"Biden says he’s not ‘hiding’ at home but ‘winning’ against Trump" by Reid J. Epstein New York Times, May 12, 2020
WASHINGTON — Former vice president Joe Biden on Tuesday morning rejected the notion that he is “hiding” at his Delaware home amid the coronavirus pandemic, arguing that he is complying with public health guidelines and declaring that he is “winning” against President Trump.
Biden has faced mounting concerns from Democratic donors, former Obama administration officials, and aides to former 2020 primary rivals that his from-the-basement campaign has left him far less visible to US voters than Trump. Many of these allies argue that, while Biden leads Trump in many current polls, the presumptive Democratic nominee and his campaign need to become more nimble and creative against a president who dominates attention through televised appearances and use of social media.
I highlighted the crap just to point out how sick I am of the wre$tling match of politics when both are driven by the same ma$ters. Feckless minions or evil collaborators, it matters not.
Asked by George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “Good Morning America” when he will “be back on the campaign trail,” Biden, appearing from the makeshift television studio at his home, said he is “on the campaign trail now.”
Why doesn't he just get his own JouTube channel then?
“Everybody says, you know, ‘Biden’s hiding,’ but I tell you something, we’re doing very well,” Biden said. “We’re winning, if you look at all the polling data. I’m not saying that’s going to last until November, I don’t know, but right now the idea that somehow we are being hurt by my keeping to the rules and following the instructions that are put forward by the docs is absolutely bizarre. I reject the premise that somehow this is hurting us, there’s no evidence of that,” he said.
Said the same about his corrupt dealings in the Ukraine, and I suppose if one rejects the "premise" -- even reality -- it's okay. He surely must be climbing the walls right now.
Biden said he is following guidance put forward by health officials such as Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, who said at a Senate hearing Tuesday that Americans would experience “needless suffering and death” if the country opens up prematurely. The former vice president condemned Trump for defying public health officials’ calls to wear face masks around other people to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus.
“I’m getting really frustrated with, not you, but this, the whole notion that somehow we can just open, we can move,” Biden said. “I’m anxious to go out and campaign, George, you know, when I campaign I’m usually the first one there and the last one to leave. I enjoy interfacing with people. I’m not trying to avoid it, but I’m trying to set an example as to how we should proceed in terms of dealing with this health and economic crisis.”
Believe me, Joe, I want you right where you are for the rest of your criminal life.
The interview appeared as Biden received the endorsement of Stacey Abrams, the former Democratic candidate for governor of Georgia. Abrams is among those Biden is considering as a potential running mate.
For shame, Stacey!
During the interview, Biden also criticized Trump for his repeated and false assertions that any American who wants to be tested for the coronavirus can be tested.
“The truth is, George, anyone can’t get a test around the country,” Biden said. “It’s a fantasyland that he’s talking about.”
How would know all about that since he lives in dementia.
--more--"
He is looking worse by the day, still has not officially clinched the nomination despite it being a foregone conclusion, and let's face it, the VP is going to be the president (Obama? Clinton?).
Btw, did you see what was notably absent in the article or discussion above?
"Frustration mounts as Biden remains silent on sexual assault allegation" by Lisa Lererand Sydney Ember New York Times, April 29, 2020
NEW YORK — For more than three weeks, progressive activists and women’s rights advocates debated how to handle an allegation of sexual assault against Joe Biden. The conversations weren’t easy, nor were the politics: Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, faced one allegation; his opponent, President Trump, at least a dozen.
Biden has faced more than one allegation, New York Times!
Never mind the disingenuous hypocrisy by diverting attention and pointing the finger at the other guy.
Finally, several of the women’s groups prepared a public letter that praised Biden’s work as an “outspoken champion for survivors of sexual violence” but also pushed him to address the allegation from Tara Reade, a former aide who worked in his Senate office in the early 1990s.
The willful blindness is disgusting and totally discrediting.
“Vice President Biden has the opportunity, right now, to model how to take serious allegations seriously,” the draft letter said. “The weight of our expectations matches the magnitude of the office he seeks.”
Then Biden’s team heard about the advocates’ effort. According to people involved in the discussions, the group put the letter on hold as it began pressuring Biden advisers to push the candidate to make a statement himself before the end of April, which is Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Along with liberal organizers, they urged him to acknowledge the importance of survivors and the need for systemic change around issues of sexism and assault.
