Reason Roundup

Barr Authorizes Election Fraud Investigations. Why Not?

Plus: Obamacare and qualified immunity before SCOTUS, Uber can acquire Postmates, and more...


Attorney General Bill Barr instructed U.S. prosecutors to look into any credible claims of election irregularities in their districts. A Monday letter from Barr is spawning a lot of worries that the Department of Justice (DOJ) backs President Donald Trump's spurious allegations of voter fraud or is at least attempting to lend credence to them. And yesterday's protest resignation of Richard Pilger, head of the DOJ branch that oversees election crimes, only added to that effect.

But Barr's letter doesn't give the impression that he's trying to help Trump hijack the election. Rather, he seems to be trying to walk a very fine line and perhaps even stamp out his boss's conspiracy claims.

There's no simply ignoring them at this point; not just Trump but other prominent Republicans have backed these claims of fraud, despite the total lack of evidence and the sheer scale that would've had to take place for it to have affected the election outcome. (Three states would have to be wrong, by a lot; this isn't a difference of a few hundred votes in one small area of one state, as with Florida in 2000.) Some listeners may never be convinced otherwise—but if anyone is to be, an inquiry blessed by Trump's top cop finding no evidence for Trump's claims is probably about the best there is to offer.

Provided these fraud claims are as bunk as they seem, then this is the best way to put them to rest.

Note that Barr isn't ordering a needle-in-a-haystack search, nor does his letter suggest that the DOJ expects to find anything. Addressed to U.S. attorneys, the assistant attorneys general of DOJ's criminal, civil rights, and national security division, and the director of the FBI, the letter authorizes inquiries into "substantial allegations of voting and vote tabulation irregularities prior to the certification of elections in your jurisdiction in certain cases."

That substantial there seems to be giving people the creeps, with its potential to imply endorsement of the allegations. But substantial does not mean substantiated, and there have been a substantial number of allegations from the president and his allies, claiming a substantial interference effort in the U.S. election that would have substantial implications. It's a weaselly word, perhaps, but not exactly wrong.

Combined with the rest of Barr's letter, I see no reason to read too much into it. His next sentence tells U.S. prosecutors to conduct inquiries "if"—if—"there are clear and apparently-credible allegations of irregularities that, if true, could potentially impact the outcome of a federal election in an individual State."

"While it is imperative that credible allegations be addressed in a timely and effective manner," Barr continues, "it is equally imperative that Department personnel exercise appropriate caution and maintain the Department's absolute commitment to fairness, neutrality and non-partisanship."

A bit down the page Barr stresses again that "while serious allegations should be handled with great care, specious, speculative, fanciful or far-fetched claims should not be a basis for initiating federal inquiries."

And "nothing here should be taken as any indication that the Department has concluded that voting irregularities have impacted the outcome of any election," Barr writes. He says he is offering this "authority and guidance to emphasize the need to timely and appropriately address allegations of voting irregularities so that all of the American people … can have full confidence in the results of our elections."

Isn't that what we want? Trump's claims can't be unheard by the many people who have heard them. Many people seem to believe them. No amount of media reporting otherwise—even by Fox News—is going to change their minds. Some amount of official attention to this is going to have to happen, and Barr's response seems measured and proportionate.

Even Trump's people are dissatisfied

"This is not what some of us wanted. This is not what I wanted," a senior Trump campaign official told The Daily Beast. "This will give the president [and others] something to play with for a while, but until Bill Barr actually puts up or shuts up, we're still where we [have been]."


The Supreme Court is considering Brownback v. King, a case involving qualified immunity for police officers. Here's how it started:

Twenty-one-year-old college student James King was walking between his summer jobs one afternoon. On his walk, he was approached by two plain-clothes officers, Douglas Brownback and Todd Allen, who were assigned to an FBI fugitive task force in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Brownback and Allen were on the lookout for a home invasion suspect. They did not have a clear or recent picture of the suspect, but they knew he was a 26-year-old white male, between 5-feet-10-inches and 6-feet-3-inches tall, who wore glasses, and apparently bought soda from the same gas station around the same time every day. Unfortunately for King, he fit the general description and was walking near the gas station, so Brownback and Allen decided to stop him.

While King at first acquiesced to the stop after spying badges hanging around the officers' necks, when the officers took his wallet from his pocket, King asked if he was being mugged and tried to run away. The officers tackled him to the ground, and when King put up a struggle, they choked him and punched him repeatedly in the head, causing one onlooker to tell the 911 operator that the officers were "gonna kill this man." As it turns out, King wasn't the suspect. And when the state of Michigan nevertheless prosecuted King for resisting arrest, a jury acquitted him of all charges.

Read more about the case at SCOTUSBlog, or check out the Cato Institute's amicus brief.

"While the issues raised by Brownback v. King may seem abstruse, the implications for King are clear: If the Court decides the 6th Circuit got it wrong, he will not be allowed even to try holding Allen and Brownback accountable for appalling conduct—conduct that the appeals court said a jury could reasonably decide violated his Fourth Amendment rights," explains Reason's Jacob Sullum. "According to the government, that is the outcome demanded by a law Congress passed to help victims of government abuse."


SCOTUS today will hear oral arguments in California v. Texas, a case challenging the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The case turns on three questions, including a question of whether plaintiffs even have standing to challenge the ACA's individual mandate—which penalized people for not having health insurance—now that there's no financial penalty for refusing to comply. From Jonathan Adler at The Volokh Conspiracy:

A threshold issue in California v. Texas, the Affordable Care Act case to be argued on Tuesday, is whether any of the plaintiffs have standing to challenge the so-called "individual mandate." This is a serious question because in 2017 Congress eliminated the financial penalty that had been used to enforce the mandate. As originally enacted in 2010, the ACA instructed Americans to obtain qualifying health insurance, and threatened to impose a tax penalty on those who failed to comply. Now, however, the instruction remains in the U.S. Code, but the financial penalty for noncompliance is gone.

Ordinarily, plaintiffs who seek to challenge a governmental action must allege that they will suffer a cognizable injury from the government imposition. So, for instance, an oil refinery challenging an environmental regulation would allege that they must spend money installing mandated pollution control equipment or face enforcement actions, backed by fines and other penalties. This injury requirement is rooted in Article III of the Constitution. As such, the Supreme Court has held, if a plaintiff cannot allege a sufficient injury, federal courts have no power to hear their case.

The lack of a penalty to enforce the individual mandate would seem to defeat any claim of standing on behalf of the plaintiffs. Yet the lower courts (and the Department of Justice) have acquiesced to their standing claims.

More on the case here and here.


• In the latest Reason Roundtable podcast, Nick Gillespie, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, and Matt Welch discuss whether the election outcome was good for libertarians.

• "The Trump White House on Monday instructed senior government leaders to block cooperation with President-elect Joe Biden's transition team, escalating a standoff that threatens to impede the transfer of power and prompting the Biden team to consider legal action," The Washington Post reports.

• The Justice Department will let Uber acquire Postmates.

NEXT: Will Biden Use the Broad Pandemic-Fighting Powers Originally Claimed by Trump?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Attorney General Bill Barr instructed U.S. prosecutors to look into any credible claims of election irregularities in their districts.

    At least they’re not manufacturing a pee dossier.

    1. Hello.



      1. Biden?


        1. Well played…

        2. Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this accation 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from tthis action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it

          what I do………work92/7 online

    2. Insider sources say that Obama used Republican ballots in Pennsylvania to clean the santorum from his anus after partying with DNC, Muslim Brotherhood associates during election night.

    3. Joe Biden announced Job opportunity for everyone! Work from comfort of your home, on your computer And you can work with your own working hours. You can work this job As part time or As A full time job. You can earn from 65$ An hour to 1000$ A day! There is no limitations, it All depends from you And how much you want to earn each day…………..VISIT HERE FOR FULL DETAIL.

    4. If Congress can officially look for Russians under the bed, the certainly the AG can look for shenanigans in the voting process.

      1. Especially when there are numerous credible reports of said shenanigans, including regular folks submitting affidavits.

    5. “And yesterday’s protest resignation of Richard Pilger, head of the DOJ branch that oversees election crimes, only added to that effect.”

      Should we not be concerned that a swamp dweller quit over being asked to…do his job and actually prosecute crimes if committed?

      1. Richard Pilger was in deep w/ Lois Lerner, so the ideological drive was there for sure.

        The report by the ACLJ says that “communications between Lerner and Pilger shows ongoing collusion between the IRS, through Lerner, and the Obama DOJ to criminally prosecute the same types of groups.” They shared “sensitive taxpayer information” between the IRS, FBI, and the DOJ. All of this information is fully protected under the law and should not have been shared.

        Forbes reported that ” a Lerner email from October 5, 2010, shows the IRS sent the FBI and DOJ a ‘1.1 million page database of information from 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organizations’ that contained confidential taxpayer information.”

        1. Fuck Pilger and anyone who swam in the same waters. That evil functionary was part of BigStates’ pursuit of opposition in 2010 – you know, while Biden the Fading was VP…

          This May 8, 2013 email by Ms. Lerner went to Nikole C. Flax, Chief of Staff to Acting IRS Commissioner Steven T. Miller, who would later be fired by President Obama:

          “I got a call today from Richard Pilger Director Elections Crimes Branch at DOJ … He wanted to know who at IRS the DOJ folk s [sic] could talk to about Sen. Whitehouse idea at the hearing that DOJ could piece together false statement cases about applicants who “lied” on their 1024s–saying they weren’t planning on doing political activity, and then turning around and making large visible political expenditures. DOJ is feeling like it needs to respond, but want to talk to the right folks at IRS to see whether there are impediments from our side and what, if any damage this might do to IRS programs. I told him that sounded like we might need several folks from IRS…”

          DOJ’s Mr. Pilger admitted that DOJ officials met Ms. Lerner in October 2010.

    6. Americans could bask in the knowledge that President Donald Trump was likely on his way out without yet confronting the reality that former Vice President Joe Biden was on his way in. But with the election called on Saturday for Biden and his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris D–Calif…………VISIT HERE FOR FULL DETAIL.

  2. “Attorney General Bill Barr instructed U.S. prosecutors to look into any credible claims of election irregularities in their districts”

    Barr really shouldn’t have to instruct this. Shouldn’t this be automatic for a credible claim of election irregularities?

    1. Trump refused to drain the swamp, and now it’s coming to haunt him. I dont think he, as a lifelong businessman, understood the moral depravity involved with being a lifelong bureaucrat, and how miserable and purposeless their lives are without individuals to stomp on.

      Reason used to talk poorly of such people, now ENB tries to suck them off to get into cocktail parties

      1. Good point.

        I’m also sure he got lots of cautionary advise that he can’t just throw out the entire bureaucracy.

        Maybe next term.

        1. I imagine its a combination of that, and his desire to be liked as a boss.

          He won’t make the same mistakes, whether it’s now or 2024

      2. Did he refuse, or was he unable to because he was hamstrung at every turn? There are I think over 10 million federal government employees. It’s hard to cull that kind of herd, especially when everyone that’s supposed to be helping you is doing everything they can to roadblock you.

        1. Poor victimized Trump. Other Republican presidents have worked just fine with the established bureaucracy. You know what a career bureaucrat hates: a moron who thinks he knows everything, and refuses to even listen to reports and briefings that they spent endless hours preparing.

          1. You’re really letting your neutrality visage drop lately.

            1. Dee is a lefty that lies about it.

            2. Learn about Venn diagrams and set theory. Criticizing Trump does not put me in the circle of people who support Biden.

              1. This particular comment doesn’t show you supporting Biden, but unelected bureaucrats that believe they are in charge of the Executive Branch, and not the duly elected President.

                Which is what lefties believe.

                1. You’d have me, if I had come anywhere near saying I believe that “unelected bureacrats [should be] in charge of the Executive Branch”. Which I didn’t.

                  What I did say, or insinuate, is that Trump plays the victim. A lot.

                  And I also said that he could have gotten a more favorable reaction from the bureaucracy if he at least pretended to pay attention to their briefings, reports, and advice.

                  1. So the top executive of the executive branch, elected by the people, needs to behave how the unelected bureaucrats want if he wants them to behave appropriately?

                    But that’s not close to saying they’re in charge?

                  2. It not longer surprised me when a Trump fan reveals cluelessness about getting along with others. It explains how you give no weight to Trump’s tantrums, vindictiveness, etc. when throwing your support behind him.

                    Listening to what people who work for you have to say is not letting them tell you what to do.

                    1. Ah, so getting along with your boss is required to do your job correctly and not undermine him.

                      We get it Dee, you believe in bureaucrats in the executive branch having authority not granted to them because of feelings. Because you’re a lefty.

                    2. Like I said, you are clueless about getting along with people.

                    3. Is the be nice part in the original text or did I miss an Amendment?

                    4. Remember when the Chinese would cut the nuts off of their permanent functionary class? Good times, good times.

              2. STFU, Dee

          2. All those other Republicans were carier bureaucrats as well and frankly barely republican

            1. I know you probably meant “career”, but I think I like the term “carrier bureaucrats”. Like maybe they don’t currently have a full blown case of it, but they’re harboring it and might transmit the disease to others. 😉

              1. Hmm. Typhoid Mary never got typhoid, but she did mange to kill a lot of people anyway through working for them as a housekeeper. This fits.

