Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Oct 15, 2021 10:10 pm





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 376 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 26  Next
Trump Watch 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Chatterbox


Joined: May 2011
Posts: 1824
Thanks: 2239
Thanked: 984 times in 780 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Trump Watch
The corrupt toadying in the Administration plunges right ahead. How many people here heard that the Bolton book had classified material in it? Yup. Of course you did. And you will continue hearing it if you watch Fox News, because they don't let facts get in the way of a good accusation.

Here's the story laid out in longer detail than most of us have any appetite for.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/23/us/p ... ocess.html
In a letter filed in court Wednesday, Ellen Knight, the professional who did the pre-publication review with Bolton, accuses the White House of falsely asserting that Bolton revealed classified information, and of retaliating against her when she refused, for reasons she stated carefully and in depth, to go along with an attempt to get her to back them up.

They lied, and then they pressured her to confirm their lie.

It turns out the accusation was by Michael Ellis, an unqualified political appointee who followed his own ignorant impulses and simply compared content to matters that were on a list of things that had been classified. Sounds legit, right? In the world Rudy Giuliani inhabits, that's all that matters. Sounds legit. The problem is the standard used for that list is the one for official government documents, which "pre-emptively classify" material, such as discussions with foreign leaders, which have not actually been reviewed for material that meets the standard of needing to be classified. But Knight and the other professionals who reviewed the book had already followed standard procedure by looking at the more stringent exclusion standards applied to books published outside, relying on whether the material stayed classified, based on real principles.

So the review by Ellis, whose qualification for the job is that he had worked for Devin Nunes, overturned the professional finding and claimed the book was full of still-classified material. Then the Justice Department, carrying this opinion, sued to block publication of the book. Fortunately the judge wasn't convinced. Would you, as a judge, take the Justice Department's word for anything these days? Judge Lamberth refused to censor the book, even though he left the question of its containing classified material for another day.

That should have been enough to pour shame on Ellis, the Justice Department, and the rest of His Messiahship's enablers. But they didn't stop there. Not only was Knight removed from her White House job and shunted back to a former job outside the national security bureaucracy, but they asked her not to communicate with them in writing so that they could deny her finding that the book contained no unclassified material by never officially declaring the pre-publication process to be complete.

The letter also describes the pressure campaign (more than 18 hours of meetings - this is Benghazi all over again, except done in the dark without cameras) by political appointees to get Knight to say she had erred. They challenged her to explain, and she responded with the details. Unfortunately for them she had actually considered the issues and knew the clear and objective reasons for allowing those matters to be published.

When Knight asked the lawyers why they were so insistent on pursuing legal action against Bolton, she speculated that it was because the most powerful man in the world said that it needed to happen. Several registered their agreement with that assessment, according to her letter.

When Adam Schiff pointed out that His Messiahship would continue to put his own political goals ahead of the good of the American public, every person in the room and most of the television viewers knew he was describing the actual situation.



Last edited by Harry Marks on Wed Sep 23, 2020 5:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.



The following user would like to thank Harry Marks for this post:
DWill
Wed Sep 23, 2020 5:41 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Chatterbox


Joined: May 2011
Posts: 1824
Thanks: 2239
Thanked: 984 times in 780 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Trump Watch
Now we have the substance of the plans by His Messiahship to steal the election. Sources inside the campaign explain a plan to use electoral confusion to cover state legislators abrogating election results and appointing electors regardless of the vote in their state.

https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters ... an/616457/

Now we know why Trump has been seeking more spread of the virus at every turn. Now we know why he lies constantly to claim that the election is going to be illegitimate.

We saw the Republican party refuse to oust him for misusing his power to blackmail an ally into smearing his opponent. We have seen them suppressing democracy at every turn. It's about to get much worse.

We need to rise up against these plutocrats and make clear what kind of system America has.



The following user would like to thank Harry Marks for this post:
DWill
Fri Sep 25, 2020 1:21 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6923
Location: Luray, Virginia
Thanks: 2252
Thanked: 2455 times in 1850 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
The Repubicans had a golden opportunity to avoid disaster for their party. They could have convicted Trump and very probably had 4 more years in power with Pence. But they blew it. The late Sen. Paul Simon said that in politics sometimes you lose when you win, and win when you lose. Republicans think they're going to keep on winning. I don't think the American public is going to reward them for their 'victories.'

Look how being 'exonerated' (not) has emboldened Trump. What reelection will cause this true maniac to do is the stuff of nightmare.



The following user would like to thank DWill for this post:
Chris OConnor, Harry Marks
Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:11 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5936
Thanks: 1381
Thanked: 974 times in 839 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
Quote:
Now we know why Trump has been seeking more spread of the virus at every turn.


:lol:



Yep - the election is going to be illegitimate as more and more issues with mail in balloting are beginning to pop up.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tempora ... d=73251533


Nothing to see here!! Move along!!




Party before principles!


Carry on.



Last edited by ant on Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:01 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6923
Location: Luray, Virginia
Thanks: 2252
Thanked: 2455 times in 1850 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
That incident needs to be investigated, of course. And so the conclusion is that Trump is justified in claiming that if he loses, it will be due to massive fraud with mail-in ballots. That is what die-hard supporters are saying, I guess.



Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:32 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6923
Location: Luray, Virginia
Thanks: 2252
Thanked: 2455 times in 1850 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
Here's a good 'equal time' article on the falsehoods and misrepresentations of both Biden and Trump. It's from the fact-check guy at the Wash Post, Glen Kessler. His column has become well-known for tallying the over 20,000 false or misleading statements coming from Trump. So, many Republicans dismiss it because, after all, it is the Post. But these people don't know that Kessler covers the other side, too. Trump's record of lies and misinformation has been so overwhelming that we forget that before Trump came along, Joe Biden was noted for getting things wrong, and even for lying, since plagiarism is a form of lying. If you want, you can read the piece and assess Kessler's side-by-side comparison.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... tale-tape/



The following user would like to thank DWill for this post:
ant
Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:57 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5936
Thanks: 1381
Thanked: 974 times in 839 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
DWill wrote:
That incident needs to be investigated, of course. And so the conclusion is that Trump is justified in claiming that if he loses, it will be due to massive fraud with mail-in ballots. That is what die-hard supporters are saying, I guess.



No, it's not what "die-hard supporters" are saying, and if they are, they do not have a copyright on the phrase, nor should anyone that is reasoning mail in balloting can result in significant fraud be demonized for saying it.
Similar incidents are popping up more often. Everyone should be concerned.



Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:05 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7193
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1123
Thanked: 2176 times in 1731 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
ant wrote:
No, it's not what "die-hard supporters" are saying


Oh yes, it certainly is what they're saying. I hear it nonstop all day long.

Quote:
Similar incidents are popping up more often. Everyone should be concerned.


I don't think it should ever be less than a concern, just to maintain diligence. In the article you linked, the 9 trashed ballots were found and an investigation is underway, the culprit fired. The supervisor was diligent enough this time.

But how much of a concern?

It's unreasonable to think that of the 140 million votes or so cast, human error or stupidity or intentional ill-will won't cause some ballots to be misplaced or trashed. I also think it's unreasonable to assume that it would greatly benefit either side, as there are fervent supporters on both sides amongst election staff.

The real fear is a single concentrated effort by one side or the other, to the order of thousands or more ballots. That sort of fraud is the type that would tilt the scales, and is the type that there is no evidence of.

I'm curious if there's any fiction or nonfiction book that talks about how someone might hypothetically bypass the safeguards to perpetrate fraud on that level.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
DWill, Harry Marks
Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:23 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6923
Location: Luray, Virginia
Thanks: 2252
Thanked: 2455 times in 1850 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
ant wrote:
DWill wrote:
That incident needs to be investigated, of course. And so the conclusion is that Trump is justified in claiming that if he loses, it will be due to massive fraud with mail-in ballots. That is what die-hard supporters are saying, I guess.



No, it's not what "die-hard supporters" are saying, and if they are, they do not have a copyright on the phrase, nor should anyone that is reasoning mail in balloting can result in significant fraud be demonized for saying it.
Similar incidents are popping up more often. Everyone should be concerned.

A someone with the power and influence of a president certainly should be demonized for making entirely false claims that lead Americans to doubt the integrity of elections. He is not even acting as a patriot. He puts himself before country; we've known that.



The following user would like to thank DWill for this post:
Chris OConnor
Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:16 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5936
Thanks: 1381
Thanked: 974 times in 839 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
DWill wrote:
ant wrote:
DWill wrote:
That incident needs to be investigated, of course. And so the conclusion is that Trump is justified in claiming that if he loses, it will be due to massive fraud with mail-in ballots. That is what die-hard supporters are saying, I guess.



