September 29, 2022

The WaPo Fact Checker fact-checks Stacey Abrams's denial that she was ever an election denier.

I scrolled immediately to see how many "Pinocchios" this got, but somehow this gets to be one of the statements that eludes the rating. Let's figure out why:

[A] review of numerous interviews shows that Abrams subsequently used language denying the outcome of the election that she now appears to be trying to play down.

For instance, Abrams at various times has said the election was “stolen” and even, in a New York Times interview, that “I won.” She suggested that election laws were “rigged” and that it was “not a free or fair election.” She also claimed that voter suppression was to blame for her loss, even though she admitted she could not “empirically” prove that. While she did acknowledged Kemp was the governor, she refused to say he was the “legitimate” governor.... 
[In 2019] when Abrams was mentioned as a possible presidential candidate, Abrams began to assert that she had “won” the election.... “I did win my election, I just didn’t get to have the job.”... “I may not have won this election, or at least, but I didn’t lose, I got the votes. But we won’t know exactly how many because of how they cheated.”... "But I know in my heart of hearts, we won.”... “We had this little election back in 2018. And despite the final tally and the inauguration and the situation we find ourselves in, I do have one very affirmative statement to make. We won.”...

More at the link, but no explanation of why there is no rating. It comes across as very clear that Stacey Abrams was an adamant election denier — for years and in many separate statements. So the question, really, is whether her denying of the denying was clear enough to constitute a lie:

In recent weeks she has subtly adjusted language to argue that, unlike Trump, she “never denied the election” and “never denied that I lost.”

What's subtle about that?  Give her the 4 Pinocchios she deserves.

The real question is how big a deal it is to challenge elections after the results have been declared. Do we need to pretend there are no problems for the sake of helping people remain calm and accept the outcome or is it perfectly normal to keep investigating and complaining and sowing doubt? 

100 comments:

RideSpaceMountain said...

"...but somehow this gets to be one of the statements that eludes the rating. Let's figure out why"

Why ask why? Everyone knows why.

Enigma said...

Don't challenge The Party. Bow down to The Party.


The Party already made Ms. Abrams United Earth "President" in Star Trek:

https://news.yahoo.com/stacey-abrams-makes-surprise-appearance-155521695.html

Hunter Biden's tax payer funded Hooker said...

ooo ooo oooo We all know why. **raises hand like Horshack.

Václav Patrik Šulik said...

This is so incredibly frustrating - the way the "fact checkers" carry water for the Dems. Everyone knows it. I've had so many breaking points on this. My last was when Glenn Kessler tried to claim there is no such thing as a fetal heartbeat. Back in 1988, our pro-choice OB-GYN showed us our daughter's beating heart on a sonogram and said "that looks to be about 4 to 6 weeks." I saw it beating, in real time, with my own eyes.

Don't try to tell me that Stacey Abrams isn't an election denier. I have seen her repeatedly do it. And if it's okay for her (and Hillary and Gore and Kerry and all the others) to do this, then it's okay for Trump to do so. Conversely, if it's wrong for Trump (and I agree that it's wrong), then it's wrong for Abrams. It's not okay when "our" side does it and wrong when "your" side does it.

(the advantage of not being tied to a party.)

Bottom line - fact checkers lie just like politicians and Kessler is one of the worst.

Paddy O said...

She didn't say elections weren't valid. She used language that did that. She's a neutral party in what the language decides to do.

retail lawyer said...

Years ago, before this became an interesting topic, I took "Remedies" in law school. I recall the chapter on elections, wherein the textbook author suggested that judges believe it to be more important that election result be final than that it be accurate. Of course, no judge would say that in a ruling. But it seemed so obvious at the time that I accepted it as common sense. This was a few years before Bush v. Gore.

Sebastian said...

"Why ask why? Everyone knows why."

Ditto.

To progs boring predictability is never boring if it serves the cause.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Don't question the questioners.

iowan2 said...

One job. Kessler had one job...

wild chicken said...

Yes. At some point we need to move on. You get your day in court, and if you can't muster the evidence, you punt.

The Drill SGT said...

exactly

fact checkers are agenda driven.

Humperdink said...

It's a mystery to me also. Could it be they retired the rating system in November 2020?

Joe Smith said...

She has liberal, huge black woman privilege...

C'mon man!

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

There are no bigger liars in journalism than “fact” checkers. Among that sorry lot there is no one with a knack for tying themselves in knots avoiding criticism of the left than Kessler. Smooooth as silk.

TrespassersW said...

Why is Abrams' lie treated (D)ifferently? I'm (D)umbfounded. (D)don't tell me WaPo's fact checker is a partisan hack.

Owen said...

Maybe the Four Pinocchios was a laudable idea: to highlight some outrageous deception in a quasi-kindergarten comedic context, so that the exposure of the deceit was a little less humiliating or a little more easily acknowledged.

But now? The Pinocchio convention seems to be absolutely futile in getting anybody to mend his or her ways. Or perhaps it was always meant as a way to habituate us all to the Big Lie: "Oh, look at that! That's gotta be three Pinoocchios! Or should it be two? Or four? Here, let's have an argument over which wing of the building is burning down faster..."

In a decent political society, Stacey Abrams would have been sent into exile a long while back. The fact that she has not, speaks volumes: about her, about her party, about the culture and values left to us.

Amadeus 48 said...

Gosh. I never knew she went on like that. I stopped listening when I saw Kemp got 50,000 votes more than she did.

Losers such as Abrams, Kerry, and Trump do go on, but they rarely gain credibility after the fact.

Christopher B said...

Who is in the Georgia Governor's Mansion right now, and who is in the White House?

walter said...

"election denier"
God, I hate this torture through language.

rcocean said...

Here's a crazy idea:

Address people's concerns. If the D's had accepted an AUDIT - repeat AUDIT - of the votes in several states in 2020, the issue would be settled. The D's refused to budge an inch. They audited the votes in Arz, after the D's fought them in the courts and every step of the way. The Mariposa counter election board then refused to cooperate, destroyed and "lost" evidence, and obstructed as much as they could.

The audit found massive irregularies, but refused to state the election was completely invalid. In every other state, the D's simply refused to do anything, and called anyone who wanted an audit a bunch of insults.

The DNC media and the Demorats run the same playbook. When they lose they scream "Russia collusion" or "Voter supression". When they win, they calling anyone who questions the results "Election deniers" "Insurrectionists" "Extremists". They have ZERO desire to hold honest, valid elections. ZERO. "just win baby, just win" is their motto.

The Center-right needs to wake up and understand that. And continuing to elect "The controlled opposition" like Romney, McConnell, etc. will just continue to lose. of course, if you're really just a Democrat who likes the Chamber of Commmerce, then never mind.

Michael K said...

The Tank is protected by her skin color and her political party. Those cancel any lies being exposed. The woman who wrecked Atlanta is similarly protected and has failed upward because of her skin color and politics.

Drago said...

Its as if Howard/gadfly/Inga were doing the "fact checking".

Leland said...

No surprise that fact checking is partisan, and like the treatment of some election deniers vs others; the lack of consistency erodes trust in the system. If the preferred team wins, then denial must be stamped out. If the detested team wins, then the illegitimate win must be overturned. If you don’t want to play the game, then simply build confidence and safe guards in the election process then have confidence in that system to allow dissent.

Outside of unearned celebrity, what does Abram bring to such an office. I see she created a beverage company a decade ago to make drinks for infants and toddlers, which is now a business focused on creating invoices for small business. She’s quite the change leader.

cubanbob said...

Abrams like Hillary and Al Gore couldn't prove it unlike Trump who wasn't allowed to prove it.

Fact checkers at the WaPo are as truthful as Pravda was back in the USSR.

Iman said...

It ain’t over until the Fat Lady shuts up.

RMc said...

The Party already made Ms. Abrams United Earth "President" in Star Trek

I'd rather see her in "Star Trek" than in the Governor's Mansion.

RMc said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RMc said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RMc said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jupiter said...

A case can be made that WaPo is worth reading because it is the grinding surface of the boot that will be stomping on our faces forever. Mustn't there be something of interest to say about the sole of that boot? Perhaps the tread pattern contains subtle messages, which will slowly be pounded into our skulls. Perhaps a delicate, rainbow lace can be descried, flapping colorfully to one side like a butterfly, in whimsical counterpoint to the brutal reciprocation. A good analyst should be able to find endless material for comment.

But the simple observation that WaPo publishes tendentious lies in service to the Democratic party is stale, and has grown tedious. Of course it does! Presumably, that is what Jeff Bezos bought it to do. Or perhaps he has it do so as a service to the legislators who do his bidding, in the same way a pimp makes his "girlfriend" give blow-jobs to his hangers-on. However it may be, we already know that lying liars lie and lie. The fact that Glenn Kessler has given another blow-job is not news.

Beasts of England said...

I’m reporting all you damned Fact Check Deniers to MiniTru!!

Mike Sylwester said...

An excerpt from The Washington Post Style Guide:

In articles about accusations that the USA's 2020 Presidential election was rigged, the article must include several of the following expressions:

* baseless

* debunked

* without evidence

* lies

* a Big Lie

-------

In articles about accusations that a Russian election was rigged, the article never may include any of the following expressions:

* baseless

* debunked

* without evidence

* lies

* a Big Lie

Yancey Ward said...

Glenn Kessler is a clown without a clown nose.

TreeJoe said...

Unlike the 2000, 2004, 2016, and Atlanta gubernatorial elections, the 2020 presidential elections actually had massive irregularities and even breakdowns of election rules by secretaries of state in multiple swing states....

And Trump still wasn't able to prove jack shit in the months following the election.

Abrams actions after the fact show how she is not a leader. As do Trump's quite frankly, even though in general I supported the federal policies he pushed.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

The real question is how big a deal it is to challenge elections after the results have been declared. Do we need to pretend there are no problems for the sake of helping people remain calm and accept the outcome or is it perfectly normal to keep investigating and complaining and sowing doubt? [Emphasis added]

Our host IMO is close to identifying the problem as partisan-dependent skepticism: That is, it is perfectly legit to question ANYTHING if you're a progressive or liberal, just as it is legit to suggest packing the court and jailing your opponents and using procedural tricks to pass sweeping transformations of America on a strict party-line vote. Those rules don't apply to the rest of us.

The part I bolded with the Althouse quote is where the paragraph starts resembling "apples and oranges" because we neither need to "pretend there are no problems" nor do we need endless investigations. Actual transparency would go a long way to solve that accepting the outcome issue AND focus the investigations on what the actual damages are: did someone break the rules or the law?

Two years later I have zero confidence in the outcome of the 2022 election because of the lack of transparency, the blatant lying and gaslighting by the "how dare you question that!" party, the state courts that abdicated their responsibility to enforce state election laws as written or even worse rewrote them on the fly because "emergency" or something, the weaselly kesslers who refuse to hold Them to the same standards by which We are judged and most of all the weak spineless Republicans who allow Democrat shenanigans because Trump threatens their sweet chinese cash train. And some like McConnel just love to play "loyal opposition" party leader. I've said enough that you can guess where I believe his loyalty lies.

Lurker21 said...

What was "subtle" or nuanced wasn't Abrams's change in position, but Kessler's attempt to create weasel room for her.

"Fact checkers" are worse propagandists than the actual reporters, since they are trying to put an authoritative seal on what's in the papers, rather than just putting it out there and letting readers make up their own minds.

It's a little like the transition from just following Big Brother and repeating what he says to actually loving Big Brother.

Mike said...

