Columns, Congress, Politics

Could Trump Win By Simple Attrition Rather than Vindication?

Below is my Fox.com column on the shift of fortunes for former president Donald Trump in the last week. Trump does not appear to be necessarily moving ahead legally but he is still prevailing politically in a curious war of attrition.

Here is the column:

While Woody Allen once said that  “80 percent of success is showing up,” former president Donald Trump proved this week that the same could be said about “just sticking around.” Trump had one of the best weeks as cases and critics seemed to implode from the disqualification effort in Washington to the scandal in Georgia. Yet, Trump is not out of the woods and is facing significant threats in what is becoming a war of attrition.

In Washington, the Supreme Court gave a chilly reception to the disqualification effort that bordered on the glacial. While law professors like Harvard’s Laurence Tribe insisted that the basis for barring Trump from office under the 14th Amendment was “unassailable,” the justices seemed utterly unconvinced and there is the possibility that the entire effort could now be defeated unanimously. Even liberal justice Ketanji Onyika Brown Jackson called the effort anti-democratic.

In Georgia, the case against Trump is floundering as allegations mount against Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis over her intimate relationship with her subordinate special prosecutor Nathan J. Wade. This week, a court filing alleged that Willis and Wade filed false claims in court on when their relationship began. The two prosecutors have insisted that they only became intimate after Willis hired Wade.  Wade’s former lawyer has reportedly come forward to contest that claim.

That allegation, if true, could make the continuation of Willis and Wade in the case untenable. Various defendants being prosecuted in Georgia are accused of false statements and filings in court. Of course, the removal of Willis and Wade will not necessarily end the case, but it will present logistical and optical problems for the office.

There are also calls for the removal of Alvin Bragg in New York, who is accused of being lax on crime overall despite his determined effort to convict Trump.

Trump has a curious fortune in critics who seem over time to combust in rather spectacular fashion. Michael Cohen, his former lawyer, went to jail and lost his law license.  At the Justice Department, various FBI officials from the Russian investigation were accused of wrongdoing and forced out of the Justice Department. That included James Comey who was found to have removed FBI material after Trump fired him and gave it to a friend who leaked it to the press. Another official pleaded guilty to criminal conduct associated with the Russian investigation.

In politics, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who attacked Trump for his treatment of women, was forced out of office for sexual harassment. Michael Avenatti was sentenced to a long prison term for fraud and other crimes. Senator Robert Menendez (D., N.J.) who voted for Trump to be convicted in the Senate is now under indictment for corruption.

Even in the arts, Trump critics have fallen from great heights. Comedian Kathy Griffin has not only become persona non grata after her gory depiction of a beheaded Trump but she is now beseeching people to buy tickets for a languishing come-back tour. Alec Baldwin, who scathingly played Trump, has been criminally charged after shooting a movie crew member.

Of course, it is fair to note that some of Trump’s allies have fared equally badly, including those convicted or facing trial such as Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and others.

Yet, there is no question that time has worked in Trump’s favor in fulfilling certain narratives. He has accused the Democrats of trying to rig elections. While debunking claims in 2020, Democrats like Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold bulldozed any high ground by trying to prevent citizens from voting for Trump as he leads in the polls.

Likewise, Trump long mocked President Joe Biden over his age and mental deterioration. This week, Special Counsel Robert Hur justified his declination of criminal charges against Biden in part due to his “diminished faculties.” He said that his team was concerned that a jury would find him a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

Biden then proceeded to hold a press conference to show that he was mentally sharp. It was a disaster. Biden not only came across as a cranky octogenarian telling reporters to get off his lawn, but he proceeded to confuse the presidents of Mexico and Egypt.

Now, 76 percent of Americans are concerned about Biden’s mental fitness to be president.

Even more important was what the report said about Biden’s underlying conduct. Despite false claims by Biden in the press conference, the report found that he had willfully retained classified material, mishandled such material for years and disclosed classified material.

If that sounds familiar, it should. The pictures and allegations are strikingly similar to those involving Trump at Mar-a-Lago. Indeed, the report showed that every element of the crime was evident, which is likely why Hur tried to use Biden’s memory and sympathetic demeanor to justify his decision. Yet, it suggested that a less sympathetic defendant with a better memory would have been charged.

