Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

An alternate home for the community from the legacy Fourth Turning Forum
User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Bob Butler »

Well, the impeachment is done and Trump did not defend the existence of fraud in the 2020 election with any evidence. There was motive enough to present any such evidence, so I can only presume he presented no evidence as there is no evidence.

John
Posts: 10078
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by John »

** 14-Feb-2021 World View: Election fraud
Bob Butler wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 1:44 pm
> Well, the impeachment is done and Trump did not defend the
> existence of fraud in the 2020 election with any evidence. There
> was motive enough to present any such evidence, so I can only
> presume he presented no evidence as there is no evidence.
>
This is a very interesting statement because it's wrong in two ways.

First, there was no motive to present such evidence, since it would
have been irrelevant to the charges. In fact, given how things are,
if such evidence had been presented, it would only have infuriated the
performing seals in the audience, and more of them might have voted to
convict.

Even worse, presenting such evidence might have further provoked
violence from the Democrats' mob, including those who attacked the
home and family of the lead Trump lawyer, Michael van der Veen, a
couple of days ago. So presenting such evidence might have been
personally dangerous to him and others supporting Trump, given how
violent the Democrats have become.

But second, and this is really interesting, some evidence of election
fraud actually was presented. Michael van der Veen sneaked this in
under of cover of defending against one of the charges, that Trump
provoked the insurrection with that phone call to the Alabama
official, where he wanted him to "find" 5,000 more votes for Trump.
That was taken entirely out of context, and it was part of a larger
conversation, where Trump gave evidence that hundreds of thousands of
ballots were illegal, and he wanted the official to "find" 5,000 of
those votes. During the trial, van der Veen quoted that entire
conversation from Trump, including details about the hundreds of
thousands of fraudulent ballots. When I heard that, I thought it was
very clever of van der Veen to give all that evidence of election
fraud under cover of defending against that flukey charge.

If I feel in the mood, I might try to search through the trial
transcripts for van der Veen's statement. Here's the web site with
all the transcripts:

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcript-tag ... ranscripts

but there are a lot of them, if you want to do the search yourself.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Bob Butler »

I understand some graffiti was jotted near the house. I would hardly count that as violence as compared to the capitol insurrection.

I did see the Democrats as repeating often the phrase ‘the big lie’. If Trump had any evidence to refute that mantra, I am inclined to believe he would have. As is, I can only conclude that the big lie was a big lie.

I would hardly conclude at this point that anything Trump could say would be evidence. It would be a liar lying.

But you can keep clinging to the alternate reality as long as you like. The longer you do, the more you have discredited your world view.

John
Posts: 10078
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by John »

So you ask for evidence, I give you evidence, then you say that isn't
evidence because Trump is a lying liar. So why bother to ask for
evidence in the first place?

spottybrowncow
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2020 11:06 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by spottybrowncow »

Bob Butler wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 3:47 pm
I understand some graffiti was jotted near the house. I would hardly count that as violence as compared to the capitol insurrection.

I did see the Democrats as repeating often the phrase ‘the big lie’. If Trump had any evidence to refute that mantra, I am inclined to believe he would have. As is, I can only conclude that the big lie was a big lie.
This is what is going to happen:

Lawsuits take time.
Multiple cases will make their way through the courts, and it will become well-established in the coming months that fraud was present. Some elected officials may even be removed from their seats by the courts, returning the Senate to the GOP.

Trump, now exonerated, will attack with his his customary impossible-to-predict style. I look for him to set up, with lots of willing help, alternative social media sites essentially immune from the attacks of the far-left government wackos and their adulating corporate sycophants.

The multiple government lawsuits against Trump will all fizzle - after all, they are all politically motivated, and that will become apparent once people start being deposed under threat of jail time.

As 2022 approaches, hold on to your seats, there is no limit to what the Dems may do or claim, as terror envelopes them. I'm laying in a good supply of popcorn. It promises to be be a great show, for those of use grounded in reality. If WWIII comes, most of us on this site are as prepared as anyone.

Dems, maybe not so much.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Bob Butler »

John wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 4:23 pm
So you ask for evidence, I give you evidence, then you say that isn't evidence because Trump is a lying liar. So why bother to ask for evidence in the first place?
Trump speaking is not evidence. Obama was not born in the US? Mexico is going to pay for the wall? The virus is a hoax? His entire career he has used lies to his gullible following believing what they want to hear to achieve popularity. He needed more and could not provide it.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Bob Butler »

spottybrowncow wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 7:03 pm
Bob Butler wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 3:47 pm
I understand some graffiti was jotted near the house. I would hardly count that as violence as compared to the capitol insurrection.

I did see the Democrats as repeating often the phrase ‘the big lie’. If Trump had any evidence to refute that mantra, I am inclined to believe he would have. As is, I can only conclude that the big lie was a big lie.
This is what is going to happen...
Nice fantasy. Perhaps I should run a blue one?

I suspect the evidence will not materialize because the claim that fraud existed never had evidence. Biden trusted the polls which showed him well ahead, heard the predictions that Trump would try to win in court, and thus ran very clean to establish the court case win ratio that ultimately materialized. The people who actively supported Trump's attempts to seize power will wonder what they are doing under the bus and eventually turn on Trump. It has already started. Trump will likely come up with an even more absurd lie a vain attempt to make people forget the old one. Meanwhile, Biden will be attacking problems that the Trump regime ignored and become ever more popular. Some red states will remain red, but Trump's lies and inaction with Biden's progress will be too much for the rest of the country.

I'm still wondering what will happen with the battle for the remnants of the Republican Party. The racist element still wed to Trump will not let go of the prejudice, but will recognize Trump is gone as his lawsuits, debts and prosecutions mount. I anticipate that Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment will eventually disqualify Trump from holding office again, and that his followers were more yes men than folks who could imitate the charm that attracted a following. The old Tea Party used to be against the establishment. What if the next person they fall for after Palin and Trump isn't one of the elite? Will McConnell's establishment faction be able to survive separation from the racist faction? Will the true conservatives manage to build a following after the elitists and racists fight? Will their policy of obstruction work against the ever more popular attempts by the Biden administration to solve what Trump ignored? Will people notice that Trump's nepotism and government posts held by con men have been replaced by competent deep state people?

Not my fight, but pass the popcorn.

spottybrowncow
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2020 11:06 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by spottybrowncow »

Bob Butler wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 8:30 pm

Nice fantasy. Perhaps I should run a blue one?

As usual, Bob, you have raised no substantive arguments against my projections. Why don't you at least try to mount a cogent defense? Never mind, I think most of us know the answer to that.

I'm excited about what's coming. Reality will triumph over the party of infinite genders, harsh reality will assert itself over the illusion of systemic oppression (what thinking being has time for such horseshit?). Cries for obeisance to pronoun preferences will fall on very, vey deaf ears.

Are you ready for all of that, Bob?
Most of us are looking forward to it.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Bob Butler »

OK. At least we agree on a need for popcorn.

One place I did mount a defense was Biden’s motive to run a clean campaign. He was ahead in the polls. Trump had telegraphed his intent to win in the courts, and thus he wanted more Republican appointed judges. He still got crushed by the courts. There was no reason why Biden wouldn’t run a clean campaign. There was no reason for Trump to sit on the evidence if it existed. There was no reason for Trump to harass the Georgia officials for evidence of fraud if he already had evidence of fraud. Thus, I assume he doesn’t have it. I agree lawsuits will take a long time, but don’t anticipate the big lie to turn out to be anything but a big lie.

I seem to view Trump’s debit, lawsuit and criminal cases more seriously than you. Since Watergate, both parties have looked for excuses to catch the other side step out of line. The Democrats had Iran / Contra and the lies about the cause of war in Iraq. The Republicans had Clinton 42 and Gary Hart failing to keep their pants zipped. Neither party has been exactly shy about going after the other’s people if they stepped out of line.

There is a difference in how they stepped out of line. The Democrats believe in big government, that they are supposed to help the people. Anyone with curves was a side benefit. The Republicans? They seem to think the government exists to help their wealthy friends. They seem to get in trouble differently.

Now a good conservative judge is concerned with the meaning of the text and the intent of the authors. A bad conservative judge has a conservative ideology and will look for an excuse to contort the law to implement the ideology. Trump seems initially to have put in the good type of conservative judge. I could grumble about them being young rather than experienced. But, still, they were selected mostly by a think tank. not by Trump. They seem to be more loyal to the law than to the person that appointed them. The Democrats initially were planning to rebalance things, but that talk has faded. I think now they owe enough to the judiciary not to attempt to ‘correct’ it. Perhaps they just have enough other things to do to rather than bother the judges?

At the same time I view liberal judges as reading their own opinions into the law and disregarding what the people really thought at the time. Especially in the early part of the US, when some slave owner wrote that all men were created equal, he meant all white male land owning protestants, not anything about women and minorities. Thus, they read the law as reflecting their own present day opinions rather than the wording of the text or the intent of the authors. This could be interpreted as either a flaw or a boon. I am of mixed mind.

But at any rate, if you step out of line since Watergate you get stepped on. The Republicans should learn to follow the law, the Democrats to keep their pants zipped. If you always lived outside the law, you should not draw the attention that comes with the political game. If Trump had stayed a reality TV star, he likely would have avoided the lawsuits, debts and criminal charges he is now facing.

I’m not one to care a lot about the infinite genders, but if you don’t have the courtesy and respect to honor people’s desires I would think less of you. Reds seem to think they have a right to insult people. I’m dubious.

Do you have any other areas you wish me to respond to? And regardless, pass the popcorn.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Bob Butler »

One more thought on the 'all men are created equal' quote. Jefferson might well have meant white male heterosexual protestants. It occurs to me that if you translate that group to the modern internet warrior's lingo, it could be translated as 'alll elites are created equal'.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests