Gee, Why Can’t Trump Accept Defeat Like the Democrats?
In 1980, Carter lost in a landslide to Reagan, 489-49 in the Electoral College. So Democrats concluded that Reagan had committed treason in order to steal the election.
The Dems’ theory was that a month before the election, members of Reagan’s campaign had clandestinely met with reps of Ayatollah Khomeini in Paris and offered to sell him weapons in exchange for a promise not to release the hostages, thus denying Carter a huge election triumph.
In other words, liberals believed the Islamo-fascist cutthroats who had been toying with Carter like a cat with a ball of yarn wanted Carter replaced by someone stronger, like Reagan. How else to explain that, minutes after Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released?
The lunatics behind the “October Surprise” conspiracy theory might have spent their days in obscurity, talking to super-computers of the future except that the NY Times began flogging the story in 1991, beginning with a lengthy op-ed by Columbia University professor Gary Sick.
Sick had been President Carter’s principal aide on Iran during the hostage crisis, which would be like being FDR’s chief adviser on “sneak attacks” in December 1941. Columbia hired Sick as a professor, apparently unable to find Carter’s aide in charge of gas prices.
Soon, other news outlets such as PBS’s “Frontline” and ABC’s “Nightline” began treating crazies howling at the moon as if they were serious intel sources.
Carter himself called for a “blue-ribbon” commission to investigate, saying, “it’s almost nauseating to think that this could be true.” (Which is ironic because that was my reaction, word for word, upon learning that Carter had been elected president.)
The theory that Reagan had arranged to keep our hostages in captivity until after the election was originally hatched by Lyndon LaRouche, the second-most ridiculous person named “Lyndon” to ever run for president.
One key American “witness” to the conspiracy — and Hitchens’ main source — was paranormal expert Barbara Honegger, who said she heard voices from the future and that satellites were directed to part the clouds during Reagan’s inauguration so that the sun would shine only on him.
Years later, Honegger promoted the theory that clocks stopped at the Pentagon at 9:32 a.m. on 9/11, proving that the plane could not have hit at 9:37.
So she was a credible source.
Another major player was fake CIA agent Richard Brenneke, who was about to be fired from his lucrative job with a left-wing think tank for failing to substantiate a different conspiracy theory: that VP Bush was running an Israeli-backed drugs-for-arms operation in Central America
To stave off his firing, Brenneke suddenly remembered that not only had he heard of the October Surprise, he had been there! A LaRouchite confirmed that he had seen Brenneke at the meeting — something Brenneke himself had not remembered until that very moment.
One by one, each of the Reagan campaign aides allegedly at the imaginary Paris meeting had their precise locations proved for nearly every minute of the crucial dates of Oct. 17-19, when the sources claimed the secret meeting had taken place.
Then it turned out Brenneke wasn’t at the nonexistent meeting, either.
These were among the nuts behind the “October surprise” fable pushed by the major media and the Democratic Party for more than a decade after Reagan’s trouncing of Carter in 1980.
Democrat-led congressional committees spent millions of dollars investigating the nutzo conspiracy theory, eventually concluding there was nothing to it.
At the conclusion of the House’s investigation, Rep. Lee Hamilton, the House Democrat who had chaired the October Surprise Task Force, wrote an op-ed in the NY Times saying: “The task force report concluded there was virtually no credible evidence to support the accusations.”
On the same day, the NY Times published a rebuttal op-ed by Gary Sick.
And that, kids, is how you concede a presidential election with grace and dignity.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Charges unveiled against Sittenfeld in his 20-page indictment allege he schemed to funnel money from developers into a political action committee (PAC) that he secretly controlled, court records show.
The “developers” were really undercover FBI agents who handed a total of $40,000 in Sittenfeld checks on three different occasions, according to the indictment.
1. Observers were allegedly prevented from watching mail-in ballots being opened. Giuliani said that many mail-in ballots were opened without observers being able to check that they were properly signed, a key protection against fraud.
Those votes, he said, were “null and void,” especially where the envelopes had been discarded, making recounts useless.
While CISA successfully helped prevent a cyberattack on “election infrastructure,” a DHS official told The Federalist that election fraud is “beyond the scope” of the authority extended to CISA and Krebs, who is authorized to address election interference only.
The study compared how well protected one group of people who used masks were compared with a second group who did not use them. The results of the study were announced in a statement released by Copenhagen’s Rigshospitalet.
It is important to note that the study looked exclusively at the protective effects of masks for the wearer, and not at the wearer’s ability to protect others.
Two men were arrested and charged in Southern CA on voter fraud charges after they allegedly submitted thousands of fraudulent voter registration applications on behalf of homeless people, said the Los Angeles County DA’s office on Tuesday.
Carlos Antonio De Bourbon Montenegro, 53, and Marcos Raul Arevalo, 34, were charged with 1 count each of conspiracy to commit voter fraud, 8 counts of voter fraud, 4 counts of procuring and offering a false or forged instrument, and other charges, said the DA’s office.
As even Juan Williams admits in the Hill, “President Trump set a record last week by attracting the highest percentage of the non-white vote of any Republican presidential candidate in the last 60 years.”
Yet we are expected to believe that, despite the worst showing among minorities of any Democrat nominee since JFK, Biden surpassed Barack Obama’s record-breaking turnout by 10 million votes?