On Erection 2020 and Guiliani
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.


Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2020-11-19 14:27 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 288 references Ignore this thread
On Erection 2020 and Guiliani
[Comments enabled]

I must say I'm materially more convinced that "there" is there than I was.

You can watch the entire presser here, and you likely should use that link since it's C-Span, which will be un-polluted.

Prior to that presser I had a 5% confidence level, +/-5, that there was enough in the myriad claims to actually sustain something that matters.

But before I get to my revision and why, I want to point out what "something that matters" means.

Specifically, enough EVs must swing to Trump to win or enough states must go into the "no-EV" bucket so Biden does not get 270 and the election goes to The House.

It does not matter, for example, if you were to prove Witmer personally stole the election in Michigan and gave it to Biden by her own hand, with proof she printed up 150,000 fake ballots and hand-delivered them in Wayne County or even that she personally altered vote totals.  That does not make Trump President although it likely would send her ugly ass to prison (where she belongs for a whole host of reasons related to Covid19.)

Nothing else makes any difference whatsoever in terms of who is President in late January.  It may well put people in prison, but it doesn't change the election outcome and that's what we're talking about here.  I note with some bemusement that the person who claims to be VP-elect (falsely; the EC has not yet voted and absent that or a concession nobody is anything-elect in this context) has not resigned her Senate seat.  If she was confident she'd be there in January she would have already done so.  What does that tell you about her level of confidence that the results will stand up?

But today my estimation has changed by the manifest weight of the evidence.  Specifically, it appears that there is a decent chance that indeed enough EVs were moved by shenanigans and that can be proved to change the outcome.

So my estimate now has gone from 5% from about 30-35%, +/-5%.  In other words somewhere between one chance in four and four in ten.

That's a big move.

With that said notice that I'm not over the 50% line even at the upper boundary of my confidence interval.  Why?  Because what we heard today is akin to an opening statement.  In fact Guiliani said exactly that, in plain English -- this is their opening statement that they would make to a court, basically.

There are plenty of opening statements made in courtrooms every day that do not carry the weight of the evidence through the rest of the trial and result in the outcome the attorney doing it (and his or her client) wants to see.

But this was clearly not a

smiley

by any stretch of the imagination.

In other words it had the elements that, if they hold up under both direct and cross examination, make a prima-facia case.

There was, speaking in specifics, reference to sworn affidavits with enough disclosed to tip the scales. That is, the content of the affidavits that was disclosed is sufficient, at the level of tampering alleged, to result in the change of outcome.

Now that does not mean that between the affiants and physical evidence all this will prove up through both direct and cross examination.  It may and it may not.  That remains to be seen.

But it cannot be argued that there isn't a case here to examine and the proper venue for that exposition is the adversarial process in a courtroom where people are placed under oath and physical evidence is subpoenaed and examined, not only for evidence of fact but evidence of tampering or deliberate erasure, which if discovered gets construed against the party caught doing it.

For today I reserve judgement, but my probability scale got tipped in a fairly serious way today.

It will be amusing to watch the media try to spin this, as I know they will.

And that too will not surprise, but it may result in more additions to my personal "**** you forevermore" list.

Go to responses (registration required to post)
 

 
Comments.......
User: Not logged on
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Showing Page 1 of 7  First1234567Last
User Info On Erection 2020 and Guiliani in forum [Market-Ticker]
Hapablap21
Posts: 800
Incept: 2007-08-21

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Here's what I keep coming back to:

The people making these accusations are not random internet tin-foil-hatters. These are extremely high profile attorneys who know the law AND who stand to lose a LOT if it can be demonstrated that they are blowing smoke. The accusations that they're making would, I think, at LEAST be grounds for some hefty defamation lawsuits. Not to mention the ended careers and destroyed reputations for people like Sidney Powell and L. Lin Wood. Yet NOBODY is filing those lawsuits.

At the very least, Giuliani, Powell, and Wood all have an honest belief that this stuff is legit. Whether they can convince a court is, of course, another matter, but I can't believe they'd be this aggressive about it if they didn't have the goods.

Jack_crabb
Posts: 9532
Incept: 2010-06-25

Peoples' Republik of Maryland
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Yeah, what Hapablap21 said.

----------
Molon Labe
Where is Henry Bowman when you need him?
How many are willing to pledge this? We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor
Peterm99
Posts: 7792
Incept: 2009-03-21

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Hapablap21 wrote..
. . . I can't believe they'd be this aggressive about it if they didn't have the goods.
IMO, the issue is NOT whether they have the goods or not, it is whether our obviously corrupt legal and political systems will have the backbone to act in a manner consistent with the (yet to be profferred) facts.

I, too, have little doubt that there was indeed massive fraud in this election, and that it was massive enough to have improperly resulted in a "win" for Dopey and the Ho. However, I have grave doubts that the ****bags in the courts and the political sphere will be willing to risk the consequences (e.g., recrimination by the leftists, threats of massive unrest, violence, etc., etc.) of doing the "proper" thing when the evidence is presented.

----------
". . . the Constitution has died, the economy welters in irreversible decline, we have perpetual war, all power lies in the hands of the executive, the police are supreme, and a surveillance beyond Orwells imaginings falls into place." - Fred Reed

Jack_crabb
Posts: 9532
Incept: 2010-06-25

Peoples' Republik of Maryland
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Excellent point, Peterm99. When "they" have the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in their pocket...

----------
Molon Labe
Where is Henry Bowman when you need him?
How many are willing to pledge this? We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor

Reason: forgot who I was responding to. duh!
Happytrails
Posts: 522
Incept: 2008-10-24

Bluegrass
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Of the three, Sidney Powell has the most credibility with me. She seemed almost teary-eyed talking about the danger to our election process. Rudy didn't pull any punches excoriating big money, big corporate interests and globalists either.
Searcy17
Posts: 126
Incept: 2011-05-17

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I like Rudy personally, but over the last 10 years have noticed he's not as sharp as a lawyer should be. Someone else should be heading this up.

However, I have a hard time believing that Sydney Powell would make all these claims, just to blow up in her face. These are career ending type moves. There is the possibility that people are feeding her info to disqualify her going forward.
Billhrny
Posts: 23
Incept: 2019-06-19

Northern Virginia
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
There is another possibility....I read it online but have not done research to see if it's true...they do not have to knock Biden below 270...all they have to do is prove that there was organized material election fraud and if the can prove he or Harris is behind it they become disqualified...Trump wins by default. Again I do not know if this is indeed is the case but it is being asserted...
Tickerguy
Posts: 169066
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Billhrny -- Nope. That's not how it works.

You can shoot someone in broad daylight but if you have 270EVs you're still President.

The Constitution says the Legislatures direct how Electors are appointed. Well, they did in the states, via legislative process. What is NOT CLEAR (and would be a case of first impression) is whether that authority is plenary; that is, can they turn around and IGNORE STATE STATUTE and do what they want in a situation like this? Yes, they'd be breaking state law, but that's for the State to deal with; on a FEDERAL level it means nothing. Further, there may be no penalty provision in said law, in which case they can't even be prosecuted for it effectively since upon conviction the punishment is..... NOTHING!

Much like The Federal Reserve Act where it say "The board SHALL" but then has no "OR ELSE" clause after it. What's the remedy when they don't?

We shall see...

----------
I don't give a flying **** if you're offended.
Aquapura
Posts: 1448
Incept: 2012-04-19

GeorgeFloyd-ville
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The fact that Kamala hasn't resigned her seat to me is the most damning evidence that there is something to all this.
Tickerguy
Posts: 169066
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Yeah she can't "un-resign" her seat, so once she does that she's all-in on the outcome going her way.

Until then I remain unconvinced. If your adversary will not commit why would you?

----------
I don't give a flying **** if you're offended.
Tinman
Posts: 1850
Incept: 2008-02-16

People's Republik Of Maryland
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Sidney Powell's wavering voice says it all. She's in fear of her life.
Asimov
Posts: 120604
Incept: 2007-08-26

East Tennessee
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Wouldn't it be fun to have an actual press corp that would ask her that question?

----------
It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.
Themortgagedude
Posts: 11833
Incept: 2007-12-17

Saint Charles MO
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Biden didn't resign until January 2009. Not sure we should put anything in the Kamala hasn't resigned narrative. She's not going to resign when she can get paid for doing nothing.

----------
I think its time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that our founding fathers intended for us. Ronald Reagan 1964
Steelpiston71
Posts: 6329
Incept: 2007-09-05

Michigan
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Lin Wood is not someone I would want hounding my ass!

----------
"We have resolution authority under Frank/Dodd... How about we USE IT?" Karl Denninger, 10/07/10 on the Dylan Ratigan Show, MSNBC.
Tickerguy
Posts: 169066
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
TMD I understand I'm just saying that going all-in when there's a confidence question is a solid move - if you're sure.

