@freemo oh because republicans literally impeached over a blowjob but seems to be totally fine with encouraging a coup,

@louiscouture Not true.. they impeached because a president lied, under oath, and in court... thats pretty serious. The fact that he used his position to take advantage of a woman isnt the best but it is not what he was impeached over.

Trump on the other hand never planned or asked anyone to do a coup. The moment any violence broke out he immediately was on TV asking everyone to go home and asking for there to be no violence.. he did not start, encourage, or perpetuate a coup.

Now what Trump was legitimately guilty of was being a fucking nut job conspiracy theorist and spreading that bullshit and others believed him... Which is totally legitimate to dislike Trump for that, but it is hardly illegal.

@freemo this is false https://www.businessinsider.com/how-trump-in-final-weeks-incited-his-followers-to-storm-the-capitol-2021-1?op=1

@louiscouture I've read this before.. does not disprove a single thing i just said.

@freemo it’s pretty obvious so I don’t know why you say this

@freemo

@louiscouture Not sure how any of that even remote supports your point.. those words and those instructions have been given countless time sto countless crowds in similar political protests.. marching on the capitol and "fighting for our rights" is a very common motif and never once represented someone intentionally inciting a coup.

@freemo no other president ever said “fight, don’t concede” The context clearly shows that he’s trying to incite them

@louiscouture actually several have, in fact i had this conversation just a week or two ago and found quotes of both kamala and biden using very similar wording in the past.

@freemo not in this context.

Clinton conceded

Romney conceded

McCain conceded

Gore conceded

Trump never conceded

@louiscouture @freemo We never got any meaningful answers to the elections from the courts. None. Many dismissed cases on standing, latches or procedural grounds. Wisconsin took a case, but decided it without arguments, ruling they had standing but didn't see merits. Thrown in there were idiots and morons like Wood and Powell with their terrible suits with massive issues; right next to well researched suits like the one out of Texas.

What are the people to do when the system designed to give relief fails utterly and completely?

@djsumdog @freemo when one side doesn’t have a valid case, it’s normal that the courts don’t want to hear.

@louiscouture

Agreed, Trump's lack of evidence means he wont get a court case heard in many circumstances, thats normal and the appropriate response.

Also many courts **did** take his case and he still lost.. so its moot either way.

@djsumdog

@freemo @louiscouture I disagree especially in the State Farm Arena. Observers were removed and counting continued. The pipe/water break never happened. They did image recounts instead of hand recounts at first. They never did a meaningful canvas. They never did signature checks on the recounts. There were tons of dead people and double votes under maiden names.

Observers were removed in Nevada, Philadelphia, and kept away at a distance so far they couldn't challenge any ballots.

Did Trump win or loose? Who the fuck knows. It's impossible to know when you dump hundreds of thousands of unsolicited mail-in ballots into the system.

Does Trump talk like an idiot? Sure, he's annoying to listen to. Should he have fought? Absolutely. The election irregularities were massive.

Election fraud is always difficult to prove. That's why they did it.

It doesn't matter what you believe about it; this is the most contentious election in recent American history. We've had worse of course. We've had a president elected without the popular or electoral vote. But it's the most significant one from our lifetimes.

That causes instability and a loss of confidence. If Biden was so sure of his 80m vote victory, why is there a military occupation in DC and why is he questioning the loyalty of military officers? That is not a sign of confidence. That's fear.

@djsumdog

We can go through each of those points one by one.. each are pretty trivially debunked with a little research.

For example in philadelphia, observers were allowed in all the places the law allows them to be (and have been allowed in previous elections). The argument made is that they were denied access to certain areas where poll watchers are and always have been explicitly denied access to.. so whats the legal argument there your trying to make at all? Where is the unfairness.. it was handled exactly as it was supposed to be.

@louiscouture

@freemo @louiscouture

Poll worker denied access in Nevada: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X2V5hPPp6w

In Detroit, they cheered when they removed GOP Observers: https://twitter.com/aricnesbitt/status/1324105401814626304

I covered a lot of this back in November: https://battlepenguin.com/politics/the-return-of-american-corruption/

How exactly do you "debunk" the counting continuing after the "pipe burst" in Fulton Co?

@djsumdog

Whats to debunk, we know what happened quite well, the pipe burst, **part** of the building was evacuated. The part where they were counting the ballots wasnt effected and the ballot counting continued after the pipe break, which occured in a different area of the building.

Whats even to debunk, there is literally no evidence anything other than what i just recited occured.

@louiscouture

@freemo @louiscouture There is literally no evidence what so ever of a pipe burst. They are on video counting afterwards with no observers called back in. Why would you NOT question this?

@djsumdog

Bullshit, many cases were heard, the courts gave very clear answers. In some situations courts of course didnt hear cases, largely because **there was no evidence**... The courts responded exactly how they should have, Trump was wrong, dead wrong, and he had no evidence. There is nothing wrong with how the courts responded.

I am not and never would argue Trumps stance was right, it wasn't, he lost and he was a pathetic sore loser who couldn't handle that. But it is still laughable to claim he intentionally started a coup.

@louiscouture

@louiscouture

Yes they did, and yes Trump didnt.. at best that allows you to say Trump is a sore loser, and I would agree with you on that. You can also say he is a conspiracy theorist, I would also agree with you on that. But none of that makes your earlier statement true. Thinking you lost an election unfairly (and being wrong about it) and wanting to fight to right that perceived wrong, through the courts, through protests, through government action, is all fine, it doesnt make you the master mind behind a coup, it just makes him an idiot.

@freemo there is nothing wrong with thinking the election was unfair, but inciting violence is clearly not.

Watch the video

We’re gonna walk to the capitol, and I’m coming with you

https://m.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/just-security-video-capitol-incitement-evidence-trump_n_600f8401c5b604d2cc864c98?ri18n=true

@louiscouture he did not "incite violence".. again walking to the capitol is a pretty standard protest tactic.. the million man march marched on the capitol too. The idea of marching on the capitol in protest is a **very** common motif so your arguments are really really weak, these exact words have been said a hundred times over from a hundred different politicians in similar settings.

@louiscouture @freemo >Clinton conceded


🙄 still hasn't.

@louiscouture it also is a horrifically inaccurate account (to be expected considering the source which is pretty bias)... but thats another matter.

@freemo ok so now that’s fake news too?

@louiscouture I wouldnt use the term Fake News.. discredited for sure though. It is clear their intention is not an objective analysis of both sides.. it is pretty obvious by the wording and context the intention is to sell a particular political perspective... is that not even obvious to you? seems pretty obvious to me, you just happen to agree with that agenda, but you suddenly become blind to the bias just because the bias is the same as yours?

@freemo ok,

1) what’s the agenda, where is the agenda? Trump lost and Biden won and there was next to no voter fraud, and if there was, it wouldn’t change the outcome.

2) Facts aren’t opinions, you don’t have two side of the same fact.

@louiscouture

> what’s the agenda, where is the agenda?

What do youmean where is the agenda. Its literally right in the **title**

> ...of how Trump incited...

The very title says "We have decided that Trump is guilty of inciting a coup and here are all the reasons you should agree with our agenda to sell that perspective.

Any news agency that had even a smidgen of journalistic integrity would not be telling you how to interpret the days events they would simply give an unbiased accounted of what happened, both supporting and contradicting any such agenda, and let the reader decide what conclusions to draw.

The article has no intention of doing that, they have a very clear agenda and the article is cherry picked and written to try to support that agenda, so very clear bias. Not a single mention of any counter points that might lead someone to disagree. That is **not** journalism.

> Trump lost and Biden won and there was next to no voter fraud, and if there was, it wouldn’t change the outcome.

Yes he did... your point?

> Facts aren’t opinions, you don’t have two side of the same fact.

What someone deems to be a fact (true) or not **is** a matter of opinion.. your opinion is that trump tried to incite a coup, you have the **opinion** that that is a fact. I am of the opinion he did not try to start a coup, I declare that him intentionally inciting a coup is **not** a fact.

There may be only one of those two facts which are true, but your opinion as to which of them that they are, and my opinion are still opinions. Saying "Facts dont care about your opinions" is a pretty dumb argument considering as it doesnt do anything to help support that your opinion of what is fact is any more valid than mine.

There's evidence of voter fraud, but it's proven that the election was rigged. Silican Valley engaged in a massive disinfo campaign, Democrats and others changed election laws illegally, illegitimate voting methods were used, and I'm sure there's more. Had Trump did that, there would have been massive riots over it, not just some lecturn being stolen and some broken glass.
@louiscouture @freemo

@wishgranter14

not really.. yes there is a lot of disinformation, and that disinformation poured in from both sides, so neither gets to play the good guy in that respect, though I admit liberals are a bit more guilty of that the last 4 years, but when a democrat president is in the republicans are the more guilty party in that regard.. either way both sides did it in spades.

There were virtually no illegal election changes. All changes were perfectly legal except for one that I know of which effected about a dozen votes total and didnt appear to be an attempt at rigging an election so much as just a poorly constructed law that was overthrown. For the most part there is no evidence to back up your stance in any meaningful way.

