The Proof Is In: The Election Was Stolen

[armati]

If this stolen election stands, there is no hope that government can be returned to the people.

References: a long list

I have read enough of the fraud reports, affidavits, and statements from election security and forensic experts to be comfortable in my conclusion that the election was stolen. But I am not confident that anything will be done about the fradulent election. The American elite no longer believe in democracy. Consider, for example, the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset. It is anti-democratic, as is globalism. Democracy is in the way of elite agendas. Indeed, the reason the elite despise Trump is that he bases himself in the people. Judges will not even preserve the vote record so that it can be investigated. In Georgia a federal judge has refused to stop the Dominion voting machines from being wiped clean and reset—


https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/1 ... as-stolen/

pcr and I disagree, he believes it matters, I see no dif between the 2 parties as there has been no change in foreign policy.
Eisenhower warned the people, jfk tried and was made an example of, today, Assange is the example of what happens to those that oppose.

[HitRed]

This is the best article I have seen on the election using math. It isn't evidence but shows where best to look.

https://votepatternanalysis.substack.co ... alies-2020

[jimboston]

If this stolen election stands, there is no hope that government can be returned to the people.

References: a long list

I have read enough of the fraud reports, affidavits, and statements from election security and forensic experts to be comfortable in my conclusion that the election was stolen. But I am not confident that anything will be done about the fradulent election. The American elite no longer believe in democracy. Consider, for example, the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset. It is anti-democratic, as is globalism. Democracy is in the way of elite agendas. Indeed, the reason the elite despise Trump is that he bases himself in the people. Judges will not even preserve the vote record so that it can be investigated. In Georgia a federal judge has refused to stop the Dominion voting machines from being wiped clean and reset—


https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/1 ... as-stolen/

The problem with everything this guy is saying (in the linked page) is that it all boils down to something that can’t be proven or disproven.

You have to take HIS WORD that the voting machines are/were rigged.

If you have the manufacturer give people the code they will just say “That’s not the real code, that’s the pre-fix code used in un-rigged machines.” Someone who WANTS to believe the vote was stolen will believe it regardless what you say or what you provide as proof it wasn’t. In the same way that a Flat-Earther will deny all evidence you provide to show the Earth is a globe.

The “Election Was Stolen” crowd keep coming up with new ways they think the election was stolen.
First it was all the mail-in ballots.
Then early votes.
Dead people voting.
Ballot box stuffing for Biden.
Trump votes thrown out.
etc.
Now it’s rigged voting machines.

They think that all these different ways is somehow proof or evidence in favor of their theory.
I mean... there are so many stories at least some must be true right?

In fact this is faulty logic, and having “multiple methods” is a flaw... and actually evidence that this is all just baloney.

Think about it... if Biden supporters could rig the voting machines... why would they bother with all the other methods?
They wouldn’t. The rigged voting machines would be sufficient. Having alternate methods in this case is not a good form of redundancy.
In fact having multiple methods would only increase the possibility of exposure. So in a black-hat opera like this you prefer one single surefire method to a scattershot method that conspiracy theorists are suggesting.

pcr and I disagree, he believes it matters, I see no dif between the 2 parties as there has been no change in foreign policy.
Eisenhower warned the people, jfk tried and was made an example of, today, Assange is the example of what happens to those that oppose.

You are right it doesn’t matter... because Biden winning is all part of the plan and has been part of the plan for awhile.

Biden won. The people are not ready to hear the truth. The Deep State released Covid (as expected) in order to destroy the economy and stop Trump. Trump managed to reduce the pain to average Americans as much as possible, but Covid did what the Deep Staters wanted (and what we wanted them to want)... and they got (just barely) enough Americans to vote against their own interests and vote for Biden.

This is all planned. Wait till you see what rises from the ashes. The average Americans (who voted for Biden in 2020) will be lying to their kids 10-15 years from now... saying they voted Trump in 2020, just so they don’t look dumb.

NCSWIC

[jimboston]

This is the best article I have seen on the election using math. It isn't evidence but shows where best to look.

https://votepatternanalysis.substack.co ... alies-2020

1) Please explain to me your educational background so we can weigh your ability to actually understand the math they talk about in this article.

2) This article published on Substack provides no info about the author(s). Why is the author(s) afraid to identify himself/herself? There is no reference to where this data was retrieved from so we don’t even know if the raw data used in the analysis is accurate. Why are they only analyzing the data in these States? Can we see how the data looks in all 50 States? It’s not even clear if they are looking at individual counties or the whole State.

3) Do you people really think that IF Biden and his supports could rig the machines or add votes that they would do so in an anomalous manner?

In any large set of data there will be anomalies. If you were rigging an election you would add votes slowly... not all at once.

It’s silly. Only it ain’t because the idea being perpetuated is dangerous.

[Jdsizzleslice]

1) Please explain to me your educational background so we can weigh your ability to actually understand the math they talk about in this article

How incredibly insulting to HitRed. You're basically saying that if he doesn't have a math degree, he is not able to understand how math works.

If I use your logic, only Electrical Engineers would be credible enough to use an iPhone, because everyone else wouldn't be educated enough with electronics to properly use an iPhone.

Jim, I want to be nice to you man, but this is complete hypocrisy coming from you. How about we weigh your educational background against your statements here in this forum? Tell us Jim, what is your educational background? G.E.D? Some College? Bachelors Degree? Graduate Degree?

[HitRed]

Your qualifications to become Mr. Negative are incredible.

Jim, you’re hired!

[jusplay4fun]

Barr Says No Evidence of Widespread Voter Fraud in Election
Attorney general’s comments contradict President Trump, who pressed forward with legal challenges

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-campaign-files-more-election-challenges-in-wisconsin-michigan-11606849219

The Justice Department hasn’t found evidence of widespread voter fraud that could reverse President-elect Joe Biden’s election victory, Attorney General William Barr said Tuesday, dealing a blow to President Trump as he launched fresh legal claims to contest the results.

Mr. Barr told the Associated Press that federal prosecutors and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents have probed complaints of voter fraud, including allegations around voting machines skewing the results.

[jimboston]

1) Please explain to me your educational background so we can weigh your ability to actually understand the math they talk about in this article

How incredibly insulting to HitRed. You're basically saying that if he doesn't have a math degree, he is not able to understand how math works.

Insulting? How so?

I have not said he’s incapable of understanding the article. I am asking him to give his statements some weight by clarifying how he processes the article? Educational background doesn’t have to be formal education... it can be experience or knowledge obtained through self education.

I don’t think you need a math degree to understand the article... but you do need some specialized knowledge, mostly in statistical analysis.

Did you read the article? I reviewed it, maybe read about 25%. I took Engineering Level math in college and that was no help... it was my Statistics courses supported by some work experiences that enable me to process SOME of what the article said. If I spent a day reading it while reviewing some of my old college books I’d probably grasp it more fully. That said I got a fair overview. I read enough to see that the author’s conclusions are not fully supported without understanding the process of how votes are tallied and the upload process at the ground level. The author is cherry-picking and it’s obvious.

I would say maybe less then 5% of the adult public in the US can read the linked article and make a good assessment of its’ validity.
(This is my subjective opinion of the general knowledge and intelligence of the average American. I’ll admit I don’t have a high opinion.)

If I use your logic, only Electrical Engineers would be credible enough to use an iPhone, because everyone else wouldn't be educated enough with electronics to properly use an iPhone.

No.

An iPhone has a user-interface specifically designed to be easy for an average person to use.

If you use my logic a better analogy would be to say only an Electrical Engineer can really understand the White Paper written to explain the Lifecycle of Materials in cell phones and their Environmental Impact.

https://www.ul.com/insights/life-cycle- ... ile-phones

A layperson can easily understand the summary (just like a layperson can understand the summary of Hitred’s linked article)... but you need specialized knowledge to know if the meat of the article is valid or bullshit.

