Election Do-Over!!! (1 Viewer)

[AccessBlaster]

Fareed's Take: How Trump Could Lose And Still Win​

 

[Pat Hartman]

The Democrats really should have considered this as a possibility before they chose to go out and attempt to steal the election. But they knew their guy couldn't win. Not only is Biden an empty suit at this point in his life, he is a pervert and a swamp creature and guilty of selling his position as Senator and VP to our enemies if we believe his son's email trails. Look how happy the Chinese, Iranians, and North Korea are that they think Biden is going to be president. Think about this. Why would those people be soooooo happy to be rid of Trump?

Trump warned the Dems to not cheat. He gave them a chance to do the right thing. And yet they did everything wrong. Even if they weren't actually cheating (which I don't believe for a moment), they made themselves look guilty by blocking observers and making it impossible to have Republicans certify the election. And when they could see that they were falling behind even with their algorithm tweak they simply shut down counting in the SIX battleground states. Now, that's not even a little bit suspicious is it? Not to mention the shredding truck that apparently disappeared the evidence of the extra ballots and then there's the missing thumb drives, etc. along with the usual dead people voting. A question to ponder - Why do dead people vote for Democrats?

Every rational Trump supporter knows for a fact that the Democrats could have won this election clean. All they had to do was to run someone who was not a Marxist and who was not a criminal. Duh!!! There were people in the Democrat primary field that i would have voted for in 2008 and 20012 - Not Bernie - he's a Marxist, Not Hilary - she's a criminal and Benghazi convinced me that I didn't want her taking the middle of the night phone call. She actively chose to let our people die!, Not Joe - he's already enriched his family by selling us out to our enemies and a pervert to boot. I was always voting for Trump this time and in 2016. But the Dems would have gotten all the never-Trumpers and possibly enough of the swing voters to pull it off.

Since most Republicans in Congress or who might win the primary are feckless pieces of dog do-do, maybe someday I'll get to vote for Tulsi Gabbard even though I disagree with a lot of her policies.

 

[moke123]

Its getting really hard to keep track of all these baseless lawsuits.
The PA. Supreme Court tossed another one today.

I really hope all the states go after the campaign for costs. The states are already cash strapped due to the pandemic and should not have to bear the costs of the frivilous actions.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Maybe the DNC will pickup the tab considering 4 years of baseless Hillary/Steele dossier.

 

[moke123]

The PA Supreme Court’s decision rests on what’s called an “adequate and independent state procedural ground,” which the US Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review. So it’s totally and irrevocably final.

 

[Pat Hartman]

baseless lawsuits.

OPINION.
Were all the other recount requests and challenges made by Democrats in the past baseless?

Hypocrisy reigns!

No one is is ever going to believe the results of this election, even many Democrats is you all don't stop obstructing. It does your cause no good to have judges who hate Trump simply dismissing cases. Let the challengers investigate if you're not afraid to loose! WHY do you fear the investigations so much?

 

[moke123]

Yes Pat, Baseless Lawsuits.
They have all (except 1) been dismissed by the judges (some appointed by trump) for valid reasons. You are confusing what is being amplified by trump and what the lawsuits are really are about. I've read the complaints. I've read the decisions.
The courts have looked at trumps allegations of fraud and cheating, etc. and found them to be baseless.
What is there to investigate?

Trump has gotten the recounts he requested. As a result Biden got even more votes.

I beg you to read this article https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...ps-quest-to-overturn-the-election/ar-BB1bs02h
It does a pretty good job of explaining what trump is doing and how he is trying to overturn the election.

If you dont understand it, ask questions. There will be a quiz.

 

[Steve R.]

Trump is entitled to file those lawsuits. Whether they are legitimate or not, that is up for the judicial process to determine. Democrats, should they actually care about the integrity of the voting process and democratic process should let these lawsuits progress unhindered.

Don't forget that Democrats called for the unjustified impeachment of Trump when he was elected. They continued, for four years to claim that Trump was "illegitimate" and unjustly persecuted him with the Russia Hoax, Mueller Witch Hunt, and an unjust impeachment.

 

[moke123]

Trump is entitled to file those lawsuits. Whether they are legitimate or not, that is up for the judicial process to determine. Democrats, should they actually care about the integrity of the voting process and democratic process should let these lawsuits progress unhindered.

Without arguing the issues of abuse of process and frivilousness, yes Trump is entitled to file whatever suits he wants and he has.
The state defendants are required to defend themselves as agents of the state. Are you saying that they should not oppose trumps lawsuits?
The democrats are as equally entitled to join those suits as interested parties as trump is to file them. I'm not even sure the DNC or Biden campaign have joined in on many of the suits, if any at all. What exactly do you mean by "unhindered"?

Don't forget that Democrats called for the unjustified impeachment of Trump when he was elected. They continued, for four years to claim that Trump was "illegitimate" and unjustly persecuted him with the Russia Hoax, Mueller Witch Hunt, and an unjust impeachment.

As Pat would say - OPINION! One could also argue that Democrats were as entitled to file an impeachment as trump is to file lawsuits.
You can also argue that the next attorney general is entitled to review Muellers evidence and do what he/she sees fit.

 

[moke123]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1333108574109646848

 

[Isaac]

Maybe the DNC will pickup the tab considering 4 years of baseless Hillary/Steele dossier.

Nice!

Yeah ... let's gloss over the hundreds of millions we spent trying to accuse Trump of something for 4 solid years.
Hope he gets at least a handful of these to the USSC.

 

[Pat Hartman]

As Pat would say - OPINION! One could also argue that Democrats were as entitled to file an impeachment as trump is to file lawsuits.
You can also argue that the next attorney general is entitled to review Muellers evidence and do what he/she sees fit.

There is some difference between procedures for criminal and civil suits as I understand the process. To bring a criminal suit, you actually need proof that a crime was committed. That was not present for the Impeachment. All we had was an opinion by a whistleblower that he didn't approve of something Trump said on a phone call. No one cared even one little bit about what prompted the comment that so many people objected to because a crime committed by a Democrat isn't a crime. With a transcription of the call and a copy of the video of Joe extorting the Ukrainians, we had all the evidence we needed and should have been able to stop this persecution in its tracks but somehow it had to progress all the way to the bitter end. Completely distracting everyone as it happens from the COVID-19 crisis brewing at the same time. For civil cases, there is a lot more flexibility and discovery is needed to prove the case. If a biased judge simply throws out the suit because he's a Trump-hater, how exactly is that a good thing? If the LEFT wasn't so scared that evidence of the fraud would be found should discovery actually be allowed to proceed, it would be far better to simply let the cases go. If you're innocent, open the doors and let them look.

This is not going to end well regardless of who wins in the Supreme Court or House if the case ends up there. The losing side is going to be persecuted and sent to reeducation camps (like in China ) if Trump loses. But if Trump wins, the left will burn down the cities. I guess I'm glad I don't live in one of the cities that will burn but I do live between two of them. Trump already proved that he isn't vindictive based on the olive branch he offered Clinton when he one in 2016 but he may have changed his mind after all he's been through so maybe you'll be the ones being reeducated.

 

[moke123]

I know there is no convincing you of trumps culpabilty in crimes commited nor how all the alleged Biden/ukranian extortion has been debunked many times, so i wont try.

Its also obvious to me that you dont understand the intracacies of our legal system and how it works so I wont try to explain that either.

For civil cases, there is a lot more flexibility and discovery is needed to prove the case. If a biased judge simply throws out the suit because he's a Trump-hater, how exactly is that a good thing? If the LEFT wasn't so scared that evidence of the fraud would be found should discovery actually be allowed to proceed, it would be far better to simply let the cases go. If you're innocent, open the doors and let them look.

Why is it that any judge who rules against trump is a Trump Hater? Trump appointed many of them.
Why do you think the left is scared? The left is only afraid of the damage trump is doing to our country and the integrity of elections in the future.

Trump already proved that he isn't vindictive based on the olive branch he offered Clinton

You mean the "Lock her up" olive branch? I'll just leave that here .... Trumps vindictiveness

 

[Steve R.]

I know there is no convincing you of trumps culpabilty in crimes commited nor how all the alleged Biden/ukranian extortion has been debunked many times, so i wont try.

What Trump crimes? The Biden extortion scheme is on tape. Joe Biden Admits to Getting Ukrainian Prosecutor who Investigated Son Fired. Then there is one follow-up on Hunter Biden evidently acting as the "frontman" to shield father Biden: Emails reveal how Hunter Biden tried to cash in big on behalf of family with Chinese firm.

 

[Steve R.]

Seemingly impossible things, like Biden winning the election, can happen. The article below does not document alleged fraud, but it does provide some anecdotal thoughts for why a Biden "win" remains an implausibility. Now it remains for the smoking-gun to be found.

5 More Ways Joe Biden Magically Outperformed Election Norms

Surely the journalist class should be intrigued by the historic implausibility of Joe Biden’s victory. That they are not is curious, to say the least.

