The US Hamster Wheel

[Bob]

"Russia did not mount any major hacking or disinformation operations to interfere in the U.S. presidential election this year, and the Kremlin’s hackers did not even attempt to target elections systems in the way they did in 2016, according to U.S. officials.

Officials and analysts said it’s too soon to know why, but they point to a variety of possible reasons. Those include cyber and other operations that helped keep the Russians at bay, harder targets at the state and local levels, and a political climate in which Americans were the largest purveyors of disinformation, dwarfing Moscow’s efforts to influence the campaign through social media and its propaganda channels."

Yep You been **** yourselves over....no help from outside needed

[PHXPhlyer]

More Trumpian bad-doing!

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... s-n1248522

Judge rules against Trump global media chief after firings
Michael Pack , a conservative filmmaker and Trump ally, made no secret of his intent to shake up the agency after taking over in June.

Nov. 21, 2020, 1:12 PM MST / Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has ruled against the head of the agency that runs the Voice of America and other U.S.-funded news outlets who was accused of trying to turn it into a propaganda vehicle to promote President Donald Trump’s agenda.

The ruling effectively bars U.S. Agency for Global Media CEO Michael Pack from making personnel decisions and interfering in editorial operations.

Pack, a conservative filmmaker, Trump ally and onetime associate of former Trump political adviser Steve Bannon, made no secret of his intent to shake up the agency after taking over in June.

He proceeded to purge the leadership at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, Middle East Broadcasting Networks and the Open Technology Fund, which works to provide secure internet access to people around the world. The director and deputy director of VOA resigned just days before the firings. Pack also dismissed their governing boards.

His moves were criticized by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress who control the agency’s budget.

The lawsuit was filed last month in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by five executives who had been fired or suspended. They accused Pack and his senior advisers of violating the “statutory firewall” intended to protect the news organizations from political interference.

After the suit was filed, Pack announced he had rescinded the “firewall rule” issued by the Broadcasting Board of Governors. In a statement posted on his agency's website, he said the rule wrongly prohibited him from directing broadcast operations and “made the agency difficult to manage.”

In her ruling late Friday, Judge Beryl Howell imposed preliminary injunctions that prevent Pak from making personnel decisions about journalists employed by the agency, directly communicating with them and conducting any investigations into editorial content or individual journalists.

In July, Pack had ordered an investigation into the posting of a video package featuring now President-elect Joe Biden on a VOA website. He called the segment “pro-Biden” and said his staff was weighing disciplinary action against those responsible.

Fourteen senior VOA journalists sent a letter to management in August protesting Pack’s actions, including the dismissal of foreign journalists and his comments denigrating VOA staff, which they said were endangering their colleagues and the international broadcaster’s credibility.

“The court confirmed that the First Amendment forbids Mr. Pack and his team from attempting to take control of these journalistic outlets, from investigating their journalists for purported ‘bias,’ and from attempting to influence or control their reporting content,” Lee Crain, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.

The global media agency did not immediately respond to a written request for comment on the ruling.

VOA was founded during World War II and its congressional charter requires it to present independent news and information to international audiences.

PP

[G-CPTN]

Apple's security chief charged with bribery.

[Woody]

Maybe it’s finally sunk in.

Donald Trump has accepted a formal US transition should begin for President-elect Joe Biden to take office.
The president said the federal agency overseeing the handover must "do what needs to be done", even as he vowed to keep contesting his election defeat.
The General Services Administration (GSA) said it was acknowledging Mr Biden as the "apparent winner".
It came as Mr Biden's victory in the state of Michigan was officially certified, a major blow to Mr Trump.
The GSA announcement means the president-elect now has access to top security briefings, office space and government officials as he prepares to take office on 20 January.

[Undried Plum]

Maybe it’s finally sunk in.

Donald Trump has accepted a formal US transition should begin for President-elect Joe Biden to take office.
The president said the federal agency overseeing the handover must "do what needs to be done", even as he vowed to keep contesting his election defeat.
The General Services Administration (GSA) said it was acknowledging Mr Biden as the "apparent winner".
It came as Mr Biden's victory in the state of Michigan was officially certified, a major blow to Mr Trump.
The GSA announcement means the president-elect now has access to top security briefings, office space and government officials as he prepares to take office on 20 January.

The tide is out; and he's got nae kecks.

[Bob]

Maybe it’s finally sunk in.

The GSA announcement means the president-elect now has access to top security briefings, office space and government officials as he prepares to take office on 20 January.

Re: the available office space, I would advise Creepy Joe to be very careful

[prospector]

[Dushan]

And we laughed at Egyptian elections in the 60s and 70s that had Nesser elected with 99.97%.

[Woody]

$3 million well spent

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... boost.html

[PHXPhlyer]

Trump falls short in Wisconsin recount he paid $3 million for NOT

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... n-n1249289

Trump falls short in Wisconsin recount he paid $3 million for
Trump paid $3 million for the recount, which ultimately left Biden with 87 more votes.

Nov. 29, 2020, 1:42 PM MST / Source: Associated Press
By The Associated Press
MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin finished a recount of its presidential results on Sunday, confirming Democrat Joe Biden's victory over President Donald Trump in the key battleground state. Trump vowed to challenge the outcome in court even before the recount concluded.

Dane County was the second and last county to finish its recount, reporting a 45-vote gain for Trump. Milwaukee County, the state's other big and overwhelmingly liberal county targeted in a recount that Trump paid $3 million for, reported its results Friday, a 132-vote gain for Biden.

Taken together, the two counties barely budged Biden's winning margin of about 20,600 votes, giving the winner a net gain of 87 votes.

“As we have said, the recount only served to reaffirm Joe Biden’s victory in Wisconsin," Danielle Melfi, who led Biden's campaign in Wisconsin, said in a statement to The Associated Press.

With no precedent for overturning a result as large as Biden's, Trump was widely expected to head to court once the recount was finished. His campaign challenged thousands of absentee ballots during the recount, and even before it was complete, Trump tweeted that he would sue.

“The Wisconsin recount is not about finding mistakes in the count, it is about finding people who have voted illegally, and that case will be brought after the recount is over, on Monday or Tuesday,” Trump tweeted on Saturday. “We have found many illegal votes. Stay tuned!”

Trump campaign officials didn't immediately respond to AP requests for comment on Sunday.

The deadline to certify the vote is Tuesday. Certification is done by the Democratic chair of the Wisconsin Election Commission, which is bipartisan.

The Wisconsin Voters Alliance, a conservative group, has already filed a lawsuit against state election officials seeking to block certification of the results. It makes many of the claims Trump is expected to make. Gov. Tony Evers’ attorneys have asked the state Supreme Court to dismiss the suit. Evers, a Democrat, said the complaint is a “mishmash of legal distortions” that uses factual misrepresentations in an attempt to take voting rights away from millions of Wisconsin residents.

Pennsylvania high court nixes mail-in ballot challenge
Another suit filed over the weekend by Wisconsin resident Dean Mueller argues that ballots placed in drop boxes are illegal and must not be counted.

Trump’s attorneys have complained about absentee ballots where voters identified themselves as “indefinitely confined,” allowing them to cast an absentee ballot without showing a photo ID; ballots that have a certification envelope with two different ink colors, indicating a poll worker may have helped complete it; and absentee ballots that don’t have a separate written record for its request, such as in-person absentee ballots.

Election officials in the two counties counted those ballots during the recount, but marked them as exhibits at the request of the Trump campaign.

Trump’s campaign has already failed elsewhere in court without proof of widespread fraud, which experts widely agree doesn’t exist. Trump legal challenges have failed in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania.

He didn't pay SH!T!
He has been fundraising begging for donations that he claims to be for recounts and law suits to overturn the election. Part of the money is being used to pay down campaign debts and the rest is going into a Super Pac slush fund to finance his post presidential aspirations or more likely his legal defense for when he no longer has immunity.
You know Rudy doesn't come cheap.

PP

[boing]

Just as a point of logic.

Trump’s campaign has already failed elsewhere in court without proof of widespread fraud, which experts widely agree doesn’t exist.

Because unnamed "experts" agree on something does not make it true, vide Covid. The important thing is to convince the population that the election process is absolutely credible otherwise there will always be distrust built into the system. Regardless of legal fine points, regardless of delays, regardless of cost it must be proven that the election process is absolutely honest. If this requires that Trump is made to look stupid or there is dishonestly proven in the process so be it. Protecting the credibility of the election system is so fundamental to democracy every effort must be made to ensure that this is done.

.

[TheGreenGoblin]

Just as a point of logic.

Trump’s campaign has already failed elsewhere in court without proof of widespread fraud, which experts widely agree doesn’t exist.

Because unnamed "experts" agree on something does not make it true, vide Covid. The important thing is to convince the population that the election process is absolutely credible otherwise there will always be distrust built into the system. Regardless of legal fine points, regardless of delays, regardless of cost it must be proven that the election process is absolutely honest. If this requires that Trump is made to look stupid or there is dishonestly proven in the process so be it. Protecting the credibility of the election system is so fundamental to democracy every effort must be made to ensure that this is done.

.

What is missing from your pious prayer is the question of just cause for complaint. Trump's people have shown none. Imagine if I was to accuse you arbitrarily, without any evidence at all of being a (take your pick) a fraudster, murderer, paedophile etc. etc. and claimed that you should be brought to court to prove your innocence when there were absolutely no grounds for impugning your good character, the court would be right to charge me with being a vexatious litigant, and you would be in your rights to sue me for libel. Trump and his people, in their attempts to obfuscate and frustrate and thwart the US democratic system, are doing something very similar to my previous example and have the outright audacity to claim, as you do, that they only seek justice for the good of the system, when in fact there are no grounds and no evidence of any injustice or wrongdoing at all. They should be brought to book and made to pay for their calculated insouciance and disrespect for the law and the American people!

[PHXPhlyer]

Dane County was the second and last county to finish its recount, reporting a 45-vote gain for Trump. Milwaukee County, the state's other big and overwhelmingly liberal county targeted in a recount that Trump paid $3 million for, reported its results Friday, a 132-vote gain for Biden.

Taken together, the two counties barely budged Biden's winning margin of about 20,600 votes, giving the winner a net gain of 87 votes.

At least the trump Campaign had to pay Wisconsin 3 million dollars for the recount in just those two counties.That's a price of only $34,482.76 per vote that went the wrong way. What a bargain!

PP

[boing]

If you have a popular headline that claims that voter turn-out is 105% of the registered number of voters (post #8327 ) then something must be done to resolve the discrepancy. This is not as simple a matter as deciding the result of the election, it is a much greater matter of convincing the US public that their vote has value, if you do not do this the result is to encourage anarchy.

True, the claim is made by Trump supporters but it is so dramatic and (you would think) so easily disproved that only a little effort would be required to do this. One must assume that, since the claim was made by two people with an awful lot to lose if they were proved to be dishonest, they can in someway justify it. The voter records should be easily available unless someone's dog ate them when they were left on a coffee table. This really should be, in the first instance, very simple. Here is the number of registered voters in the area, here is the number of votes that were actually cast, bingo. If the comparison supports the accusers then the matter needs to be credibly resolved. It is all very well saying that a simple recount confirms the tally but if the question of manipulated votes is not examined so that it is clear that the basic numbers being counted are correct then the recount means nothing.

These people, should the facts they possess justify their belief, most certainly have just cause which they are willing to provide to a court for examination.

Your claim that "there are no grounds and no evidence of any injustice or wrongdoing at all" should be decided by a duly constituted court not on the basis of your extra-sensory perception.

.

[TheGreenGoblin]

If you have a popular headline that claims that voter turn-out is 105% of the registered number of voters (post #8327 ) then something must be done to resolve the discrepancy. This is not as simple a matter as deciding the result of the election, it is a much greater matter of convincing the US public that their vote has value, if you do not do this the result is to encourage anarchy.

True, the claim is made by Trump supporters but it is so dramatic and (you would think) so easily disproved that only a little effort would be required to do this. One must assume that, since the claim was made by two people with an awful lot to lose if they were proved to be dishonest, they can in someway justify it. The voter records should be easily available unless someone's dog ate them when they were left on a coffee table. This really should be, in the first instance, very simple. Here is the number of registered voters in the area, here is the number of votes that were actually cast, bingo. If the comparison supports the accusers then the matter needs to be credibly resolved. It is all very well saying that a simple recount confirms the tally but if the question of manipulated votes is not examined so that it is clear that the basic numbers being counted are correct then the recount means nothing.

These people, should the facts they possess justify their belief, most certainly have just cause which they are willing to provide to a court for examination.

Your claim that "there are no grounds and no evidence of any injustice or wrongdoing at all" should be decided by a duly constituted court not on the basis of your extra-sensory perception.

.

You are avoiding, as if often the way with cultists, or those with fixed or false a priori opinions or specious, tendentious arguments, the central fact here, which is that there is no just cause, or evidence for the preposterous claims made by Trump and his minions, who, by all accounts, include you. The fact that over thirty Trump sponsored claims have been dismissed by the courts for the lack of evidence, doesn't seem to register with Trump and his incompetent legal team or you for that matter.

[boing]

GG,

You are avoiding, as if often the way with cultists, or those with fixed or false a priori opinions or specious, tendentious arguments, the central fact here, which is that there is no just cause, or evidence for the preposterous claims made by Trump and his minions, who, by all accounts, include you. The fact that over thirty Trump sponsored claims have been dismissed by the courts for the lack of evidence, doesn't seem to register with Trump and his incompetent legal team or you for that matter.

The weakness of your argument is that you claim it is based on a "central fact" that you have no means of independently confirming. Unless lawsuits are allowed to go ahead, no matter how weak the superficial facts, divisions in the populous will remain. Of far greater value to the society would be to complete the lawsuits and allow the established facts to be released. Some people would have egg on their face, others may end up in jail but only a thorough and open investigation of the facts will allow an uncontested election in the US in the future.

I believe it was you that previously quoted Yeats.

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

And, by the way, I sit perhaps an inch right of centre.

I strongly advocate universal health care in the US but I object to it being used at public expense for cosmetic or social reasons.
I strongly advocate universal education in the US but I object to the idea that everyone deserves to go to college to gain a devalued diploma because we don't want them to feel bad.
I strongly support legal immigration but I believe that everyone contravening existing immigration regulations be sent back home regardless of excuses.
I believe that if you don't want to do the time you don't do the crime.
I believe taxation is necessary but would prefer greater citizen involvement in decisions.
I believe the direction of law enforcement in the US is wrong but I also believe that law enforcement is law enforcement not a political football.
I believe that the First Amendment supports all other laws.
I believe that the Second Amendment is required but that laws aimed at preventing gun violence are selectively and inadequately enforced mainly because of social engineering.
I believe there are too many self-serving politicians in Washington, not all but too many.
I believe that the US is dangerously close to cracking apart because what divides us is being emphasised to the detriment of what unites us. This is greatly driven by politics.

Sometimes I feel such a terrible Right Wing Extremist that I need to go to a BLM protest and prostrate myself before their wise leaders on my knees.

.

[PHXPhlyer]

Well stated, boing.

PP

[TheGreenGoblin]

GG,


I believe it was you that previously quoted Yeats.

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

And, by the way, I sit perhaps an inch right of centre.

I strongly advocate universal health care in the US but I object to it being used at public expense for cosmetic or social reasons.
I strongly advocate universal education in the US but I object to the idea that everyone deserves to go to college to gain a devalued diploma because we don't want them to feel bad.
I strongly support legal immigration but I believe that everyone contravening existing immigration regulations be sent back home regardless of excuses.
I believe that if you don't want to do the time you don't do the crime.
I believe taxation is necessary but would prefer greater citizen involvement in decisions.
I believe the direction of law enforcement in the US is wrong but I also believe that law enforcement is law enforcement not a political football.
I believe that the First Amendment supports all other laws.
I believe that the Second Amendment is required but that laws aimed at preventing gun violence are selectively and inadequately enforced mainly because of social engineering.
I believe there are too many self-serving politicians in Washington, not all but too many.
I believe that the US is dangerously close to cracking apart because what divides us is being emphasised to the detriment of what unites us. This is greatly driven by politics.

Sometimes I feel such a terrible Right Wing Extremist that I need to go to a BLM protest and prostrate myself before their wise leaders on my knees.

.

30 vexatious suits, that have failed, amounts to vexatious litigation where I come from. Let Trump show just cause or simply cease and desist.

As for our opinions I am sure you are a reasonable man boing. I wouldn't attempt any debate with you if you weren't.

As for me I am me... just left of centre with a deep personal antipathy to both extreme right and left wing due to personal experiences in my life.

[boing]

One thing that is being ignored by those to whom it is an inconvenient fact is that a vote recount is useless if the underlying data is suspect. You can count all day and come up with the same numbers which is what the vote-counters are doing but meanwhile deeper investigation is needed to expose the systemic flaws.

It has now been demonstrated that the Dominion voter machines can be updated on-line if they are connected to the internet. The first argument produced in favour of these machines is that they were totally secure. Their lack of security now having been demonstrated the defense has changed it's claim to that they were never connected to the internet. Who knows what happened in the time-out periods when no communication was received from the group of critical states where the Dem/Rep margins were very thin?

At least two prominent statisticians have identified unusual patterns in the voting counts during the time-out periods. One has a long, tedious, explanation of his assessment on the internet. I do not claim to understand the mathematical basis of these claims and pretty certainly I doubt if your average judge does either but the results sound impressive. One assessment shows an approximately equal rate of Dem/Rep votes received throughout the initial voting returns, which makes sense since the candidates were running neck and neck, but strangely the rate changed to something like 94% Dem for a short period of time during the time-out. It is quite possible that this change, though unlikely, was valid based on the locality involved but unless the cause of the blip is established it will forever be considered and indicator of election corruption.

Do we really want to go through this torture in every future election or should we investigate now, prove the system works honestly, and give ourselves a more stress free time in the future?

Saying that 30 lawsuits are vexatious and should be rejected is like saying that 30 murders charges should not be investigated because nobody could be bothered to carry out the autopsies. What we should be doing now is to face the challenge however tedious and expensive it is, prove the system works honestly, ridicule the challengers if they are proved wrong, lock up the corrupt if any are found, change procedures as required and then hope to get on with normal life.

.

[TheGreenGoblin]

One thing that is being ignored by those to whom it is an inconvenient fact is that a vote recount is useless if the underlying data is suspect. You can count all day and come up with the same numbers which is what the vote-counters are doing but meanwhile deeper investigation is needed to expose the systemic flaws.

It has now been demonstrated that the Dominion voter machines can be updated on-line if they are connected to the internet. The first argument produced in favour of these machines is that they were totally secure. Their lack of security now having been demonstrated the defense has changed it's claim to that they were never connected to the internet. Who knows what happened in the time-out periods when no communication was received from the group of critical states where the Dem/Rep margins were very thin?

At least two prominent statisticians have identified unusual patterns in the voting counts during the time-out periods. One has a long, tedious, explanation of his assessment on the internet. I do not claim to understand the mathematical basis of these claims and pretty certainly I doubt if your average judge does either but the results sound impressive. One assessment shows an approximately equal rate of Dem/Rep votes received throughout the initial voting returns, which makes sense since the candidates were running neck and neck, but strangely the rate changed to something like 94% Dem for a short period of time during the time-out. It is quite possible that this change, though unlikely, was valid based on the locality involved but unless the cause of the blip is established it will forever be considered and indicator of election corruption.

Do we really want to go through this torture in every future election or should we investigate now, prove the system works honestly, and give ourselves a more stress free time in the future?

Saying that 30 lawsuits are vexatious and should be rejected is like saying that 30 murders charges should not be investigated because nobody could be bothered to carry out the autopsies. What we should be doing now is to face the challenge however tedious and expensive it is, prove the system works honestly, ridicule the challengers if they are proved wrong, lock up the corrupt if any are found, change procedures as required and then hope to get on with normal life.

.

Squawk as you must. The US system has proven to be rigorous with generally decent Republican leaning lawyers and judges providing due process and showing the hollowness at the core of the Trumpian cabal and their claims. Are you one of the latter, I ask you?