Nearly two weeks later, Biden and his campaign have yet to make that statement, and the advocates have not released their letter. The Biden campaign has said little publicly beyond saying that women deserve to be heard and insisting that the allegation is not true; privately, Biden advisers have circulated talking points urging supporters to deny that the incident occurred.
#MeToo/Fraud/Dead
As two more women have come forward to corroborate part of Reade’s allegation, the Biden campaign is facing attacks from the right and increasing pressure from the left to address the issue, and liberal activists find themselves in a tense standoff with a candidate they want to support but who they say has made little attempt to show leadership on an issue that resonates deeply with their party’s base.
What other choice do you have, and you know the Veep nominee is going to be the real president, right?
“It’s difficult for survivors to see that a woman who has more corroborating sources than most survivors have in similar situations is being tossed aside and actively being weaponized by cynical political actors,” said Shaunna Thomas, a founder of UltraViolet, a women’s rights advocacy group that is involved in the effort to push the campaign. “It would be an incredible moment of leadership for Joe Biden to show up.”
Since Reade spoke out in March with her allegation — that Biden penetrated her with his fingers in a Senate building in 1993 — his aides and advisers have denied it, saying it is “untrue.” They have remained unconcerned about any significant political blowback from Reade’s accusation, according to people who have spoken with the campaign, who insisted on anonymity to discuss private conversations.
OMG!
They are f**king the most disgusting type of organism that exists!
Top Biden aides are telling allies that they do not see the allegation resonating with voters in a measurable way, these people say. They’re confident that the allegation will not shake voters’ perceptions of Biden’s character as a devoted father and husband, with family ties forged through deep tragedies. They also believe that voters will view the allegation with great skepticism.
OMG!
That paragraph is even more out of touch than the last one!
They believe, are confident, unconcerned, and view allegations to the contrary with great skepticism.
Isn't that why he voted to invade Iraq?
I have to tell you, the condescension to women that oozes from the paragraph above is appalling. Woman who vote for Biden should be ashamed of themselves.
A Biden campaign spokesman declined to comment for this article Wednesday. A Biden adviser said that the campaign was talking to activists and that Biden considered their views important.
That's what they call lip service, and is that not just one more form of sexual harassment?
The Biden campaign talking points, which were first reported by BuzzFeed News, instruct supporters to describe the candidate as a “fierce advocate for women” who has never faced any “complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct.” The talking points also inaccurately suggested that an investigation by The New York Times this month found that “this incident did not happen.”
They helped advance all the Mueller crap, and the NYT certainly has helped him by running interference for him like they did Weinstein, et al.
Related:
"NBC Universal announced Monday that Andrew Lack, the NBC News chairman since 2015, would leave the company by the end of the month. The announcement brings to a close Lack’s tumultuous tenure at the helm of NBC News, during which he oversaw a turnaround in marquee properties like the cable channel MSNBC while grappling with a cascading series of controversies, including the toppling of star anchor Matt Lauer in a sexual harassment scandal and questions over the network’s coverage of Harvey Weinstein. Cesar Conde, the chairman of Telemundo, will replace Lack as the chairman of the NBC Universal News Group. He will have oversight of NBC News, MSNBC, and CNBC. Conde, a young executive in the NBCUniversal family, has impressed NBC Universal chief executive Jeff Shell with his stewardship of Telemundo, the Spanish-language network that has made strides under his leadership in catching up with its chief rival, Univision. The company said that NBC News president Noah Oppenheim and MSNBC president Phil Griffin will both report to Conde. Rachel Maddow, the MSNBC anchor, was among those at the news division who were publicly critical of Lack and the NBC News leadership team during his time at the network."
What took so damn long?
In a statement issued Wednesday, The Times noted that the investigation “made no conclusion either way.”
One person who received a version of these talking points said it was pulled back by the campaign several hours later because it was revising its strategy.
Biden has yet to be asked about the allegation in an interview.
--more--"
Oh, he got to that:
"Biden reveals allies who will help pick a running mate" by Katie Glueck New York Times, April 30, 2020
Joe Biden’s presidential campaign on Thursday announced the leaders of his vice presidential selection committee, moving his search for a running mate into a new and more serious phase.
Biden, 77, has suggested that the vetting process can take until July — but as a former vice president himself who has promised to select a female running mate, he has already given significant thought to the choice, publicly detailing his criteria for the job.
