December 31, 2020

"Mr. Hawley’s challenge is not unprecedented... Democrats in both the House and Senate challenged certification of the 2004 election results..."

"... and House Democrats tried on their own to challenge the 2016 and 2000 outcomes, though without Senate support. ... Senator Barbara Boxer of California... briefly delayed the certification of George W. Bush’s victory... cit[ing] claims that Ohio election officials had improperly purged voter rolls... which Mr. Bush carried by fewer than 120,000 votes. Nancy Pelosi, then the House Democratic leader, supported the challenge.... The House voted 267 to 31 against the challenge and the Senate rejected it 74 to 1...  After the 2016 election, several House Democrats tried again, rising during the joint session to register challenges against Mr. Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton in various states. The Democrats cited reasons ranging from long lines at polling sites to the Kremlin’s election influence operation."


So... in the last three decades, every time a Republican won, Congressional Democrats challenged the certification of the election, and every time a Democrat won, Congressional Republicans did not challenge the certification.

That certainly puts a different light on what Josh Hawley is doing!

Either challenging the certification is the norm or it is not. It can't be the norm for Democrats and abnormal when a Republican does the same thing. Either Congress has a role in looking into the workings of the state elections or it does not. It can't be that the role is to question Republican victories and rubber-stamp Democratic victories.

I can see — in the NYT write up — the basis for arguing that there actually should be a lopsided role. To fill out something I elided above: "In challenging those results Democrats cited claims that Ohio election officials had improperly purged voter rolls and otherwise disenfranchised hundreds of thousands of voters in the state...." 

The argument that's hinted at is that there should be heightened scrutiny where the challenge has to do with discrimination against a traditionally discriminated against group. 

148 comments:

PB said...

Is the electoral count act of 1877 constitutional?

David Begley said...

Here’s my January 6, 2021 hope. Results from 6 states are contested. Pence presides over the 12 hours of Senate debate.

As President of the Senate, Pence refuses any EC votes from the six disputed states stating that the results are unreliable and tainted by fraud. Trump wins.

The Dems would riot in Congress. Schumer would physically attack Hawley.

Breezy said...

What traditionally discriminated against group was affected by purged voter rolls in Ohio?

stevew said...

If there is a law or rule allowing a member of the Congress to challenge the reported results of the election then doing so is legitimate. All these incidents mentioned indicate a lack of confidence in the integrity of the election. In my view it would be bad politics to remain silent if you believe there are problems. There is nothing more important to a peaceful transition than to prove legitimacy of the vote and president elect.

@David Begley: I agree. That would be wildly entertaining.

rhhardin said...

Any difficulty confuses blacks, is the idea.

PB said...

Still waiting to see if enough Democrats will show up to elect Pelosi as Speaker. Wouldn't that get the new year started off right if the Republicans were able to take adcantage of a temporary house majority and elect a republican speaker?

GingerBeer said...

The justification for Stacey Abrams' claim of victory in the 2018 GA gubernatorial election was the same, disenfranchisement of Black voters by purging voter rolls in accordance w/ federal and state law. GA's implementation of Bill Clinton's "Motor-Voter" law was so hideous, Black turnout in GA in 2018 was up 31% over the previous election, a presidential year. The same port in every R storm.

Wince said...

The argument that's hinted at is that there should be heightened scrutiny where the challenge has to do with discrimination against a traditionally discriminated against group.

Another way of the NYT saying “you ain’t black” unless you voted for a Democrat.

GingerBeer said...

If an R does what a D did it is both unprecedented and a threat to the Constitution.

Lyssa said...

If my kids throw a temper tantrum, everyone just accepts it; kids will be kids. If my husband were to throw a temper tantrum, this would suggest something very troubling, about him or the situation or both. This situation is disturbing because everyone, NYT included, has internalized the idea that the Dems are just expected to sometimes throw tantrums, and it doesn’t matter much. It really is different when the adults do it.

Howard said...

Filed under who gaf? More circus tricks.

Not Sure said...

What traditionally discriminated against group was affected by purged voter rolls in Ohio?

Dead people.

campy said...

Lyssa @6:16: LOL (and also crying because it's so true)

Lyle Smith said...

Republicans are now a group traditionally discriminated against by Democrats. Heightened scrutiny it is.

mezzrow said...

I would like to believe that the Republicans have a step by step plan to inflict any and all obstructions or annoyances that has been used by the Democrats in the past on said Democrats over the next few years, but that would give the GOP too much credit.

This is probably just an outlier. Time will tell, though.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

This time the ballot stuffing is real. 200,000 votes in PA that do not connect to a real person.

stevew said...

What are the Republicans doing to prevent a recurrence of the 2020 presidential elections shenanigans happening in the GA Senate races? Too little I expect.

Mr Wibble said...

I find the hysteria about how these legal and procedural challenges are somehow "undermining our institutions" to be tiresome. Our institutions aren't undermined by following legitimate processes set out by other parts of the system. What does undermine our institutions is when half the electorate believes that their votes don't matter because of chicanery, and that their party leaders are too craven, too corrupt, or too incompetent to fight back.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Evenhandedness violates the media’s mission to promote Democrats and hinder Republicans. “It’s different when we do it” is literally their POV on challenging election results.

wild chicken said...

Voter rolls are a mess. People move all the time, esp the young, and the old ones move to nursing homes and die. Half the names are marked Inactive at any given time.

Hell, customer lists are a mess too. Always disconnects, returned mail no forwarding address. Mobility is chaos.

The rule here was miss two general elections and you're dropped. But we don't have many minorities here so no one cares much.

Bill Harshaw said...


I've no real problem with Hawley's position, seems close to Boxer's in 2004. Though the content is idiotic--Reps used to be the party believing in the sanctity of the states and the importance of local rule. But the process is like a pressure relief valve on a steam engine. (I don't think which party protests when is significant--it all boils down to which party loses and how they lost--it's not a matter of adherence to principle.)

If there were any reality to the claims of fraud, they would have been made in court and affirmed by courts. Instead the Trump people have an almost perfect record of failure.

What's problematic about the whole thing, and different from 2004, is the fervor of people who believe the election can be overturned and who might take to the streets in violent protest.


mockturtle said...

David Begley asserts: The Dems would riot in Congress. Schumer would physically attack Hawley.

Now this would be worth watching. Haven't had a good physical altercation in the Senate since about 1856 when Senator Charles Sumner [Republican] was beaten to unconsciousness with a cane by Democratic Congressman Preston Brooks.

Mike of Snoqualmie said...

The Democrats are the party of double standards. It's a good thing, otherwise they'd have no standards.

daskol said...

It's close enough to 2021 that I feel confident calling this the most irritating comment of the year. I don't know if this comment is made in all seriousness as a result of idiocy or naïveté so thick it appears that way, or if it's just more of that 2020 gaslighting.

If there were any reality to the claims of fraud, they would have been made in court and affirmed by courts.

mikee said...

"It can't be the norm for Democrats and abnormal when a Republican does the same thing."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. (breathe) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Jersey Fled said...

My daughter gets three ballots in two states. I wonder how many people exercised her voting rights for her.

This shouldn't be that hard to fix. If the Democrats really wanted to fix it.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

“One party thinks they can overturn an election”? The amazing thing is he is not referring to the party that has attempted to overturn every Republican elected president since Reagan. Do you believe the shit you write here?

campy said...

"What are the Republicans doing to prevent a recurrence of the 2020 presidential elections shenanigans happening in the GA Senate races? Too little I expect."

"Too little" is the best case scenario. "Nothing" is the real answer.

daskol said...

There are many spheres in which our modern legal concept of protected classes seems to run up against American ideals of fairness and equity. Applying the concept of protected classes to voting would seem, as the communists liked to say, to heighten that contradiction.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Just remember - behind every democrat hack double standard is an unconfessed single standard.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

“Due process, good for me but not for thee” is how the D party rolls. Also the exact meaning of “unprecedented” is expressed clearly as “you are not allowed to play Calvinball the way we play.”

Temujin said...

Virtually every US citizen is disenfranchised when we allow some states to send out blanket, unlimited mailings of ballots like so many grocery story coupon flyers. Multiple ballots to single dwellings. Voter rolls not cleaned up or purged in decades. Ballot harvesting. Non-compliant election dates and times. All of this makes a mockery of our elections and provides those who would commit fraud to do just that.

That, plus unsecured voting machines tied to the internet make our elections a travesty and if we do not fix it, we're just walking into an abyss. But, hey...at least we've still got Netflix, right?

I'm Not Sure said...

"So... in the last three decades, every time a Republican won, Congressional Democrats challenged the certification of the election, and every time a Democrat won, Congressional Republicans did not challenge the certification."

Shorter: Democrats are hypocritical assholes.

Mike Sylwester said...

Breezy at 5:29 AM
What traditionally discriminated against group was affected by purged voter rolls in Ohio?

Dead people

Chuck said...

The subject of this post — the Democrats’ historical reversion to these electoral college objections, and Hawley’s citation to it as some sort of justification — is pretty much exactly what I posted in yesterday’s blog post about Hawley:

Blogger Chuck said...
I was interested in the one vaguely-true part of Hawley’s statement on this subject. Hawley offered zero proof that the results of the election were fraudulent. But he did state — accurately — that Democrats staged futile objections to the electoral certification in 2016. So from that, I interpret Hawley’s position as being, ‘We are doing this stupid and futile thing because Democrats did the same stupid and futile thing four years ago.’

12/30/20, 3:42 PM Delete

And so again I say that the essence of Hawley’s position is that he is doing this stupid and futile thing because in the past, Democrats have done this stupid and futile thing.

But let’s also note that the context of those Democratic objections was that the presidential candidates in question were not challenging their losses. No one doubted the electoral outcome. Hawley might be able to sit down with those Democrats and agree that we’ve never had a fraudulently elected president, but it may be worth a Congressional review of federal election procedures in many states.

But that also is NOT Trump’s thing. Trump doesn’t give a flying fuck about voting, per se . Trump’s thing is different from the electoral losses of Clinton, Kerry and Gore. Trump wants to overturn the results, long after those results have been confirmed.

And for my part, unlike the progressive and Trumpist partisans, I am not burdened by past-position hypocrisies. As an anti-Trump Republican, I didn’t support the Democrats’ stunts, and I won’t support this Trump stunt.

Elliott A said...

During the Georgia Senate election hearing yesterday, the expert presenter had his colleague hack into a Dominion voting machine in an open polling place in real time. Took a couple minutes. Also confirmed that they were in fact connected to the internet and data was flowing in both directions.

