Trump 2020 Continues ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​:)


Recommended Posts

Ginsburg Supreme Court: Republicans secure vote for replacement

Breaking News image

Republicans have secured the numbers needed to ensure that President Trump's Supreme Court nominee will face a confirmation vote in the Senate.

Senator Mitt Romney of Utah has given the party the 51 votes needed to move forward with voting on Mr Trump's candidate to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Friday.

The move ensures a bitter political battle.

Democrats argued there should be no confirmation in an election year.

President Trump says he will announce his nominee on Saturday

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I didn't see the correction regarding the woman who complained her hijab was torn off. Allegedly....she lied. Trump was elected by virtue of the votes of those he persuaded with his campaign pron

This is all I will say on the subject. Let's be honest, they didn't exactly have an easy choice. Liar vs. Liar is a pretty accurate way to frame it. They made their choice but were deeply divided in d

Posted Images

It really won't matter if Trump loses in November. With the changes made to the Supreme Court in favour of "sanity" over "feelings", the days of the Socialist Left will have been halted for quite some time. 
 

By doing so Trump really did MAGA.

 

Mitt Romney says he'll support moving forward with Supreme Court pick

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) announced Tuesday that he would support moving forward with a Senate vote on President Trump's selection to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Why it matters: Barring any big surprises, Democrats have virtually no shot at stopping the confirmation process for the president’s nominee before November’s election.

The big picture: Romney was one of the few Republican senators who were question marks amid Trump's push to quickly nominate a replacement for Ginsburg. Earlier this year, Romney was the sole Republican who voted to convict Trump for abuse of power after the impeachment trial.

Republican Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) have both said they oppose voting before the election.

What he's saying: "The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own," Romney said in a statement.

“The Constitution gives the president the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees."

"Accordingly, I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”

Driving the news: Romney declined to say at a press gaggle whether he would support voting for Ginsburg's replacement in the lame-duck congressional session between November and January if Biden wins the presidency.

Context: Republicans in 2016 opposed confirming President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, because it was an election year and control of the government was divided between the GOP and Democrats. Romney said in the press gaggle that he did not believe the Garland decision was "unfair," arguing that it was "consistent with precedent."

https://www.axios.com/mitt-romney-trump-supreme-court-pick-840e1fbf-1ee0-497a-b22e-1791e8edb32d.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54238592

 

Quote

The ‘Trump train’: 'I'm tired of people putting down our president'

By Tara McKelveySterling, Virginia
  • 22 September 2020
Related Topics
Vehicles drive along the roadImage copyrightGETTY IMAGES

Some Trump supporters in Democratic-leaning districts of Virginia, Wisconsin and other states say they feel maligned because of their conservative views. They are now banding together in convoys for solidarity. Here is what a ride on the "Trump train" looks like - and what it means for the nation.

Scott Pio coasts through a neighbourhood in northern Virginia on a recent Sunday in his Jeep, a Wrangler draped in Trump flags. He waves at two women dressed in tank tops who are chatting in a front yard. They give him a hard stare.

Pio, a 36-year-old software engineer, is hardly surprised.

On weekends the president frequently comes here to play golf at his club, Trump National, and progressive activists gather in front of its entrance to protest his policies. Here in this Democratic-leaning part of Virginia, a Trump supporter like Pio (pronounced PIE-oh), gets a chilly reception.

One of the Democratic activists who congregates at the entrance to the president's club, Juli Briskman, became famous several years ago for making an obscene gesture at the presidential motorcade. She is now an elected county official, a position that she owes in part to her newfound celebrity-dom.

Pio heard about Briskman when he moved to the area about a year ago. Now he leads a convoy made of flag-draped motorcycles, Jeeps and big-wheelers that drives up and down on the street in front of golf club. The "Trump train", as it is also known, acts as a counterbalance to the actions of Briskman and the Democratic protestors.

"I'm tired of people putting down our president," says Pio, explaining why he decided to organise the convoy. "And I'm tired of the disrespect."

 

Pio likes the president's efforts at deregulation - removing restrictions on businesses - and his immigration policies, especially the US-Mexico border wall.

"He's a builder, not a politician," he says.

There are similar pro-Trump convoys across the US.

The processions roll along highways and dusty trails in liberal enclaves such as Sterling; Eau Claire, Wisconsin; and McAllen, Texas. In many of the towns, the people in the convoys may not see the president's motorcade, as they do in Sterling. Yet they are still demonstrating their support loudly and clearly.

For many people, the idea of Trump 2020 flags on trucks evokes harrowing images from Portland last month when Trump supporters in a caravan clashed with liberals. On that day one supporter, Aaron Danielson, was shot and killed. The convoys that take place in Sterling and other cities have been peaceful, though.

 

The people in the convoys are united both by their affection for the president and also by their own feeling of being marginalised within their communities.

The processions are driven by those who describe themselves as the president's base. As a demographic group, the president's base are white men and women who earn relatively high salaries but are less likely to have a college degree than Democratic voters, according to a study.

Many of these conservatives believe Democratic elites "look down on them because they're more religious and they're interested in guns", says Stephen Norwood, a history professor at University of Oklahoma in Norman, adding: "There's a lot of resentment that they've been overlooked."

Says Norwood: "They see Trump, and he's able to convince them that he's contemptuous of the elites."

Trump complains about how badly he is treated in Washington and celebrates his base, the "forgotten man and the forgotten women".

His poll numbers are falling, though, and his supporters worry about his fate and their own.

 

"These guys kind of feel their economic and political birthright slipping away," says Jefferson Cowie, a history professor at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. "So they're screaming."

Or they're ringing a cow bell: Roger Cole, 64, a home-improvement contractor, clanged one on a recent Sunday.

He was standing next to his big rig, a 1980 model with a Trump flag, that had broken down ("power-steering issues") across from the president's golf club. Cole was momentarily out of action, and he was showing his support for the convoy with the bell.

   

The convoy, like many others across the US, formed spontaneously and without the help of Trump campaign officials.: "It was 100% organic," explains Pio, the organiser of the Virginia convoy.

Says 32-year-old Clare Krenzelok, a mother of four in Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, who organised a 500-strong convoy in her state: "This was completely a movement of the people."

The vehicular processions have grown over time. The Virginia convoy has jumped from 30 people in the early summer to "168 patriots", says Pio. They do not all show up every weekend, but they come when they can.

 

The convoys build solidarity among the Trump supporters, a group of people who describe themselves as "the common man".

One of them, Lee Jackson Shockey, 73, was sitting behind the wheel of a pick-up truck on a recent Sunday. He says Trump understands them in a way that few political leaders do.

The son of a hog farmer, Shockey grew up in Virginia and works as an accountant. "Lots of times I hear President Trump on TV, and I think: 'Damn. I would've said that.'"

A hunter who was raised around firearms, he says he likes the way that the president stands up for the Second Amendment, which protects a right to gun ownership.

And Shockey believes the president has been good for the economy, that he has "streamlined a lot of these regulations that strangled businesses".

On the Sterling convoy, some vehicles have signs that say: "Trump National Rapid Response Team". They head down Lowes Island Boulevard, a road that was carved into a hill not far from the Potomac River, and drive past the entrance to the president's golf club.

 

One of the truckers, Mike Taylor, 62, a retired fire marshal in a '79 Kenworth, says that Trump stands up for the country and its workers: "He stopped taking second- or third seat to other countries, specifically China."

Standing on a sidewalk only yards away, progressive activists stage their own demonstration. They grip banners that denounce the president as a "Democracy Killer" and wear T-shirts emblazoned with the names of Joe Biden, the Democratic presidential nominee, and his running mate, Kamala Harris.

Juli Briskman, 53, the elected country official, still comes regularly to the event. Speaking on the phone, she says that she holds a banner in front of the golf club that says: "Lock him up". She says that the place where she lives, Loudoun County, once a Republican district, is now mostly Democratic.

 

She reflects on the way that the Trump supporters now band together in convoys in the neighbourhood to express their views. "It might be painful to be told that your views are outdated," she says. "Their reactions are the feelings of white fragility."

One of the progressives at the event, Meagan Donahue, 49, stood on the side of the road in a Biden-Harris shirt and watched the Trump convoy roar past. "You see these, like, semis with these flags," she says, referring to the trucks on the convoy. "They are like a cult."

The mood on the street is tense. Some of the Trump supporters shout at the progressive activists and call them names ("Losers!"). Sometimes, says Pio, the progressive activists throw water bottles at the drivers in the convoy. "Full ones," he says.

He palms a mud-splattered steering wheel, heading past the president's club, while an American flag on the side of the jeep flaps in the wind.

The flag blocks the flying debris, he says: "The flag does protect me." It is secured with knots he learned as an Eagle Scout while growing up in Florida. Knot-tying, it turns out, is a useful skill for a convoy leader.

In a nearby parking lot, the air smells of pine needles and hand sanitiser, and people shout over the roar of four-cylinder engines. Pio tells them to keep an eye on their blue-and-red pro-Trump signs. "We've got to protect them," he says explaining that the progressive activists sometimes tear them down: "They threw them in the trees last time."

In the afternoon, the president leaves the club, and people start to head home.

Reflecting on the event, Pio seems pleased: "It was perfect." He walks along the side of the road, picking up signs. The election outcome and the fate of the president and his base is unclear. In the meantime, Pio plans for the next weekend and another convoy.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I said I would not look at this post again, but here I am. ?

its really striking to me to see extreme views. And it seems to be getting worse. I suppose it has to do with an election coming. And the fact that I never paid attention before.

Seems clear to me (at this point) that the US institution and how they've set up their government is heavy. 

It also seems to me that the democrats appear to be loosing their sanity. I've researched both candidates and their accomplishments. I'm leaning towards the Republicans as they seem the least corrupt. But I'm sure the left wing and the right wing belong to the same bird.

But there is something disturbing about societies that are okay with this type of stuff?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Amelia said:

I said I would not look at this post again, but here I am. ?

its really striking to me to see extreme views. And it seems to be getting worse. I suppose it has to do with an election coming. And the fact that I never paid attention before.

 

Extreme viewpoint is what we FREE humans are all about.  If it wasn't we would be living in "The Brave New World" where everyone was bred, educated to hold the same reliefs and POV.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Amelia said:

I said I would not look at this post again, but here I am. ?

its really striking to me to see extreme views. And it seems to be getting worse. I suppose it has to do with an election coming. And the fact that I never paid attention before.

Seems clear to me (at this point) that the US institution and how they've set up their government is heavy. 

It also seems to me that the democrats appear to be loosing their sanity. I've researched both candidates and their accomplishments. I'm leaning towards the Republicans as they seem the least corrupt. But I'm sure the left wing and the right wing belong to the same bird.

But there is something disturbing about societies that are okay with this type of stuff?

 

 

Just watched this documentary tonight, I think it explains quite well why society is where it's at.

 

https://www.netflix.com/ca/title/81254224

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JDunkin said:

P.S. Sorry, no time to watch the long video you posted just prior to this one.

 

Likely would have been a waste of time.  Here is evidently what the show is about:

Quote

Plot: What's the story about?

The Social Dilemma is a powerful exploration of the disproportionate impact that a relatively small number of engineers in Silicon Valley have over the way we think, act, and live our lives. The film deftly tackles an underlying cause of our viral conspiracy theories, teenage mental health issues, rampant misinformation and political polarization, and makes these issues visceral, understandable, and urgent.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Marshall said:

The film deftly tackles an underlying cause of our viral conspiracy theories, teenage mental health issues, rampant misinformation and political polarization, and makes these issues visceral, understandable, and urgent.

So I guess they are referring to a) The MSM namely CNN, NYT, CBC, Toronto Star

                                                     b) Facebook, Google, Twitter, censorship ?

                                                     c) The Democrats, / Liberals ?

                                                                    or 

                                                     d) Deicers posting history ? :Clever:

                       

Edited by Jaydee
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Politifact article says that allegation is false. So what's the point?

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/dec/07/blog-posting/complex-tale-involving-hillary-clinton-uranium-rus/

Our ruling

A Facebook post claims that Hillary Clinton transferred uranium to Russia in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation. It also says Robert Mueller was involved.

The claim makes it seem like Clinton bears responsibility for the deal when a panel of several departments and agencies were part of its approval.

And while the connections between the Clinton Foundation and the Russian deal may appear fishy, there is no proof of any quid pro quo.

As for Mueller, the ties are even more specious.

We rate this claim Mostly False.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to that, there is this backgrounder on it:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/oct/24/what-you-need-know-about-hillary-clinton-and-urani/

Clinton told a New Hampshire TV station in June 2015 that "I was not personally involved because that wasn’t something the secretary of state did." And Jose Fernandez, who served as assistant secretary of state for economic, energy and business affairs under Clinton and represented the department on the panel, told the Times that Clinton "never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter."

But even if you don’t take either Clinton or Fernandez at their word, the reality is that the State Department was just one of nine government agencies that signed off on the transaction.

Second, while we concluded that nine people related to the company did at some point donate to the Clinton Foundation, we found that the bulk of the $145 million came from Giustra. Guistra said he sold all of his stakes in Uranium One in the fall of 2007, "at least 18 months before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state" and three years before the Russian deal.

We couldn’t independently verify Giustra’s claim, but if he is telling the truth, the donation amount to the Clinton Foundation from confirmed Uranium One investors drops from more than $145 million to $4 million.

The main exception is Ian Telfer, an investor who the New York Times found donated between $1.3 million and $5.6 million to the Clinton Foundation during and after the review process for the Russian deal.

So while Trump was within his right to question links between foundation donors and their ties to Uranium one, his specific charge was exaggerated.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post Fact Checker subsequently looked at a similar Trump statement: "Remember that Hillary Clinton gave Russia 20 percent of American uranium and, you know, she was paid a fortune. You know, they got a tremendous amount of money."

The Fact Checker came to the same conclusion about Trump’s misleading language, giving Trump’s assertion its worst rating of Four Pinocchios.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JDunkin said:

Clinton, whose charity got ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS from Russian associated groups was part of the approval. What was proven to be false was that she approved the uranium deal alone. Others in the Obama administration were part of the approval. 

Who wants to have a bet with me(I'll give you a million to one odds) that there are no more donations coming into Hillary's charity from that same source any more.

It seems from your many posts on this thread De-icer that when anything that appears fishy with Trump happens, you leap into action and post it with your reasoning that he shouldn't be president. Funny how frauds like you make any and every excuse when the tables are turned.

Because you are a fraud, just like the rest of the left.

So when I use the information you post, you don't believe it.

You then continue your name calling and attacks against me.

You really were grinding that ax while you were away, weren't you?

So you dispute your own 'facts', and blame me for posting what is wrong.

Hey, Hilary lost.

Trump is a fraud.

The convictions against him are real.

There is more to come.

You need help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, JDunkin said:

 

So ignore all that stuff and base your vote on their policy in which there are clear differences.

 

Once again you are correct.  However you fail to acknowledge that trumps policies are for self aggrandizement, self enrichment, and to further racism.

Again, Hilary lost.

And if the main thrust of my posts is to convince people not to support trump, then let me ask you this:

Why do you fail to see the mountainous amount of proof as to his malfeasance, and why do you support his racism, fascism, nepotism, and misogyny?  What does it take for you to see evil in the world?  So you must support it.

Get away from the qanon.  Hilary still isn't in jail, Obama is American, and not everyone is a pedophile.

The convictions against the trump administration are real.  

The books that document trump's behaviour in the White House are real.  Choose carefully.

The truth is trump has been involved in over 4500 lawsuits, and although the majority of them were before he became president, and there are still several hundred active against him.  He will see jail time when he is voted out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lawsuits_involving_Donald_Trump

As for yootoob videos, the first thing I look at is who is the poster.  Most of them are 'commentators' who use edited and altered footage to promote an agenda.  That's why I stay away from them and stick to verifiable sources.

Mail in voting has been the mainstay of American elections for decades.  Only now is it being used as an 'excuse' to start even more lawsuits to challenge the results of the upcoming election.   That is why he has stated he won't have a peaceful transfer of power.  He's running scared.....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, deicer said:

Mail in voting has been the mainstay of American elections for decades.

I'm trying to understand your argument but puzzled why you would consider mail in voting as being 'the mainstay of American elections for decades' when the primary method of casting a ballot has been in person at a polling place 'for decades'?  Mail in vote vs in person vote was a 25/75 split in 2016.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@JDunkin, just a suggestion, if you choose the option to ignore content by deicer your life will be eminently better.

If you don't want to do that please don't quote him so the rest of us can live in peace.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Airband said:

I'm trying to understand your argument but puzzled why you would consider mail in voting as being 'the mainstay of American elections for decades' when the primary method of casting a ballot has been in person at a polling place 'for decades'?  Mail in vote vs in person vote was a 25/75 split in 2016.
 

Absentee balloting started in the civil war, and it's been a staple since.  3 states only vote by mail as well.

https://electionlab.mit.edu/research/voting-mail-and-absentee-voting

https://www.history.com/news/vote-by-mail-soldiers-war

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53353404

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JDunkin said:

Once again folks, NEVER believe what de-icer posts.