To lead the search, Biden’s campaign tapped former Senator Christopher Dodd, a friend of Biden’s who campaigned with him this year; Representative Lisa Blunt Rochester, a Delaware Democrat; Mayor Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles; and Cynthia C. Hogan, a former White House and Senate counsel to Biden. Garcetti and Blunt Rochester are also cochairs of Biden’s campaign.
Of course, he HAS NOT actually collected enough DELEGATES to clinch the nomination because of COVID-19!
Meanwhile, according to a Twitter post from MSNBC, Biden will publicly address an allegation of sexual assault for the first time in an appearance on morning television Friday, after weeks of silence on the issue that had prompted frustration from Democrats and attacks from Republicans.
Biden will discuss the allegation on “Morning Joe,” the a Twitter post said.
The decision followed intensive discussions in the Biden campaign about how to more forcefully confront the allegation.
Separately, in another sign of Democratic Party machinery snapping into place before the general election, Biden’s campaign and Senator Bernie Sanders’s team on Thursday announced an agreement around delegates that would ensure supporters of Sanders are still represented at the Democratic National Convention.
That is rather frightening imagery, isn't it?
The matter had been a significant source of anxiety and anger for supporters of Sanders, who had been Biden’s chief rival in the race, and the resolution of the matter is a step toward broader party unity. The developments come as elements of the vice presidential race play out in plain sight.
They throw you a sop and think you are to be satisfied with being taken for granted again.
Several potential running mates, including Senators Kamala Harris, of California, and Amy Klobuchar, of Minnesota, have campaigned recently on behalf of Biden; and Stacey Abrams, the former Georgia House minority leader and 2018 nominee for governor, has been especially vocal about her interest in the role, and a number of prominent Democrats have spoken openly about their preference for a woman of color on the ticket with Biden.
“Whatever that process is, it needs to work its way out to see who rises to the top,” said Blunt Rochester, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, when asked if she had a preference on whether Biden should select a woman of color.
“That’s probably the best I can answer right now, but I know there’s a lot of desire out there, and I’ve heard it from different groups as well.”
Then they want to lose?
I suppose if it is the right woman of color.....
--more--"
Certainly would me a momentous choice:
"Why Biden’s choice of running mate has momentous implications" by Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns New York Times, May 3, 2020
WASHINGTON — For decades the vice-presidential selection process has had an air of cloak-and-dagger to it. The party’s nominees would say little, the would-be running mates would reveal even less, and an elaborate game of subterfuge would unfold that captivated insiders and usually had little bearing on the election, but a convergence of forces has transformed Joe Biden’s search for a running mate on the Democratic ticket. His pledge to pick a woman limited the pool of potential candidates and intensified the competition; that decision has remade the tryout period into an unusually public audition, and Biden has increasingly pushed into the foreground the overwhelming reason that his choice may be the most consequential in decades: the expectation that the 77-year-old would be a one-term president. If that turns out to be the case, his running mate now could well be leading the Democratic ticket in four years.
Even if Biden loses in November, his decision will all but anoint a woman as the party’s next front-runner, and potentially shape its agenda for the next decade, depending on if she is a centrist or someone more progressive.
There is another factor at play. Tara Reade’s allegation of sexual assault against Biden has ensured that whichever woman he selects will be his principal surrogate battling those claims, while leaving many Democrats, men and women, convinced the party must put forward a female nominee in 2024.
Biden has chatted with Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, and held phone calls with senators Kamala Harris of California and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who answered bluntly “yes” when asked on MSNBC if she would accept an offer to be Biden’s running mate.
They should have refused his call, but I can understand Whitmer taking it.
Related: Warren calls Biden’s denial of sexual assault credible, stands by her endorsement
That article never made print, and Warren just proved what a complete fraud and sell-out she is to women.
A number of Biden allies are advocating lesser-known Democratic women, including Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico, a Latina who served in Congress and as the state’s health secretary, and former national security adviser Susan Rice, a black woman who has never run for office but who has deep governing experience.
Rice is out now that the Flynn unmasking is being unveiled.
Stacey Abrams, the former candidate for governor of Georgia, has recently embarked on a media tour to pursue the vice presidency. Whoever gets the nod, Biden officials say, it will not be until the summer.....
If the name comes up CLINTON, he LOSES for SURE!
--more--"
Of course, I say that assuming it is going to be a semi-honest election with black box voting machines and exit polls. The likely reality is a mail-in ballot subjected to massive fraud, with the cost approaching $30 million this November alone. When the Globe says state voting reforms can’t wait, that means they indeed can!
"Reade’s ex-husband said she spoke of harassment in ’96 court document" by Stephanie Saul and Lisa Lerer New York Times, May 8, 2020
Tara Reade complained to her former husband during the 1990s that she had been a victim of sexual harassment while working in Joe Biden’s Senate office, court records show, providing the first contemporaneous record supporting her claims that sexual misconduct occurred when she worked for Biden.
The records, part of more than 500 pages filed in connection with Reade’s 1996 divorce in California, do not specifically say that Biden, the former vice president and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, was the perpetrator, nor do they allege that she was sexually assaulted, her most recent claim.
The existence of the document was first reported by The San Luis Obispo Tribune on Thursday. The New York Times subsequently obtained a copy of the court file from San Luis Obispo Superior Court.
First Buzzfeed, now the San Luis Obispo Tribune scoops the NYT!
In the document, Dronen said he believed the events disturbed Reade and led to her departure in 1993 from Biden’s office when he served in the Senate.
“It was obvious that this event had a very traumatic effect,” he said, according to the court document, arguing that it led her to make exaggerated claims against him, “and that she is still sensitive and effected by it today.”
Was the break-up amicable because he just damned her with false praise?
--more--"
Did you notice that every single article that the Globe picked up on Biden came from the New York Times?
It's like they are PART of HIS CAMPAIGN!
Related:
"A federal judge on Tuesday ordered elections officials in New York to hold the state’s Democratic primary election in June and reinstate all qualifying candidates on the ballot. The ruling came after the presidential primary was canceled late last month over concerns about the coronavirus....."
Maybe that will clinch it for Creepy Uncle Joe, or will it be Nebraska that puts him over the top?
"Nebraska is forging ahead with plans to hold the nation’s first in-person election in more than a month, despite health concerns about the coronavirus pandemic and allegations that political motivations are fueling opposition to an all-mail approach. Barring an unexpected change, Nebraska’s primary will take place on May 12 — five weeks after Wisconsin held the last in-person balloting when courts sided with Republican legislators who pushed for that election to go forward. Republicans who hold all statewide offices and control the Legislature have encouraged people to cast early, absentee ballots; however, they argue state law requires polling sites to be open and that it’s important for voters to have a choice for how they vote, even amid health concerns."
Maybe he can clinch the first ballot nomination in Delaware.
On to the conventions then:
"President Trump has made clear that he wants a traditional political convention in Charlotte, N.C., in late August, with thousands of sign-waving delegates from out of state filling an arena to acclaim his renomination, but in North Carolina, they are not so sure. Even the Republicans. As the relaxing of shutdown orders across the country leads to alarming projections of a surge in coronavirus cases, some leaders of the president’s party in the state that is hosting the convention are striking a less rosy view....."
"Florida does not have to come up with a new way to list candidates on the ballot, a federal appellate court ruled Wednesday, dealing a blow to Democrats who argued that Republicans have an unfair advantage because the current system automatically lists their candidates first. Under Florida law, President Trump would automatically appear at the top of the ballot in November. That’s because top billing goes to the party of the state’s governor....."
What an INSULT coming from the Democrats!
Yup, we is all just a bunch of pathetic wretches who don't take our votes seriously, just mark the first name.
Of course, if the governor were a Democrat they would not be complaining at all!
I guess you can put Florida in Trump's electoral college column once again, with the Jewi$h vote pulling it out for him thanks to the third-party candidate who will appear on the ballot.
That will leave a leaderless nation adrift in a crisis as the president has put his political interests above the national interest; thus, under cover of Covid, press freedoms will die in the COVID concentration camps if you don't have the proper vocabulary.
{@@##$$%%^^&&}
I have a few choice words for thi$:
"House democrats unveil $3 trillion aid bill with cash for states" by Erik Wassonand Laura Davison Bloomberg News, May 12, 2020
WASHINGTON — House Democrats proposed a $3 trillion virus relief bill Tuesday, combining aid to state and local governments with direct cash payments, expanded unemployment insurance, and food stamp spending as well as a list of progressive priorities like funds for voting by mail and for the troubled US Postal Service.
