Is the Fat Lady clearing her throat?

Electoral college meets noon today in WI

Get ready to hate on Brian Hagedorn again. Joining the court’s three liberals, the WI Supreme Court by a 4 to 3 vote today (12-14-20) ruled that Biden/Harris won the election. It dismissed Trump’s challenge as too little and too late.

“The challenges raised by the Campaign in this case, however, come long after the last play or even the last game; the Campaign is challenging the rulebook adopted before the season began,” Hagedorn wrote.

Put another way, if the traffic sign reads 55 mph but local law says that street should be 35 mph, do you get penalized for the traffic department’s malfeasance? Do your votes get tossed because election officials erred?

What’s our next move, diehards? Choose one or all, mix and match, add yer own!

About David Blaska

Madison WI
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

88 Responses to Is the Fat Lady clearing her throat?

  1. Now that’s a poll that I took part in. Good job giving me the two options I could choose.

    Rebuild a working class, traditional values conservatism under the leadership of more congenial standard-bearer than the narcissistic Trump.

    Accept the reality that Biden/Harris won no matter how distasteful.

    I’m ready to move on.

    Like

    • Liberty says:

      I’d have no problem accepting that Harris/Biden won if I new it was legitimate. Like millions of Americans, I have serious questions about the integrity of the election.

      In light of the hundreds of sworn testimonies, data dumps, and statistical improbabilities, we should just move on, shut up, and accept it?

      Not me. I demand answers to my satisfaction.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Liberty wrote, “In light of the hundreds of sworn testimonies, data dumps, and statistical improbabilities, we should just move on, shut up, and accept it?”

        You’re reading things between the lines that are not there. That wasn’t one of the options Liberty, it was literally “Accept the reality that Biden/Harris won no matter how distasteful.”

        They should continue to investigate what happened in this election!

        Liked by 1 person

        • Alfred E Neuman says:

          Statistical improbabilities? None. Hundreds of sworn Testimonies? where. Data Dumps? of course there are data dumps, it’s an election, how else is the vote going to be tabulated?

          Like

        • Batman says:

          Steve,
          What bothers Batman about, “Accept the reality that Biden/Harris won no matter how distasteful” is that you are removing a very useful tool from the *resist these rat-bastards every step of the way* tool box. Delegitimizing these two fraudulently elected creeps should be one of the ongoing four year daggers that perpetually twists.

          Batman is wholly certain that every millimeter relinquished to the socialist’ strategy enforced by their brownshirt goons Antifa, the cancel culture, violent riots, all forms of vandalism/intimidation, road blockades, heckler’s veto, MSM propaganda, social media censorship, biased search engine algorithms, and student indoctrination, is lost ground to the remaking (notinagoodway) of the USA.

          Accepting these two halfwits as legitimately elected is just too many millimeters in the wrong direction, plus it’s fun to use loser Lefty tactics against them.

          And that’s a wrap!

          Liked by 1 person

      • Liberty says:

        “Statistical improbabilities? None. Hundreds of sworn Testimonies? where. Data Dumps? of course there are data dumps, it’s an election, how else is the vote going to be tabulated?”

        I addressed this NUMEROUS times. Not my fault you can’t read or that your TDS is so advanced you refuse to see past your own hatred.

        While you’re at it, answer the questions posed to you.

        Liked by 1 person

      • dad29 says:

        Liberty is correct. Girly-men give up and “move on.”

        As to this: Do your votes get tossed because election officials erred?

        Clever re-wording of reality!! Almost CNN-level!!

        Better phrased this way: Do you votes get tossed because election officials deliberately and maliciously allowed and encouraged fraud?

        WHOSE votes got tossed, Mr. “Conservative”?

        The answer: honest people’s votes were “tossed” by dishonest criminals masquerading as public servants.

        Then they got ex-journalists to cover for them with deceptive bumper-sticker questions.

        Like

    • Liberty says:

      If H/B are inaugurated, we will of course, have no choice but to “move on.” But if the left expects us to just unite and go along after what how they treated Trump & his supporters for four years, no thanks.

      I don’t negotiate with bullies, communists, and people who resort to violence when they don’t get their way.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Liberty wrote, “But if the left expects us to just unite and go along after what how they treated Trump & his supporters for four years, no thanks.”, “I don’t negotiate with bullies, communists, and people who resort to violence when they don’t get their way.”

        No one said that moving on requires anyone to stop the fight against that which you oppose.

        Like

        • Liberty says:

          We still have the problem of not trusting the election process.

          I don’t trust it, neither do millions of other Americans. How do you just move on from that and have faith that your vote will actually matter in future elections?

          It will also be more difficult to fight with Dems in full control. They WILL pack the courts, they WILL make it impossible for conservatives to gain control of either House (DC, PR), they WILL socialize us.

          And who’s stopping them? Media and big tech are on their side, as are the RINOs who drink from the same trough.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Again; no one said that moving on requires anyone to stop the fight against that which you oppose.

          Like

        • Alfred E Neuman says:

          No different then the right treated Obama and his supporters over the years, and you know it.

          Like

        • Alfred E Neuman wrote, “No different then the right treated Obama and his supporters over the years, and you know it.”

          You sir are a liar and a troll.

          Liked by 1 person

      • richard lesiak says:

        Bullies? Violence?? Like the rightwingers threatening election officials, Shooting at people in Washington, picking fights in DC, vandalizing churches in DC? Those bullies???

        Like

        • georgessson says:

          Richard, You’re so ignorant that I’m beginning to suspect yer stoopid, too. All those “people” you mention are actually the result of the Liberal press projecting all the previous vile disruptions by Progs. Not only did the national press never report the Trump administration fairly, they ignored 90% of the Left’s juvenile behavior. And on a local level right here in Madison -Didn’t you ever get tired of them silly & singing syncopants at the Capital each and every day? My Lord, Man ! Dreamin’ o’ buttocks has affected yer mental processes…

          Like

  2. Liberty says:

    “Rebuild a working class, traditional values conservatism under the leadership of more congenial standard-bearer than the narcissistic Trump.”

    How, exactly? With Biden’s loyalty to China, how do you propose we do that? And if we lose the Senate, we can pretty much say goodbye to those “traditional conservative values.” Trump the “narcissist” was the only person standing in the way of China’s dominance.” But hey, if tracking citizens, Communism, human rights abuses, and loss of the American spirit is your thing.

    “Begin impeachment proceedings on Inauguration Day.”

    If Biden has sold his soul to China on America’s backs, then yes.

    The new GOP is not the old GOP. We are much more diverse, passionate, and galvanized. Are we violent and will we break windows and such? No, that’s a leftist thing. But we’re not going to sit back and shut up and nod our heads because the left says so.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Liberty,
      The way I understand impeachment you can’t impeach a President for something he did before becoming President, you can only impeach a President for things done while in office, so the choice “Begin impeachment proceedings on Inauguration Day” is a ridiculous choice because it’s not Constitutionally possible.

      Like

      • Liberty says:

        You mean like the left tried to do to Trump from day one without cause?

        I’ll let constitutional lawyers explain it better, but if Biden doesn’t relinquish his ties to China on day one, then he is possibly complicit in treason and yes, impeachment should be explored.

        A president’s loyalty is to THIS country, not China.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. Everyone needs to read this…

    Anyone that chooses to hate Biden, Harris and Democrats in the same manner in which they have hated Trump, Pence and Republicans over the last four years is no better than the Democrats. You either choose to prove that you’re better than the Democrats or you choose to prove that you’re the same as the Democrats.

    Democrats set a new precedence over the last four years to flush their morals and hate those they oppose, choose to fight the good fight but do not hate.

    The choices are yours.

    Like

    • Liberty says:

      Feels like a lecture. Like you’re telling us how to feel and think. Isn’t that what leftists do?

      I’ll get over this when I’m good and ready, on MY timeline. I’m a reasoned adult who knows how to conduct myself properly, and think and act with reason.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Liberty wrote, “Feels like a lecture.”

        It feels that way because it IS a lecture, it’s truth and it needs to get heard by those out there actively preparing for tit-for-tat retaliation against the Democrats and I don’t give a damn if someone doesn’t like hearing it.

        Make your own choices but understand that choices have consequences.

        Like

        • Liberty says:

          I have no intention of participating in any violence if that’s what you’re referring to. Not my style. So you’re lecturing to the wrong person.

          Perhaps you should address your concerns to people in positions of power or to those who are actually intent on taking said action. I highly doubt Gotch, Gary, Batman, and the others who come here are combatants.

          Like

        • With all due respect to you and your opinion I think my point about hate has completely blown over your head thus increasing your cranial-power-generation-potential. 😉

          Like

        • Liberty says:

          “With all due respect to you and your opinion I think my point about hate has completely blown over your head thus increasing your cranial-power-generation-potential.”

          Don’t start a sentence with “With all due respect” then proceed to insult me. I know exactly what you meant.

          You’ve shown that you can’t address opinions that differ from yours in any other way except to attack, talk down to, and use sarcasm. Anyone that doesn’t agree with you is an idiot? Sound like some libs I know.

          BTW, I see you’re laser focused on this one comment, but haven’t addressed my other statements, including this one. Since you seem to be a Constitutional scholar, please debate. Without depending on insults.

          “I’ll let constitutional lawyers explain it better, but if Biden doesn’t relinquish his ties to China on day one, then he is possibly complicit in treason and yes, impeachment should be explored.”

          Like

        • Liberty wrote, “You’ve shown that you can’t address opinions that differ from yours in any other way except to attack, talk down to, and use sarcasm. Anyone that doesn’t agree with you is an idiot? Sound like some libs I know.”

          I sling one humorous “insult” your way and even include a wink and you come up with this attempted character assignation nonsense. Bite me Liberty.

          How about you reread all my comments in this thread without reading into my comments and then apologize for attempted character assignation.

          Liberty wrote, “BTW, I see you’re laser focused on this one comment, but haven’t addressed my other statements, including this one. Since you seem to be a Constitutional scholar, please debate. Without depending on insults. “I’ll let constitutional lawyers explain it better, but if Biden doesn’t relinquish his ties to China on day one, then he is possibly complicit in treason and yes, impeachment should be explored.””

          Is there some rule that I have to address every damn thing you write, even the absurd bastardized hyperbole like “treason” and ridiculous calls for impeachment for perceived offenses. Your argument is no better than the Democrats ridiculous arguments leading up to President Trump’s impeachment and the Democrats complete embarrassment arguments during the Senate impeachment trial.

          I know, I know, how dare I disagree with you. Well damnit, get over yourself, we agree about some things and we disagree about some things, big freaking deal.

          Are you done now or do you want to go another couple of rounds?

          Like

        • Liberty says:

          Steve,

          “I sling one humorous “insult” your way and even include a wink and you come up with this attempted character assignation nonsense.

          No, I’ve seen you as hubritic, combative, defensive, and insulting the moment I disagreed with you. My opinion, my right to express it.

          “Bite me Liberty.”

          Back atcha’.

          “How about you reread all my comments in this thread without reading into my comments and then apologize for attempted character assignation.”

          Learn the difference between opinion and character assassination. You have a blog and don’t understand the difference??

          Tell me one thing I’ve said that has assaulted your character. Meanwhile, you call me an idiot.

          “Is there some rule that I have to address every damn thing you write, even the absurd bastardized hyperbole like “treason” and ridiculous calls for impeachment for perceived offenses. Your argument is no better than the Democrats ridiculous arguments leading up to President Trump’s impeachment and the Democrats complete embarrassment arguments during the Senate impeachment trial.”

          Yes, loyalty to China and profiting from those partnerships, especially in a way that threatens our nation’s well being, is treason. I suggest watching and listening to Mark Levin. Smart man. You might learn something.

          “I know, I know, how dare I disagree with you. Well damnit, get over yourself, we agree about some things and we disagree about some things, big freaking deal.”

          Look in the mirror. And get over YOURself.

          “Are you done now or do you want to go another couple of rounds?”

          You’re not worth my time.

          Like

        • Liberty wrote, “No, I’ve seen you as hubritic, combative, defensive, and insulting the moment I disagreed with you. My opinion, my right to express it.”

          You’re welcome to your opinion even when that opinion is ridiculous and verifiably false.

          It’s clear that you didn’t go back and reread my comments in this thread after I asked you to. Yes, you attempted a character assignation to deflect from what I wrote, it failed miserably.

          I do listen to Mark Levin, in fact him and Tucker Carlson are the only two people I follow on Parler as of now. I sometimes agree with Levin and his guests and sometimes I don’t. Due to some implicit bias on Levin’s show I tend to agree with Carlson more than I do Levin and his guests but Levin and his guests do get the critical thinking wheels cranking into overdrive.

          At this point I don’t think you’re arguing in good faith and it appears that you’re just trying to anger me, so we’re done here.

          Like

        • Liberty says:

          “Is there some rule that I have to address every damn thing you write, even the absurd bastardized hyperbole like “treason” and ridiculous calls for impeachment for perceived offenses. Your argument is no better than the Democrats ridiculous arguments leading up to President Trump’s impeachment and the Democrats complete embarrassment arguments during the Senate impeachment trial.”

          Please look within. You accuse me of “character assassination” when you do the exact same thing.

          Like

        • Liberty says:

          “You’re welcome to your opinion even when that opinion is ridiculous and verifiably false.”

          Instead of dismissing & insulting me, tell me HOW I got it wrong.

          Like

    • Gary Kriewald says:

      I would agree that flushing your morals and hating your opponents are not viable options … if we were talking about any sphere of human endeavor besides politics. But the Dems have proven conclusively that playing fair and taking the moral high road in that realm gets you nowhere but on the outside looking in. Proof is that they managed to elect a senile, washed-up old blowhard to the highest office in the land. The prospect of a third Obama term should be enough to get Republicans to start writing a new dirty playbook–one that would make Roger Stone blush.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Liberty says:

        “if we were talking about any sphere of human endeavor besides politics. But the Dems have proven conclusively that playing fair and taking the moral high road in that realm gets you nowhere but on the outside looking in.”

        Exactly. Conservatives love to take the “high road.” Noble. But we’re not dealing with decent, fair-minded people here. These are people (some of whom are elected officials) who publicly call for their “soldiers” to become combative with Trump supporters.

        Love my opponent? They want to annihilate everything I care about. For the past four years, they’ve accused Trump supporters of being Nazis & racists, have destroyed our cities, and canceled or doxed anyone who doesn’t submit to groupthink, And WE’RE the ones who should be lectured to about playing fair and loving our neighbor?

        Will I call the cops if I see one in trouble? Sure. But I’m not going to look the other way and pretend like the last four years (including election fraud) didn’t happen, or expect that they’ll play fairly.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Liberty wrote, “Love my opponent?”

          That is an absolutely absurd extrapolation of don’t hate your opponent!

          No one is saying love your opponent.

          Like

        • Liberty says:

          “Liberty wrote, “Love my opponent?”

          Really, that’s how I read it. The burden is on the writer to explain his intentions. If I assume something you didn’t intend, perhaps it’s because of the way YOU worded it.

          Like

        • Liberty wrote, “Really, that’s how I read it. The burden is on the writer to explain his intentions. If I assume something you didn’t intend, perhaps it’s because of the way YOU worded it.”

          You reading don’t hate your political opposition as being equivalent to love your political opposition is signature significant to English language and logic problems that I can’t fix.

          My suggestion at this point is for you to stop digging, but I’m sure you won’t.

          Like

        • Liberty says:

          “You reading don’t hate your political opposition as being equivalent to love your political opposition is signature significant to English language and logic problems that I can’t fix.”

          How else should I read what you wrote? It felt like a lecture. Don’t like it? Your problem.

          You accuse me of disparaging your character, then proceed to insult my intellect. Self-awareness?

          I ask you to explain why you think I’m wrong about Biden being treasonous, but instead you fall back on insults. Still waiting on that answer.

          “My suggestion at this point is for you to stop digging, but I’m sure you won’t.”

          I’ll stop writing when I’m good and ready, not when you dictate.

          That said, this “conversation” is going nowhere. If you think you won something special here, knock yourself out. But I don’t want to waste my evening with someone who just wants to talk down at me.

          Fight with someone who cares.

          Like

      • Alfred E Neuman says:

        Playing fair, republicans? you’re joking right? I don’t it’s necessary to hold your hand on this is it?

        Like

    • Batman says:

      In Aikido one uses an attacker’s energy against them but through training learns how to do this as *dispassionately* as possible. One can be in it but not of it. One can co-opt the (non-violent) dirty methods of rat-bastard radical dems and still sleep like a baby with the full knowledge of what is at stake and how playing nice only empowers these evil commies.

      There is no place for appeasement or passivity just like when dealing with ISIS. When doxed, dox back for example. The last four years provides useful information for stonewalling and eventually defeating the socialist cancer that pervades our country.
      Nothing has changed for the radical dems. They still intend to assume all power literally by any means they can get away with.

      We are the good guys compared to the radical dems. We won’t be burning, looting, and murdering, but people out protesting/marching would be wise to alert police ahead of time and be prepared for Antifa to attack from behind.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. Cornelius Gotchberg says:

    “Begin impeachment proceedings on Inauguration Day”

    THAT sounds familiar, now where has The Gotch heard/read that before?

    Oh yeah; a 01/20/2017 headline from the Lefty $#!T RAG WaPo:

    The Campaign To Impeach President Trump Has Begun

    Despicable Lefties!!!!!

    The Gotch

    Liked by 2 people

    • Liberty says:

      From day one, the leftist complex tried to take down Trump, even using the DOJ to try to carry out their dirty deeds.

      And what did Trump do exactly? Did he become wealthy in office while accomplishing absolutely nothing? No. Did he extend his loyalties to Communist China or profit from his dealings with them? No.

      But hey, it’s us conservatives who need to be lectured about right and wrong. Sure.

      Like

    • richard lesiak says:

      We stole this election from you and there is nothing you can do about it. Your lawyers all suck, your judges turned against you all because we got to them. Trump lost the popular vote last time because 3 million illegals voted against him. He lost by 5 million this time because we smuggled in another 2 million. Chavez may be dead, but we paid his family a ton for that computer program. I drove to Illinois so I could vote using both my dead parents ID’S. You got played for a fool. It’s funny and I love it.

      Like

    • madtownforsure says:

      Yes, start the impeachment proceedings now, I agree. We all know that she will become the first gender/racial based president soon, as soon as Biden breaks another bone.

      Like

  5. Liberty says:

    Speaking of narcissists, isn’t this Obama’s THIRD autobiography? Obama just got a pass because he’s more charismatic than Trump and not as loud. He also had the media doing his bidding.

    Trump’s an outsider. That’s why the swamp (including those on the RIGHT) hate him. He exposed the depth & depravity of DC and it’s media/tech allies.

    Like

    • Batman says:

      “Obama just got a pass because he’s more charismatic than Trump and not as loud. He also had the media doing his bidding.”

      Obama got a pass you say. I think you’re missing the most likely and obvious reason; was that on purpose?

      Like

    • richard lesiak says:

      The media doing his bidding? That’s just stupid. Fox, Rush, Jones,etc. were doing his bidding? You have lost your mind.

      Like

  6. pANTIFArts says:

    Using war analogies is not hyperbole. The Progressive factions of the Democrats have declared war on conservatives already, and seek to bring the rest of the party in line. We have been overtaken by a better prepared group, using previously unseen tactics, (weaponized pandemic, control of social and mainstream media, manipulated elections, etc). We are 1940 France, after the blitzkrieg. Do we “play along to get along”? Will the Mitt Romneys of our party form a “Vichy coalition”, to show that we are “better than them”? In the end, it was only when the Allies, using the same tactics as their opponent, were the Germans dislodged. (The re-taking proving much more difficult than the initial conquest). And, unlike the French, there is no “America” to save us.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Liberty says:

      You couldn’t be more correct in your analysis.

      “And, unlike the French, there is no “America” to save us.”

      There is NOBODY left to help us. Not the DOJ, elected officials, the media, or big tech. Not even sure about law enforcement anymore.

      We’ve been betrayed and are all alone. Trump was the only thing standing between us and the Establishment, which by the way, consists of RINOs, as well.

      Just hope people like Communism. Like Mark Levin said yesterday on his show, Biden is the wrong president at the wrong time. China is going to eventually control us and people in positions of power are too busy partaking of the trough to take action.

      Trump’s “narcissism” and Tweets were apparently more threatening to some conservatives than China, Antifa, defunding of the police, a “hate America” agenda, babies being slaughtered, and liberal indoctrination of our schools.

      But hey, we got the “high road.” Right.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Gary Kriewald says:

      “… there is no “America” …. Truer words were never spoken–there is no America after the 2020 election. I like your 1940 France analogy, but there’s one element missing–the French Resistance, the real heroes of the story; it’s high time for an American Resistance–the kind that, like their WW2 counterpart, uses guns, bombs and sabatoge, not marching in pussy-hats up State Street (when there still was a State Street).

      Like

  7. ObviousFraudIsObvious says:

    We live in a banana republic now so get used to sociaism.
    We have no chance in GA because voting no longer matters.
    I seriously doubt some lifer neocon GOP dbag is going to do anywhere near as well as Trump.
    Say goodbye to the silent majority, and say goodbye to democracy.

    Like

  8. madtownforsure says:

    The ones who voted for Biden/Harris know they will regret it but they hated Trump so much to think clearly. Even now with what they find on Hunter that they hid from the masses won’t change anything except to put the first gender based racial based unqualified person in the white house. It will turn around after the middle America pay thru their arses.

    Like

  9. Larsen E. Whipsnade says:

    Hagendorn sucks! He is no Conservative. Trump clearly won on the law but did not prevail because hapless Hagendorn went along with the BS procedural “laches” ruse of the libs on the Court. Why did we support him again?

    Liked by 1 person

    • richard lesiak says:

      You supported him because all he had was a (R) behind his name. That’s why. No other reason. This case was only one of the 60 that trump’s clown car legal team lost.

      Like

      • Larsen E. Whipsnade says:

        I supported him because he was sold as a Conservative. If there’s anything worse than an up-front Prog/Lib spitting in your face, it’s a duplicitous Republican fraud stabbing you in the back. To be clear, I despise them both. Bah, Humbug!

        Like

  10. richard lesiak says:

    What a great day….1. Biden wins. 2.Barr quits. 3.Congressman Mitchell (R) quits his party. Fox is being sued. 4.Vaccine is finally here. MERRY XMAS…God bless us every one.

    Like

  11. Cornelius Gotchberg says:

    Is there ANYTHING more pitiable than a septuagenarian’s pathetic self-esteem hinging on how he thinks his side is perceived?

    Didn’t think so!

    The Gotch

    Liked by 1 person

    • Liberty says:

      Even more pathetic is their childish and imbecilic attempts at taunting us. As if it bothers us.

      In a way you really kinda’ have to pity people like that. They probably have miserable lives.

      Like

      • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

        “They probably have miserable lives.”

        Empty miserable lives, and no probably about it!

        It’d be one thing if it were funny, heck, even amusing, but it’s just ill-informed off-topic blather swallowed whole and converted into imbecilic drivel.

        The Gotch

        Like

        • Liberty says:

          “but it’s just ill-informed off-topic blather swallowed whole and converted into imbecilic drivel.”

          Yep. How pathetic of a life do you have to have to come to a forum just for the sake of trolling?

          I have some theories about how leftists came to be like this, but I’ll keep it to myself.

          Like

        • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

          “Yep. How pathetic of a life do you have to have to come to a forum just for the sake of trolling?”

          Catastrophically pathetic doesn’t quite sum it up, am I right?

          A lifetime of poor choices leaves one with few options, which is compounded when all the Lefty forums kick you off for being a rank, indigent, stumbling/mumbling/bumbling POS.

          Turned out by your own kind; it just don’t get no sorrier than that!

          The Gotch

          Like

  12. Good Dog,Happy Man says:

    Yes, Stacey “Tank” Abrams is warming up her lovely singing voice.

    There’s two chances President Trump will win, … Slim and none, and I saw Slim out behind the barn, saddling up, and getting ready to ride off into the sunset. But hold your horses. “It ain’t over ’til it’s over.” We didn’t give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, did we? Hell, no. After all, we’re Americans.

    Undisputed states voted electorally today, but if neither Biden or Trump reaches 270, … neither one is the winner. The five GOP state legislatures (Arizona, Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania) of the six disputed states (minus Nevada) say they need to postpone their electoral votes because they are still investigating fraud and illegalities.

    The legislatures perform due diligence (holding hearings to collect the evidence) and conclude that fraud and illegalities unilaterally hurt Trump and only helped Biden. Assuming that the Democrat Legislature in Nevada says everything was legitimate, each disputed GOP state may reach this conclusion on any day after Dec. 14 … say, on Dec. 27 or even Jan. 15. Then they appoint electors who vote for the rightful winner: Trump (provided the GOP-selected electors aren’t NeverTrumpers, RINOs, TDSers or other breeds of wascuwwy wepubwiccans). Then they appoint electors who vote for the rightful winner: Trump. (provided the GOP-selected electors don’t suffer from TDS). These votes are added in to the votes cast on Dec. 14. Trump goes past 270 electoral votes. Trump wins!

    What happens if the disputed states cannot select the electors, and neither Trump or Biden reaches 270?

    Then it goes to the House of Representatives, and each state has one vote, and this one vote is determined by the political makeup of the state legislatures. The GOP controls 29 state legislatures, and the Democrats have 19 (two are split). Trump wins again.

    The Electoral Count Act of 1887 says each chamber of Congress will separately decide which slate of ‘dueling electors’ to accept. Wisconsin GOP followed the rule of law. They also met today, putting forward their own 10 electors, thus preserving their status in a contested electoral process. The final outcome is STILL pending in the courts. Individual States have always held the electoral power, … they just never used it before. Let’s pray they use it now to preserve our country, because a house divided against itself cannot stand.

    Like

  13. I know it’s long but read it to the bottom and be informed.

    I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that some of you have noticed a familiar theme to the argument tactics used here by the commenter with the moniker Liberty. You might agree with some or all of what Liberty is writing but there is something behind the rhetorical tactics that needs to be addressed. Let’s review in some detail what’s happening and we’ll use this particular thread to shine the light on the tactics.

    First we have the tried and true progressive tactic of reading between the lines and then arguing against what was written based on the things between the lines. Here is an example: I wrote above that I think we should “Accept the reality that Biden/Harris won no matter how distasteful.” I didn’t elaborate that at all. Liberty wrote in reply to my comment “In light of the hundreds of sworn testimonies, data dumps, and statistical improbabilities, we should just move on, shut up, and accept it? Not me. I demand answers to my satisfaction.” His reply implies that by accepting the reality of a Biden Presidency means that we should shut up and no longer try to get answers to questions that we have. I replied to Liberty’s comment by stating “You’re reading things between the lines that are not there.” and “They should continue to investigate what happened in this election!”. Notice at no time in my comment did I attack, talk down to, use sarcasm or imply or say that Liberty was an idiot, I simply stated a fact. To continue this pattern Liberty also replied to my original comment with “But if the left expects us to just unite and go along after what how they treated Trump & his supporters for four years, no thanks.”, “I don’t negotiate with bullies, communists, and people who resort to violence when they don’t get their way.” These aren’t bad arguments but they are again reading things between the lines that simply don’t exist. My reply was “No one said that moving on requires anyone to stop the fight against that which you oppose.” Again notice at no time in my comment did I attack, talk down to, use sarcasm or imply or say that Liberty was an idiot, I simply stated a fact. After this Liberty doubled down on his deflection and ignored the facts as they were presented. You may or may not agree with the arguments that Liberty is presenting but in context with the topic they are defections from what Liberty was replying to. Liberty’s method of argumentation is what’s called logical fallacies or to be more accurate it’s strawman fallacies and also red herrings. These rhetorical tactics are most often employed by progressives in their attempts to control the narrative away from something they don’t want discussed and shift it to something they do want to discuss.

    Second we have the rhetorical tactic of making accusations without supporting those accusations. Liberty made an accusation in the exact same manner that progressives have been arguing for the last four years, unsupported innuendo. Liberty wrote “If Biden has sold his soul to China on America’s backs, then yes.” This is an unsupported innuendo accusation hidden behind the word “if” and then he goes on to use the innuendo that he hasn’t supported as if it is a fact to support impeachment on day one of Biden’s Presidency. My reply to this was “The way I understand impeachment you can’t impeach a President for something he did before becoming President, you can only impeach a President for things done while in office, so the choice “Begin impeachment proceedings on Inauguration Day” is a ridiculous choice because it’s not Constitutionally possible.” Again notice at no time in my comment did I attack, talk down to, use sarcasm or imply or say that Liberty was an idiot, I simply stated a fact. Liberty replied “You mean like the left tried to do to Trump from day one without cause? I’ll let constitutional lawyers explain it better, but if Biden doesn’t relinquish his ties to China on day one, then he is possibly complicit in treason and yes, impeachment should be explored. A president’s loyalty is to THIS country, not China.” So now Liberty is invoking a tit-for-tat rationalization because of Trump and doubling down on his accusation that Biden has sold his soul to China with a new absurd unsupported innuendo accusation of treason needing an impeachment investigation. This is exactly what the unethical and immoral progressives Democrats did to President Trump, it was wrong then and it’s wrong now, I chose to ignore this absurd innuendo accusation. Later Liberty complained that I hadn’t addressed this previous statement so I replied in part “Is there some rule that I have to address every damn thing you write, even the absurd bastardized hyperbole like “treason” and ridiculous calls for impeachment for perceived offenses. Your argument is no better than the Democrats ridiculous arguments leading up to President Trump’s impeachment and the Democrats complete embarrassment arguments during the Senate impeachment trial.”

    Third, attempted character assignations. This is a tried and true rhetorical tactic that has been used by absolutely every single progressive I have ever debated on line or face-to-face. After I slung a humorous insult towards Liberty because the point of my arguments regarding hate seem to have blown straight over “his” head without any connection to grey matter whatsoever, Liberty proceeded to dive into an attempted character assignation writing “You’ve shown that you can’t address opinions that differ from yours in any other way except to attack, talk down to, and use sarcasm. Anyone that doesn’t agree with you is an idiot? Sound like some libs I know.”. As I noted above what my comments towards Liberty did not attack, talk down to, use sarcasm or imply or say that Liberty was an idiot except for the one humorous poke. The commenting record is there for everyone to read and the record supports my opinion on this and does not support the accusations in the attempted character assignation. The record shows that I can and I do in fact address opinions that differ from mine without attacking, talking down, using sarcasm and I fully understand that those that disagree with me are not idiots until they show beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are an idiot. In fact the record shows that I’ve replied to things Liberty has written that I disagreed with by simply stating facts. Once Liberty jumped straight into the gutter with unsubstantiated accusations attacking my character civil discourse was over and at that time I wrote “I know, I know, how dare I disagree with you. Well damnit, get over yourself, we agree about some things and we disagree about some things, big freaking deal.” Liberty later replied doubling down on the attempted character assignation with “I’ve seen you as hubritic, combative, defensive, and insulting the moment I disagreed with you.” This is an outright false statement and a simple review of the comment thread shows that the first disagreement reply from me to Liberty was “You’re reading things between the lines that are not there. That wasn’t one of the options Liberty, it was literally “Accept the reality that Biden/Harris won no matter how distasteful.” They should continue to investigate what happened in this election!” which was not hubritic, combative, defensive, or insulting it was simply matter of fact; this claim by Liberty was a verifiable lie.

    In conclusion; it appears to me that Liberty has completely absorbed and made his own the same unethical and immoral tactics that progressives have been using for the last 12 years to destroy their opposition and these tactics have become so natural to Liberty that Liberty seems to think they are acceptable.

    Lastly I’d like to say that Liberty and I actually agree on some things about where the political left appears to be trying to drag the United States; however, just because we agree on some things does not mean that I won’t call out that which I believe to be wrong. If there’s one thing that I learned well in the Army it’s that we can argue in disagreement and violently agree all we want in our foxholes but when the bullets fly we’re brothers in arms and nothing will stop our resolve. based on the content of the rhetoric and not the tactics used I suspect that Liberty and I are in the same foxhole in violent agreement opposing the same “evil” and we simply disagree what tactics should be used before rotating the selector off safe.

    Like

    • Liberty says:

      Oh my God, you’re kidding. You actually spend time on this?

      You’re completely off base. And nobody is assassinating your character. Are you freaking kidding? When you do what you just did, people will hesitate to engage with you. Is that what you want?

      Speaking of character assassinations, what do you call this? You don’t see me freaking out, though.

      “You reading don’t hate your political opposition as being equivalent to love your political opposition is signature significant to English language and logic problems that I can’t fix”.

      “With all due respect to you and your opinion I think my point about hate has completely blown over your head thus increasing your cranial-power-generation-potential. 😉”

      “Is there some rule that I have to address every damn thing you write, even the absurd bastardized hyperbole like “treason” and ridiculous calls for impeachment for perceived offenses. Your argument is no better than the Democrats ridiculous arguments leading up to President Trump’s impeachment and the Democrats complete embarrassment arguments during the Senate impeachment trial.”

      “I know, I know, how dare I disagree with you. Well damnit, get over yourself, we agree about some things and we disagree about some things, big freaking deal.”

      “Are you done now or do you want to go another couple of rounds?”

      To Alfred Neumann:

      “You sir are a liar and a troll.”

      Like

      • Liberty says:

        Another dig to me:

        “In conclusion; it appears to me that Liberty has completely absorbed and made his own the same unethical and immoral tactics that progressives have been using for the last 12 years to destroy their opposition and these tactics have become so natural to Liberty that Liberty seems to think they are acceptable.”

        So it’s ok for you to accuse me of being unethical and immoral and to disparage me, but I’M the one who’s assassinating your character?

        Like

    • Liberty says:

      Let me ask, what is it you want from me?

      I come to Blaska’s blog because it’s one of the few places I thought I could go and not feel like I’m walking on eggshells.

      But if it’s going to be like this and you’re going to accuse people of character assassinations (while assassinating characters yourself) people aren’t going to want to exchange ideas with you.

      I did find your tone to be preachy. It’s the Internet, intentions get lost, and this is a stressful time for all of us.

      Can we please be adults and just stop this? Seriously, life is too short.

      Like

    • Liberty says:

      …based on the content of the rhetoric and not the tactics used I suspect that Liberty and I are in the same foxhole in violent agreement opposing the same “evil” and we simply disagree what tactics should be used before rotating the selector off safe…

      I can live with this. I do think that if the GOP wants to succeed in the future, that we have got to stop the in-fighting.

      I do have real issues with Biden’s ties to China, as they are a global threat. And if, I said IF he was complicit in anything that put our country’s security at risk (and that those deals are STILL putting our country at risk), impeachment needs to be considered.

      I don’t see why this is wrong. What I asked, was that you explain WHY I was wrong. Telling me my premise is absurd is just not helpful. I don’t claim to be a Constitutional scholar so was genuinely asking for your POV on this.

      It’s a shame this discourse got so combative.

      Like

      • Liberty wrote, “I can live with this.”

        Good, then we maybe we can keep that in mind, move on and continue with a more civil tone. I know I’m a hard-ass but I’m willing to give it another try, how about you?

        Liberty wrote, “I do have real issues with Biden’s ties to China, as they are a global threat.”

        Damnit Liberty; Support your claim! It’s not our job to try and figure out what your talking about and support your claims, it’s your job to support them.

        What ties to China and how are those ties are a global threat?

        Without presenting the details so these things can actually be intelligently discussed these claims are unsupported accusations, conspiracy theories, innuendo based propaganda and cannot be taken seriously – just like the countless number of claims that were spewed out about President Trump. This is the same kind of thing that the political left does; accuse, accuse, accuse and link the accusations to removal from office then when asked to support their claims they refused to do so and instead rhetorically attack the one asking for evidence. Over four years of continuous anti-Trump propaganda is one of the ways that the Democrats and their lapdog media rigged, yes rigged*, the 2020 Presidential election; it’s straight out of the USSR’s Pravda propaganda playbook.

        I purchased some John Deere toys last year for my grandchildren that ended up being made in China. I’m looking at a computer monitor that’s an American company but the damn monitor is made in China. I’m using a computer that’s a USA company and the damn computer is assembled in Mexico! As careful as I am to constantly promote and purchase Made in USA products it’s damn near unavoidable to purchase things that are made in China and we all know that a good portion of any money going to China ends up in the hands of the Communist elites running the country and then those dollars are put to agenda items that promote communism world-wide and help build up China’s military. Those too are ties to China, are they also considered global threats? This is not sarcasm, it’s to make a point that I’ve made a few times, support your claims so we know what the hell you’re talking about.

        Again; talking about beginning impeachment on inauguration day based on unsupported innuendo about things that may or may not have taken place before inauguration is just a ludicrous as what the political left did to President Trump. There are people that wanted to impeach President Trump because he didn’t release his personal taxes and releasing personal taxes is not a requirement of any Presidential candidate and it’s not an impeachable offense. The Constitution is the only guide to impeachment and it trumps everything else; bastardizing** the Constitution in regards to impeachment is wrong no matter who does it. It was wrong for the political left to spew their unsupported anti-Trump propaganda and unconstitutional calls for impeachment and it’s just as wrong for the political right to spew their unsupported anti-Biden propaganda and unconstitutional calls for impeachment. The ends does not justify the means.

        *Rigged: manipulated or controlled by deceptive or dishonest means.

        **Bastardize: change (something) in such a way as to lower its quality or value, typically by adding new elements.

        Like

  14. richard lesiak says:

    Well; it’s official. Trump knows for sure it’s over. Putin called Biden, congrats on winning. Donny’s BFF just walked away; crushing blow.

    Like

  15. old baldy says:

    Geez, I love it when they eat their own. He condemns the GA R’s for doing their job, yet can’t do his own with any amount of success. And trump is laughing all the way to the bank with all the donations being sent to his “campaign” to carry on his endless, and fruitless, fight against democracy. What has he lost, 50 or so lawsuits? How many has he won? Even his hand picked SC came out on the side of democracy.

    Full disclosure: Biden was not my first choice as the D candidate, maybe 3 or 4. And no, I was never a Bernie or Warren supporter. But Joe was the best choice to beat trump, and avoid 4 more years of ever increasing fascism.

    Like

    • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

      Hankdog/old baldy;

      Trust The Gotch on just this one thing; you specifically, and Lefty generally, will find out sooner rather than later just how breathtakingly ill-prepared the VPOTUS Affirmative Action hire is to be sitting in the Oval Office.

      The everLUVin’ kicker? She won’t be able to negotiate the same way she got her…um…start with a li’l…er…nudge from Willie Brown.

      And you wouldn’t know fascism if it nipped you in your oversized @$$.

      The Gotch

      Like

      • Cornelius Gotchberg says:

        And please note that self-respecting Conservatives WON’T launch into a dangerous, yet voluntary catatonic, apoplectic, pillow-biting, pants $#!tting, bed wetting, wind-sucking, chest palpitating, vital sign ramping, mouth-breathing, fist-pounding, foot stomping, safe-space seeking, triggering, weenie-whiny, simpering-whimpering, complete metaphysical, emotional, existential, psychological, philosophical, full-throated, freaking out, melting down, totally collapsing free-fall.

        You know, like Lefty snowFLAKES< have been doing for the last ~ 48 months.

        Despicable Lefties!!

        The Gotch

        Like

        • Liberty says:

          The trolls came out to gloat. LOL.

          How pathetic that their joy in life is predicated upon attempting to make us miserable. If only they knew how insignificant we view them as.

          Like

      • Liberty says:

        “And you wouldn’t know fascism if it nipped you in your oversized @$$.”

        The only fascism I see is coming from the left. Violent demonstrations when they don’t get their way. Sending cops to arrest people for daring to want to keep their businesses afloat, while said demonstrators get a pass.

        “You know, like Lefty snowFLAKES< have been doing for the last ~ 48 months."

        Accuse others of what you, yourself do. Not sure if they're following Saul Alinksy's playbook or just have really poor self awareness.

        Liked by 1 person

        • old baldy says:

          While I seldom , if ever, agreed with SW, today I do. Your guy lost, and is now showing his true colors;petty, vindictive, profiteering, and ever so fascist. And he will keep up the whining, as will gootchie, et al, until trump gets distracted by an even more profitable con on the gullible. Better send him a check now, the WH silverware might still be available as a gift.

          “liberty”, what an odd name for a guy (assume it is) that supports a failed candidate that is advocating ( as are his minions) the violent overthrow of our government, physical harm to elected officials (R’s included) for doing the job they were elected to do, and secession from the union. Sore losers all, ith the emphasis on losers. And treasonous to boot.

          Like

        • old baldy wrote, “While I seldom , if ever, agreed with SW, today I do. Your guy lost, and is now showing his true colors;petty, vindictive, profiteering, and ever so fascist. And he will keep up the whining, as will gootchie, et al, until trump gets distracted by an even more profitable con on the gullible. Better send him a check now, the WH silverware might still be available as a gift.”

          GIVEN: SW means Steve Witherspoon

          At first glance it appears that you agree with me at least according to your first sentence in that paragraph; but then, you list a bunch of stuff to finish out the paragraph that I didn’t state or imply in anything I wrote.

          I have to ask; exactly what part of what I’ve written in this thread do you agree with?

          Like

        • Liberty says:

          “liberty”, what an odd name for a guy (assume it is) that supports a failed candidate that is advocating ( as are his minions) the violent overthrow of our government, physical harm to elected officials (R’s included) for doing the job they were elected to do, and secession from the union. Sore losers all, ith the emphasis on losers. And treasonous to boot.”

          Be specific.

          Like

        • old baldy says:

          SW: I was responding to “liberty”, and how he was disagreeing with you. You said, “Accept the reality that Biden/Harris won no matter how distasteful.”, and “I’m ready to move on.” And I agree.

          liberty: The list is long, and mentioned in this thread several times. I’m sure you rwead it, have heard/read it on every media source ever so slightly left of Attila the Hun, so no need for me to say it again. Do your homework.

          Like

  16. Eric Z says:

    Wondering if the rest of the conservative wing felt the same way but Hagedorn is the new guy so he gets his turn in the barrel.Then they save face.

    Like

  17. It’s been less than 24 hours since Biden was elected by the Electoral College and Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin have already had a phone call. It was reported that Putin said “Russia and the U.S., which bear special responsibility for global security and stability can, despite the differences, really contribute to solving many problems and challenges that the world is currently facing” and “I am ready for interaction and contact with you”.

    I’ve already read someone saying that this phone call is evidence, it’s absolutely shocking that a President elect would already be colluding with Russia via coded niceties. There’s treason in the air. When will an anti-Biden confidential whistleblower come forward to tell us what the coded niceties really mean.

    Yup folks, this is an prime example of the same kind of spinning crap that the political left was pulling with its innuendo based propaganda. I won’t be a part of this crap.

    Like

Comments are closed.