Trump vs Biden 2020, Day 64 of the Pennsylvania count (pt 5) Read OP

ohnonotgmail

innuendo141 wrote: »

He has to be intentionally trying to get himself banned from Twitter at this point. Himself and his Jonestown followers would see him as an even bigger martyr than they already do.

I would be happy to provide the kool aid*



*I am aware it wasn't actual kool aid that was used.

Penn

Boggles wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1329060562442067969

I have read that 4 times, not a fúcking scooby what he ranting about.

It makes sense if you add "Yeahbutnobutyeahbutnobutyeahbutnobutwhathappenedwas..." in front of it

ohnonotgmail

Boggles wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1329060562442067969

I have read that 4 times, not a fúcking scooby what he ranting about.

if you dont understand what it says consider that a good sign for your mental state.

gmisk

innuendo141 wrote: »

He has to be intentionally trying to get himself banned from Twitter at this point. Himself and his Jonestown followers would see him as an even bigger martyr than they already do.

They can't really ban him til he is no longer president.
I doubt he will last much longer after January.

Quin_Dub

gmisk wrote: »

They can't really ban him til he is no longer president.
I doubt he will last much longer after January.

I wonder what the odds are for him getting banned even temporarily on January 20th are?

I fully expect him to not attend the inauguration and I also expect him to be rage tweeting all the way through it.

Once the clock strike midday his "Person of Special Interest" protection is gone.

Tweets like those from today will get him a 24hr ban right out the gate once he no longer has the cover of elected office.

briany

gmisk wrote: »

They can't really ban him til he is no longer president.
I doubt he will last much longer after January.

They can't (or really don't want to) ban him because he is Donald Trump and holds one of the largest followings on the platform, and consistently generates huge engagement. All of this will continue to be true after January, unless he becomes incapacitated.

Quin_Dub

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I wonder what the odds are for him getting banned even temporarily on January 20th are?

I fully expect him to not attend the inauguration and I also expect him to be rage tweeting all the way through it.

Once the clock strike midday his "Person of Special Interest" protection is gone.

Tweets like those from today will get him a 24hr ban right out the gate once he no longer has the cover of elected office.

I think there is a good chance that not only will be not attend the inauguration, but that he will hold his own rally at the exact same time, in which he will stop short (only just) of proclaiming himself the true president

Tchaikovsky

Deleted User wrote: »

I think there is a good chance that not only will be not attend the inauguration, but that he will hold his own rally at the exact same time, in which he will stop short (only just) of proclaiming himself the true president

99% certain that this will happen.

Padre_Pio

Deleted User wrote: »

I think there is a good chance that not only will be not attend the inauguration, but that he will hold his own rally at the exact same time, in which he will stop short (only just) of proclaiming himself the true president

At this point we're on the cusp of sedition.

Cody montana

Padre_Pio wrote: »

At this point we're on the cusp of sedition.

What does that mean?

Are they going to sedate him and drag him out of the White House?

Quin_Dub

Deleted User wrote: »

I think there is a good chance that not only will be not attend the inauguration, but that he will hold his own rally at the exact same time, in which he will stop short (only just) of proclaiming himself the true president

Padre_Pio wrote: »

At this point we're on the cusp of sedition.

He'd certainly be sailing very very close.

I would not be at all surprised if he held a "Trump 2024" on January 20th.

In and of itself that's not illegal - Childish, Ignorant and utterly Imbecilic for sure , but technically not illegal.

However , given his penchant for Verbal Diarrhea there is every chance that he'd veer into Sedition by mentioning the "phony" or "stolen" Inauguration etc.

extra gravy

gmisk wrote: »

They can't really ban him til he is no longer president.
I doubt he will last much longer after January.

That's his personal Twitter account though? I'm sure they could ban him if the really wanted to. There's an official President's account that retweets some of leas deranged tweets.

Padre_Pio

Cody montana wrote: »

What does that mean?

Are they going to sedate him and drag him out of the White House?

Sedition:
noun
conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.

valoren

It’s all a pretense. Flood the courts with frivolous law suits to give the impression that there is actually a case to be answered. There is no case.

The media, legal experts, election officials, cyber security officials and even the Department of Homeland Security are in agreement. There is no evidence of fraud. Yes, you’ll always get minor individual cases of fraud perpetrated but there is no evidence of the sort of fraud being touted by Trump and his sycophants.

