I don’t watch that garbage. I don’t respect either men especially not Zuckerberg so no, I won’t be watching it.
I’ve got to run, so I’ll try to circle back to your comments later. In the meantime, twice more with passion — the U.S. Constitution and our justice system is not a belief-based institution, it is an evidence-based institution. So I don’t care what Trump “believed”, he was 100% wrong to double down on false claims that had all been rejected by the courts. That’s the game. The courts are your only recourse, not your personal beliefs. Once the courts reject your claims, your beliefs are worth nothing whatsoever. And a sitting president should very fucking well know that 
Or are you saying that, if Biden loses in 2024, all he needs to do is say “I believe I actually won, and therefore will send my own fake electors to congress and instruct Kamala to declare me winner.” After all, all that matters is what you believe, not what you can actually prove!
" But exactly the same question turns back on you. How would you know if you don’t look through the same sources that I do, test the same assumptions that I test?"
Easy: DUE PROCESS. If Trump had won any of those court cases, I’d take his “beliefs” more seriously. But he didn’t, because the evidence simply isn’t there, despite his continued doubling-down on the self-serving lies that are being fed to him.
I’ll one-up this: If I believe the FBI is corrupt and violating the contitution, am I not honor bound by several oaths to take up arms against the FBI (all enemies, foreign and domestic). If that is my belief, then you are saying that it is all ok and I’m good to run for President, regardless of if it is against the law and I should not even be investigated for any crimes for things that I believe to be true?
@steljarkos
The system is broken, and it’s the Democrats who finally broke it. A broken system is one that can no longer be trusted.
I noted it in my twitter feed earlier today. Not surprised at all. It’s how they work. Just business as usual.
Sounds like another belief-based narrative that is being used to support Trump’s own belief-based narrative. Very convenient, wouldn’t you say, that there are no authorities whatsoever who could possibly hold Trump accountable for his corruption? This path only leads to total nihilism, where beliefs and narratives easily outweigh due process, and anyone can say anything at all, as long as you get enough people to “believe”. How do you do that? Never apologize, always double down. IOW, reality distortion field.
So the individual judges who laughed Trump’s “evidence” out of court — a great many of them (most of them?) were appointed by Trump himself. All of them have been “broken” by democrats? Basically, anyone who says anything bad about Trump cannot be trusted? Also very convenient.
Fortunately I believe we are backing off the precipice and the majority are either backing off from Trump or doubling down, getting more extremist, committing a crime and going to jail. This further increases the majority margin who do not want Trump 47.
A part of me hopes that Trump gets indicted for Jan 6. This will give him the right of Discovery… the right to revisit old evidence and uncover new evidence that once and for all proves electoral fraud. Thank you Dinesh D’Souza for re-opening the controversy with 2000 Mules.
lol good luck. The last thing Trump wants is old evidence uncovered, lol. That’s why he’s pleading the fifth.
But also by way of exploration, it profits @steljarkos monetarily to stoke these fires in Trump supporters while he himself does not actuall take any substantive action. Others will read his opinions on his twitter and see it as the validation they need to load their guns with ammo and charge into their local FBI office with guns blazing - while he sits back laughing all the way to the bank.
A part of me hopes that Trump gets indicted for Jan 6.
There’s the shared reality I was looking for, regardless of the fact that I think it will very clearly prove Trump to be a fraud who attempted to directly undermine the same Constitution his supporters claim to defend, and you think it will exonerate him. I’m guessing you haven’t been watching any of the Jan 6 hearings, though, and hearing his own team testifying against him? If so, you would have definitely heard of the fake electors plot, which is definitionally an attempted. coup.
Dinesh D’Souza
Ah, known and convicted liar/propagandist Dinesh D’Souza, whose “2000 Mules” claims were even laughed and sneered at by William Barr himself. Good luck with all that 
Yeah, about that …
You guys still don’t get it. The system is broken. Everybody is a clown in Clown Culture.
Yes, Trump culture is Clown Culture and therefore every Trump Supporter and conspiracy theorist is a clown
Hey Ray,
I’m “in the business” and VERY familiar with Mobile Ad ID at the device, network, data analysis and use case levels for both individuals and statistically. What was shown in 2000 Mules is a very basic use case with extremely high accuracy. Simple stuff for True the Vote to do.
Data does not mean 1 interpretation of data is correct if there is more than one interpretation. What about the alternative explanations for the data?
If a person is in the same location 10 times in a day - is there only one explanation?
