The money question is, given that deaths have been rising in an almost constant fashion for the last 10 years, why did the CDC expect deaths to go down? On what was that based? Would be nice if they just told us these things because it's damn hard to even track down all cause deaths for the last 10 years.
It's time for many of you people to grow up. I'm probably older than almost everyone on this site and this beating up on Trump is disgusting.
This man gave up everything he had, worked on average of 20 hours a day for 4 years, against both national parties, the media, the elites, and every other institution in this country and yet still accomplished more in one term than any two term president in my lifetime (which again, is longer than almost everyone's here--judging by the lack of grammar and clarity of thought).
He then had to fight off the most systematic election fraud in US history, under extreme time pressure, and with no court even giving him the simple justice of reviewing the evidence of his case. And still he fought on.
He called for people to come to DC because he thought he had a chance to use that spectacle to persuade Congress and his own VP to take unprecedented action when state legislators refused to do what the should have done in December.
Some hotheads allowed themselves to be carried along with Antifa idiots and a brave women is now dead. Those who went in really did nothing worse than what was done in Wisconsin years ago, but what should they have done? In a perfect world they'd have sat in the seats of the members quietly and refused to leave until justice was done, but that world doesn't exist, especially with the younger types.
So Trump played his awful hand for four years better than any of us could have hoped for; and yet that's not good enough for the keyboard warriors here. Every one of you has someone you love in your life (or you should have if you're normal) whose politics is the opposite of ours here. Would you really wish them dead in a real hot war? Would you be OK with them wishing that on you? This 'cross the Rubicon' stuff was always idiocy and if you thought Trump would really do that, you weren't listening to him. I've watched him longer than most of you have been alive and that's never been who he is, nor should it have been. Maybe some of you have nothing to lose, but lots of us are normal people with families, homes, children and the rest.
He's still alive; he's still viable; and as long as that's the case, we have to regroup and prepare for the next. What we should be focusing on, as some here are doing, is thinking how to make this hurt the establishment--before we send our children to fight and possibly die. Coordinated economic actions; leaving the GOP (a minimum). I'm with Rush--I wouldn't swear off all measures, but talk is cheap and I have too many family members who've seen war and labor camps and watched their loved ones on rail cars. If Poland can throw off the Soviet Union without a shot, we can take down the deep state without sacrificing a generation. Our enemies are not super human and they are not invincible.
Fight for Trump; follow Trump; have faith in the US your fellow patriots and Trump.
OK. You guys. Stop. The site is just a public record site. I inserted my name (I'm behind enemy lines). I came up too. It's not an arrest record site. It's got everyone who's ever done anything--owned a home; had a job, etc.
Check the portraits. In 2017 (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/spot-the-difference-oval-office-edition/538008/), the portrait on DJT's right was of Jefferson. In this photo it's of Lincoln.
When did that change?
I think the basic outline is sound, but I think the Insurrection Act is not the way it will go, nor is it the way it should go. That's too easily playing into their hands and would likely scare off some percentage of normies.
The way it might happen is this: He uses the EO to impound all Voting devices in the suspect states (and abroad if that's a thing) and all mail in and absentee ballots. He then, under the EO (citing the national security threat via the election) mandates a hard audit (with signature check) of all ballots and a complete audit of the hardware and software of all devices. These audits are to be done with full transparency and observers from both parties with real abilities to observe all actions (like, up close and personal).
He agrees to live with whatever the result is and challenges Biden to do the same. In the end, he (and the US) win, the traitors are exposed, the world has hopefully pivoted.
Here's a guess: It's an Equal Protection thing. In GA and MI, there are voter ID laws. If those in person had to submit ID but those voting by mail didn't, then there's an argument that those voters weren't treated equally--those who voted in person had a burden to meet that the others didn't. Or maybe that the threshold for identification of the the mail in ballots doesn't meet the standard required for Equal Protection.
Someone get this to the lawyers for Team Trump:
Their argument shouldn't be required to provide evidence of voter fraud; that's a fool's errand and the Ds know it. They should argue (with overwhelming support in the law) that once the vote counting was stopped in MI, WI, GA, and PA--FOR NO REASON THAT I'VE HEARD--that the presumption of a fair election is NO LONGER in force!
The presumption is now on the Ds to demonstrate that the election in those jurisdictions WAS fair! Because there is ample prima facie reason (in law both here and internationally) that a delay in the vote count is evidence of fraud.
They don't need to argue voter fraud--the Ds need to argue for fairness!
Let's see them do that!
Social scientists usually go with the 95% confidence level. With that, the poll has an error margin of around 4.4%. Still way too high, IF the sample was truly random. But of course it wasn't. BS poll as usual from BS people.