# What if all the election-fixing suggested against Trump is proven true? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 29, 2018, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768 "2018-01-29T23:51:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/101 "2018-02-01T16:34:45Z")
> [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > My question is: doesn’t everybody get to say what they want? If the Russians want to post “HRC is a poopy head” a million times on the internet, don’t they get to? I could go to the Daily Caller web site and start posting, “Theresa May is a poopy head” every day, and maybe the paper would cancel my account, but I would never be charged with a crime, no? Add this to the hypothetical: you’re representing yourself to the Daily Caller as May’s deputy. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/102 "2018-02-01T17:00:12Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Thank you. I believe in democracy because I believe that ultimately the best thing for all of us is for the majority to decide the fate of the country. Even if that differs from the way that I would do things by fiat. My fiat (or anyone’s fiat) will ultimately destabilize society, and so even if I disagree somewhat with the majority, it is ultimately in my best interest for society to be stable. > > I don’t mind that Republicans win elections. I’ve voted for a equal (technically, one more Democrat than Republican, but it’s an odd number of elections!) number of Democratic and Republican presidential candidates in my life. I mind that they are cheating to win elections that they shouldn’t win, and instituting unpopular policies that are destabilizing society. The ends do not justify the means. The means are going to ruin this country for us. That kind of sentiment is not worth much. Everyone nominally espouses that. The question is whether you determine that there was “cheating”. If you look around the world, you’ll notice that a much bigger threat to democracy than this sort of cheating to win elections is governments using the power of the justice and intelligence systems against their political opponents. (One well known practitioner of this art is a guy named V. Putin - you may have heard of him.) So logically, one might think that you should be very concerned – on the most non-partisan basis, of course – about the possibility that something along these lines might have happened in the US. But instead it’s remarkable how many liberals have zero concern about this potential threat, and instead have what seems to be a newfound appreciation for the integrity and value of the FBI and intelligence services generally, and resist any suggestion that that elements of these services might have been biased in any way, viewing any such suggestion as itself a threat to the country and it’s glorious security forces. But of course, it all boils down to what you believe the facts are. Liberal zealots fervently believe that Trump is guilty of collusion and that the investigations of him are uncorrupted. People on the other side of the aisle tend to believe a different version of the facts. Nothing wrong with any of that. But it makes the posturing quoted above meaningless. You’re not some sort of great patriot and democracy supporter for strongly supporting this investigation, any more than you’re a corrupt totalitarian for strongly supporting the FBI, and similar applies to people with differing views. Everybody is concerned about everything, and it’s all about the facts. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/103 "2018-02-01T17:08:27Z")
This is not a both-sides situation. Mueller is a Republican. He was appointed by Rosenstein, who is also a Republican, and was appointed by Trump himself. How the right has made this investigation seem like a plot by the Democrats I will never understand. It’s Republicans investigating one of their own. There are no both-sides. Its the same side!!! ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/104 "2018-02-01T17:36:22Z")
The current Mueller investigation is completely separate from the pre-election FBI investigation. These should not be conflated. The Nunes memo focuses on the latter. I imagine that there are some people who want to use accusations about the FBI to undermine the Mueller investigation in some vague way, but others can distinguish the two (e.g. Paul Ryan who took pains to make this distinction when commenting on the memo). ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/105 "2018-02-01T17:52:47Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > The current Mueller investigation is completely separate from the pre-election FBI investigation. These should not be conflated. The Nunes memo focuses on the latter. I imagine that there are some people who want to use accusations about the FBI to undermine the Mueller investigation in some vague way, but others can distinguish the two (e.g. Paul Ryan who took pains to make this distinction when commenting on the memo). “You imagine that there are some people?” Are you familiar with who we have as President of the United States? I think conservatives are nuts to stake their claim on their own dossier about illegal spying on Carter Page. Let’s remember that this is Carter Page, who is basically in the same camp as Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn as the “disposable” figures in the Russia investigation. As in, “When the final Mueller report comes out, I guarantee you that there will be nothing about collusion with the Russians! Except for Manafort, Page, and Flynn… we all know that those guys are crooked and they were barely part of the Trump team for more than, like, 15 minutes back in 1968.” When the FBI is calling the Nunes Dossier a crock of shit, and it is completely clear that Republicans are suppressing any evidence that may shine light on this crock of shit, it’s a bit rich to claim the moral high ground on defending the civil liberties of innocent Americans. After all, if civil liberties were so important to Republicans, they would have written a different FISA reauthorization bill, seeing as how Nunes said way back in March of 2017 that domestic intelligence collection was out of control and threatening political campaigns. It’s almost like Nunes said FISA was broken back in March 2017, it was fixed for a long time, enabling him to cheerlead the reauthorization of the authority in mid-January, only to discover hours later that FISA was once again a terribly broken tool. I’m tempted to ask, just how stupid do they take the American people to be? Then I look at the Republican leadership today, and I reply, “Aaaah… THAT stupid.” ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/106 "2018-02-01T18:06:46Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > “You imagine that there are some people?” Are you familiar with who we have as President of the United States? Trump is one of the more confused and fact-challenged people out there. You can’t extrapolate from things that Trump says to other people. (I don’t understand what specific point you’re making in the rest of your post, though I do get the idea that you don’t think highly of Republicans.) ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/107 "2018-02-01T18:19:40Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Trump is one of the more confused and fact-challenged people out there. You can’t extrapolate from things that Trump says to other people. > > (I don’t understand what specific point you’re making in the rest of your post, though I do get the idea that you don’t think highly of Republicans.) Some of my best friends are Republicans. All of them are smarter than to be pro-Trump, however. The point I’m making is that you seemed to have difficulty thinking of any Republican who might view the Nunes Dossier in a certain way. To relieve you of the need to use your imagination to figure out who “some people” may be, I pointed to a particularly notable one who by media reports intends to… “misuse” the dossier just in that “vague” way. [“Vague” meaning your euphemism for “attempt to discredit all investigations into Trump.”] And frankly, the assertion you made that Paul Ryan is urging Republicans to use the dossier the “right” way is about as convincing as buying a bong in a head shop and having the storekeeper urge you to only use “legal product” in your water pipe. Once again, how stupid are we supposed to be, again? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/108 "2018-02-01T18:37:49Z")
So the bottom line is that you’re determined to believe that Trump’s statements represent all Republicans and Ryan’s none (if even himself). Not much in arguing over that, believe what you want. Some of your best friends are Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/109 "2018-02-01T18:42:55Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > So the bottom line is that you’re determined to believe that Trump’s statements represent all Republicans and Ryan’s none (if even himself). Not much in arguing over that, believe what you want. Some of your best friends are Republicans. I’m saying that you’re trying to portray that it is just a few Republicans who want to use the Nunes Dossier to discredit all investigations into Trump. I’m saying that the top Republicans in the White House and the House have that intention, and only some are trying to obfuscate it. You also seem intent on saying that if one disputes the obvious intention of Nunes’ BS, that person is automatically a partisan. In response, I’m wondering why conservatives such as yourself are implicitly defending a Republicans on this issue that have such great credibility problems, principally Trump and Nunes. ETA: I would also add that not all Republicans are taking your line of defending Nunes’ memo. [Senator Burr](http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/371774-senate-gop-leader-cautions-nunes-on-fbi-memo) is showing some principle, and I commend him for it. Not to mention the Republicans at the top of the DOJ who seem to be more concerned about national security than about being part of the Trump defense fund. But that’s a pretty lonely group of Republicans… I count two. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/110 "2018-02-01T18:54:59Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m saying that you’re trying to portray that it is just a few Republicans who want to use the Nunes Dossier to discredit all investigations into Trump. I’m saying that the top Republicans in the White House and the House have that intention, and only some are trying to obfuscate it. > > You also seem intent on saying that if one disputes the obvious intention of Nunes’ BS, that person is automatically a partisan. In response, I’m wondering why conservatives such as yourself are implicitly defending a Republicans on this issue that have such great credibility problems, principally Trump and Nunes. I’ve not defended Trump or Nunes specifically. I’ve merely said that it’s possible to have concerns about FBI partisanship of the type being investigated by Nunes without having the intention of undermining the Mueller investigation, and I think there are many people who do. The assumption that it’s not possible is driven by partisanship and/or a belief that the are no facts along these lines worthy of investigation, two factors which tend to themselves be highly correlated. That’s all. In context here I was giving a counterpoint to someone who was presenting his concerns as genuine non-partisan above-politics concerns, and pointing out that this is a veneer can be used to polish either side in this matter. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/111 "2018-02-01T19:02:53Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’ve not defended Trump or Nunes specifically. I’ve merely said that it’s possible to have concerns about FBI partisanship of the type being investigated by Nunes without having the intention of undermining the Mueller investigation, and I think there are many people who do. The assumption that it’s not possible is driven by partisanship and/or a belief that the are no facts along these lines worthy of investigation, two factors which tend to themselves be highly correlated. > > That’s all. In context here I was giving a counterpoint to someone who was presenting his concerns as genuine non-partisan above-politics concerns, and pointing out that this is a veneer can be used to polish either side in this matter. It is theoretically possible to do oversight that divorces an attempt to undermine the credibility of the Department of Justice, FBI, and Mueller from anything relating to Trump. In the same way that it is credible to buy a bong from a headshop for “legal product.” Either way, whether it is possible to do so is a different question from whether that is being done, for which the answer is an obvious one. The entire issue of the FBI’s alleged partisanship is an issue ginned up because of Trump and his animosity toward the Clintons. It’s a fact. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/112 "2018-02-01T20:00:04Z")
Boy this thread sure turned into the typical lame political sniping quick. Just thought I’d point out that people on the first page were incorrect who said a court never has or would order a re-election. I’m surprised everyone forgot that it happened in the last election in North Carolina though the Supreme Court overruled that order. > **[US Supreme Court tosses NC legislative districts; no special election ordered](https://www.wral.com/us-supreme-court-tosses-nc-legislative-districts-no-special-election-ordered/16743271/)** > > The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld without comment a lower court's ruling that North Carolina lawmakers illegally relied too much on the race of voters when they drew 28 state House and state Senate districts in 2011. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/113 "2018-02-01T20:42:37Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Boy this thread sure turned into the typical lame political sniping quick. > > Just thought I’d point out that people on the first page were incorrect who said a court never has or would order a re-election. I’m surprised everyone forgot that it happened in the last election in North Carolina though the Supreme Court overruled that order. > > [http://www.wral.com/us-supreme-court-tosses-nc-legislative-districts-no-special-election-ordered/16743271/](http://www.wral.com/us-supreme-court-tosses-nc-legislative-districts-no-special-election-ordered/16743271/) Given the context of this thread, I think we all assumed we were talking about the SCOTUS ordering a rerun of the presidential election. That is certainly what I meant, and I didn’t think I had to explicitly say that. Just as I would not have said that no court would order a redo of the election in the United States. This thread is about the US presidential election, and we should’t have to qualify everything we say as referencing that topic. I would only qualify if I wasn’t referencing that topic. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/114 "2018-02-01T20:52:39Z")
> [@Johnny\_Ace](#): > > Add this to the hypothetical: you’re representing yourself to the Daily Caller as May’s deputy. But, that would be dishonest! :eek: I guess you are saying that is what the Russians were doing with their fake news propaganda push, posing as someone they were not. What is the answer to it? Foreign state actors pushing disguised propaganda… Sounds like a job for the FBI or DHS or something like that. But, if we discredit all those organizations as mere partisan tools, how do they succeed at tasks like that? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2018, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/115 "2018-02-01T21:19:25Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Given the context of this thread, I think we all assumed we were talking about the SCOTUS ordering a rerun of the presidential election. That is certainly what I meant, and I didn’t think I had to explicitly say that. Just as I would not have said that no court would order a redo of the election in the United States. This thread is about the US presidential election, and we should’t have to qualify everything we say as referencing that topic. I would only qualify if I wasn’t referencing that topic. Well Shodan asked “Has any court in the US ever ordered a do-over?” and Jonathon Chance said “no court will order a voiding of an election”. Regardless, it’s odd not to have been brought up. Guess everyone was busy measuring their guns. ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2018, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/116 "2018-02-02T01:29:31Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I agree. I fucking hate that conservatives got stuck with the color red. > > [Red states and blue states - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states#Origins_of_the_color_scheme) As an aside, I remember when the colors would be alternated each election cycle. The current Red/Blue alignment got “baked in” in 2000, I think. Could be worse, you could have gotten the _third_ primary color. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2018, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768/117 "2018-02-02T02:34:52Z")
Hell, even the Libertarians get green. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-all-the-election-fixing-suggested-against-trump-is-proven-true/807768.md?page=5)