Posts made by Calatar

@ManHandler:

@Calatar:

You're right - it is just a theory… or a claim.  He never provided any evidence to support this belief and has since never provided any proof.  So it seems like it was just another of his spurious claims.

I'm certain people on his team prepared - evidenced by the number of lawsuits that were filed shortly afterwards.  The problem is the proof... which a court will require.  And, in court, perjury is a thing... so they can't lie.  And in every instance where a case was brought before a judge, the prepared and organised team produced... nothing.  And/or admitted that their claim was... not quite right ("there was a non-zero number of people in the room" being the most famous response).

So I think you're right - they did prepare.  But sadly for them, there was nothing actually that went wrong and so they couldn't continue.

Well that's just factually ridiculous. Sure some of the claims and lawsuits have been tossed, but the appeals process means it's going to the SCOTUS. So you claiming that it's spurious or whatever means nothing because we already established that this would happen and it would go to the top. You're claiming victory before the process has played out, and that's dumb. Just today a video was released of them pulling ballots out from under a table after they told everyone they were done.

You do know that’s not how your legal system works, right? You know what “with prejudice” means in a court judgement, right?

Because if you knew these two things, and still posted this… you are either lying to desperately try and cover up how terribly wrong you’ve got things, or you’re utterly ignorant. I really hope it’s the former and not the latter...

When you say some of the suits have been tossed... that would be all of them except for 1... last I checked, that wold be 31-1 against Trump’s comparing so far. Not a great record...

As I’m sure you understand what “with prejudice” means, I know you’ll understand it can’t go down the full appeals process easily (they have to ask the appeals judge to disregard the previous judges ruling... providing evidence for why they shlkld do so... as they haven’t provided evidence in the first place, how that is going to work is... well... it’s not...). And this can continue right the way up to SCOTUS, assuming people keep wanting to fund him (which looks like they are... which is terribly sad!). But they will also have no choice but to strike it down if no evidence is presented.

So you must somehow think that, for some unknown reason, they’re willing to let alll their cases get struck down in the lower courts for lack of evidence... just to present a bunch of evidence to SCOTUS... but why on Earth would anyone do it that way? Why wouldn’t they present evidence right the way up? Makes no sense... well, it does if there’s no evidence to present...

So then they will go vis the court of public opinion, via the state legislatures... which allows them to say all kinds of things with no fear of perjury. But so far, that doesn’t look to be going so well either (with Guiliani’s star witness looking... and sounding... completely unhinged...). And also note that the same star witness has not been allowed to give this testimony in a court... for obvious reasons I should think!

Do you really see this going well for Trump? What’s the logical reason why so much evidence hasn’t been shared that at least some of the lower courts should be saying... actually, there’s a case here...? Even Trump and other Republican appointed judges are saying: nope.

@ManHandler:

Bullshit. Communism and Socialism are the same thing. Socialism is Communism "Lite." Everyone knows it. The problem with the United States is that it adopted a lot of Socialist programs under the New Deal. You guys are quick to say, "the police is socialist so socialism is good." Then turn to say that the "police should be defunded." It's so hypocritical and dumb it makes me laugh at how stupid you are. Social Security… Socialist. Politicians use it as a rainy day fund for sippin' margaritas on the beach and Joe Biden is one of them and so is Pelosi. That's why the paychecks keep getting smaller and smaller.

Sigh… your arguments are always the same... I tell you your wrong about something and demonstrate why and how you might go about getting the information to not be wrong... and you say ‘no’ (in lots more words) and then just repeat the same thing again with another random inaccurate example of what other people have said and which I have never said.

This is not debating... it’s you doing the intellectual equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming la la la when anyone other than you is speaking. You are your own echo chamber.

Continuing like this is pointless with you... if you really do want I have a debate, I would welcome it. It’s fun. But at the moment you are seemingly incapable of doing so. So I suggest you toddle off and pop back when you are a lot more clued up.

FYI, Socialism is seen by economists as a route to Communism. As many countries can demonstrate (as I said in my very last post, if you had bothered to read it) that it doesn’t always follow.

If you can’t even understand that... well... I think you probably aren’t going to be able to understand much else more complex than this and you should probably avoid forming any opinions whatsoever.

@ManHandler:

Shut up! You don't even know what the definition of Democracy is! Calatar.

Really? That’s the best response you can come up with? Hah… I think I’m getting through to you at last. You wanting me to shut up means I must be

@ManHandler:

Ok. So if you post something from CNN, I'm sorry but my browser doesn't allow me to visit that site. So why don't you just go into your browser and make sure you can't see what Infowars says? You have the freedom of choice! I like to hear all viewpoints, and regardless if someone was wrong about one little thing that you can't even name… I'll consider your argument dumb.

I don’t block anything as I like to get information from everywhere. And knowing what’s being posted on infowars makes life easier when I’m disputing something. Usually as if it’s there, it’s wrong. Not always, but usually.

You just want to consider everyone’s arguments as dumb to make you feel better. But… that only makes you less capable of debating and more likely to look the fool when you do.

@ManHandler:

Right… it was just an "accident." Shut up. That's dumb. Computers don't forget how to add 1 + 1.

Well, a computer can be programmed to do anything according to you… so...

All joking aside, this is precisely why it is explained to be a human error... not a computer error.

@ManHandler:

You are in denial. There was mass voter fraud and the proof is there. Giulliani is not just making a "bunch of claims." He has evidence. An affidavit is evidence, maybe not proof. But it is evidence. And he has over 1,000 now. People willing to stand up to being condemned by the likes of your kind. The evidence then goes through a process before it becomes proof. That involves a Jury. So you may not be convinced, but you aren't there at the trial. They are not the same claims, they are different in every state.

Oh dear…

No, an affidavit is not evidence unless it is submitted through the court process. There is a reason why Guiliani is not doing that and preferring to go before the legislatures... why do you think that is?

A jury does consider evidence - but an affidavit only becomes evidence when it is turned into a sworn testimony... which... has consequences if people lie... wonder why all this so called ‘evidence’ never goes into the court proceedings?

@ManHandler:

Your approach and premise is all wrong. Trump’s lawyers are going to the Legislatures for their remedy, not the courts. They’re only going to the courts to get the ball moving towards the SCOTUS, who is eager to exercise their power. SCOTUS has already been following the case, and Alito is like: Gimme Dat Now. Trump's team doesn't need the lower courts, he already knows what they're going to do. The process with those courts is merely a formality, the appeal to SCOTUS has already been prepared.

Already considered. And yes, this must be his plan.

The problem with this? He’s got to prove it’s a case for them - which means proving the case. So far, all the legislatures don’t seem to be thinking this is going to go anywhere… and will also strike it down (fairly confident of that as Guliani hasn’t managed to prove there is a case for them to hear, although we will have to see!).

This being the case, SCOTUS will also have no option but to also strike it down.

@raphjd:

I won't get into name-calling with you.

I used descriptors for her.  Ok, I remembered her wrong, in that she's an arab jew, not black.

She is still fat.

She lied because she jumped at the chance to fulfill her narrative of labeling ICE agents as nazis.  She didn't fact-check it.

You claim to be center-right, but you care more about me calling her fat than the harm she did to the disabled war vet.   You care more that I called her black, than the fact that she is still a fact checker for social media.

Her "apology" was clearly corporate lawyer written.

You won’t get into name calling with me?! Hilarious… seeing as that’s all you ever seem to do (I quote: “leftist”, “low information” etc... I could go on...). I’m pleased to see you’re glowing up and putting this behind you... now that someone had decided enough from you is enough and to treat you with the same medicine. Glad you don’t like it either!

Exactly - your poor memory is not great, and so your descriptions are faulty... and... still... irrelevant. It should have been quicker for you to type in a few quick lines in Google to confirm her name, then post that.

No one cares if she’s fat. Except you. Do you like fat women or something?!

If you had actually used descriptors for her, you would have said: “a fact-checker contractor for PolitiFact”. This is how you should have described her... do you see now why your claims of “I just described her!!!” make you look silly, at best?

She still didn’t lie... keep claiming this all you like, but the more you do, the more it is you who is lying... unless you can prove it, as I’ve asked you for... so, can you?

And now you’ve made another claim about me... and yet you have no idea, at all, what I care about. So let’s clear some things up for you:
No I don’t care more about you calling her fat and black than I care about the vet... but because you did that, I was forced to explain to you about how silly you’re making yourself look instead of addressing the wider topic. (Same goes for your lies and misinformation about her reasoning).
No I don’t care more about the fact she’s black than that she’s still a fact checker for social media... any? Because I don’t care about either of those things at all... and why? A person being black is irrelevant to me... and a person making 1 mistake does not mean their career and job is over (obviously!).

Does that help clear things up for you? Or would you like to make some more incorrect claims?

@raphjd:

Why did they send everyone home, then count the ballots?

Very odd.

Also, why put the ballots under the table, hidden by the tablecloth?

1. They didn’t

2. Not really

3. Ran out of room elsewhere

As I said… looked suspicious... but on finding out what the story was actually, it’s not.

Read the articles I’ve posted, they’ll explain it for you.

@raphjd:

AND AGAIN, you claim I am uneducated and uninformed, while you are uber educated and uber informed, but you have no clue about any of this.