Unknown said...

If you really want to act like Democrats, time for an independent counsel to investigate the Biden administration for crimes! And don't forget to start a rumor that he's a spy for a foreign dictator. I heard he likes prostitutes to pee on his head.

320Busdriver said...

Walmart retracted it’s shitty retort to Hawleys Twitter. Seems someone mistakenly put the #soreloser comment on the corporate feed instead of their personal feed.

Whoooops

daskol said...

Chuck don't do stunts
Neither Trump stunts nor prog stunts
No stunts from any of those cunts

bgates said...

Mr Hawley
Mr Bush
Mr Trump
Senator Barbara Boxer
President-elect Joseph R Biden Jr

I think I see the unconfessed single standard.

mtrobertslaw said...

There is absolutely nothing wrong that Democrats should have the exclusive right to challenge the certification of an election. After all, to borrow a phrase from J.S. Mill, they are the "Stupid Party" and this exclusive privilege helps level the playing field.

RMc said...

It can't be the norm for Democrats and abnormal when a Republican does the same thing.

Sure it can. All day. Every day. (Also, you're a racist.)

hombre said...

“So... in the last three decades, every time a Republican won, Congressional Democrats challenged....”

Great stuff from which more leftmediaswine lies will roll out.

John henry said...

Re shooter attacking hawley:you mean like this?

The Caning of Charles Sumner, or the Brooks–Sumner Affair, occurred on May 22, 1856, in the United States Senate, when Representative Preston Brooks, a pro-slavery Democrat from South Carolina, used a walking cane to attack Senator Charles Sumner, an abolitionist Republican from Massachusetts, in retaliation for a speech given by Sumner two days earlier in which he fiercely criticized slaveholders, including a relative of Brooks.

Another unhinged Democrat.

John Henry

daskol said...

I like to imagine brave Sir Chuck accompanied by his favorite troubadour, roaming the digital wilds searching out opportunities to take his looney, lonely stand

Bruce Hayden said...

“If there were any reality to the claims of fraud, they would have been made in court and affirmed by courts. Instead the Trump people have an almost perfect record of failure.”

Nope. None dismissed on the merits yet. Mostly dismissed on legal technicalities. Keep spinning though.

320Busdriver said...

Fulton county ballots for R areas were different from ballots printed for D areas. Target area read by scanner in R areas leads to adjudication of those votes.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/raffensperger-gets-caught-georgia-ballots-printed-differently-gop-counties-vs-dem-counties-election-rigged/

So, If there were any reality to the claims of fraud, they would have been made in court and affirmed by courts.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Mostly dismissed on legal technicalities.

As in “laches” preceded by the “too early” argument with generous dollops of “no standing” here and there, since apparently no one is harmed by election fraud, according to SCOTUS. Violating state constitutions is fine too, which used to seem like something the Supremes cared about.

hombre said...

Bill Harshaw: “If there were any reality to the claims of fraud, they would have been made in court and affirmed by courts. Instead the Trump people have an almost perfect record of failure.”

If anybody has the Brooklyn Bridge for sale, here’s a buyer, right here! Just advertise in one of the bubbles, NYT, WaPo, etc.

Bruce Hayden said...

“The argument that's hinted at is that there should be heightened scrutiny where the challenge has to do with discrimination against a traditionally discriminated against group.”

Only leftist loons, who read the NYT, would take that argument seriously. Here we have a lot of proof of actual election fraud. In those cases, it was merely wild conjecture that maybe those evil Republicans might have expunged too many Black voters, presumably on the same grounds that they use to argue against requiring IDs to vote - that Blacks are too dumb to get a driver’s license or free state ID if they can’t drive. In their case, it is entirely made up nonsense. Very condescending nonsense by the party of slave owners, the KKK, and Jim Crow. Presumably for their own good.

hombre said...

Mr. Wibble at 7:09 offers an end to the discussion. 👍🏻

Big Mike said...

Hawley might be able to sit down with those Democrats and agree that we’ve never had a fraudulently elected president, but it may be worth a Congressional review of federa l election procedures in many states.

Try Rutherford B. Hayes and the election of 1876.

Qwinn said...

"It's close enough to 2021 that I feel confident calling this the most irritating comment of the year. I don't know if this comment is made in all seriousness as a result of idiocy or naïveté so thick it appears that way, or if it's just more of that 2020 gaslighting."

Gaslighting. There's enough gaslighting going on to power several small cities. Not a single one of these cretins believes there wasn't fraud or that it didn't overturn the election. Every single one knows it's true, and every one of them is motivated to lie about it because OrangeManBad.

Hasn't anyone noticed that none of them are accusing *us* of lying? We're all stupid or ignorant or naive or led astray by the Bad Orange Man, but none of them are claiming anyone but Trump is being actively deceitful. Which is kinda funny because he's not the ultimate source of any of the evidence we've been presenting, it's all been from other sources.

Jersey Fled said...

More statistical evidence for excess pro Biden votes in key counties.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/expert-biden-win-suspicious-289-000-election-changing-excess-votes

It just keeps piling up until at some point it becomes overwhelming. Not fast enough to overturn the election, but enough to make Biden an illegitimate president.

Francisco D said...

David Begley said...Here’s my January 6, 2021 hope. Results from 6 states are contested. Pence presides over the 12 hours of Senate debate.

So far it looks like Pence is going the way of the GOPe. They want to get rid of Trump as badly as the Democrats.

Trump has to go because he threatens the rice bowls of the corrupt establishments in both parties. The duopoly wins!

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

The argument that's hinted at is that there should be heightened scrutiny where the challenge has to do with discrimination against a traditionally discriminated against group.

I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut and don't care if it short-dicks every member of the Pelosi family past, present, and future. National, State and local elections should always be rigorously scrutinized, even the case of a Nixon/McGovern blowout landslide, for the benefit of all American Citizens. Any politician who balks at that idea should be hanging from a gibbet.

mockturtle said...

Bruce, we should make the case that deplorables are a group widely and systematically discriminated against. Because it's certainly a fact.

rcocean said...

So the D's did in the past, what they NOW consider insane, criminal, and unheard of.
Gosh, how surprising!

Somehow, the D's and their Judges (including 4 on the SCOTUS) were perfectly willing to intervene in the 2000 election and "Recount" the votes and ignore Florida's Sec of state certification and hand the election to Al Gore.

But now, Trump must concede. For good the country. hahahahaha.

Really.

Joe Smith said...

Ann has discovered the word 'hypocrisy.'

The only thing I admire about democrats and progressive radicals (one and the same these days) is that they fight.

rcocean said...

The DOJ has just issued a report that Fraud has changed the votes in GA and other states, enough to steal the election from Trump. Will anyone hear of it, who doesn't follow Trump's tweets or right-wing websites? The DNC Newsletters (aka TV Networks/NYT/Wapo) will bury it - of course. Nothing to see here, just move along.

rcocean said...

The GA state Senate hearing on the 2020 fraud was VERY enlightening. Seems like the Crooked Sec of state put out ballots that (1) allowed ballots in heavily D areas to have no barcodes which enabled cross-referencing and cross-checks in the system (2) put misaligned bar codes on R ballots, so they were spit out and had to be "adjudicated" and (3) put out ballots with different bar codes that allowed anyone knowledgeable to know whether it came from a heavily D county or a R county.

Number 3 meant that a crooked election official didn't have to cheat by destroying ballots or "making up ballots", all that was neccessary was to "adjudicate" ballots by R and not run them through the machine, and process ballots from D ballots no matter what. Or even run them several times through the machine, since there was no cross-reference code!

rcocean said...

BTW, the D's and the Left don't give a shit whether they are hypocrites are not. Constantly pointing it out, and give long winded explanations as to why they are hypocrites is only enlightening for gullible Independents and Conservatives, who still naively think the D's and the Left have any principle except "Just win baby, just win".

For the rest of us, the only question is, what are we going to do about it?

Jupiter said...

"It can't be the norm for Democrats and abnormal when a Republican does the same thing."

Looks like the turnip truck just got into town.

Chuck said...

Blogger NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...
...
I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut and don't care if it short-dicks every member of the Pelosi family past, present, and future. National, State and local elections should always be rigorously scrutinized, even the case of a Nixon/McGovern blowout landslide, for the benefit of all American Citizens. Any politician who balks at that idea should be hanging from a gibbet.


I might give your rant a passing moment of sincere consideration if I thought that Trump was concerned about real election integrity. He isn’t. He would cheat if he knew how, to steal the 2020 election.

And Josh Hawley doesn’t have a clue about any real fraud in the 2020 election. Hawley’s concern is posturing himself with the Trump base, for 2024.

Ditto all of the Trump media jerkoffs. Limbaugh; Hannity; Levin; Carlson; Ingraham; Breitbart; Newsmax. They discuss serious election law topics about as often as they discuss serious health care reform topics.

wholelottasplainin' said...

@David Begley: I agree. That would be wildly entertaining.
************

I would hope that at the very least the Dems started picking up chairs and loose objects and throwing them at the GOP members, the way the august legislators in Taiwan do from time to time.

But if Schumer brings a cane to the vote, Hawley better watch his back.

Rusty said...

"If there were any reality to the claims of fraud, they would have been made in court and affirmed by courts. Instead the Trump people have an almost perfect record of failure."

I find your childlike belief in our corrupt legal system,.......childlike. There is more than enough evidence that fraud occurred. That you don't want to see it is the problem with the system.

DEEBEE said...

Previously Trump’s accusations baseless, now his actions impotent. What wonders will extreme neutrality fecal flings wrought next?

I'm Not Sure said...

"For the rest of us, the only question is, what are we going to do about it?"

Seeing as how so many of the Republicans who are in a position to do something about this are willing to just roll over for the Dems so that they can all get back to business as usual, what *can* we do about it?

This is not snark or rhetorical, it's an honest question.

I already won't vote for anyone of any party who gives me even the faintest hint that they're okay with the sewer that DC has become as long as they can benefit from being part of it. But it's clear that voting is a farce, in place just to give the illusion that you have a voice in the matter. As has been attributed to Mark Twain (among others), "If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it."

So, where to from here?

wholelottasplainin' said...

rcocean said...
The DOJ has just issued a report that Fraud has changed the votes in GA and other states, enough to steal the election from Trump. Will anyone hear of it, who doesn't follow Trump's tweets or right-wing websites? The DNC Newsletters (aka TV Networks/NYT/Wapo) will bury it - of course. Nothing to see here, just move along.
**************

How about at least giving US a link to that report?

Chuck said...

Here is something that isn’t childlike:

Blogger Rusty said...
"If there were any reality to the claims of fraud, they would have been made in court and affirmed by courts. Instead the Trump people have an almost perfect record of failure."

I find your childlike belief in our corrupt legal system,.......childlike. There is more than enough evidence that fraud occurred. That you don't want to see it is the problem with the system.


The kind of lunacy where you imagine that hundreds if not thousands of poll workers, law enforcement professionals, legal professionals, judges, judicial staffs and prominent elected officials from both parties are ALL in on a secretly massive multi-state conspiracy... That’s not “childlike.” No child is that fucking twisted or conspiratorial. It takes a really warped, damaged adult to think that way.

Sebastian said...

"It can't be the norm for Democrats and abnormal when a Republican does the same thing."

It can't be the norm! How could x be irrelevant when it is relevant! It's terrible! Why would they say or do such things!

Anyway, since we're dealing with progs, the standard is that there is one standard for progs and another for the GOP.

It would be abnormal for progs to argue in good faith. Instead, they follow the norm that what advances prog power, goes.

320Busdriver said...

“I might give your rant a passing moment of sincere consideration if I thought that Trump was concerned about real election integrity. He isn’t. He would cheat if he knew how, to steal the 2020 election.“


TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP ...

My Trumpblinders don’t allow me to see how refusing to acknowledge a stolen election will result in my being thought of as a pariah by half of my countrymen and nothing stands in the way of my desire to rid the world of Trump. FIFY

Readering said...

Trump fan fiction

Readering said...

Donald Trump just reminded me to help set a record for contributions. Not sure what the record is. Distracted by the places where "Trump Steaks" was deleted.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Chuck, I think you should make your New Year's resolution to kill yourself.

hombre said...

Chuck Channeling Schumer: “As an anti-Trump Republican, I didn’t support the Democrats’ stunts, and I won’t support this Trump stunt.”

2020 is the year in which Never Trumpers stopped the bullshit and acknowledged by word or deed that they are Democrats in drag. As always, Chuck is behind the curve.

Readering said...

2021 is the year in which Trumpists slink away and look for other demagogues to follow.

Readering said...

I'm sure Chuck knows when he comes here that it could all just be dogs on the internet.

mockturtle said...

I'm not sure asks: So, where to from here?

That's the biggest question going into 2021. Doing nothing is not an option. But, IMO, neither is rioting or even protesting in the streets. My personal plan is to resist in every way I'm able any unconstitutional mandate, law or dictate. But I'm certainly open to some organized form of resistance. It will have to be done under the radar, which will be difficult, as every form of communication is now closely monitored. What is your solution?

Readering said...

Wear a mask.

Chuck said...

Blogger Readering said...
I'm sure Chuck knows when he comes here that it could all just be dogs on the internet.


I am very well aware — as I expect you are too — when the punches are landing. A really good example would be someone’s publishing a wish that I kill myself.

Happy new year!

The Vault Dweller said...

Was Althouse trying to garner something when she used the word elided in her post?

Leland said...

I agree with Francisco at 10:10a. I support Hawley and those that will back him. In the end, I expect Biden to be certified. I don't like it yet despite bluster, I don't sense people taking up arms to argue against this action. If Trump voters aren't willing to "riot in the street and tear things up" then DC establishment will fear the Antifa/BLM rioters and not the GOP rioters. You get the government you deserve.

That said, all the Senators in the GOP not supporting Hawley don't care about their majority. If they did, they would back Hawley. The Georgia election should be a win for Republicans, and a loss will suggest fraud. One way to make this point is to back Hawley. If you get the majority, then you can claim "at least we can stop Biden excess". If you don't get the majority; then what use is the GOP to anybody on the right? I remember 2009. I remember Pelosi had no problems locking Republicans out of chambers and voting for whatever she, Schumer, and Obama wanted. The NYT will support these actions again in 2021.

Joan said...

I watched a good bit of the citizen investigation rally in AZ yesterday and the fraud information they presented was horrifying. They attempted to verify the voter roll and found a truly staggering amount of fraudulently cast mail-in ballots. Voters registered with sports stadiums or public municipal buildings or empty lots as their home addresses, and so many more instances of fake addresses and fake people it was scary. The percentage of fake voters was absolutely huge and more than enough to call into question the integrity of the election. I commend these private citizens for their efforts, but I have no confidence that anything will come of it for this election.

Qwinn said...

rcocean said...
The DOJ has just issued a report that Fraud has changed the votes in GA and other states, enough to steal the election from Trump. Will anyone hear of it, who doesn't follow Trump's tweets or right-wing websites? The DNC Newsletters (aka TV Networks/NYT/Wapo) will bury it - of course. Nothing to see here, just move along.
**************

How about at least giving US a link to that report?


Yes, please. Cannot find at all.

Rusty said...

Well.
That got all the corrupt shysters going.

Qwinn said...

Leland: "If you don't get the majority; then what use is the GOP to anybody on the right?"

It isn't - it exists only to give us the illusion of representation for years, but it has been completely infiltrated for decades. Do you really think the conservative base in this country picked McCain and Romney over all other choices?

I think many millions of people have realized this utterly due to the events of 2020. Which is why you shouldn't be so dismissive of the reaction we're going to see. The Left see political violence as a dial. The Right sees a switch, and knows when the last chance to ever flip it before endless tyranny prevails has arrived.

Joe Smith said...

"2021 is the year in which Trumpists slink away and look for other demagogues to follow."

Calling all libs...just remember, when things go to hell under paste-eatin' Joe, you will own it.

The media will try to cover for all the bad news, but I hope the lefty commenters here will be honest enough to own up to the coming shit storm (I know, not a chance).

And I realize that you will welcome much of it...lower GDP, more reliance on the state, being China's bitch, etc.

But there will be a backlash, and it will be glorious.

Joe Smith said...

"That said, all the Senators in the GOP not supporting Hawley don't care about their majority. If they did, they would back Hawley."

The Treehouse makes a compelling case that Mitch would rather be the minority leader...much more leverage and cash that way.

It's a good point.

Joe Smith said...

"How about at least giving US a link to that report?

Yes, please. Cannot find at all."


Is this it? Haven't looked yet...

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1344173684983017473

Kirk Parker said...

"...ALL in on a secretly massive multi-state conspiracy... "

Good thing that's not what anyone is claiming.

You dishonest dirtbag...

Qwinn said...

Didn't do a very good job on the "secretly" part, did you?

You, on the other hand, easily and casually believe that over one thousand people falsely filed affidavits under the penalty of perjury that there was fraud, and apparently every one of them is lying, and that doesn't require conspiratorial thinking in the slightest.

Big Mike said...

I am way past fed up with Democrats kvetching about the 2004 General Election in Ohio. Is there any evidence -- even the slightest scintilla* -- that anyone was denied the right to vote in Ohio having been wrongly removed from the voting rolls? Any evidence whatsoever?

Then let's cut the bullshit, shall we?


* I have never heard the phrase "slightest scintilla" said by anyone except lawyers. Is it in some legal style book somewhere?

Greg The Class Traitor said...

The argument that's hinted at is that there should be heightened scrutiny where the challenge has to do with discrimination against a traditionally discriminated against group.

Well, everyone's favorite group to discriminate against is white males, so clearly there should be "heightened scrutiny" whenever a white male conservative loses

Right?

Qwinn said...

A judge in PA ruled in Trump's favor.

The appeals judge both upheld it and said Trump's team was likely to win on the merits.

The PA Supreme Court, which themselves illegally changed the rules by which the election would be conducted, and therefore could not possibly have been more conflicted, overrode them.

And I was personally a poll watcher in PA who was not allowed to watch the count.

To claim that the above should satisfy *anyone* is rank gaslighting that will not mollify anyone.

Chuck said...


Blogger Kirk Parker said...
"...ALL in on a secretly massive multi-state conspiracy... "

Good thing that's not what anyone is claiming.

You dishonest dirtbag...

I was responding to Rusty’s idiotic suggestion that we should not accept the near-unanimous state and federal court failures to overturn election results into Trump’s favor. That only a “childlike” belief in our legal system could accept it.

And so now, you get to be the idiot who explains succinctly what it is that serious minds such as yours would argue IS the claim being made on behalf of Trump. You know; the really serious, credible claim that Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett might agree is a winner for Trump. Or some other such thing. I’m teeing it up for you. I seem to have not gotten “what anyone is claiming,”. Your words. Now, you get to tell me and everyone what the real claim is.

Qwinn said...

UPDATE: Arizona Citizens Investigation Discovers Thousands of Phantom Voters in State – Up to 30% of Addresses in Investigation Were Fraudulent

Liz Harris then rounded up several hundred patriot volunteers who knocked on these doors looking to find what Piton calls “phantom sleeper” and suspicious Undefined or “U” voters. They are not eligible to vote for a variety of reasons. He estimated there are 160,000 to 400,000 of these illegal voters in Arizona. The team were able to visit 1,000 of the addresses in person and were often harassed or threatened by the residents. They found 539 voters DID NOT LIVE at these addresses. Additional results are below.


Voters that are dead, verified no longer at that address
Several with the actual name “Unknown Voter”
Registered at commercial addresses, especially Church’s Chicken
Non-U.S. Citizens who denied voting
Felons who stated they can’t vote, others in jail for years
Out of State residents who just don’t live in Arizona
Registered using Schools, car lots, and sports arena’s addresses
65 using the AZ Tabulation Center & Recorders Office as their address
Vacant lots at elderly villages (55 & over) and undeveloped properties
Wilderness addresses on Bureau of Land Management & State Trust land
Abandoned homes completely unlivable or boarded up
Street names that just do not exist in any Arizona records

Qwinn said...

When did judges completely replace juries?

bagoh20 said...

"...there should be heightened scrutiny where the challenge has to do with discrimination against a traditionally discriminated against group. "

The issue is politics, and the the group discriminated against in politics is conservatives. In addition to the heavily lopsided media coverage, social media bias, and censorship, as well as the reality exposed in this particular post, that case is unassailable. This election disenfranchised more American voters than any in history via fraud, and those people were overwhelming working class conservatives, not to mention a record number of minorities who voted for the Republican this time. Do they even matter? Do they have a voice, standing? What is it that erases or subordinates the rights of those people - millions of them?

Qwinn said...

Every leftist here has made it clear that they don't give a fuck that we believe the election was stolen. Couldn't matter less to them. They just can't stop spiking the football.

The part where they don't give a fuck about the other side is entirely mutual. Their denials mean less than nothing, it only marks them as complicit. As someone put it above - anyone who by this point is still denying the evidence is a pariah to more than half the country. No longer our countrymen. Domestic enemies. And frankly, no conceivable response I can think of can go too far. Civil War isn't just justified, it's arguably overdue.

Chuck said...


Blogger Qwinn said...
When did judges completely replace juries?


Practically any and every time that a plaintiff pleads for injunctive relief, specific performance or other similar remedies. Which you should have learned in your First-year Civ. Pro. class. Which was ... when?

Chuck said...


Blogger Qwinn said...
Every leftist here has made it clear that they don't give a fuck that we believe the election was stolen. Couldn't matter less to them. They just can't stop spiking the football.


You should not limit this to “leftists.”

I’m not a leftist, and I am still preoccupied with thinking of newer and better ways to “spike the football” as you suggest.

Qwinn said...

Chuck asks for evidence. Yet another small piece of the mountain is provided to him. He completely ignores it, and instead argues that "our corrupt judges denying injunctive relief is to be considered every bit as determinant as a verdict by jury trial" as something anyone has ever agreed to or argued successfully for.

Readering said...

Also don't give an f if you think moon landing staged.

Readering said...

Lot of evidence has been offered the years for that too.

bagoh20 said...

I think plenty of Dems here and elsewhere know perfectly well that fraud was rampant, know the hypocrisy is indefensible, and know that Biden and Harris are a mistake at best. They know down in that guarded kernel of honesty, even they posses, that they are part of the lie, and are defending a steal, but they don't have the integrity that would cause that to bother them when the stakes are high. That's why I don't care what they say anymore about anything. Its all just cover up of one lie after another, and trying to convince people of things they don't even really believe themselves. That's being very generous to some.

Joe Smith said...

"I’m not a leftist..."

Marx: "I am not a communist."

Dude, just give it up already.

Steven said...

Hillary Clinton on Barbara Boxer's objection in 2005: "I commend the senator from California for raising the objection."

But now, four years after supporting Hillary Clinton for President, Chuck discovers he disagreed with this.

Joe Smith said...

"Lot of evidence has been offered the years for that too."

Only if you have a feeble mind...which apparently is the case with you.

I'm Not Sure said...

"I think plenty of Dems here and elsewhere know perfectly well that fraud was rampant..."

Of course they do. Why else would they be so insistent that none of these fraud claims be investigated? If they honestly believed the election was run fairly, they'd have no problem indulging the Trump supporters they so intensely hate, just to have the chance to rub their noses in it when all those claims of fraud were proven false. The fact there is so much pushback on investigating fraud claims clearly indicates that Bidenoids are afraid of what investigations would turn up.

victoria said...

"I’m not a leftist..."

Kind of like when Trump said, "I am not a racist. I am the LEAST racist person in the white house". Lie, lies and more lies.

and Gaslighting? Please, we have been gaslighted for the last 4 years into believing what Trump did was actually good for America. No no no. We are far worse off today as a nation today than we were 4 years ago. Place that blame right at the feet of the Administration and his happy hoards of buffoons supporting him. Glad to be rid of him and his crooked cronies.


Vicki from Pasadena

Chuck said...


Blogger Steven said...
Hillary Clinton on Barbara Boxer's objection in 2005: "I commend the senator from California for raising the objection."

But now, four years after supporting Hillary Clinton for President, Chuck discovers he disagreed with this.

Fuck you, liar. I didn’t “support” Hillary. I didn’t vote for her. I made what was to me the near-ultimate sacrifice and voted for Trump. On the comments pages of this blog I said that I would not vote for her under any circumstances, even before I had resigned myself to the distaste of voting for Trump that one time. I called Mrs. Clinton “the worst Democratic nominee since Al Smith.”

Joe Smith said...

All hail Vicki, the latest to join us all the way from the left side of the Bell Curve.

Welcome!

bagoh20 said...

Remember the left refused to accept the Trump win in 2016 for four years based on a single known fake dossier paid for by the opposing campaign. The same people now tell us thousands of eye witnesses are not sufficient. Wining by any means is all that matters. It's embarrassing. They did that for four years after that inauguration. We haven't even gotten to the starting point of the next inauguration, so they need to get used to hearing about the crime they proudly supported.

bagoh20 said...

Vicky, who gaslighted you, on what, and how. You probabaly haven't even really thought that through, so take your time.

tcrosse said...

Consider this challenge as pre-impeachment. And it goes for Kamala as well.

Chuck said...

Blogger bagoh20 said...
Remember the left refused to accept the Trump win in 2016 for four years based on a single known fake dossier paid for by the opposing campaign...


Right now on the Drudge home page, is a link to 2017 video of then-Vice President Biden overruling objections to the certification of Trump’s 2016 election.

Qwinn said...

Note that there are two House races in New York where the Republican holds a small lead.

Their Democrat opponents did NOT go through the courts, as we're being relentlessly told is the only valid avenue.

They instead went to Nancy Pelosi, and got her to refuse to seat those who are still held to have won.

The only people not following standard procedures here... are the Democrats.

And that's held to be okay, because we all know that their only principle is the will to power, and anything Democrats do for power is ipso facto legitimate.

Not anymore. Not one more fucking day.

JackOfClubs said...

"That certainly puts a different light on what Josh Hawley is doing!"

Acting like a Democrat? Funny, when we used to complain that it was unfair that the Dems were being immature and irresponsible, I always thought we meant we wanted them to grow up. I never realized we were just pushing for equal tantrum-time.

Rusty said...

Blogger Joe Smith said...
All hail Vicki, the latest to join us all the way from the left side of the Bell Curve.

Welcome!
With all the rest of the minus 90 IQs.
For Readering.
The earth is round. We landed on the moon several times. Fire does melt steel. We are not now or have ever been visited by aliens. And there is more than enough proof that you and your friends stole the presidential election.
It's not my fault you're corrupt.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Watched some of OANN coverage of senate investigation testimony on GA voter fraud. Recalled Doonesbury's Nixon Rant. GUILTY!, GUILTY!, GUILTY!

BUMBLE BEE said...

Substantiate your claims Victoria. I need a good laugh.

Readering said...

Double delusion thinking the 81 million believe there was fraud.

rcocean said...

"Yes, please. Cannot find at all."

https://www.oann.com/doj-adviser-lott-trump-votes-subtracted-biden-votes-inflated/

Big Mike said...

We are not now or have ever been visited by aliens.

Wait! How else do you explain Dennis Rodman?

mockturtle said...

Rusty@ 5:07, And Epstein didn't kill himself.

Big Mike said...

Right now on the Drudge home page, is a link to 2017 video of then-Vice President Biden overruling objections to the certification of Trump’s 2016 election.

It’s not as though Slow Joe and Crooked Hillary were exactly best friends. Biden believed, IMO rightly, that he deserved to be the presidential candidate in 2016, and that he would have run a better campaign than Hillary did.

mockturtle said...

Vicki, take note: There is a difference between hoards and hordes.

Big Mike said...

Please, we have been gaslighted for the last 4 years into believing what Trump did was actually good for America.

@Vicki, limousine liberals living in high-tax, left wing extremist cities (e.g., Pasadena) made out worse than low-income workers and small business owners. We understand your elitist pain.

Chuck said...


Blogger Big Mike said...
“Right now on the Drudge home page, is a link to 2017 video of then-Vice President Biden overruling objections to the certification of Trump’s 2016 election

It’s not as though Slow Joe and Crooked Hillary were exactly best friends. Biden believed, IMO rightly, that he deserved to be the presidential candidate in 2016, and that he would have run a better campaign than Hillary did.


There’s always another conspiracy in Trump World. One more conspiracy to explain the failures of the previous half-dozen conspiracies. 2021 is gonna be epic, with the conspiracy theories abounding to explain away the upcoming Trump criminal indictments. After the Trump self-pardons.

Big Mike said...

@Chuck the moron, is it a conspiracy if it’s true? I’m basing my assertion on Biden’s own words from 2016.

Chuck said...


Blogger Big Mike said...
@Chuck the moron, is it a conspiracy if it’s true? I’m basing my assertion on Biden’s own words from 2016.


Your conspiracy — and you’re even dumber than I imagined if you didn’t understand it — is conflating any personal distance you imagine between Mrs. Clinton and President-elect Biden, and then-Veep Biden’s certification of the Trump election as some sort of personal vendetta. As opposed to the patently obvious, standard, accepted, rule-of-law certification of the national vote. Which Biden did properly. By the book. No personality conflict involved.

Big Mike said...

Only an utter moron like Chuck would turn “It’s not as though Slow Joe and Crooked Hillary were exactly best friends” into an assertion on my part that there was some sort of personal vendetta between them. How are you still alive? A brain as weak as yours must have difficulty remembering to tell your lungs to breathe.

Readering said...

Peace on earth, good will to men.

Big Mike said...

Peace on earth, good will to men.

Now you want peace and good will? You missed your window of opportunity months ago.

mockturtle said...

Per Big Mike: Now you want peace and good will? You missed your window of opportunity months ago.

Yep.

Readering said...

I wanted it months ago too.

Big Mike said...

Readering is either lying to us or to himself..

Readering said...

Sigh.

Narayanan said...

Bruce Hayden said...
“If there were any reality to the claims of fraud, they would have been made in court and affirmed by courts. Instead the Trump people have an almost perfect record of failure.”

Nope. None dismissed on the merits yet. Mostly dismissed on legal technicalities. Keep spinning though. --------
-----------==========

cruelly neutral legal technicality is how you kill rule of law



Readering said...

So Biden just lucky to be up against Trump and Giuliani and Powell? No, enough courts looked at the merits. Trump won nowhere. Who does that?

Qwinn said...

"No, enough courts looked at the merits."

Not a single fucking one, liar.

Readering said...

Wah!

Bill Harshaw said...

For those who claim the courts never reached the merits, aren't you left with two options:
1 Trump, who hires only the best, has a set of lousy lawyers who weren't able to find and present cases of fraud that would convince the courts? Or
2 Trump, who boasts of reforming the courts, was sadly mistaken in his appointments, as in Judge Bibas? https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/read-the-third-circuit-court-of-appeals-ruling-in-pennsylvania-election/e2bfd645-efb5-4862-8680-ce92c9ccf6e2/


Rusty said...

Readering said...
"I wanted it months ago too."
Funny. You've never acted like you did.

Readering said...

So says you.

Big Mike said...

So say we all!

Readering said...

So says you both