]
Click to expand...

I really don't know. The law itself is clear. It doesn't offer any wiggle room. This is why Georgia Governor certified the election results. He was required by law to do so and so are the Michigan state board of canvassers.

The Trump campaign can legally challenge the certified results of either or both but state officials are required to do what the law instructs them to.
 
I must admit, I find myself more irritated at Team Trump's shenanigans than I expected I would be, because it really isn't playing out the way I expected.

I expected Trump and Friends to demand recounts anywhere they could, and the partial recounts in Wisconsin make perfect sense to me. I expected them to try to throw out as many votes as possible, on the flimsiest of technicalities. While that is somewhat anti-democratic, it pays lip service to the law. It's a complete pretense to insist that you respect the law so much that you think you have to throw out a ballot because it wasn't dated, but I would have to grudgingly admit that if the law says the ballot must be dated, it's fair to throw it out if not dated. I expected all those things, and though I dreaded the possible result of that sort of strict adherence to the letter of the law, I would not be able to come up with a good argument for doing anything else.

But that's not what they are doing. The tactics I expected would not be enough, and they know it, so they are just trying to find any possible excuse for disregarding perfectly legal votes. Their lawsuits are so ridiculous that they are making a mockery of the law. They aren't looking for any way they can to eke out some sort of advantage by exploiting a corner of the law here and there. They are just simply putting up something that has the form of a legal complaint, hoping to find a biased judge who will go along with it because he wants their guy to stay in power, and will twist the law into a pretzel to make it happen. Or, perhaps, they don't even want that. Perhaps winning isn't even their goal. Perhaps they're just trolling, or possibly hoping to cast doubt on our institutions and our government, and subverting our legal system for assistance.

It's disgraceful. It's disgraceful that Trump is doing it, directly or via his cronies, and it is disgraceful that so many Republicans are willing to go along with it. At least I am proud of the ones who refuse, like the Georgia Secretary of State, or the Michigan legislators who apparently were not persuaded by Trump's pitch. Congressman Kelly of Pennsylvania, on the other hand, deserves to be tarred and feathered for his role in a lawsuit attempting to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians.

It's a sad time for America.
 
Last edited:
Donald, Rudy and Sidney fully expect the Election Officials and Judges to do what is in the interest of The President, or at least their Party's interest instead of the law.
They are literally privileged, in that they think that there should be a private law for them, and the "common law" for everyone else.
 
Meadmaker said:
I must admit, I find myself more irritated at Team Trump's shenanigans than I expected I would be, because it really isn't playing out the way I expected.

I expected Trump and Friends to demand recounts anywhere they could, and the partial recounts in Wisconsin make perfect sense to me. I expected them to try to throw out as many votes as possible, on the flimsiest of technicalities. While that is somewhat anti-democratic, it pays lip service to the law. It's a complete pretense to insist that you respect the law so much that you think you have to throw out a ballot because it wasn't dated, but I would have to grudgingly admit that if the law says the ballot must be dated, it's fair to throw it out if not dated. I expected all those things, and though I dreaded the possible result of that sort of strict adherence to the letter of the law, I would not be able to come up with a good argument for doing anything else.

But that's not what they are doing. The tactics I expected would not be enough, and they know it, so they are just trying to find any possible excuse for disregarding perfectly legal votes. Their lawsuits are so ridiculous that they are making a mockery of the law. They aren't looking for any way they can to eke out some sort of advantage by exploiting a corner of the law here and there. They are just simply putting up something that has the form of a legal complaint, hoping to find a biased judge who will go along with it because he wants their guy to stay in power, and will twist the law into a pretzel to make it happen. Or, perhaps, they don't even want that. Perhaps winning isn't even their goal. Perhaps they're just trolling, or possibly hoping to cast doubt on our institutions and our government, and subverting our legal system for assistance.

It's disgraceful. It's disgraceful that Trump is doing it, directly or via his cronies, and it is disgraceful that so many Republicans are willing to go along with it. At least I am proud of the ones who refuse, like the Georgia Secretary of State, or the Michigan legislators who apparently were not persuaded by Trump's pitch. Congressman Kelly of Pennsylvania, on the other hand, deserves to be tarred and feathered for his role in a lawsuit attempting to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians.

It's a sad time for America.
Click to expand...

Of minor note, something like this action by Bill Pascrall, Jr, provided that it had effect, could potentially serve as some of the beginning for rectification of the problem.

I’ve just filed legal complaints with the AZ, MI, NV, NY, and PA bars against Rudy Giuliani and 22 other lawyers seeking their disbarments for filing frivolous lawsuits and trying to help Trump steal the election and dismantle democracy.
Click to expand...

Not going to hold my breath on it, but a mass disbarment for those saboteurs would be some concrete action.
 
Meadmaker said:
I must admit, I find myself more irritated at Team Trump's shenanigans than I expected I would be, because it really isn't playing out the way I expected.

I expected Trump and Friends to demand recounts anywhere they could, and the partial recounts in Wisconsin make perfect sense to me. I expected them to try to throw out as many votes as possible, on the flimsiest of technicalities. While that is somewhat anti-democratic, it pays lip service to the law. It's a complete pretense to insist that you respect the law so much that you think you have to throw out a ballot because it wasn't dated, but I would have to grudgingly admit that if the law says the ballot must be dated, it's fair to throw it out if not dated. I expected all those things, and though I dreaded the possible result of that sort of strict adherence to the letter of the law, I would not be able to come up with a good argument for doing anything else.

But that's not what they are doing. The tactics I expected would not be enough, and they know it, so they are just trying to find any possible excuse for disregarding perfectly legal votes. Their lawsuits are so ridiculous that they are making a mockery of the law. They aren't looking for any way they can to eke out some sort of advantage by exploiting a corner of the law here and there. They are just simply putting up something that has the form of a legal complaint, hoping to find a biased judge who will go along with it because he wants their guy to stay in power, and will twist the law into a pretzel to make it happen. Or, perhaps, they don't even want that. Perhaps winning isn't even their goal. Perhaps they're just trolling, or possibly hoping to cast doubt on our institutions and our government, and subverting our legal system for assistance.

It's disgraceful. It's disgraceful that Trump is doing it, directly or via his cronies, and it is disgraceful that so many Republicans are willing to go along with it. At least I am proud of the ones who refuse, like the Georgia Secretary of State, or the Michigan legislators who apparently were not persuaded by Trump's pitch. Congressman Kelly of Pennsylvania, on the other hand, deserves to be tarred and feathered for his role in a lawsuit attempting to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians.

It's a sad time for America.
Click to expand...

The last four years have been a sad time but especially the 1-1.5 years.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
How big is this guy's following? On Nov 6 he said no one he knows or who contacts him via the show voted for Biden ergo Trump must have won, or something like that.

I wasn't going to watch at first but it turned out to be pretty funny.
Click to expand...

I just checked and it looks like he has 1.44 million followers, so that's not tiny.

He started his channel with Sam Harris as his first guest. It was meant to be creating a space for "dangerous" views that went against the grain of PC culture (or something), and it all went downhill from there, with him bringing on ever more obviously reactionary figures until he was just sitting and nodding along to some of the most outrageous members of the alt-right. He said he modelled himself on Larry King which was his excuse for not pushing back against the most reactionary stuff people said, but I think it became clearer and clearer that he wasn't merely a platform for lunatics - he himself is a lunatic and he simply agreed with them.

In fact, I think there is a funny diss video around somewhere where Larry King actually came on his show live and Larry King answered a phone call and spoke for about 5 minutes during the interview while Rubin floundered and said, "uummm ummmm-mm-mm-m-m--m Leeeearry King, Leearry!" or however Rubin's voice can be transliterated.
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
Of minor note, something like this action by Bill Pascrall, Jr, provided that it had effect, could potentially serve as some of the beginning for rectification of the problem.



Not going to hold my breath on it, but a mass disbarment for those saboteurs would be some concrete action.
Click to expand...

it would be a very good move, especially for the overloaded courts, to make it clear that you don't have the right to waste everyone's time.
 
I would describe their behavior as treasonous. Anyone trying to overturn the rightful winner of a democratic election in bad faith is a traitor to the US.

The real shame is there isn’t a way to hold them accountable
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom