Sirens

[dukealien]

Sirens


I see America cheating

as when in the Nineties
their president lied and philandered
but laughed it off
and people felt they could or should
drive through red lights
for they too could lie

so since November’s fraudulence
many pull out into moving traffic
for they too can cheat
others who must swerve or brake
to avoid destruction

some are growing angry
enough at least to clip a cheater
often I hear sirens

---

With minor apologies to Walt Whitman...

(Though posted in Misc, suggestions on how to clarify the message are appreciated.  Yes, I see a lot of this these days.)

[Knot]

.
Hi duke,
as one watching from afar I'm not sure I buy this.
The lies of Clinton (coming, as they did, after Reagan and Iran-Contra, not to mention Nixon) seemed always on the pale side, and 'November's fraudulence' hasn't been established, has it? Or is the 'fraud' Trump's? (Either way, weren't a great many already pulling out 'into moving traffic' before the election?) Then you've got 'clip a cheater' (and discounting the 'wise guy' interpretation of 'clip') this, again, pales given the surprisingly long list of people being run down at various protests (L.A, Minneapolis, Indianna, Charlottesville, Buffalo, Seattle, etc etc.) And the question remains, what of those who don't choose to lie or cheat or clip, aren't they America too? What distinguishes the 'others who swerve'?
I think the idea is interesting, a kind of corrosive 'trickle down' effect, but I don't know that these are the best illustrations of that.
Starting with 'often I hear sirens' might be an idea.


Best, Knot



.

[dukealien]

The fraud is definite, distinct, and definitely the Democrats'.  There is abundant evidence.  The response below is apparently still at Stage 1 denial... which has gone quite a bit further down its track elsewhere:

Stage 1 - There was no fraud.
Stage 2 - There was no widespread fraud.
Stage 3 - There was widespread fraud, but not enough to alter the results of the election.
Stage 4 - There was enough fraud to alter the results of the election, but it's too late to do anything about it.
Stage 5 - RESIST! RESIST! RESIST! (Reserved in case of Trump's second inauguration... accompanied by rioting, looting, and destruction in precisely those Democrat-ruled cities where the fraud was perpetrated.  Karma's a cast-iron bitch.)

It is an interesting observation that Republican wrongdoing doesn't produce these drive-time tropes.  I suggest this is because, due in part to media bias, Republicans don't get away with it - Oliver North was persecuted/prosecuted, Nixon driven from office, and Bush II roundly castigated for Iraq II.  There's also a more relevant distinction:  Reagan and Bush weren't acting from self-interest, where Clinton and now Biden (or his backers) definitely are.  Carter and Obama got a pass for different reasons:  Carter for his obvious cluelessness (which endures) and Obama because he was the house... Affirmative Action hire and everyone knew after his first few months that he was a worthless race-baiter the like of which we've all seen and understand for what they are.

So:  Americans are taking the impunity of Clinton and Biden personally.  Hear the sirens now?

.
Hi duke,
as one watching from afar I'm not sure I buy this.
The lies of Clinton (coming, as they did, after Reagan and Iran-Contra, not to mention Nixon) seemed always on the pale side, and 'November's fraudulence' hasn't been established, has it? Or is the 'fraud' Trump's? (Either way, weren't a great many already pulling out 'into moving traffic' before the election?) Then you've got 'clip a cheater' (and discounting the 'wise guy' interpretation of 'clip') this, again, pales given the surprisingly long list of people being run down at various protests (L.A, Minneapolis, Indianna, Charlottesville, Buffalo, Seattle, etc etc.) And the question remains, what of those who don't choose to lie or cheat or clip, aren't they America too? What distinguishes the 'others who swerve'?
I think the idea is interesting, a kind of corrosive 'trickle down' effect, but I don't know that these are the best illustrations of that.
Starting with 'often I hear sirens' might be an idea.


Best, Knot



.

[Erthona]

Duke,

"There is abundant evidence."
I have yet to see any, please explicate.

Bill Barr even said that their was no evidence of fraud.

I'll give you that Clinton got off too lightly. Perjury is a serious thing, without being compelled by fear of punishment the witness might risk lying. Most are unwilling to risk being caught in perjury due to the high penalty (20 yeas I think) . Clinton weakened this to some extent, however most people saw this as unfairness; unfairness in that "Clinton" got away with it and they knew they would not.

dale

[dukealien]

The Navarro report ("The Immaculate Deception") is a good place to start.  It can be downloaded at this link to pdf .  It's a fairly long document, but there was a great deal of fraud... and there is a great deal of evidence.

Have you, by the way, looked at/for evidence yourself, or trusted voices asserting there's no evidence (and the other story lines listed above) - and, furthermore, that it's terribly dangerous even to think or suspect fraud took place?

When you're living in a bubble, everything outside it looks like a pin.

Duke,

"There is abundant evidence."
I have yet to see any, please explicate.

Bill Barr even said that their was no evidence of fraud.

