Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 123 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-26-2017 11:27 PM
471 online now:
Coyote, DrJones*, Percy (Admin), Pressie, Theodoric (5 members, 466 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 799,488 Year: 4,094/21,208 Month: 2,489/1,605 Week: 126/563 Day: 126/27 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
9Next
Author Topic:   Some evidence for voter fraud
Faith
Member
Posts: 23452
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 1 of 129 (797861)
01-28-2017 10:04 AM


I'd start a coffee house thread on this but I'm banned from the coffee house so I'm putting it here.

Here are a couple of Infowars reports on evidence for voter fraud including the claim by Trump of millions of illegals voting. It's mostly quotes from various studies over the last few years, and it's mostly video so pinning down the facts from among the other stuff is very tedious and I'm not up to it right now. Maybe I can come back later and fill it in. So this is preliminary but I think there is enough here to raise serious questions about the integrity of the "mainstream" media in reporting this.

For now all I can do is ask that people take the time to listen to the reports because it's just about the only place you are going to hear anything that contradicts the "mainstream" media lies.

http://www.infowars.com/...als-voting-and-swinging-elections

http://www.infowars.com/...udulent-registered-voters-in-2016''

A written report on the same info from the same page:

A study revealing that over 800,000 non-citizens voted for Hillary Clinton doesn’t account for dead and fraudulent voters, which accounted for over 25 million “registered voters” during the 2012 presidential election – and little has changed since then.
Illegal alien voters combined with dead and “multiple state” voters could easily explain Clinton’s “popular vote” margin over Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, especially considering that her “victory” came from Democratic-controlled counties known for illegal immigration and loose voter ID laws such as in New York and California.

“…The Pew study found that almost 3 million people are registered to vote in more than one state,” NPR added.

There was a report on the Drudge Report of a study that showed that there were 800,000 illegals who voted for Hillary, which is considered to be one of many different studies that together add up to the millions that Trump is claiming. For some reason I can't find this report on Drudge and my eyes keep giving out in the effort.

And if I can I will come back and add evidence on the numbers that attended the inauguration. At the moment I can say I've heard that the photo offered in proof of extremely low attendance at Trump's inauguration is false, and it looked false to me when I first saw it. There are even a few possible clues in the photo itself, a few identical trees in both the Obama and Trump pictures for instance, eight years apart yet. And don't such surveillance photos normally have the date and time stamped onto the film rather than added later as is clearly the case here? And another thought is that people were still arriving after the time given on the supposed Trump film, if the film even counts at all. I myself haven't doubted that Obama's attendance was much larger so I apparently disagree with Trump's information. Doesn't make my sources right or his right either. Something to find out.

I understand more evidence is required so I hope to come up with it.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 01-28-2017 11:44 AM Faith has responded
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 3:10 PM Faith has responded
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 4:46 PM Faith has responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12388
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 2 of 129 (797862)
01-28-2017 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
01-28-2017 10:04 AM


If you promise to refrain from participation in The Trump Presidency thread then I'll promote this thread to Coffee House and restore your posting permissions.

Edited by Admin, : Grammar.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 10:04 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 12:14 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 23452
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 3 of 129 (797863)
01-28-2017 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
01-28-2017 11:44 AM


OK
This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 01-28-2017 11:44 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12388
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 4 of 129 (797865)
01-28-2017 1:22 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Some evidence for voter fraud thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18154
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 5 of 129 (797866)
01-28-2017 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
01-28-2017 10:04 AM


Welcome back Faith

Alex Jones (Infowars = alt news) implies they all voted. From your link:

quote:
A study revealing that over 800,000 non-citizens voted for Hillary Clinton doesn’t account for dead and fraudulent voters, which accounted for over 25 million “registered voters” during the 2012 presidential election – and little has changed since then.

First lets look at the link:

quote:
Trump argument bolstered: Clinton could have received 800,000 votes from noncitizens

Hillary Clinton garnered more than 800,000 votes from noncitizens on Nov. 8, an approximation far short of President Trump’s estimate of up to 5 million illegal voters but supportive of his charges of fraud.

Political scientist Jesse Richman of Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, has worked with colleagues to produce groundbreaking research on noncitizen voting, and this week he posted a blog in response to Mr. Trump’s assertion.