          3. Career bureaucrats *are* morons who think they know everything.

            I work with government people more than I would like to, and outside of the military, I hardly ever meet any who I would describe as having above-average competence in their career line of work.

          4. Other Republican presidents have worked just fine with the e̶s̶t̶a̶b̶l̶i̶s̶h̶e̶d̶ ̶b̶u̶r̶e̶a̶u̶c̶r̶a̶c̶y̶ Deep State.

            1. If you want to call them the “Deep State”, go ahead. Whatever.

                1. Repetitive R Mac bot is repetitive.

                  1. And Dee is a squawking bird.

                    1. Infinity

                    2. No, eventually you’ll either die or become unable to squawk all of this board.

                    3. Caw, caw, cawed R Mac, the craven raven! AKA, the Trumptatorshit-craving, raving, neuronless necrophiliac, who worshipped freedom-dead, 1-party, fossilized states!

                    4. More gibberish from shit-eater.

              1. Career bureaucrats that persist across all the changing administrations for 30 years or so is the definition of the “Deep State”.

                1. Yeah but if Trump just did things like they wanted him to, they would’ve just gone right along with him.

          5. Sure, big government repugs working hand in hand with big government dems to bring the American people the cornucopia of wonderfulness that is government run anything.

            1. Trump is small government?

          6. Troll post, I know. But other Republican presidents have worked just fine to perpetuate and grow the established bureaucracy. None of them vowed to do the opposite and “drain the swamp”.

      3. They should have encouraged Trump’s attempts, instead they chose to attack the messenger.

      4. Trump should have had a list ready on day one to fire the usual suspects. He had 10 weeks between election day and inauguration to get it done and he didn’t. Its a sure bet that Biden’s people aren’t so lazy.

      5. Trump has a developer has dealt with bureaucrats his whole life its just that those he could pay off

      6. Now, that’s just projection.

    2. The DOJ protocols are to look at fraud claims after certification of vote. In this case Barr is authorizing an earlier examination. It has been point out, as does ENB, that Barr left it all pretty iffy suggest his audience is one and not the DOJ field prosecutors.

  3. “Provided these fraud claims are as bunk as they seem, then this is the best way to put them to rest.”

    Where in this once great publication does this analysis exist? I see plenty of denial, not a lick of journalism. What’s the point of this rag?

    1. Did you even read the article, let alone with an open mind? In the link provided in the article… … We see that even Trump-adoring “Fox News” has had enough of Trump’s stupid bullshit and lies about so-called massive vote fraud!

      The point of is to report the news (with FACTS and LOGIC and LINKS, hello?) from a perspective of the love of individual freedom, reason, and skepticism about just HOW MUCH an ever-growing Government Almighty supposedly Loves Us All!

      You might find what you want at Breitbart, 4-Chan, or, via time-travel, the regime of Atilla the Hun!

      1. That’s your rebuttal?I ask for journalism and you send me one link, to another publication?

        I know you’re autistic but I’ve seen you do way better.

        1. If you flag and refresh whenever you see the SQLSRY tag, the comments are much more readable. He is like a retarded child that shits himself in the middle of the room and then complains that it smells bad.

          1. Except he doesn’t complain about the smell, he gets a big grin on his face and has a snack.

      2. Has anyone else noticed that Trump is now only re-tweeting Breitbart and Newsmaxx stories. It looks like he may have stopped watching Fox News.

        1. So has everyone else.

        2. Fox’s ratings went in the tank last weekend. They finished behind CNN and MSNBC for the first time in years.

          CNN providing relatively balanced analysis on Election Night, while Fox basically self-immolated by allowing its Obama and Hillary-donating election analyst to call Virginia and Arizona immediately after they started reporting numbers. Fox’s relatively conservative viewership isn’t going to stick with a network they think is blatantly trying to influence sabotage the Republican candidate.

          1. No idea if it’s true, don’t care to look, but I heard the guy that runs their decision desk is a Hillary donar.

        3. On election night my buddy sent me a story that Trump allegedly phoned Rupert Murdoch after Fox called AZ for Biden and demand that he change it.

          Rupert Murdoch refused. I don’t imagine it’s because Rupert Murdoch cares about journalistic integrity. It’s probably because no one, especially Donald Fucking Trump, gets to demand things from Rupert Murdoch.

          Now it seems that they are giving each other the silent treatment.

          1. I heard that, too.

            1. Cite?

        4. Did you notice that they actually filed lawsuits with evidence attached? So your comment works for the DailyKos, but otherwise ignorant.

          1. What “they” that I was discussing in that comment filed lawsuits? Breitbart? Fox News? Newsmaxx?

    2. “What’s the point of this rag?”

      To promote anything that will serve to lower COGS for its patron. Increased immigration lowers wages, so that gets pushed. Tariffs increase costs of imported goods and raw materials, so those are evil, and so on. Oh, and they’re not fond of The Drug War.

      Post-handshake with the likes of George Soros, other social reforms such as bail reform, de facto decriminalization of petty theft, and ignoring riots: all get ink too.

      1. That should be posted on the home page

        1. It does sum it up nicely. Add in ENB whoring I guess.

          1. Makes sense she’s so defensive about prostitution.

            1. Such gentlemen.

              1. Not aware of ENB writing lots of articles about sex workers?

      2. There is so much wrong with the idea of “17 intelligence agencies”. Why do we need or have 17?
        It is an easy oxymoron pun.

    3. You have it backwards. The people that are claiming election fraud are the ones with the burden of proof.

      1. Evidence has been presented, and it has to date been ignored.

        There’s a reason DC is still boarded up.

        1. Very little evidence has been presented. Trump has ranted vaguely on Twitter and interviews. Giuliani ranted at a press conference at Four Seasons Total Landscaping, but there has been very little meat to back up the sizzle.

          1. There’s been plenty of evidence, you just ignore it because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

          2. The lawsuits need to proceed to gather evidence. The democratic election officials are refusing to allow anyone to view the data dummy.

            1. Ooh, ow, you called me “dummy”. Excellent debating skills.

              1. Be quiet ENB. Not fooling anyone here.

              2. There was no comma so he didn’t call you a dummy. You see what you want to see, dummy.

                1. And does your MAGA-magic underwear protect YOU from what YOU do not want to see? What’s up-Chuck with that, up-Chuck?

                2. Oh, so he was referring to a “data dummy”. That’s probably some technical term used by experts in forensic statistical analysis.

                  1. I’m laughing at your stupidity.

        2. And what has been presented, has not been ignored. For example, there is going to be an inquiry into the affidavit from the postal worker that said that 130 ballots were postdated fraudulently in Pennsylvania.

    4. Wouldn’t the burden of proof be on the parties claiming fraud. How can Reason, or any other news source, disprove vague accusations.

      CNN did debunk a list of dead people that supposedly voted, but that was a list that has been circulating around the internet, not something from the Trump campaign..

      1. “It’s not on journalists to do journalism”

        1. Yes, this is what 6cc2d28 really believes! Real, honest journalism is ALWAYS pro-Trump, and is conducted by tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists at QAnon, drunks under the bridge, and fantasy-spinners at Breitbart!

          1. That’s not what he said retard. You’re off your meds again aren’t you?

            1. Wow, what clever wit! Did your mommy help you write that?

              1. That’s still not what he said, retard.

      2. Wouldn’t the burden of proof be on the parties claiming fraud. How can Reason, or any other news source, disprove vague accusations.

        Seems those proofs would be determined in the courts, not by the media. Considering they went all-in on blacking out anything that might hurt Biden last month, ENB’s claims of “total lack of evidence” are rather disingenuous in that regard. The media aren’t arbiters of what’s fact and fiction anymore, they’re blatant propagandists for a single political party.

        It’s easy to claim “tHEre’S No evIDeNcE!” if you don’t do any real, actual investigative reporting to confirm what happened one way or another. One might think that the fact that vote counting stopped for several hours in the precincts of several key battleground states that were critical to calling the election, only to have 100% percent jumps for one of the candidates in the tens and even hundreds of thousands immediately after the reporting started again, would be worthy of deeper investigation than a simple, “oh, well, mail-in voting overwhelmingly helps Biden, and the DNC says there’s nothing to see here, so we’re good!”

        With that said, if Trump’s legal team doesn’t have its ducks in a row when it presents its case to the courts, then this will ultimately fall apart anyway. For now, AOC and the far left going on their “Enemies List” kick right after the media claimed that Biden won, appears to have woken up a number of Republicans to realize that the Democrats aren’t actually interested in “healing,” and that they’re going to try and turn the country into East Germany if they get the chance. So instead of buckling to the media pressure to get Trump to concede, which was looking likely a few days ago, they’re now closing ranks and wanting to look deeper into what actually happened–which ironically makes them a lot more honest than the Democrats’ mouthpieces in the media.

        I’ll keep going back to what I’ve said on this before–this is Bush vs. Gore on steroids, and ultimately the Supreme Court is going to end up settling this. What would really make this lunacy dial up further is if they find so many instances of election fuckery in PA specifically, but also in AZ, GA, NV, MI, and WI that one or more of those states sees their final “official” count invalidated.

        1. the far left going on their “Enemies List” kick

          The ‘party of change’ going old school to burn the crops and salt the earth against those who refused to surrender.

    5. the fact that there is no evidence is the evidence. why are those who don’t think there was fraud compelled to provide evidence of a negative, when there is no evidence anything happened?

      1. There is evidence. You’re ignoring it.

  4. Provided these fraud claims are as bunk as they seem, then this is the best way to put them to rest.

    After having had to listen to Russia interference claims from top Democrats and every journalist over the past four years, I am hoping these never get put to rest. I hope it dogs them and their agenda (although without the press onboard it’s unlikely) through the first three years at least.

    We don’t get to claim elections are above reproach now just because our guy was declared victor.

    1. Reason loved the Russia narrative, and is not at all interested in the federal government doing it’s duty to ensure votes are counted properly.

      This place turned into a real shithole, may it rest in peace if Biden is elected. Apparently Trump was the only government entity worth screaming about the past four years.

      1. I don’t remember them loving RussiaGate here. Maybe I’m misremembering.

        All large news organizations are currently reporting, without evidence, that the state elections are untainted and that Joe Biden is officially president-elect.

        Unless OANN or Newsmax suddenly become major players, what was done to Trump will not be repeated on Biden. There will be no endless investigations, no scathing accusations, no pall cast over his administration because it’s “respectable” and without stain.

        1. Just like the scandal-free Obama years?

        2. Showing 25 of 1444 results found for: russia

          Active filters:
          From January 1, 2016 to present

          1. ???

        3. You do realize the investigation into Russian interference was initiated by Trump administration officials?

          1. No, it started prior to that when “17 intelligence agencies” claimed that it happened, only for it to have all been based on Steele’s made-up piss dossier and a bunch of FISA warrant requests with fabricated evidence.

          2. Initiated by people who became Trump administration officials.

            Do you ever not lie?

          3. It started in July of 2016 dummy.

        4. No, but they weren’t exactly pushing back on it. Jimmy Dore pushed harder FFS.

        5. There will be no endless investigations, no scathing accusations, no pall cast over his administration because it’s “respectable” and without stain.

          The FBI knows which party craves a police state.

      2. Cite for “Reason loved the Russia narrative”?

          1. What a fun little precedent you’ve set for yourself Dee.

            1. So, you have nuthin’.

    2. The “Russia Russia Russia” narrative was and is held up as Holy Writ by the Left. Supposedly Putin rigged the election because he “has something” on Trump. Trump is a “Russian asset”, “Putin’s cock holster” and so on.

      So if that’s true, why didn’t Putin rig the 2020 election too? After all, an asset that’s President of the United States is extremely valuable. Why wouldn’t Putin want him kept in place?

      1. Don’t forget Steven Colbert calling Trump out for having two scoops of ice cream while everyone else only had a single scoop.

        1. Speaking of Stevie ColberT, what’s he and the other taints going to do now that his only source of “jokes” is leaving?

          1. That Soylent Geek legit crying on the air because “Lardneld Blormph didn’t immediately concede!” has actually been one of the more amusing moments of this election cycle.

      2. With how shady the Bidens are the most likely scenario is that he has even MORE dirt on creepy Joe so there was no need to keep Trump around. No need to rig anything this time around, the media did that for him.

        That is of course if you believe Russia has the ability to substantially influence our elections, which they do not unless you consider Facebook ads to be substantial influence.

    3. so what you are saying is that you want to submit the country to 4 more years of BS and vitriol….. you don’t get to claim an election was rigged just because your guy lost.

      1. Haha. Yeah, that would be terrible, foodd.

  5. Barr: Just a reminder guys, your job is to fight crime.


    1. Barr: GUYS! What are you doing?!? Go out and defend the integrity of the Federal government!

      DOJ (chocolate on face): Hansel?

  6. No amount of media reporting otherwise—even by Fox News—is going to change their minds.

    Muh cherished institutions!

    1. How dare Republicans undermine a democratically elected President by claiming fraud and electoral interference!

  7. Google is now paying $17000 to $22000 per month for working online from home. I have joined this job 2 months ago and i have earned $20544 in my first month from this job. I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out whaat i do……. Click For Full Detail.

