Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - noel c.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8
General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 11, 2020, 12:36:00 AM »

“You say installed but not elected?”

Yes, I did.

“So tens of thousands of voters in just a few states were all able to bypass the security that was in place to keep this from happening.”

What security?

“And what evidence has been presented so far?  None.”

What investigation has there been so far?

“What is your cut off for calling it wide spread?  Will you agree it is not widespread if the number of fraudulent ballots in a state of 5 million is under 100?  Under 1,000?“

You are already negotiating the cutoff number for “widespread” fraud? What kind of confidence in your team is that?

“If you think they will not find enough fraudulent ballots to over ride the results we have now, why not concede the race and get on with the transition?“

I don’t want undermining of the voting process to matter only when it is successful, it will inevitably bleed into other elections where small percentages are more frequently making a big difference.

“Maybe it is because Trump really does not care about election security but about chaos.”

Right, Trump is enamored of chaos. Why is it so difficult for you to understand that Trump believes he can win this?

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 10, 2020, 07:00:04 PM »

“I suspect that if Trump spoke in favour of a flat earth, you'd become a flat earther too.”

You never fail to meet my expectations.


“What security waivers? Which states? What specific fraud issue are you concerned with?”

I have answered you below, but be let me state clearly that I am not soliciting an assessment of fraud adequate to change the final result, as stated way back in this thread. I believe that Biden will be installed as President. What I expect from pending suits, and investigations, is conclusive proof of widespread fraud, largely through individual initiative. There are highly motivated partisans who would go so far as to elect Biden, even if he is impeachable upon taking office. What could be done to make that happen, likely has been done.

I do not want it repeated in two months, two years, or the election that will replace Biden.

My concerns:

- Ballot harvesting (Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia all statutorily condone the practice, but from a practical perspective, any State that allows unmonitored ballot drop-boxes is a harvester-friendly State.)

- Unsolicited ballot applications (Eleven States, including Minnesota, Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Maryland, Wyoming, South Dakota, Illinois, Nebraska, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, )

- Unsolicited ballots (Vermont, Nevada, District of Columbia, California, New Jersey, Colorado, Hawaii, Utah, Washington, Oregon)

- Obstructed poll observer accommodation; Pennsylvania, and Michigan, due to local determination authority. I see this is as a blatant violation of civil rights. States are entitled to legislate rules for partisan observers, but not if there will be meaningfully effective partisan observers. (Four States have mandatory Federal election observers; Alaska, California, Louisiana, and New York, which are linked to racial civil rights enforcement. This number is down from thirteen a few years ago.)

- Unpurged voter rolls (all states are required to “maintain” voter rolls, but only Wisconsin, Ohio, Kentucky and Georgia made the news for doing it. Even these States do not clear the rolls every election cycle.)

- Lack of voter identification requirements (California, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Wyoming, and Washington, D.C.)

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 10, 2020, 11:48:25 AM »

“To second m^2 his statements are going to deepen the political divide of the nation.”

On that I guarantee you are correct, in retrospect would you still ignore concerns expressed by the right regarding ballot security?

“I'm guessing posters like you will continue to claim fraud in this election without evidence for years because you believe this clown.”

You keep asserting that people need Trump to tell them security waivers pushed by the left are harmful, step outside of your echo-chamber if you have an issue with problems that were self-inflicted.

“There will never be any evidence... “

So you say.

“... but the conspiracy theories are going to live on and on.”

I love your pejorative use of language, but yes, unless corrective measures are allowed to run their course, a significant portion of the country will deem Biden illegitimate. I suspect his legitimacy will also be compromised by any substantial findings of voter fraud. 

“It's going to make it harder for Biden to govern.”

Who could have seen that coming?

“Trump and his acolytes are going to continue to be a plague on the nation.“

You are talking about half of the “nation”.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 10, 2020, 10:30:26 AM »

“The man is unhinged. He makes these kind of statements everyday with no follow through and no evidence.”

If you are right, then his efforts will come to nothing, correct?

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 10, 2020, 01:16:59 AM »

Just when you were beginning to sound reasonable you post this:

“Substantiated Voter Fraud:
Terri Lynn Rote
Fraudulent Use of Absentee Ballots... “

She was sentenced to two years probation for mailing in an absentee ballot, and then personally delivering a second at her designated voting station.

She was probably given probation for being criminally stupid. I wish the pros were this dumb.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 10, 2020, 01:02:04 AM »

“Obamagate Obamagate anybody?

You believe that both Barry, and Uncle Joe were, unaware of, and uninvolved in:

- FISA abuse?
- Unpredicated counterespionage operations against Republican candidates before, during, and after the 2016 election by the FBI?
- Illegal unmasking by Barry appointees, including Uncle Joe, of American citizens?
- Agency head; Comey, Clapper, Brennan lying to Congress regarding surveillance of American citizens?

“Citizenship question on the census?“

And it is coming back, are you worried? I have never heard of sweeps to deport Canadians.

“Lying about the use of armed forces to clear Lafayette square?”

Are you talking about the  D.C. National Guard, or the Park Police? The former never took action against the crowd. Barr, and the Park Police, observed the crowd throwing “projectiles”. Barr authorized, and the police responded with pepper balls, about thirty minutes prior to the official curfew. You are probably confused regarding Barr’s denial of the use of tear gas.

“Embarrassing himself over Roger Stone?“

This could be considered damning to only a very niche subset of leftist wacko. It is you who are embarrassing yourself.

“The man is basically an uber-partisan...

No, he is basically a Bush Republican who is wearied by the crap left behind following Barry’s residence in the White House. I understand why that qualifies as “Uber” to people like you. Along with the rest of us, Barr rolls his eyes when Trump goes feral.

“... continuously jamming semi-automatic rifle, with a misaligned scope and loaded with nothing but blanks.“

So you are not concerned in the least by Barr taking action against election fraud, and we will not hear another word from you on the subject, correct?

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 09, 2020, 09:25:21 PM »

Of all of the genuinely conservative “multidimensional“ Republican candidates (Fiorina, Cruz, Carson, Santorum, Paul, Huckabee, Jindal, and Walker) you settled for John Kasich, and his single-payer healthcare was a peripheral issue for you?

Do you see why I might question your self-identification?


“It was only a matter of time... Trump's personal lawyer Bill Barr directs the US Justice Department to find ways to keep the president in power (that is "investigate vote fraud")”

Left-leaning Americans are justified in being concerned that Barr is on board. Involvement by the Justice Department is not a half-cocked decision by this particular AG, in spite of snide Canadian commentary to the contrary. Neither does Bill Barr shoot blanks.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 09, 2020, 06:56:28 PM »

“Never said I was for Medicare for all,  just that Kasich would have been better than Trump.  You keep making assumptions about me. And almost all of them are wrong.”

Just for clarity, you are “conservative”, and Kasich’s Medicare position was not a deal breaker for you?

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 09, 2020, 12:46:28 PM »

“Too bad I am not on the left.”

The Kasich “Medicare for all” right, is the left.

“This was a planned outcome from the Republican legislatures to cause this chaos. One that would have been easily solved. Let the mail in ballots get pre canvassed.“

Early vote result publication is a really bad idea. Is that what the issue is?

“Did you miss the part where three larger states did not have an issue since they did allow the pre canvass?”

Yes, I am busy working.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 09, 2020, 10:31:38 AM »

“This whole fiasco was caused by Republican state legislatures creating this delay and the complaining about the delay.”

This is a fiasco, isn’t it, but it was caused by lax ballot security. Just own it, and live with the consequences. Investigations are going forward regardless of whining from the left.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 09, 2020, 09:37:16 AM »

“Leave the investigations to state’s attorneys general to run after the election to secure the next election.“

Yes, I think that you are correct about the results being decisive, but not because of “100” fraudulent votes. The lefties created conditions for election fraud for purposes of electoral expediency that are likely to now nip them in their glutes.

Conservatives do not want a repeat of election meddling two months from now in Georgia.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 08, 2020, 07:10:19 PM »

“People keep saying, ‘But you could!But people don't.  People who attempt to submit fraudulent votes by and large get caught, and their votes don't count.”

Military Maxim:

“Do not base your plan of action on what the enemy would do. Base your actions on what the enemy could do.”

Rear Admiral Richmond Turner foolishly led three heavy cruisers to annihilation, and a fourth scuttled, constituting the worst U.S. naval defeat of WWII, at the battle of Savo Island on August 8th, 1942 by ignoring this common-sense application of military doctrine. There is a reason that political contests are called ”campaigns”.

As I was already aware, and you pointed out, the voting integrity commission did not find an absence of voter fraud. I am also aware of Tenth Circuit District Court Judge Julia Robinson’s decision on Kansas’s 2018 voter identification law, which similarly did not find an absence of voter fraud (67 cases), yet struck down the law notwithstanding. Judge Robinson is wrong, and that precident will not survive review by the current Supreme Court. Bank on it.

You keep referring to voter fraud, that was detected, as quasi-proof that all voter fraud is detected, and punished. You are not going to force an explanation of what is wrong with that reasoning, are you? When estimating cockroach infestation, spotting a single one during daylight hours is a pretty good indicator that 27+ are staying under protective cover.

Conversely, claiming that little, or no, voter fraud was ”proven“, and therefore little, or no, voter fraud ”exists“, is formally an argument from ignorance. I am not going to chase that canard no matter how many times you repeat it, especially as applied to current conditions promoting cultivated non-traceability of unsolicited ballots.

“The evidence I see supporting vigorously checking and following up on potential voter fraud in the U.S. seems worthwhile.”

Great, we are in agreement.

“Enforcement and having a good database result in the findings that attempts at voter fraud, intentional or no, don't result in invalid ballots being included in final election results (in the news reports I have found.)“

Yes, that is the basic premise behind treating opportunity for fraud, as likelihood of fraud. Door locks are not an esthetic design feature.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 08, 2020, 12:41:06 PM »
Grant’s attempted humor aside; does anyone on this board really expect that flaws in election security will not be exposed in the course of pending Republican investigations? If so, send me a PM, and let’s lay odds.

Another election is coming in 2022, again in 2024. Georgia will be going through this drill in only two months. Democrats have an interest, equal to Republicans, in getting it right. The best way to perpetuate/embolden election fraud is to make it safe to commit, and only confidence in election results can establish groundwork for a “reconciliation“, that Biden claims to seek.

What kind of screws do you need to have loose to roll-over on the integrity of the most fundamental operation in a viable democracy? Democrats have invited doubt into the process by sacrificing security to enhance their candidate’s prospects.

This is the price of that expediency.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 08, 2020, 11:43:49 AM »

“You may be unaware of this Noel, but that's understandable.  This was part of the secret meeting.  But I'll let you know because you won't believe me anyways.”

Thank for an insider’s perspective.

“Canada is actually the center of the socialist conspiracy.  It's totally not a backwater.  Trudeau is actually pulling the strings for Venezuela, China, and Norway.  When world socialism is made reality, Ottawa will be revealed as the world globalist capitol.”

Ah, I suspected as much.

“I addition, I don't think that the ignorance of the majority of Americans can be used as evidence to prove that something is unimportant.”

Now you are shaking my confidence. Is Grant an American?

“The majority of Americans can't even name a single Supreme Court Justice.  The majority of Americans also believe that Biden is preferable to Trump.  I don't know if you want to use that as evidence for anything.”

Umm, Biden’s nomination was a Democratic brain fart? I follow you.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 08, 2020, 05:59:47 AM »

“If the Utah legislature has adopted universal mail-in voting safeguarded by a digital database, matching signatures, and unique identifiers on ballots, envelopes, and voters, and Utah is in the running for most conservative state in the U.S., with the Utah legislature run by a Republican supermajority, where does that fit on the discussion of whether every vote being able to count being or not being a conservative vs. liberal concept?”

One of the current lawsuits is focused upon electronic signature verification failure. What the technicalities are behind that alleged failure are yet to be publicly clarified, but there should be a way to create a readily accessible low-resolution signature verification system readable at the poll. My issue with Utah’s present system is that the State sends out unsolicited live ballots, and I do not have confidence that an electronic signature record has the resolution, or nuanced pen stroke pressure detection capability, to reveal even a mediocre forgery. Banks use fingerprints as a backup to signatures for that reason. Taken to that level of security, a hypothetically revised Utah system would work regardless of irresponsibly distributed ballots. Utah has a long way to go before it is there however.

“But really how do we commit voter fraud?“

Fraud in a mail-in ballot scenario is defined as someone, other than the authorized voter, casting the ballot, or unduly influencing the rightful voter’s selections. 

" ‘Banana republic’ voter fraud is committed by the government, regardless of the votes actually cast.”

That is not usually how it happens. Enthusiastic Party supporters are the typical tool of election fraud. We had our Tammany Hall, or "boss," politics of Chicago, which mirror South American tactics of power acquisition.

“Manipulation of individual ballots is by definition a small scale operation.“

Not if corruption is culturally endemic and highly motivated, in conjunction with insecure ballot distribution. Harvesting schemes also defy a “small scale” definition.

“Submitting fake ballots is limited by the ability to forge someone's signature, and is only possible to slip through if the actual voter does not vote,“

Assuming instantaneous detection, how is that conflict resolved?

“... which is protected by the risk of a felony.“

Only if there is a substantial chance of getting caught. Tell me how that happens.

“So that's the risk of mailing out ballots to all registered voters, right?“

As amended, correct.

“Fake voters, non-eligible voters, dead voters, are all completely traceable and verifiable for the purpose of protecting the records.”

Traceable how?

“Large scale fraudulent voting (enough to affect an election), is not possible with the current standards available in the U.S.“

That is what Democrats would have you believe, however; only critical counties need to be targeted in a close election, not an entire network of State polls.