That unsympathetic figure is sitting in Mar-a-Lago facing 37 counts.

Hur tried to distinguish the cases by citing Trump’s failure to cooperate and his efforts to allegedly obstruct the investigation. However, that explains the obstruction counts. The problem are the other counts for retention and mishandling. Some of those charges require a simple showing of gross negligence.  Hur found willful misconduct by Biden, but dismissed similar charges.

For many, the two special counsel investigations have proven, again, a two-tiered legal system. In Florida, Jack Smith went after Trump with an abandon while in Washington Hur showed an avoidance that proved insulting to both the president and the public.

Polls show most Americans believe that the FBI has been politicized.  Even in Georgia, a recent poll found 77 percent believe that politics played a major role (59%) or some role (18%)  in charging Trump.

None of this means that Trump is out of the woods. It is possible that he could scuttle the federal investigation if he is elected or even pardon himself. However, cases in Georgia and New York can still move forward absent legal challenges.  Moreover, he has had a couple of rough weeks including a massive award in a defamation lawsuit and a pending ruling that could bar him from doing business in New York and potentially hundreds of millions in damages.

The biggest concern remains timing. While polls indicate that the public sees a political motive of some of these cases, a majority of voters in swing states also indicate that they would be swayed by a conviction against Trump.

Perhaps for that reason, Smith continues to push courts to allow him to try Trump before the election. However, with a pending appeal over immunity, he may be running out of runway. The Justice Department has long opposed trials within a couple months of an election. A Trump trial would likely go months, making any date after the summer increasingly difficult. If Trump is elected, Smith knows that there may be support to drop the cases from an exhausted public in 2025.

However, at this rate, Trump may be counting less on vindication than attrition.

179 thoughts on “Could Trump Win By Simple Attrition Rather than Vindication?”

  1. Having enough money to fight the legal system is the only way One actually gets Justice in America today. It takes a great deal of money to hire Good lawyers that know the law, and are able to competently represent their client. Otherwise, One is either stuck with incompetent legal representation, or forced the take a plea deal. Over 90% of the time the people who don’t have the financial resources of a Donald Trump are going to jail no matter if their guilty or not.

  2. In the runup to the last election cycle, one commenter asked: “if Liberals win, what’s the worst that can go wrong?” Well, we now see a power dive trajectory they’ve taken us, and the rest of the world down. With respect to the prospect of WWIII, as Sen. Kennedy has observed, this regime is ‘whacking a wasps’ nest with a short stick.’ It’s only because Putin is the only adult in the room that nukes have not flown. The border is wide open, millions have stormed across, which include a broad range of tropical diseases, the criminal element and very possibly terrorists. Our economy and military are in shambles. The list goes on.

    This is all intentional sabotage. The discussions from Davos luminaries signal that clearly.

    In all my decades of life, I never saw the level of desperation, dirty tricks, and villainy that this regime, its followers, apparatchicks and enablers stream out daily. They must be stopped and held to account.

    Si est Deus in caelo, percutite eos.

    1. Well, if you, as a MAGA-ite don’t want so many people to cross the border, why did your hero command the Republicans to oppose the Border Security Bill solely to prevent Biden from getting another “win”? You speak of “desperation, dirty tricks and villany”–which are apt descriptions of Trump and Republicans. After working for months on a compromise, they simply walk away, solely to help Trump’s chances in November.

  3. “Trump has a curious fortune in critics who seem over time *to combust* in rather spectacular fashion.” (JT, emphasis added)

    That is not an accident. Reckless people do reckless things.

    Just give them enough rope.

  4. all elections…ONE DAY, IN PERSON, WITH ID

    I don’t care if you vote, I care if you cheat!

    1. Every U.S. citizen is issued a Social Security card with a photo ID which must be used in every election involving a federal office.

      1. Green Card holders (foreign nationals working in the U.S.) are recipients of social security #s…pay SS taxes and recieve SS benefits.

        We need to tighten the process up. Perhaps issue VOTER CARDs through an expanded passport system.