When the fallacious feckless fact free "fact checkers" at the WaPoo see the Bad Orange Man say anything, they will promptly declare it a "Four Pinocchio Felony Falsehood." They rhetorically send him to purgatory as the exponent of a "Big Lie".

OTOH nothing that the really Big Liar Stacey Abrams has to say will ever merit a fact checker rating of anything more than a minor misdemeanor unintentional misstatement.

That's just the way the "fact checkers" at the Wapoo roll.

Static Ping said...

Because it is an opinion column masquerading as a "fact checking" exercise, and the columnist has proven multiple times to be left-wing partisan. Base your logic on those premises and you will not go wrong.

I think there was some effort early on to try to appear non-partisan, dinging Democrats every once in a while to keep the appearance of impartiality. That facade was smashed due to Trump, but Kessler keeps going through the motions in the hope that he will still have some credibility the next time he has to suppress something damaging.

Kessler's entire bit right now is to make or to avoid making sound bites for political ads. Could Kemp make a political ad from this column? There's no rating and the information is already readily available from other sources, so probably not.

Bailey Yankee said...

rcocean is right.

If you are seriously injured (as our country has been) and you believe you have a case, with strong evidence, you can't just let it go. This is particularly true for those who have sworn to protect the Constitution from all enemies--foreign and domestic.

Right from the get-go after the election, all legal means were tried to get the judiciary to hear the cases. They refused--on trivial grounds. The Dem pols and their reinforcers, the media, scoffed and propagandized against these efforts. The possible last chance to be heard was the possibility of sending electors back to the states for audits--to be decided Jan 6th.

We wanted that hearing to proceed. The whole insurrection thing makes no sense. It was a set up. It was obvious and that only exacerbated the already grave suspicions of half the electorate that the election was rigged.

Instead of simply allowing the audits and cases to proceed, half the country was just told to shut up, go home, and accept the beatings.

I hope you can see how hard "closure" in those circumstances might be.

hawkeyedjb said...

There is no such thing as a "fact checker" in any widely-read media. They are merely partisan opinion-checkers, and everyone knows it - including the opinion-checkers themselves and those who read them.

Relying on the Washington Post "fact checker" for facts is akin to trusting Twitter or Facebook to bring you the news.

Steve said...

Putting things "into context" is WAPO speak for Four Pinocchio's.

And dear Lord, the comments over there are a massive collection of race baiting and transference.

The Tangerine Tornado said...

In summary:
Abrams denied the election result.
Abrams denied denying the election result.
Kessler denied that the 2nd denial was a lie and didn't even address lies embedded in the 1st denial.

Abrams is only known nationally because of her denial of the election results. I guarantee the ordinary follower of politics couldn't name the barest fraction of Gubernatorial losing candidates outside their home state. It's literally the reason for her notoriety.

Temujin said...

"Do we need to pretend there are no problems for the sake of helping people remain calm and accept the outcome..."

Well...the current policy of the Department of Justice is that if you disagree, the FBI will be coming to knock on your door soon. At the crack of dawn. With a slew of agents, armed and ready to go.

Can you imagine the resulting chaos if an election was shown to have been stolen? That state sponsored cheating took place? Imagine the numbers in the streets in that scenario? The Ruling Class has thought about this and they will do whatever they can to avoid that happening.

Now imagine a nation expected to believe that Joe Biden received over 81 million votes. Yes, that Joe Biden. The one you see stumbling around daily, waiting for his wife or someone else to show him how to exit stage left.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

I'm sure the world is full of intelligent, highly competent, Black women. I've come across zillions.

That the Democrat party consistently elevates Black women who are brain-dead clowns speaks volumes about their cynically vicious tokenist racism.

Achilles said...

RideSpaceMountain said...

"...but somehow this gets to be one of the statements that eludes the rating. Let's figure out why"

Why ask why? Everyone knows why.

Ann is a lawyer.

The purpose of lawyers is to obscure the obvious truth and hide it under a pile of words that sound good.

Christopher B said...

The legitimate comparison between Trump and Abrams is that they both had reasonable, even if they were not proven nor would have altered the outcome of the election, claims that election officials, state government officials, and judges made questionable changes to election laws and procedures.

Via Glenn Reynolds, the RNC rolls 12 minutes of tape of numerous other Democrats claiming multiple elections that they lost were stolen.

Owen said...

Lurker21 and others are making IMHO an important point. Which is that "fact checking" is a layer of intermediation between the original assertion of an alleged fact (something that can be objectively verified and comes to us with a claim that it has been and can be so verified); and the stuff we are forced to read or hear as a report of "news" or an opinion based on "news". Instead of just saying X and letting us all make up our own minds about its truth value, the fact-checker interposes himself or herself like Underwriters Laboratory or Consumer Reports, purporting to have done some work that allows us to look at X with greater (or lesser) confidence.

But that process implies a whole discipline that we can't really see: the work that the fact-checker does or claims to do. We have just delegated to some other party the task of testing X. We are still in the position of having to trust that third party. Unless we can audit the fact-checker's books, we are simply moving our trust from the person originally asserting X, to the fact-checker. Why should we do that?

As we know, WaPo has its own bias. And Glenn Kessler, ever so diligent and honorable, has his biases too.

The whole thing adds less and less value. Dare I suggest it adds negative value?

tommyesq said...

**raises hand like Horshack

Sadly, this comment is appreciated by fewer and fewer people as time goes by.

Mind your own business said...

WaPo gets 5 Pinnochios. As usual.

Leland said...

Where one person is the arbiter of what is true or false, democracy is dead.

Mike Sylwester said...

Correcting my own comment at 10:55 AM

I for the word "false". The corrected list of mandatory/forbidden words:

* baseless

* debunked

* without evidence

* false

* lies

* a Big Lie

n.n said...

Four assess braying, four elephants trumpeting.

Fact checkers evolved, and were likely conceived, as narrators of handmade tales, and, as with all myth makers, there is truth in what they publish.

traditionalguy said...

The state courts only accept cases claiming election fraud when the wrong candidate was announced the winner by the vote counters. The courts can hear evidence and order recounts. In the recent Big Steal the state courts all found no standing to hear cases and dismissed the challenges with no evidentiary hearings. One is left to ask why the courts feared the Dem and ChiComs election stealers so much. Biden’s FBI and DOJ are showing us why.

Wilbur said...

"She also claimed that voter suppression was to blame for her loss, even though she admitted she could not “empirically” prove that."


Bless her heart, Stacy's a fighter, a scrapper, and devoted to public service, right?.

But no one has ever asked her to name one, just one, individual whose vote was suppressed by the Georgia legislation.

Of course, if that person actually existed, they'd be as famous as George Floyd.

Butkus51 said...

First time I heard the term "Fact-check" I was immediately suspicious.

Aggie said...

Stacy Abrams was in Star Trek twice? I knew about the first one, where the crew went back in time because they needed the sound of her voice to save the planet.....

Jupiter said...

"Glenn Kessler is a clown without a clown nose."

It might get in the way.

Rory said...

"They have ZERO desire to hold honest, valid elections. ZERO. "just win baby, just win" is their motto"

They haven't even had honest primary seasons in the last two presidential cycles.

The Vault Dweller said...

I legitimately hate how dishonest and unprincipled the media are. I don't like it when politicians are that way, but people kind of expect to have to check up on politicians.

hugh42 said...

Full explanation by PaddyO. Excellent insight.

n.n said...

Relying on the Washington Post "fact checker" for facts is akin to trusting Twitter or Facebook to bring you the news.

Caveat emptor.

LakeLevel said...

Kemp should just go ahead and make an add saying that the Washington Post gave Abrams Four Pinocchio's, just to dare them to fact check that, to call attention to the deception.

RMc said...

The responses to the original WaPo article basically boil down to, "It's different when the good guys do it!"

Earnest Prole said...

They say Stacey Abrams is the black Donald Trump but in truth Donald Trump is the orange Stacey Abrams.

Michael K said...

Today I was looking at the official Arizona election pamphlet. It has a number of ballot propositions described with arguments pro and against. One would change all of Arizona's election laws. The first PRO argument convinced me to vote against it. I am also coming to the conclusion that anything the "League of Women Voters" supports, I will vote against.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

The real question is how big a deal it is to challenge elections after the results have been declared. Do we need to pretend there are no problems for the sake of helping people remain calm and accept the outcome or is it perfectly normal to keep investigating and complaining and sowing doubt?

That depends on whether you've identified actual problems
.

Removing inactive voters from the voting rolls is a feature, not a bug. Any actual voters can re-register, all that's blocked is fraud.

Having more votes "counted" than voters recorded as voting? That's a problem, and should be looked into.

Violating vote handling rules? That's a problem.

And unless everyone involved gets fired for doing that, it's clear indication of fraud

Jefferson's Revenge said...

There is no penalty for lying anymore in the media nor on the left. There is no shame. No one on the left talks about the horrendous results of their policies. They make up issues like pronouns so they can have something to talk about to deflect from what people are seeing daily.

And the press lets them do it. Will anyone on the left ask Biden if we destroyed the Nord pipelines? I mean ask him directly in a press conference and not through his sock puppy. I'd like to have an answer to that question.

gadfly said...

Whatever

Lawrence Person said...

What's "subtle" about it is that there is a (D) after Abram's name.

To the Democratic Media Complex, that absolves her of all sins.

ALL. SINS.

Václav Patrik Šulik said...

And another thing....

I see that President Biden has declared the democratically elected winner in Italy is a threat to democracy. So, the US should bomb Italy and install a government that is pleasing to Joe?

WaPo writer:
https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1575510167688462340?

ga6 said...

Protected class..easy explanation.

mikee said...

AlGore tried to steal the 2000 election. Kennedy did steal the 1960 election. Keep that in mind when discussing the history of election shenanigans in the US.

Andrew said...

But can Stacey Abrams play the crystal flute?

gadfly said...

Did you know that Trump has established the "Russian Riviera" in South Florida to help the children of Russian elites, famously oligarch Oleg Deripaska, establish dual citizenship under our anchor baby laws? And Trump has "such a deal" for a stay at Trump Tower in Manhattan if you want to talk to the man.

Deripaska has just been indicted by SDNY:

"Despite DERIPASKA’s ongoing support for the Russian regime, he funded hundreds of thousands of dollars of transactions so that his child could take advantage of the U.S. healthcare system and U.S. birthright. [A] payment of approximately $300,000 worth of U.S. medical care, housing, childcare, and other logistics to aid . . . DERIPASKA’s efforts to help [his girlfriend] give birth in the United States, which resulted in the child receiving U.S. citizenship."

Achilles said...

Earnest Prole said...

They say Stacey Abrams is the black Donald Trump but in truth Donald Trump is the orange Stacey Abrams.

People with 80 IQ will find this incredibly witty.

traditionalguy said...

She really believes she is authorized to take power based on race theory. Now submit to her. She is a Spelman Woman.

Yancey Ward said...

Aggie at 1:02 p.m. wins the internet for the month of September.

Paul said...

So Abrams is a liar/hypocrite... i.e. Democrat. Who cares.... her outing means nothing while rumors of anything Trump mean everything.

donald said...

This would end right this fucking second with paper ballots. If you disagree with that you’re the bad guy.

Also, she is one fat fucking tub of lard.

Drago said...

The Hopeless gadfly: "Did you know that Trump has established the "Russian Riviera" in South Florida to help the children of Russian elites,...."

LOL

Trump invented Miami! And the beaches! Trump did all that all by himself! And whaddya know, russkis like to take advantage of the birth tourism that the demcraticals like gadfly have given us! What a shock.