@louiscouture

Google vomited a steady stream of garbage news from news.google.com. Everyday it was bullshit articles about how Trump's hair was unpresidential and other garbage like that, with ZERO actual news. I'm not on facebook and twitter, but they openly admitted they were doing the same thing. By supressing news favorable to Trump, and promoting anti-Trump news, they created an information bubble. Yea, it wasn't literal "fake news" per se, but it might as well have been. It was akin to having someone screaming bullshit in your ear when you're trying to read in the library. This is unlike pizzagate and other conspiracies, because these did not have the backing of the inner mechanisms of the internet. I can shitpost pizzagate crap 24/7 as an individual, but that's not the same thing as removing likes/view from videos that promote Trump or anti-Joe youtube videos or news articles or alter the algorithm so that I get only anti-Trump/pro-Dem search results. Which is a whole other level of information manipulation.

Election laws were illegally changed to allow for votes to be counted without signature checks, by getting judges to change them, instead of going through the state legislature. This is illegal under the Pennsylvania Constitution, and I'm sure the same for Georgia too.

Mail-in ballots is an illegitimate method voting based on the fact that it cannot be cast anonymously.

Theses illegal and unethical things affected 100s of thousands, probably millions of votes in Joe's favor.
@freemo @louiscouture

@wishgranter14

I agree, the news had shitposted like crazy trying to destroy trump and exaggerate every nonsense thing.. but the republican news does the **exact** same thing. The issue here is that the democrats just happened to do it better, and it won them an election. I am not saying that is ok, its completely unacceptable. But the republicans should have thought of that and not acted the same way and then maybe they would come out smelling like roses.

Instead as far as I can see it both sides have been completely bat shit crazy slinging shit for over a decade and the liberals just happened to out exaggerate the right and won. Yea its wrong, yea it should get the democrats abolished, but it should also get the republicans abolished for doing the same thing, they dont get a free pass just cause they did a shittier job at it.

> Election laws were illegally changed to allow for votes to be counted without signature checks, by getting judges to change them, instead of going through the state legislature. This is illegal under the Pennsylvania Constitution, and I'm sure the same for Georgia too.

You will have to site the specific examples if you want to discuss this point. I have reviewed a shit ton of law changes on this topic and have yet to find one that is illegal and effected any significant number of votes.

> Mail-in ballots is an illegitimate method voting based on the fact that it cannot be cast anonymously.

Wait what, no votes are cast anonymously, including mail in ballots. Which have been a legitimate form of voting for multiple elections now. They were used and legal when Trump won too, why were you up in arms about it then, you had 4 years to get it changed before Trump lost, after which any such efforts are too little too late.

@louiscouture

Republicans do not control the infrastructure of the internet. Google does.

Republicans do not control who gets banned/shadowbanned on Twitter/Facebook, nor do they control what gets trending and what doesn't. Jack and Mark do.

Same with Youtube. Google controls what get trending, it suppresses and alters view count and likes to skew its own algorithm. In this way, it suppresses content they deem wrongthink.

This is entirely different than a co-ordinated group of Republicans, or leftists for that matter, organizing together on a hashtag "campaign" or whatever social media campaign.

This explains how they changed the signature verification in pennsylvania illegally: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/12/07/levin_why_pennsylvania_mail-in-ballot_changes_are_unconstitutional.html

>no votes are cast anonymously
No, you're wrong. In a traditional lever machine voting booths, they are cast in secret. It's the same with the scanning machines. Your vote is literally anonymous. There is no way to determine who voted for who, although there are methods to determine whether you voted or not. (I mean, if you voted at the physical polling station) A secret ballot is crucial to a free and fair election. Otherwise, you can be extorted, votes can be bought, etc. You cannot cast a mail-in ballot in secret, therefor it is an illegitimate method of voting.
@freemo @louiscouture

@wishgranter14 @freemo hey nobody is forcing you to use google. There are plenty of alternative such as DuckDuckGo.

@louiscouture
Google has a de facto monopoly. ddg is just a cope
@freemo

@louiscouture @freemo

endless lies from the liberal press

while actually doing what they project onto others

a cognitive defect that disqualifies them from holding power

and for which it must be forcibly taken from them

@EMPEROR

Thats all well and good, but you better take it away from the conservatives two then. Both groups are guilty of that. It isnt an excuse for how the liberals act mind you, but if it means actually abolishing them then the republicans need to be right up there on the chopper with them.

@louiscouture

@freemo @louiscouture

yes, any group that typically acts like that must be shorn of power

justifying antifa and blm thuggery disqualifies them or anyone

if we see the right doing that, as they will in some cases, then the same applies

@EMPEROR glad we agree both the republicans and the democrats should be abolished.. sounds good to me.