What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

duploelabs · 30-11-2021 2:58pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245048#Comment_118245048

Your prolific use of the ignore button clearly demonstrates you're not fair game for anything

Leroy42 · 30-11-2021 3:01pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245048#Comment_118245048

So you are back to talking about context. It is really funny how everything to do with Trump must be seen through various contexts, understandings and interpretations, yet even the post above you are posting yet more conspiracy nonsense with nothing more than apparently and email mentioned "10 held by H for the big guy?"

Why are you so quick to draw conclusions about stuff you haven't even seen yet are so quick to ignore stuff you have seen (and heard) but doesn't suit you position.

On the Raffensperger call, why do you think he made the call? Why do you think he attacked any GOP governor for not calling the election fraudulent? Why do you think he then proceeded to try to strong-arm the VPOTUS into ignoring the constitution? Can you not see the clear path he was on? HE wasn't making to the call to shoot the breeze or talk about 'infrastructure week' was he?

PropJoe10 · 30-11-2021 3:26pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245048#Comment_118245048

I have listened to the call. It's an obvious attempt to strong-arm a dedicated election official - as the last person said, why do you think he made that call? If you honestly believe that it was to "ensure the integrity of the election" then all I can say is that either not all your dogs are barking, or you're so far down the Trump rabbit-hole that you're simply incapable of believing that he could've done anything wrong. Probably a little of both, being honest.

Secondly, you'd probably suffer less attacks here if you made any sort of effort to engage with people - instead, you ignore any questions put to you, disappear for a few days to allow the dust to settle, and then come back and start posting the same load of unsubstantiated, delusional nonsense. And yes - if you act like Trump, with constant lies and nonsense, then you are fair game. We live in a world now where the value of the actual truth is under serious attack, and people like you are a root cause of this. You may not like it, but if you continually post nonsense, expect to be called out.

robinph · 30-11-2021 3:52pm

> If you honestly believe that it was to "ensure the integrity of the election"

The main thing that any elected official should do during an election to ensure its integrity, is to stay away from and never ever, ever, contact the people charged with carrying out that election.

TheIrishGrover · 30-11-2021 4:19pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245048#Comment_118245048

You mean the entire hour long call? Fair play. Here is a full transcript. You don't have to get an hour is before you hear him asking to "find" the votes. Right from the start he lies about the fraud (Proven lies).

The other thing, dead people. So dead people voted, and I think the number is close to 5,000 people. And they went to obituaries. They went to all sorts of methods to come up with an accurate number, and a minimum is close to about 5,000 voters.

The bottom line is, when you add it all up and then you start adding, you know, 300,000 fake ballots. Then the other thing they said is in Fulton County and other areas. And this may or may not be true . . . this just came up this morning, that they are burning their ballots, that they are shredding, shredding ballots and removing equipment. They’re changing the equipment on the Dominion machines and, you know, that’s not legal.

And they supposedly shredded I think they said 300 pounds of, 3,000 pounds of ballots. And that just came to us as a report today. And it is a very sad situation.

...

But we’re so far ahead. We’re so far ahead of these numbers, even the phony ballots of [name] , known scammer. You know the Internet? You know what was trending on the Internet? “Where’s [name]?” Because they thought she’d be in jail. “Where’s [name]?” It’s crazy, it’s crazy. That was. The minimum number is 18,000 for [name] , but they think it’s probably about 56,000, but the minimum number is 18,000 on the [name] night where she ran back in there when everybody was gone and stuffed, she stuffed the ballot boxes. Let’s face it, Brad, I mean. They did it in slow motion replay magnified, right? She stuffed the ballot boxes. They were stuffed like nobody has ever seen them stuffed before.

So there’s a term for it when it’s a machine instead of a ballot box, but she stuffed the machine. She stuffed the ballot. Each ballot went three times, they were showing: Here’s ballot No 1. Here it is a second time, third time, next ballot.

I mean, look. Brad. We have a new tape that we’re going to release. It’s devastating. And by the way, that one event, that one event is much more than the 11,000 votes that we’re talking about. It’s, you know, that one event was a disaster. And it’s just, you know, but it was, it was something, it can’t be disputed. And again, we have a version that you haven’t seen, but it’s magnified. It’s magnified, and you can see everything. For some reason, they put it in three times, each ballot, and I don’t know why. I don’t know why three times. Why not five times, right? Go ahead.

...

