FNC’s Hemmer to Sen. Tillis on Vote Fraud Claims: ‘What Moment Do You Say Put Up or Shut Up?’

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cathoholic

Guest
I must admit. I am disappointed in Hemmer asking a question with built-in wrong pre-supposition in such a situation.

.

FNC’s Hemmer to Sen. Tillis on Vote Fraud Claims: ‘What Moment Do You Say Put Up or Shut Up?’​

PAM KEY

10 Nov 2020

News anchor Bill Hemmer pressed Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) Tuesday over the Trump campaign’s claims of widespread voter fraud in the presidential election.

Hemmer said, “Senator, I don’t know if you were with us a few moments ago, but Matt Schlapp just came back from Clark County that’s Las Vegas, Nevada. He’s arguing that there are thousands and thousands of illegal votes cast. Well, that may or may not be the case, but so far, we haven’t seen any evidence of that. . . . .
Click to expand...

One of the excellent comments rhetorically reminded the readers about the FAKE news we have been subject to.
WhiteBluecollarRedneck

“There’s no evidence of rioting” says MSM in front of burning buildings.
“There’s no evidence of looting” says MSM in front of a trashed Walmart.
“There’s no evidence of voter fraud,” says MSM in front of a van full of ballots.
There’s no evidence MSM can tell the truth.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
Senator, I don’t know if you were with us a few moments ago, but Matt Schlapp just came back from Clark County that’s Las Vegas, Nevada. He’s arguing that there are thousands and thousands of illegal votes cast. Well, that may or may not be the case, but so far, we haven’t seen any evidence of that
Click to expand...
Well, Bill, I think the intention is to show the evidence in court. Last I heard, your not a judge.
 
I agree that before we say there has been a fraud, the evidence for that claim must be confirmed by the competent authority.

For the same reason , I also think that before we declare Biden President elect, this too must be confirmed by a competent authority.

The Press is not a competent authority and the premature official congratulations pouring in amount to a foreign interference in America’s electoral process.
 
Last edited:
As I was reading this morning, it will be decided in the courts. Sounds like many journalists are not happy with that, but there is a process for contesting close elections. The article can be seen here ~

“# Could These Court Cases Reveal a Final Trump Victory?
The Trump campaign has confined its election challenges to the normal legal process that follows a close election. The same could not be said of Democrats in previous elections.”

 
JonNC said:
Well, Bill, I think the intention is to show the evidence in court. Last I heard, your not a judge.
Click to expand...
That is what has astounded me. WHy would anyone present evidence to rank and file citizenry on youtube? As though that is a good legal strategy.

If you stand trial for murder, does the prosecutor generally say ahead of time “here’s what I have. I am laying my cards on the table.”

I cannot tell if the people who keep uttering this are really that dense, or being disingenuous. They may not have any evidence, but if they do, they aren’t showing the common rabble ahead of time.
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
That is what has astounded me. WHy would anyone present evidence to rank and file citizenry on youtube? As though that is a good legal strategy.
Click to expand...
The Trump campaign lawyers have also failed to show evidence to the court. They have presented speculations and hearsay of hearsay. What type of strategy is that?
 
If that continues, so be it. Lots of cases to be heard and evidence is still being gathered, supposedly.

But the low-brow, unintelligent calls asking where the evidence was PRIOR to them going to court (from both sides of the aisle in some cases) was asinine.
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
But the low-brow, unintelligent calls asking where the evidence was PRIOR to them going to court
Click to expand...
I’m not generally opposed to someone engaging in evidentialism as their epistemology. If someone is trying to have true justified beliefs then justification to accept a proposition as true is needed.

But, I’m thinking more about the judges to which these claims have been presented that have asked for evidence and received nothing substantivethat met the rules of evidence (example).
 
I’d like to see why we have not be emailed evidence of the state’s case against Ghislaine Maxwell? Is anyone as appalled at how they haven’t posted it on reddit yet?!?

Talk about an over inflated sense of self-importance some people have, thinking they owe YOU any evidence prior to a trial.
 
This is why I do not like our News Media. They say, show me the proof. What? Are you not a journalist? DO you not investigate? Or do you just analyze, give opinion and wait for things to fall on your lap?

I tell you, if I was a news leader, I be like. Louis Lane, go to Pensilvania and scan all districts in the city. Clark Ken make sure she makes it there on time. This will make me rich!! I hope Superman had something to do with it.
 
They can ask for whatever they want. Their desire to have a belief confirmed is irrelevant in the big scheme, though.

I am sure Ghislaine Maxwell’s family wants her acquitted, and as such wants the evidence to be able to confirm that. That’s not how it works though.

I’m no lawyer, but did watch an episode of L.A. Law once where Jill Eikenberry’s lamaze classes conflicted with her husband’s softball tournament, so I figure I have a pretty good grasp of the legal system. As such, I don’t believe the steps in evidence gathering are:
  1. gather evidence
  2. send to Bill Hemmer and/or Chris Christie
  3. Go to court
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
I cannot tell if the people who keep uttering this are really that dense, or being disingenuous. They may not have any evidence, but if they do, they aren’t showing the common rabble ahead of time.
Click to expand...
Have you looked at the complaints? The allegations, even if true, would not establish any reason to overturn the election. The affidavits they attached are an embarrassing combination of speculation and hearsay. I am fine with the Trump campaign making its case, but the reason we haven’t seen it is not because they are holding back for trial. They are putting what they have out there and its garbage.
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
They can ask for whatever they want. Their desire to have a belief confirmed is irrelevant in the big scheme, though.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the insignificance of a person having knowledge will in anyway demotivate them from asking for it. Having some significance to one’s self may be all the motivation that is needed for the inquiry.
Dr_Meinheimer said:
I’m no lawyer, but did watch an episode of L.A. Law once where Jill Eikenberry’s lamaze classes conflicted with her husband’s softball tournament, so I figure I have a pretty good grasp of the legal system.
Click to expand...
LOL 😁
 
It’s eight days after the elections. Time is moving. States are certifying.

If there is evidence, file a suit in court. Then we can all see the evidence.
 
TMC . . .
The allegations, even if true, would not establish any reason to overturn the election.
Click to expand...
The “election” isn’t settled yet, much less “overturned”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top