ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
So you’ve read the affidavits and listened to cross examination...BS

The states should’ve thought long and hard about intentionally making a mess of their elections. The people that bring that to light aren’t the bad guys.

Do you want free and fair elections or not? This crap we just had is not secure, you know it too.
There’s been bipartisan commissions in the recent past state that mail in voting is the least secure form of voting. That’s before just bypassing safety measures, such as signature match or sending ballots to every registered voter in the state.
If we have elections like this last one in the future, we’re done.
Yes Bill, not all of them but plenty, all that I have time to do.

Bill, nobody has presented evidence that shows it wasn’t secure. Let me know once they have done so.
 
If Giuliani et al have sworn statements why are Democrats so adamant they shouldn’t be heard? These are American citizens. If they perjure themselves in court it’s on them. Another question. Do you think Dominion will sue the Trump campaign? If not why? Their business has been destroyed.
Their business SHOULD be destroyed. Any business that’s exists for the sole purpose of defrauding voters, whether here or in other countries, should not be allowed to exist.
 


This is a great illustration of what went on. This is clear data manipulation. Without the manipulation the curves continue on their path. Over this large of sample, manipulation is the only answer. How to prove it?

They'll have the physical votes somewhere to back this up. Those need to be examined for validity, then matched to the registrations and those checked for validity.

They had to know the data alone would be a giant red flag. To avoid adding serious bells and whistles too of insane turnout (like WI), they would've had to create that night or before fake people to register to vote. Otherwise like WI you get 93%+ turnout.

To get WI level turnout, WI must've had a really high organic turnout. You know the libs had to be sweating bullets when the data showed they were going to need to increase manipulation to such an extent turnout was nearly 100%.

Another thing, they almost surely did this four years ago too but lost because of how bad the polls were off. Same thing happened here, except this time.....they had a backup plan. That was put into place when all swing states simultaneously stopped counting, then suddenly started recounting in the early morning in secret.

The stall wasn't to apply the algorithm. They almost surely had that running in real time. The stall was to create the fake registrations and fake votes to backup the algorithm and avoid 100%+ turnout numbers.

That's why they absolutely must get to these registrations. Because the votes will be there and so will the registrations. The only other angle is to stall while they get the actual machine that ran the algorithm or at least had unauthorized unknown access to the real time raw data.

They're absolutely stalling. I hope they're stalling in an attempt to prevent this certification and are close to getting this machine. It is much easier to fight before the results are certified. If they're just stalling hoping to run out the clock, I don't see it working.
 
Did people not watch the briefing by Trump’s legal team today? Unbelievable people think this shit didn’t happen. I’ve never seen anything like it. Absurd.

It absolutely happened. I'll even go so far as saying I think most people are certain it happened. A certain group just doesn't care.

Proving it is altogether different issue
 
Looked at CNN...
In Michigan, supposedly 5,456,846 votes for President and only 5,312,104 for House members. In other words, 144,742 more votes for President than House. Is that normal? Especially when there is a "drop" of 138,000 votes ALL for one Pres candidate?

Not normal and statistically impossible. Ga had 95,000 votes that were biden only.

These are absolutely red flags. Giant ones
 


This is a great illustration of what went on. This is clear data manipulation. Without the manipulation the curves continue on their path. Over this large of sample, manipulation is the only answer. How to prove it?

They'll have the physical votes somewhere to back this up. Those need to be examined for validity, then matched to the registrations and those checked for validity.

They had to know the data alone would be a giant red flag. To avoid adding serious bells and whistles too of insane turnout (like WI), they would've had to create that night or before fake people to register to vote. Otherwise like WI you get 93%+ turnout.

To get WI level turnout, WI must've had a really high organic turnout. You know the libs had to be sweating bullets when the data showed they were going to need to increase manipulation to such an extent turnout was nearly 100%.

Another thing, they almost surely did this four years ago too but lost because of how bad the polls were off. Same thing happened here, except this time.....they had a backup plan. That was put into place when all swing states simultaneously stopped counting, then suddenly started recounting in the early morning in secret.

The stall wasn't to apply the algorithm. They almost surely had that running in real time. The stall was to create the fake registrations and fake votes to backup the algorithm and avoid 100%+ turnout numbers.

That's why they absolutely must get to these registrations. Because the votes will be there and so will the registrations. The only other angle is to stall while they get the actual machine that ran the algorithm or at least had unauthorized unknown access to the real time raw data.

They're absolutely stalling. I hope they're stalling in an attempt to prevent this certification and are close to getting this machine. It is much easier to fight before the results are certified. If they're just stalling hoping to run out the clock, I don't see it working.
Well, they needed time to manufacture the votes.
 
This reminds me of the "Calipari will eventually get caught cheating" people. So, exactly how long is "eventually?" How long before no proof of fraud is shown is it confirmed there is no proof?

Although this is from Scott Adams. So I'm not sure if he's being serious or making fun of Trump supporters.

100% serious
 


This is a great illustration of what went on. This is clear data manipulation. Without the manipulation the curves continue on their path. Over this large of sample, manipulation is the only answer. How to prove it?

They'll have the physical votes somewhere to back this up. Those need to be examined for validity, then matched to the registrations and those checked for validity.

They had to know the data alone would be a giant red flag. To avoid adding serious bells and whistles too of insane turnout (like WI), they would've had to create that night or before fake people to register to vote. Otherwise like WI you get 93%+ turnout.

To get WI level turnout, WI must've had a really high organic turnout. You know the libs had to be sweating bullets when the data showed they were going to need to increase manipulation to such an extent turnout was nearly 100%.

Another thing, they almost surely did this four years ago too but lost because of how bad the polls were off. Same thing happened here, except this time.....they had a backup plan. That was put into place when all swing states simultaneously stopped counting, then suddenly started recounting in the early morning in secret.

The stall wasn't to apply the algorithm. They almost surely had that running in real time. The stall was to create the fake registrations and fake votes to backup the algorithm and avoid 100%+ turnout numbers.

That's why they absolutely must get to these registrations. Because the votes will be there and so will the registrations. The only other angle is to stall while they get the actual machine that ran the algorithm or at least had unauthorized unknown access to the real time raw data.

They're absolutely stalling. I hope they're stalling in an attempt to prevent this certification and are close to getting this machine. It is much easier to fight before the results are certified. If they're just stalling hoping to run out the clock, I don't see it working.
Chicago, 1960, all over again, but on a larger scale. Wow, just wow, if true.
 
Watching you all get your hopes up is like porn. Your misery makes me smile.

You're just a typical liberal. You don't take happiness in anything normal. You get through each day by seeing, actually HOPING that others are miserable like you and trying to agitate them. MY 6 year old niece acts like that.......but she'll grow out of it. Like most liberals, you weren't capable of growing up.
 
Watching you all get your hopes up is like porn. Your misery makes me smile.

EnNoRn3UUAAA55v
 
I haven't made any arguments about the merits of Trump's lawsuits at all. I've just pointed out that none of the trial courts have found even a scintilla of evidence of fraud. And the standard at the stage is incredibly deferential. Not sure why you think cases so easily dismissed are going to find their way to the Supreme Court, especially with the legal team that Trump has left, none of which are the heavy hitters who normally argue this kind of stuff before the Supreme Court.
And you are the same idiot that think you know more about stand your ground laws than the people that live in that state. What’s your opinion of Florida’s new law that gives citizens the right to shoot looters, rioters and pyromaniacs? Come on LeadBelly.
 
That's absolutely not true. That's not the way some of these lawsuits work. The Trump Campaign is involved in many of the cases where not specifically identified as the lead plaintiff. In re: Canvassing Operation is one of them. Here is a link to one of the filings by "Donald J. Trump for President, Inc." https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/trump-camp-pa.pdf


Huh? Trump Campaign either filed a particular case or not.

The link you provided is actually an "Answer to Petition for Appeal" regarding "watcher" access from back when certain Philadelphia precincts weren't allowing watcher's inside and/or within a distance where they could actually see.

Here's the subject matter from the start of the conversation:

"Rudy said it best early in the press conference, criminals always make mistakes that get them caught. They are finding their mistakes and will prove it in court."

So here we are discussing today's press conference and the overall election result (a winner declared by Media) in various states and the legal team representing Trump post-election concerning election fraud.

The "they" is Trump's legal team as was presented today led by Rudy G, Sidney Powell, J.enna Ellis, Victoria Toensing and Joe diGenova. The plaintiff is the Trump Campaign. The matter is the validity of the election tally/outcome in various states.

The two direct responses in re to Rudy and team was "they are 1/30 in court cases" and "did they present any actual, concrete evidence that can be admitted in court? So far they are 0-26."

Show me where "they" (the Trump Legal team that spoke today on behalf of Trump Campaign as plaintiff) have filed either 30 or 26 lawsuits regarding the election results.

I believe people see #'s on social media that include cases that were filed pre-election, cases filed by other plaintiffs, cases filed in regards to watchers being denied access while ballots were being counted, etc., and then want to throw out that # in reply to a subject matter that is specifically dealing with the election result (as declared by the Media, who firmly believes they decide who won or not) and the assertions made today by Rudy G., Sidney Powell, et al.