Truly.

Next up: How Trump directed the sun to shine most days of the year in Miami so that russkis looking to get out of the cold would feel better.

Next next up: Adam Schiff publishes Articles of Shampeachment accusing Trump of causing global warming due to his Sunshine Manipulation tactics. Carl Bernstein is immediately booked on CNN+or- to declare this is "far worse than Watergate. Max Boot announces he is leaving the republican party for the 729th time in 6 years. Jonah Goldberg orders the other half of the suckling pig with sweet and sour sauce. The Lincoln Pedophile Project throws another celebratory "download more child porn" party.

Next next next up: gadfly gleefully rubs his hands together in his mother's basement declaring "The Solar Radiation Walls Are Closing In Now!"....after spending a few moments looking up "Solar Radiation" for the first time in his/her/xer's life.

donald said...

Spelman. Lol.

Unknown said...

So much stray voltage posted on this site.

hawkeyedjb said...

We should vote like France: paper ballots, hand counts, voter ID, no machines, no mail voting. Also no accusations of either fraud or 'voter suppression.' France has a large minority population, like the USA, but no assumption of incompetence, stupidity or inability to understand election law, so minority participation is not an issue. Voters living abroad have polling places set up for them to vote. Why can't we be like France? It's all because one party needs to assume stupidity and incompetence on the part of some of its voters.

tommyesq said...

Did you know that Trump has established the "Russian Riviera" in South Florida to help the children of Russian elites, famously oligarch Oleg Deripaska, establish dual citizenship under our anchor baby laws?

Finally, Gadfly comes out against anchor baby citizenship!!! IS there nothing Trump cannot do???

Tina Trent said...

Wapo, Annenberg and Poynter Institute are professional liars. I've provided all three with statistics documented by mainstream experts and government agencies utterly disproving their claims. None responded.

Mid-Life Lawyer said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mid-Life Lawyer said...

I have never watched another MLB baseball game since they canceled the All Star game in Atlanta over the actions of the Georgia legislature to fortify the integrity of the vote. This woman was at the forefront of that pathetic fraud. At least I got to see the Cubs win the WS in 2016 as I was finishing up my cancer treatment at MD Anderson. I don't have any idea how the Cubs are doing or who is in first place, I don't give a flying f^&*. The progressives and their media whores ruin everything. I'm so oblivious to politics now that when my neighbors put up a Beto O'Rourke sign in their front yard, I did not know what he was running for. I live in Texas. I used to know everything about politics. The progressives and mostly the media have ruined everything. It's all just a reality show and I have never watched a reality show.

Mason G said...

"Aggie at 1:02 p.m. wins the internet for the month of September."

Sadly, this comment is appreciated by fewer and fewer people as time goes by.

JRoberts said...

I may be posting this too late for anyone to see or respond to, but here goes…

Four years ago Abrams raised big money from outside Georgia to implement a fool-proof ballet harvesting scheme that would turn Georgia blue in 2018 and pave the way for Dems to win the White House in 2020. She “stacked the deck” and still lost to Brian Kemp. Her efforts not only didn’t win the election, her “guaranteed scheme” didn’t get her close enough to force a recount under Georgia law. The only way she could attempt to save face with her out of state donors was to claim she had been cheated from the victory she assumed was rightfully hers.

This cycle, 80% of Abrams donations have come from outside Georgia. 80% of Kemp donation are from inside Georgia. That says a lot.

JRoberts said...

Regarding Atlanta losing the 2021 MLB All-Star game, Abrams has been running campaign ads blaming Kemp for the location change while attempting to paint herself as the “hero” who tried to save the game for Atlanta.

She’s shameless.

The Godfather said...