  8. ” . . . despite the total lack of evidence . . . ”
    Videos and sworn statements are no longer evidence? Really?

    Exactly how free is your mind, really? Or was it paid for after all?

    1. Mostly total lack of evidence.

      1. What is evidence? Are real people, making sworn statements, not evidence?

        I don’t understand this thought process. If everyone buried their heads, then the thing didn’t happen?

        1. That’s what they’re hoping for. It’s the same as the mostly peaceful protests, they want people to buy the narrative. In this case it’s that Biden won.

    2. We need more anonymous sources before we can take the claims seriously.

    3. But, 30 year old claims with zero evidence are totally CREDIBLE!

    4. Christine Blasey Ford: “Brett Kavanaugh stole second base when we were in high school. It was sometime in the 80’s, I think we were in a house…it had a bathroom, I know.”

      Entire media, including Reason: “These detailed and credible accusations are irrefutable, Kavanaugh’s nomination must be withdrawn! We believe women!”

    5. Remember…they thought Christie Blasey-Ford was “credible”, And she didn’t even know WHEN Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her. WHERE it happened. Her eyewitnesses didn’t corroborate.

      THAT was credible to people like ENB.

      You will literally never live that down. Ever.

  9. despite the total lack of evidence and the sheer scale that would’ve had to take place for it to have affected the election outcome.

    “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

    And the widespread “no widespread fraud” talking point is disingenuous. “Razor-thin margins” can be toggled by slight, um, mistakes.

    1. There are mountains of evidence of vote fraud.
      What remains to be determined is the strength of that evidence, and if anybody not on Team Trump cares about trying to keep this country from having an electoral system that sinks to third world dictator level of democracy.

      1. they need to look and even if it was all miss understandings and computer glitchs it needs to be proven to the public. And those who denied observers entrance need to be prosecuted. otherwise there will be no safe election in the future since there will be no consequences

      2. What remains to be determined is the strength of that evidence, and if anybody not on Team Trump cares about trying to keep this country from having an electoral system that sinks to third world dictator level of democracy.

        Again, we impeached the sitting President for the crime the presumed President, then VP, claims he committed.

        We’re already well into tin pot/banana republic territory.

  10. “a senior Trump campaign official told The Daily Beast. ”

    Name, or GTFO.

    1. It is a senior official. Why do you need more?

      1. NOT Donald Trump, “Junior”. Confirmed.

      2. Anonymous sources from left wing media is evidence, signed affidavits are not. How hard is this to understand?

  11. spawning a lot of worries that the Department of Justice (DOJ) backs President Donald Trump’s spurious allegations of voter fraud or is at least attempting to lend credence to them

    I know I’ve ragged on your intelligence (and your fugly appearance) in the past ENB, and I feel like I owe you an apology. I didn’t realize you were actually retarded. So going forward I’m going to try my best not to go after your intelligence (or your ghastly appearance).

    Take care, Einstein 🙂

  12. “Fox News just cut away from
    , saying the network could not in good conscience continue to air her false claims, for which she has provided no supporting evidence.”

    Something something NY Post,,, something, Hunter Biden’s emails… something, something, Twitter censor.
    Fox is in great company.

    1. Fox hasn’t been the Left’s boogeyman, ever since Ailes left the building. Besides Tucker, maybe Hannity, they’re controlled opposition now. Chris Wallace capering around in a skin suit to appease the God of Elections.

      You’ll know the Right’s had enough of this, when they take a page from the book of radical Islam, and guys like Cavuto start getting their heads exploded when they get into their car service to go to work. Taking another step towards the US devolving into another Third World shithole.

      1. Regarding Fox News:

        You guys remember the Twentieth Century Motor Company in “Atlas Shrugged”?

        That’s what the next generation of Murdochs reminds me of. Good chance they’ll be bankrupt in one generation.

  13. The Supreme Court is considering Brownback v. King, a case involving qualified immunity for police officers.

    Well, well, well. Helloooooo, Notorious ACB.

    1. Glorious if something actually starts reining in the beast of QI.

  14. The Trump White House on Monday instructed senior government leaders to block cooperation with President-elect Joe Biden’s transition team…

    Wake me when they pull the W’s off the keyboards.

    1. Wake me when Trump and Pence personally direct the FBI to set up a senior Biden transition official for fraudulent criminal charges.

      (For those who have spent the last four years with their head in the sand, yes that really happened. And it really is documented in the personal handwriting of two officials who were present, including presumptive AG sally Yates)

  15. The Justice Department will let Uber acquire Postmates.

    Easier to destroy the business model of one company than two.

  16. All those kids at the birder not reunited with the kids? It is because their parents refused the reunion by sending kids back to their countries of origin. Biden is considering a new pathway for illegal immigrants to send kids first to the border then let the parents come under the guise of reunion.

    parents will be given the opportunity to come to the U.S. to reunite with their children and pursue claims to asylum.

    While the administration is considering it and it is not final, this would increase children illegally crossing. A dangerous action.

    1. I wouldn’t mind those “illegals”, if they get votes they’re probably going to go to any future Trump-like populist. One that is interested in bringing jobs to the US, not sending them to China.

    2. “All those kids at the birder…”

      Bird-watching? Nothing to see HERE, folks! No birds here! Just bird-brains like JesseSPAZ!

      1. SQRLSY gets almost as excited about a typo from Jesse as he does a giant platter of shit.

      2. That’s literally what you are reduced to.

        1. Oh Great Eminent Legal Scholar… Have you gotten your GED yet? Maybe lame-duck Donald the Duck-witted could grant you and “Executive Fiat GED”? Just a suggestion…

          1. “Oh Great Eminent Legal Scholar”

            Where the fuck does this even come from?

            1. JesseSPAZ is counting on Dear Leader to appoint JesseSPAZ to the SCROTUS, if an opening should open soon (or other Fed-Judge, failing that), that’s where this comes from! WHO DARES to challenge the words of the Chosen One?!?!


              President Donald Trump declared himself “the Chosen One,” while defending his administration’s decision to continue the trade war with China.

              1. So it comes from your mental illness, got it.

                1. Wow, what literary talent and rapier wit! Let’s see if I can match or exceed it, with some OTHER brilliantly smart comments that I have created just now!

                  Fuck off, spaz!
                  You eat shit, you said so yourself!
                  You’re a racist Hitler-lover!
                  Take your meds!
                  That’s so retarded!
                  You’re a Marxist!
                  Your feet stink and you don’t love Trump!
                  Your source is leftist, so it must be false!
                  Trump rules and leftists drool!
                  You are SOOO icky-poo!
                  But Goo-Goo-Gah-Gah!

                  Whoa, wow, I am now 11 times as smart and original as you are!

                  1. No. Just crazy.

    3. Well, it’s just a first step. After the media does a big splash on the children dying in the desert, drowning in the Rio Grande, being raped by drug traffickers, etc. it will be declared the responsibility of the U.S. taxpayer to provide the children with safe free transportation across the border.

      1. trains have a nice historical record for safe effective transport – – – – –

      2. “After the media does a big splash”

        You don’t really think the media will cover such a story during a Dem administration?

        1. I figure they’ll blame it on Trump and then Biden will “fix” it.

          Come on man! Everything bad that happens in the next four–maybe eight–years is “Trump’s fault!”.

          1. I am making 8 to 10 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 3 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily…. Here is Jobs .

            1. I like this bot, at least he’s making plausible claims.

              1. Yeah but if he’s only making 8 to 10 dollars he’s a loser.

        2. Of course they will. They just won’t blame “the big guy”. It will be a scolding about what “we” need to do better.

  17. A Media Research Center (MRC) poll conducted by McLaughlin & Associates found that 36 percent of Biden voters were not aware of the evidence behind claims that Joe Biden was personally involved in his son Hunter’s business deals with China. Thirteen percent of those voters (4.6 percent of Biden’s total vote) said that if they had known the facts, they would not have voted for Biden.

    1. Biden has already started adding silicon Valley CEOs to his projected cabinet.

      1. Referring to the ones covering it up, not the voters

    2. There isn’t much evidence of it.

        1. Mr. R Mac can moo! Can you?!

          1. We know you can squawk like a bird, Dee.

            1. Infinity!

  18. Democrats impeached a president over one anonymous whistle-blower. GOP is up to 131 public whistle blowers with signed affidavits and we are told to ignore it all.

    1. The ones demanding more evidence have no idea what sufficient evidence would look like, it’s just denial

      1. Do you have any idea how many straws it takes to break a Kamala’s back?

        1. I heard she is pretty flexible.

        2. That’s impossible to do. She gets where she is by laying on her back. you can’t stack straw on it

      2. Well, (not) believing is (not) seeing.

    2. They are conflating the existence of evidence (which can come in many forms) with being persuaded. If they are not persuaded, the reasoning goes, there is no evidence.

  19. Biden’s stunning landslide victory is already paying off for’s benefactor Charles Koch.

    Mr. Koch earned $2,760,000,000 yesterday.

    Once Biden takes office, things will continue improving for our benefactor. Because the new Administration will reverse the high-tariff / low-immigration policies that have caused Mr. Koch so much misery over the past 4 years.


    1. I was wondering how he did yesterday.

      1. Expect the Biden years to be full of days that are that good — or even better — for Mr. Koch and the other richest people on the planet.


    2. The more he’s worth, the more Kamala can take from him – – – – – – – –

  20. A round up of the democrats descent into stalinism/maoism as they push for lists and truth and reconciliation commissions.

    1. I’m sure they’re all just kidding or trolling, and that this has no inkling of their true feelings for how they’ll govern once given power.

    2. My memory is a little hazy, can anyone remind me of how many of the Literally Orange Hitler’s supporters compiled lists of people to face consequences for holding the wrong political views?

    3. Also, has anyone on Biden’s team bothered to condemn these people and the idea of keeping political enemies’ lists? It might go some ways towards all that national healing and convincing Republicans to give up and accept Biden as the next president, like they constantly keep talking about.

  21. Biden tried to ruin Clarence Thomas’s life.
    Harris tried to ruin Brett Kavanaugh’s life.

    I’ve heard Karma can be a bitch.

    1. Depends on what you can do to help her, doesn’t it?

    2. Not in Washington, evidently.

  22. Bidens first day in office includes…

    Raising taxes
    Increasing energy costs
    Granting positive benefits to illegals through EO
    Paying for abortions in other countries

    And many more.

    1. Good times. Just lay back and think of England.

    2. Ending all Hunter investigations, General. Don’t forget ending all Hunter investigations.

  23. despite the total lack of evidence and the sheer scale that would’ve had to take place for it to have affected the election outcome.

    From no fraud, to no significant fraud, to it wouldn’t change the election.

    Funny how that goes. Why is reason not highlighting the fraud to stop it in future elections?

    1. “This is not what some of us wanted. This is not what I wanted,” a senior Trump campaign official told The Daily Beast.

      Back to truth by anonymous sources. Never change.

    2. We’ve moved up on the meter.

      Reason Ignore-O-Meter:

      It’s Not Real
      It’s Russian Disinfo
      It’s Real But Doesn’t Matter <– YOU ARE HERE
      It Matters But Not Very Much
      This is Old News
      Shut Up Racist

    3. Broke: “There’s no evidence of election fraud.”
      Woke: “There were no significant voter irregularities.”
      Wired: “We had no choice but to commit voter fraud because we needed to get rid of the Bad Orange Man.”

    4. “No significant fraud” is saying exactly the same thing as “it wouldn’t change the election”. That’s what the word, significant, means.

      1. Uh, if fraud took place, wouldn’t that warrant further investigation?

        Going from “nothing to see here” to “no signficant fraud or irregularities” would, in a non-dysfunctional society, lead to a deeper look at what happened, n’est-ce pas?

        1. I agree that ENB should not write absolute statements like “total lack of evidence”. There probably is some fraud. It’s normal for there to be some fraud in every big election.

          1. Just because it’s “normal” doesn’t mean that it should be tolerated, and in an election like this, it’s obtuse of anyone initially claiming there’s “no evidence,” then changing gears and say “there’s no evidence of “significant fraud” to get the surprised Pikachu face when their opponents start demanding a full investigation into any and all fraud that took place, and that any illegitimate votes should be invalidated.

            1. The non lefty White Knight is admitting their is fraud, but it doesn’t matter.

              1. It matters. It should be investigated. But mattering is not the same thing as being significant.

                1. Which still doesn’t invalidate the argument.

  24. The question is not whether the FBI will investigate, the question is whether they will investigate before or after results are certified.

    Apparently they have a longstanding policy of waiting until results are certified.

    Yes, there’s a very very tiny possibility that they will turn up so much fraud that it “would have changed the results.” But that’s actually the case in every election.

    1. Yes, this, eyeroller! NOTHING is ever 100 % perfect! Trumpistas will now find (or invent) 3 or 5 or 7 cases of voter fraud, and declare the entire election to be stolen! Brainwashed partisans will be brainwashed partisans!

      It is good to see that SOME of us, at least, have not fallen under the mind-warping Magic Wand of TrumpDeMort!

      1. “3 or 5 or 7 cases of voter fraud”

        Are you being ignorant or lying?

        1. Question for you: Are all right-wing nut-jobs liars, or only the stupidest ones?

          1. No idea. What does that have to do with Democratic voter fraud?

      2. They already had 3k votes changed due to an error dummy.

        1. “3 or 5 or 7 (thousand) cases”, nothing to see here!

    2. Apparently Barr departs from that usual practice in the letter (he mentions that they should investigate if the fraud is credible and substantial to change the outcome before votes are certified) and it was enough for the DOJ prosecutor who is in charge of investigations into elections to resign shortly after the letter was published

      1. the DOJ prosecutor who is in charge of investigations into elections

        You really should look up that particular guy – he was involved in the Lois Lerner crap involving the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups in retaliation for Citizen’s United, in other words, he’s an Obama holdover who never should have been allowed to keep his position. He is on the record as stating that he’s now worried that Trump may now also fire Christopher Wray and Gina Haspel. “Worried” that they might be fired. Two more Obamaites that never should have been put in their positions.

        This is what really bugs the shit out of me about Trump, he’s so goddamn lazy and careless and unfocused and stupid that he never even bothered cleaning house. Did he really not understand how many people hated his guts and how much they hated him? Did he seriously believe that the civil service is filled with dedicated public servants who simply follow the orders they’re given regardless of who it is that’s giving them and therefore the people who cheerfully worked for Obama would now just as cheerfully work for him?

        1. Now, now…the permanent bureaucracy works for the American people, not any one particular party or President!

          CNN, The New York Times and the Washington Post assure me this is so.

    3. What the DOJ does or doesn’t do in the next month is borderline irrelevant.

      Trump’s legal challenges and the ultimate vote tabulation are completely independent of any criminal charges that might be brought either before or after election certification.

      The only thing DOJ investigation might do to influence the process is if they discover some fraud or irregularity which Trump’s legal team (and others) don’t or wouldn’t have discovered, which then widens the Trump team’s challenge.

  25. Sunday Night Football viewers:

    2020 Season, Week 9: – Saints vs. Buccaneers:

    13.78 million

    2019 Season, Week 9: – New England vs. Baltimore:

    22.03 million

    Earlier in the season, they were using the excuse that basketball and baseball games were taking viewers away from the NFL, but there was no such competition for the NFL last Sunday night.

    It’s entirely possible that some people aren’t watching because of a lack of fans in the stands. I strongly suspect, however, that the drop in ratings is also disproportionately represented by the 48% of Americans who voted for Trump instead of Biden.

    Why is it so hard to believe that Americans are turned off by millionaire players disrespecting the national anthem? People may give other reasons for not watching the games, but then if they’re shy about telling us they plan to vote for Trump over the phone, they’re probably even more reluctant to speak out against BLM.

    If you want to see what people really think, don’t listen to what they say. Watch what they do. When someone in line at Walmart tells you he’s against trade with China, but his shopping cart is full of Chinese made products–don’t believe what he says. If your fiance says she loves you and she’ll always be true, but she has hickeys on her chest and bruises on her ass–and you didn’t put them there? Don’t believe what she says. Watch what people do.

    And when the American people tell us that they’re still into the NFL, but they don’t watch it anymore? Believe the market data–not what people say.

    1. The fake crowd noise is a sign of desperation.

      1. I find the fact they’re doing that rather amusing for a couple of reasons–1) it confirms that the crowd noise dynamic is fluffed up by the home team’s audio techs, and 2) the games seem like professional wrestling now with the piped-in crowd noise.

    2. Not that I matter but I’m almost certain people see it like me but it’s exactly that for me.

      I don’t watch because fuck millionaire athletes who lecture and are useful idiots. No fans in the stands and masks depress me. And I will NEVER accept that. So I went cold turkey. I don’t miss it at all.

      I also barely watch TV or movies now. I watch Adult Swim and some reality shows (Deadliest Catch for me) with my wife because there’s zero chance of being lectured by some dumbass celebrity moron.

      I even lost patience with dumbass friends and their shrill Covid nonsense and ‘popping champagne’ for a fucken retard loser like Biden.

      In the meantime, I made probably my best alla carbonara yet.

      1. Worst sports in order with 1 being the worst when it comes to SJW and the Wuhan:

        1) MLS/Euro Soccer
        2) NBA
        3) MLB
        4) NFL
        5) NHL.

        1. Actually, maybe NBA can be #1. But it’s a toss up.

      2. Do you use whole eggs or just the whites? I’ve tried it both ways.

        NHL did some fun things with their obvious lack of fans during the playoffs.

        1. Damn. Very late. In case you see it. Whole.

          Maybe if I see you around I’ll mention it again.

          1. I love a good carbonara. So, I hate it when people try to pass off a white / cream sauce pasta with a bit of bacon in it like it’s the real deal.

            It’s a tricky thing to get the temperature just right to make the eggs thicken and the cheese stick properly. But, the trickiness of the process is what makes it fun. Like a good consommé.

            Sounds like you’re doing it right.

    3. I don’t know how they measure it, but I watched it over the air.

    4. “Why is it so hard to believe that Americans are turned off by millionaire players disrespecting the national anthem?”

      That’s not why I’m not watching.

      I’m not watching because the Cowboys suck.

  26. There wouldn’t be much to read into if he hadn’t been a dutiful lapdog the entire time he’s been in there. He’s a fixer- always was, always will be.

  27. “spurious allegations of voter fraud”


    You are a hack. If the situation was reversed, is there any doubt that your selected adjective would be “credible” or “significant” or “concerning”?

    A free and fair election is the only way the country has survived and will survive. All allegations of fraud must be investigated, on either side. Our system is designed to do just this, and allows a set period for counting, recounting and legal actions.
    Anyone dismissing out of hand the numerous allegations that have been raised is, frankly, nothing more than a vile partisan.

    1. Partisanship >> Principles

    2. Yeah, whatever the facts turn out to be, this needs to be investigated thoroughly. If people lose trust in elections, that’s really bad. And if there is significant fraud, we need to know.
      If Biden, etc. was serious about uniting the country, they would be leading the call for investigations.

      1. “If Biden, etc. was serious about uniting the country, they would be leading the call for investigations.”

        Exactly. this is the biggest reason I think there is something that needs to be investigated.
        Biden ran on a ticket of Unity and against the divisiveness of Trump. what better way to project unity, then to support an investigation.
        The fact that Biden’s campaign is very clearly avoiding the topic, and that their media flacks are desperately censoring/dismissing the allegations, is a stronger indicative of issues then any statistical analysis of the votes.

        1. Well, they’ll be very united in calling for Truth and Reconciliation trials…

    3. Kavanaugh was “credibly” accused of rape in an accusation that included no allegations of anything remotely approaching rape at an event that by all available evidence seems to have never happened and that he somehow has convincing documentation that he never attended.


      I suppose credible is an incredibly flexible word.

  28. The fact that Barr is even attempting to placate the fascist who currently sits in the Oval Office is enough to earn him derision. It’s really astonishing how far Republicans are willing to go in either outright support or just acquiescence to a President who says in essence “L’etat c’est moi!.” Louis XIV would be proud. Trump is another in a long line who just believes in divine right.

    1. Lol.

    2. “L’etat c’est moi!.”

      “Suck my cock”?

      Sorry, my French is rusty.

    3. Where the fuck were you for the last four years and the collective leftist tantrum that accompanied them?

      IT WAS HER TURN!!!

    4. Hey, jackass! Still waiting to hear how your magic mantra makes those nasty wildfires go away!
      And when is the rapture?

      1. There will be trumpets, and shouts; no twitter or facebook however.

        1. Well then fuck it, I’m out.

          1. It’s up to you – – – – – – – –

    5. Years ago, someone said here that, if the roles were reversed, we’d all be screaming our heads off over how horrible the accusations are.

      And I said that, if the roles were reversed, we’d see all the usual suspects and media talking heads rolling their eyes at the sore loser, not taking it seriously.

      And here we are.

      1. Meanwhile, when the intelligence agents that pushed the Russia narrative in the media for years testified before Congress, they said they didn’t know of any actual evidence of collusion, yet here we have signed affidavits.

  29. I feel like Reason has really gone downhill. I have heard 20-50 times here how there is no evidence of voting irregularities, the claims are baseless, submitted without evidence, etc etc. But there has not been any systematic debunking of any claim. Reason is acting like even giving it a serious look is beneath them, but that makes no sense. If the voting irregularities claims had even a sliver of validity, they would be worth closely examining to ensure the electoral system is fair and valid. If they have no validity at all, they should be easily to summarily debunk by refuting the claims. Why is Reason trying to sweep this under the rug?

    1. That’s not how claims of fraud work…you don’t get to accuse someone or something of fraud, and then it’s up to the accused to debunk the claim. YOU provide the evidence, YOU take it to court, and then if the court agrees the evidence is solid, the accused will have to debunk it, as you say. And so far, not a lot of success from the courts.

      Let me put it this way…the courts aren’t overturning this election. It ain’t happening.

      1. Here is how fraud claims work:

        1. An allegation of fraud is made;
        2. It is investigated;
        3. It is either corroborated, or not.

        What you and the entire leftist hivemind are now insisting upon is complete and unequivocal corroboration of all allegations, beyond and doubts, at Step 1. And, if this cannot be done, then it is over. You do not understand how the legal system works at all.

        1. But jackass is certain that shouting ‘fight climate change!’ can make wildfires go away, right, jackass?
          But he won’t tell us how or when.

        2. You left out 1A:
          That allegation gets laughed at by investigators and courts and goes nowhere.

          And that’s where you are.

          But keep those tears flowing! I’m loving it!


          1. Jackass
            Keep praying! I’m laughing!


          2. You left out 1A:
            That allegation gets laughed at by investigators and courts and goes nowhere.

            No, goofy, we’re at 1B:
            The DoJ is preparing to conduct its own investigation

            1. I would be happy to read that the fraud charges were rejected by courts for lack of evidence, or investigation is proceeding but hasn’t reported any findings, or just anything that tells me from Reason WTF is going on. Citing Fox News as cutting away from press conference tells me Fox thinks the claim is not credible, but their evaluation doesn’t carry any legal weight. I am 100% open to the idea that the fraud claims have no merit at all, but it seems obvious to me they should at least be investigated in a serious fashion.

              I got into Reason during the start of Obama years because I consistently found good quality reporting that wasn’t present elsewhere, where the facts checked out. A number of times I would see other outlets reporting something Reason reported on days or weeks after Reason broke the story. I’m increasingly feeling like Reason is now just regurgitating crap others put out and doing less original reporting themselves. I like Rommelman a lot, I’ve really grown on Soave, and I still like The Jacket. Most of the others usually feel like a letdown.

              1. I think a lot of us have been laboring under the illusion for a while that Reason is a journalistic outfit as opposed to a commentary magazine. There’s honestly nothing wrong with them being the latter, since they’re operating from a Libertarian paradigm anyway and have never made any secret of their biases. That doesn’t make them any different from something like Counterpunch or National Review, however, which function in the same manner. Outfits like that might have 1 or 2 actual journalists doing journalist things, but ultimately they’re pundits with an agenda to push.

                Balko, when he was here, and Soave are the only writers on this site I’ve ever seen that I’d fit with the label of journalist, because they do actual investigative work. Rommelman’s kind of a one-off because she’s working a very specific niche that will eventually go away, so I wouldn’t really consider her a journalist either–she’s more of an observer reporting on events as they unfold. The rest are just commenting through the regurgitation of other people’s work, and giving it a Libertarian twist. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that, it just doesn’t make them a news magazine, per se.

      2. Unless it comes from anonymous sources, right?

        1. “Four sources within the Biden transition team told NBC today that there is significant concern regarding the voting irregularities in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and Arizona. ‘This isn’t over yet,’ one of them said. ‘Biden and Harris have been getting constant updates on these reports, and they’re starting to get worried that the irregularities might lead to states having their vote totals invalidated.’ If such a doomsday scenario were to occur, the question would be thrown to the state legislatures to pick the delegates, all of whom are controlled by Republicans.”

          There’s your reporting template for the last four years:
          –“Sources say…”
          –“Random political football”
          –“Nothing has been confirmed, but it doesn’t look good for Blumph.”

          1. The walls are closing in!

            1. The Depends adult diapers are getting soaked!

              1. The White Staff started up The Gorilla Channel again!

      3. If i call the cops and say something is going on next door they investigate without evidence. Once you investigate you have evidence or not then charge or not.

        1. It’s like these people don’t know the difference between “probable cause” and “evidence.”

          Right now, there’s probable cause based on irregularities that have been taken place in several battleground states. The evidence, or lack thereof, will be determined by the investigation.

          Quite frankly, I’d say the time for crawling up the ass of these election offices and doing a full sweep of their activities is long overdue. It’s too bad it took the presence of the Bad Orange Man to even bring that discussion into play.

          1. Orange Man Bad forced them to be more blatant.

      4. Reason is not the accused jackass. They’re supposed to be journalists.

    2. To add If there is fraud more than likely they took many votes from their candidate knowing no one pays attention to the LP party . Heck JoJo may have had a higher percentage but Reason’s TDS is so bad they are happy their party lost and the Marxist won

    3. Reason is acting like even giving it a serious look is beneath them, but that makes no sense. If the voting irregularities claims had even a sliver of validity, they would be worth closely examining to ensure the electoral system is fair and valid.