Jim, I want to be nice to you man,

Then be nice and don’t assume the worst.

or not.

but this is complete hypocrisy coming from you.

It’s not hypocrisy. It might be wrong, you can argue it’s rude... but it’s not hypocritical.

How about we weigh your educational background against your statements here in this forum? Tell us Jim, what is your educational background? G.E.D? Some College? Bachelors Degree? Graduate Degree?

Please do... I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Industrial Management... which is essentially a dual Engineering/Business Management Major. This is supported by 25+ years in the computer industry, including 10+ years running a successful business. I read a lot, more since I retired, about 50% sci-fi stuff for fun, and 50% history books. Though I dabble is sociology and science books too.

That said one of the smartest guys I know personally has a GED as his highest education.

[jimboston]

Your qualifications to become Mr. Negative are incredible.

Jim, you’re hired!

Thanks.

I don’t mean to insult... but if you’re gonna post an article and claim it’s correct... I think you should read and understand it first no?

You can’t just read the summary and say “yes that’s right”. It’s called confirmation bias.

[jimboston]

Barr Says No Evidence of Widespread Voter Fraud in Election
Attorney general’s comments contradict President Trump, who pressed forward with legal challenges

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-campaign-files-more-election-challenges-in-wisconsin-michigan-11606849219

The Justice Department hasn’t found evidence of widespread voter fraud that could reverse President-elect Joe Biden’s election victory, Attorney General William Barr said Tuesday, dealing a blow to President Trump as he launched fresh legal claims to contest the results.

Mr. Barr told the Associated Press that federal prosecutors and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents have probed complaints of voter fraud, including allegations around voting machines skewing the results.

So Trump’s hand-picked buddy Attorney General agrees with me.

[Jdsizzleslice]

Insulting? How so?

You insulted his intelligence by saying you would need to "weigh" his education in order to "understand" the math.

I have not said he’s incapable of understanding the article.

Your statement demanding he provide his education infers that you think he is a total moron.

I am asking him to give his statements some weight by clarifying how he processes the article?

That's not what you asked, Jim. You asked for educational background, not clarification.

Educational background doesn’t have to be formal education... it can be experience or knowledge obtained through self education.

I don’t think you need a math degree to understand the article... but you do need some specialized knowledge, mostly in statistical analysis.

And are you going to ask every person you are in a conversation with whether or not they have the "education background" to even talk to you about certain issues? Arguments based on authority are illogical and are filled with fallacy, and that is what you are being right now. Falliable and illogical.

Did you read the article? I reviewed it, maybe read about 25%. I took Engineering Level math in college and that was no help... it was my Statistics courses supported by some work experiences that enable me to process SOME of what the article said. If I spent a day reading it while reviewing some of my old college books I’d probably grasp it more fully. That said I got a fair overview. I read enough to see that the author’s conclusions are not fully supported without understanding the process of how votes are tallied and the upload process at the ground level. The author is cherry-picking and it’s obvious.

Your opinion on the article should not be equivocated to your extremely limited comprehension in order to understand the full mathematical ramifications posed in the article.

I would say maybe less then 5% of the adult public in the US can read the linked article and make a good assessment of its’ validity.
(This is my subjective opinion of the general knowledge and intelligence of the average American. I’ll admit I don’t have a high opinion.)

Well it's nice to see you admit that you think you are the end-all-be-all for knowledge assessment...

No.

An iPhone has a user-interface specifically designed to be easy for an average person to use.

If you use my logic a better analogy would be to say only an Electrical Engineer can really understand the White Paper written to explain the Lifecycle of Materials in cell phones and their Environmental Impact.

https://www.ul.com/insights/life-cycle- ... ile-phones

A layperson can easily understand the summary (just like a layperson can understand the summary of Hitred’s linked article)... but you need specialized knowledge to know if the meat of the article is valid or bullshit.

