Leo

Well-known member
bolton's hit upon the obvious truth: the conspiracy is so vast and successful that they figured out how to leave no evidence. the fact that there is no evidence is itself proof that it happened. @HMGovt will be popping the champagne now!
 

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
Staff member
bolton's hit upon the obvious truth: the conspiracy is so vast and successful that they figured out how to leave no evidence. the fact that there is no evidence is itself proof that it happened. @HMGovt will be popping the champagne now!
The less evidence there is for a conspiracy, the more certainly true it is, because it just goes to show how fiendishly clever and ruthless the conspirators are!
 

craner

Beast of Burden
You just called me a Mock the Week contestant. I can't believe it. Irreparable breach. 20 years of friendship flushed down the loo!
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
I can't see that article, but is the implication that they put a candidate in the race with the same name as the democrat so that those not paying attention might vote for the wrong guy and thus deplete his vote?
Do you remember the LiTeral Democrats?
At the European Parliament Election, 1994, Huggett was nominated under the label "Literal Democrat" for the Devon and East Plymouth seat. He ran his campaign from Canonteign Manor, the home he shared with his mother near Christow in the Teign valley in Devon. In an interview recorded during the campaign but due to be broadcast after it Huggett hinted that future government should be conducted through electronic referendums and said "the traditional party system generates all sorts of undemocratic processes."
When the nominations closed and it was revealed that Huggett was a candidate with the description "Literal Democrat", the Liberal Democrats launched legal action in the High Court of Justice alleging that the Returning Officer had wrongly accepted a nomination which was designed to confuse voters. The Judge ruled that the nomination had to stand. In the result, Huggett won over 10,000 votes, far more than the 700 vote majority of the Conservative candidate over the Liberal Democrat.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Apparently he later changed his name to Gerald Maclone to stand against Gerry Malone in Winchester in 1997 but they were wise to him by then and nipped it in the bud.
 

version

Who loves ya, baby?
Yeah, and the Republican won by 34 votes. Also the shadow candidate didn't even live in the area and lied about his address under oath, had no campaign at all and apparently loaned himself two grand. There was also another shady candidate who seemed to be being pushed by the same people.
As WPLG reported, Rodriguez’s candidacy also bears striking similarities to that of Celso D. Alfonso, another no-party Florida state Senate candidate.

Both men were registered as Republicans in 2018, and both qualified for this year’s election on the same day, with hand-delivered checks time-stamped within minutes of one another, according to the Herald. Their listed email addresses are nearly identical, too.

Reached by WPLG at his house, Alfonso said that he decided to run at 81 years old to pursue a childhood dream of public service. Asked about his campaign fliers — which were sent out by the same mysterious PAC — Alfonso said he had no such ads.

Minutes later, he changed his story.
 

version

Who loves ya, baby?
"Prosecutors are now looking into Alex Rodriguez, the Miami Herald reported, and he has since retained a lawyer. That attorney, William Barzee, declined to comment in a text message to The Washington Post."
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
So, finally, some kind of proactive pushback
I’ve just filed legal complaints with the AZ, MI, NV, NY, and PA bars against Rudy Giuliani and 22 other lawyers seeking their disbarments for filing frivolous lawsuits and trying to help Trump steal the election and dismantle democracy. *
I don't know who this guy is and whether it will go anywhere, but it does feel as though there ought to be some way to stop this zombie army of cretinous lawyers clogging up the courts and wasting so much time and resources when they have no evidence or even solid accusations. You'd think it would be better for everyone to just concentrate on whatever they think their best shot is... or is it really that they have nothing at all and have to try literally everything they can and hope for some kind of huge fluke?
 

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
So, question re Trump and the Georgia run-off - how far does it have to go before Trump's refusal to accept defeat starts to look like a liability? A stat I saw the other day said that something like 40% of Republican voters think the election result is illegitimate. On the one hand that's terrifying, on the other hand I'd imagine that it's likely to get chipped away at a bit as the various legal challenges come to nothing and damning evidence continues to not emerge, but most pertinently, doesn't it leave at least 60% of Republican voters who see all the talk about faithless electors and so on as Trump basically trying to stage a coup to overturn the result of a democratic election with the GOP as a whole kind of tacitly supporting it, and won't some of them conclude that that's maybe an even worse affront to democracy than gun control and universal healthcare?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
I definitely think having the Trump lawyers literally saying in court that the conspiracy theories are not true is the only chance for the R supporters to accept it.
I suspect that overall though this ridiculous situation is doing more harm than good.
 
Top