Trump: What about, what about the ballots. The shredding of the ballots. Have they been shredding ballots?

Germany: The only investigation that we have into that — they have not been shredding any ballots. There was an issue in Cobb County where they were doing normal office shredding, getting rid of old stuff, and we investigated that. But this stuff from, you know, from you know past elections.

Trump: It doesn’t pass the smell test because we hear they’re shredding thousands and thousands of ballots, and now what they’re saying, “Oh, we’re just cleaning up the office.” You know.

Raffensperger: Mr. President, the problem you have with social media, they — people can say anything.

Trump: Oh this isn’t social media. This is Trump media. It’s not social media. It’s really not; it’s not social media. I don’t care about social media. I couldn’t care less. Social media is Big Tech. Big Tech is on your side, you know. I don’t even know why you have a side because you should want to have an accurate election. And you’re a Republican.

Raffensperger: We believe that we do have an accurate election.

Trump: No, no you don’t. No, no you don’t. You don’t have. Not even close. You’re off by hundreds of thousands of votes. And just on the small numbers, you’re off on these numbers, and these numbers can’t be just — well, why wont? — Okay. So you sent us into Cobb County for signature verification, right? You sent us into Cobb County, which we didn’t want to go into. And you said it would be open to the public. So we had our experts there, they weren’t allowed into the room. But we didn’t want Cobb County. We wanted Fulton County. And you wouldn’t give it to us. Now, why aren’t we doing signature — and why can’t it be open to the public?

And why can’t we have professionals do it instead of rank amateurs who will never find anything and don’t want to find anything? They don’t want to find, you know they don’t want to find anything. Someday you’ll tell me the reason why, because I don’t understand your reasoning, but someday you’ll tell me the reason why. But why don’t you want to find?

Germany: Mr. President, we chose Cobb County —

Trump: Why don’t you want to find . . . What?

Germany: Sorry, go ahead.

Trump: So why did you do Cobb County? We didn’t even request — we requested Fulton County, not Cobb County. Go ahead, please. Go ahead.

You know what I did there? I didn't even read it all. I just looked for large paragraphs and cut-and-pasted.

Here's a link to the transcript of the perfectly innocent call you listened to. One name has been redacted as trump defamed them. But, apart from that, it's transcript.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html

So you think that call was perfectly legit?.

notobtuse · 30-11-2021 4:25pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245142#Comment_118245142

ad hominem attack

Leroy42 · 30-11-2021 4:30pm

Fox have been shown, multiple times, to outright lie and are clearly on the side of Trump. There is no question about how they paint their version of the news.

It is not unreasonable, therefore, to see yet another unverified piece in Fox News that is based on very little actual evidence but what evidence does exist is extrapolated to be portrayed in only one light.

Fox News is not an unbiased media outfit. That is not to say that everything they produce is wrong, but it needs to be viewed in the light it is produced under. Is the story verified? Multiple sources? Have they gotten any opposing views? Have they considered different scenarios?

duploelabs · 30-11-2021 4:34pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245913#Comment_118245913

You don't even understand an ad hominen attack, otherwise you'd know it isn't one

duploelabs · 30-11-2021 4:34pm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/nov/30/donald-trump-called-top-aides-capitol-riot-biden?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

notobtuse · 30-11-2021 4:40pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245201#Comment_118245201

You do realize the Washington Post had to run a correction admitting it ‘misquoted’ Trump in Georgia election story

“Trump did not tell the investigator to ‘find the fraud’ or say she would be ‘a national hero’ if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find ‘dishonesty’ there. He also told her that she had ‘the most important job in the country right now.'”

https://nypost.com/2021/03/15/washington-post-runs-correction-admitting-it-misquoted-trump/

Trump attempted Lydon B Johnson style of arm-twisting. But Raffensperger said ‘no’ and Trump didn’t retaliate against him in any way for refusing what Trump recommended, therefore it was legit. Two guys talking.

Igotadose · 30-11-2021 4:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246012#Comment_118246012

So what? The transcript quoted in the call is not the one the WaPo had to run a correction for.

How sad the NY Post tries to make news about an error at another newspaper. Imagine how much could be said about the Post and the routine drivel they run and never apologize for.

Leroy42 · 30-11-2021 4:47pm

You think it is perfectly reasonable for POTUS, the most important politician in the US, the leader of the GOP, so simply call up the GOP governor of a state that he lost and simply shoot the breeze about election fraud? And then tell him he needs to find some votes?