Yes, that's exactly what you are saying. You're saying HitRed needs to read the math version of the "White Paper on Statistics" in order to understand the article. Your logic is extremely invalid. According to your logic, you need to understand how an iPhone works completely in order to even be able to comment on it (AKA, HitRed needs to have the statistical background in order to completely and fully understand the math in his linked article). Seeing as how you don't have any education in Electrical Engineering, and therefore don't understand how an iPhone's digitizer, LCD screen, MPC, battery, ADCs, MOS and Gate Logic, etc. work, you are therefore unqualified to have any opinion about how an iPhone works.

Jim, this is EXACTLY what you sound like. Condescending, at best. Doughebag egotistical narcissist at medium.

Then be nice and don’t assume the worst.

or not.

Jim, with my many conversations with you, I try not to assume the worst in most of my initial posts. Your responses only affirm that you cannot be reasoned with, and that you are only looking to be right. You don't want to have an exchange of ideas here. I didn't comment in this thread to try and have a discussion with you. I know that is fruitless.

I commented to call you out in your hypocrisy and bullcrap.

It’s not hypocrisy. It might be wrong, you can argue it’s rude... but it’s not hypocritical.

It is exactly hypocritical, and it's even textbook.

Please do... I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Industrial Management... which is essentially a dual Engineering/Business Management Major. This is supported by 25+ years in the computer industry, including 10+ years running a successful business. I read a lot, more since I retired, about 50% sci-fi stuff for fun, and 50% history books. Though I dabble is sociology and science books too.

That said one of the smartest guys I know personally has a GED as his highest education.

Your education has nothing to do with your comprehension to understand things outside of your knowledge base. You even state this yourself. I have a Masters in Electrical Engineering, with Math Minors in both undergrad and grad degrees. But do you know why I don't talk about it that often and I don't use it to make points based on authority? Because we all have areas in which we are not the most knowledgeable, but still are competent enough to understand what is going on. You shouldn't require a specific educational background just for having the privilege of talking to you. Your educational background does not dictate how logical or illogical your argument is. Period.

You don't need a business degree in order to understand economics. You don't need an engineering degree to understand how a computer works. And you don't need a math degree to understand how statistics works.

Jim, you can talk all day and night about how others are wrong, and you are the only source of right that can ever exist in this form. But don't you dare insult the intelligence of others by requiring they have your standard of education background just to have a discussion with you.

Honestly, one of the most pathetic lines of logic you have used thusfar Jim.

[jimboston]

Insulting? How so?

You insulted his intelligence by saying you would need to "weigh" his education in order to "understand" the math.

Read my post. I used the word “we”, not the word “I”.

Go on... read it.

I have not said he’s incapable of understanding the article.

Your statement demanding he provide his education infers that you think he is a total moron.

Please look up the definition of the words infer and imply.
Go on...

https://www.google.com/search?q=infer&i ... ent=safari
https://www.google.com/search?q=imply&i ... ent=safari

You are suggesting that I am implying he’s a moron. I don’t think I am doing that.

You however are inferring that I believe that, even though that wasn’t stated.

I am asking him to give his statements some weight by clarifying how he processes the article?

That's not what you asked, Jim. You asked for educational background, not clarification.

I asked for educational background so we could give weight to the validity of his believe by understanding how he processed the article.

Do I have to type a thesis out for you to understand me? I am not able to use any common language or shorthand?

Educational background doesn’t have to be formal education... it can be experience or knowledge obtained through self education.

I don’t think you need a math degree to understand the article... but you do need some specialized knowledge, mostly in statistical analysis.

And are you going to ask every person you are in a conversation with whether or not they have the "education background" to even talk to you about certain issues? Arguments based on authority are illogical and are filled with fallacy, and that is what you are being right now. Falliable and illogical.

No. He posted a pretty detailed article that, in my opinion, needs a fair amount of knowledge to really comprehend.

If you’re gonna post something like that and state it’s 100% true, then yah... I want to know why you think you’re qualified to make that assessment. Is this required for ever post? No. Shit, it’s not like it’s even “required” for this post. He could stand up for himself and just tell me to GFY.

Did you read the article? I reviewed it, maybe read about 25%. I took Engineering Level math in college and that was no help... it was my Statistics courses supported by some work experiences that enable me to process SOME of what the article said. If I spent a day reading it while reviewing some of my old college books I’d probably grasp it more fully. That said I got a fair overview. I read enough to see that the author’s conclusions are not fully supported without understanding the process of how votes are tallied and the upload process at the ground level. The author is cherry-picking and it’s obvious.

Your opinion on the article should not be equivocated to your extremely limited comprehension in order to understand the full mathematical ramifications posed in the article.

LOL

OK. So you misused the word “equivocated” there. I don’t think you know what the word means... as your sentence makes no sense.

https://www.google.com/search?q=equivoc ... ent=safari


Also, you didn’t answer my question. Did you read the article? You’re telling me I have an “extremely limited comprehension”... but you aren’t even addressing if you; a) read the link or b) understood the article

I fully understand the main thrust of the article, I didn’t get into the weeds, but the main point was clear. I also understood that the author (who is unidentified) cherry picked his data, and ignored important points related to collection and input of that data.

I would say maybe less then 5% of the adult public in the US can read the linked article and make a good assessment of its’ validity.
(This is my subjective opinion of the general knowledge and intelligence of the average American. I’ll admit I don’t have a high opinion.)

Well it's nice to see you admit that you think you are the end-all-be-all for knowledge assessment...

I stand by my comment.

Also, my comment doesn’t say what you claim it says. I am NOT claiming to be “the smartest” and the “end-all-be-all”.
(Though I am claiming to be in the top 5%.)

No.

An iPhone has a user-interface specifically designed to be easy for an average person to use.

If you use my logic a better analogy would be to say only an Electrical Engineer can really understand the White Paper written to explain the Lifecycle of Materials in cell phones and their Environmental Impact.

https://www.ul.com/insights/life-cycle- ... ile-phones

A layperson can easily understand the summary (just like a layperson can understand the summary of Hitred’s linked article)... but you need specialized knowledge to know if the meat of the article is valid or bullshit.

Yes, that's exactly what you are saying. You're saying HitRed needs to read the math version of the "White Paper on Statistics" in order to understand the article. Your logic is extremely invalid. According to your logic, you need to understand how an iPhone works completely in order to even be able to comment on it (AKA, HitRed needs to have the statistical background in order to completely and fully understand the math in his linked article). Seeing as how you don't have any education in Electrical Engineering, and therefore don't understand how an iPhone's digitizer, LCD screen, MPC, battery, ADCs, MOS and Gate Logic, etc. work, you are therefore unqualified to have any opinion about how an iPhone works.

Yawn. Your analogies fail.

Jim, this is EXACTLY what you sound like. Condescending, at best. Doughebag egotistical narcissist at medium.

Condescending is not necessarily wrong. Just want to make sure you understand that.

If someone is going to post an article with detailed Statistical Analysis at it’s core... AND claim it’s “proof” of something... then yeah, I’m gonna be a bit condescending if that person can’t explain the statistics used in the “proof”.

Now note... I never said HR couldn’t do that. I simply asked if he could.

Then be nice and don’t assume the worst.

or not.

Jim, with my many conversations with you, I try not to assume the worst in most of my initial posts.

Lie. You immediately jumped down my throat. It’s fine. That’s your MO.

Your responses only affirm that you cannot be reasoned with, and that you are only looking to be right.

I can be reasoned with when people use ‘reasonable tones’... though I will admit lI like to be right.

You don't want to have an exchange of ideas here.

Wrong.

I didn't comment in this thread to try and have a discussion with you. I know that is fruitless.

I commented to call you out in your hypocrisy and bullcrap.

You commented to TRY to bash me and call me out.

Again... I can see how I may sometimes off as condescending and a “know-it-all”.
This especially true when responding to you, for obvious reasons.

Calling me a hypocrite is off based and unfounded.