Your shitty news sites didn't tell you about this, but you could use different news outlets, but you reject them because they don't gel with your leftist agenda.  Don't give me that sht that you are center-right because your posts show you clearly aren't.

And yet again you lie and make up what I’m saying… please quote me where I say you’re uneducated and uninformed? Please quote me where I say I’m Uber educated and Uber informed? Please... just once...

For everyone else, they can see I’ve not made these claims - and have instead asked John to prove just one of your many many many claims... just one... so that I might believe you have any credibility at all.

You refuse.

Instead you will bring up many more claims, then claim I don’t believe your ‘news’ sources...

Well, here’s the thing... I don’t believe any news sources. At all. I use my capability to analyse and think to judge whether a news sources is valid. I check the sources. I check the story. I check everything I can.

This is why I’m asking you for the proof of one of your claims.

And no (and I really shouldn’t have to spell this out for you...) repeating something over and over doesn’t make it true. Nor does listing a whole bunch of other claims that you like to make, make any of them true - let alone the first claim you make.

The sad thing is, I read and source my news from a great many outlets - left and right. But you don’t want to believe that because the few sources of truth you cling to like to tell you that anyone who disagrees with you or them... is left-ist and “low information”.

The reality is you’ve got no clue at all whether what you’re taking in is true or not... you simply believe. And so when confronted by those of us who demand evidence, your tiny world can’t handle it and all you’ve got is some very pathetic attempts to insult people and try and belittle their knowledge... which only does one thing, every time you do it: prove you know nothing at all about what you speak (the only claim I’ve ever made here about you!)

For those who want a more thorough and nuanced dismissal of this nonsense story, I would recommend (instead of the Daily Fail!), reading here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?next_url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.washingtonpost.com%2fnational%2fsurveillance-tape-breeds-false-fraud-claims-in-georgia%2f2020%2f12%2f04%2f8e203752-3686-11eb-9699-00d311f13d2d_story.html

So I thought… hmmm... looks suspicious! Should definitely be explained... and... with but a tiny little search of Google... found that it had been explained already. Perfectly sufficiently to mean that it was not indeed suspicious.

I hate linking to the garbage that’s the Daily Mail, but even they managed to get this story right... and I figure that, as they’re a similar reporter of garbage news, you would probably believe them... so... here you go:
‘Georgia Secretary of State investigated ‘bombshell’ video Giuliani claims proves voting fraud and says it shows nothing out of the ordinary’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9019125/Georgia-secretary-state-investigated-bombshell-video-Giuliani-claims-proves-fraud.html

Surely it makes you wonder, if even the Daily Fail doesn’t want to write stories about Guiliani’s nonsense, why would you think it’s worth the time of day to post here?

Hah! That’s brilliantly funny!

@scratcher71:

I think the main problem is that a majority of these parties and politicians make false promises in hoping that they may get a chance at the spotlight. A majority of changes happen usually throughout several years, but what's surprising is that people believe that action will be taken immediately, which can, but just saying. It's a process that has to undergo multiple situations.

Yes, this exactly…

Sadly politicians, in order to get elected, need to make unrealistic promises to the electorate. And the electorate than feels aggrieved when those promises prove to be undeliverable.

The ones that are worse are the ones which promise blatantly disprovable things... verses the ones who promise at least something which is deliverable, albeit very difficult.

I would say the other issue is that the electoral systems of places like the USA and the U.K. actively encourage people to not engage with the system. Add to that the education system doesn’t teach civics any longer, so people don’t know what their civic duties are within a democracy... and then add to that people not understanding that politics is about compromise... and voila. You have the crazed group in the USA who think Trump was going to be their saviour... and who are now sad and angry... and the likewise crazed group in the U.K. who were promised a Brexit promised land which can never occur.

I hope we can grow passed this... but suspect well end up having to live through some pretty awful times (when viewed through history) before we have fixed these things enough that they no longer affect us.

@raphjd:

Why should I have to provide the most educated, clued up person on the planet anything?  You should already know it from your perfect news sources.  You don't need lil ol me and my crappy CT fake news sources to tell you anything since you already know it all.

Ok, let's try AOC and the Squad, Clinton's Labor Sec Robert Riech, MSNBC's Chris Hayes, Bill Kristol, Salon, CNN, and many others have called for lists to be made of Trump supporters or Truth and Reconciliation commissions.   Actors have called for McCarthy type blacklists for Trump supporters.   There are several videos on YouTube showing actual video of people saying this shit or showing their social media posts.

Countless blue check marks have said this shit and yet you never heard about any of it.  HMMMMM.

Sigh… again, more whataboutery...

No... let’s not try a bunch of other claims because you can’t prove the first one that you’ve made.

