The link [above] takes you to a full transcript of the conversation. The paragraphs below on this page are the first response from the Georgia Secretary of State to Trump’s spiel where he rolls out his usual blather about election fraud…to an official who’s already investigated those claims.
Raffensperger:…Well, I listened to what the President has just said. President Trump, we’ve had several lawsuits and we’ve had to respond in court to the lawsuits and the contentions. Um, we don’t agree that you have won. And we don’t — I didn’t agree about the 200,000 number that you’d mentioned. And I can go through that point by point.
…Going back, primarily what you’ve talked about here focused in on primarily, I believe, is the absentee ballot process. I don’t believe that you’re really questioning the Dominion machines. Because we did a hand retally, a 100% retally of all the ballots and compared them to what the machines said and came up with virtually the same result. Then we did the recount, and we got virtually the same result. So I guess we can probably take that off the table.
And that’s the way the whole attempt goes round and round. Trump blathers his lies…then, Georgia’s Secretary of State politely disagrees…offers the real/verified facts…and Trump says they didn’t do their job.
You can interpret his bullshit however you wish. This reads as an attempt to get a state official to change the vote count to favor Trump instead of Biden. An impeachable offense. If you voted for Trump, you won’t think you hear that or admit the transcript says that. Most journalists, attorneys, who listened to the recording have enough confidence in what they heard to trust a court of law, another impeachment.
Could be even more beautiful if people didn’t keep getting in the way.
I typify this as American sophistry at its political zenith for obvious reasons – if you’ve read about and understand the formation and foundations of sophistry. How American politicians turned it into the rationale for every copout foisted upon the body politic.
Life on one side. Death on the other. And it needn’t matter which side takes which position. That’s what needs to be understood. Obviously the best Congressional solution eventually lies between the two. Pick a war in the last 70 years!
Lucy P. Marcus
❝ The late US Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” That may be true. But, entitled or not, politicians and electorates are constructing their own alternate realities – with far-reaching consequences.
❝ Nowadays, facts and truth are becoming increasingly difficult to uphold in politics…They are being replaced with what the American comedian Stephen Colbert calls “truthiness”: the expression of gut feelings or opinions as valid statements of fact. This year might be considered one of peak truthiness.
❝ To make good decisions, voters need to assess reliable facts, from economic data to terrorism analysis, presented transparently and without bias. But, today, talking heads on television would rather attack those with expertise in these areas. And ambitious political figures – from the leaders of the Brexit campaign in the United Kingdom to US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump – dismiss the facts altogether…
❝ …The Iraq War was launched in 2003 under false pretenses. Intelligence reports had not established that there were weapons of mass destruction in the country, yet British Prime Minister Tony Blair dutifully followed US President George W. Bush in ordering his military to invade. The consequences of that decision are still emerging.
If our leaders can be so willfully wrong about such consequential matters, how can we believe anything they tell us? This question has opened the door for a new, more overt truthiness, espoused by the likes of Trump, who seems to introduce freshly invented “facts” on a daily basis. Trump’s surrogates, for their part, use television appearances and social media to restate the falsehoods, seemingly operating under the principle that if you repeat something often enough, it will become true…
RTFA for more details – if you need them. There is an added parallel example in the cupidity of British voters and how they were misled quite deliberately into the Brexit vote. Lies, agitprop both for and against voting at all. Not unlike Republicans who swear they haven’t a bigoted bone in their body – and never emit the slightest peep over that party’s vaguely-disguised voter suppression campaign.