It’s not hypocrisy. It might be wrong, you can argue it’s rude... but it’s not hypocritical.

It is exactly hypocritical, and it's even textbook.

Hypocrisy:
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

Please explain to me how my posts are “textbook” hypocrisy?

Please do... I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Industrial Management... which is essentially a dual Engineering/Business Management Major. This is supported by 25+ years in the computer industry, including 10+ years running a successful business. I read a lot, more since I retired, about 50% sci-fi stuff for fun, and 50% history books. Though I dabble is sociology and science books too.

That said one of the smartest guys I know personally has a GED as his highest education.

Your education has nothing to do with your comprehension to understand things outside of your knowledge base. You even state this yourself. I have a Masters in Electrical Engineering, with Math Minors in both undergrad and grad degrees. But do you know why I don't talk about it that often and I don't use it to make points based on authority? Because we all have areas in which we are not the most knowledgeable, but still are competent enough to understand what is going on. You shouldn't require a specific educational background just for having the privilege of talking to you. Your educational background does not dictate how logical or illogical your argument is. Period.

I disagree. Education does not have NOTHING to do with your comprehension.. It provides a groundwork and basis upon which to build... both inside and outside you field of study. Saying it has no value or “nothing to do with” comprehension is incorrect. It’s just not the end all be all.

Agreed.

You don't need a business degree in order to understand economics. You don't need an engineering degree to understand how a computer works. And you don't need a math degree to understand how statistics works.

but it helps

Jim, you can talk all day and night about how others are wrong, and you are the only source of right that can ever exist in this form.

You mean this forum?

I don’t talk day and night about how others are wrong. I just asked a question. LOL

But don't you dare insult the intelligence of others by requiring they have your standard of education background just to have a discussion with you.

Or?

LOL

You are taking a big leap with what I stated... again refer back to the definition of the word “infer”. That’s what you’ve done since this started. You inferred bad intent on my part where there was none.

Honestly, one of the most pathetic lines of logic you have used thusfar Jim.

It wasn’t even a point of logic, but go ahead... explain to me how or why it is ‘wrong’ for me to ask a poster his/her ability to process a pretty detailed paper on statistical analysis. I don’t think posters should link something as “proof” of some point if they themselves don’t have the background to judge if the statics in the paper are even valid.

[riskllama]

more gish gallop casserole, guillermo?

[HitRed]

December 2, 20

The media lies to one and all about the real happenings that are taking place. They search for ways to change the reality of the situation to suit them. Evil is clearly at work in your media today you can hardly believe a word. It is all about the false narrative to keep people in the dark about the reality of it all.

I come to dispel the darkness and let the light of truth in. Following me is the way of truth. The enemy is the way of deceit and lies that falsely lead people into darkness. My heart is sad at the many who fall for the media's lies and falsehoods. There are many who do not care as long as they can go about their ways.

Pray for the evil to be revealed and all who played a part of the evil’s ways. There will be an account of people’s actions. My plan will go forward with the right man in office. Do not let evil win! Must pray the evil schemes are thwarted and revealed to the public. The knowledge of the truth must be made known to all! I am the way of truth. Follow in my ways says the Lord God.

Go in my love and mercy.

[riskllama]

does "god" have any proof he'd care to offer up, HR? perhaps he could serve it as a dessert option, as the main course seems to be a steady diet of bullshit casserole being served up by president reject trump...

[HitRed]

Who is this lowercase "g" god of yours?

[jonesthecurl]

Pray for the evil to be revealed and all who played a part of the evil’s ways. There will be an account of people’s actions.

Amen to that, at least.

[thegreekdog]

Look guys, I have read enough of the fraud reports, affidavits, and statements from election security and forensic experts to be comfortable in my conclusion that the election was not stolen.

For those of you who find it too technical and volumnious to read through the massive evidence of election fraud,

LOL! Also... volumnious (a type of cloud I believe)...

Consider that Biden won despite the Democrats losing representation in the House.

