Lou Dobbs absolutely loses it over Bill Barr saying there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud, accusing Barr of joining "the Deep State and the Resistance" before saying this:
— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) December 1, 2020
"He is either a liar or a fool or both. He may be – perhaps compromised." pic.twitter.com/x9kU5xkctV
२ डिसेंबर, २०२०
There's a point in this Lou Dobbs rant where — if you been paying attention — you'll cry out loud "He" — Barr — "didn't say that!"
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१६८ टिप्पण्या:
Unexpectedly
Anyone who doesn't think Barry is completely compromised at this point is an idiot or glad that he is in fact compromised.
That Klinesmith is the only perp walk we've had since Barr took over in the avalanche of crimes we know took place is evidence of that. Klinesmitb was a token patsy. How the HELL are Brennan and Strozk not in jail already? Never mind Hillary and even Biden. How the hell did the DOJ and FBI sit on Hunter's laptop for a YEAR, including during the impeachment where it could not have been more relevant?
Every bit as bad as Sessions. Worse, maybe.
Treason.
Very hard to defend Barr. He seems to think that somehow the law will have a magic power to correct and heal lawlessness.
I hope he's right. He had the golden opportunity and it seemed to be the right man at the right time. Maybe it was Freud who just couldn't come through when it mattered.
Dobbs declares Barr a Suppressive Person.
Release the Kraken
Sydney Powell listed a plaintiff in her suit in Wisconsin who was not contacted by Powell or desired to be included.
How people can think someone with so many basic mistakes (and open deceit here) is going to have any success in court is beyond me.
"I learned through social media today that my name was included in a lawsuit without my permission," Van Orden said in a statement. "To be clear, I am not involved in the lawsuit seeking to overturn the election in Wisconsin."
The kraken may have been released, but it was really a jackass in a kraken mask.
We have testimony and statistical analysis that shows extreme improbabilities that had to have occured to arrive at a Biden win, but no real evidence.
It's true that Barr didn't say that, but it's also true that he chose to make a statement at this time that he knew would be misinterpreted, which means, as Lou Dobbs said, he is either a liar, a fool, or he's compromised.
I didn't need this statement by Barr to know the FBI and DOJ are 100% compromised.
I only needed to know the avalanche of evidence of Democrat crimes they've collected and done nothing with, alongside observing that the only crimes they're interested in investigating are those perceived as committed by conservatives. Money for pardons, FFS? The wife of Marc Rich can still be reached for comment, and incarceration.
The story now is that the headlines didn't reflect what Barr actually said.
That's why immediately commenting one's first reactions may not be a good thing.
I don't know what Barr said, but putting a comment in a headline can make it less tentative and more definite than it really was.
On another note, I’m delighted Barr quietly appointed Durham as a special prosecutor, back in October. I figured the first thing the Biden people would do once they got in was sweep all Russia/dossier/FISA machinations under the rug. Then roll the rug up and take it to the dump.
I get the sense Barr came back to DOJ because he was shocked at the institutional corruption. And for all he’s described on the news this morning as a Trump loyalist (the better to trumpet his “break” with Trump), it’s almost as if he cares more about that than about Trump’s political fortunes.
Maybe I’m telling myself a reassuring story here, but I hold out hope that the kind of people - Brennan, Clapper, Page, Strzok, McCabe - who took it upon themselves to “save” us from Trump will yet face consequences.
I am less interested in how accurate Dobbs’ rant was — a good rant gets hyperbolic by its very nature to make a point in the strongest way possible. That’s the whole point of a rant.
What is far more concerning here is that we absolutely cannot trust DOJ to do anything to enforce any law against any Democrat, ever.
That makes us ruled by people, not laws.
A Revolution was fought over that idea 244 years ago.
“Not one of the military ballots was a registered voter and the ballots looked like they were all exactly the same Xerox copies of the ballot – they were all for Biden across the board, there wasn’t a single Trump vote and none of the voters were registered, “witness Patty said. “They had to manually enter the names, addresses, enter birthdate of 1/1/2020 which would override the system and allow them to enter non-registered voters of which I saw several that day, throughout the day, that’s how they would override voters that were neither in the electronic poll book or in the supplemental updated poll book.”
Apparently Biden won 100% of Military Absentee ballots in Fulton County Georgia too.
