Trump Consciousness

Well then they aren't very good lawyers if they can't get into the courts. Do they know procedure?
So you just randomly pick and choose what edited statements by politicians are meaningful - oh excuse me, not so random. You pick and choose based on your bias. We can all play that game, you know, and "prove" anything.

Are you sure that's the game you want to play? I will remember that you think what Sasse says is real. That is going to come back to haunt you. I'm sure that there is a lot of what Sasse says that you will disagree with. Then it will be, "Eh..Sasse is a lying conservative!"
 
Last edited:
So you just randomly pick and choose what edited statements by politicians are meaningful - oh excuse, not so random. You pick and choose based on your bias. We can all play that game, you know, and "prove" anything.

Are you sure that's the game you want to play? I will remember that you think what Sasse says is real. That is going to come back to haunt you. I'm sure that there is a lot of what Sasse says that you will disagree with. Then it will be, "Eh..Sasse is a lying conservative!"
Haha no. I'll be just fine, thanks.
 
Not sure what you mean by "Republicans" and "move on." That is because Republican politicians and Republican voters are not the same. This year, Many Republican politicians have acquiesced to Democrat demands. Many Republican voters are so repulsed by what their elected officials have done that the groups are now behaving in very different ways.

As for "moving on", that's the kind of thing a rapist suggests to a victim as he exits the crime scene. The purpose of the suggestion is self-serving. It is equivalent to saying, "you better let me get away with this."
When there is evidence in the courts, then we can talk.:)
 
All I'm saying is that I can't watch the whole thing. You're side has the burden to prove these claims. Just saying things doesn't make it so. Prove it in court.
not sure whey anyone thinks the U S justice is fair in anyway . is one of the most corrupt in the free world ...it railroads the poor and minorities and gives protection the wealthy and corrupt. ..
 
not sure whey anyone thinks the U S justice is fair in anyway . is one of the most corrupt in the free world ...it railroads the poor and minorities and gives protection the wealthy and corrupt. ..
That's true. So I guess we should just accept what Trump says? What's the alternative?
 
That's true. So I guess we should just accept what Trump says? What's the alternative?
How about taking the time to review the evidence and thinking for yourself. Is that asking too much? Apparently so.

And, btw, now that you have revealed yourself to be a big SJW, your hypocrisy becomes even more apparent. Defund the police! The system is racist and corrupt!.....but wait....the system says Trump is wrong. Trust the system!

You are so obvious. You are not "fine". You are one big walking talking hot mess of a contradiction.
 
How about taking the time to review the evidence and thinking for yourself. Is that asking too much? Apparently so.

And, btw, now that you have revealed yourself to be a big SJW, your hypocrisy becomes even more apparent. Defund the police! The system is racist and corrupt!.....but wait....the system says Trump is wrong. Trust the system!

You are so obvious. You are not "fine". You are one big walking talking hot mess of a contradiction.
Haha. You make me laugh. You know absolutely nothing about me. What arrogance.:)
 
I support Trump now, but didn't when he first announced his candidacy. At the time, all I knew about Trump was what I remembered from tabloid articles I read when I lived in New York City in the 1980's. What those articles told me is that Trump had committed adultery, he is very wealthy, and he owned a lot of property, including the Plaza Hotel and a casino in Atlantic City. I later heard that he was on a TV show called "the Apprentice" but to this day I haven't seen even a commercial for it. My mother-in-law owned an apartment in his Trump Plaza building, now sold.

I lived in Europe when Trump announced his candidacy. At the time, not knowing any better, I accepted without question the media assertion that that Trump wasn't a serious candidate. When they described him as a "clown", I adopted the term in my communications with colleagues in the Netherlands. At some point before the 2016 election, I saw a full speech by Trump. Later, I saw a story about the speech in the media. Two things struck me about it. First, at no point in the full, unedited speech did Trump sound like a clown. Second, the media materially misrepresented his comments to make him sound like a racist. There is no doubt they did this. When they presented commentary on the speech, they edited it to eliminate context that undermined their claim of racism. From this point on, I stopped accepting media descriptions of Trump at face value.

