Another MAGA talking point shot down!

Tinkerpeach said:
You seem to think that advisors have some sort of expertise here, they don't.

Hell Karl Rove was a senior advisor to Bush.

There opinions are not expert opinions.

Smith would have to show they had extensive knowledge of how elections work for their opinions to actually matter.

And an advisor gives advice which could be either right or wrong, a president is not required to follow it.

This whole issue is dumb, Smith can call whoever he wants because it's not going to change anything.
Click to expand...

Your great legal mind is amazing. Why aren't you on Trump's legal team? You would win this case in 5 minutes.
Or the judge would laugh you out of court.

I am going for the latter.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Plenty of people told Trump there was fraud.

That is the problem with Smiths case.

He cannot prove what Trump thought.
Click to expand...

The DHS Director told Trump the election was secure.

The DOJ AG William Barr told Trump the election was secure with no significant fraud.

The election numbers showed Trump lost with Biden getting 7 million more votes and over 70 electoral votes.

His whacko crackpot lawyers and advisors Rudi Giuliani, Steve Bannon and Sydney Powell told him the the election was stolen.

He believed the latter. If Trump didn't have the cognitive ability to process this information from these sources to come to the correct conclusion, I question his cognitive ability to make the correct decisions required for a POTUS.

I rest my case.

tenor.gif
 
Tinkerpeach said:
You seem to think that advisors have some sort of expertise here, they don't.

Hell Karl Rove was a senior advisor to Bush.

There opinions are not expert opinions.

Smith would have to show they had extensive knowledge of how elections work for their opinions to actually matter.

And an advisor gives advice which could be either right or wrong, a president is not required to follow it.

This whole issue is dumb, Smith can call whoever he wants because it's not going to change anything.
Click to expand...

You seem to think advisors have no value and that is false.

A POTUS is expected to hand pick and surround himself with advisors because he thinks they are amongst the most competent in the world in their various areas of expertise. Or that they have common sense he can rely upon.


If ALL your hand picked advisors say 'NO' and you instead go with 'yes' and yes turns out to be wrong and illegal, you better be able to demonstrate a good reason for going with yes or a jury can and will find 'you should have known', and find you guilty.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Except Smith is going to try and prove that Trump knew his information was false and acted against it.

That is a big difference.

Smith is the one pursuing this particular path.

He is the one that opened the door on this, not Trump.

That's because it's all he's got which shows how weak his case against Trump actually is.

He is going for conspiracy charges which are notoriously hard to prove in court.

He doesn't have any actual evidence of Trump doing wrong.
Click to expand...

Oh, I think he has the evidence.
 
Joe Capitalist said:
The DHS Director told Trump the election was secure.

The DOJ AG William Barr told Trump the election was secure with no significant fraud.

The election numbers showed Trump lost with Biden getting 7 million more votes and over 70 electoral votes.

His whacko crackpot lawyers and advisors Rudi Giuliani, Steve Bannon and Sydney Powell told him the the election was stolen.

He believed the latter. If Trump didn't have the cognitive ability to process this information from these sources to come to the correct conclusion, I question his cognitive ability to make the correct decisions required for a POTUS.

I rest my case.

tenor.gif
Click to expand...

You need to add in Trump and his Team Crazy advisors paid two firms to find the Fraud for them, and both those firms came back saying 'We investigated and found no fraud'.


A second firm hired by Trump campaign found no evidence of election fraud
The founder of the company has been interviewed by federal prosecutors investigating the former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 results


...Ken Block, founder of the firm Simpatico Software Systems, studied more than a dozen voter fraud theories and allegations for Trump’s campaign in late 2020 and found they were “all false,”...

“No substantive voter fraud was uncovered in my investigations looking for it, nor was I able to confirm any of the outside claims of voter fraud that I was asked to look at,” he said. “Every fraud claim I was asked to investigate was false.”

...

Federal records show the Trump 2020 campaign paid Block’s firm more than $750,000 in six payments. The first, for $390,000, came three days after the election, records show, and the final payment came around Thanksgiving of that year. The payments were labeled “Recount.”

Separately, prosecutors have interviewed multiple employees from the Berkeley Research Group in recent weeks, another Trump-paid firm that produced a 29-page report ultimately undermining many of Trump’s fraud claims, according to three people familiar with the matter. Berkeley’s study contradicted claims made by Trump and his advisers that there were extensive numbers of dead voters and cases of fraud in states such as Georgia and Nevada....
Click to expand...