The USPS better prepare for a fundamental shift in the way they do business!
While there is little chance of the aid package gaining Senate approval and President Trump’s signature as written, passage in the Democratic-led House gives Speaker Nancy Pelosi a marker to set down. Both parties are positioning themselves for elections in less than six months. It’s also the opening bid in negotiations with the Trump administration and Senate Republicans.
Oh, she put down a political marker thinking we are f**king fooled by it!
This is like the ice cream in our face bit on late night TV.
“Not acting is the most expensive course,” Pelosi said at the Capitol. “We face the biggest catastrophe in our nation’s history.”
Brought about by people like you.
House Speaker Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), talked about the Heroes Act aid package, in Washington, on Tuesday. (Graeme Jennings via The New York Times)
I'm tired of having "heroes" who are bought off actors in empty hospitals dancing to videos and all the other "e$$ential" workers being thrown in the face of us "non-essentials," too. That is not winning you votes!
The bill is a followup to the $3 trillion Congress has already spent in response to the crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic. The legislation is slated for a House vote on Friday.
Trump said last week he’s in “no rush” to get another aid package, and Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday dismissed the bill as a “big laundry list of pet priorities” and indicated the GOP would ignore the Democratic proposal.
“What Nancy Pelosi is proposing will never pass the Senate,” Wyoming’s John Barrasso, the third-ranking Republican in the chamber, told reporters.
Then the rest of this Bloomberg slop is simply filler, isn't it?
Among its key provisions, the bill would give about $1 trillion in aid for state and local governments. Of that, $500 billion would go to states, $375 billion to localities, $20 billion to tribal governments, and $20 billion to territories. $90 billion would go to states through education grants.
Democrats also propose providing $1,200 in cash payments to individuals and $1,200 for dependent children — up to $6,000 per household — at a cost of $599 billion. The bill would make dependent children up to the age of 24 eligible for payments, responding to complaints that college students were left out of the earlier round. It would also allow undocumented immigrants to receive payments.
That last bit buys them some vote fraud, doesn't it, and as for the children, Massachusetts families are get a lifeline against hunger: $400 per child from the federal government in the form of EBT cards! The ca$hle$$ society and turn to totalitariani$m is nigh!
The legislation also would extend a $600 weekly increase to unemployment insurance into next January.
One of the provisions highlighted by Pelosi is $200 billion to fund what Democrats describes as “hazard pay” for essential workers who’ve had to risk exposure to the virus.
Why didn't she get all that before when trillions were being lavished on corporations and Wall Street instead of getting angry at Jake Tapper for bringing up her loss of leverage?
Oh, I forgot, she has now laid down a marker as to why we should vote for Democraps.
--more--"
The Globe, of cour$e, agrees, arguing that Washington must help the states and cities because without federal money, states and cities will be left to raise taxes, slash services, and lay off employees, including firefighters, police, and teachers.
Related:
Trump rages against foes as coronavirus spreads
Isn't that Amazon's paper?
Maybe she could look into the foul spew and war lies that come from them on a daily basis, hmmm, or is she virtually powerless to do anything?
"Six communities that have been hardest hit by the virus — Chelsea, Brockton, Everett, Lynn, Randolph, and Lawrence — were all previously designated by the state as “environmental justice" communities. Each has a high percentage of minority, low-income residents, and each has high rates of asthma and other environmentally-related respiratory diseases, in part because of pollution. Researchers are beginning to see clear correlations between long-term exposure to air pollution and COVID mortality rates — a nationwide study from Harvard researchers this month found that long-term exposure to air pollution increases the risk of dying from the coronavirus, but as the virus pummels certain cities and leaves others relatively unscathed, experts and activists are examining how environmental burdens combine with other factors such as overcrowded housing, working essential jobs, and relying on public transit to tighten the virus’s grip....."
It's more than likely that COVID-19 is the deadly consequences of dirty air combined with other factors.
"The very nature of the presidency was under scrutiny at the Supreme Court on Tuesday, as the justices heard more than three hours of arguments on whether House committees and prosecutors may obtain troves of information about President Trump’s business affairs. The court’s ruling, expected by July, could require disclosure of information the president has gone to extraordinary lengths to protect, or the justices could rule that Trump’s financial affairs are not legitimate subjects of inquiry, but some of the justices’ questions raised a third possibility: that the court could return the cases to lower courts for reconsideration under stricter standards. That would have the incidental effect of deferring a final decision beyond the 2020 presidential election. The justices’ questions mostly reflected their usual inclinations, with the more liberal members of the court expressing skepticism of Trump’s arguments and the more conservative ones saying they were worried about opening the door to partisan harassment of the president, but Chief Justice John Roberts suggested that the case was in one sense routine. “It sounds like at the end of the day,” he said, “this is just another case in which the courts are balancing the competing interests.”
Just reheating the same old $hit.
Also see:
Trump tells federal retiree fund to scrap plan for Chinese investments
I see another Pacific War and the start of WWIII.
While on the topic of WWIII, this is what the United States and its allies need to do RIGHT NOW (listen up Trump, Pompeo, Kushner, and the neocon globe-kickers)!
First, secure Venezuelan oil. You will need the gas pump.
Next, use NATO to open up a 3,000-mile front against Russia, from the Arctic to the Caspian to tie up the Russians and show that Hitler dude how it is done (as well as Napoleon).
Then use our Middle East allies to drive into the soft underbelly that is Iran and up into Russia while at the same time driving up through Southeast Asia and landing on the beaches of North Korea to keep the Chinese tied up, with the Russians and Chinese eventually cornered in Siberia where they can be safely nuked.
It's a fool-proof plan, guys, but you gotta move now, right now.
I mean, what would W do?
UPDATE:
As Biden veep search ramps up, Harris and Klobuchar get a close look
Joe is at it again?!
Democrats unveil historic rule change to allow remote voting in Congress during pandemic
"A former Navy combat pilot claimed victory Wednesday in the fight for an open US House seat north of Los Angeles, a win that would mark the first time in over two decades that a Republican captured a Democratic-held congressional district in California; however, she said she expected to win in November, when the two meet again in a rematch for the full, two-year House term that begins in January. “This is only one step in this process,” she said in a statement. Republican Mike Garcia, a political newcomer, had a 12-point edge over his Democratic rival, Christy Smith, in Tuesday’s special election for the swing 25th District. An unknown number of ballots remained uncounted. Los Angeles County, where most of them are located, was not expected to update its tally until Friday. California routinely counts large numbers of votes after election day, and mail ballots can arrive as late as Friday and still be counted if they were postmarked by election day. With about 143,000 ballots tallied — almost all of them mail-in ballots — Garcia had 56 percent. All voters received mailed ballots because of the coronavirus outbreak, though a sprinkling of polling places were available for those who wanted to vote in person. The contest took on outsized importance as the only competitive House race in the country in the midst of the coronavirus crisis. It’s seen nationally as a proxy vote on President Donald Trump’s leadership....."
Then it doesn't look good for the Democrats!
"Senior White House adviser Jared Kushner raised eyebrows Tuesday by suggesting there was some uncertainty about whether the presidential election would happen in November as scheduled because of the coronavirus pandemic and that he had some role in making that determination. Hours after his remarks to Time magazine generated a strong reaction on social media, Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law, issued a clarification, saying he was unaware of and not involved in any discussions about changing the date of the 2020 election. Neither Trump nor Kushner as his advisor has any legal authority to change the timing of the presidential election. The brief and disconcerting episode raised doubts about Kushner’s familiarity with the laws and constitutional provisions governing US presidential elections. According to the Congressional Research Service: ‘‘The text of the Constitution does not appear to contain a constitutional role for the Executive Branch in such decisions.’’ A federal statute says that Election Day is to be held on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November."
The infamous "second wave" that is planned will short circuit any vote in November and we will be stick with Trump and the Kushner crime family forever.
They have already called Wisconsin for Trump.
Manafort released to his home for prison sentence
He's being compared to a Mafia Don, and they framed him the same as this guy:
"Ex-FBI official is said to undercut Justice Dept. effort to drop Flynn case" by Adam Goldman and Katie Benner New York Times, May 13, 2020
WASHINGTON — A key former FBI official cast doubt on the Justice Department’s case for dropping a criminal charge against President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn during an interview with investigators last week, according to people familiar with the investigation.
Just as Flynn is to be exonerated, the Deep $tate cretins leak to the NYT.