That also means that I looked at alternate sources more carefully. My preference was to see Trump himself, unedited or live if possible. As far as I could tell, the media missed no opportunities to defame Trump by falsely reporting on his statements and actions, or artfully misconstruing his meaning. They did it so often that by the time the election came around, I thoroughly distrusted the media. From then on, I assumed that anything they wrote about Trump was false unless proven otherwise.

Backtracking a little further, I did not take an interest in politics until 2003, when I witnessed malfeasance on a military project I worked on for a large entertainment company. At the time, I thought of it as a few people trying to scam the government. In other words, it was about money, not politics. But then I read about some scandals involving the Clintons. Bill Clinton had personally authorized the money for my project and a few other related projects. The style of the other scandals I read about matched the signature of what I saw on my project. It was at that time that I realized I was conservative. Until then, perhaps because I was a vegan long-haired artist working in Hollywood, it never occurred to me that I might want to have any political ideas of my own. When I thought about it, I did not like the idea of politicians and their cronies profiting on the backs of taxpayers for no commensurate benefit. I also didn't like the idea of supporting what I saw as dishonesty, such as in the politicization of climate science, environmentalism in general, education, etc.

Getting back to Trump, if you bother looking for the original source of any mainstream (negative) story about him, you will discover either a liar, conjecture, or what amounts to purported telepathy to see Trump's motives. I believe telepathy is real but I do not believe that every reporter at the New York Times can exercise the ability at will when writing about Trump. If you look at what Trump actually does and says, you will get a completely different picture of him. I went from thinking he was a clown, compromised by multiple failed marriages and dubious businesses in New York to thinking he is one of the most honest men to have ever held political office.

Keep in mind, my original opinion was not based on evidence. It was based on what I read in the media, and that material, in turn, had an unsound basis. My current position is based on evidence. I have seen Trump fulfill promises in the face of fierce opposition. I have seen him maligned and even impeached for asking about a crime while the person who actually committed the alleged crime was ignored, then nominated for president. I saw Trump attacked for non-crimes, normal business practice, and often laudable activity. Meanwhile, his accusers clearly had to manufacture evidence to use against him and his allies, in every case using underhanded means to do it.

Even my anarchist uber-liberal hippie colleague in the Netherlands admitted that he was amazed by how vicious and dishonest the press was regarding Trump. Students, many of whom were Socialists, could tell the press was lying about Trump. They asked me about it occasionally, though I never brought up politics while I taught there.

In the end, I think the press has lied consistently, brazenly, and libelously about Trump. They have persuaded many, perhaps because they are their only source of news. In my case, I might never have discovered conservative news if not for the fact that I liked to paint way out in the middle of nowhere. On those long drives, I usually listened to CDs of John Denver singing about Colorado. One day, I got bored of that and turned on the radio. I heard Matt Drudge interviewing Ann Coulter. It was interesting enough to warrant further investigation, which I did when I got home.

If you look at the citations in anti-Trump books and articles, you will find they form a circular group that is ultimately self-referential and without any serious substance. They may refer to a real quote from Trump, but without important context. More often, they will cite another reporter's subjective impression of what Trump meant rather than what he actually said. If you look through the citations in a pro-Trump book, you are far more likely to find a full quote with context so that it cannot be misconstrued.

Over the years, several conservative news organs have been bought by liberals and co-opted to their cause. Disney bought Fox media a few years ago, Fox News excepted. However, shortly after taking control of every other Fox property, liberal leadership was installed at Fox and it became a liberal news outlet. The DrudgeReport became liberal more than a year ago. It is rumored to be the result of a sale but I have never seen confirmation. There are a number of conservative journals, like the New Republic, that have never supported Trump. Peter Schweizer's book, "The Secret Empire", explains why. There are just as many corrupt Republicans as Democrats.

After having had a few years to look it all over, I have come to the conclusion that the worst I can say about Trump is that he had a mistress and divorced more than once. Compared to the millions of dollars accepted by Republican and Democrat politicians from foreign donors (mostly Chinese), Trump comes off much better in the comparison. An interesting thing about Bill Clinton is that he did a lot of things I objected to, but the country was prosperous while he was president. I cannot say that for Obama. From what I saw from my vantage in Europe, Obama made America poorer and more dangerous. Trump did a lot of good by restoring American business and helping all Americans overall. He actually didn't start any wars, got us out of others, and accomplished more in the middle east than any American before him had even attempted to achieve.

I do not believe Trump is a racist. If I did, I wouldn't support him. I do not believe he has used the presidency for financial advantage. On the contrary, I wouldn't be surprised if he has lost money by becoming president. I do not believe he is incompetent, foolish, boorish, or dangerously aggressive. As far as I can tell, he is far more reasonable and intelligent than he is given credit for being. More than that, although I don't know him personally, I know several people who do. All of them have nothing but praise for him. They do not praise him for his intelligence or business acumen but for his kindness, which seems to be his most distinctive trait to those who know him.
Andy, THANK YOU for your detailed reply. It is very helpful in understanding your actual position.

Before I say anything else, let me “nail my colours” to the mast. So,
  • I am American but I have now lived half my life in the UK (I am 52 years old). So, we share a bit of perspective there - both being American but both having extensive experience living outside the US.
  • Here in the UK, I received my UK citizenship maybe 15 years ago. When that happened I briefly joined the Conservative Party. Why? Because I felt an obligation to participate in UK democracy and the Conservatives felt closer than Labour.
  • That said, my feelings have changed. I am no longer a member of the Conservatives and I’m not sure where I stand now.
  • Last election, I could not vote for Boris (he lost my vote when he prorogued Parliament) but it is also that case the Jeremy Corbyn turned my stomach. I basically wasted my vote by voting somebody like Greens.
  • In the US, I have always voted Democratic but I would say I am on the “right wing” of the Democrats.

So, feelings about your post.
  • I have “been aware” for a long time that the US has the "best Congress that money can buy”.
  • I would also say that I have been aware that there is a “spin” on things in the press. But certainly the points you make do make me consider that this is perhaps much, much larger than I have realised.
  • You make a great point that we all digest our politics in ten to forty second segments that have been “sliced and diced” before we ingest (and digest) them. Is an interesting point that I should maybe spend some time with the “raw data” (complete Trump speeches) rather spending time on MSNBC (which is what I have done, I am a great Rachel Maddow fan).
  • So, you have shaken up my feelings about Trump. Not saying I am now a supporter but certainly I am intrigued by what you have said.
A few other things:

[QUOTE="Andrew Paquette, post: 150750, member: 3”]
Keep in mind, my original opinion was not based on evidence. It was based on what I read in the media, and that material, in turn, had an unsound basis. My current position is based on evidence.
[/QUOTE]

Yes. Very interesting. I like to believe that I believe what I believe because of the evidence. I personally hold some very controversial opinions about a variety of things. These include the existence of God, the nature of God, the activities of the Archangel Michael and the possible Second Coming of Jesus Christ. I have a FileMaker database with 4052 records on all of this. That’s a lot of evidence. Yet, my experience is that nobody wishes to actually consider the evidence. People are lazy and have their own “prejudices” (existing opinions on this sort of stuff) and they really don’t want to know what is in my database. They don’t actually care about understanding reality. They care about their sports teams, their children, making money and a pint down at the pub (when that was allowed) and all that is, in a way, laudable yet it is still astonishing to me that 99% of people just don’t care. 99% of people choose the Blue Pill.

That said, I am not sure I can recommend the Red Pill. There are some plus sides. Michael is HILARIOUS. Yet it is also deeply unsatisfactory. I am eleven years deep in this rabbit hole yet I am still deeply uncertain about whether my spelunking is “a revelation” or a “dangerous waste of time and energy”.

[QUOTE="Andrew Paquette, post: 150750, member: 3”]
There are a number of conservative journals, like the New Republic, that have never supported Trump. Peter Schweizer's book, "The Secret Empire", explains why. There are just as many corrupt Republicans as Democrats.
[/QUOTE]

Just bought this on Audible.

[QUOTE="Andrew Paquette, post: 150750, member: 3”]
More than that, although I don't know him personally, I know several people who do. All of them have nothing but praise for him. They do not praise him for his intelligence or business acumen but for his kindness, which seems to be his most distinctive trait to those who know him.
[/QUOTE]

This is quite interesting. Certainly the case that he has a number of loyal “followers” (his family and certain employees).

THANKS.
 
A general comment on the expression, "overturn the election." I wish people would stop saying this. No one is trying to overturn the election. There is one group, "Biden supporters" who want to maintain the fiction of a Biden win despite fraud during the election. The other group, "Trump supporters", want to know what the actual legitimate vote is. That has nothing to do with "overturning" anything. It is really irritating to see this expression multiply because it contains the false assumption that the election results are not fraudulent.
 
So, now the interesting point. Let's say the election really has been stolen by some guys in Wisconsin at 3 in the morning. How do I feel about that? Stealing an election is a criminal and amoral thing yet whoever has done this has done a GREAT SERVICE to the United States and really the whole World. If I was at the pub and ended up chatted with some guy and then he admitted to stealing the election for Biden, would I buy him a beer and shake his hand?
Alan, If you study history you can find out why civilization invented the rule of law. It was to protect the weak from being oppressed by the strong. The people who founded the US and wrote our constitution understood history. They lived through tyranny. The writers of the US constitution had the benefit of a previous attempt (the articles of confederation) at forming a national government to educate their efforts. If you think a political group that will ignore the rule of law has done a service to anyone except themselves you are woefully mistaken.

You can't build a utopia through underhanded means. If you try, the people who will end up in charge are those people who are best at using underhanded means and they will serve their own interests not the public's interest, they will turn on their past supporters whenever their personal interest diverge and use the same underhanded means they used to obtain power to oppress their onetime allies.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...#Text

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.​
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.​
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.​
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.​
 
The fact that some of the evidence hasn't been heard by courts works both ways in that it hasn’t been subject to any serious cross examination either.

This is why Rudy’s roadshow has been a bit of a joke... Well one of several reasons of course.
 
If Biden is sworn in the global power balance will shift dramatically in an instant. The CCP will be celebrating. The Globalist goons at the economic forum will be salivating. Will they not?

One year closer to 2030. Better wake up soon!
 
I saw this the other day but only now see it is by a researcher at the Department of Justice.

“The precinct level estimates for Georgia and Pennsylvania indicate that vote fraud may account for Biden’s win in both states,”

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3756988#

A Simple Test for the Extent of Vote Fraud with Absentee Ballots in the 2020 Presidential Election: Georgia and Pennsylvania Data​
John R. Lott​
US Department of Justice
Date Written: December 21, 2020​
Abstract​
This study provides measures of vote fraud in the 2020 presidential election. It first compares Fulton county’s precincts that are adjacent to similar precincts in neighboring counties that had no allegations of fraud to isolate the impact of Fulton county’s vote-counting process (including potential fraud). In measuring the difference in President Trump’s vote share of the absentee ballots for these adjacent precincts, we account for the difference in his vote share of the in-person voting and the difference in registered voters’ demographics. The best estimate shows an unusual 7.81% drop in Trump’s percentage of the absentee ballots for Fulton County alone of 11,350 votes, or over 80% of Biden’s vote lead in Georgia. The same approach is applied to Allegheny County in Pennsylvania for both absentee and provisional ballots. The estimated number of fraudulent votes from those two sources is about 55,270 votes.​
Second, vote fraud can increase voter turnout rate. Increased fraud can take many forms: higher rates of filling out absentee ballots for people who hadn’t voted, dead people voting, ineligible people voting, or even payments to legally registered people for their votes. However, the increase might not be as large as the fraud if votes for opposing candidates are either lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate. The estimates here indicate that there were 70,000 to 79,000 “excess” votes in Georgia and Pennsylvania. Adding Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, the total increases to up to 289,000 excess votes.


https://amgreatness.com/2020/12/29/...e-election-fraud-in-georgia-and-pennsylvania/

Lott was appointed as senior adviser for research and statistics at the DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs in October of 2020.
...
“The precinct level estimates for Georgia and Pennsylvania indicate that vote fraud may account for Biden’s win in both states,” said Lott.​
 
Last edited:
Top