And actually it is 3 firms as Cyber Ninja's also found no fraud and determined that Bidens margin of win should have been bigger.
 
Jarod said:
Her confidence is entertaining as she spouts ignorance.
Click to expand...

As long as you know she's nothin but a far right wing troll spreading far right wing bullshit, then she can be very entertaining as she flails and panics over her king trump sinking into the abyss.

flea.gif
 
Mr.Badguy said:
If Trump thought he could prove fraud, why go with a fake electors scheme, why try to make Jeffery Clark AG so he could overturn the results? Both of these go beyond the scope of challenging results. Imagine how you'd feel if a Democrat did either of those things
.
Click to expand...

Alternate elector slates are precedent in this nation.

JFK used them in 1960

1960: Hawaii Sends Two Slates to Electoral College > Hawaii Free Press

And Al Gore used them in 2000.

The Biden Regime is attempting to criminalize customary and normal actions in order to tamper with the 2024 election.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
You sure Trump was the one who did the fake electors?

That is something Smith is going to have to prove and since he had no direct hand in it that will be tough.

Smith will need one of the people that did organize to prove that they were doing it under orders from Trump.

Smith also needs to show that they had specific intent to vote for Trump regardless, again, another very difficult thing to prove in a court of law.
Click to expand...

Alternate slates of electors are normal and customary under US law in a contested state. JFK and Al Gore both used them with the blessing of the high court.

What the Biden Regime is doing in attempting to criminalize common acts is outrageous - and treasonous.
 
Jarod said:
Her confidence is entertaining as she spouts ignorance.
Click to expand...

She is Marjorie Greene or Lauren Boebert.

Greene brags how she gets in rooms with top government advisors who are subject matter on defense and other topics and how she calls them all liars and tells them they are wrong.

I cannot fathom, working to get to the top of your field, gaining a life time of experience and being hired to make your case on your views and having to deal with Greene or Tinker speaking as if an authority on topics they know nothing about but are so convinced they are right.

Even here you can see Tinker handwaving away advise of all WH advisors combined as if meaningless.
 
Joe Capitalist said:
As long as you know she's nothin but a far right wing troll spreading far right wing bullshit, then she can be very entertaining as she flails and panics over her king trump sinking into the abyss.

flea.gif
Click to expand...

I think she is my fav MAGA.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Ever since the Orange Oaf lost the 2020 election to Uncle Joe, the mantra of his sycophants in the GOP, the right wing media and the MAGA crowds of registered Republicans has been that there was definite disparities (if not outright criminal activity) in the vote counting. Now for all this time the general public has been given a rehash of the "official" rulings that the Oaf and his minions were/are dead wrong, and that the 2020 election was secure. But reality and facts don't serve the Oaf and his MAGA cult well, so they just keep repeating such.

Now what caught my eye/ears this morning was a CBS interview with the Oaf's created/appointed security chief for just such a situation....a man he immediately fired when told that the election was secure and he lost fair & square.

Why this man's story has not been repeated loud and often is troubling, because in my opinion it would help silence a lot of MAGA mooks and make them look foolish in the eyes of "undecided" voters. Here's the story, judge for yourself:

Transcript: Chris Krebs on "Face the Nation"


MAJOR GARRETT : Welcome back, up now CBS News cybersecurity expert and analyst Chris Krebs, who as head of CISA, we'll get into what that means in a second, announced soon after the 2020 election that it was the, quote, 'most secure election in history.' The former president disagreed and memorably to Chris, fired him. Chris, it's good to see you.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/transcript-chris-krebs-on-face-the-nation/ar-AA1eROkg
Click to expand...

If God Himself descended upon Earth and declared the Big Lie was a big lie the MAGA militia still wouldn’t believe it unless their Messiah admitted such, all the facts in the world don’t make a difference
 
QP! said:
You seem to think advisors have no value and that is false.

A POTUS is expected to hand pick and surround himself with advisors because he thinks they are amongst the most competent in the world in their various areas of expertise. Or that they have common sense he can rely upon.


If ALL your hand picked advisors say 'NO' and you instead go with 'yes' and yes turns out to be wrong and illegal, you better be able to demonstrate a good reason for going with yes or a jury can and will find 'you should have known', and find you guilty.
Click to expand...

All of his handpicked advisors didn't say no.

Some said yes.

They are there, like you said, to lend expertise mostly in their areas and although the president may ask them for advice on other things he doesn't need to take it.

He may decide they were wrong.

So ultimately it doesn't matter what his advisors told him.

There is nothing illegal about this whatsoever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top