The question---"did they show any actual, concrete evidence......"

Evidence is presented in court, not in an press conference that is more akin to an opening statement.

2) Also, it appears that some folks may not understand what is considered "evidence". If one looks at the Federal Rules of Evidence, they will see that Relevant Evidence comes in various forms, including "sworn testimony" from eyewitnesses, and "expert witness testimony" regarding things (evidence) such as data, software, etc.

A tremendous amount of "evidence" has been and is still being gathered.

Here we are in the midst of a fraudulent election the likes of which happens in Venezuela or some 3rd World Country, and some Americans don't give a flying hoot, thinking it's one big joke.

What is this---coup d'etat attempt #4 since 2016 by the Democrats and their co-conspirators?

Houston, we have a serious problem in this country......Good vs Evil.

God save the Union.
 
Last edited:
You're just a typical liberal. You don't take happiness in anything normal. You get through each day by seeing, actually HOPING that others are miserable like you and trying to agitate them. MY 6 year old niece acts like that.......but she'll grow out of it. Like most liberals, you weren't capable of growing up.
No just the ridiculous posters on here. The amount of ignorance contained in this thread is staggering. Think skinned poor losers. Get over yourself. Biden is your president. Will be for 8 years. Put your big boy pants on and get used to it
 
NewsMax is the bomb. They really are a great news source. They don't care what side you take, they just want all the things happening out there reported and not hidden. They are basically doing what a news channel is supposed to do. Imagine that.
AKA kissing the ass of the host of the apprentice? You know some news against dear leader is allowed to be negative right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pulaski Cat Fan
No just the ridiculous posters on here. The amount of ignorance contained in this thread is staggering. Think skinned poor losers. Get over yourself. Biden is your president. Will be for 8 years. Put your big boy pants on and get used to it

If you were at all concerned with the ignorance in this thread, you'd remove yourself from it.
 
No just the ridiculous posters on here. The amount of ignorance contained in this thread is staggering. Think skinned poor losers. Get over yourself. Biden is your president. Will be for 8 years. Put your big boy pants on and get used to it


I'd be willing to wager any amount of money or anything else that will NEVER happen....................
 
Huh? Trump Campaign either filed a particular case or not.

The link you provided is actually an "Answer to Petition for Appeal" regarding "watcher" access from back when certain Philadelphia precincts weren't allowing watcher's inside and/or within a distance where they could actually see.

Here's the subject matter from the start of the conversation:

"Rudy said it best early in the press conference, criminals always make mistakes that get them caught. They are finding their mistakes and will prove it in court."

So here we are discussing today's press conference and the overall election result (a winner declared by Media) in various states and the legal team representing Trump post-election concerning election fraud.

The "they" is Trump's legal team as was presented today led by Rudy G, Sidney Powell, J.enna Ellis, Victoria Toensing and Joe diGenova. The plaintiff is the Trump Campaign. The matter is the validity of the election tally/outcome in various states.

The two direct responses in re to Rudy and team was "they are 1/30 in court cases" and "did they present any actual, concrete evidence that can be admitted in court? So far they are 0-26."

Show me where "they" (the Trump Legal team that spoke today on behalf of Trump Campaign as plaintiff) have filed either 30 or 26 lawsuits regarding the election results.

I believe people see #'s on social media that include cases that were filed pre-election, cases filed by other plaintiffs, cases filed in regards to watchers being denied access while ballots were being counted, etc., and then want to throw out that # in reply to a subject matter that is specifically dealing with the election result (as declared by the Media, who firmly believes they decide who won or not) and the assertions made today by Rudy G., Sidney Powell, et al.

The question---"did they show any actual, concrete evidence......"

Evidence is presented in court, not in an press conference that is more akin to an opening statement.

2) Also, it appears that some folks may not understand what is considered "evidence". If one looks at the Federal Rules of Evidence, they will see that Relevant Evidence comes in various forms, including "sworn testimony" from eyewitnesses, and "expert witness testimony" regarding things such as data, software, etc.

A tremendous amount of "evidence" has been and is still being gathered.

Here we are in the midst of a fraudulent election the likes of which happens in Venezuela or some 3rd World Country, and some Americans don't give a flying hoot, thinking it's one big joke.

What is this---coup d'etat attempt #4 since 2016 by the Democrats and their co-conspirators?

Houston, we have a serious problem in this country......Good vs Evil.

God save the Union.
Rack!
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT