Jump to content

A story about a pathetic man's downfall [34 Felony Convictions]

Francisco 2.0

By Francisco 2.0
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 41.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • tx 3 putt

    1687

  • TwiceHorn

    1467

  • WhatTheBuck

    1322

  • atomheartbevo

    1315

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Beau Vine
Beau Vine

To be fair, President Trump’s four years in office weren’t so bad, except when when he incited an insurrection against the government, mismanaged a pandemic that killed nearly half a million Americans

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

Y’all about to get a great visual representation of Cullman, Alabama. Only good things to come out of Cullman are the Britt brothers (Roll Tide!) and orange rolls from All Steak restaurant. That pla

ChiTownDoc
ChiTownDoc

You seem really pissed off for a nontrumper.  Just laugh at the trumpers, bro.  They’re really gullible dumbfucks who worship this orange blob…you know, people completely unlike yourself.  

Posted Images

TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31457

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Now Trump has a laptop:

 

Yeah, I saw that, although it didn't have much about whose laptop it was.  Also, I read that it was a single classified document that was turned over, along with the revelation that it seemed to have been copied into/onto a laptop, which was then seized.

I think given the revelation that incidental/accidental document retention by former executive branch officials is pretty routine, some proof of nefarious intent or actions would be necessary to being the espionage act charges.  The obstruction charges would still be very viable, though.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sbbruin

Sbbruin 21849

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, I saw that, although it didn't have much about whose laptop it was.  Also, I read that it was a single classified document that was turned over, along with the revelation that it seemed to have been copied into/onto a laptop, which was then seized.

I think given the revelation that incidental/accidental document retention by former executive branch officials is pretty routine, some proof of nefarious intent or actions would be necessary to being the espionage act charges.  The obstruction charges would still be very viable, though.

Yeah, the “but everyone was doing it” defense in this case will go a long way

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31457

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

Yeah, the “but everyone was doing it” defense in this case will go a long way

Sad, but true.  I think historically prosecutorial discretion tends to require a case of either further disclosure or real recklessness as to the potential disclosure before charges are brought under 18 USC 793, even though the statute only requires willful retention. 

Pence and Biden could probably avoid prosecution solely on the willful retention and that would provide a principled basis for not charging them while charging Trump.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32389

Posted
  • Author
Posted

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/11/trump-campaign-report-electoral-fraud/

 

Quote

Former president Trump’s 2020 campaign commissioned an outside research firm in a bid to prove electoral fraud claims but never released the findings because the firm disputed many of his theories and could not offer any proof that he was the rightful winner of the election, according to four people familiar with the matter.

The campaign paid researchers from Berkeley Research Group, the people said, to study 2020 election results in six states, looking for fraud and irregularities to highlight in public and in the courts. Among the areas examined were voter machine malfunctions, instances of dead people voting and any evidence that could help Trump show he won, the people said. None of the findings were presented to the public or in court.

 

 

Quote

About a dozen people at the firm worked on the report, including econometricians, who use statistics to model and predict outcomes, the people said. The work was carried out in the final weeks of 2020, before the Jan. 6 riot of Trump supporters at the U.S. Capitol.

Trump continues to falsely assert that the 2020 election was stolen despite abundant evidence to the contrary, much of which had been provided to him or was publicly available before the Capitol assault. The Trump campaign’s commissioning of its own report to study the then-president’s fraud claims has not been previously reported.

 

 

Quote

“They looked at everything: change of addresses, illegal immigrants, ballot harvesting, people voting twice, machines being tampered with, ballots that were sent to vacant addresses that were returned and voted,” said a person familiar with the work who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private research and meetings. “Literally anything you could think of. Voter turnout anomalies, date of birth anomalies, whether dead people voted. If there was anything under the sun that could be thought of, they looked at it.”

 

Spoiler

The findings were not what the Trump campaign had been hoping for, according to the four people. While the researchers believed there were voting anomalies and unusual data patterns in a few states, along with some instances in which laws may have been skirted, they did not believe the anomalies were significant enough to make a difference in who won the election.

