Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Now Trump's claiming anti-Trump 'voter fraud' in three states. Our president-elect is unhinged.

By Hunter  
Sunday Nov 27, 2016 · 7:55 PM EST
Doubling down on his earlier post-truth tweet declaring that he would have won the popular vote if it weren’t for “millions of people who voted illegally”—a false claim making the rounds on internet conspiracy and hoax sites and nowhere else—Trump took to Twitter again this evening to promote the entirely false theory that there was “serious voter fraud” in three states that voted against him.

 Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
Serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California - so why isn't the media reporting on this? Serious bias - big problem!
7:31 PM - 27 Nov 2016
  13,588 13,588 Retweets   40,514 40,514 likes
There are two possibilities here. One, the president-elect is getting his news from conspiracy nuts and/or conspiracy websites even as he refuses to sit for classified intelligence briefings. Two, the president-elect is an unapologetic liar who is announcing crooked information that he indeed knows is crooked—a naked, post-truth propaganda attempt.

There is no choice three.

In either case he is plainly unfit for the office he’s about to hold. And that is a big, big problem.

Read more

Donald Trump: 'I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally'

By Hunter
Sunday Nov 27, 2016 · 4:15 PM EST

Donald Trump, president-elect, is now seeking to delegitimize those that voted against him by declaring that they must be “illegal.” This is known as spreading fake news.

 Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally
3:30 PM - 27 Nov 2016
  18,375 18,375 Retweets   49,505 49,505 likes
For the record, he's lying. It's total crap—a hoax. The "millions of illegal votes" garbage is a conspiracy theory started by one conservative guy who posted it on Twitter, did not bother to back it up, and who has not presented even the tiniest shred of "evidence" for his "theory" since. Some Guy said it on Twitter, and a conspiracy theory was born in the far-right that now President-Elect Dumbass is citing from his bully pulpit because, apparently, his advisers are all steaming idiots and his constant need for adulation can't stomach the idea that most of America voted against him.

All right then, Donald, you're rich and you're powerful: Prove it. Prove the illegal votes. C'mon, you pathetic whiner. You couldn't prove your birtherism. You couldn't prove your own income.

It sounds like what we need here is a recount to check whether there are, indeed, millions of "illegal" votes. C'mon, you gigantic coward—surely this is an effort you're willing to pony up a few of your Donald Bucks for?

Why traditional media failed so badly in 2016 election, and why they're still failing

By Sher Watts Spooner
Sunday Nov 27, 2016 · 2:15 PM EST

The election was horrible, the coverage was worse, and the outcome was unbelievable. Yet here we are, soon after being served up an orange turkey on a Thanksgiving platter, and the traditional media still haven’t learned their lesson.

We waded through nonstop screaming coverage of Hillary Clinton’s emails on every channel and every inch of print. Yet there was so little coverage of Donald Trump’s coming conflicts of interest, his fraudulent practices at Trump University, and his pay-to-play dealings with the Trump Foundation that the average voter would react with a shrug and a big, “Huh? Never heard of it.”

Media Matters has a rundown of how the news media avoided reporting on Trump’s conflicts of interest before the election. Even now, there are scant stories outside of left-leaning blogs and small mention in traditional media about the obvious ways Trump and the Trump offspring are already profiting off his new status as scammer-in-chief. Trump tweets that only the “crooked media” think there’s a problem with his set-up.

There is growing normalization of the extremist positions taken by those with possible appointments in a Trump administration and of his supporters. A Los Angeles Times story about a white nationalists’ meeting in Washington after the election referred to the group as a “think tank” (this used to be referred to as “propaganda,” but I guess now it’s a “think tank”). A video of these neo-Nazis giving a straight-arm Hitler salute was too dramatic to be ignored, so it got more coverage.

Trump summoned about 40 major television media players to Trump Tower for an off-the-record meeting (nothing wrong with that; Obama sometimes did the same thing), but they got played again. Leaks (no doubt from Trumpland to show what a “real man” he is) reported that he screamed that they were all liars, deceitful, and corrupt. Even worse, they run unflattering photos that made him look fat! (Do we need to point out that Trump has not had an actual press conference since July, which Hillary Clinton was excoriated for repeatedly during the election?) Now Trumpland is claiming that the meeting was “substantive.” There was also an on-again, off-again, on-again meeting with The New York Times.

This problem is about more than just corporate ownership of newspapers and television networks. We won’t soon forget that statement from CBS CEO Les Moonves about overplaying Donald Trump: “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.” We won’t forget the $2 billion in free media coverage, just to increase clicks and eyeballs.

No, what’s worse is that it’s lazy journalism that adheres to group-think. Media are still going out of their way to avoid being labeled “liberal.” Instead of election coverage worth reading or listening to, we got pablum and drivel, with constant updates about poll numbers and horserace coverage. And I fear it’s not going to get any better anytime soon.

Read more

NEW REPORT: Astonishing Recounts From Wisconsin May Restore Your Faith In Humanity (VIDEO)

By Elisabeth Parker - November 26, 2016
Share on Facebook Tweet on Twitter

Wisconsin has barely begun their vote recount as requested by the Green Party’s Jill Stein. Experts insist this effort is unlikely to change the election results. Yet hope springs eternal, and Donald Trump’s narrow margin of victory has already shrunk by 5,000 votes.

How? The Palmer Report explains that the president-elect allegedly won the state of Wisconsin with 1,409,467 votes to Hillary Clinton’s 1,382,210. This gave him a razor-thin margin of 27,257 votes, now revised downward to an even slimmer 22,525 votes. Officials in one county alone found that at least three precincts had counted more votes than had actually been cast. And all those extra votes went to Donald Trump.

22 Nov
 Suzan Eraslan @SuzanEraslan
Thread: with at least 1 county showing 3 different precincts with more votes tabulated for President than ballots cast, #AuditTheVote.
 Suzan Eraslan @SuzanEraslan
The numbers display that in 3 precincts in Outagamie County, all won by DT, more votes were counted for President than cast. #AuditTheVote
9:49 AM - 22 Nov 2016 · Virginia, USA

The Palmer Report explains how these wards in Outagamie County had mysteriously padded Donald Trump’s lead by 18 percent.

‘Even ahead of the forthcoming recount in Wisconsin, Donald Trump’s lead has already shrunk to just 22,525 votes. That means 18% of his “lead” has already vanished, based on precincts catching some of their own incorrect numbers, and internet gawkers catching others.’

But here’s the strange thing, Donald Trump’s numbers got bumped up, while Hillary Clinton’s have barely budged in either direction.

‘But the second thing that jumps out is that the revisions have served to erase thousands of votes from Trump, while affirming that Clinton’s vote total was essentially correct to begin with.’

WBAY added that Outagamie County Clerk Lori O’Bright blamed the bizarre numbers on “human error” and explained that they’re now revising their totals with members of both major parties present.

‘The canvass is conducted by county clerks throughout the state. We are on the partisan ticket so our canvass also has to have a member of the opposite party on the canvass, along with another member. So, it is reviewed as fairly as possible.’

Will the Wisconsin vote recount change anything?

Voters are fuming as Donald Trump swaggers about as though he’s won a mandate while Hillary Clinton’s lead with the popular vote surges past 2 million. Yet hopes are rising in the face of mounting evidence that the election in three key swing states — Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania — may have been stolen.

All three of these contested states would have to break for Clinton in order for her to win.

Wisconsin has 10 electors, Michigan has 16 electors and Pennsylvania  has 20. All three states broke for Trump this year despite the fact that they’ve reliably voted blue in all the previous elections since 1988. In Michigan, Donald Trump also won by a slim margin of only 10,0704 votes. Pennsylvania has the highest hurdle for those hoping this vote recount can replace Donald Trump with Hillary Clinton. He won the Keystone state by 70,368 votes.

A group described by New York Magazine as “prominent computer scientists and election lawyers” have urged Hillary Clinton to request vote recounts in these three states. After all, Russian hackers have already proven themselves to be a direct threat to the U.S. election system.

‘Last Thursday, the activists held a conference call with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and campaign general counsel Marc Elias to make their case, according to a source briefed on the call.’

Candidates can request vote recounts, but states can require them to cover the staggering costs. Election officials estimate the effort in Wisconsin alone may cost up to $1 million. The Clinton campaign remained eerily silent last week, but the Green Party’s Jill Stein stepped up to the plate and raised $5.2 million in less than two days. On Sunday, Team Clinton finally announced that they would lend their efforts to the recount.

Experts and journalists insist Jill Stein’s vote recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania won’t change the outcome of the 2016 race. Even J. Alex Halderman, a computer science professor at University of Michigan and one of the experts who urged the Clinton campaign to demand a recount, cautions that he doesn’t think Russians or the GOP hacked the ballots. But, he adds, there’s only one way to know for sure.

‘The only way to know whether a cyberattack changed the result is to closely examine the available physical evidence?—?paper ballots and voting equipment in critical states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.‘

But despite these “expert” opinions, the recount has barely begun and Donald Trump’s victory has already shrunk by 5,000 in the hotly-contested state of Wisconsin.

Regardless of the outcome, at least we’ll likely have the comfort of knowing fewer of our fellow Americans voted for a racist, LGBT-hating, anti-Muslim, Jew-baiting misogynist than we’d thought.

Read more

Re-post of a favorite: The burden of proof lies with the believer...

Re-post of a favorite: We all win if we can depend on one another.

Five OBG cartoons from 2007

Meanwhile, in the religious world

Reviewing the Republican/Conservative mindset

Social injustice

Just one cost of our loose gun policies

You want the guns? You can't handle the guns! GunFail!