I'll give you that Clinton got off to lightly. Perjury is a serious thing, without being compelled by fear of punishment the witness might risk lying. Most are unwilling to risk being caught in perjury do to the high penalty (20 yeas I think) . Clinton weakened this to some extent, however most people saw this as unfairness; unfairness in that "Clinton" got away with it and they knew they would not.

dale

[Erthona]

I take whatever the talking heads say with a large grain of salt.I was generally basing it on statements of Republicans who have said it was a secure election, that and the 52 court cases that Trump and his allies have lost regarding fraud. His own security guy said this was the most secure election there has been.Of course Trump fired him after he said it. McConnell has even congratulated Biden on winning the election and asks the Republican Senators not to disrupt the formal counting of the Electorate. I am a moderate and really have no dog in this race, however I do take it seriously when someone is trying to overturn votes and get their guys to throw out the electoral college and replace it with their own electorate. That Biden (who I don't personally care for) won by such a large amount in both the popular vote and the electoral college makes me think the fraud would be pretty obvious and it is not. That and a large portion of the courts that heard the cases were packed by Republican appointees, not to mention the Supreme Court.

I look at your link just the same, but unless it has strong supporting evidence I doubt I will be swayed.

dale

_______________________________________________________________________________
Duke,

I have read the article and found it to be unsupported conjecture. When it does quote sources, they are from articles in far right wing magazines such as "Epoch Times" or "OAN," to name two; who are themselves only reporting conjecture. Oftentimes it quotes itself, and when it refers to its own made up charts (it gives no supporting evidence for these charts, merely stating them as fact).
At one point in the article it referred to 50 cases as evidence, it failed to say they had only won, one of these cases and at present that number is 1 of 52. To me this article is dishonestly written, this does not mean that articles from the left are not equally dishonest, but we are discussing this one.

Not only did I see no evidence to persuade me, I saw no evidence at all. Sorry  

dale

[busker]

It's a report that merely compiles Trump's claims and conspiracy theories, none of which have stood up in court. There is no new information presented in it (here's the actual link: https://bannonswarroom.com/wp-content/up...5.20-1.pdf)
I don't know why you would present it as something that adds to the conversation.

Here's an example of what's in it (page 9):
"one of the most disturbing examples of possible fake ballot manufacturing involves a truck driver who has alleged in a sworn affidavit that he picked up large crates of ballots in New York and delivered them to a polling location in Pennsylvania."
The above is attributed to OAN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0xaA4dYsbQ
None of these claims have held up in court. They also abound in weasel words like 'possible' and 'I believe'.

[Erthona]

"weasel words" I like that.

[dukealien]

I point out, mildly, that "none of the cases held up in court" is incorrect.   None has actually been *tried* in court, all (but one?) have been denied a hearing using one rationalization or another.

The dog that's not barking here is state and local AGs/DAs who refuse to investigate, much less bring charges based on the massive evidence of fraud having been committed.  The antecedents of these officials mostly explain their refusals; lack of evidence does not.  (The residue is cowardice.)

People who take an interest in these matters understand that such vote anomalies, otherwise inexplicable and all going only one direction, could not occur without hands on the controls.  Refusals to investigate, under those circumstances, imply complicity before and/or after the fact.

Those in the bubble, refusing to see or draw appropriate conclusions, will be surprised when their bubble bursts.  You know it will happen:  factually, the bubble is already leaking and willed ignorance won't fix it.  Yes, there is danger - but the danger began with the fraud, not with drawing attention to it.  That danger can only be reduced by honestly investigating - not coverups, no matter how pompous or dismissive.

[CRNDLSM]

The thing is, I'm pretty certain trump would have won but the democrats truly banded together and put aside their future disagreements to vote solely on getting trump out. 'vote blue no matter who' and 'im not proud but I voted for biden' was seriously their voting strategy.

[busker]

I point out, mildly, that "none of the cases held up in court" is incorrect.   None has actually been *tried* in court, all (but one?) have been denied a hearing using one rationalization or another.

The dog that's not barking here is state and local AGs/DAs who refuse to investigate, much less bring charges based on the massive evidence of fraud having been committed.  The antecedents of these officials mostly explain their refusals; lack of evidence does not.  (The residue is cowardice.)

People who take an interest in these matters understand that such vote anomalies, otherwise inexplicable and all going only one direction, could not occur without hands on the controls.  Refusals to investigate, under those circumstances, imply complicity before and/or after the fact.

Those in the bubble, refusing to see or draw appropriate conclusions, will be surprised when their bubble bursts.  You know it will happen:  factually, the bubble is already leaking and willed ignorance won't fix it.  Yes, there is danger - but the danger began with the fraud, not with drawing attention to it.  That danger can only be reduced by honestly investigating - not coverups, no matter how pompous or dismissive.

Because the 'evidence' is a morass of fairly obvious fabrications and hearsay. 
The low intelligence of Trump's base was never in doubt, so it's not surprising that they continue to follow the piper.

[Erthona]

"I point out, mildly, that "none of the cases held up in court" is incorrect.  None has actually been *tried* in court, all (but one?) have been denied a hearing using one rationalization or another."

Let's not nit-pick. It is a spurious argument to say they have not won because they were not heard. Considering that these cases have been thrown out from lack of evidence in courts all across the United States mostly with Republican appointed judges, it seems difficult to fathom that lack of courage is the cause. It seems much more likely that lack of evidence was indeed the cause. To pursue this idea of conspiracy is neither rational or logical. The bottom line is there is nothing to investigate.

dale