      Not only that but it pretty solidly reinforces the whole “voting is pointless. The TPD wins either way.” narrative if a massively popular/ist outsider candidate can’t get re-elected because of fraud.

      If Trump can’t get re-elected because of COVID or because he’s boisterous and flippant, what chance does someone 10X as popular as Gary or Jo stand?

  30. “A Monday letter from Barr is spawning a lot of worries that the Department of Justice (DOJ) backs President Donald Trump’s spurious allegations of voter fraud or is at least attempting to lend credence to them. And yesterday’s protest resignation of Richard Pilger, head of the DOJ branch that oversees election crimes, only added to that effect.”

    He resigned because Barr wrote that the fraud should be investigated before votes were certified, if they were credible and sufficiently widespread. It had nothing to do with the claims being “spurious”

    So to disagree with your reading of the letter, yes it is a big deal. If they get enough evidence this could impact the election. Doesn’t matter what the media thinks about the evidence they refuse to even consider.

    1. Oddly enough, nothing in that initial passage noted that Pilger was the one who aided Lois Lerner in covering up the IRS going after conservative political groups.

      “Barr’s asking me to investigate my own party’s fuckery? Screw that, I’m out of here.”

      1. He’s taking his chance to be the next (maybe last?) martyr of this administration.

      2. Trump’s biggest mistake was not cleaning house in the federal bureaucracy, Day 1 of his Administration. Civil Service rules made it difficult, and not being a Washington guy, he didn’t have his own army of cronies to fill seats. A lot of the intransigence of the bureaucracy could have been headed off though, if he cleared out a bunch of people who it turns out have been working against him all of this time.

        1. Like Julius, Trump was magnanimous and merciful in victory.
          Antony and Octavian won’t be so foolish.

          1. So Trump is like an Orange Julius?

        2. Should’ve just sent the Feds all over the country. Stick them in “unhip” spots so they cannot hang out with their friends in DC. Hell, kill the unconstitutional “Make DC a state” nonsense by simply labelling the WH and Congress as federal property and shipping the entire district back into Maryland.

  31. The counting has not been completed, and there are legal challenges to adjudicate. It is most accurate to say that we do not have a winner yet. It is a little premature for Sleepy Joe to start measuring the curtains in the Oval Office. The disbursement of GSA monies can wait until after the EC votes.

    The legal challenges need to get wrapped up in the next 24 days (deadline is Friday, December 4th). Why by then? It would allow SCOTUS a weekend to step in and act if there is an emergency, before the Tuesday 12/8 EC meeting. POTUS Trump’s legal team needs to get their shit together and find the evidence of fraud (assuming it is there, and it may be).

    1. You lost. Get over it. We 86’d 45 (Trump) and now it is time to 69 46 (Biden).

      1. Gross image

      2. Big yikes.

      3. If you want to be Biden’s ice cream cone, you do you.

        But please leave the rest of us out of it.

      4. I think you purchased the wrong administration sex doll.

  32. “despite the total lack of evidence”

    Impossible levels of voter turnout, >100% registration, video evidence of illegal ballot correction, late postmarking, “glitches” and problems that only benefit Biden, sworn affidavits from witnesses who would be perjuring themselves if they lied for political gain, and everything just happens to occur in swing states with small margins that trigger automatic recounts regardless of “proven” fraud…the only thing totally lacking evidence is your honesty.

    Tucker is right; we have an honesty problem. You can’t just say there’s no evidence when there is evidence. You’re going to drive people insane. If you don’t want someone even “worse” than Trump, stop martyring him and start admitting that his concerns are valid.

    1. I live in a leans-blue county in one of the currently contentious swing states. Here and in the surrounding counties, Trump’s vote count is 10-15% higher then 2016 and higher then any prior GOP candidate. Biden’s is 15-20% higher then 2016 and higher then any prior Dem candidate. But, there was absolutely zero enthusiasm for Biden here…none. no one believes the numbers. sure, dems are excited…because they expected Trump to win….but they don’t believe the numbers.
      The media is gaslighting the nation into thinking there was no fraud. but individually, most know that there was.
      An investigation must be done and put it to rest one way or another. Because if even a fraction of the 70 million+ Trump record-setting-turnout voters believe that their voice/vote has been stolen, heaven help us all.

      1. I hear this argument all the time. It’s so tired.

        I live in a state that went HEAVILY for Biden. Like, so heavily that a million recounts wouldn’t change a thing. You see more Trump flags than Biden flags…but that’s not because there are more Trump voters. It’s because of the way his supporters elevate him to a deity in their minds. No one coal rolls with Biden flags because it’s just not like that.

        1. So what’s worse?

          People who elevate a political leader into a deity, or people who elevate government into a church?

        2. Why exactly would Biden voters not show the same level of enthusiasm they did for Hillary, especially in a deep blue state?

        3. It’s because of the way his supporters elevate him to a deity in their minds

          Sheer fallacy and gaslighting. Pretend some immature caricature of a sliver Trump voters represents all of them.

          Do you get your news from Vox or HuffPo before you head over here?

          1. I get my news mainly from here. Then I usually head over to Fox (the website, not the TV channel), then Breitbart to see what their version is, and to have some idea what Trump will be Tweeting about an hour before he does it. Sometimes as a last step I will then go look at CNN to see their take.

            I’m being completely serious. I don’t have cable TV. I use Reason as my #1 news source, and I click on pretty much any link that any commenter here posts, regardless of whether I usually agree with them or not.

        4. What scares you about recounting and investigating Jomo, you should have nothing to fear if what you say is true.

          1. In the objective sense, nothing scares me about it. If only we were dealing with empirical facts….

        5. I live in a state that went heavily for Trump, and all I see are Biden signs.

          Also, they are STILL UP.

          1. virtue signalling

      2. “Because if even a fraction of the 70 million+ Trump record-setting-turnout voters believe that their voice/vote has been stolen, heaven help us all.”

        Why? What are they going to do about it? Past performance suggests they’ll shut up, grumble, go back to work, and not bother voting anymore. Wins across the board really, if you’re for Team Biden/Global Uniparty.

        There are no consequences for rubbing Flyover Nation’s face into its own shit.

        1. “There are no consequences for rubbing Flyover Nation’s face into its own shit”.

          Funny thing about that. That statement’s true right up until it isn’t.

    2. “> 100% registration”

      Where? Cite?

      1. WK trolls himself these days.

        1. So, you’ve got nuthin’.

          Don’t you think if there actually were someplace where there was greater than 100% voter registration, it would be kinda hard for the mainstream media to cover up.

          1. So, you’ve got nuthin’.

            I didn’t make the claim. You trolled yourself again, troll.

            Keep on citin’, dude!

          2. So, you’ve got nuthin’.

            Here you go. Conveniently, an “updated” analysis by the secretary of state has since revised those numbers down. Just a glitch guys!

            1. So, awildseaking was repeating an old story that has been corrected as if it were still a real case of fraud?

              1. No, I was referring to Judicial Watch confirming what we already knew about disparities between voter rolls and population. Hundreds of counties in the US have, using the best data available, more registered voters than citizens.

                Maybe you are too blue pilled to be saved at this point, but just because Snopes or Politifact address claims with rhetoric and strawmen does not mean that their assertions are factual. Deboonkers are partisans that couldn’t be more full of shit if they tried.

                The whole point of exposing discrepancies in the number of registered voters and eligible voters is that many of these counties are part of states that mailed a ballot to all registered voters. That means unsecured ballots being sent to someone the state has not confirmed as present or eligible to vote. These discrepancies account for potentially 1.8 million voters.

                Snopes made a fair point in their so called fact check. Discrepancies alone do not prove fraud and the separate databases for population and voter registration are not synchronized. However, they always fall short with their arguments because they argue with strawmen. I agree that the databases are not in sync; why aren’t they? Why do we continue to run into opposition when we ask for stronger means of verification for voters? COVID is a valid reason to not vote in person, but it is not a valid reason to forgo all forms of security and verification. Many of the states who mailed ballots without being requested also loosened signature verification and postmarking procedures.

                The financial industry has stricter regulation and more thorough rules for identity verification than our elections. If that doesn’t make you realize why the rules are lax, given that Democrats are typically the ones pushing for such regulations, I don’t know what will. They work for us according to them, but not for their elections. I wonder why.

          3. Of course this has been a nationwide problem for decades, but I’m sure there will be “updated” analyses in several hundred US counties forthcoming.

  33. They have presented the evidence. Obviously the media is ignoring it. Duh. They’re in on the racket and fraud.

    It’s in the hands of the courts now, no?

    There’s enough here to warrant investigating.

    No way in hell did Biden win this fair. That’s just a hunch.

    Joe Biden. GTFOH.

  34. Donald J. Trump
    Level 1:
    Based on the fraud committed by Senator Ted Cruz during the Iowa Caucus, either a new election should take place or Cruz results nullified.
    9:28 AM · Feb 3, 2016·Twitter for Android

    1. Uh, didn’t the Democrats feature some election fuckery of their own in Iowa this year? Have we forgotten about that already?

      1. What stood out to me here was that 1)Trump claims fraud in every election he’s part of (even those he wins) and 2) for some reason Ted Cruz carries water for Trump after this. Then again, Cruz, Graham and others went from “DJT is a pathological liar” to “he’s totes cool” so…

        1. So, there’s nothing really relevant here, just Orange Man Bad.

          1. Yes I suppose directly quoting someone’s s voluntarily-posted Tweet that contains the same accusations as now constitutes “Orange Man Bad.”

            1. Did election fuckery actually take place, or not?

        2. IIRC, Ted Cruz’s people were allegedly making robo-calls claiming that Carson had dropped out of the race.

          1. As nice as Jamie Harrison here pretending that the Constitution Party candidate did not drop weeks before the election to endorse Lindsay Graham.

        3. And Kamala Harris went from ‘Joe Biden tried to keep me in segregated schools’ to ‘Joe Biden is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful person I’ve ever known’.

          Funny how that works.

  35. That’s not how claims of fraud work…you don’t get to accuse someone or something of fraud, and then it’s up to the accused to debunk the claim. YOU provide the evidence, YOU take it to court, and then if the court agrees the evidence is solid, the accused will have to debunk it, as you say. And so far, not a lot of success from the courts.

    Let me put it this way…the courts aren’t overturning this election. It ain’t happening.

    1. The point is not for the courts to “overturn” anything.

      The point is for the courts to require a fair, transparent, accounting of “the vote” that is consistent with the various elections laws of the involved States.

      If the result is different from a previous erroneous accounting, the previous accounting is not “overturned”. The previous accounting is deemed to be not validated. Never was.

    2. Hey, jackass! Still waiting!

    3. Here is how fraud claims work:

      1. An allegation of fraud is made;
      2. It is investigated;
      3. It is either corroborated, or not.

      What you and the entire leftist hivemind are now insisting upon is complete and unequivocal corroboration of all allegations, beyond all doubts, at Step 1. And, if this cannot be done, then it is over. You do not understand how the legal system works at all.

    4. Doing copypasta doesn’t increase the accuracy of your claims, goofy.

      1. Shreek has a tremendous amount of trouble putting his posts in the correct place when he’s socking. He also outs his socks routinely. He recently busted out his old AddictionMyth account, which he accidentally outed while he was socking with his Dajjal account. Jackand Ace is another of his really old identities. I guess he’s hoping enough of the old Reasonites had left or forgotten.

    5. Unless you accuse Donald Trump of fraud, in which case he’s supposed to turn over all of his tax returns and other financial records for your fishing expedition.

  36. Republicans have been taking this very slow. Primarily pointing to the President’s right to challenge the vote. Much as Senator McConnell and Bill Barr have done. Much of the speculation is that they are trying to contain the President’s ego and his followers rage. At some point they will either need to address the reality of the situation or cross their Rubicon and give the President an election win he did not actually earn. Neither alternative is pleasant and the question is when does that point arrive?

    1. Nothing happens on the weekend. That’s why Trump played golf for 2 days. That’s why it looks slow at the beginning. This is a legal battle now. Trump has mostly delegated to lawyers. That’s what smart people do. His job was to campaign, and he did it like a beast.

      1. Smart people do not put a drunken, incompetent buffoon like Rudy Giuliani in charge of their legal team.

        “The first person Rudy Giuliani, the attorney for President Donald Trump, called up as a witness to baseless allegations of vote counting shenanigans in Philadelphia during a press conference last week is a sex offender who for years has been a perennial candidate in New Jersey.”

        1. Ad hominem (Latin for ‘to the person’), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious.Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

          1. Giuliani is a boob.

        2. “Joe Biden’s VP nominee was a woman whose only apparent skills to get her early jobs was a willingness to suck Willie Brown’s cock. She then proceeded to lock parents in jail if their kids skipped school, kept people in jail after a court demanded their release so the state had cheap firefighters, and fought to avoid exculpatory evidence to be brought in defense of a death row inmate”

          1. I’m actually not much of a fan of Kamala Harris.

    2. Moderation4ever gets it!

      “…or cross their Rubicon and give the President an election win he did not actually earn.”

      A totally apt historical reference! If this happens, it will end multi-party democracy in the USA for who knows how long! Welcome to the Trumptatorshit, citizens! But this is exactly what Trumpistas want! Their egos and power-lust are SOOOO BIGGLY YUUUGE, that they think that other ways of thinking, other political parties, can be stomped into the ground forever, and we will ALL be better off! They totally ignore the historical realities of multi-party v/s one-party nations!