No, it's not what "die-hard supporters" are saying, and if they are, they do not have a copyright on the phrase, nor should anyone that is reasoning mail in balloting can result in significant fraud be demonized for saying it.
Similar incidents are popping up more often. Everyone should be concerned.

A someone with the power and influence of a president certainly should be demonized for making entirely false claims that lead Americans to doubt the integrity of elections. He is not even acting as a patriot. He puts himself before country; we've known that.


Why shouldn't he bring to the forefront the obvious issues with mail-in ballots?
Issues exist. It is not some made up fantasy, nor should it be a taboo topic because a climate of desperation exists for the left.

The democrats are pretending there aren't any risks.
That is false. Whether you choose to admit it or not.



Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:43 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6923
Location: Luray, Virginia
Thanks: 2252
Thanked: 2455 times in 1850 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
The mistake you're making is ignoring what Trump's claim actually is. It's that mail voting will produce massive fraud, not that mistakes have occurred or someone somewhere tried to manipulate results. You'll have problems of execution in every large-scale process, but to prove existence of a systemic problem you need evidence that neither Trump nor anyone else has provided. Studies have shown that the incidence of voting fraud is miniscule in relation to total number of votes cast, and mail voting has been with us for quite some time. Trump's tip-of-the-iceberg claim for mail voting problems is dishonest and demagogic.



The following user would like to thank DWill for this post:
Harry Marks
Thu Oct 01, 2020 7:50 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Chatterbox


Joined: May 2011
Posts: 1824
Thanks: 2239
Thanked: 984 times in 780 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Trump Watch
ant wrote:
a climate of desperation exists for the left.
I'm curious what you mean by that. It seemed obvious on Tuesday night which candidate was desperate, and obvious that his accusations that there will be fraud were motivated by desperation.

The polls are strongly signaling a victory for Biden, and quite possibly a Democratic Senate. Of course the election is still a month away and a lot could happen, but in the months and months since it became clear who the nominee would be, they haven't moved a lot. So where does this idea of a climate of desperation come from?



Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:58 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5936
Thanks: 1381
Thanked: 974 times in 839 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
Harry Marks wrote:
ant wrote:
a climate of desperation exists for the left.
I'm curious what you mean by that. It seemed obvious on Tuesday night which candidate was desperate, and obvious that his accusations that there will be fraud were motivated by desperation.

The polls are strongly signaling a victory for Biden, and quite possibly a Democratic Senate. Of course the election is still a month away and a lot could happen, but in the months and months since it became clear who the nominee would be, they haven't moved a lot. So where does this idea of a climate of desperation come from?



I'm not putting much faith in polls, considering what happened 4 years ago.


Fact check Biden's first debate, Harry.

Also, Biden was the first to interrupt that evening - a total of 3 straight times..
Trump was rude for the remainder.


Ben Shapiro said it best immediately after the debate.

Paraphrase:
I don't know who won the debate, all I know is that we all lost.


Good luck with your fandom of lesser evils.



Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:11 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Chatterbox


Joined: May 2011
Posts: 1824
Thanks: 2239
Thanked: 984 times in 780 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Trump Watch
ant wrote:
I'm not putting much faith in polls, considering what happened 4 years ago.

Yeah, I'm still kind of traumatized by the surprise. There is some indication that a similar "come from behind" or "come out of nowhere" victory for Trump may be in the offing. In particular, older white males seem to be registering in much greater numbers than people expected, in the Rust Belt areas that gave Trump his upset win in the Electoral College in 2016. But there are also signs pointing the other way, and most important of all, nobody takes a Dem victory for granted, so even people like my brother-in-law (who tends to think Bernie Sanders is too conservative or panders to the moderates) are very clear that they don't want to see the same outcome again. He made the same mistake in 2000, and I think people catch on eventually.

ant wrote:
Fact check Biden's first debate, Harry.
Well, there were certainly distortions and unfair attacks, but by and large he stayed within traditional bounds except with his quiet insults about "Why don't you just shut up?" and "this clown" and "he doesn't know how to do that" about taking turns.

ant wrote:
Also, Biden was the first to interrupt that evening - a total of 3 straight times..
You might be right. I was watching for who interrupted during the other person's time, and I had the distinct impression that Trump did that first, but I could be wrong. I refuse to re-watch it to try to assess that. It seems obvious that Trump did not come prepared to play it straight and then got knocked off his game. His usual round of lies and viciousness seemed pretty thoroughly prepared.