This is my favorite one. It's not that people like Republicans but dislike Trump... that's too simple. If only you read the fraud reports, affidavits, etc. (if you don't have time, just trust Paul Craig Roberts) you'd know it's because the election was rigged!

[riskllama]

Look guys, I have read enough of the fraud reports, affidavits, and statements from election security and forensic experts to be comfortable in my conclusion that the election was not stolen.

For those of you who find it too technical and volumnious to read through the massive evidence of election fraud,

LOL! Also... volumnious (a type of cloud I believe)...

Consider that Biden won despite the Democrats losing representation in the House.

This is my favorite one. It's not that people like Republicans but dislike Trump... that's too simple. If only you read the fraud reports, affidavits, etc. (if you don't have time, just trust Paul Craig Roberts) you'd know it's because the election was rigged!

and who the f*ck are you to claim this? you a lawyer or some shit???

[thegreekdog]

Look guys, I have read enough of the fraud reports, affidavits, and statements from election security and forensic experts to be comfortable in my conclusion that the election was not stolen.

For those of you who find it too technical and volumnious to read through the massive evidence of election fraud,

LOL! Also... volumnious (a type of cloud I believe)...

Consider that Biden won despite the Democrats losing representation in the House.

This is my favorite one. It's not that people like Republicans but dislike Trump... that's too simple. If only you read the fraud reports, affidavits, etc. (if you don't have time, just trust Paul Craig Roberts) you'd know it's because the election was rigged!

and who the f*ck are you to claim this? you a lawyer or some shit???

I'M ROBERT PAUL CRAIGS!!!

[riskllama]

yeah, i don't know who that is...

[thegreekdog]

yeah, i don't know who that is...

You don't need to know who that is. All you need to know is that he is confirming your biases and therefore he's right. That's all you need to know. Trust him, he's not steering you wrong for some nefarious reason like money or fame. He's totally got loads of experience and expertise and tons of evidence that he'd be willing to go to court with... Motherfucker has three first names! What the hell else do you want?

[riskllama]

alright, i'm on board.

[Dukasaur]

yeah, i don't know who that is...

Paul Craig Roberts was a serious economist, once. He was well respected and a confidante of Ronald Reagan. Served in Reagan's cabinet or some near-Cabinet-level post, if I recall correctly. After the Reagan years he gradually became unhinged. Started gradually moving from the intellectual core of conservatism to its lunatic fringes. Eventually became an armati type. I think his last book was something like "Why America is Falling Off the Edge of the Earth" or something like that.

It's always hard to interpret TGD's motives, but I think the reason he's bringing him up is that Symmetry used to try to smear conservatives with their association to Roberts. Those who remember the glory days of this forum will smile at the memory.

[thegreekdog]

yeah, i don't know who that is...

Paul Craig Roberts was a serious economist, once. He was well respected and a confidante of Ronald Reagan. Served in Reagan's cabinet or some near-Cabinet-level post, if I recall correctly. After the Reagan years he gradually became unhinged. Started gradually moving from the intellectual core of conservatism to its lunatic fringes. Eventually became an armati type. I think his last book was something like "Why America is Falling Off the Edge of the Earth" or something like that.

It's always hard to interpret TGD's motives, but I think the reason he's bringing him up is that Symmetry used to try to smear conservatives with their association to Roberts. Those who remember the glory days of this forum will smile at the memory.

Believe it or not, I did not have Symmetry in mind. I suspect Symmetry would type something similar to what I've typed (albeit less awesome).

There are people who are profiting off of this idea that the election was rigged against Trump (with zero evidence); I believe one of those people is this Roberts fellow. So what I've done here is a combination of (1) parroting Roberts's ideas (e.g. "I'm really smart and will tell you what is going on") and (2) making fun of Roberts's commentary (e.g. "I spelled voluminous wrong"). Roberts is a grifter (much like Guliani and frankly Trump); he should be called out on his grifting.

EDIT - I did not all of the sudden become liberal (or whatever). I just don't like grifters, hypocrits or stupid people.