Everybody knew that there was a BIG risk of fraud in the 2020 election, because of election law changes supposedly to deal with the pandemic, some of which weren't even adopted through required procedures. Even I knew that. There was plenty of time BEFORE ELECTION DAY to prepare challenges to the votes in close States. But Trump didn't do that. His challenges all seemed to be prepared on the fly, with minimal (if any) evidentiary support. If I were a cynic, I'd say Trump knew he'd lost, but wanted to undermine Biden, just as the Democrats (and their Deep State allies) had undermined him four years ealier. Because I'm NOT a cynic, I'll say that Trump just blew it.
Trump did a lot of good things in his four years. I respect him and appreciate what he did. But nominating him in 2024 would be a waste of a great opportunity for effective popular-conservative government.

boatbuilder said...

The basic premise which is proposed for acceptance is that there is something criminal or unpatriotic about questioning the purported results of an election. This is an untruth, whether the questioner is Stacey Abrams or Donald Trump or Al Gore or Hillary Clinton.

Whether the questioning of the election is legitimate or not depends on the facts and circumstances of the election and the strength of the arguments, but the questioner is nonetheless entitled to their belief, and being labeled an "election denier" as not simply a criticism of the position, but as an accusation of perfidy strikes me as pure demagoguery.

If we could have absolute or at last near absolute confidence that all of the elections in question were untainted by corruption, fraud or error, then perhaps such labeling might be justified. Hah! It is merely a means of silencing dissent.

Ms. Abrams lie, of course, is that she now, for obvious political reasons, claims that she didn't do what she clearly and famously did, which was to claim that the purported result of the election was illegitimate. And she is only doing it now because, prior to Trump, the idea that Democrats could loudly and publicly claim and argue that elections were rigged or corrupt or unfair was taken as a given. And now she has to pretend that wasn't the case.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

An election denier is shorthand for someone who denies the validity of an election and supports extralegal methods to overturn it. Stacy Abrams didn’t do that. No Pinocchios.

Earnest Prole said...

People with 80 IQ will find this incredibly witty.

When you love the poorly educated you take the trouble to crack jokes they will understand.

Alexisa said...

"So much stray voltage posted on this site."

Althouse needs to pretend she's not a good little Eichmann

Bob said...

The awarding of Pinocchios is to call the receiver a liar, either a mild liar or a flaming liar, but a liar nonetheless. Kessler has been brave enough to call the current President a flaming liar by awarding 4 Pinocchios more than once, but he's unwilling in the present case to award Abrams any. Why the disparity? Because Abrams is a black woman, and a leftist like Kessler is more in dread of being called a racist than he is a political hack. The entire US has decided that racism is the ultimate crime, worse than murder, rape, or pedophilia, and will go to great lengths to avoid the accusation - - unless one is a MAGA Republican white supremacist insurrectionist, and those people just need to be shot down like the family dog in an ATF raid...

Bob said...

The awarding of Pinocchios is to call the receiver a liar, either a mild liar or a flaming liar, but a liar nonetheless. Kessler has been brave enough to call the current President a flaming liar by awarding 4 Pinocchios more than once, but he's unwilling in the present case to award Abrams any. Why the disparity? Because Abrams is a black woman, and a leftist like Kessler is more in dread of being called a racist than he is a political hack. The entire US has decided that racism is the ultimate crime, worse than murder, rape, or pedophilia, and will go to great lengths to avoid the accusation - - unless one is a MAGA Republican white supremacist insurrectionist, and those people just need to be shot down like the family dog in an ATF raid...

heyboom said...

These fact checkers, and Kessler is the worst of them by virtue of having the biggest platform, remind me of my kids when they were caught doing something they shouldn't have been doing. It's Olympic caliber mental gymnastics.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

Left Bank of the Charles said...
An election denier is shorthand for someone who denies the validity of an election and supports extralegal methods to overturn it. Stacy Abrams didn’t do that. No Pinocchios.

Trump didn't do that, either.

So therefore by your definition Trump is not an "election denier", and neither are 99% of the people you lefties have been calling "election deniers".

So you might want to go back to the drawing board on that one

T2 said...

Anne—sorry, but I missed something. I thought you were not using WaPo anymore. What happened?