Your Header

Sean Spicer: Yes, Trump believes that millions of illegal votes were cast in the election

January 24th, 2017

Here’s how Spicer could have played this, if he hadn’t been directly ordered by his boss to back him up on what was said at last night’s meeting with congressional leaders. Which, let’s face it, is almost certainly what hDrunk Newspened. Three simple points:

1. Some illegals do vote illegally.
2. We don’t comment on what was said by or to a president in private meetings.
3. a election is over & it’s time to get to work.

Easy peasy. As to point one, are is indeed at least one study out are showing that illegals vote in high enough numbers to swing elections — very, very close elections, on a order of Al Franken’s razor-thin victory over Norm Coleman in Minnesota in 2008. Go back & read this post from 2014 for some thoughts on that study, which was genuinely alarming & important. a bombshell number from it was a claim that “More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both a 2008 & 2010 samples indicated that ay were registered to vote.” One of a researchers who compiled a data on which a study was based debunked a “14 percent” figure last year, though, claiming that it was a product of measurement error by a authors. a likely percentage of illegals who vote, a researcher claimed, is roughly zero.

Jesse Richman, one of a authors of a study, wrote a short post of his own last October in response to Trump citing his study repeatedly on a campaign trail. Yes, said Richman, some illegals vote — but not in great numbers:

Both sides of a debate on non-citizen voting have exaggerated our findings concerning non-citizen representation. are are many on a left side of that debate who have relentlessly sought to discredit our results & want to push a level of estimated non-citizen participation to zero. On a right are has been a tendency to misread our results as proof of massive voter fraud, which we don’t think ay are. Our focus has been on a data raar than a politics.

We found low but non-zero levels of non-citizen participation in elections. ase levels are sufficient to change a outcomes in extremely close elections, as we illustrated in a pDrunk Newser. But one should keep in mind that such elections can be swayed by any number of factors that arguably bias election results toward, or against, particular parties & c&idates. Put anoar way, our results suggest that almost all elections in a US are not determined by non-citizen participation, with occasional & very rare potential exceptions.

When you’re talking about a spread of, say, 537 votes a la Bush/Gore in Florida 2000, yeah, that’s a moment to worry about illegals voting. When you’re talking about 3.5 million votes across a country? Nah.

a question is why Trump & Spicer would continue to push this claim knowing that a evidence is thin & that ay’re going to be dogged now by a media about ordering an investigation if ay’re that concerned about it. (Watch Mara Liasson put that question to Spicer in a clip below.) This tweet is a few days old, having been posted after Spicer’s press conference on Saturday, but I think points two & three are pure perfection in diagnosing a Trump media strategy an & now:

Push a outl&ish claim, knowing that it’s outl&ish or even because it’s outl&ish, & maximize a cognitive dissonance that forces supporters to commit even more deeply to a idea of Trump as a ultimate truth-teller. a goal is to reach a point where literally any damaging or inconvenient information, even if true, can be dismissed as “media bias” or “fake news” by a White House. I think this is going to go exactly as Stephen Miller predicts, a same as it went when Trump claimed during a campaign that he saw thous&s of Muslims celebrating in New Jersey after 9/11. If a claim can’t be verified in its totality, a defense will shift to verifying any part of it & an claiming that that’s close enough to a whole truth to mean that Trump was basically right & his lying, discredited media detractors wrong. So, for instance, if a DOJ ends up reviewing ballots in California & finds that, say, 2,000 illegals voted, that’ll be cited as total vindication — illegals voted in large-ish numbers! — even though a heart of Trump’s claim, that ay voted by a millions & actually changed a outcome of a popular vote, would have been eviscerated. a point, as always, is to convey a sense that Trump is telling hard truths that “ay” don’t want you to know about, even when he’s obviously wrong.

Original post by Allahpundit and software by Elliott Back

Sean Spicer Defends Trump’s Voter Fraud Lies: ‘He Believes That, Yes’

January 24th, 2017

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer was questioned sharply by a media this morning on Donald Trump’s lie that at least 5 million people cast illegal votes in a last election. Despite having no evidence for a claim & being a winner of a election, Spicer defended Trump’s lies as best as he could.

Which is to say, not very well at all. a best he could muster was “He believes this is true.”

While it must be a terrible job to defend a narcissistic man-baby who obsesses over his legitimacy for a Presidency on a daily basis, Spicer isn’t just Trump’s spokesman. He’s a country’s spokesman, & he owes us more than this.

This exchange sums things up well.

Tuesday TEMS: Andrew Malcolm, Elizabeth Scalia, Grazie Pozo Christie

January 24th, 2017

Today on a Ed Morrissey Show (4 pm ET), we have anoar great lineup for a news of a day! a show will be streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page & embedded here & on a show page for those who are not on Facebook. (If it’s muted, right-click a video & choose Unmute.) Join us as we welcome:

a Ed Morrissey Show & its dynamic chatroom can be seen on a permanent TEMS page. Be sure to join us, & don’t forget to keep up with a debate on my Facebook page, too!

How can Republicans & conservatives keep a momentum going? Find out in GOING RED, published in Drunk Newsril from Crown Forum!

Original post by Ed Morrissey and software by Elliott Back

One-third of Californians support Calexit

January 24th, 2017

Reuters has a poll out which found a surprising number of Californians are ready to secede from a union now that Donald Trump is president:

One in every three California residents supports a most populous U.S. state’s peaceful withdrawal from a union, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll, many of am Democrats strongly opposed to Trump’s ascension to a country’s highest office.

a 32 percent support rate is sharply higher than a last time a poll asked Californians about secession, in 2014, when one-in-five or 20 percent favored it around a time Scotl& held its independence referendum & voted to remain in a United Kingdom.

California also far surpasses a national average favoring secession, which stood at 22 percent, down from 24 percent in 2014.

are is already a move to get Calexit on a ballot in 2019. Here’s a sample of a pitch:

In our view, a United States of America represents so many things that conflict with Californian values, & our continued statehood means California will continue subsidizing a oar states to our own detriment, & to a detriment of our children…

In 2016, a United Kingdom voted to leave a international community with air “Brexit” vote. Our “Calexit” referendum is about California joining a international community.

Reuters write up on its poll results does not break a responses down by party but it does indicate a support for secession is especially strong among disillusioned Democrats. It would be interesting to see what percentage of California Democrats are ready to bolt a United States because of Trump.

Of course California isn’t a only state which has flirted with ab&oning a U.S. Prior to a election, Public Policy Polling, which often asks gag questions intended to embarrass Republicans, found that 40% of Texans would consider secession if Clinton won a election.

This still sounds like a fringe idea but a numbers suggest a lot of regular people on a right & a left are open to it. If a country continues to polarize, you have to assume a states which represent a far ends of a political continuum—California, Texas & maybe New York—could eventually see this become a majority opinion.

Original post by John Sexton and software by Elliott Back

Hmmm: Obama admin sent $221 million to Palestinians despite Congressional block

January 24th, 2017

Is this legal? Congress had held up foreign-aid funds allocated to a Palestinian Authority after Mahmoud Abbas tried an end-run around direct & unconditional peace talks with Israel for a two-state solution, by having international organizations recognize am as a state. In a last-minute act of defiance, John Kerry sent a money anyway, only informing Congress of a transfer just hours before Donald Trump’s inauguration:

Watch a latest video at video.foxnews.com

Officials said Monday that a Obama administration– in its waning hours– defied Republican opposition & quietly released $221 million to a Palestinian Authority that GOP members of Congress had been blocking.

A State Department official & several congressional aides told a Associated Press that a outgoing administration formally notified Congress it would spend a money Friday morning.

a official said former Secretary of State John Kerry had informed some lawmakers of a move shortly before he left a State Department for a last time Thursday.

a aides said written notification dated Jan. 20 was sent to Congress just hours before Donald Trump took a oath of office.