        If you want to vote you will put out the effort. SAnd for all the critics… IT SHOULD BE FREE. Only thing required is your time. Don’t want to make that small investment… then don’t vote.

  5. if he wins he needs to JAIL thousands of criminal Democrats and RINOs from across government….including congress, DOJ, judges, etc

  6. That all being said, Trump is still a rapist and a traitor who is now openly encouraging Putin to attack NATO. Trump is disqualified to old any office because of his attempted coup, even if the chickenshits on SCOTUS pass the buck. Let’s not forget him stealing, and then lying about classified documents.

    2. It isn’t that obvious that you don’t actually read any documents but get all your propaganda from the woman who wishes she were man oh and let’s not forget the insurrection where all the participants came unarmed – except for the government employees that is. Yes sir, you are either employed by those who would burn this country down or a fool who would rather watch a sports event than learn any critical thinking skills.

      1. It is more logical that the side that supports a rapist, traitor, criminal, liar, and guy who did the first attempted coup in US history wants to burn the country down.

        1. Which do you mean Sammy, Joe Biden accused of Rape by Tara Reade or Bill Clinton accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick? In both of those cases you have a Democrat accused by a Democrat. This eliminates the obvious conflict of interest.

  7. A bit of both actually. He’s already been vindicated with regards to a few of the government attacks, and surely will be vindicated on more, for as MTG said, ‘It’s all Bull****.” And anything that’s left over, quite possibly attrition will cause the cases to be dropped…especially once he’s back in office. But those who did this need to prosecuted themselves!!!

    1. What has Trump been vindicated on? And just for fun, your answer must not contain lies.

      1. Erm…Trump WAS spied on by the FBI/DoJ. The Alpha Bank story was completely false. There was no collusion–under oath Adam Schiff admitted he had not seen any evidence of collusion. The FBI never reviewed the supposed evidence of HIllary’s emails being stolen. They accepted Crowdstrike’s (a DNC contractor) conclusions. Contrary to the beliefs of a large majority of Democrats, there is ZERO that even a single vote was changed by Russia. The entire edifice has been obliterated for all but the most obtuse, brain-dead Dem partisans. And that’s just the beginning.

        1. 1. Trump was legitimately spied on because his campaign was communication with Russian agents. It would have been a dereliction of duty to ignore that threat. Nothing here to “vindicate” him about at all.
          2. There was no direct evidence that Trump himself was part of the communications between his campaign and Russian agents. Inconclusive, not vindication.
          3. Anything Hillary related has nothing to do with Trump being vindicated.
          4. There was suspicion that Russia could have mucked with the actual votes. This was a legitimate concern and needed to be investigated. And has nothing to do with Trump being vindicated or not.

  8. Think about this: side by side comparison —Biden’s wherewithal to withstand what Trump has withstood over the years — not even close — Biden got incensed over his memory being challenged —- Trump would have said something like ‘consider the source’ and moved on with his daily duties. Biden feels ‘entitled.’ “I” put this country back on its feet. Note the “I” —- meanwhile, his wife needs to take him by the hand and lead him away from the podium — you think Trump would EVER need to be led — So Joe, it you are so ‘together’ mentally, why refuse the cognitive test?

  9. I believe that the greatest earned condemnation in the 2024 election process is much more related to neither candidate but the willingness of so many States to succumb to petitioners in or outside the government to deny citizens the right to have their candidates on the ballot. The cries go up that the only salvation for Democracy is to eliminate Democracy. Why? Because, We the People might make an unacceptable choice over whom We prefer to govern on our behalf. This has to be a defining moment in our nation. We are facing the elimination of free elections in order to secure the power of one party over another. This is an ultimate disgrace and an act of treason against the Union. Destroying the foundations of our elections is as great an evil, as a military attack from a foreign nation. The citizens of the United States must demand that the means of the People, retain their right, to vote for their candidates, and uphold the founding principle, that the government serves only at the consent of the governed.

    2. What else would you expect when we no longer have a legitimate administration in office?

  10. Prof. Turley – if Trump wins the election he IS vindicated.

    A trump victory means that a majority of voters do not beleive or do not care about the Lawfare against Trump.

    That is essentially a jury verdict on the Trump lawfare with a 7:5 jury in favor of innocence.

    That IS vindication.

  12. Thank “Crazy Abe” Lincoln and Karl Marx for that half-time debacle, whatever the —- that unintelligible miasma was.

    The United States of America has been “fundamentally transformed,” illegally invaded, vanquished, and subjugated.

    1. Its really quite simple;
      Trump’s efforts to restore and preserve America is far more popular and garners far more support than the very unpopular Ahmerikhah Transfromationalist woke efforts to decimate and dismantle America.

  13. How do you solve a problem like Joe Biden?

    James Carville says Joe Biden Super Bowl interview snub reflects White House’s lack of ‘confidence’

    “It’s the biggest television audience, not even close, and you get a chance to do a 20, 25-minute interview on that day, and you don’t do it, that’s a kind of sign that the staff or yourself doesn’t have much confidence in you. There’s no other way to read this,” he said.

    https://news.yahoo.com/james-carville-says-joe-biden-222027401.html

  15. Dear Prof Turley,

    Trump could win because Joe Biden is a deeply corrupt, cognitively impaired vicious old fool who has brought the world to the brink of catastrophe. Almost exclusively.

    At this point, any support for Biden is a vote for Trump.

    *ipso facto

  16. When America is over $34T in debt, how is it not a rebellion to give away another $95B to foreign countries? That is an insurrection by the US Senate. Every senator and House member who votes in favor should be prosecuted under 18 USC §2383.

    1. And they did it on Super Bowl Sunday. Gee, I wonder if that was a mere coincidence, or if that tactic helped them do it without people paying attention.

  17. Mail-In Ballot Fraud Study Finds Trump ‘Almost Certainly’ Won In 2020
    https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/mail-ballot-fraud-study-finds-trump-almost-certainly-won-2020
    Disclaimer: I voted for Donald Trump in 2020, albeit very reluctantly. While it has been clear to me for years that fraudulent ballots were cast in the 2020 election, I have always been skeptical of claims by Trump and his supporters that illegally cast votes cost him the election outright. Until I delve further into the details of this analysis and the objections to its conclusions, much of that skepticism will remain. However, this is the first serious attempt of which I am aware to quantify the number of fraudulent ballots cast, and statistically analyze those numbers in terms of the effect on electoral college voting, so the claim has gained some plausibility to me.

    1. The Constitution requires times and places for elections.

      Mail-in ballots preclude times and places.

      Mail-in ballots and voting are unconstitutional.

      1. 38 US states constitutionally require secret ballot elections.
        including 5 of 6 swing states.
        The legal requirements for a secret ballot election are:

        1). an official ballot being printed at public expense,
        2). on which the names of the nominated candidates of all parties and all proposals appear,
        3). being distributed only at the polling place and
        4). being marked in secret.

        Mailing voting can NEVER meet 3 and 4, and often does not meet #1.

        #1 requires that ballot printing is similar to printing currency – it must be done such that ballots cannot easily be counterfeited.
        In AZ in 2020 some precints ran out of ballots and photocopied blank ballots.
        The moment they did that – it was no longer possible to tell a fraudulent ballot from a valid one, because anyone can counterfeit a photocopy easily.

        I would note that the secret ballot requirements do NOT prohibit early voting, or some forms of absentee voting.
        Voters are still required to come to a county election office, fill out and seal their ballot in secret at the polling place with ballots never leaving the polling place.

        There are good reasons that elections should be at the polls and only on election day.

        But even early voting and absentee voting can be done such as to not violate secret ballot constitutional requirements

        If you do not meet the secret ballot requirements – even if you do not have massive fraud immediately – you will eventually.

        We know this because we have seen that every where we have not had secret ballot election – including most US elections in the 19th century.
        The reason that 38 states have constitutional amendments requiring secret ballot elections is because of the massive election fraud in the 19th century.

    2. Heartland Institute – Bias and Credibility

      QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

      A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

      Overall, we rate the Heartland Institute Right Biased and Questionable based on promoting anti-science propaganda, lack of transparency with funding, and more than five failed fact checks by IFCN fact-checkers.
      https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/heartland-institute/

      ZeroHedge – Bias and Credibility

      CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE

      Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information; therefore, fact-checking and further investigation is recommended on a per-article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

      Overall, we rate ZeroHedge an extreme right-biased conspiracy website based on the promotion of false/misleading/debunked information that routinely denigrates the left.
      https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/zero-hedge/

      1. And why is mediabiasfactcheck reliable?
        Fact checkers, like those at the Washington Post, have not been reliable.

          1. I do not Care what they SAY is their methodology.

            I care about there results – and the FACT is that it is Mediafacts that is BIASED.

            T%here results do not track reality.

        2. They are not trustworkthy based ont he very criteria that ATS provided from them.
          They litterally claimed that denegratg the left makes you unreliable.

          Talk about drowning

      2. ATS – Neither Heartland nor Zero hedge, nor TTV, nor Prof. Lott, Nor Rassmussen nor most of the those alleging evidence of fraud in 2020 meet YOUR defintion of fraud.

        Rassmussen as an example is a polling company. There owners/founders are conservative.
        But the accuracy of their polls is significantly better than most – They have had a few bad cycles, but on average they are the most accurate national poll on election day.

        So what is your definition of Bias ? Some of the polls that show Trump with the highest lead over Biden are polls affiliated with left wing media groups.

        I have zero interest what OBVIOUSLY biased grousp such as “mediafacts” claims regarding bias.

        Evidence of actual bias would be Data collection methods that alter the results – such as “push polls”

        Or application of inapproriate statistical methods to analysis,
        or conscious of unconscious skewing of Data.

        Heartland has a bad rep with left wing nuts because their are one of the preminent organizations debunking bad studies of Global warming. Thus far Heartland has been correct. We are on track for about 1.2C of warming in the 21st century, that is about the same as the 20th century, and the 19th century and the 18th century.

        Conversely IPCC no longer reports on climate models that do not report 2-5C of warming for the 21st century.

        And the models are now running about 3 std dev hotter than reality.

        If we are evaluating Bias based on accuracy in reflecting reality – Heartland has done far better than the CAGW crowd.

      3. “Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence.”
        So do you or media facts have EXAMPLES of this ?

        I would note Mediafacts “explanation” is already a problem. Some conspiracies are real, some are not.
        Claiming that a site reports conspiracies does NOT indicate their reliability.

        Zerohedge as an example Did NOT buy the collusion delusion – WaPo and NYT did, Conversely ZeroHedge did allege a conspiracy between the clainton campaign and the FBI/DOJ – and they were correct.
        Myriads of outlets reported that the Hunter Biden laptop was russian disinformation – that was a conspiracy theory that was FALSE.
        It is one that every outlet that mediafacts thinks is eliable failed.

        Pseudoscience is about as bad as conspiracy. Myriads of scientists throughout the world challenged Public Health officiasl regarding the science of Covid and publice heatlh responses. Almost universally it is government public health officials that have proven to be pseudoscience.

        How is unverifiable information a reflection of bias ? If you can not verify something – you can not know if it is biased.

        CAGW is unverifiable with respect tot he future – we do not live in the future we do not know what global temps will be.
        There is absolutely no science that will ever be able to tell us with certainty future temperatures.

        But warmists scientists have been predicting the future for many decades – and their predictions are 3 std dev warmer than reality.
        While we can not verify predictions with respect to the future – we can see how good they were when we arrive – and CAGW scientists have done poorly.

        Zerohedge does alot of economic predictions. Like everyone who does economic predictions they are nearly always wrong.
        But they are closer to correct than say “The federal reserve” Regardless like cliamate predictions economic predictions are always unverifiable until the future arrives.

        So Mediafacts claims regarding Zerohedge rest on criteria that are themselves biased.
        Criteria such as conspiracy, pseudoscience, unverifiable are subjective – i.e. highly subject to bias criteria.

        “Overall, we rate ZeroHedge an extreme right”
        How is that relevant ?