“Fraudulent voting of any type is a negligible problem in the U.S.  (It is also a negligible problem in Canada, coincidentally.) This is not a tautology. It is a fact.“

You just walked off the plank. How are you going to prove a negative?

“People keep saying, ‘But you could!’ But people don't.  People who attempt to submit fraudulent votes by and large get caught, and their votes don't count.”

You are going circular on me again.

“I am not aware of any studies finding any widespread problem of voter fraud.  Every study created finds no evidence of non-negligible voter fraud.”

Every study of what election(s)? Certainly you are not going to tell me that late 19th to early 20th century New York, or Chicago, pass the sniff test. How about Peronist Argentina, or modern Bolivia, Uruguay, and (again) Argentina? Where leftist ideology gains a foot-hold, electoral corruption flourishes, and power concentrates. Contemporary Democratic politics have taken a decidedly unapologetic socialist turn.

“People continue to make allegations, but no one has found evidence which matches the allegations.  People who try, appear to get caught.”

There you go again; how would you know? Even Donald concedes fraud will occur. I contend that current political environment is an incubator for significant voter fraud. Let the investigations run their course.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 08, 2020, 02:37:20 AM »

“Depending on the state, getting a mail in ballot can require certain pre-conditions to be met which he wouldn't qualify for. I know my 2004 mail-in ballot required me to certify that I going to be outside of the area on election day and unable to physically vote in person. They've since changed the laws on that prior to Covid19, but other states still retained the more restrictive criteria until this year's events.”

I think absentee ballots should be reserved for absentee voters. There are distinct drawbacks to their use. If an “hour” wait is the best rational that Drake can come up with, and he has to search CNN to find that, his argument is difficult for me to take seriously.


“Some might view insulting someone's residence as an apparent argument to disregard their opinion as a personal attack.”

Did you make reference to the “metropolis of Spanish Fork”, and are you “... disregarding my opinion”? Do I need to recalibrate my sensitivity to feel “attacked”?

“But I guess it's true that Canada is socialist and also that it's a backwater, Noel C. implies, so it's not really an insult?”

It is socialist, and internationally Canada is an economic, military, trade, and policy lightweight. Facts do not care about your feelings.

“It appears that Noel C. is serious that we should disregard any Canadian's opinion on valid or reasonable election procedures.”

That would be an unwarranted leap in logic. There are highly respectable Canadians whose opinions I value for reasons quite unrelated to their nationality. Interestingly, they do not hold Canada up as an exemplar of international enlightenment. Your reasoning is drifting into tautology.

“I do not agree that we should disregard the opinions of people who live in backwaters on reasonable election procedures.“

Kidv, your reasoning is becoming circular again. Work to manage that habit... just my opinion.

“I also do not agree that we should disregard the opinions of people who happen to live in places with universal mail-in voting with signature verification as to whether that is a worthwhile voting option.“

As you pointed out, I am one of those people, and my opinion is that universal mail-in voting, with signature verification, is asinine. Are you ”disregarding” my opinion that it is not a ”worthwhile option“?

“So I guess 6 and 7 hours sometimes.”

How did we ever have a compassionate election prior to COVID-19? If a Mother Jones search is the source of your angst, call the Texas Secretary of State, Elections Division, in behalf of those people to complain. Better yet, assume that they are not potted plants, and can act for themselves.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 08, 2020, 01:47:12 AM »

“Again with the ‘personal experience’ line? Most of us don't have to have a personal experience to know things are happening. I know your observation of the world stops at the end of your nose, but most of us can have empathy for people who are not us.”

“Things are happening”, now that is insightful. I have waited “more than an hour“ to get on “Pirates of the Caribbean”, and “the Haunted Mansion“, without developing a hunger for “empathy“. Again, if in-person voting is too rigorous a sacrifice for you, request an absentee ballot. 

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 08, 2020, 01:01:25 AM »

I should not have taken Donald’s bait.

“To the specific question of being a ‘backwater’, Canada is a member of the G7-7.”

Yes, the G-7 controls roughly 60% of the world’s wealth, and Canada made the membership cut with an economy one-tenth that of the U.S.. That international status is commendable, and Canada has always been a loyal, if reluctant, ally. That said; it has problems that friends should be able to criticize without recrimination. I do not need lectures from a Canadian informed by CNN on why complacency with U.S. electoral defects ought to be overlooked because Canada does even dumber stuff. Don’t get me started on the Trudeau revolution.


“It might be helpful to identify that you live in a State with default universal mail in voting, with a ballot mailed to every registered voter.“

Why do you think that would be “helpful”, except to possibly lodge my disgust that an unsolicited ballot, in my name, entered the ether-would in spite of my timely reregistration?

“Polling stations are only necessary and available for those people who didn't want to drop off or mail their ballot, or didn't go to vote in person for the 30 days before the election.  The experience of one voter in the metropolis of Spanish Fork [Utah] might not be universally applicable to the question of overcrowded polling stations.“

You did notice that I am a native Californian, correct?

“I suspect most observers have seen multiple examples of U.S. voters stretched out for blocks waiting to vote in the last  4 weeks.  This might be an actual problem which top minds of the world's greatest democracy might want to address.“

I have not, and if you personal experience differs, say so.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 07, 2020, 10:53:00 PM »

“Yes, Canada is a socialist backwater, which is why most Americans could not even name the Canadian Prime Minister,


What part of my statement do you have an issue with?

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 07, 2020, 10:40:25 PM »

“Something that allows an equal amount of convenience. Mostly this isn't about lazy people before you start crowing about adults. Primarily this is designed to assist the elderly, frail, or disabled community. So you might be somebody who works with blind people, who would have a hard time just going to a polling place. I'm not exactly sure what could fill that gap, apart from voting by mail which you loathe.“

More specifically; I “loathe” unsolicited mail-in ballots, a point which seems to be alluding you. Absentee ballots, as a secondary option are a reasonable alternative. That method is not ideal as it suffers from a breach of secrecy/undue influence, but still passes muster with me.

“You've missed several points. First, I'm not sure why you assume that every situation I describe is about me personally. I don't live in California, I don't have problems with transportation. To help you reread what I wrote, I'm describing a person who lives in Gilroy, meaning they have to vote in Santa Clara county. Their polling place could be a hundred yards from their front door, and it wouldn't make any difference if they work in San Francisco.”

I have “missed” nothing material. Work commutes are long in the Bay Area. Take the day off if the logistics of getting to your polling place are unmanageable, or apply for an absentee ballot.

“It doesn't even satisfy employment identification on its own. The I-9 requires a picture ID to go with it. Groups as varied as the ACLU and the Cato Institute oppose the creation of such a thing out of fears that the government will use them to create a Chinese like surveillance system of citizens.”