This is going to be lit.
JPS said...
On another note, I’m delighted Barr quietly appointed Durham as a special prosecutor, back in October. I figured the first thing the Biden people would do once they got in was sweep all Russia/dossier/FISA machinations under the rug. Then roll the rug up and take it to the dump.
Speculation is that Barr did this so Trump couldn't declassify Crossfire Hurricane and release it.
Achilles is just a meat puppet for Putin's social media rumor factory.
No one show Lou Dobbs the front pages of the NYT and WP.
Pretty sure Revolution not fought over enforcing the law against Democrats.
Anyone who takes their oath to the constitution and tells the truth is not welcome in the Trump cult, even someone who compromised his department’s role for Trump in the past.
What is far more concerning here is that we absolutely cannot trust DOJ to do anything to enforce any law against any Democrat, ever.
That makes us ruled by people, not laws.
A Revolution was fought over that idea 244 years ago.
12/2/20, 8:02 AM
THIS^^^ It isn't going to end well. Lock and load!!
Renowned MIT scientist, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, PHd, testifies that in Arizona, the only way to recreate the results in several counties is to systematically give Biden 130% of the Democrat vote, and Trump -30% of the Democrat vote.
If you apply those factors, the data fits perfectly. In no other circumstance does the data make any sense at all.
Which answers why the vote count is stored in decimal.
I’ll I see on social media from the lefties is that Barr says there’s no evidence of fraud.
I know he didn’t say that. You know he didn’t say that.
But, to the vast majority of Americans barely paying attention, he did say that.
I watched the entire Penn and AZ hearings. The’s a lot of evidence. There’s affidavits and now testimony. There’s impossible vote numbers in the record. Judges are now ordering the securing of physical evidence. There’s whatever the hell happened in the Dept of Defense raid on the CIA server farm in Germany. So, we’ll see what happens. But, either Barr is leading people to believe this is a non issue or there’s something more strategic in play.
Whatever the hell did happen during that raid on the CIA? I don't read German. German press must have a lot.
ger•ry•man•der jĕr′ē-măn″dər, gĕr′-►
transitive verb
To divide (a geographic area) into voting districts in a way that gives one party an unfair advantage in elections.
In a white house race, the "voting districts" are state lines.
You cannot gerrymander state lines.
You're kind of a moron.
WIDESPREAD? How is that defined?? From what I'm seeing and in affidavits, there is more than ample evidence that something isn't right.
You're kinda weak at reading comprehension.
Blogger jnseward said...
It's true that Barr didn't say that, but it's also true that he chose to make a statement at this time that he knew would be misinterpreted, which means, as Lou Dobbs said, he is either a liar, a fool, or he's compromised.
Exactly. He's just a long time member of the Swamp, Bush division.
@Qwinn at 8:43
Exactly. The video I saw of him talking through the way the data fits exactly the way an algorithm would make it look was quite compelling — exactly zero percent chance that happens otherwise.
Technically-minded people understand these arguments immediately and implicitly. Others, maybe not so much.
Oh wait, crap, wrong thread.
The idiocy is still there in the other thread. I'll move it over there.
And I'll openly delete my post here as mistaken.
THIS^^^ It isn't going to end well. Lock and load!!
Seriously-cool it. I actually love my fellow citizens. Not all of them, but I certainly do not hate 40% or want to see them dead. Are you going to track down and kill the democrats that go to your church? or just throw them in internment camps?
Nobody is starting a civil war. Get over it.
---Maybe I’m telling myself a reassuring story here, but I hold out hope that the kind of people ... who took it upon themselves to “save” us from Trump will yet face consequences.[JPS]
There's always hope, JPS. Unfortunately, there is nothing but hope; and, if you're betting on past performances, the outcome for which you are hoping is an extreme longshot. Bob Barr was hired to do that job. He failed and now he leaves.
Durham? He must have been hanging out with John Huber. When he makes his "report," if ever that day should come, expect the Democrats to whisk it away with some Schumerian rhetoric about nonsensical politicized overzealous Trumpist concoctions; and that is the last we will ever get. That is what the past performances tell us to expect.
So are the resident Althouse trolls claiming that there is no evidence of fraud in the face of the affidavits, sworn testimony and statistical findings from numerous expert? Really?