Based on national polling by a consortium of universities, a report by Mr. Richman said 6.4 percent of the estimated 20 million adult noncitizens in the U.S. voted in November. He extrapolated that that percentage would have added 834,381 net votes for Mrs. Clinton, who received about 2.8 million more votes than Mr. Trump.


Curiously we get no reference to this "groundbreaking research" or the methodology of this "research" or to the blog.

So I did a little search and found:

quote:
I do not support the Washington Times Piece

As a primary author cited in this piece, I need to say that I think the Washington Times article (http://m.washingtontimes.com/...ed-800000-votes-from-nonciti) is deceptive. It makes it sound like I have done a study concerning the 2016 election. I have not. What extrapolation I did to the 2016 election (https://fs.wp.odu.edu/...trumps-popular-vote-loss-to-clinton) was purely and explicitly and exclusively for the purpose of pointing out that my 2014 study of the 2008 election did not provide evidence of voter fraud at the level some Trump administration people were claiming it did. I do not think that one should rely upon that extrapolation for any other purpose. And I do not stand behind that extrapolation if used for ANY other purpose.


So the author said the Washington Time piece is deceptive and that the evidence "did not provide evidence of voter fraud at the level some Trump administration people were claiming" rather that the extrapolation was solely for the purpose of showing that this kind of voter fraud could not be anywhere near the Trump claim of 5 million -- over 6 times what can only be considered a worst case ball park estimate.

So there is no evidence that shows a single adult noncitizens actually voting.

Next Alex said

quote:
Illegal alien voters combined with dead and “multiple state” voters could easily explain Clinton’s “popular vote” margin over Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, especially considering that her “victory” came from Democratic-controlled counties known for illegal immigration and loose voter ID laws such as in New York and California.

“A report by the Pew Center on the States finds that more than 1.8 million dead people are currently registered to vote, and 24 million registrations are either invalid or inaccurate,” NPR reported in 2012, which is ironic given how NPR is heavily controlled by Democrats.


Bold for emphasis.

What does the PEW report actually say:

quote:
February 14, 2012 — Approximately 24 million active voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or have significant inaccuracies, according to the Pew Center on the States. Research in Pew's report, Inaccurate, Costly, and Inefficient, underscores the need for registration systems that better maintain voter records, save money, and streamline processes. This is an effort that eight states are spearheading with Pew’s support.

The report highlights the challenges nationwide:

Not Registered:

  • At least 51 million eligible citizens remain unregistered—more than 24 percent of the eligible population.
  • More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as active voters.
  • Approximately 2.75 million people have active registrations in more than one state.
  • About 12 million records have incorrect addresses, meaning either the voters moved, or errors in the information make it unlikely any mailings can reach them.

Since 2010, election officials from several states have been working with Pew on plans to upgrade their voter registration systems using advanced technology. This new approach consists of three elements:

Inaccurate registrations:

  • Comparing registration lists with other data sources, such as motor vehicle and National Change of Address records.
  • Implementing proven techniques and security protocols that use those data sources to better track and identify both inaccurate records.
  • Minimizing manual data entry by establishing ways voters can submit information online.

Read the report.


So not only is Alex implying something NOT in the report, but he is using a report that is 5 years out of date, so it doesn't include all the legitimate voters that have been purged by republican states.

Again, there is no evidence of anyone actually doing voter fraud in this study. The ONLY case known in the last election was a republican caught in a red state that voted twice for Trump.

12 million records with incorrect addresses does not mean they voted twice.

2.75 people with registrations in multiple states does not mean they voted in those states.
Bannon has registration in two states -- did he vote twice? It is possible that I am still registered in Michigan (there is not process to unregister iirc) but I did not vote there (I would have voted there instead of RI if I had the choice -- because MI)

1.8 million deceased individuals still on the registry does not mean someone voted for them, just that they are still registered and haven't been purged (unless in one of the red states that purged everyone they could, whether they were legitimate or not).