The CCP surveillance system involves a lot more than issuance of a photo Social Security card, and legal use restrictions could be placed upon a Social Security photo ID just as restrictions were placed upon merchants demanding secondary credit card identification when writing a check (how time flies). As a side benefit, such a card would stop employment of illegal aliens cold. That is a good thing.

If your concern is Micro-Federal surveillance, that genie is already out of the bottle with the NSA’s PRISM data capture program. Remaining off the grid pretty much necessitates disabling GPS, audio, and camera functions on your cell phone.

“They will (and do) argue that attempts to create such an ID for employment to crack down on illegal immigration would eventually migrate to full blown tracking and destruction of privacy. The same objections would happen for a national voter ID.”[/i]

Like I said, we are already there, and a card’s legal use is much easier to regulate.

This is what happens when confidence in voting protocol is undermined. :

Where things stand with Trump’s litigation :


1. To compel Philadelphia election officials to stop counting ballots.
A federal judge dismissed the request.

2. To compel state election officials to allow Trump campaign officials closer observation of the counting process.

A state judge ruled in the campaign’s favor, allowing campaign officials to observe the Philadelphia process from a six foot distance. Philadelphia election officials appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court, and the outcome of that appeal is pending.

3. To compel Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and all 67 counties to impose an earlier date for voters to show proof of identification if it was not on their initial ballots.

Litigation is ongoing.

The presiding judge ordered all counties to segregate ballots if the voters do not provide supplemental identification by Nov. 9. The ballots with supplemental identification provided after Nov. 9 cannot be counted until approved by the court.

4. To compel the Montgomery County Board of Elections to stop counting mail-in-ballots

The campaign and Republican National Committee filed suit to halt the process of counting mail-in ballots in Montgomery County, one of the counties in suburban Philadelphia, alleging that the board of elections was counting 600 ballots that had not been placed in secrecy envelopes and was therefore not complying with requirements.

The litigation is ongoing.

5. To intervene in an already existing dispute before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether ballots the state received after 8 p.m. on Election Day should count.

The litigation is ongoing.


1. To impose an injunction on the automated signature-verification machines used in Clark County as ballots continue to be counted.


1. To halt the counting of absentee ballots, on the grounds that campaign officials had not been given access to observe the process as required by state law.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Cynthia Stephens denied the campaign’s request on Nov. 6.

2. To halt the certification of election results in Detroit, Michigan’s largest city and a Democratic stronghold.


Probable request for statewide recount.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 07, 2020, 06:46:21 PM »

“I know, Canada is a socialist backwater, but we don't have this incessant drama over litigating federal elections in ways similar to what the USA puts itself through every 4 years.“

Yes, Canada is a socialist backwater, which is why most Americans could not even name the Canadian Prime Minister, and you are on this site following the American presidential election as if you were citizen.

“We also have equivalent levels of voter fraud as does the USA, that is to say, negligible.“

This is epistemological tautology.

“And as for identification and voter registration?  We allow onsite registration using either accepted IDs OR via taking an oath.”

It is a good thing that Americans do not consider Canada a standard worth emulating. Don’t get me wrong, I like Canada. You just are not important enough to be relevant to the American political process.

“We accept that there is no universally available ID available in the country (and this in a country with universal health care where IDs are provided as part of the service).”

Good for Canada!

“We allow online registration.  We allow people to register while returning tax forms. It is illegal to vote in a federal election if you are not a citizen, and that is generally sufficient to dissuade non-citizens from voting.”

The United States is manifestly more important in the international scheme of things, and our standards need to be higher, of necessity.

“Mistakes do get made, no question. Since we do not disenfranchise adult citizens in other ways (we see you, prison-industrial complex) it really isn't that hard.“

It is not “mistakes“ that concern me.

“The dead also rarely vote - maybe because we have government pensions, and the controls on reporting deaths are far stricter in order to avoid continuing to pay dead people subsistence wages when they no longer should be collecting them.  Purging voter roles the way some US states do is just not a thing.“

The dead should never vote, and I am stunned that Canada ever has that problem. Election cycle voter-role purging is the only mechanism that non-socialist America has to avoid unsolicited ballots, and ballot requests.

“Do some non-citizens vote?  Yes, every election a few people are caught voting, mostly inadvertently, but guess what - it doesn't really matter.  The level of such votes is negligible.”

This sort of tampering with election integrity has an established history for creation of Banana Republic governments. Grant naively, in my opinion, believes that corruption on this order is inconceivable. South America’s struggle with post-colonial totalitarianism is textbook evidence that widespread election fraud is the rule, not the exception, where voter fraud investigation is not honored, immediate, thorough, and dispositive.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 07, 2020, 05:46:31 PM »

“I can get something notarized online. I send a picture of my ID, and a picture of myself. Why can't people register that way?“

I never have, and venture to guess that you are more sophisticated than the vast majority of people who you are concerned about. To register, and make an absentee ballot request, that sounds like a perfectly acceptable option to me... just not widely accessible. Remember, you are talking about individuals who may not even know that there is an election which they need to register for.

“Noel, I'm glad you enjoy your privilege of working jobs where you can take off for an hour or more in the middle of the workday, and drive the automobile you can afford, to a rural polling place.“

Actually, I did not take time off from work. I voted between work, and school. Yes, I have vehicles, but public transit (Bus, and Train) is available for those who do not.

“Try that when you have an hour and a half commute via train and bus into San Francisco from Gilroy, which isn't in the same county.“

Your polling place is located one and one-half hours from your residence? California was not that disorganized when I was there. Gavin Newsom must be dramatically more incompetent than Jerry Brown. I would raise hell with the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which has established an advisory committee in each of the 50 states, and the District of Columbia.

“Early voting does solve a lot of the problem, and I'm a strong advocate for it. I'm okay with not sending pre-emptive ballots, if the process to get an absentee ballot is unrestricted, simple, and honest.”

Early voting creates a set of problems of its own. Jimmy Carter destroyed the campaigns of down-ballot Democratic candidates with his early concession to Ronald Reagan in 1980.

“I'm okay with eliminating ballot collection, sometimes called harvesting, if reasonably equivalent alternatives exist.“

What would a “reasonable equivalent” to ballot harvesting look like?

“To a certain extent, I think I'd support necessary re-registration for everyone over selective silent removal.”

On that we are apparently in agreement.

“See how I'm willing to make concessions, but you aren't Noel? See how you say incorrect things, like claiming a social security card is ID, when it doesn't satisfy any requirement for voting?”

It satisfies federal identification requirements for employment, but you are correct that it should have all of the validation safeguards of a State driver’s license. You can consider that a concession if you like. Who could disagree with reliable Federal voter identification?

“I'm not treating voters like juveniles, I'm treating them like citizens and customers.”

No, voters are not customers, they are citizen-owners. They need to assert their superior status over the State. Don’t encourage governmental agencies to believe otherwise.

“The state exists to serve the needs of the people, not the other way around.“

The State exists at the pleasure of the people, and we dictate what we need through the franchise. It is government’s obligation to comply with our will, not the other way around.