But because you don't know of any action he took, and we all know how petty and vendictive Trump is in that he has publicly called out GOP members, including the VP, you deem it perfectly fine?

Did you read the parts of the transcript posted above? Again, I will ask you. The leader of the free world, in the middle of a pandemic that was killing hundreds of thousands of US citizens, millions out of work, a rental crisis etc etc, took time out of his busy day, time that he could have been planning the Afghan withdrawl, or infrastructure, or publishing the long awaiting health care reforms, instead he took time to call this guy, out of all the GOP governors across the states, he just happened to pic up the phone to the one that was in charge of a state he needed to win.

I go back to my earlier question, why do you insist that everything that Trump did or said must be seen in the most generous light when ou do not apply the same standard of generosity and understanding of those who's political views you do not agree with?

Raffensperger: We believe that we do have an accurate election.

Trump: No, no you don’t. No, no you don’t. You don’t have. Not even close. You’re off by hundreds of thousands of votes.

Trump was not merely talking about the election, he was outright saying that the state election was fraud, that there was thousands of votes wrong.

Tell me how · 30-11-2021 4:48pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246012#Comment_118246012

"All I want to do is this: I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have... Fellas, I need 11,000 votes, give me a break.

You think that was legit and just two guys talking? 😂😂😂

Raffensperger knew exactly what was going on, which is why he recorded the call and released it.

notobtuse · 30-11-2021 4:48pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245456#Comment_118245456

No, I don't think it was to "ensure the integrity of the election." It was Trump at his worst, but not illegal. Just two guys having a conversation, a heated one, an uncomfortable one, and an ill-advised one, but still only a conversation.

I engage with people who do not use personal attacks. I engage with plenty of posters, I engage with you. Anyone I ignore is free to make a public apology for the public personal attacks and I would be happy to reconsider engaging them. The ball is in their court. And FYI... Differences of opinion are not nonsense. Plus, I provide source material to back up my opinions. You just don't like them.

everlast75 · 30-11-2021 4:53pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246071#Comment_118246071

"Just two guys having a conversation, a heated one, an uncomfortable one, and an ill-advised one, but still only a conversation."

Sorry, but that's ****ing delusional.

Leroy42 · 30-11-2021 4:53pm

If Raffensburger had somehow fond a way to find those votes, would that make what Trump attempted illegal?

You do understand that attempting fraud, but being stopped by honest people, still is illegal?

Trump, by your pwn admission, attempted to use his position as both POTUS and leader of the GOP, to change the result of an election. I assume you need him to actually stuff the ballot papers himself to see if it is illegal?

TheIrishGrover · 30-11-2021 4:55pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246012#Comment_118246012

So that transcription is not correct? Is edited (Apart from the edit I posted during the original post)? Is that what you are saying? Yes or no? You have listened to the ENTIRE call? It's a simple question. Is this transcript correct apart from the defamation redaction?

If so. then here:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7340548-Trump-Transcript-A

And. Complete with link to full audio (1:02:04)

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html

Quin_Dub · 30-11-2021 5:35pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246106#Comment_118246106

This is the key point.

Trump did not care whether what he was saying was true or not - Had Raffensburger been weak or a crook and "invented" the requisite ~11k votes , Trump wouldn't have batted an eye and would happily have taken the victory.

That's why all of the things the GOP are doing right now is so concerning , they are working to ensure that there are only invertebrate slimes in the key positions across multiple States so that should similar circumstances arise in 2024 there won't be anyone saying "But Mr. Trump , there was no fraud in the election".

Look at the people that Trump is endorsing right now - There's a reason why he's throwing out endorsements so far down ballot. He's going after people that refused to throw the 2020 election his way and seeking to remove key office holders and committee chairs that have influence over Elections in swing states.

Trump couldn't care less about Election integrity , the Constitution or anything else. He cares about himself and his pathetic ego.

Tippex · 30-11-2021 5:38pm

Looks as if the executive privilege case is not going terribly well based on this exchange

The two parts I find particularly intriguing are

Millett: Your thought is that without any guidance from the former president without any insights any declaration, any arguments from the former president, the court itself is supposed to go through and make arguments that the former president hasn't as to individual documents...

..., that's your position in this case?

Clark: I'm not sure I follow, your honor.

Millett: what arguments have has your client made or have you made in this case that says it's an individual document...where is that in the record?