"At the center of what the trial court subsequently found to be “a massive, well-conceived and well-orchestrated absentee ballot voter fraud scheme” were a large number of absentee ballots—nearly 70 percent of the total—cast from Little Havana. Little Havana voters reinstalled Commissioner Hernandez, the embattled Suarez ally who won reelection to the City Commission by a large majority after being removed from office by the governor following a 23-count indictment for bank fraud and money laundering. An expert in statistical analysis testified at trial that the large number of absentee ballots from Little Havana was a statistical “outlier,” the Little Havana absentee ballot rate was an “aberrant case” so unlikely that it was “literally off the [statistical probability] charts.”

The trial judge, Thomas S. Wilson Jr., concluded that “the evidence shows a pattern of fraudulent, intentional and criminal conduct that resulted in such an extensive abuse of the absentee ballot laws that it can fairly be said that the intent of these laws was totally frustrated.... This scheme to defraud, literally and figuratively stole the ballot from the hands of every honest voter in the city of Miami.” Judge Wilson overturned the results of the November 4 election and ordered a new election, but his remedy was overturned on appeal.

The appellate court affirmed the finding of fraud but voided the remedy of a new election and remanded the case to the lower court with instructions to enter a final judgment that voided all of the absentee ballots, determining the outcome of the election by the machine total alone. This decision took victory out of Xavier Suarez’s hands and gave it to Miami’s new mayor, Joe Carollo. The 1997 Miami mayor’s race presents one of the more egregious cases of election fraud in recent memory.

https://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/publications/Analysis.pdf

It is very amusing to see that you post snippets, yet not the whole.  Very misleading in your desire to accuse me of being untruthful.

Why don't you put up that it wasn't a federal election in your 'example'?  It was a mayoral race in Miami.  Also, the fraud was caught immediately.

Once again using your example, the 'lefty' site demos.org, if you read the whole article, it explains that while voter fraud does exist, it isn't as big a boogeyman as you are personally making it out to be.

From your article:

Election Fraud Today


Based on the research and analysis conducted for Securing the Vote, we offer several conclusions about
election fraud in the United States today:


Voter fraud appears to be very rare in the 12 states examined in that report. Legal and news records
turned up little evidence of significant fraud in these states or any indication that fraud is more than a
minor problem. Interviews with state officials further confirmed this impression

.
Notable election reforms of the past 10 to 15 years—such as the NVRA, more permissive absentee
balloting rules, all mail-in voting in Oregon, and the enactment of Election Day Registration in several
more states—have not facilitated voter fraud.


Analysis of several cases of election fraud that have received significant attention in recent years suggests
that some of the most notable allegations of fraud have proved to be baseless. While the 1997
mayoral primary election in Miami, Florida, was one of the most egregious election fraud cases in recent
memory, there are other noted cases where charges of significant vote fraud have been disproved,
such as the 1996 Dornan/Sanchez contest for the U.S. House of Representatives in Orange County,
California. There are yet other cases, such as the 2000 election in St. Louis, Missouri, in which politicians
have made great hay, but charges of widespread fraud have not been substantiated. A new Demos
report on voter fraud in states offering Election Day Registration finds that despite the hundreds
of news stories reporting on allegations of voter fraud in Wisconsin in the 2004 presidential election,
practically no fraud has ever been proven. An intensive effort on the part of the federal government to
uncover and prosecute voter fraud in Wisconsin resulted in only 14 indictments and five convictions
or guilty pleas for illegal voting in an election in which over 3 million ballots were cast.16



 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of voter suppression...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/09/republican-senator-bill-illegal-mail-vote-count-deadline.html

Republican Senator Proposes Bill That Would Make It Illegal to Count Votes

On Thursday, Florida Sen. Rick Scott proposed a bill that would change election laws with less than six weeks to go until November’s election, causing complete mayhem and ensuring that untold numbers of otherwise valid votes would not be counted. Scott’s proposal is simple and entirely unworkable. His Help America Vote Act of 2020 would require that mail-in ballots be counted within 24 hours of when voting closes on Election Day. Scott’s proposed legislation would also prevent mail-in ballots received prior to Election Day from being processed and counted until the morning of Nov. 3, contradicting state election statutes across the country including one that he signed when he was governor of Florida. Basically, the bill would move back the date by which votes can start to be counted and move up the date by which the count must end. This would limit the count to a single less-than-48-hour window, shortening the count in some cases by weeks. In Scott’s own home state of Florida, as one example, votes can start to be counted up to 22 days before Election Day. In Colorado, which does all mail-in voting, they can be processed as soon as they are received and counted 15 days before Election Day. Under Scott’s law, those votes would all have to begin to be counted on Election Day itself. Any votes that did not get counted simply would not count.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.