      1. I don’t think most Trump supporters want that, but there is a hardcore Christian right contingent who would love an American theocracy.

        1. Cite? You buffoon.


            False Idol — Why the Christian Right Worships Donald Trump

            When The Father, The Son, and The Holy Trump are on YOUR side, you can do no wrong!

          2. Just my opinion in the end, but not without evidence:


            As I said, not most Trump supporters, but a contingent.

            1. WK, when you have SRQSLY defending your fallacies, you might have reached a new low.

              Don’t forget to flag and refresh, folks!

              1. SQRLSY’s cites are pretty darn relevant.

                1. A Rolling Stone opinion piece? Lmfao.

                2. Haha Dee thinks Rolling Stone is a real source. What a dumbfuck.


            ‘Unparalleled privilege’: why white evangelicals see Trump as their savior

            There’s plenty more out there! But I am sure that all of these sources are “Marxist” to True Trump worshippers!

            1. Yeah, I noticed Trump supporters literally drawing fawning paintings of him with a halo around his head and Trump declaring his ability to cause the seas to recede when he was elected, just like your chocolate Jesus.

              Also, you can link to 50 more opinion pieces regurgitating the same shit that you do. It’s not evidence of anything except the fact that you live in an echo chamber.

              1. Echo chamber describes the empty-headed Trumpistas who post here all day, every day! They REFUSE to even think about, what nations have worked best, 1-party states, or multi-party states? The march of the morons, towards yet another Evil Empire, continues apace! Arrogance knows no bounds! Humility? What does THAT mean?

                Pride goes before a fall, arrogant power-worshipping egomaniacs!


            President Donald Trump declared himself “the Chosen One,” while defending his administration’s decision to continue the trade war with China.

            The Narcissist in Chief does NOT reject, in ANY way, the Holy Warriors and Jihadists who will wage Holy War for HIM! Praises Be Unto HIM!!!

    3. What rage? All people are asking for is that we make sure the counts are accurate, and the process is transparent. I know many Trump supporters and nobody is anywhere even close to being enraged. Nobody is crying. Nobody is gnashing their teeth. Whether Trump stays or not, people realize this election signaled a major shift among the electorate away from the woke politics of the left.

      1. lc1789 calls for Civil War 2 like every other post.

        1. Considering your allies are openly calling for Trump voters to lose their livelihoods, a civil war might be the least of those worries.

      2. That may be, but have you looked at how Trump himself has been ranting.

        1. Look how the left ranted for 4 years and are continuing to rant. What’s your point?

          1. Trump is not Presidential material. If a revote could be held, people should vote against him just based on his unhinged behavior for the last week.

      3. Please note that there are any number of checks on the data. If you assume that the states called for Trump are legitimate is there reason to think those called for Biden are not? The treatment of the ballots is not that different. At some point Republicans will have to tell people that Joe Biden won the Presidency. This will not be easy. Think about times in your life when someone had to tell you something hard, your lawyer, your doctor, your car mechanic. Never easy. Right now some people are in the denial phase, note this was just as true for Hillary supporters in 2016, at some point there will be a need to accept the results. How long can Republican leaders slow the process?

        1. So, you’re okay with the DoJ conducting a colonoscopy on the voting procedures in those states, since everything is on the up-and-up, right?

          1. I have no problem if they can back up these inquiries with facts. There have been any number of investigation by the DOJ instigated at President Trump request over his term of Presidency. All have yielded nothing (and hand slaps for not following usual protocols don’t count). You may recall that Barr did not produce anything before the election and the President was irritated. At some point you need to come up with some facts not just accusations. Bill Barr for all his deference to the President’s moods has shown no willing to make things up. I don’t think he will start here.

            1. I have no problem if they can back up these inquiries with facts.

              Then it seems a bit premature that your side is declaring “there’s no evidence” when this is all still being hashed out.

      4. Trump supporters asking for massive irregularities to actually be investigated is exactly the same as Biden supporters rioting, raping, murdering, maiming, burning and stealing for 8 months leading up to the election and threatening to burn down Washington D.C. if their candidate loses. boTh SiDEs!!!!!!

    4. The one mistake the Democrats seem to be making is that they are not countering by looking into possible fraud in swing states that Trump won. They may blow it by being too confident Trump will not pull off an upset.

      It is possible that the Democratic Party is quietly looking into Republican fraud, and it just isn’t getting as much attention.

      1. The one mistake the Democrats seem to be making is that they are not countering by looking into possible fraud in swing states that Trump won

        Probably because those states didn’t feature stopped vote counts around 10 pm, nor instantaneous spikes in reported votes for Trump in the tens of thousands when the counts started back up. They counted the votes and reported them like normal.

        It’s probably not a coincidence that Florida went relatively smoothly this time with Brenda Snipes not around to fuck with the ballots in Broward.

        1. For those who don’t know, snipes was around for 2000 and gore. With Florida reporting all of their results the same day, Broward county and neighboring Palm Beach County would usually come in some 12 to 24 hours after any other county in Florida.

          This year, the governor replaced Broward county and Palm Beach county elections supervisors. Broward county and Palm Beach county reported their results at the same time as everyone else did.

          Having all of the major cities in the swing states sitting below 20% of their vote count reported in when the rest of the state is in the 90% range should be a major red flag for any citizen.

          Prior to the election that was one of the red flags that experts pointed to as a signal that shenanigans were afoot. if you want to swing an election, it has to be close first. You cannot rig a 60/40 election and think that you are not going to get caught. The next step was that you report your totals after the other guys report theirs. That way you know how many votes you need to “find.”. If you read stories about the Chicago machine, California elections irregularities, Texas, Louisiana, any place that has a history of vote fraud, this is what they did. they would hold back the count and their stronghold, and then once the votes are in they would have just enough to win the election.

          That is by no means dispositive, but it is like it called shot. When everyone joked that Epstein was not going to live out the week and then he ends up committing suicide, eyebrows are going to be raised.

          1. This year, the governor replaced Broward county and Palm Beach county elections supervisors. Broward county and Palm Beach county reported their results at the same time as everyone else did.

            Seems the solution is to tell these election supervisors, “Report all your ballots by this time. If you don’t, you’re fired and any reported numbers coming in after that time will be invalidated.”

  37. If Government Almighty was doing ONLY the things that it MUST do, to keep peace and prosperity (property rights), there wouldn’t be all this distrust and fighting! Soon, Government Almighty will tell us all who we can marry, and mandate our breakfast menu each day!

    So OF COURSE we all get our panties in a twist over each and every vote, as we fight like weasels in heat, over Government Almighty power! I see the day coming, when, in order to vote, I have to give DNA samples (to prove my ID) to one each representative of the Democrat Party, the “R” Party, and the “L”, “G”, and “C” Parties, each for their independent verification. And then there will be armies of bureaucrats to oversee and record each and every DNA test, yada-yada.

    Instead of fighting the every-growing Government Almighty nit-picking, micro-managing powers, the right-wing nut jobs are just gonna keep right on feeding this here beast that I have just described!

  38. a senior Trump campaign official told The Daily Beast.
    Irrespective of the vote fraud question, this is clearly bullshit.

    I’ll start believing anonymous sources in the media again in the next life maybe.

    1. Anonymous sources are the veritable and irrefutable truth. 131 affidavits and 2800 incident reports of election fraud are fake news.

  39. I am making 8 to 10 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 3 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily…. Here is Jobs .

  40. Until we get real answers to the following statistical anomalies many will view this election as a fraud. The issues are:

    !. Down-ballot anomalies swing states vs non-swing and Biden vs. Trump. Only Biden’s down-ballot stats break down, and only in swing states pointing to likely fraud.
    2. Violations of Benford’s Law – same as above but totally independent statistical method.
    3. Time series data analysis. Much more complicated. Some really brilliant work done by the data scientists behind this piece. View here:

    Trump should concede at some point but the fraud involved here is epic. As one statistician put it, “it’s insulting that its so brazen, obvious and heavy handed. They could have at least tried to cover their tracks.” He gives leftist thugs too much credit though. Their emotional, not that smart and driven by TDS.

    1. Or we’re in the electing a horse as a senator stage. What does it matter how brazen you are, when you can’t be touched for it?

    2. As Radley Balko said yesterday, invocation of Benford’s Law is a good filter. If someone repeats that flimsy talking point, it’s a clear indication they are a gullible partisan believing everything they hear that confirms their pro-Trump prejudices.

      1. Why are Biden’s totals the only ones that violate Benford’s law?

        1. They are not going to allow anyone to bring up inconsistencies demonstrated by methods they are too stupid to understand. Only they get to use Science! to amaze the masses.

        2. Read the links I provided. It is addressed.

          1. No it’s not.

      2. Which is why many elections experts have used it to point to other countries such as Venezuela or Iran?

        You’re an idiot.

        1. So, Benford’s Law was used to suss out election fraud in countries already known to hold sham elections.

          You keep claiming it has been used to analyze these countries’ elections. Cite?

    3. If you want to challenge your beliefs about how Benford’s Law proves fraud in this election:

      “Having the distribution of leading digits stray from the expected percentages predicted by Benford’s Law can happen by chance, though it is more common when the law’s assumptions are violated, as they often are with vote tallies. Benford’s Law, and other math-based inquiries, can be used to detect voter fraud, but the vast majority of these violations are not conclusive evidence of fraud.”

      1. can be used to detect voter fraud, but the vast majority of these violations are not conclusive evidence of fraud

        So it’s evidence, just not conclusive evidence.

      2. Holy crap, your own link disputes your assertion.

        All he claims is that it is not conclusive of fraud, but admits it can indicate it. Are you an idiot? Wait, we know you are.

      3. Benford’s Law, and other math-based inquiries, can be used to detect voter fraud, but the vast majority of these violations are not conclusive evidence of fraud.

        That’s why pointing out that Biden’s vote tallies in swing states universally violate Benford’s law is not the entirety of the argument, it’s one data point among thousands of statistical irregularities and documented incidents of illegal and shady behavior by election officials. You’re really bad at this. Your own talking point undermines your talking point. Wait for someone a little brighter to tailor your propaganda to the specifics of the argument to which you are replying. When you try to apply the talking points outside the context they were originally given to you, you keep fucking it up royally because you’re too stupid to even contextualize it.


      “‘It is often used to test whether an election is legitimate or phoney […] it was used in establishing electoral fraud in the 2009 Iranian election.’ This is not a fair summary of the Wikipedia page linked, which includes a quote from a paper that explains ‘Benford’s Law is essentially useless as a forensic indicator of fraud’ for elections. I would argue that one person used it to allege fraud in 2009 Iranian election, rather than establish it.”


      “Abstract: The proliferation of elections in even those states that are arguably anything but democratic has given rise to a focused interest on developing methods for detecting fraud in the official statistics of a state’s election returns. Among these efforts are those that employ Benford’s Law, with the most common application being an attempt to proclaim some election or another fraud free or replete with fraud. This essay, however, argues that, despite its apparent utility in looking at other phenomena, Benford’s Law is problematical at best as a forensic tool when applied to elections. Looking at simulations designed to model both fair and fraudulent contests as well as data drawn from elections we know, on the basis of other investigations, were either permeated by fraud or unlikely to have experienced any measurable malfeasance, we find that conformity with and deviations from Benford’s Law follow no pattern. It is not simply that the Law occasionally judges a fraudulent election fair or a fair election fraudulent. Its “success rate” either way is essentially equivalent to a toss of a coin, thereby rendering it problematical at best as a forensic tool and wholly misleading at worst.”

      1. boy, you are desperate to stop the investigation. why is that?

        Benford’s law only provides a potential ‘red flag’ indication of fraud….few are claiming it proves anything. But it does raise question, and our system is designed to answer those questions in the time before Electors are confirmed. There is zero reason to not investigate. Unless you are afraid of the investigation.

        If Benford’s law violations are so meaningless, then why is Facebook and Twitter censoring that discussion?

        1. Twitter is censoring discussion of Benford’s Law? I just did a search on Twitter, and see lots of discussion. Same for Facebook.

          1. Twitter and Facebook have been actively censoring discussion of Benford’s law. maybe they stopped, but when the first analysis came out 4 days ago, the links were consistently blocked by both. But perhaps since you are hard lefty, you don’t experience the shadow banning and blocks that have plagued the right for the last few years.

            And I read your links and they are no different then anything else circulating. They distinctly do not claim that Benford’s law is useless, but rahter that it isn’t proof. no one is claiming it is. The closest the one article comes is to saying that violations can be random. That is certainly possible in certain data sets. But the kicker here, is that ‘random’ violations of Benford’s law then wouldn’t only be happening to Biden’s returns. Random would require them to happen to Trumps as well….which it doesn’t.
            The very fact that we’re only seeing Benford’s law violations in the specific urban areas of swing states that are defining the election, and only seeing them for one candidate is a huge red flag if for no other reason is that it isn’t ‘random’.

            1. Someone interested in fair elections would encourage an investigation, if for no other reason then to get the complaining side to just shut up and accept defeat. But you and your ilk are spending lots of effort trying the invalidate the very concept of an investigation, when our process is already set up to do that normally.