Why do you need to prove your claim? Well, you don’t... but then... no one will believe you and we’ll just think you’re a conspiracy theory nutter. Up to you!

So, I would recommend proving each claim you make... fully... one at a time... without resorting to making more new claims. As those prove nothing!

Completely understand that.

You too - stay very safe when you start moving in the world again!

@bc22:

Not going to happen, Calatar. You must think I'm very young and have not been anywhere yet.

The more I've seen, the less I know. Pales in comparison to my partner who has held security clearances in the past.

There's no shadow world, just reality (often filtered or changed) and a lot of people (including me) only get to see a small portion of that in a lifetime. Some of what is seen is often not realized for what it is. Ha, I'm starting to sound like a conspiracy nut myself.

Do believe in what you want to, as everyone needs their own straws to reality and their fairy tales. This will never be a sane world.

Oh I see! Sorry, I think I misunderstood what you were referring to.

Yes, I’m sorry - it did sound sort of conspiracy theory-esque! But what you were meaning is that we all just only get to experience a small amount of all the stuff that happens to happen in our world within the confines of our lifespan… which I couldn’t agree more with.

I’m a bit of an experience nut... so I go out and seek experiences, as much as possible (no, not in the climb Everest, BASE jumping sort of way!). I’ve had a number of different and fun ‘careers’ in my life so far... and about to embark on a new one. Exciting! Can’t wait

I hope you’ll continue to find and explore the world as much as you can too. And even better you can do it with your partner! (I’m the one who has held the highest level security clearances in my relationship... ).

@raphjd:

So, you are from Australia.  Whoopee.

You know… had to think about this more to realise it... but this is just sort of typical of where you’re at and what you don’t understand.

I explained to you something that shows, without any doubt, that your way of labelling and describing this is silly and is making you look like a fool.

Your response?

“Whopee”.

Surely you must realise that by taking that response... you are admitting you didn’t understand what I said (maybe? Happy to explain further for you, if that would help!) or you can’t... because the rest of your knowledge is so deficient you can’t actually understand these things (maybe akin to explaining general relativity to a child...).

Those are your only two options... that’s it. That’s all you can come away with this from...

So, do you want me to explain it further to you? Why calling people liberal doesn’t mean what you’re trying to make it mean? That saying that all groups of all of those people are the same, is literally nonsense? I’m very happy to give you a 101 in politics and how it sits together, if you would like it.

@bc22:

This reminds me of what I said earlier.

Most of the public does not see most of the dirty.

Every source you can possibly read, even the conspiracy, far left, far right, and other news sites, does not share or report everything because not everything is brought to light or leaked to them. Some news is actually faked or generated for specific purposes, down to a fine art.

Nobody will know the whole truth. Some of it is not worth knowing, and some of it will get one or many killed. Those in power can control some of the flow and ebb, but only some.

Don't put all of your eggs (trust/beliefs) in one basket.

I’m not really sure this is helpful, to be honest. Or true…

Why do you believe this? Have you had evidence to support that this is the case? I would welcome seeing that!

News outlets (real ones, with credibility... not hacks pretending to be news...) are under pressure to find these sorts of hidden things out and expose them. They’ve done this quite a few times in the past... even on places like Wikileaks (whose entire purpose is to expose these sorts of things!).

I struggle to believe there’s this whole shadow world that just no one knows about except for the people in it (and, presumably, all the people close to it?) and that shadowy world is so effective at keeping things from the rest of us that no one, no where, at any point or time, has leaked anything about it. I mean we had Snowden, for heaven sake... he let something out that’s pretty horrendous that the American government was perpetuating on the population. And he was not only able to share that, but leave the country with vast amounts of its secrets and travel to 2... how to say it... less on-side countries! And is still alive.

Of course there is one way you could find out about all this stuff for sure... go work for the government/go into politics. Then you would have to know, surely?  Why don’t you do that?

@raphjd:

LOL, ok.

Your news sources suck if they keep things from you, but you clearly like that.

As usual, you have no clue about what is going on, so you claim it's a CT.   You refuse to learn what is being said by people.  If the news goes against what you believe, it's junk news.

So, you are from Australia.  Whoopee.

So me asking you to provide me the proof you claim, is me also refusing to learn what is being said by people… right...

You do realise your logical inconsistencies just make your arguments look poor, your so-called knowledge look non-existent and your general world view look uneducated and uninformed? Do you realise that?

Please provide the evidence I've asked for or stop making spurious, silly claims. Or you can continue to look bad and make your side look bad in the process.

My news sources don’t keep things from me - but then again, they don’t make stuff up either like the news sources you listen to so avidly.

And no, I’m not from Australia... shows how little you know about the world, yet again