----------
I don't give a flying **** if you're offended.
Lemonaid
Posts: 12121
Incept: 2008-01-20

Metro Detroit
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Someone has to take Kamala's seat if she resigns. She's halting that process.

----------
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved." Ludwig von Mises
Wifi
Posts: 4550
Incept: 2013-02-13

Seagrove Beach
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Mich Voter Fraud Witness Melissa Carone tells the Inside Story of Dominion Machines in Detroit
Interesting


----------
"Freedom cannot end where fear begins."
Robby Dinero
Phils
Posts: 9
Incept: 2018-02-07

st pete FL
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
How did we sink to this level of corruption?
Venezuela voting machines and software, votes shipped to Germany and Spain for
"counting"?

By Monday we should have mid level Dominion employees ratting each other out.

"Rumble in the DC Jungle" It's gonna be fun!
Rickylc
Posts: 745
Incept: 2009-02-09

Lansing Michigan
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
another twitter analysis of coodemonkeyz's evidence (he is officially helping the Giuliani case) analyst goes by handle Gummibear737

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/13288....

Reason: spelling
Ihsmta
Posts: 658
Incept: 2008-04-10

Midwest, USA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I think that part of the reason for todays presser was to try to scare or "smoke out" whistle blowers and/or overt witnesses.

If someone thinks that they are close to being discovered and prosecuted they may come out singing like a canary in an attempt to cut a deal to save their ass - or at least Trump's legal team hopes.

But, they're running out of time.

----------
"Economists are no different than the prophets of ancient Pompeii who reassured that Mt Vesuvius would never blow. After all, it never had before." Baxter Black, DVM and Cowboy Poet

"You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality." Ayn Rand
Apotheoun
Posts: 3966
Incept: 2009-08-14

MN
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
OMG!!! Listen to 1:35:00 - 1:35:06

EXPLOSIVE!!!!

Guiliani made a HUGE statement in 1 second. This MAY be the tip of an iceberg...

----------
Waiting for the third box, I'm done.
Billhrny
Posts: 23
Incept: 2019-06-19

Northern Virginia
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Phils - If all this is true, and if there is this much systemic fraud and corruption in our election process, then they only reason I can think of is - it was allowed...by both parties. In a two party systems with nearly equal Ds and Rs one part could not implement his kind of fraud without the others help...at least I wouldn't think.

Or maybe it's reply true...there has always been only one Party...with two different butt cheeks to sit on.
Expat_tom
Posts: 123
Incept: 2020-07-06

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Eh, as far as opening statements go, it rates about as good as the Chewbacca Defense.

Many of the counties they have raised objections to didn't even run Dominion voting machines and in my mind that madness undercuts any sort of legitimacy the other arguments might have.

I have no doubt as you said, there is fraud because there is always fraud and have no doubt some dirty ballot counters could run multiple batches through at multiple times or could 'discover' set s of ballots.

But I find it telling that they want the States to accept the results of all of the down ballot elections and ONLY want to raise objections to the Presidential contests. Why? Logic says if there was that much tampering then they MUST also have evidence that can call control of the House and Senate in to question.

But somehow those Institutions of Democracy are still sacrosanct and untouched by this supposed massive conspiracy...it does not compute.

The law and the process is pretty clear, voting for President doesn't matter all that much in a Constitutional sense, because it is so indirect, and it is safe to call it bull**** because at the end of the day it has always been bull****, we never democratically elect a president, we use the voters as a confidence measure so that the States can feel safe awarding their electors and picking the President in an insular way. It is only a mass delusion that we have told ourselves that the selection of a president is actually a democratic process, so calling foul on it regardless of how crazy the arguments are doesn't matter all that much.

If they were serious, then every election in supposedly affected areas should be being challenged but they are not because they know it is just another scam for the rubes, contesting a Presidential Election is just as much game of make believe as actually electing a President.
Tickerguy
Posts: 169066
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
That's a pretty weak argument @Expat_tom when the crux of the issue, and the biggest individual piece of evidence, is batches of ballots that:

1. Came in late.

AND

2. Were "too perfect" (e.g. filled in as if printed, not colored in by hand)

AND

3. Had no evidence of being physically handled (no crease where folded to put in the envelope which if an absentee HAD TO HAPPEN to legitimately be in the ballot stream from mail-in voting, etc)

AND

4. Had only ONE race (not a straight-ticket ballot, ONE RACE) voted -- President.

The odds of those being legitimate ballots are statistically nil.

----------
I don't give a flying **** if you're offended.
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Showing Page 1 of 7  First1234567Last