              Recounts are not unusual. litigation of issues is not unusual. These are normal parts of our election process.
              Why so afraid of the normal process playing out?

              1. I never said not to investigate. Go right ahead. Be my guest.

      2. WK, Is there someone saying that these statistical irregularities prove fraud?
        All I’m seeing people say is that it’s an indication. The way to prove or disprove fraud is through an investigation of the evidence and testimony provided.
        Do you agree that a full investigation would be a good thing?

        1. a) Read the links I provided above. They debunk that Benford’s Law even provides an indication of fraud.
          b) Let’s say that Benford’s Law does indicate fraud? Where do you go from there? What exactly do you fully investigate?

          1. Do you agree that a full investigation would be a good thing?

            WK will agree to no such thing. He already went and found few studies that cast doubt on the applicability of the law and although there are other papers that question the analysis of those papers, he is sticking to his story.

          2. Read the links I provided above. They debunk that Benford’s Law even provides an indication of fraud.

            Benford’s Law, and other math-based inquiries, can be used to detect voter fraud, but the vast majority of these violations are not conclusive evidence of fraud.”

            1. Read EVERYTHING I linked to. Don’t just selectively quote from one link.

              1. Maybe try not to link something that doesn’t fit your claim.

                1. Math is hard.

                  1. For you, sure. But your links don’t prove your assertion, they prove the assertions you claim they refute.

                    1. Bluff harder. A lie repeated often enough…

                  2. So is not quoting something that doesn’t say what you argued, apparently.

              2. You mean only quote the parts YOU like? Not the parts which do not state what you claim?

          3. 1. I glanced through them. I’m not going to spend an hour going down this rabbit trail. As others point out, even your own sources are mixed on whether it can be an indicator of election fraud.
            2. We investigate the polls in which we see these disparities. We follow up with witnesses who have given sworn testimony about seeing illegal or shady behavior. We examine these records of dead people voting.
            There’s a decent amount of evidence already. There’s good reason to search these out to find out whether they’re legitimate.

            Do you think they should investigate these things?

          4. They don’t debunk anything you moron. They actually prove the assertion given, that it is an indication of possible fraud. My god man.

          5. a) Read the links I provided above. They debunk that Benford’s Law even provides an indication of fraud.

            You fucking blockquoted text from the articles that clearly states the opposite. Holy fuck, are you actually fucking illiterate?

            1. Dee is very dumb.

      3. So quoting an opinion piece by someone who agrees with you is ‘evidence’?

        1. You didn’t read the links, did you?

          “Distributions that would not be expected to obey Benford’s Law: … “Accounts with a built-in minimum of maximum”.

          One of the reasons that Benford’s Law works so well for, say, logarithm tables is that the range encompasses several orders of magnitude and has “naturally occurring” values. Precincts have uniform sizes, and tend to have the same percentage vote totals in each precinct.

          1. Yes, I read the one to which I was referring:

            “…This essay, however, argues that, despite its apparent utility in looking at other phenomena, Benford’s Law is problematical at best as a forensic tool when applied to elections…”

            That’s an opinion piece by someone who agrees with you, and your attempts at logic remain questionable at best.

        2. The most pathetic thing was JesseAz attempting to bluff that he is some kind of expert on statistical analysis, and then f’ing up his talking point by referring to it as “Brenfords Law”.

          It was like when JesseAz tried to bluff about knowing all about Wisconsin gun laws:

          “Black allegedly told Rittenhouse after the shootings that he knew it was illegal to buy the gun for his underage friend, according to police records. Black allegedly told the younger teen that he was worried he would be in ‘more trouble’ for buying the gun than Rittenhouse would face for pulling the trigger.”

          1. Holy crap, you’re still lying about Wisconsin gun laws even after I linked directly to the state gun laws?


            Your claim was that underage kids couldn’t open carry rifles. A claim directly refuted by the laws I cited.

            By god you’re a true blue idiot.

            1. You totally bluffed about knowing Wisconsin gun laws.

              Was Rittenhouse on a hunting trip when he shot three people? No, he wasn’t. Then he had no business carrying a rifle around.

          2. And I do like how you keep denying the law is even valid for inference of an election issue when your own links state it can infer an election issue.

            You could be the dumbest person on here. Hilarious.

            1. Keep up the brazen bluffing.

  41. Dozens of eyewitnesses called “total lack of evidence”. Eyewitness testimony has always been evidence.

    Elizabeth Nolan Brown is dishonest and Reason should be ashamed.

    1. Only evidence when it’s the right eyewitnesses testifying the right things, like when the right kind of person accuses the wrong kind of person of a rape that may or may not have happened sometime in the early eighties somewhere within a 10 mile area.

      1. STFU! That was 100% credible because….ah….my feelz!!!

    2. Yeah, comparing this situation to the Kavanaugh coverage is enlightening. Vox Light carried water for “credible” claims against Kavanaugh with a passion; even with it was clear it was nothing but a hit-job by the Democrats. For the election, there are dozen of personal allegations, mountains of statistical questions; Vox Light and the MSM aren’t even trying to investigate.

  42. “Provided these fraud claims are as bunk as they seem, then this is the best way to put them to rest.”
    “…bunk as they seem…”? The country clearly doesn’t need to waste time with a Justice Department investigation, as long as there are all-knowing ‘reporters’ such as Brown telling us the way it is.
    Anyone remember when Obama was elected? Reason subscriptions took off as people were looking for an alternative to the Democrat-Republican bullsh!t. Times have changed. Now Reason writers have to insert their own opinions into new pieces, just to polish their libertarian credentials. Reason has become irrelevant.


    So is President Trump staging a coup, or what?

    Good turn-of-phrase out-take below…

    Donald Trump’s coup-coup clock has rung. How worried should Americans get?

    SQRLSY comment: For the sake of American democracy, I sure hope that Trump’s coup-coup clock gets a VERY thorough cleaning!

    1. I wouldn’t worry about it if I were you.

    2. How is it a coup if the Electoral College hasn’t actually confirmed Biden as President yet?

      1. Counting all of the votes and tossing out the fraudulent ones is a coup. Using an oppo dossier to illegally spy on the incoming administration of your successor and then spending 4 years continuing to use the same dossier as a pretext to spend 100 million dollars investigating nothing, and then impeaching the president on the basis of the fake oppo dossier is just good accountability.

  44. Three things you’re foolish about if you’re counting on them ever happening:
    3. The Jets winning another football game
    2. Trevor Lawrence wearing a Pat’s uniform next year
    1. The courts overturning the election results.

    Three things you absolutely can count on:
    3. Reason commenters fully displaying their authoritarian impulses
    2. More whining from Trump about everything
    1. Joe Biden being sworn in as President in January.

    Check back!


    1. 3. Reason commenters fully displaying their authoritarian impulses”

      How is it authoritarian to look into possible election Fraud. if they truly look into it which is doubtful. If no fraud is found most will accept the outcome but it will be our legal right to stop any and all actions of a Biden president.

      1. Here’s what you have to do:

        1. Make a claim of voter fraud with accompanying evidence.
        2. Take it to court
        3. Get the court to agree there is enough evidence of fraud that a trial is warranted.
        4. If fraud is proven, get enough of it to overtake tens of thousands of votes in multiple states.

        You’ve done none of the 4 to date. None. And number 4 is never going to happen, even if you’re lucky enough to get 1 through 3 somewhere…which you haven’t so far.

        By the way, down below you said Gore wouldn’t leave Observatory Circle and Bush had to issue an executive order. Please provide a link to that fact…I’m willing to believe it if you can.

        1. You didn’t answer his question…

          Also, your steps are literally what Trump’s attorneys are doing.

          1. And they’ve struck out every time so far with the courts. Nevada, Georgia, and Michigan.


            They’ve got 5 in PA. so far, and most think one has a chance of making it to SC. And that won’t come close to nullifying PA’s margin of victory to Biden.

            I’m telling you again…the courts aren’t overturning this election, Biden will be Pres in January, and Jets won’t win another game.

            1. OK. Fair enough. Biden is likely to take office in January.
              You’re a lot more certain about the outcome than I am.

              But what were you saying about authoritarian impulses?

        2. You should post this 45 or 50 more times in the same thread so you can get it crammed up your ass 45 or 50 more times, shreek.

      2. At least we can agree about the Jests (pun intended), no?

    2. And we can count on steaming piles of lefty shit from jackass!


      1. Q: What’s the difference between a good (genuinely funny) joke, and Sevo?

        A: One is a shift of wit. The other is a wift of shit!

    3. But Trump’s dad’s dying wish was for his son to be president for two terms.

      1. My wish, probably gonna be my dying wish, is for American voters to WAKE THE FUCK UP, and smell the covfefe!

  45. The Trump White House on Monday instructed senior government leaders to block cooperation with President-elect Joe Biden’s transition team”

    I seeTrump has learned from Gore. note even after the SC confirmed Bush Gore did not leave the VP house for over a month after the inauguration. because of that Bush came out with an executive order for that to not happen again but as we know executive orders only last for the term of that president unless they came from Lord and Saviour Obama

    1. Say wha’?

  46. Bibles and newspapers ‘would be banned under new hate crime law’

    Books, bibles and newspapers would be seized and destroyed under the SNP’s plan to criminalise “inflammatory” publications, religious and secular organisations have warned.

    An unlikely alliance of chapels, kirks, gurdwaras, humanists, secularists, artists, writers and journalists have united in condemnation of the Scottish government’s Hate Crime Bill.

    Only Muslim Engagement and Development (MED), an Islamic rights lobby group, and the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities (Scotjec) argued that the bill did not go far enough in the latest round of scrutiny by Holyrood’s justice committee.


    I truly sympathize with those dealing with losing — it’s not easy — but at a certain point one has to think not only about what’s best for the nation (peaceful transfer of power) but how any future employers might see your character defined during adversity.

    1. These idiots really are asking for violence.
      Don’t worry – it won’t be “widespread”

      1. How soon are you gonna go postal, Nadless?

        1. How soon are you going to stop eating poo?

          1. Some folks are smart enough, and well-informed enough, to discuss ethics, morality, and politics. Others are so damned stupid, all they can talk about, literally, is shit!

            1. Right. You, for example, have repeatedly admitted that you have a scat and coprophagia fetish and make reference to the “Trumptatorshit” literally hundreds of times every single day

              1. A Trumptatorshit is a Trumptatorshit is a Trumptatorshit!

                By any other name, it smells EVIL, to the Highest Heavens!

            2. And some people copypasta extremely long posts about Tim The Enchanter hundreds of times a week. And also admitted they eat shit.

              1. And some people post LIES all day every day, because they are habitual liars! The Evil One is aptly named “The Father of Lies”, you know, Evil One Junior! Do you take your cues from the Stable Genius, Stable Genius Junior?

                I’ll give you a hint, Evil One Junior: The Evil One, AKA Father of Lies, is ***NOT*** your friend! Greedy power-worshipping, without principles, does NOT lead you to your Happy Place!

                1. Who would choose to be friends with Don Jr.?

                  1. Well, yeah, pretty much no-one with their heads screwed on even 1/8th straight…

    2. You know who else threatened people’s livelihoods because of their political speech?

      1. Martin Van Buren?

    3. Jake Tapper peddled Russian collusion the entire 4 years of Trump’s first term and has never once apologized or corrected himself for lying.

  48. Ukraine’s Election: Next Steps
    Ambassador John Tefft, Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs
    Testimony Before the House International Relations Committee
    Washington, DC
    December 7, 2004

    The following are examples of the most egregious, widely observed and reported examples of election-day fraud on November 21:

    Illegal Use of Absentee Ballots: According to the respected NGO “Committee of Voters of Ukraine” (CVU), massive electoral fraud was committed through the illegal use of absentee voter certificates. For example, people were caught in Dnipropetrovsk and Sumy oblasts with their pockets stuffed with blank absentee ballots that they were using to vote at multiple polling stations.
    Opposition Observers Ejected: Observers from Our Ukraine and other opposition groups were expelled from most polling stations in eastern Ukraine on Election Day. For example, in Territorial Election Commission (TEC) district number 42 in Donetsk oblast, Our Ukraine observers were kicked out of all but a few polling stations.
    North Korean-Style Turnout in the East: Turnout in the pro-Yanukovych eastern oblasts was unnaturally high. In several electoral districts, turnout for the run-off round increased by 30 to 40 percent over the first round. In Luhansk oblast, the reported turnout rate hit nearly 96 percent — a number that, to quote the OSCE, even Stalinist North Korea would envy. A similar turnout rate was reported in Donetsk oblast, where 98 percent of the votes went to hometown candidate Prime Minister Yanukovych.
    Mobile Ballot Box Fraud: In the second round of the election, the number of voters who supposedly cast ballots at home using mobile ballot boxes was double that of the first round. Much of this voting occurred without observers being present and was massively fraudulent. In Mykolayiv oblast, for example, nearly 35 percent of the oblast’s voters purportedly cast their ballots “at home.”
    Computer Data Allegedly Altered To Favor Yanukovych: There were credible reports showing that that Yanukovych supporters gained illegal access to the Central Election Commission’s computer system and illegally altered vote tabulation data being transmitted by TECs to the CEC.
    Reports of Opposition Fraud: Yanykovych’s supporters allege that Yushchenko’s supporters stuffed ballot boxes in western Ukraine. But the reports and evidence of pro-Yanukovych fraud greatly outweighed those indicated for Yushchenko.