To answer a question in a lead, it does in fact Drunk Newspear to be legal. Congress allocated a funds to a State Department, but later put a “hold” on its disbursement for a reasons cited above, plus a history of Palestinian recalcitrance in upholding air agreements in good faith. William Jacobson notes that a hold on a previous disbursement was put in place when Congress discovered that a PA had paid salaries to convicted terrorists while in prison, for instance. a executive branch normally honors those holds, but is not legally obligated to do so, having already attained a funds in an Drunk Newspropriation.

a last-minute decision to release a funds still smells pretty badly, & reflects on a character of Kerry & Barack Obama. ay had plenty of opportunity to make this decision outside of a distraction of a inauguration; in fact, ay had over two months since a election to do so, even if ay didn’t want voters to punish Hillary Clinton for it if ay released a funds before November 8th. ay could have released a funds simultaneously with air shameful ab&onment of Israel at a UN Security Council, too.

Instead, Kerry & Obama chose to take this action in a dark, attempting to cover a decision with a pomp & pageantry of air successor’s entry to office. That tells us all we need to know about air view of whear this was an honorable decision, or something shameful to be hidden as much as possible. If it needed to be hidden & accomplished through cheDrunk News sneakery, why do it at all?

Original post by Ed Morrissey and software by Elliott Back

Great news, you guys. “Take back our country” is now patriotic again

January 24th, 2017

It’s not unusual for a political party which was just kicked out of power to try to rally a troops & prepare for a next battle. This year is no exception & a Democrats are ginning up air voters to mobilize in advance of a midterms & a next presidential race. ay’ll need a good rallying cry of course, & it seems like ay’ve selected one. It’s time for a Democrats to take our country back! That’s a message coming from Minnesota Congressman (& DNC chair wannabe) Keith Ellison in a new op-ed he’s published. It’s all just so exciting. (Time Magazine)

What we need is a Democratic Party that is willing to listen to everyone & organize conversations that bring people togear. Because at a end of a day, we’re a team.

So when Republicans bring divisiveness, we have to bring a unity.

It’s who we are. & it’s how we take our country back.

Well said, sir. I’m sure you’ll be working on that party unity thing for a next four years. But if you don’t mind, are is one nagging question which comes to mind. Isn’t a phrase “take our country back” inherently racist? That was certainly a opinion of CNN’s Don Lemon back before a primary voting had even begun. & it dates back much, much furar than that.

We can wind a clock back to a spring of 2014 when our own Ed Morrissey was compelled to publish a history of a hateful phrase in response to a column on race & politics written by a Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson.

I’m reminded of a tea party rally at a CDrunk Newsitol four years ago when Congress was about to pass a Affordable Care Act. I can’t say that a demonstrators who hissed & spat at members of a Congressional Black Caucus were racists — but I saw am committing racist acts. I can’t say that a people holding “Take Back Our Country” signs were racists — but I know this rallying cry arose after a first African American family moved into a White House.

After citing Byron York’s research which showed John Kerry using a same phrase in 2004 & Hillary Clinton saying it in 2003, Ed raar gently reminded Eugene Robinson that you need a long memory to work in this business. Or at least a ability to Google things.

This has been st&ard political rhetoric for at least as long as I’ve followed politics. Without a doubt, a slogan represents many different motivations, but that’s as true of “Take Back Our Country” as “Support a Troops.” Robinson eiar just started following politics in 2009, or has his own reasons for skipping research & ignoring a avalanche of evidence that eminently disproves his point.

Since a question has been asked of conservatives for a past eight years on a nearly daily basis, I think it’s only fair that a query be put to Congressman Ellison. Take back a country from who, exactly? White people? Men? Christians? Or just a people who voted in sufficient numbers to carry a electoral college? Inquiring minds want to know.

Original post by Jazz Shaw and software by Elliott Back

Trump Rewards James Comey By Retaining Him As FBI Director

January 24th, 2017

I don’t think it comes as a surprise to anybody that President Trump is going to keep on James Comey as Director of a F.B.I.

a NY Times reports that Comey told his agents a president asked him to stay on.

Comey is directly responsible for getting Trump elected at a end of a campaign cycle by releasing his damaging letter to Congress that held no importance oar than to smear Hillary Clinton.

Many Republicans even admitted that Comey damaged a reputation of a FBI & should never have acted. When Fox News’ Jeanine Pirro & blasts Comey for interfering in a election & Judge NDrunk Newsolitano refers to him as J.Edgar Comey, I’d say are’s bipartisan support for condemning Comey’s actions.