But the biggest number is 51 million eligible citizens remain unregistered. This is an order of magnitude larger than Trumps petty claim. And I expect this number to be significantly bigger in 2016, especially in the red states that were purging legitimate voters and blocking people from voting -- THAT is the REAL fraud in this election.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 10:04 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 4:38 PM RAZD has responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5529
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 6 of 129 (797867)
01-28-2017 3:31 PM


One study
Massive Non-Citizen Voting Uncovered in Maryland (October 29, 2014)

https://pjmedia.com/...-citizen-voting-uncovered-in-maryland

An election integrity watchdog group is suing the state of Maryland, alleging that it has discovered massive and ongoing fraudulent voting by non-U.S. citizens in one county. But because of the way that the non-citizens are able to cast votes in elections, the fraud is likely happening in every single county and subdivision across the state. The group believes that the illegal voting has been happening for years.

The group, Virginia Voters Alliance, says that it compared how voters in Frederick County filled out jury duty statements compared with their voting records. The group's investigation found that thousands of people in Frederick County who stated that they are not U.S. citizens on jury duty forms went on to cast votes in elections. Either they failed to tell the truth when they were summoned for jury duty, or they cast illegal votes. Both are crimes. The same group previously found that about 40,000 people are registered to vote in both Virginia and Maryland.

It is a federal crime to cast votes if you are not legally eligible to vote. Non-citizens, whether in the country legally or not, are prohibited from voting in most local and all state and federal elections. Yet the VVA investigation found that hundreds of non-citizens have been voting in Frederick County, Maryland. One in seven Maryland residents are non-U.S. citizens.

More

A local civil grand jury attempted to do a similar study but the Court refused to release the pertinent records. The "powers-that-be" like things the way they are...


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-28-2017 5:30 PM Coyote has not yet responded
 Message 92 by Theodoric, posted 01-31-2017 9:26 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 23452
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 7 of 129 (797873)
01-28-2017 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
01-28-2017 3:10 PM


The discussions at Infowars took into account the age of the data. And of course it's obvious that 800,000 is not three to five million, nobody is overlooking that. They are talking about having MANY studies from different locations in different years, which they'll be covering over some time.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 3:10 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 5:19 PM Faith has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18154
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 8 of 129 (797874)
01-28-2017 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
01-28-2017 10:04 AM


Inaugeration Crowd
And if I can I will come back and add evidence on the numbers that attended the inauguration. At the moment I can say I've heard that the photo offered in proof of extremely low attendance at Trump's inauguration is false, and it looked false to me when I first saw it. ...

Just find a picture that does not show white at the far end but does show the monument there.

Here is one from the 2015 Million Man March for reference:

Here is one from Trump Inauguration taken at a low angle (tends to hide gaps)

Note that you can still see a gap just over the media tower and smaller lines for gaps beyond that, and that the end of the mall is white and finally I only count 4 "jumbotron" screens that showed the inauguration stage for people to see and hear in real time.

Now look at this:

quote:
Crowd controversy - apparent contrasts in inauguration crowd (slow load)

Notice the time stamp on this photo that ran in a BBC story on the inauguration. Is this the same picture CNN ran with?

4:20 PM in London, UK is
11:20 AM in Washington, DC

When did Trump get sworn in?


Noon, 40 minutes later. There would have to be an explosion of late-comers to fill the mall out to match either of Obama's inauguration crowds. Is there any evidence of a late large surge in crowd size?

Here is a video showing the whole day for comparison. The crowd never fills the mall, there is no large surge in people arriving, they just straggle in:

Then there is this Trump supporter video:

quote:

Published on Jan 21, 2017

I've seen a lot of lies about the size of Trump's crowd in the mainstream media, so I made this video to put those lies to rest. Yes, he probably didn't draw a crowd as big as Obama's, but the images ABC and CNN have put out about the crowd, and their reporting on it, is all bogus. Here's actual footage of the Inauguration. I made this video because my Dad was trying to tell me that Trump was so unpopular, believing what he sees on cable TV as usual. He even suggested I was a robot for believing otherwise in an email he sent me, so I had to take the time to put this lie to rest. It's all a petty tactic of the media moguls to manipulate the American population, and it's rather pathetic. Unfortunately, it's not easy for others to find this footage according to other videos I've seen on the topic, so here it is.


quote:
Photos: Compare the crowd at Trump's inauguration with Obama's

If you wonder whether the crowd grew bigger during that 30 minutes, it doesn't appear to change that much. Below is another photograph taken at 12:01:18 p.m. when Trump was taking his oath. We used the photograph taken earlier for comparison as it shows a wider area.