Clark: It's not there yet.

https://twitter.com/AndrewFeinberg/status/1465700236605624330

It seems to me that once again they have gone into another case without "evidence" so not prepared. In other words, Trump is calling executive privilege on documents essentially coz he wants to.

Another killer is Clark saying "There are considerations such as if a document is going to be an embarrassment to a former president...or cause political turmoil..." in other words Trump knows the release is an embarrassment to him.

notobtuse · 30-11-2021 5:45pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246335#Comment_118246335

Presidents all the time try to get officials to do their bidding for things they feel is right an just. And officials have every right to refuse if they think they are being asked to do something they are uncomfortable with doing. And as long as there is not retaliation taken against them it all legit and the way things have always worked here in America.

Quin_Dub · 30-11-2021 5:54pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246395#Comment_118246395

Trump didn't "feel it was right and just" , he didn't care , he just wanted to win and didn't care how it happened.

As I said , had Raffensberger "found" the votes, Trump wouldn't have questioned it for a second.

Through every act of his entire life he has proven that he simply doesn't care or understand about right and wrong - He only cares about winning and losing.

He doesn't care how he "wins" just as long as he does.

Attempting to defend that as somehow normal and "the way things work" is simply pathetic.

Igotadose · 30-11-2021 5:59pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246395#Comment_118246395

So, if Biden does this, just look the other way? Really? "Hey, special prosecutor, stop asking about my son. I'm sure you can find documents showing his involvement with the Ukranian oil company was legitimate. And, didn't I see your daughter's photo on a CIA officers desk the other day next to a copy of Private Eye?'

Funny, I have memories of LBJ being accused of throwing his weight around Capitol Hill, but that involved passing legislature in DC. I don't recall him messing with elections. Nor Clinton. Or Reagan, or Bush. Or Obama.

Got an example? We're both getting old, we could be remembering things we liked to believe, as actually having happened.

Brian? · 30-11-2021 6:00pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245003#Comment_118245003

I’m not giving clicks to either the NY post or Foxnews, 2 outlets who regularly publish lies.

notobtuse · 30-11-2021 6:01pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246106#Comment_118246106

If Raffensburger would have legitimately found those votes then Trump's request would have been proper. But if he felt uncomfortable with it he did the right thing and politely told the president... NO!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245953#Comment_118245953

Wasn't Fox News merely reporting on the findings of Politico? All our media entities, except for maybe CSPAN, are biased. Is it your contention that every news story should be ignored until there is verification. Wow, we'd need to ignore about 80% of the mainstream stories in that case.

Leroy42 · 30-11-2021 6:04pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246395#Comment_118246395

Fine, does it stop at just the POTUS? What about a VP? Should they be able to use their position to their advantage do you think?

At least you can stop with the incessant 'outrage' over Hunter and your pearly clutching that Biden might be using his position. Even if it was true, (there is no evidence that it is) but it falls down as all he has to say is he felt it was right and just and you obviously will have no issues with it.

Brian? · 30-11-2021 6:08pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246071#Comment_118246071

It wasn't just “2 guys” having a conversation though was it. It was the POTUS talking to a man in charge of running an election for POTUS.

notobtuse · 30-11-2021 6:08pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246488#Comment_118246488

As opposed to the NY Times, CNN, MSNBC and a whole host of others that regularly publish lies? Best not to bother asking me questions anymore if you only believe what the mainstream media, who swim in lies when it comes to Trump, reports.

everlast75 · 30-11-2021 6:09pm

This is interesting. I was expecting an indictment for non cooperation

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1465726629104263174?s=20

Leroy42 · 30-11-2021 6:16pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246536#Comment_118246536

And yet again you miss the point. While this poster may rule out Fox News, which based on previous is not unreasonable, nobody here ever says that any media outlet is proof of anything. It may point us in a direction, it may help in the uncovering of issues (Watergate for example) but simply taking one source is never a good idea. Even the article you linked to have the line "While the leak contains genuine files, it remains possible that fake material has been slipped in."

So you have a discredited news source, with an article that openly states it doesn't know what is true or not. That is hardly evidence now is it?

But again, its all moot anyway. You have no problem with politicians reaching out to others to try to get what they see as 'right and just'. Just a bit of banter between two people and if the people gave money to Hunter then thats on them. Clearly Biden did nothing to harm them attack them. Its all good.

By your own value system.

notobtuse · 30-11-2021 6:17pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118246529#Comment_118246529

Yes it was.

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Comments