Serious thread about election fraud

Like your thoughts. He owns a lot of his mistakes. Who hires the swamp. He hires the swamp.

Why sign that Bill? Pissed a lot of conservatieves off for no gain.

Don't tease declassifying if you aren't going to do it.

Don't have Rudy tease big things shortly after Christmas and release nothing! False hope.

The Amistad Project does not have proof. They haven't done anything more than just make up numbers. Explain to me how could they possibly know there were 200K fraudulent votes in Georgia. Where did they find them? Did they count them by hand? Were they all for Biden?

Keeping It Objective wrote:

Like your thoughts. He owns a lot of his mistakes. Who hires the swamp. He hires the swamp.

Why sign that Bill? Pissed a lot of conservatieves off for no gain.

Don't tease declassifying if you aren't going to do it.

Don't have Rudy tease big things shortly after Christmas and release nothing! False hope.

Agree, he is all bark and no bite. He doesn't do most of what he says, and gives in to most of what the other half wants anyways.

Yeah, he F'ed up by signing that bill. Not a good way to go out actually. I am sure there is much more to the story (politics is freaking dirty) of why he signed it than we the public will ever know too.

He should go out declassifying lots of crap, and pardoning the 3 people his opponents hate most in Snowden, Assuage and Silk road dude. But he won't, cause he is weak for the most part unfortunately.

I wasn't a Rudy fan initially, but really, all he is saying is to have transparency. Anyone who is against that, I just don't understand other than they are complicit with fraud or just happy their guy won regardless.

Who knows, maybe he has something, but it won't matter, the courts won't change it, and the GOP wants him out of power anyways.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

The Amistad Project does not have proof. They haven't done anything more than just make up numbers. Explain to me how could they possibly know there were 200K fraudulent votes in Georgia. Where did they find them? Did they count them by hand? Were they all for Biden?

How can you say they don't have proof if you haven't even looked into what they are saying or how they came up with their data?

Take the 15 min to do that. I'd post linked, but I am afraid to do it here. Site is not good that way.

Yes, they have their "proof". It isn't hard to look at voter rolls and compare to where people live, the age of voters, whether they are illegal etc.

But the fact you can say they have no proof but haven't even looked at what they said, says a lot.

But but but

No. The Democrats are people of ethics and morality. This can't be true!?

Nice piece of journalism. Nice.

No accountability measure is sufficient until it proves Trump won - this is ALL we are asking for guys - come on! Basic stuff!

Fantastic. So you are joining the growing number of people who don't trust our system of justice to reveal the truth. Welcome aboard. We are making progress!

Now, are you still among those who say election fraud didn't happen because judges aren't taking the cases? Or are you going to maintain a double standard? See what I did there?

You seem reasonable. You haven't insulted me yet. If you register your handle we'll let you join the discussion.

the beagle wrote:

the beagle wrote:

Precisely. Continually claiming “LOADS of evidence” doesn’t will such into existence.

Reposted for emphasis.

So if Trump is ineffective and not many people like him, why is the simple explanation not correct:

He lost the election because he was unpopular.

There is no evidence anyone has presented to supposed the bold claim that this election was stolen. The Amistad project has filed lawsuits all over the country claiming that hundreds of thousands of votes are illegal. They have gotten nowhere.

It is funny that you claim the courts will never interfere with an election as they are the ones who stopped the recount in 2000 and effectively ended the election.

I think you just know nothing favoring Trump will come from this pointless lawsuits so you're trying to divert from the entire process.

DiscoGary wrote:

Fantastic. So you are joining the growing number of people who don't trust our system of justice to reveal the truth. Welcome aboard. We are making progress!

Now, are you still among those who say election fraud didn't happen because judges aren't taking the cases? Or are you going to maintain a double standard? See what I did there?

You seem reasonable. You haven't insulted me yet. If you register your handle we'll let you join the discussion.

But these judges were appointed by the GOP and some by Trump himself! Why would they do him in like this.

The DEEP STATE is insane, I tell you.

It's interesting that these Amistad people are claiming a large % of votes are fraudulent but audits and recounts turn up only a handful of errors and changes. You'd think something so obvious would be immediately caught in recount or audit!