And if Biden did stick the needle in just to throw Trump off, he should be ashamed of himself, but you kind of have to see that in some sense it worked. An awful lot of housewives who try to get their kids to have a semblance of politeness were stuck watching the leader of the free world beat the tar out of all their admonitions. And they are going to stay up at night thinking about someone with his finger on the nuclear button who is completely unable to govern his anger. Would anyone you know want a person with their 10-year-old's temperament ("You did it first!" "Did not!" "Did so!") managing the fate of humanity?
ant wrote:
Trump was rude for the remainder.
You think? But really, it wasn't just the rudeness that got such a reaction of disgust. We all expect rudeness and other boundary violations from our Dear Leader. It was the lack of self-control that was disturbing. And, of course, the inability to condemn white supremacist terrorists. Either he has given some thought to what white supremacists mean for the country, in which case he is thoroughly evil, or he is just unable to see anything except "us and them" and he is thoroughly toxic in his dysfunctionality.


ant wrote:
Ben Shapiro said it best immediately after the debate.
Paraphrase:
I don't know who won the debate, all I know is that we all lost.
Yeah, I agree with that. I'm a person in whom argumentativeness runs very strong, and I felt dragged into the mud. I never felt that way with, say, William F. Buckley or George Will.

I have some experience, as I have said before, with narcissistic personality disorder. They will do that to you. A little unfair dig here, a little shouting and blustering there, and pretty soon all you can think about is conflict. It's really horrible. That was one reason I really appreciated Biden's tactic of looking directly at the camera and appealing to the audience of voters. In general he did not do a good job of stepping out of the vortex of nastiness, but at those moments he gave a sense that yes, we can rise above this crap.

ant wrote:
Good luck with your fandom of lesser evils.
LOL. Guilty, I guess. I don't really consider myself a fan. But hey, I was a fan of Bill Clinton for his ability to grasp and explain economic forces, and he turned out to be pretty dysfunctional (in a way that tons of politicians do, probably including Biden). Maybe Biden will turn out to be not much better than the one we have. But that's not how it looks to me now. Biden had no trouble at all, for example, saying "If I lose, that will settle it". He gets democracy. His opponent couldn't say it, and instead asked for his base to lurk at the polls like he lurked in the 2016 debates. With everybody watching, he undermined democracy.



The following user would like to thank Harry Marks for this post:
ant, DWill, Taylor
Fri Oct 02, 2020 4:30 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6923
Location: Luray, Virginia
Thanks: 2252
Thanked: 2455 times in 1850 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Trump Watch
I'm admittedly disposed to be suspicious of the Trump White House. Glad to say that it has handled well Trump's positive test and transfer to Walter Reed. The 18-second video Trump made before stepping onto Marine One was exactly the right thing to do, reassuring for the public. Politics as usual will be suspended for a while--almost, that is. There really isn't a reason for Nancy Pelosi to say she hopes that his illness will be a turning point towards seriousness about mask-wearing, etc. I hope it is, too, but for now that should not be said. All anyone needs to say is "get well."



The following user would like to thank DWill for this post:
Harry Marks
Fri Oct 02, 2020 7:12 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 376 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.Evaluations: 1, 5.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 26  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:



Site Resources 
HELPFUL INFO:
Community Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Author Interview Transcripts
Book Discussion Leaders

IDEAS FOR WHAT TO READ:
Bestsellers
Book Awards
Banned Books
• Book Reviews
• Online Books
• Team Picks
Newspaper Book Sections

WHERE TO BUY BOOKS:
• Coming Soon!

BEHIND THE BOOKS:
• Coming Soon!

PROMOTE YOUR BOOK!
Advertise on BookTalk.org
Promote your FICTION book
Promote your NON-FICTION book





BookTalk.org is a thriving book discussion forum, online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a community. Our forums are open to anyone in the world. While discussing books is our passion we also have active forums for talking about poetry, short stories, writing and authors. Our general discussion forum section includes forums for discussing science, religion, philosophy, politics, history, current events, arts, entertainment and more. We hope you join us!


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSOUR BOOKSAUTHOR INTERVIEWSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICYSITEMAP

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism Books

Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2021. All rights reserved.

Display Pagerank