Photo taken at the National Mall shows the crowd attending the inauguration ceremony to swear in US President Donald Trump at 12:01pm.


Does that set the matter to rest for you?

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 10:04 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by mike the wiz, posted 01-28-2017 4:58 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 5:16 PM RAZD has responded

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4542
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 9 of 129 (797875)
01-28-2017 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by RAZD
01-28-2017 4:46 PM


Re: Inaugeration Crowd
Hi RAZD, I really don't care all that much about this issue, I don't really do politics but it strikes me on the BBC photograph that their camera angle is from the rear, making the stark, white, "gap" at the back, seem much larger than from a birdseye view. If we count the sections where people are, it would seem one and a half are empty which but the camera is closer on the rear view, just as from the front view the crowd will look larger from the front.

What this all means I don't know, I'm just trying to throw out an opinion, my knowledge of politics is close to zero.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 4:46 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 23452
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


(1)
Message 10 of 129 (797876)
01-28-2017 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by RAZD
01-28-2017 4:46 PM


Re: Inaugeration Crowd
I keep trying to compare the pictures with each other and am finding it hard to find clear points of reference, making it very hard to judge the soze pf the crpwds.

I still don't really know what degree of authenticity to assign to the long shots, or what numbers are represented by them.

But I don't need Trump's crowd to be as large as Obama's, I've said I don't think it was, though Trump may have thought it was; and that looks like a pretty huge crowd to me in any case.

But what would help put things in perspective is to see the original pictures Trump was objecting to as showing the crowd from some perspective that in his judgment minimized the actual numbers, based on his view from his position up front. I don't see anything in these photos that makes that comparison.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 4:46 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 9:21 PM Faith has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18154
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 11 of 129 (797877)
01-28-2017 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Faith
01-28-2017 4:38 PM


The discussions at Infowars took into account the age of the data. And of course it's obvious that 800,000 is not three to five million, nobody is overlooking that. They are talking about having MANY studies from different locations in different years, which they'll be covering over some time.

Of course they are. Talk is cheap.

I repeat that the ONLY case of voter fraud in the last election was a woman that tried to vote twice for Trump. She said it was because of all the talk about voter fraud, so she wanted to counterbalance it.

This is the danger of spreading false information. ie -- prove it, THEN we can talk.

Meanwhile I still note that:

quote:
But the biggest number is 51 million eligible citizens remain unregistered. This is an order of magnitude larger than Trumps petty claim. And I expect this number to be significantly bigger in 2016, especially in the red states that were purging legitimate voters and blocking people from voting -- THAT is the REAL fraud in this election.

51 million UNREGISTERED LEGITIMATE VOTERS is way more than all the trumped up assumed numbers from republicans, and that was in 2012. It's worse now with the voter ID laws that have been used to disenfranchise legitimate voters. The republicans are using multiple voting MYTH to justify disenfranchising legitimate voters,

So I will be happy with a full study and ways to rectify any actual voter fraud as long as legitimate voters are embraced and allowed to vote.

Tit for tat eh?

Of course 51 million voters would have likely changed the election, while the pretend voter fraud didn't.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 4:38 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 5:35 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 16 by xongsmith, posted 01-28-2017 9:01 PM RAZD has responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1318
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 6.4


(3)
Message 12 of 129 (797878)
01-28-2017 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Coyote
01-28-2017 3:31 PM


Re: One study
Massive Non-Citizen Voting Uncovered in Maryland (October 29, 2014)

Wow! Those non-citizens sure are patriotic.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Coyote, posted 01-28-2017 3:31 PM Coyote has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 23452
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 13 of 129 (797879)
01-28-2017 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by RAZD
01-28-2017 5:19 PM


I'm afraid I'm sort of getting dragged along in this discussion because I haven't had the time to really get into it. I was away for weeks becauser my computer had crashed and am now trying to deal with accumulated emails and other problems that a computer crash creates. So I'm just giving quick impressions. I should probably not post until I get more of a grip on it.

Something I left out of my previous post: The two pictures you said to identify by the presence of the monument are not so easy to judge because the distances are different.

I posted the OP because I thought there WAS enough evidence for a start, though I said I knew more was needed, so you can refrain from accusing me of spreading false information.

I have no idea what you are talking about when you say legitimate voters are getting disenfranchised by voter ID. Voter ID is intended of course to keep illegitimate people from voting, and the kind of problem you are talking about either doesn't exist or is some kind of glitch that needs correction, but which shouldn't be a monumental task.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 5:19 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by NoNukes, posted 01-28-2017 7:22 PM Faith has responded
 Message 15 by NoNukes, posted 01-28-2017 8:42 PM Faith has responded
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2017 9:12 PM Faith has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9208
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.8


(5)
Message 14 of 129 (797880)
01-28-2017 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Faith
01-28-2017 5:35 PM


and the kind of problem you are talking about either doesn't exist or is some kind of glitch that needs correction,

No, it is not always a "glitch". In fact, in North Carolina, the problem of disenfranchising voters through voter ID laws has been adjudicated in court where evidence was produced that the impact of the law was to deliberately encumber voting of student voters and African American voters. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, a well-known conservative Circuit that upheld Voter ID in Virginia found that the disenfranchisement by the North Carolina Legislature was deliberate in its attempts to limiting voting.

quote:
In the North Carolina case, the 4th Circuit panel agreed with allegations that North Carolina’s omnibus bill selectively chose voter-ID requirements, reduced the number of early-voting days and changed registration procedures in ways meant to harm blacks, who overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic Party.

Just some facts to throw in, the legislature reviewed voting patterns in NC and then targetted their id requirements and other options to affect young folks, students, and African Americans. For example, state-issued gun permits are acceptable IDs, but state-issued student ID cards are not. As a second example, programs to register high school seniors and juniors ahead of graduation were canceled.

Finally, evidence that dead people are registered and that folks are registered in two states is not evidence of voter fraud. It is instead evidence that states, often under Republican control (the majority of states) don't police their registration roles. There is generally no procedure for an individual to remove his registration when he moves or for his family to remove that registration when he dies. It is then no surprise that millions of folks, country-wide, have invalid registrations through no fault of their own.

More alarmingly, some states use record purging steps that have the effect of removing valid voters from the registration list.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith

Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 5:35 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 01-29-2017 5:36 AM NoNukes has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9208
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 15 of 129 (797881)
01-28-2017 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Faith
01-28-2017 5:35 PM


I posted the OP because I thought there WAS enough evidence for a start, though I said I knew more was needed, so you can refrain from accusing me of spreading false information.

I appreciate your honesty here. There really is not much evidence at all that the press is lying about this issue. If you can turn up some evidence, that would be cool and this thread might well become extremely interesting. Right now I'd have to suggest that you opened the thread prematurely.

Trump and Steve Bannon are calling the press the "opposition party" and Kellyanne Conway has insisted that it is not the job of the press to challenge any statements coming from the administration. I find the idea that the press is just supposed to be stenographers and mouthpieces to be fairly laughable. You might be able to convince folks that Trump was not lying because he actually believed his crowds was the largest one ever. But you won't be able to convince anyone reasonable that he never stated that.

Just as admin is not fond of us calling each other liars, I think there are issues with the press leaping to the conclusion of lying every time somebody gets their facts wrong. I am not sure that this particular incident is one of those cases. But being dead wrong, and lying are not the same thing. Trump is not even in the ballpark about the size of the inauguration crowd.

The fact is Trump drew enormous crowds. He could have celebrated that, but it seems to me that his "mirror mirror on the wall" type ego has repeatedly sabotaged Trump's photo ops. He managed to insult the CIA by standing in front of their hallowed monument to deceased employees and going off on a self-aggrandizing speech full of self-puffery.

Further, Trump did have an outstanding week with the presidential pen. His already convinced supporters have a lot to cheer about. However, but many of those cheers are regarding things that his non-supporters would certainly not cheer Trump, Obama, or anyone else for. Then this other unseemly crap gets piled on top of that.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : wording change. No added content


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith

Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Faith, posted 01-28-2017 5:35 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Faith, posted 01-29-2017 6:16 AM NoNukes has not yet responded

    
1
23456
...
9Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017