The research also contradicted some of Trump’s more conspiratorial theories, such as his baseless allegations about rigged voting machinesand large numbers of dead people voting.

A person familiar with the findings said there were at least a dozen hypotheses that Trump’s team wanted tested.

“None of these were significant enough,” this person said. “Just like any election, there are always errors, omissions and irregularities. It was nowhere close enough to what they wanted to prove, and it actually went in both directions.”

Senior officials from Berkeley Research Group briefed Trump, former chief of staff Mark Meadows and others on the findings in a December 2020 conference call, people familiar with the matter said. Meadows showed skepticism of the findings and continued to maintain that Trump won. Trump also continued to say he won the election. The call grew contentious, people with knowledge of the meeting said.

The research group’s officials maintained privately that they did not come into the research with any predetermined conclusions and simply wanted to examine the data provided by the Trump campaign in the battleground states.

Through a spokesman, Meadows declined to comment.

“President Trump received a record-breaking 74 million votes, the most of any sitting president in the history of the country. Anyone who takes a look at Joe Biden glitching through his presidency knows who really won the election,” Trump spokesman Steven Cheung said. Biden won 81 million votes and won the electoral college, 306 to 232.

Cheung did not answer a question about Trump’s reaction to the researchers’ findings.

“Our experts provide independent and objective factual analysis and as a matter of firm policy, we do not comment on client engagements or on privileged and confidential matters,” a spokesperson for Berkeley Research Group said.

The findings from Berkeley were among the many streams of information after the election that showed Trump he lost. According to testimony presented to the Jan. 6 committee, Trump was repeatedly told by advisers that he did not win the election but continued to cast about for others who would entertain his theories and say that he had won. Dozens of judges — including many Trump appointees — rejected his campaign’s attempts to challenge election results in court.

Trump has continued to spread false claims that he won the election, frustrating some of his advisers who wish he would move to a forward-looking message as part of his 2024 bid to reclaim the presidency.

The Berkeley research came about, according to people familiar with the matter, after Trump as well as some of his advisers became convinced the election was stolen. Others on his team wanted a sober analysis of what they could say and prove, some of the people said. Some of Trump’s advisers even hoped that a definitive report from Berkeley Research Group might tamp down some of the false claims.

“The goal was to find out what actually happened,” one of these people said. “If you remember in that time, there were all sorts of crazy things being said. We wanted to sort it out.”

The Berkeley research was done through a subsidiary company called East Bay Dispute and Advisory. FEC filings show the Trump campaign paid East Bay Dispute and Advisory more than $600,000 in the final weeks of 2020. A person familiar with the matter said there were also other researchers commissioned to help prove electoral fraud from outside Berkeley Research Group. The payments were described as consulting fees.

The states studied by the analysts over a period of several weeks included Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Nevada, according to people familiar with the matter. All but Nevada had been won by Trump in 2016 but flipped to the Democratic nomineefour years later.

The Washington Post has not reviewed a copy of the report, but three people familiar with its contents described the findings.

Those who worked on the report included Janet Thornton, who has about 40 years of experience in accounting and investigations, according to Berkeley Research Group’s website. Others included Craig Freeman and John Auerbach, the people said. Their professional biographies describe decades of experience in accounting, investigating corporate fraud and handling other complicated inquiries.

Auerbach, who is now with a different firm, declined to comment. Freeman, who left Berkeley as well, and Thornton did not respond to requests for comment.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AnTiM

AnTiM 1666

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Geeze, does all this research possibly mean that trump actually lost the election?  What a shock.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by AnTiM
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NAVY

NAVY 6740

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

And now I’m sad.  I sat through the whole shit-show Speaker of the House election - and not once did I Photoshop McConnell, Gaetz, Bobert and Green into a human centipede (the Speaker at the rear). 

Chop chop with your new goal MFer 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...