73,407,471 Americans voted for Trump. That’s a lot of people to potentially upend and shakedown for dollar donations. How it works is that you refuse to accept the result. You refuse to concede, ever. It’s a pre-requisite to a con job. You rile up a proportion of those millions of people and appeal to their patriotism and dupe them into handing over cash to pay for a case which is baseless and an insult to the democratic process. It is all a front. He couldn’t care less about not engaging in an orderly transfer of power. National security? Can’t let something like that get in the way of perpetrating a con.

Let’s say half of those voters (36 million) get duped by the begging letter’s sent out by the Trump campaign in the aftermath of the election. For argument’s sake, assume they pay $25 (a small sum) each. That’s a potential $900 million dollars right there and so we can begin to appreciate why a career grifter such as Trump is happy to mug his supporter’s off with cries of electoral fraud and stop the steal. He has significant campaign debts that need paying off, he has $421 million of personally guaranteed loans coming due in the next few years. He needs money, lot’s of it. He only has 65 days left to continue this agenda. It will likely continue after Biden is sworn in and Trump muses running again in 2024. He’ll need financing for that too and so those letters and emails will spam people for years ahead still invoking electoral fraud and the injustice of it all. Trump knows there is no case, he knows he’s lost but he has to think ahead, to keep the wolf from the door and gullible people will help him to do that. Fools and their money. Even if Trump moves to a television network then his narrative of “I lost the election, I am a one term President” does not have the same lure as “I was robbed, I actually won, illegal votes were cast, I was trying to protect the country…”

The nanosecond Trump concedes then that grift would automatically stop and the cash flow into the PAC coffers would cease as there is no case considering Trump publicqally accepted the result and was in the process of transferring power to the incoming administration.

briany

valoren wrote: »

It’s all a pretense. Flood the courts with frivolous law suits to give the impression that there is actually a case to be answered. There is no case.

The media, legal experts, election officials, cyber security officials and even the Department of Homeland Security are in agreement. There is no evidence of fraud. Yes, you’ll always get minor individual cases of fraud perpetrated but there is no evidence of the sort of fraud being touted by Trump and his sycophants.

Yeah, and the problem is that Trump supporters will get news about the cases going ahead with a sensational headline, like "MAJOR fraud investigation underway in Michigan! EXPLOSIVE new evidence has been uncovered!", but because of the media bubble they live in, they don't hear the follow-up where that case turns out to be a complete and total load of b****x.

walshb

Padre_Pio wrote: »

At this point we're on the cusp of sedition.

He truly is that deranged, despicable and dangerous a man!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

everlast75 wrote: »

Agreed.

The media are directly responsible for a good portion of his recipe for success in 2016.

The free airtime they gave him was worth tens of millions of dollars.

I’m afraid that a lot of that media leg-up was treating Clinton like a sure thing. I think that was alienating to a lot of the electorate.

I’m also still gobsmacked, four years later, that the reason Clinton didn’t appear at the Javits Centre on election night was because she didn’t have a concession speech prepared. Dude. The complacency. Like, even if you are sure you are going to win, just hire a speechwriter to write one and then file it away, hoping you’ll never need it.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I think there is a good chance that not only will be not attend the inauguration, but that he will hold his own rally at the exact same time, in which he will stop short (only just) of proclaiming himself the true president

has he not already said he would have his own inauguration?

Banbh

You're going to be gobsmacked for the next four years if you're waiting for a Trump acceptance speech.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Banbh wrote: »

You're going to be gobsmacked for the next four years if you're waiting for a Trump acceptance speech.

Did I say I was waiting for that? This behaviour is to expected of Trump. Clinton, I expected more of.

ohnonotgmail

extra gravy wrote: »

That's his personal Twitter account though? I'm sure they could ban him if the really wanted to. There's an official President's account that retweets some of leas deranged tweets.

His personal twitter account is (currently) considered an official voice of government because he uses it as such

Billy Mays

https://twitter.com/EricTrump/status/805517281333837824?s=20
Well said Lurch

Oh wait...

everlast75

I mean, look at the legal submissions being made by Trump/GOP?

*in their own words*, they are saying there is no fraud.

https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1329126963605286912?s=19

The MAGA nonsense always falls apart upon scrutiny

Professor Moriarty

Billy Mays wrote: »

https://twitter.com/EricTrump/status/805517281333837824?s=20
Well said Lurch

Oh wait...

Poor little rich boy hasn't got a fcuking clue.

Kermit.de.frog

Billy Mays wrote: »

https://twitter.com/EricTrump/status/805517281333837824?s=20
Well said Lurch

Oh wait...

I love the way the whole family leaves a trail of sh!t behind them on Twitter to be dragged up later at the right moment

ExMachina1000

valoren wrote: »

It’s all a pretense. Flood the courts with frivolous law suits to give the impression that there is actually a case to be answered. There is no case.

The media, legal experts, election officials, cyber security officials and even the Department of Homeland Security are in agreement. There is no evidence of fraud. Yes, you’ll always get minor individual cases of fraud perpetrated but there is no evidence of the sort of fraud being touted by Trump and his sycophants.

73,407,471 Americans voted for Trump. That’s a lot of people to potentially upend and shakedown for dollar donations. How it works is that you refuse to accept the result. You refuse to concede, ever. It’s a pre-requisite to a con job. You rile up a proportion of those millions of people and appeal to their patriotism and dupe them into handing over cash to pay for a case which is baseless and an insult to the democratic process. It is all a front. He couldn’t care less about not engaging in an orderly transfer of power. National security? Can’t let something like that get in the way of perpetrating a con.

Joe biden.com

WE ARE RELAUNCHING THE BIDEN FIGHT FUND

Donald Trump is doubling down on lawsuits. We need to be able to afford the legal battles ahead, and ensure Trump doesn't win them just because we don't have the funds to fight back. Will you donate directly to the Biden Fight Fund right now so that we can pay for the new round of legal resources for our campaign and for Democrats across the country?

$15$32$50$100$250$500$2800OTHER


A visit to the terms and conditions shows that the vast majority of donations actually go to the Democrats party.


Grifting. They are both at it

everlast75

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Joe biden.com

WE ARE RELAUNCHING THE BIDEN FIGHT FUND

Donald Trump is doubling down on lawsuits. We need to be able to afford the legal battles ahead, and ensure Trump doesn't win them just because we don't have the funds to fight back. Will you donate directly to the Biden Fight Fund right now so that we can pay for the new round of legal resources for our campaign and for Democrats across the country?

$15$32$50$100$250$500$2800OTHER


A visit to the terms and conditions shows that the vast majority of donations actually go to the Democrats party.


Grifting. They are both at it

Can you stop with the "pox on both houses" nonsense please?

It's completely transparent and manifestly ridiculous.

duploelabs

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Joe biden.com

WE ARE RELAUNCHING THE BIDEN FIGHT FUND

Donald Trump is doubling down on lawsuits. We need to be able to afford the legal battles ahead, and ensure Trump doesn't win them just because we don't have the funds to fight back. Will you donate directly to the Biden Fight Fund right now so that we can pay for the new round of legal resources for our campaign and for Democrats across the country?

$15$32$50$100$250$500$2800OTHER


A visit to the terms and conditions shows that the vast majority of donations actually go to the Democrats party.


Grifting. They are both at it

Trump is fabricating his reasons, his proof, and his motivations for taking these lawsuits. Biden has to raise his funds to fight these suits.

They most certainly are not 'both at it'.

But then those of an orange persuasion aren't exactly familiar with the term 'false equivalency'

Professor Moriarty

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Joe biden.com

WE ARE RELAUNCHING THE BIDEN FIGHT FUND

Donald Trump is doubling down on lawsuits. We need to be able to afford the legal battles ahead, and ensure Trump doesn't win them just because we don't have the funds to fight back. Will you donate directly to the Biden Fight Fund right now so that we can pay for the new round of legal resources for our campaign and for Democrats across the country?

$15$32$50$100$250$500$2800OTHER


A visit to the terms and conditions shows that the vast majority of donations actually go to the Democrats party.


Grifting. They are both at it

Oh look! A logical fallacy called false equivalence.

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

The first statement is an answer to the question I was asked

The second is an separate point of news

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Joe biden.com

WE ARE RELAUNCHING THE BIDEN FIGHT FUND

Donald Trump is doubling down on lawsuits. We need to be able to afford the legal battles ahead, and ensure Trump doesn't win them just because we don't have the funds to fight back. Will you donate directly to the Biden Fight Fund right now so that we can pay for the new round of legal resources for our campaign and for Democrats across the country?

$15$32$50$100$250$500$2800OTHER


A visit to the terms and conditions shows that the vast majority of donations actually go to the Democrats party.


Grifting. They are both at it

One is wasting the time and resources of the system, the other is making sure a democratic result isn't undermined. You seem to drop the same statements over and over again but rarely address those who respond to you.