        While mediafacts sprayed a bunch of words INTENDED to convey that Zerohedge is unreliable, they did NOT provide any actual evidence that they are. Being “extreme right” or “extreme left” does not inherently make one unreliable.

        Zerohedge BTW is NOT extreme right. They have the typical political lean of successful investors and economists who are rong

        “biased conspiracy website based on the promotion of false/misleading/debunked information that routinely denigrates the left.”
        So here we have it “denigrating the left” makes you unreliable ?

        ROFL

        All you have done is very successdully proven that medifacts uses biased criteria that will always produce results that classify those on the left as trustworthy and those on the right as not.
        And they are OPEN about it.

        1. @ John Say : “How is unverifiable information a reflection of bias ? If you can not verify something – you can not know if it is biased.”

          I hope you’ll forgive my pedantry because I do understand your point as you have elaborated it and I tend to agree with the gist of it.

          That notwithstanding, in the context of reporting “unverifiable information” (i.e. rumor, innuendo etc.) it can indeed reflect bias. If a source of “unverifiable information” repeatedly presents such information as “evidence” promoting only one side of an argument or issue it is abundantly clear the source has a bias.

          The question is not whether the “information” qua information is biased. As you rightly point out that’s unprovable. Rather, the question is whether the source reporting the “information” is biased an thus engaging in sophistry with an obvious one-sided slant — which is undoubtedly a form of bias.

      4. Ha! Media Bias Fact Check is hardly objective. Neither is Snopes or Poynter. Nice try Rather than actually debate the contents of the Heartland Study, you quote some BS fact checker. Typical liberal

    3. I have a problem with the study –

      The margin of victory in AZ, GA and WI was .31, .24. .63 respectively.
      It was also a total of only 43,000 votes
      Trump winning those three state would have resulting in a very narrow Trump victory.

      The actual election fraud was primarily in Detroit, Milwaukee, Los Vegas, Pheonix, Atlanta, and Philadelphia.
      All of which went for Biden by 70% or higher margins and all of which were massively mailin voting.

      TTV’s study of Ballot Box cameras and Geofencing of Ballot boxes to identify “mules” – people who dropped off more than 10 ballots at a time to more than 10 ballot boxes in one night, which is fraud in every single state. Found that Trump would likely have won every swing state except michingan – and likely by significant margins TTV’s conservative estimate of fraud in those cities is 400,000 ballots, and could be as high as 2million.

      I would note this is NOT individual ballot fraud – like the Heartland study looked at. This is organized ballot fraud.
      It is impossible4 to tell from the TTV data whether the 400K-2M fraudulent ballots were MERELY illegally “harvested”

      i.e. campaign workers came to the homes of voters that had not yet voted and cajoled them into voting – or worse still coerced or induced them. Project Veritas found that the going rate to buy a completed ballot that reflected the wishes of the local party in detroit was about $300. We know that Mules in AZ were paid $10/ballot for taking ballots to ballot boxes.
      We know from the maricopa county audit that in a state Trump lost by 10,000 votes, that 48,000 mailin ballots were received for only 13,000 voters.

      This could be as Heartlands suggests – individuals who voted more than once. But the TTV data and a more disturbing way to read the Maricopa county audit results is that potentially hundreds of thousands of MANUFACTURED ballots were submitted.
      We KNOW because Democrats have admitted it, that Zuckerbucks were used to allow Zuckerbergs people to essentially take over election administration in the 6 key cities where fraud is alleged. We KNOW because democrats have admitted it that this resulted in the campaigns in those cities being given real time data about registered voters that had not yet voted. While the data was given to both parties, This was done almost exclusively in big cities where democrats make up 75% or more of the vote.

      If you have the voter registration information for a couple of hundred thousand people who have NOT voted a few days before the election,
      you have everything that you need to manufacture fraudulent ballots for them.

      If you submitted 200,000 manufactured ballots in Maricopa county for voters who had not voted a few days before the election, you would have a SMALL numer of instances where you submit a fraudulent ballot and the person actually votes.

      I would note that voter registration data not only tells most everything needed to fill in a mailin ballot, it also tells how frequently that person votes. Fraudsters could deliberately choose to submit ballots only for people who had not voted so far and appeared unlikely to vote.
      Reducing the number of collisions.

      I would further note that statitical analysis done by reputable statisticians such as Prof. Lott found voting patters in these 6 cities that were not consistent with nationawide, state wide or event demographically similar adjacent counties.

      i.e while Lot found that Biden did get a slightly larger percent of the vote than Hillary did. that in those 6 specific cities Biden’s vote share gains were significantly larger than nationwide gains state wide gains or even adjacent county gains. The statistical odds of Biden getting several more percent of gain in only those 6 places than he did anywhere else – especially given that he did not visit or have ralies in any of those cities.

      If you or others wish to beleive that AFTER True inquiry Biden still would have won – you are free to do so.

      But there are many many many problems with the 2020 vote that were not investigated thoroughly – or that the investigations by groups like PV or TTV that found fraud were discounted.
      The odds against the outcome we had are lower than 5 of a kind Aces in poker.

      It is not impossible, But it is highly unlikely

    4. An organization that specifically rejects the concept data driven science is not one at all to be trusted with any studies.

  18. “…critics who seem over time to combust in rather spectacular fashion”
    Any form of “Derangement Syndrome”, no matter who or what is prepended to that phrase, is a mental illness; frequently serious, with largely predictable consequences.

  19. The paragraph that says: In Washington, the Supreme Court gave a chilly reception to the disqualification effort that bordered on the glacial. While law professors like Harvard’s Laurence Tribe insisted that the basis for barring Trump from office under the 14th Amendment was “unassailable,” the justices seemed utterly unconvinced and there is now the possibility that the entire effort could now be defeated unanimously. Even liberal justice Ketanji Onyika Brown Jackson called the effort anti-democratic.
    Does this mean even though the judges ruled, the judges are now considering reversing their decision?

  20. “Even in Georgia, a recent poll found 77 percent believe that politics played a major role (59%) or some role (18%) in charging Trump.”

    Thanks for providing the link to the poll, Professor Turley. 68% of Georgians said Trump was wrong to ask Raffensperger & other Republican Georgia election officials to change the outcome of the 2020 election.

    But to be fair, the poll Turley cites was taken 3 months ago. A poll taken last month shows 52% of Georgians approve of criminal charges being laid against Trump in Fulton County. 47% said if the criminal charges against Trump prove to be true, he should be disqualified from the presidency.

    Thanks for endorsing the accuracy of Georgia polls, JT.

    1. Trump did not ask Georgie officials to “change the outcome of the election.”. He asked them to find, not create, several thousand additional ballots. It is not unprecedented to find uncounted ballots after an election.

      1. He asked them to find a specific number votes, not ballots: “The current margin is only 11,779. … I just want to find 11,780 votes.”
        And elsewhere, approximating: “we lost by essentially 11,000 votes. … Look, we need only 11,000 votes. … I only need 11,000 votes. Fellas, I need 11,000 votes. … we’re only down 11,000 votes. … all we have to do Cleta is find 11,000-plus votes.”

        It’s routine for there to be uncounted ballots, as most states allow mail-in ballots to arrive by election day (and sometimes later), and mail-in ballots often take longer to count (e.g., they may go through an individual checking process, as occurs in my county, checking outside-envelope signatures, checking to make sure that they weren’t filled out with pencil by mistake — in my county it has to be pen, etc., before being fed into machines to count them).

      2. Yes, like the 80K they “found” at 4AM in Philadephia, after they had stopped the counting.

        1. Exactly, and the “broken” water pipe in, where was that Atlanta, Wisconsin? So many swing states conveniently stopped counting when Trump was up big only to wake up with Biden in the lead. Guess they “found” the ballots they needed.

    2. Trump never asked anyone to “change the outcome of the election”. He contested the accuracy of the vote count and asked them to audit it – as many candidates do in tight races. If the question were phrased on you write it, it would be a dishonest question and would indicate the quality of the poll you cite…in other words, they were rigging it with incorrect, prejudicial language in their questions.

Comments are closed.