Or wait, these weren't the right type of audits! Redo them until they find what I want!!!

Here's an article regarding a whistleblower who claimed to have driven in thousands of ballots from out of state:

I skimmed through Amistad's lawsuit and it's just a bunch of typed in numbers without evidence. You do realize that Amistad is very biased towards Trump, right?

Harambe wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Of course the right way to approach the topic would be to ask yourself, "how would I see this evidence if I were Republican?" or "What if a Democrat made these accusations of fraud?"

That's all I'm asking for, which is a LOT, I know.

As far as I'm aware, no Democrat has filed 50+ lawsuits in various swing states trying to change the results of an election they lost. Perhaps it has been done many elections ago.

I just think if it is so obvious the election was stolen there would be evidence that would, at the very least, convince the GOP official and appointees to get on board.

I guess Trump didn't drain the swamp enough or something. Or he appointed too many deep staters. This is hard to unravel!

LMFAOO

the beagle wrote:

the beagle wrote:

Precisely. Continually claiming “LOADS of evidence” doesn’t will such into existence.

Reposted for emphasis.

Great addition!

SDSU Aztec wrote:

ohhh Yeahhh wrote:

Yes I know you don't get this, but regardless of who the quote is from, it is the truth.

The things they wanted actually audited were not audited. But go ahead and talk about nonsense.

No, you don't get this. If it was the truth, a top of the line attorney, from a major law firm, would be representing Trump. When you're case is based on bullsh*t, you bring in the clown team.

What exactly does your "audit" entail and who is going to pay for it? There is no reasonable suspicion that would justify investigating the Dominion machines. Giuliani claiming that China or some other foreign country controlled our election is not good enough.

Lol. Stay home child.

stanky legs wrote:

the beagle wrote:

Reposted for emphasis.

Great addition!

It’s been proved over and over throughout this thread.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

I skimmed through Amistad's lawsuit and it's just a bunch of typed in numbers without evidence. You do realize that Amistad is very biased towards Trump, right?

Yeah, don't care too much about the truck driver. He could be making it up or not, doesn't matter. There are over 1 to 2 thousand people who came out and said they saw fraud. He isn't alone.

Yes, the Amistad is a conservative law firm, but from what you can see how the Rep GA Governor is treating Trump, that doesn't mean jack when it comes to actual support.

Not sure what you mean by they don't have any actual evidence. They cant post people's addresses and names and who they voted for online. I am sure they can present to the court if they were allowed. There have been others that have said the same as they have.

If you want, you can do your own research. The voter roles exist and you can get them.

Here is another example of invalid ballots the legislators won't touch cause they would have to admit they sucked at their job or they are corrupt.

All in NEVADA (other examples in the other battle states as well if you look for it):

Jesse Binnall, an attorney heading the challenge on behalf of six would-be Republican delegates to the Electoral College in Nevada, gathered evidence from data scientists which bring into the question the validity of the election results in the state.

Here is what they found:

• Over 42,000 people voted more than once. Their experts were able to make this

determination by reviewing the list of actual voters and comparing it to other

voters with the same name, address, and date of birth. This method was also able

to catch people using different first name variations, such as William and Bill,

and individuals who were registered both under a married name and a maiden

name.

• At least 1,500 dead people are recorded as voting, as shown by comparing the list

of mail voters with the social security death records.

• More than 19,000 people voted even though they did not live in Nevada; to be

clear, this does not include military voters or students. These voters were

identified by comparing the lists of voters with the U.S. Postal Service’s National

Change of Address database, among other sources.

• About 8,000 people voted from non-existent addresses. Here we crossed-referenced voters with the Coding Accuracy Support System which allowed our

experts to identify undeliverable addresses.

• Over 15,000 votes were cast from commercial or vacant addresses. Our experts

found these voters by analyzing official U.S. Postal Service records that flag nonresidential addresses and addresses vacant for more than 90 days.

• Incredibly, almost 4,000 non-citizens also voted, as determined by comparing

official DMV records of non-citizens to the list of voters in the 2020 election.