Department officials reviewing the Flynn case interviewed Bill Priestap, the former head of FBI counterintelligence, two days before making their extraordinary request to drop the case to Judge Emmet Sullivan. They did not tell Sullivan about Priestap’s interview. A Justice Department official said that they were in the process of writing up a report on the interview and that it would soon be filed with the court.
Meanwhile, Sullivan appointed a retired jurist on Wednesday to evaluate whether Flynn should be held in criminal contempt. The judge’s order is the second signal in as many days registering his resistance to swiftly accepting the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss all charges against Flynn. Sullivan appointed former federal judge John Gleeson as an amicus curiae — or friend-of-the-court — and asked him to explore whether Sullivan should hold Flynn in “criminal contempt for perjury.”
Maybe he should recuse himself if he doesn't know what he is doing, and then resign due to incompetency. Or he can do the right thing and dismiss the case.
Regarding Priestap, the Justice Department referred to notes that Priestap wrote around the bureau’s 2017 questioning of Flynn, who later pleaded guilty to lying to investigators during that interview. His lawyers said Priestap’s notes — recently uncovered during a review of the case — suggested that the FBI was trying to entrap Flynn, and Attorney General William Barr said investigators were trying to “lay a perjury trap.”
They are very good at that.
That interpretation was wrong, Priestap told the prosecutors reviewing the case. He said that FBI officials were trying to do the right thing in questioning Flynn and that he knew of no effort to set him up. Media reports about his notes misconstrued them, he said, according to people familiar with the investigation.
What a liar, but if so, the ma$$ media has been discredited once again.
The department’s decision to exclude mention of Priestap’s interview in the motion could trouble Sullivan, who signaled late Tuesday that he was skeptical of the department’s arguments.
Priestap and the Justice Department declined to comment. Priestap told investigators that he did not remember the circumstances surrounding the notes, and that he was providing his interpretation of his notes as he read them now, according to a person familiar with his interview.
It boggles the mind, the levels of disassembling to which they will resort. The tossing out of shit like this is an insult to the public.
Former prosecutors and defense lawyers called the department’s position hypocritical and troubling.
The department’s decision to drop the Flynn case was a stunning reversal, widely regarded as part of an effort by Barr to undermine the Russia investigation. The prosecutor who led the case, Brandon Van Grack, withdrew from it, and only the interim US attorney in Washington, Timothy Shea, a longtime adviser to Barr, signed the motion.
Mueller already undermined it with his report and Congre$$ional testimony; that's why the Democrats had to impeach to protect Biden, and when that failed, they Deep $tate and globali$ts that control them rolled out the COVID $camdemic.
Both Van Grack and Jocelyn Ballantine, another prosecutor on the case, were upset with Barr’s decision to drop the charge and his overall handling of the Flynn review, according to people familiar with their thinking.
Barr, who has long said that he had misgivings about the decision to prosecute Flynn, asked the top federal prosecutor in St. Louis, Jeff Jensen, earlier this year to scrub the case for any mistakes or improprieties.
Priestap’s notes were among the documents that Jensen found. The prosecutors already on the case, Jensen’s team, and the FBI disagreed about whether they were exculpatory and should be given to Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell. Jensen prevailed and gave them to Powell, who declared that they would exonerate her client, people familiar with the events said.
The criminal FBI tried to keep 'em secret and cover it up!
Priestap played a central role in the FBI investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election and was involved in high-level discussions about whether to question Flynn, whose phone calls to the Russian ambassador at the time, Sergey Kislyak, had aroused investigators’ suspicions.
Those phone calls were standard practice for all changes of administrations as the newly elected executive's team prepares to take over so that the changeover is smoother.
Jensen and Ballantine, herself a veteran prosecutor, interviewed Priestap along with another prosecutor, Sayler Fleming, and an FBI agent from St. Louis who was there to memorialize the encounter.
???
Justice Department investigators spoke with Priestap while they were embroiled in a debate about whether to drop the Flynn case.
Eventually the FBI agreed to release the documents because they contained no classified or sensitive material, even though they believed they were not required to share them with the defense, according to an e-mail from lawyers in Boente’s office on April 23.
Yeah, the main law enforcement agency of the nation considers itself above the law.
By the beginning of May, Jensen recommended to Barr that the charge be dropped, and the team began to draft the motion to dismiss it.