In which case, Donald Trump is the reincarnation of P.T. Barnum 
All alternative explanations I’ve seen are similar to Barr’s - “I don’t think it shows anything.” I haven’t seen anyone show that True the Vote is “inaccurate”.
You didn’t watch 2000 Mules, did you? (you’re “just sayin”, just like Corey - LOL).
Anyway, here’s nuts and bolts:
- MAID locations are built based on GPS, IP addresses (cell tower data paths, your home and work broadbands), public scans of WiFi networks (yours, your neighbors, the gas station, Walmart - they are ALL in the database)
- MAID’s are “technically” anonymous. MAID is a token assigned to your phone, not your identity, that Apple and Google do not “share” directly.
- MAID’s in practice are not anonymous. So your MAID assigned to your iPhone is anonymous, BUT I can purchase data on EVERYWHERE your phone is every minute of every day. So, when your phone spends every night at 123 Sesame Street, it’s an extremely high accuracy “guess” that this MAID is assigned to Ray Bennett. Then add in that your MAID spends M-F 9-5 at 321 Clown Show Drive, you have another validation point on Ray Bennett. So you’re a member of the Gender Fluid Church of Gettin’ Some and corroborate that said MAID spends every Wednesday at GGCGS. Accuracy increased. Note that who resides at your home address is a simple public record search and likely the same for your work location.
- MAIDs not only show location, but also “dwell time”
- So now a Data customer like True the Vote, Proctor and Gamble, Crown Castle, Local/State/Federal Agencies purchase these data sets.
So now what? Here’s an example that I have 1st hand knowledge of. In a major Canadian city, the Ritz Carlton wanted to lure Four Seasons customers to their hotels. So RC purchased MAID data sets for the last 6 months of conventions when room rates were high. RC then back tracked EVERY SINGLE MAID to the airport (as well as drivers), then mapped every incoming flight origination, then bought MAID data sets for likely outbound flight origination points. Ok - it’s all “statistical” right. But this isn’t hard.
RC then tracked EVERY MAID in the flight origination city back to the travelers home address - where they spend the night.
So at this point, RC knows every travelers HOME ADDRESS.
They then barrage with mailing offers to stay at RC next time they go to Toronto.
Since they know what Convention you attended (highly like sense room rates are sky high during the conventions), they have a really good idea that as a Integral Sociologist, you’re likely to attend the Integral Pathologist convention on Sept 3rd so guess what you receive in the mail. Yup - a $200 spa voucher for the next conference.
My point here is that you can say “it’s anonymous” or “it’s statistical data”, but that’s like saying you “might” misidentify your daughter in the airport when you’re waiting to pick her up. You could, but you’ve got a 99.999% chance of identifying here.
What True the Vote did is track MAIDs from Zuckerberg/Chan funded NGO’s that made 20 or more trips from the NGO to a drop box location.
True the Vote’s “filter” of 20 more drop box visits AND to at least 5 different drop boxes AND a trip to a Democratic NGO is hardly “coincidental”. If they had set the bar at 1 drop boxes, then sure it’s suspect. Or if they didn’t combine the NGO’s with the 20 drop box visits, maybe it’s suspect.
True the Vote also FOIA’ed what surveillance data they could get showing the same women and men making multiple drop offs of handfuls of ballots.
Knowing what I know, the True the Vote work set very high filters on # of drops with multiple conditions which makes their analysis extremely accurate and reliable.
Are you surprised that I didn’t watch an obvious and widely-debunked propaganda hit piece produced by a known felon who himself committed fraud by knowingly making illegal campaign contributions in other people’s name? One of the few times I’ll say, I’ll just trust William Barr’s opinion on this
But I get it — we have to maintain that plausible deniability that Trump’s attempted overthrow of the Constitution was a perfectly reasonable thing for a President to do, evidence and court rulings be damned!
What a political Wag.
Like “wag the dog”? I am not sure what you mean here.
But these are basically the stakes, right? Trump attempted to overthrow the result of the 2020 election, resulting in the first non-peaceful transfer of power in modern history. This is an undeniable fact.
Which means that either:
a) he was justified in doing so, based on empirical evidence,
or
b) he was not justified in doing so, which means his actions were in violation of both the spirit and the letter of Constitutional law.
Which means, if you personally or your tribe don’t want to view Trump as criminal, then you have no choice but to find some reason why his actions were justified. And you know deep down that simply “believing” an election was stolen without objective evidence presented to the courts in no way meets that bar.