IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New My assistant was in today.
She is very talented in many ways, but is a very conservative Christian from the South and is voting for Trump.

She says everything I hear about him is bunk.

Today her thing was the groping in first class on the airplane. She says some guy from England flew to the US at his own expense to testify he was on that flight and remembers the moment distinctly, and there was no such groping.

This all sounds very suspicious to me. Anybody heard anything about this?
New There are two ways to read the remark in your MJ linked article.
The president, clearly troubled by Trump’s claims of a fixed election, quickly decided not to hold back. He described Trump’s allegations as a threat to American democracy and to the “integrity and trust” of the country’s civic institutions.

"A threat to American democracy" === "A threat to corporate hegemony". Are we a democracy? No. We aren't. But if by "democracy" you mean a corporate backed duopoly that allows the citizens to pretend they have a choice, then I guess, yeah, claims about "fixed elections" would be a threat to that system.
bcnu,
Mikem

We read one day, We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But if a man doesn't have a job or an income, he has neither life, nor liberty, nor the pursuit of happiness. He merely exists.
MLK
New Horse's mouth.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/10/18/press-conference-president-obama-and-prime-minister-renzi-republic-italy

Ayesha Rascoe.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to ask you about the election. Donald Trump is telling his supporters that the election is rigged, and asking them to monitor certain areas on Election Day. How concerned are you about the potential for violence? And what about after Election Day -- are you worried the results of the election may be distrusted?

And for Prime Minister Renzi, the offensive in Mosul has begun. Are you concerned about what happens after liberation? And, Mr. President, if you want to weigh in on that as well, I'd appreciate it.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: I do.

Q Thanks.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: One of the great things about America's democracy is we have a vigorous, sometimes bitter, political contest. And when it's done, historically, regardless of party, the person who loses the election congratulates the winner, reaffirms our democracy, and we move forward. That's how democracy survives, because we recognize that there is something more important than any individual campaign -- and that is making sure that the integrity and trust in our institutions sustains itself. Because democracy, by definition, works by consent, not by force.

I have never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history any presidential candidate trying to discredit the elections and the election process before votes have even taken place. It's unprecedented. It happens to be based on no facts. Every expert, regardless of political party, regardless of ideology -- conservative or liberal -- who has ever examined these issues in a serious way will tell you that instances of significant voter fraud are not to be found; that, keep in mind, elections are run by state and local officials, which means that there are places like Florida, for example, where you've got a Republican governor whose Republican appointees are going to be running and monitoring a whole bunch of these election sites. The notion that somehow if Mr. Trump loses Florida it's because of those people that you have to watch out for -- that is both irresponsible, and, by the way, it doesn't really show the kind of leadership and toughness that you'd want out of a President.

If you start whining before the game is even over, if whenever things are going badly for you and you lose you start blaming somebody else, then you don’t have what it takes to be in this job. Because there are a lot of times when things don’t go our way, or my way. That’s okay. You fight through it, you work through it. You try to accomplish your goals.

But the larger point that I want to emphasize here is that there is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America’s elections, in part because they’re so decentralized and the numbers of votes involved. There’s no evidence that that has happened in the past, or that there are instances in which that will happen this time.

And so I’d advise Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes. And if he got the most votes, then it would be my expectation of Hillary Clinton to offer a gracious concession speech and pledge to work with him in order to make sure that the American people benefit from an effective government. And it would be my job to welcome Mr. Trump, regardless of what he’s said about me or my differences with him on my opinions, and escort him over to the Capitol, in which there would be a peaceful transfer of power.

That’s what Americans do. That’s why America is already great. One way of weakening America and making it less great is if you start betraying those basic American traditions that have been bipartisan and have helped to hold together this democracy now for well over two centuries.

[...]



How you can find a way to disagree with that is, er, surprising.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Shouldn't be surprising.
Fixed it up a little.
And when it's done, historically, regardless of party, the person who loses the election congratulates the winner, reaffirms our democracy somewhat democratic plutocracy, and we move forward. ... Because democracy somewhat democratic plutocracy, by definition, works by consent, not by force.

The Carter Center said that they would have been unable to monitor Florida's General Election in 2000 because Florida's election rules did not meet the standards necessary to have them monitor the election. In 2008, I was unapologetically told my vote would be "too difficult to count and wouldn't change the outcome anyway." That's "fair and true" elections in a democracy?

And then there's the 800 pound gorilla in the room. The only people who can even run for national office in this country (in either party - and the parties *own* the election process) are those that carry water for the monied elite. I think we can agree, at least, on that point. So, the faceless masses are allowed to delude themselves into believing they have "some choice" every four years for the nation's highest office when in fact they are choosing between two people, each of whom is beholding to the 1%.

It is in this sense that the elections are "rigged." The only people who have any representation at the federal level are those criminals living on the bottom half of that little island between the Hudson and East rivers.

Whatever else Trump is, one thing is clear. He is the logical consequence of our nation's national politics' evolution over the past 36 years. With each election cycle we move further in our transition from somewhat democratic plutocracy to outright oligarchy. Trump, or someone like him, is the end game of our national politics. Ironically, it will be the useful idiots who have suffered most (and they are legion) that "elect" our first oligarch as president.
bcnu,
Mikem

We read one day, We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But if a man doesn't have a job or an income, he has neither life, nor liberty, nor the pursuit of happiness. He merely exists.
MLK
New Re: Snopes.
That tells what we already know - but nothing about this British guy on whom T's story hinges.
New It does say she had contemporaneous reports to others.
So she's not just making it up now because Trump is running for President.

But on your point, yeah, it's older than the newest spin.

Here's a breathless account of how her story is "fake".

Of course, Gilberthorpe has issues, and the airplane excuses don't work either, and ...

But you knew all that. ;-)

HTH.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Try this one
http://nypost.com/2016/10/14/trump-camp-puts-forward-witness-to-refute-sex-assault-claim/
Gilberthorpe made headlines in 2014, when he went public with a claim that as a 17-year-old he procured boys (some who “could have been” underage”) for sex parties with high-ranking British politicians.

Gilberthorpe has no evidence to back up his claim — just his self-described excellent memory.

It's not clear if "his claim" in that last line refers to the 2014 claim or the recent one about Trump.
--

Drew
New The British guy seems to be a serial attention seeker and liar
Which neither confirms nor denies his story in this instance, but you can draw your own conclusions.
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
     My assistant was in today. - (Andrew Grygus) - (8)
         Snopes. - (Another Scott) - (7)
             There are two ways to read the remark in your MJ linked article. - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                 Horse's mouth. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                     Shouldn't be surprising. - (mmoffitt)
             Re: Snopes. - (Andrew Grygus) - (3)
                 It does say she had contemporaneous reports to others. - (Another Scott)
                 Try this one - (drook)
                 The British guy seems to be a serial attention seeker and liar - (malraux)

The names have been changed to protect the innocent.
55 ms