Priestap’s notes, taken hours before agents questioned Flynn on Jan. 24, 2017, showed that FBI officials were debating how to proceed and trying to determine the objective of questioning Flynn.
Priestap wrote: “What’s our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” Priestap also mentioned the risks of an interview, adding, “Protect our institution by not playing games” and “If we’re seen playing games, WH will be furious.”
Well, it worked, because that honorable man who would have been in the job he was supposed to be in at this point in time has now had his private life destroyed because of the FBI criminals like Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr, et al, who still have not been deposed or seen the inside of a courtroom.
--more--"
How much you want to bet the Supreme Court has to decide the next election (if there even is one)?
"Justices ask if chaos will ensue if states can’t force electors to back popular-vote winners" by Mark Sherman Associated Press, May 13, 2020
WASHINGTON — Supreme Court justices invoked fears of bribery and chaos Wednesday to suggest they think states can require presidential electors to back their states’ popular vote winner in the Electoral College.
The justices heard arguments on an unusual voting issue that could have important consequences for the 2020 presidential election in an era of intense political polarization.
A focus of the questions was whether states can replace electors who decide to vote for someone other than the state’s popular vote winner. If they can’t, “it would lead to chaos,’’ Justice Samuel Alito said, “where the popular vote is close and changing just a few votes would alter the outcome.’’
Justice Clarence Thomas asked, “Can a state remove someone, for example, who openly solicits payments for his or her vote?”
As odd as it may sound, those are the two best justices on the court right now. May God watch over and protect them (with a woman to replace Ginsburg?).
Wednesday was the court’s final day of arguments by telephone in May, with livestreamed audio, and dealt with whether presidential electors are bound to support popular-vote winners in their states or can opt for someone else. Arguments had been scheduled for the courtroom in April but were postponed because of the pandemic.
If not, they thwart the will of the people and our Constitution!
So-called faithless electors have not been critical to the outcome of a presidential election, but that could change in a contest with a razor-thin margin.
Thirty-two states and the District of Columbia require presidential electors to vote for the popular-vote winner, and electors almost always do so anyway. Under the Constitution, the country elects the president indirectly, with voters choosing people who actually cast an Electoral College ballot for president. It takes 270 votes to win.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said people become electors by pledging to support a candidate. What troubled her, Ginsburg said, was, “I made a promise to do something, but that promise is unenforceable.’’
The issue arose in lawsuits filed by three Hillary Clinton electors in Washington state and one in Colorado who refused to vote for her despite her popular vote win in both states. In so doing, they hoped to persuade enough electors in states won by Donald Trump to choose someone else and deny Trump the presidency.
In all, there were 10 faithless electors in 2016, including a fourth in Washington, a Democratic elector in Hawaii, and two Republican electors in Texas. In addition, Democratic electors who said they would not vote for Clinton were replaced in Maine and Minnesota.
Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig, who favors broad changes in voting, redistricting, and the way campaigns are funded, represented the Washington electors at the Supreme Court. Lessig briefly sought the 2016 Democratic nomination and called for presidential electors to support Clinton because she won the national popular vote four years ago.
If there is no electoral college then the candidates will only campaign in the big cities and states. It will make the actual representation in our allegedly democratic republic skew even farther from the character and culture of this nation, and I suspect that is the entire point of the exercise.
The Campaign Legal Center, which also supports campaign finance and redistricting reforms, warned in a legal filing that a high court ruling that electors are free agents creates the “possibility that presidential campaigns and outside groups could direct large sums of money to crucial or wavering electors.’’
That is the last thing we need, more money in politics. although at this point it hardly seems to matter. COVID-19 tyranny knows no party.
The closest Electoral College margin in recent years was in 2000, when Republican George W. Bush received 271 votes to 266 for Democrat Al Gore. One elector from Washington, D.C., left her ballot blank. The Supreme Court played a decisive role in that election, ending a recount in Florida, where Bush held a 537-vote margin out of 6 million ballots cast.....
There is some debate that 9/11 would not have occurred had Bush not stolen Florida and the USSC not awarded him Florida, and maybe there is merit to that; however, Gore and the Democrat senators had their chance to stop it and not one would sign on to the resolution by the Black Caucus.
--more--"
Related:
Trump lawyers press for immunity in defamation case
He's acting like the mayor of Atlantic City.