“I'm tempted to ask if you would have supported poll taxes and literacy tests, because after all adults can pay a nominal fee and pass a simple test?“

I would not have supported a “poll” tax under any circumstances. It reverses the relative standing of government, and the people. If there was a way to constitutionally exclude citizens suffering from mental incompetency, I would be sympathetic to the proposition for the same reason that I agree with minors being barred from the franchise. Unfortunately I can not see a way of legally making that determination. Again, democracy requires an educated electorate.

Hopefully these people self-disenfranchise, and are not made targets of ballot harvesting, although I am certain that it has been tried... probably successfully.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 07, 2020, 03:59:00 PM »

“I can be called liberal, and almost certainly by your standards. With respect to voting, I'm fine with reforms. They should make voting easy and secure, not one at the expense of the other.“


“I think signature match is sufficient. You don't? Okay.”

Would “matching” a fraudulent signature, with another fraudulent signature meet your standard of “security“?

“Make a proposal that isn't just everybody should plow into overcrowded polling stations.”

At 5:00 P.M., November 3rd, my polling station looked no more crowded than a train terminal, and there was only one polling place in all of Spanish Fork. As I checked designated locations in other cities going north and south from me, there was, likewise, only one polling station per city. I cannot recall being in an overly crowded poll even when I lived in California.

“Tell me you want to expand polling stations.”

If your’s was too crowded, approach the State about setting up another. I certainly will not object. The issue returns to personal responsibility.

“Tell me you support a secure, remote method to register and verify identity.”

It has always existed. Commonly we call it an “absentee ballot“. My only objection to making this a default choice is that the purpose behind a secret ballot is circumvented.

“I'll get on board. You want to scrub voter rolls? Don't just dump people. Contact them.”

This is where the liberal mindset is taking over. It is not the job of government to tell individuals that an election is taking place, and they need to register. If a voter is that detached from the world around them, it is probably a good bet that they are not qualified to register an informed choice. Voting in a democracy is all about cultivating an educated electorate.

“Verify that we're not scrubbing valid voters because they happen to have the same name as somebody else.”

That would be addressed by taking the individual initiative to register. Again, you are treating people like juveniles.

“Use tax data to test the rolls, everybody submits a return every single year with their address, SSN, and can be cross checked.”

I seriously doubt that the demographic that you are concerned about can be relied upon to file yearly tax returns, but if they did not, it would still not disqualify their vote if they are serious about it.

“Require a universal, national voting ID.”

That is called a valid Social Security card.

“Require a blockchain unassailable electronic submission.“


“Suggest a national holiday for voting, or just move it to veterans day and roll it together. Require businesses to close that day.“

There you go with the hand-holding again. Adults can find time between work hours, and/or school, to vote. I have thirteen-hour days, and manage. We don’t need one more stupid federal holiday to exercise our civic responsibility.

“But all I ever hear from conservative circles is, everyone should have an ID anyway. Everyone should just show up on election day, never mind that they might be working two jobs that day.“

Or a full time job, and school. I will repeat; voting is an adult activity.

“Just go to your polling location, even if you live in a rural area with no public transport.”

I seriously doubt that many rural residents are this helpless, but for those who are the absentee ballot is a sufficient remedy.

“Polling lines that take eight hours to get through are no problem... “

I have never seen such a thing, and I do not believe that you have either.

“... if you really want to vote you should be willing to stand in inclement weather longer than it takes to get the latest iphone.“

You make an interesting point; should the commitment to vote equal the motivation to possess the latest iPhone. Even juveniles seem to rise to the occasion.

“You call it ‘hand holding’. I call it inclusion.“

The difference is that I am right. Further, what makes a vote precious is its legitimacy. Why would you advocate compromising my vote?

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 07, 2020, 02:35:01 PM »

“Also... that is not a ‘conservative’ vs a ‘liberal’ concept.“

Perhaps this is just a huge misunderstanding, but you, Y-22, NH, LR, and Drake are all “liberal”, correct? Is it a coincidence that none of the conservatives on this board agree with federally sponsored voter hand-holding measures, ie. ; waiver of election cycle registration, presentation of identification, and default in-person ballot delivery, yet all of you do?

Are you applying a rhetorical distinction between a general “concept“, and the very specific application of ”mail-in-voting“ which;  renders “... the delivery of the vote... no longer in the control of the voter.“, yet makes the government responsible for that vote being registered under virtually all conceivable mishaps?

If so, would you be in favor of a holding a new election in which implementation of personal voter responsibility could lend legitimacy to the results?

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 06, 2020, 03:50:45 PM »

“It's a rhetorical observation of the lack of awareness of the cognitive dissonance by the speaker in a speech, not a directly logical argument.”

I read it as being a clear, and fallacious, argument.

“But it does allude to Occam's razor, whether it's more likely to have A) a vast fraudulent action to undermine Mr. Trump but fail to defeat any of other Republican candidates, or B) a vast network of people who support Republicans but specifically reject Mr. Trump.“

Tapper does reduce his argument to a binary choice, which is fine provided that there are, in fact, only two possible conclusions.

“To dismiss a thought on a logical fallacy, it would probably be helpful to explain the lack of any evidence for the initial evidence of the claim in the speech.  Where does that fit on the relative value of burden of proof and strength of argument?”

Taper makes a wholly unjustified assumption that all Republicans vote for Trump in equal proportion to down-ballot Republican candidates, and that both Independents, and blue-collar Democrats, are not a deciding factor in Trump’s success. The Trump vote is separable from a Republican party-line vote, and this would be reflected in fraudulent ballots. Trump’s strength within the Republican Party came from outside the Party. Identity politics, adopted by both Hillary, and Joe, have very effectively alienated the traditional Democratic base. Hillary’s “deplorables” were formally her parties core voting block.

Regarding Utah ballot duplication, the form is easy to recreate, but not bar codes. I did not see them. Hopefully computerized cross-referencing does immediately flag double cast ballots, but that brings new problems. If both votes are deleted on election night, then someone has been effectively disenfranchised. If both are counted, someone has been disenfranchised. If the phone number written on the ballot is used to track down the voter on election night, that may be a solution, but it still leaves the fraudulent voter free of accountability, and therefore risk. As you pointed out, if I failed to vote in person, the fraudulent voter’s choices would stand.

It is better to require voters to reregister every election cycle, appear in-person with identification at their polling station, and cast a secret ballot. That process avoids the “undue pressure“ factor of even safe-guarded absentee ballot systems, which would need to be perpetuated out of necessity, not convenience.


”Yep, the democrats not taking back the senate is going to harm the economy severely. The minute Biden takes office McConnel is going to go into deficit reduction mode during a recession and make it worse.”