Candidate Joe Biden was so effective at animating voters in 2020 that he received a record number of votes, more than 15 million more than Barack Obama received in his re-election of 2012. Amazingly, he managed to secure victory while also losing in almost every bellwether county across the country. No presidential candidate has been capable of such electoral jujitsu until now.

While Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton’s 2016 totals in every urban county in the United States, he outperformed her in the metropolitan areas of Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. Even more surprising, the former VP put up a record haul of votes, despite Democrats’ general failures in local House and state legislative seats across the nation.

He accomplished all this after receiving a record low share of the primary vote compared to his Republican opponent heading into the general election. Clearly, these are tremendous and unexpected achievements that would normally receive sophisticated analysis from the journalist class but have somehow gone mostly unmentioned during the celebrations at news studios in New York City and Washington, D.C.

 

[moke123]

Now it remains for the smoking-gun to be found.

Happy Hunting!

 

[Steve R.]

The American Spectator has articles that have gone into greater detail, than I have been otherwise seeing, concerning election fraud. Looks like I'll need to spend more time looking into this "rag".

Election Fraud, Voter Fraud, and What Statutes of Limitations Tell Us. The significance of this story is that investigation take a long time to uncover the facts. Unfortunately we do not have time.

And investigations. Ask yourself: How long does a serious fact investigation take to uncover shenanigans? Well, think to the Mueller Investigation. Here was a Special Counsel with an unlimited budget and a legal team as numerous as a football squad, and they still needed two years to get to the bottom of … nothing.

The article also noted statistical flukes in the voting. Statistical flukes may indicate a strong possibility of fraud, but they don't prove it in a hard sense. But they do demonstrate that something is rotten.

Incomprehensibly high turnout in Wisconsin. For example, Milwaukee ended up with an 84 percent turnout, while a nearby Midwest city with a comparable demographic, Cleveland, had a 51 percent turnout. In all, Wisconsin reported voting by 90 percent of their registered voters. Numbers like that are off the charts. Biden inched ahead of Trump in Wisconsin by under 1 percent. By contrast, Trump’s lead in Ohio was too large to overcome with shenanigans.

Pennsylvania Bombshell: Biden 99.4% vs. Trump 0.6%. Another massive statistical fluke.

There are landslides and then there are landslides. There are lopsided votes and then there are lopsided votes. There are egregious examples of vote manipulation and then there are really egregious examples of vote manipulation. What surfaced during hearings in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, on November 25, 2020 may set the standard for electoral outrageousness. An expert testifying to the Pennsylvania Senate flagged a batch of ballots that recorded some 570,000 votes for Joe Biden and only 3,200 for Donald Trump.

Yes, you read that correctly. That would equate to Joe Biden bagging 99.4% of that enormous chunk of votes. That one batch alone would have flipped the state to Biden.

 

[moke123]

I believe in hearings witnesses are sworn in and They dont serve sandwiches.

One witness, Phil Waldron, a retired colonel, got introduced as a statistician, but had to clarify that he wasn't.

'I am not a statistician. I’m a combat officer and didn’t do well in math,' he said.

 

[Pat Hartman]

You mean the "Lock her up" olive branch? I'll just leave that here

No, that was dumb but we all know that people running for election say things that make their supporters happy or that will convince non-supporters to vote for them (wait'll you see all the about faces Biden takes). That doesn't excuse the chants. I'm pretty sure he didn't start them. They would have been started by someone in the crowd but he should have shut them down.

I was referring to the comment he made where he promised to NOT investigate Hilary once he took office. I was bummed because I think she should have been prosecuted for playing fast and loose with secure emails among other things. Other people have gone to jail for lesser crimes but not a "Clinton". She's Teflon just like Bill. But I agreed with Trump's decision because taking down Hil would inevitably lead to the Clinton Foundation and that would take down Bill and reflect very badly on Obama and at the time, I was willing to go for peace rather than retribution. NOT THIS TIME.

The problem of course is that time is of the essence and judges with TDS are squashing motions to preserve evidence!!!!! Why was it necessary to wipe the voting machines this weekend? The answer is obvious, they couldn't take the chance of anyone seeing the code. If they were innocent, there would have been no corruption to find. Destruction of evidence is itself evidence of a crime. It won't undue the election but those people need to go to jail. Maybe they were paid to take one for the team. Maybe Biden will pardon them next year.

 

[Isaac]

Just wait ... somebody, somewhere on the Dem side will come up with a rationalization for why it was actually necessary to wipe the machines right away.

I'll just wait for it.