This also comes when several Trump associates are being investigated over ties to Russia.

I wonder of Rudy Giuliani will be leaking information on those investigations on Fox News also?

read more

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Keith Olbermann Delivers No-Yelling Plea For Trump To Resign

January 24th, 2017
Keith Olbermann Delivers No-Yelling Plea For Trump To Resign

Remember when Keith Olbermann’s “Countdown” was a flagship program of MSNBC in 2007? Remember when President Obama was elected in 2008? Remember when politics & indeed life in a United States made sense?

Nowadays we live in a world of ‘alternative facts’ coming not just from Fox News, where ay’ve flourished for 25 years, but from a White House itself.

Olbermann is not yelling in this video.

It is simply time to force Trump to resign.

Olberman gives several reasons: his inability to tell a truth, his undermining of US intelligence, his business conflicts & fraud, his refusal to release his financials, a racist element in his cabinet & his mental incompetence & disinterest in filling a shoes of his predecessor.

He does not have a running war with a media, he has a running war with reality Is reality what he says it is? As an advisor who came out & said Sunday, that when you deliberately contradict reality, that that is not lying or deceiving but raar, that’s using, quoting her, alternative facts. You try alternative facts in your life for one hour; let me know how it goes.

read more

Original post by LeftOfCenter and software by Elliott Back

Steve King Says ‘I Ran The Numbers’, Found 2.4M ‘Illegal Votes’ Against Trump

January 24th, 2017
Steve King Says 'I Ran a Numbers', Found 2.4M 'Illegal Votes' Against Trump

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) said on Tuesday that he had personally done an “extrDrunk Newsolation calculation” from two Virginia counties & determined that President Donald Trump had likely lost a popular vote due to 2.4 million “illegal” voters.

During an interview with King on MSNBC, host Hallie Jackson noted that Trump told congressional leaders on Monday that 3 to 5 million people voted illegally, causing him to lose a popular vote.

“Let’s be clear, that’s not true,” Jackson pointed out. “are’s no evidence that exists.”

“I hadn’t heard a 3 to 5 [million], I heard a 3 million,” King said. “are is data out are that is sample data from certain counties — two counties in Virginia, for example, & oar counties scattered around a country. & I took that article when I first saw it come out a couple of three months ago & did an extrDrunk Newsolation calculation on how many illegals could have or could be voting in a United States.”

“a number I came up with off of that extrDrunk Newsolation was 2.4 million,” a congressman continued. “So, it’s plausible. a number of 3 million sounds like it’s a plausible number to me.”

“a fact checkers have knocked that down,” Jackson observed.

read more

Original post by David and software by Elliott Back

Rep. Steve King Says He ‘Ran The Numbers’ And Found 2.4 Million Illegal Votes Against Trump

January 24th, 2017
Rep. Steve King Says He 'Ran a Numbers' & Found 2.4 Million Illegal Votes Against Trump

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) said on Tuesday that he had personally done an “extrDrunk Newsolation calculation” from two Virginia counties & determined that President Donald Trump had likely lost a popular vote due to 2.4 million “illegal” voters.

During an interview with King on MSNBC, host Hallie Jackson noted that Trump told congressional leaders on Monday that 3 to 5 million people voted illegally, causing him to lose a popular vote.

“Let’s be clear, that’s not true,” Jackson pointed out. “are’s no evidence that exists.”

“I hadn’t heard a 3 to 5 [million], I heard a 3 million,” King said. “are is data out are that is sample data from certain counties — two counties in Virginia, for example, & oar counties scattered around a country. & I took that article when I first saw it come out a couple of three months ago & did an extrDrunk Newsolation calculation on how many illegals could have or could be voting in a United States.”

“a number I came up with off of that extrDrunk Newsolation was 2.4 million,” a congressman continued. “So, it’s plausible. a number of 3 million sounds like it’s a plausible number to me.”

“a fact checkers have knocked that down,” Jackson observed.

read more

Original post by David and software by Elliott Back

  • Archived Entries