I fully expect McConnell to be as scrupulously cooperative with Biden as the House has been with Trump over the last four years. Call it Karma. That is, however, an entirely different issue than what I am alluding to. No president, with any economic policy, is going to be able to prevent a very painful deleveraging that has been building in severity since 2008. Given the irrationality of the electorate, reference COVID, I am happy to have Biden in office when this bubble bursts. That he has decided to assist the collapse through public policy simply fixes his fingerprints on the outcome.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 06, 2020, 01:36:32 AM »

“Why? Because you believe Trump when he claims fraud and shows you no evidence.”



”Cheer up!  Biden was able to hold on in the face of all that Republican vote fraud you are so worried about.  You should be thankful for the fantastic Democratic turnout, so that the Republican fraud wasn't able to sway the presidential election.“

... and dumber.

I had mixed feelings about conservatism inheriting the impending economic disaster, especially given that the economy is where Trump has staked his legacy claim. As I assess tangential election fallout, I am actually quite sanguine, and look forward with optimism to the political realignment coming in 2024.

- Conservatism has finally, for the first time in my life, locked in the Supreme Court for a generation. If Trump accomplished nothing else, this single achievement would have excused all of the Trumpian faceplants over the last four years.

- Trump brought to a high resolution the danger posed by an entrenched state bureaucracy that asserts entitlement to govern independently of the American people. I am grateful for that discovery, it will I form my future voting criteria.

- Trump exposed the CCP for the threat they are, and blew any pretense to the contrary out of the water.

- Trump has catalyzed new alliances in the Middle East, and legitimized Israel’s right to exist in a peaceful environment achievable through no previous administration’s efforts.

- Britain is once again on a path to revitalization, and American partnership, via Brexit.

- Trump opened up the Indo-Pacific as an American alliance, particularly in respect to India, which is poised to become the world’s next economic superpower. I recently learned that the Indian Navy is equipping their two aircraft carriers with F-18s, rather than the Su-33. This is a big deal, and I am hopeful that this has set a pattern of cooperation into the future.

- Trump has revitalized our military in a way that will easily survive four years of a Democratic administration.

- Trump has kept us out of foreign wars, as promised.

- Finally, Trump’s provocative style has tipped the left‘s hand on just how ideologically committed they are to the rule of law. The country will never be the same as a result, and it could not have come at a better time in our nation’s history.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 05, 2020, 11:40:30 PM »
The really sad thing is that Biden will assume office without the legitimacy which an electorate expects from constitutional process.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 05, 2020, 08:19:47 PM »

“Mr. Tapper then noted that Mr. Trump would have us believe that there is a vast conspiracy to submit sufficient fraudulent votes to defeat Donald J. Trump but allow all the republicans to win in every other instance that Mr. Trump cited.”

Non sequitur.


“Biden's wrong.  There is nothing to support this.  It's conspiracy theory level stuff.”

My argument does not necessitate “conspiracy”, only human nature.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 05, 2020, 08:09:37 PM »

“Not sure they actually keep the approved ballot connected to the envelope (which has voter identification information on it), do you have knowledge they do?”

No, I am not certain that envelopes, and ballots, are kept together following a count in Utah. It makes sense that they should be, and the poll workers had zero difficulty identifying me to reissue a ballot, but I am making an optimist assumption that computer ballot issuance records correlate with records of a cast vote. Interestingly, even when we vote in person, the ballot is deposited into a collection box with a poll-worker present to verify the presence of an envelope signature. Hopefully, he would also object to a deposit of multiple ballots by a single individual. I should have asked.


“How many fraudulent votes would it take to sway the presidential election in Nevada?  There is currently a gap of roughly 12,000 votes?  Are you suggesting that there were 12 THOUSAND fraudulent votes made in Nevada this election?  12 THOUSAND?”

Yes. Those numbers are obtainable under current circumstances, and it does not even require an “organizer” to accomplish. Ill conceived voting laws alone can induce that kind of distortion of vote tallies in a highly divided electorate. Even Biden thinks so . :

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 05, 2020, 06:40:12 PM »

“A 9% yearly number of people moving is grossly overestimating the number of people who were moving in October and requested a ballot be sent to the address they were moving away from. How many people do you think that is?”

I moved, within the same Utah zip code, last April. No “mail-in” ballot was sent to me at my current address despite timely reregistration. A new ballot was issued to me in person at my polling station. Would that ballot have been issued if someone submitted the unsolicited ballot linked to me in a dated voter role?

You believe that 9%/year average address change is too high for the month of October. Let’s cut that number in half to isolate Democrats. Cut it in half again to separate ethical Democrats. Cut that in half again to sift out cowards. There still remains 1.12%, which is enough to tip the scale in some of these counties.

“Dead people, again something easy to verify is fraudulent after the election. Also requires someone to have died relatively recently and the state to not have procedures to remove them from the voter rolls and for their surviving family to request a ballot in their name in order to vote. I still don't see either of these activities being widespread and I would wager what fraud does happen of this type is an effective wash politically. Neither party could have a mechanism for doing either of these things in a wide spread systematic way that would go unnoticed.”

No, the issuance of a ballot does not uniformly require a “request”. The required percentages are low, and cumulative with other fraudulent methods. The “mechanism” is pretty simple; individual initiative can double the voting power of a living family member who is motivated to “make a difference”, or rationalize that “this is what mom would have wanted”.

“The ballots have to be ‘real’ to be readable by the machines.“

Not Utah ballots, I could make them.

“And again if there is wide spread voter fraud/impersonation going on. It would be detectable after the fact. Take a sample of 2,000 people who cast a ballot and after the election go ask them if they voted. If you get 100 people who will swear they didn't then you have detected a voter fraud issue.”

A better method is to do a recount provided the signed envelopes were also saved. I think we will see a lot of that in the coming months.

“The Democratic observers were kept at the same distance away. With thousands of ballots being sent through the machines at a time the only thing observers can do at any distance away is to make sure each ballot is only sent through the machine once. And 6ft or 30ft you can verify that. If Pennsylvania failed to allow observers at the opening and readying of the ballots then take that up with their republican state legislature.”

It doesn’t matter if Democratic observers were kept at the same distance. It only matters who the ballots were supplied by. Possibly Democrats have become more ethical since the 1960 presidential election, but I doubt it. Your standards for presidential office are as low as anyone who I have ever discussed the issue with. Would you really care if Biden came to office fraudulently?


“The fact that leaving the garage door open is stupid does not prove that theft occurred.“

True, but your analogy breaks down on precisely the crux of why *voluntarily* leaving the garage door open is “stupid”. There are few Republicans that think leaving the door open to voter fraud is a good idea, as a cursory reading of conservative comments on this thread illustrate.

”I can buy that mailing unsolicited ballots may present problems and opportunity for fraud.  But it is not evidence that fraud occurred.”

... And, strictly speaking, if I dump a bag of cash from a helicopter into Manhattan at lunch hour, and the streets are mysteriously spotless three minutes later, it is not “proof” that some people ended up with a free lunch. The question becomes; how oblivious do you have to be to believe otherwise?

“There's nothing.  If a system has too many loopholes, I support closing them.”

How about never promoting “loopholes” to begin with?

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 05, 2020, 02:38:30 PM »

You can stop pretending to be following an actual race for electors.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 05, 2020, 02:37:18 PM »

“As to impeding third party observers, I have not seen anything on that.  My understanding is that people have been designated, from both parties, to be available when votes are being counted.  These are your safeguards.  Third party yahoos that want to just jump in and watch are not part of the system.  So I'm going to need some more information before I can say that the safeguards that have been put in place are being impeded.”

Your understanding is correct, however; is the “designated” observers that are lodging complaints. If the police asked you if you saw your neighbor steal from your garage, and you said; “no because her husband held me at bay thirty feet around the corner”, then you have a cause of action in filing a complaint for theft.


“And your assertation is that hundreds of thousands of Americans (actually only democrats) decided to commit a felony by requesting a ballot in someone else's name and then really, really, hope that the individual decided not to update their voter registration thereby immediately flagging that as a troubled ballot and then authorities then could easily go to their address and arrest the culprit.”

Yes, and not only fraudulent ballot ”requests“, but diverted live ballots intended for move-outs (9% of the population annually), and dead people. Further, given the scenario witnessed last Tuesday by designated observers held thirty feet from the “readers”, these “ballots” estimated in ~120,000 tranches, did not even need to be real ballots. They just needed to be machine readable.

At the point that Republican observer interference takes place, the burden of proof for ballot legitimacy shifts to Democrats.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 05, 2020, 12:22:28 PM »

“I've seen no evidence presented that supports this assertion.  Mail in ballots have been used since when?  The ease at which the process is susceptible to fraud does not prove that fraud occurred.  It simply means that there is reason to revise the laws in place.  Claiming that fraud occurred without proof is dangerous and irresponsible.  Sean Hannity is free to present his case in court.  If he has evidence, let him put it forward.”

Respectfully Grant, no, it is not irresponsible to openly assert fraud under current circumstances. To claim fraud within a system inherently susceptible to abuse, to which third party observation is the only safeguard, and is demonstrably impeded in such States as; Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona, and Michigan is manifestly “responsible”.


“And which of the battleground states sent out unsolicited ballots?”

... And/or ballot requests from dated voter rolls; Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Nevada.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 05, 2020, 08:04:11 AM »

“And here's one reason why the right wing believes, without any basis, that election fraud is a significant issue. Sean Hannity.”

I think that you have the issue reversed; Sean Hannity believes that this election was corrupted due to the very same reasons that I have been pointing to now for weeks. Unsolicited “mail in ballot requests” and “mail in ballots” are an open invitation to numerous varieties of election fraud... especially where we are now looking at “victory” margins of less than two percent.

Biden will be installed as President, rest assured, but a substantial portion of the electorate will never consider him to be duly elected. His presidency is tainted out of the gate, and he will achieve nothing that cannot navigate the angry obstructionist Senate now sitting in his path to governance.


General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 04, 2020, 07:56:59 PM »

“And more baseless rumors designed to cast doubt on election results.”

We have a lot of election litigation headed our way, and as acrimonious as I expect this exercise to be in terms of general acceptance of a “President Biden“, there is one huge positive effect. The public will be educated on just how insidiously corrosive “vote-by-mail“ schemes are.

The left made a Faustian bargain, and the devil will have his due.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 04, 2020, 06:32:11 PM »

“I find it amazing that the people who worry about Joe Biden having dementia support a guy who speaks to them like he was a 4th grader and brags about passing a dementia test as if he aced an IQ test.  ;D

No sense of perspective.”

For perspective:

Trump’s youngest son is autistic, and I have speculated for some time that he inherited it from his high functioning father. As president, Trump accomplished more, in areas that matter to me, during his single term than Reagan did in eight years. He achieved more in one year of his pre-presidency than Biden has in a lifetime.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 04, 2020, 06:22:57 PM »

“They have a moral responsibility to prevent the country from unraveling, and it is DJT that is pulling on the threads.”

You should have been more focused upon “moral responsibility” when the left concocted their scheme to undermine confidence in the most basic civic function: our, erstwhile, secure and confidential voting process. That is a thread that will be extremely difficult to re-weave.

General Comments / Re: Election Results
« on: November 04, 2020, 05:03:19 PM »
Well, the pollsters either need to find another vocation, or they were willing purveyors of left-wing propaganda. Trump was right, but he will still lose even after a litigious period extending weeks, or months. For as stupid as many on this board believe him to be, neither Hillary nor Biden have shown much of a contrast in public popularity.

What I expect in the next four years:

- Domestic economic collapse triggered, not caused, by the idiotic COVID policies Biden will now feel compelled to implement.

- A Senate that will stand as a bulwark against any attempt to pack the Supreme Court, admit D.C. and Puerto Rico as States, or pass any other item on the Democratic wish list.

- Additional disclosures regarding Biden-family political/financial corruption that will dog his entire presidency with perpetual Senate investigations.

- Widespread apprehension at the display of Uncle Joe’s progressive dementia on the international stage. Short of death, his ego will preclude replacement by Harris.

2024 is looking very good for conservatives.


“What's so mysterious? Unless you're cheating the American people out of revenue, or embarrassed being caught lying about what you earned, or claiming dependents your family and friends didn't know about.“

Or; any number of situations in which public disclosure of tax records could create a competitive disadvantage.


“Please do make a quote from the debate that supports you. Otherwise you are a *censored*ing joke.”

You seem so easily entertained. Use the text if you prefer, but the audio is priceless (minute 48). I don’t know what that counter was reading. Rudy’s alleged role as a Russian dupe was effectively dispelled with DNI John Ratcliffe‘s categorical rebuttal of Democratic claims that the Hunter Biden scandal is part of a Russian disinformation conspiracy.

I also liked the way Joe emphatically asserted that he has ... “never taken money from a foreign government, not once”. Technically he is telling the truth, but using his son as a proxy for political graft is even worse. Tony Bobulinski has already commented upon this Biden extortion tactic, and more will come out in the Senate gearing. Bobulinski is now being requested to make himself available to the FBI for questioning.


“Or that Trump has continued to refuse to release his tax returns.

I would refuse disclosure of my tax returns too. Where does the notion that strangers are entitled to examine private financial records come from?

“Those who believe Hunter and so Joe are guilty fear that it makes Joe vulnerable to blackmail or undue influence from foreign powers.
Yet the same people are not concerned at all of Trump's vulnerability to blackmail and undue influence.
-- he owes 300+ million to unknown foreign entities
-- He never separated himself from his business interests which foreign entities and various corporations have ‘donated’ to the tune of a billion + “

This seems rather shotgun in its approach to excusing Joe. Get specific.

“Does it bother anyone about how the laptop has been reported to have been attained, The chain of custody?”

Yes, I wish Hunter would have turned the computer into the FBI himself. Apparently, there are bounds to his stupidity.


“Did you see him in the debate last night? What a little cry baby about how unfair the IRS is to him. He could release his returns but he is choosing not to. Nothing about being audited precludes public disclosure.”

If a tax liability is still being determined, there is not much to disclose. I wish that he would have just told Biden to copulate with himself.

The trickle continues...

Three cell phones will be presented before a Senate committee tomorrow by Tony Bobulinski. No doubt, the FBI will want to subpoena those in addition to the Hunter laptop. Fortunately for the voting public, we will see the cell phone evidence, just as we have the Hunter laptop evidence, prior to FBI lockdown. :

What was Uncle Joe’s debate answer to all of this last night : “Russia”! Yes folks, the Russians dropped that laptop off at the “blind” computer technician’s shop.

1h: 10 m: 45 s (relevant dialogue)

P.S. ,

WmLambert is also correct about the prevalent assumption that the MSM matters at all in determining, and disseminating, validation findings. The mainstream media has been methodically excluded from the Hunter Biden story precisely because they are worse than useless in ferreting out objective narratives. Most have been politically animated since choosing journalism majors in college to “make a difference”. They needed to direct their creative impulses into a less destructive life path such as Horticulture, or Feng Shui.


“This is still the official line from the FBI. I don't see anything that confirms that the NYP story. Even if the FBI is in possession of a real laptop belonging to Hunter Biden, and that's a big if. We have no way of knowing if the copy of the drive provided to Rudy and the NYP has been altered in any way.”

WmLambert is correct about Tony Bobulinski, he is the cc’d email recipient that I made reference to in my last post, and is making an appearance at the debate tonight as Trump’s guest.

Don’t hang your hat on the FBI’s “no comment policy” either. I addressed that in the same post. The FBI still writes receipts for property taken into custody, and Mac Issac has one with a case number that was already referenced for you. The case code indicates a high probability predicate assessment of criminal activity pertaining to White Collar money laundering. As far as worrying that Mac Issac gave Rudy a corrupted copy of the Hunter hard-drive, you are beginning to sound like Descartes. Were you this unreasonably scrupulous about provenance, or purity of transmission, when the so-called Steele Dossier was being circulated?

10% “Big Guy” cut in most damning email authenticated by copied email recipient. :

“The email includes a note that ‘Hunter has some office expectations he will elaborate.’ A proposed equity split references ‘20’ for ‘H’ and ‘10 held by H for the big guy?’ with no further details.
Fox News spoke to one of the people who was copied on the email, who confirmed its authenticity.”

FBI criminal investigation cover exposed. :

“One of the documents, obtained by Fox News, was designated as an FBI ‘Receipt for Property’ form, which details the bureau's interactions with John Paul Mac Isaac, the owner of ‘The Mac Shop’ who reported the laptop's contents to authorities. The document has a ‘Case ID’ section, which is filled in with a hand-written number: 272D-BA-3065729.
According to multiple officials, and the FBI's website, ‘272’ is the bureau's classification for money laundering, while ‘272D’ refers to ‘Money Laundering, Unknown SUA [Specified Unlawful Activity]—White Collar Crime Program,’ according to FBI documents. One government official described ‘272D’ as ‘transnational or blanket.’

Predicate “criminality” presumption required to open case connected with the Hunter laptop acquisition by the FBI Baltimore branch. :

" ‘The FBI cannot open a case without predication, so they believed there was predication for criminal activity,’ a government official told Fox News. ‘This means there was sufficient evidence to believe that there was criminal conduct... If a criminal case was opened and subpoenas were issued, that means there is a high likelihood that both the laptop and hard drive contain fruits of criminal activity,’ the official said."

FBI confidentiality fire-wall breached in time for voter consideration through deft control retention of hard drive contents by Rudy Giuliani. :

“The FBI, in its letter to Johnson, wrote that ‘consistent with longstanding Department of Justice (Department) policy and practice, the FBI can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any ongoing investigation or persons or entities under investigation, including to Members of Congress... The emails in question were first obtained by the New York Post and, in part, revealed that Hunter Biden allegedly introduced his father, the then-vice president, to a top executive at Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings less than a year before he pressured government officials in Ukraine to fire prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who was investigating the company's founder.."

And the controlled trickle of politically damaging information has fourteen more days to run. Rudi is sucker-punching the Biden campaign from a position of complete narrative domination.


October 19, 2020 - 01:45 PM EDT

“Schiff stands behind his remarks to CNN.

‘We know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin. That's been clear for well over a year now that they've been pushing this false narrative about the vice president and his son,’ Schiff told anchor Wolf Blitzer.

‘Clearly, the origins of this whole smear are from the Kremlin, and the president is only too happy to have Kremlin help and try to amplify it.’ “

“We know” nothing of the sort. Schiff, as Intelligence Committee chairman knew that his characterization of the Hunter emails would be taken seriously, and he leveraged that presumption to pass a whopper of a lie, a lie that members of this site were “... only too happy to help and amplify it.”.


“I still don’t take it as a confirmation of anything he said. I take it as a we’re not talking about that but he can.”

This is why I come to Ornery. Where else could I peer into the thought processes of the loyal left. Thanks Y-22, and I mean that sincerely.


“Your track record suggests it really isn't worth plowing through a 13 minute fox news video to look for something other than what they wrote on their website.”

This... coming from a guy who asked me to ”plow through“ a 960 page Senate report on Bill Clinton‘s compromise of national security, and managed to refute his own argument in citing the referenced report? Drake, watch the fifteen minute video, you might hit pay-dirt.

“The FBI said they had nothing to add to the statement about Russian intelligence. I also don't see any quotes from anyone saying ‘we have confirmed this is, in fact, Hunter Biden's laptop’.“

Have you seen, or read, any DOJ or FBI officials talking about “alleged“ Hunter Biden laptops, emails, or photos? Law enforcement is scrupulously conscious of the distinction.

“I'm happy to concede that the Russians weren't involved. That doesn't mean everything else about the narrative is ironclad fact.“

Are you equally willing to concede that Adam Schiff lied his ass off to spread the false “Russia misinformation” narrative which all of the lefties on this board have parroted until yesterday? How about the revelation that Hillary Clinton was directly responsible for initiating the false “Russia collusion” talking point that ultimately led to a sham impeachment last year? Watch the Fox video, and you may be willing to concede that also.


“Yep, where no comment stated as nothing to add counts as a conformation of anything.”

Um, it counts as nothing to add to what was stated by John Radcliffe. Do you agree with what the DNI Director has said?


If Rudy lied about the authenticity of the laptop as a Hunter Biden possession, or the derived photos, and emails extracted from the computer, then he is personally liable for slander, and libel, at minimum. Hunter is not, at least technically, a public person. Whatever monetary damages occur as a result of all of this, including Biden attorney fees, could amount to quite a bit depending on what other scams Hunter had brewing on the back burner.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8