  49. Of Course The Party Of Moral Authoritarianism Would Cheat On Elections

    Yet too many of us still don’t recognize what we can also call moral narcissism when it’s right in front of us. We hope that’s a correct assessment. If we’re wrong, then Heaven help us, because roughly half of the country, the portion that voted for and supported Joe Biden and down-ticket Democrats, is made up of moral narcissists, willing to force their policy preferences on the rest of the country.

    Just a few of the many screeds, rants, and tweets that have been issued since Election Day are evidence that the Democrats and progressive left feed on their moral narcissism. They are convinced that their ideas are so righteous, their judgment so impeccable, their understanding so deep that anyone who disagrees with them must be cast aside, redeemed only after being re-educated. Their moral narcissism is to be imposed on the rest of us by a moral authoritarianism.

    Even as votes were still being counted, the political left fired up efforts to enforce its brand of tyranny. It’s demanding Donald Trump supporters be held accountable for holding differing views. Some of our moral betters want to compile an enemies list to include names of those who must pay for the offense of backing Trump, or questioning the election.

  50. Yeah be a shame if they actually found something. That would mess it all up for the koch reason hard left liberaltarians.


    Universally-applied rules are a severe impediment to centralized power. The elite CANNOT be made to live under the rules they force the rest of us to follow. If they were, they would be less eager to write elaborate rules. Exemptions and favors are key elements of REAL power.

    It’s important for the general public to accept and internalize the idea that the elites are special and “deserve” exemptions from the rules – even the rules that are supposedly matters of life and death. The elites are too important and virtuous to follow the rules they write.

    This extends to “virus justice” too. People who have Good Politics and the right Party cards are granted generous exemptions from the virus rules, even as the rest of us are told we’re selfish monsters just for wanting to hold a funeral, go to church, or go to work.

    In all ways, in every situation – even a pandemic – the idea of universal rules must be energetically attacked, so it never takes root in the public mind. It’s important for the public to see, and accept, these big “Virus? What Virus?” riots and demonstrations.

    If the public sees EVERYONE obeying the pandemic rules equally – including Democrat politicians and Democrat-approved demonstrators – they might start getting weird and dangerous ideas about applying OTHER onerous rules to everyone equally, regardless of race, creed, or status.

  52. Fox News just cut away from @PressSec, saying the network could not in good conscience continue to air her false claims

    They weren’t about WMD.


    The Deep State in one sentence.
    “As coronavirus declines rapidly, is the US military prepared to assist in overseas conflicts?”

    1. If Trump really is on the way out I hope he’s ultra petty about it. Withdraw US troops from everywhere immediately, make it a giant logistical nightmare to re-establish the kind of presence that enabled our shitty foreign policy. The hawks will have to spend a lot of time and money to regain the ability to indiscriminately bomb anyone on the planet, they’ll do it of course but this would at least slow them down.

      He’s got until January and he no longer even needs to pretend he gives a fuck what anyone thinks. Lets see what he does.

      1. or he could do what Obama did and investigate Biden prior to Jan 20th and slap his minions with Logan’s act violations.


    You are being brainwashed to accept the results of the election as fair. You will be told that only bad people are skeptical in this situation, and that you will be held to account for doubting.

    1. “President-Elect Biden”


    Obama Official Ben Rhodes Admits Biden Camp is Already Working With Foreign Leaders: Exactly What Michael Flynn Did


    They’ve now moved the goalpost to “massive fraud.”


    American Geophysical Union says we need to rethink science for a more diverse and adaptable future.

    Equity uber Alles.

  58. Lol

    Relatable live shot on MSNBC:

    Anchor: “Ken what have you learned?”

    Ken Dilanian: “Shit. Fuck.”

    Anchor: “Okay, seems like we lost Ken.”

  59. teh real question is Why does teh left fear a recount and investigation why are they fighting this if they believe in their results? don’t they want to show they are the true winners and aswage the rights fears and bring us back into the fold?

    1. because their own numbers suggest the election isn’t over yet and they are desperate to stop further counting.

      For instance, PA has 100k provisional ballots left that are expected to lean heavy Trump. Even with no recount and no further litigation, it is still possible for PA to go to Trump. and that would make it ‘interesting’ to say the least.


    “We have put together…the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization.” – @JoeBiden


    For the conservatives who are mad about this: yes, it is possible for a story to be factually accurate *and* for it to be part of a misinformation campaign aimed at undermining confidence in an election.
    Quote Tweet

    Kevin Roose
    · 12h
    Facebook is absolutely teeming with right-wing misinformation right now. These are all among the 10 most-engaged URLs on the platform over the last 24 hours (per @NewsWhip data)


      Most of these stories aren’t “false,” per se. Many have been reported elsewhere. But if you look at how they’re framing and serving them up (“BAM,” “REVEALED,” “JUST IN”) and what facts they aren’t including, it’s obvious they know what they’re doing.


        I don’t think any of this is going to change the result of the election. Which is why it’s notable that so many people are trying to censor it. They don’t care about the truth. They only care about power.
        Quote Tweet

        Steven Crowder
        · 1h
        Watch what happens when you try to retweet this.

        Leftist Big Tech is in such a panic they’re now fact-checking sworn affidavits.…

      2. Not very surprised. The censors in china aren’t people who cackle evily in the dark. They for the most part truly believe they are protecting people from disinformation. Being true isn’t as important as leaving people with the right mindset.

    2. Grow a vagina and accept that Trump lost.


    That means they need the “right to be wrong” – the right to challenge prevailing notions without guaranteed success. Censorship always begins as a crusade against “false information,” and it always ends as a jihad against impertinent questions. /end

    1. It’s not like NBC being a media arm for the DNC isn’t common knowledge by now.

    2. Be wrong until your tits turn blue. We still have to get on with the new administration at some point.


    This is crazy. He helped Biden draft his speech on Sat night, without disclosing that fact to the audience (or anyone?), then reacted to the speech live on the air as a paid MSNBC contributor. Let me guess- he liked it?

  64. >>spawning a lot of worries that the Department of Justice (DOJ) backs President Donald Trump’s spurious allegations of voter fraud

    “These allegations are both persistent and disturbing. We have no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, but the seriousness of the allegations, and the weight of circumstantial information, compel an effort to establish the facts.” ~~Tom Foley


    No one should believe this. Dems just want to win the GA Senate races and they know “packing the court” is unpopular, so they’re hedging. Manchin will fall in line with the rest of them if Dems get Senate control.
    Quote Tweet

    Daily Caller
    · 17h
    West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin says “I will not vote to pack the courts. I will not vote to end the filibuster… I don’t know of any Democrats in the caucus that are for defunding the police… We can’t even pay for Medicare for some.”

    1. I think it’s worse than that. Right now there’s an incredible amount of institutional pressure on court Justices to rule in favor of Biden in any election proceedings. One Democrat Senator promising to be a spoiler for some of the more egregious items on the Democrat agenda is taking some pressure away from the other side.

      1. I’d say it’s more like Manchin is trying to cover his ass. He’s up for re-election in 2024, and with how deep red WV is now, he’ll either need to switch parties or he’s looking at the strong probability of losing his seat regardless of what he does.

        1. He is lying to take the pressure off GA Dems.

        2. It may be, but it still has the effect of removing pressure on (potentially) the Supreme Court to decide in Trump’s favor. If Justices were worried about a Biden administration packing the Supreme Court, Sen Manchin just gave them the cover to rule against Trump. No such cover exists for Justices worried about ending up on a leftist hit list.

          1. If those Justices actually think the Dems won’t follow through on their threat, they’re even dumber than that hicklib pederast PB.

  66. Credible fraud allegations should always be investigated this year and any other year. There probably have been instances of voter fraud this year as there have been in other years. What we don’t know is the extent and if there was enough voter fraud to sway the election.

    Personally, I doubt that there will be enough evidence to alter the projected winner for the presidency.

    I’m glad that Trump lost, but sad that Biden won.

    I’m sad that the corporate media has become a sycophantic propaganda arm of the Democrat party. I’m happy that the corporate media are now so overtly obvious with their double standards that they have exposed themselves.

    I expect Reason to hold Biden’s feet to the fire with as much attention was spent holding Trump’s feet to the fire these past 4 years. I however believe that the corporate media to continue to shelter and protect Democrats and Biden and attack any opposition they feel is a danger to their partisan goals.

  67. I however believe that the corporate media to continue to shelter and protect Democrats and Biden and attack any opposition they feel is a danger to their partisan goals.

    I’d say that’s a given now, especially with how deeply linked the DNC, MSM, and Big Tech are at this point. Reason’s already issued several articles criticizing Biden’s positions even as the presumptive winner, so I don’t expect that to change.

  68. I’m not sure why fraud is such a long-shot diagnosis here when many agree that Kennedy probably won in 1960 on voter fraud.

    At the high level, a number of people have been putting Benford’s law to the Biden vote totals, and while nothing in those results is slam-dunk proof, they show enough of an anomaly to absolutely do further investigation.

    1. Tell me this doesn’t raise an eyebrow.

      Did Democrats REALLY vote harder for Biden than they did for Obama?

      1. no…no they didn’t and most folks in PA don’t believe the numbers.

        This is why there is very little crowing from the Biden camp about the astronomical voter turnout they got….because no one believes it.

        1. But Trump’s impressive turnout numbers, and all the down-ballot Republican success, that’s not fraud, that’s all legitimate, because hey look over there and reasons and stuff.

  69. no…no they didn’t and most folks in PA don’t believe the numbers.

    This is why there is very little crowing from the Biden camp about the astronomical voter turnout they got….because no one believes it.

  70. No evidence?!! So still a lying cunt, I see.

  71. Honestly, the fact that Twitter and FB are censoring discussion about voter fraud, along with the MSM ignoring any obligation to investigate/discuss, that tells me pretty much all I need to know. You don’t have to love Trump to see the blatant coverup by the MSM.

    Honest questions for the liberal leaning Libertarians around here:

    Do you not see these actions as troubling? (4am vote drop in WI and MI that was almost entirely for Biden. Questionable mail-in vote processing in PA.)

    Do you honestly believe the MSM would act the same way if there was questionable results that helped Trump get elected?

    1. Trump discouraged mail voting, so most of the mail votes were for Biden. Republicans insisted in Pennsylvania that mail votes not be counted until later. I’ll leave the complicated math to you.

      The media are rightly chastened by their role in giving Trump the election by fixating on nonsense Hillary email non-scandals peddled by foreign agents, so they’re trying to not actively participate in the undermining of democracy this time.

      Thanks for asking.

  72. This “no evidence to support an investigation” dodge is really the dumbest argument the left & m5m has ever rolled out. The whole point of investigating allegations is to *uncover evidence*. If we already had the evidence, no investigation would be necessary.

    Also notable: there has been never been a requirement from the press that anyone produce a shred of evidence of Russian collusion or any other negative claim about the trump (or, say, Kavanagh, or broadly speaking, anyone on the right) before investigating…. or skipping the investigation step altogether and just running with the story under the presumption of guilt.

    Im conclusion: ENB = TDS.

  73. A DOJ investigation is like being treated by a psychiatrist or a dermatologist. The patient neither dies or recovers — he or she just goes on being treated forever and the process never reaches a conclusion or ends.

  74. I guess I get to tick “living through a bona fide attempted coup” off my bucket list.

    The scariest part is the propaganda. Most of the things you people are saying are outright falsehoods. But you’ll never know that, because the media you trust has told you that 99% of all other sources of information are in a conspiracy against you.

    Just to take stock, that’s:

    Mainstream journalism
    Popular entertainment
    All foreign countries except Russia and North Korea

    all in a conspiracy agains you.

    Fuck, if I believed that, I would just give up. Literally the entire civilized world is against you. I mean what’s the point? Abortion?


  76. I dislike Trump but it’s sad to see Reason go full on TDS. ENB wishes to casually dismiss serious allegations of fraud in an election with historic massive levels of mail-in voting with lowered safeguards for the integrity of those votes among other irregularities. There were documented problems with blocking of poll watcher access and software glitches. There were middle of the night massive dumps of all-Biden mail-in votes which changed the election. Yet she calls these allegations “spurious” without a full investigation. That’s insane.

    And I just watched in disgust as Reason’s Suderman go on an anti-Trump tirade on Fox because Trump won’t concede.

    Trump’s allegations of fraud and legal challenges almost certainly won’t change the outcome of this election but that doesn’t make them illegitimate. There are serious problems with our election process which lowers its integrity and makes any close outcome completely suspect – including this one. We should investigate all concerns and reform the system, ensuring more integrity in mail-in voting among other changes.

  77. [FOR USA ] Making money online more than $15k just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info on thispage.. CLICK HERE FOR FULL DETAIL

  78. I am investigating you for beating your wife

    What do you have to be afraid of?

    Why not?
    Because it is abuse of power

  79. Americans could bask in the knowledge that President Donald Trump was likely on his way out without yet confronting the reality that former Vice President Joe Biden was on his way in. But with the election called on Saturday for Biden and his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris D–Calif……….. CLICK HERE FOR FULL DETAIL

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.