If not, what are they doing, just slinging their usual bullshit because none of this is important? /s
Oh. Evidence is what the bubble people get from NYT, WaPo, CNN and the other mediaswine and their anonymous sources. Right?
So here we are trying to discuss the country’s future with interjections by smart rocks sealed in bubbles. Go figure.
Wendybar said: THIS^^^ It isn't going to end well. Lock and load!!
Which I take to mean "Be prepared to defend your God-given rights, with lethal force if necessary", not "Let's go shoot us some goddam liberals until we get things the way WE want them".
The deplorables are about to become the ungovernables.
Dr. Ayadurri, the man who invented email? The one who made similar baseless charges after he lost the 2020 Mass Senate primary with 3% of the vote? The one who lives a world of lies and libel suits? Highly persuasive!
Quinn - are you ever capable of changing your mind based on new evidence? Seems that whatever happens you only dig in and become even more sure that you are right. Barr's DOJ hasn't uncovered evidence of substantial fraud. That makes it even more likely such fraud occurred in your warped mind. If the drafters of the hundreds of affiants all recanted and said they were paid off, a normal person might take that as an indication that there wasn't significant voter fraud. But I'm sure you would conclude that fraud was even more likely. It would just prove that the deep state is even more powerful than even you had believed.
Must be nice to always know the truth beyond any doubt. Damn the evidence that goes in the other direction.
D.D. Driver said: Nobody is starting a civil war. Get over it.
Defund enough police departments under a Harris administration, and I will guarantee you are wrong.
D.D. Driver said: Nobody is starting a civil war. Get over it.
Nobody is taking the plywood down from their windows, either.
D.D. Driver said...
Nobody is starting a civil war. Get over it.
You already started the Civil War.
We are just choosing when to end it.
Even a Large Number of Democrats Believe Biden Stole the Election
The hivemind voted Biden(C-orrupt)
Many democrats voted Trump.
The left flooded the zone with ballots that could not be traced to actual people.
They stuffed the ballot box and potentially - used Dominion to up the tally for Biden and erase votes for Trump.
In key blue cities.
Howard said...
Achilles is just a meat puppet for Putin's social media rumor factory.
There is no more social contract. You broke it. You burned down people's businesses. You threatened their livlyhoods. You attack them on college campuses.
We had previous agreements to how an election would be run and you broke those agreements.
We do not accept those abrogations.
You are now my enemy.
"Pretty sure Revolution not fought over enforcing the law against Democrats."
True enough. That fight was actually the Civil War in the 1860s. And here we are again. Dems are always refusing to let free people leave the plantation. Why do they always do that?
Does the name Pavlov ring a bell, Achilles?
Blogger D.D. Driver said...
"I actually love my fellow citizens."
Well, then they must love you too, right? So, nothing to worry about. Pack your bag and get on the train.
Michael K said... He's just a long time member of the Swamp, Bush division.
When I saw that Trump was going to hire GHWB's former attorney general, I assumed the guy would turn out to be a plant sent to make reassuring anti-swamp noises while doing nothing. Maybe I'll turn out to be wrong, but feeling good about that prediction right now.
Yes, BidenFamilyStupidName, RedState articles are always the best source of info about what the left thinks.
They also have the market cornered on straw men, but don't fret over it.
Achilles fancies himself Charlie Manson, bringer of Helter Skelter. Do you think he will be surprised when Jupiter, Quinn, bagoh2o, doc Mike, Wendybar and the rest of you fail to muster to his bugle call?
It is obviously impossible that the FBI and DOJ have done any serious investigation of the election. Have they even examined any records? I doubt it. No one else has been allowed to. There is no useful information being made public, which means that the people who control the information do not want it to become public. That in itself is all the evidence you need that there was fraud. Not enough evidence to convict people of crimes, but that is a very high bar.
You people better start orienteering clubs and haul 50-kilos of gear 50-klicks every day. It'll take thousands of rhhardin's to set up the necessary repeaters. Have you been practicing CW? Are you acclimated to fasting and dehydration? Snow shoes?
'Cause if you think sitting on top of a dozen assault rifles and a pile of ammo is all that's required, I'll get the popcorn. You will end up like the Zappos founder barricaded in the potting shed.
Time for another sip of your prune juice, Howard.
Howard said...
You people better start orienteering clubs and haul 50-kilos of gear 50-klicks every day. It'll take thousands of rhhardin's to set up the necessary repeaters. Have you been practicing CW? Are you acclimated to fasting and dehydration? Snow shoes?
'Cause if you think sitting on top of a dozen assault rifles and a pile of ammo is all that's required, I'll get the popcorn. You will end up like the Zappos founder barricaded in the potting shed.
As for me yes to all of that. And there are thousands of me.
But we are just going to drive. You leftists are all crammed up in little geographically segregated urban centers. No need to go for a walk with a bunch of shit. We will just land on the X or on the Y.
And all we need are for millions of rhhardins to stand on barricades at street corners. They don't really need to do that much.
Howard said...
Does the name Pavlov ring a bell, Achilles?
Your self awareness. Or lack of it...
"Must be nice to always know the truth beyond any doubt. Damn the evidence that goes in the other direction."
There isn't any evidence going in the other direction. Only the utterly implausible word of obvious Democrat plants that refuse to look at the evidence going in our direction.
The evidence in my direction is staggering, loaded with witness testimony and overwhelming statistical impossibilities.
That you've planted people in key positions ahead of this theft who avert their eyes and shout "No evidence!" when we've seen it for ourselves isn't persuasive.
In fact, what evidence there *could* be to demonstrate the vote was valid has been getting destroyed by Democrats with no supervision every day for weeks.
Doctrine of spoilation, buddy. Look it up. The burden of proof is on you guys now to prove the vote *couldn't* have been stolen.
steve uhr said...
Must be nice to always know the truth beyond any doubt. Damn the evidence that goes in the other direction.
What evidence steve?
Seriously list out the things that have been done to prove that this election was legitimate.
What's your beans and gas plan?
You mean the x,y. Utm grid?
If only we could run our gas plan off of Howard's gas.
We'd have enough for a generation.
Blogger Achilles said...Seriously list out the things that have been done to prove that this election was legitimate.
That's easy. Your fake lawyers never presented the "mountain of fraud evidence" in an actual court court.
Per Michigan witness testimony yesterday, the only thing you needed to do to get the scanning machines to accept a ballot from an unregistered voter was to input the birthdate "01/01/2020".
That's it.
No evidence!
I love it when you talk dirty, April
"Your fake lawyers never presented the "mountain of fraud evidence" in an actual court court. "
False.
It was presented. Court after court populated by the very Democrat judges that enabled this fraud refused to review the evidence.
Just last week we found out that for the very first time in Nevada, a judge was going to permit the Trump team to present any evidence at all.
It was a "huge Trump win" that they were finally allowed to present evidence of fraud, over 3 weeks after the election.
What else do you need to know?
Unless he drops a 'big one' soon, Barr has been a pretty big disappointment.
He talked a big game early on but hasn't delivered.
If he was too old for the fight he should have said so before taking the job.
No worries then, your Catholic SCROTUS will carry the futbol across the goal line. Never say never again
The anatomy of lunacy, on display among Althouse's commentators.
There is lots of evidence of fraud, is what I hear people saying. And yet, there are basically no fraud suits out there. All over the country, Trump's lawyers have been saying: we are not pleading fraud. Except, of course, Sidney Powell, who at the last minute has gone full Dominion, even citing the folks from QAnon, you know, the ones who claim that the Democrats are child pornographers. Of course, it's not clear exactly who she's representing, since Trump's other lawyers have disowned her, and it appears that she filed a lawsuit on behalf of someone without his authorization to do so, a major ethical breach. Let's see how that all works out for her, given that the Georgia hand recount confirmed the accuracy of the Dominion machine count.
So why no fraud claims, other than those supported by QAnon: guess what, its because the lawyers for Trump, including Giuliani and Ellis, don't dare make such claims in court, because, if they do, they will be called on to provide the supporting evidence, AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY. And what do you make of the fact that not a single Republican Senator, even those most on the right, from the reddest of states, has supported or endorsed those claims. They too know that they are false.
So you folks, like Trump himself, have freed yourselves from the requirement that there be credible, relevant evidence in support of your wild fraud theories. But lawyers and judges who play for keeps are not free of that requirement. Nor are state officials who have to run a system that is fair to both sides. That's why Trump has lost every lawsuit so far.
In addition to the problem that you have no evidence of fraud, there's the embarassing fact that there are a lot of people who are prepared to testify that your claims are unfounded, even malicious. Your response: everyone, everyone, who claims that there was no fraud sufficient to taint the outcome is a corrupt liar or a dupe. And that's though the list includes Trump's hand picked and highly partisan attorney general, his Department of Homeland Security, his chief financial backers, the last Republican President before Trump, the last Republican presidential candidate before Trump, and a slew of Republican state and local officials with extensive personal knowledge of the process who have heretofore been vocal and enthusiastic Trump supporters. Notice, I haven't cited a single Democrat. These are the people on your side saying this, but you disown them all.
Only Donald Trump, perhaps the most well-documented liar in American history, is telling the truth, in your book. And you are left in a boat with him, Sidney Powell, and QAnon. Very good company.
Now we have Republicans in Georgia saying that they won't vote in January because the system is fraudulent (though a $5 million audit found nothing). We have the people running elections, including Republican elected officials, under police protection and receiving death threats. Indeed, we ordinary workers receiving such threats, essentially on the basis of no evidence. We have far right commentators saying that elected officials should be shot. All based on a lie or delusion.
Wake up people. You are allowing yourself to be part of something that is deeply wrong.
The Left wants us to accept the validity of this election based on nothing more than the pronouncements of select lawyers, and select judges who are also lawyers.
Mondale: Lawyer
Ferraro: Lawyer
Dukakis: Lawyer
Bentsen: Not a lawyer! Wow!
B. Clinton: Lawyer
Gore: Failed law divinity school!
Lieberman: Lawyer
Kerry: Lawyer
Edwards: Lawyer
Obama: Lawyer
Biden: Lawyer
H. Clinton: Lawyer
Kaine: Lawyer
Harris: Lawyer
Conversely...
Reagan: Not a lawyer
H Bush: Not a lawyer
Quayle: Had law degree, never practiced
Dole: Lawyer, among multiple other professions
Kemp: Not a lawyer
W Bush: Not a lawyer
Cheney: Not a lawyer
McCain: Not a lawyer
Palin: Not a lawyer
Romney: Not a lawyer
Ryan: Not a lawyer
Trump: Not a lawyer
Pence: Lawyer, practiced only 2 years
Gee, I wonder why Democrats want lawyers to rule over us without question.
One Nation, Under Lawyers.
PB said...
We have testimony and statistical analysis that shows extreme improbabilities that had to have occured to arrive at a Biden win, but no real evidence.
*****************************
Testimony and statistical analysis ARE "real evidence".
The question is, are they enough to meet the civil standard of proving your case with "the preponderance of evidence". ( Cases brought challenging the illegal actions by the PA SecState are of a civil nature.)
For fraud the criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" applies. That's a tougher standard. It's no wonder Trump's people are pursuing the civil route.
If your cry is "Barr didn't say that" or that Dobbs is putting words in Barr's mouth, you might be correct. On the other hand if you are a Los Angeles Times headliner writer writing for this morning's newspaper, you write that Barr said there was no fraud. And the reporter under the headline talks about Trump's "false allegations of fraud". No bias there, none at all, no siree.
But then why would I expect anybody in the press--or on Lou Dobbs's show to get it right. Everything these days gets distorted through a political prism.
"No worries then, your Catholic SCROTUS will carry the futbol across the goal line. Never say never again"
What kind of fucking religious bigot are you? Fuck off.
Given the documented overwhelming preponderance of lawyers among Democrat executive branch nominees, and the similar absence of lawyers among Republicans...
...which party do you think all the lawyers and judges making all these decisions against Trump think will be more inclined to advance their economic prospects (not to mention just their raw power over everyone)?
IMHO, there should be a Constitutional Amendment barring anyone with a law degree from running for President or VP.
Lawyers already control the other two branches completely. Giving one single profession complete dominance over all 3 branches is obviously destructive of anything resembling checks and balances.
Barr has been working both side of the street since he was hired. His primary and overriding goal has not been serving Trump, much less the USC, but protecting the Organs of State Security which made him what he is. (I take it as a given that Barr is compromised, but he would protect the apparatus anyway.)
I haven't said much about election fraud, since I don't think it will change anything. The D's have been masters of fraud and manipulation for close on 200 years now, and even if there was a comparable R tradition, Trump himself had no experience in the practice.
Some commenters postulate that Trump is playing a deep and subtle game to expose D malfeasance with Barr's connivance but I don't see it.
Narr
R's have a different Tradition of Corruption
That's actually a great point Quinn. Lawyers should be ineligible for any and all elected office, include judges.
Well I wish Trump had a more lawyerly disposition. Maybe he would speak more carefully.
So Pence may have practiced only two years but at least he doesn't say a lot of loose shit.
The moment I knew a Second Civil War was inevitable was the moment I learned Bill Barr, Rush Limbaugh, and Tucker Carlson had all joined the Deep State and the Resistance.
Reagan: Not a lawyer
H Bush: Not a lawyer
Quayle: Had law degree, never practiced
Dole: Lawyer, among multiple other professions
Kemp: Not a lawyer
W Bush: Not a lawyer
Cheney: Not a lawyer
McCain: Not a lawyer
Palin: Not a lawyer
Romney: Not a lawyer
Ryan: Not a lawyer
Trump: Not a lawyer
Pence: Lawyer, practiced only 2 years
Not sure about Kemp or Dole.
Reagan, Palin, and Trump get a pass.
Pence could choose exile.
The rest...
Joe Smith:. Thanks for your interest. I'm bigoted against religions that sanction rape of children.
"Joe Smith:. Thanks for your interest. I'm bigoted against religions that sanction rape of children."
But public school teachers with a far far far far far worse record of child abuse, and the routine moving of those teachers around from state to state whenever they get caught, those are a-ok, because they donate money to Democrats.
Howard said...
That's easy. Your fake lawyers never presented the "mountain of fraud evidence" in an actual court court.
You know that the PA supreme court has thrown out cases because the election hadn't occurred and there was no injury to litigate?
You know that the PA Supreme Court has thrown out cases because the litigants filed after the election and didn't file in a timely manner?
We see you Howard.
Election Fraud = allowing Blacks to vote.
A buddy of mine's wife is a public school teacher in New Jersey.
Her union explicitly ordered her to vote for Biden.
We all see your Keystone kops lawyer team, Achilles. Only the best people.
In order to have evidence you need an investigation. Did Barr do one? No. And how does he know it wouldn't affect the election? How did he quantify the fraud? Lets see his numbers.
Oh wait, he doesn't have any.
What Barr did was very unhelpful, no doubt done purposely, like delaying the Dunham investigation till 2021. Did ANYONE help Trump win re-election except Trump? He was sabotaged by every Establishment Republican.
"Oh wait, he doesn't have any. "
It's not the DOJ's job to assemble evidence.
It's their job to review evidence provided to them by the FBI.
Barr's statement is equivalent to: "The FBI hasn't provided me with any evidence of fraud."
I wonder if they ever even showed him Hunter's laptop.
"Blogger jnseward said...
It's true that Barr didn't say that, but it's also true that he chose to make a statement at this time that he knew would be misinterpreted, which means, as Lou Dobbs said, he is either a liar, a fool, or he's compromised."
Exactly. And he said it to a "reporter" from the AP which has become one of the left's primary propaganda outlets. He's a savvy operator - he knew his words would be twisted and he wanted them to be.
This was in my inbox from the WSJ this morning. Bold text in the original.
William Barr says there is no evidence of voter fraud. The attorney general, a strong ally of the president, directly contradicted Trump's allegations that the election was stolen from him, dealing a blow to fresh legal claims to contest the results.
Lou Dobbs is right. If you have been paying attention to the testimony at the AZ, MI, and PA hearings it is devastating. The USPS whistle blowers are incredible in their honesty and detail. At this point you have to assume some on the inside are afraid for their lives.
And here in Wisconsin the alignment between Madison and Milwaukee implemented massive fraud. Both now just corrupt shit communities led by crooks.
Notice we are 12 days from the Electoral College meeting and Kamala Harris hasn't resigned her Senate seat.
"The attorney general, a strong ally of the president,"
...they said, without evidence.
This is the filing of Howard's keystone cop lawyers in Wisconsin.
Have fun with this Howard:
"While there was a pattern of activities improperly undertaken that affected the Election, four stand out:
(1) a total of at least 170,140 absentee ballots were improperly counted as they were issued without the elector having first submitted a written application as expressly required by Wis. Stat.§ 6.86(l)(ar);
(2) no less than 5,517absentee ballots were improperly counted as the certifications were, when received by the clerks' offices, incomplete and, as to a substantial proportion, the clerks' offices subsequently altered the certifications by inserting missing information;
(3) 28,395 absentee ballots were counted that were improperly cast by individuals claiming Indefinite Confinement status even as there was "reliable information that [the] ... elector no longer qualifies for the service." Wis. Stat. 6.86(2); and
(4) 17,271 absentee ballots were improperly cast or received at "Democracy in the Park" events.
Despite clear law to the contrary and the express objections by Petitioners to the inclusion of the ballots identified in the Recount totals, the Milwaukee County and Dane County Boards of Canvassers improperly included those ballots in their Recount totals. The Milwaukee County and Dane County Boards of Canvassers' decisions are in direct conflict with applicable Wisconsin Statutes and case law and implicate an urgent matter of state-wide and national importance."
Let's do a thought experiment. I don't expect it at all, but let's say Barr comes out in the next few days and says "Actually, I have now seen evidence of sufficient fraud to overturn the election".
What would our lefties say? Would they respect that finding?
Will they respect anything the USSC says that favors a finding of voter fraud, after spending weeks telling us that the word of judges is inviolate and perfect?
To ask is to answer. Appeals to authority only last exactly as long as those appeals give them the outcome they want, and not one second further.
By the way, something I learned on Thanksgiving that I have forgotten to mention.
My son-in-law, who also lives in PA, was sent a ballot that he never requested.
He wasn't even registered.
Kamala Harris hasn't resigned her Senate seat in part because the GOP is failing to follow tradition by doing the bare minimum this month in the Senate. Very busy in that chamber. Balance shifts one vote today thanks to AZ special election. Biden didn't resign his Senate seat until January 2009.
I don't think Harris not resigning her seat means anything. It would be politically unwise for her to do so until the inauguration, regardless of circumstances.
Unlike every last one of our resident leftists, I don't grasp anything that can possibly be twisted to make the opposition look bad if it doesn't make a logical difference.
Quinn said:
"Let's do a thought experiment. I don't expect it at all, but let's say Barr comes out in the next few days and says "Actually, I have now seen evidence of sufficient fraud to overturn the election".
What would our lefties say? Would they respect that finding?
Will they respect anything the USSC says that favors a finding of voter fraud, after spending weeks telling us that the word of judges is inviolate and perfect?"
--------------------
You have just summed up the difference between me and you Quinn. I don't trust Barr but if proved in a court of law, following the rules of evidence, or some similar objective forum interested in the truth and not politics, I would accept it. Wouldn't like it but that isn't the issue.
To ask is to answer. Appeals to authority only last exactly as long as those appeals give them the outcome they want, and not one second further.
Request for help.
Links to the complaints in Wisconsin, before the Michigan Supreme Court and in Georgia? The Guardian reported that at least some of them were on Powell's website, but they appear to have been taken down.
"but if proved in a court of law, following the rules of evidence,"
...which includes our plants steadfastly rejecting even looking at the evidence...
"or some similar objective forum interested in the truth and not politics,"
Weasel words identified. Naturally, any forum that goes against you will be decreed not objective and interested in politics instead of truth after the fact.
Achilles, the outside of the ballot where you sign affirms the request for the ballot.
I could detail how the rest are absolute billshit too but as you have already threatened to ride in with guns and impose martial law fuck that.
I only wonder how many months before your crew starts putting us on trains.
"I only wonder how many months before your crew starts putting us on trains. "
He says, less than 12 hours after a Staten Island bar owner is arrested and hauled away for giving out free beer.
By 40 "cops", who were not NYPD.
"Achilles, the outside of the ballot where you sign affirms the request for the ballot."
So scribble anything you want in that space. Makes it legit.
Stupidest, lamest response imaginable.
Mark said...
Achilles, the outside of the ballot where you sign affirms the request for the ballot.
Wait.
You mean to say that you make a written request for a ballot... on the ballot as you turn it in?
I can see how you thought that is what they meant when they wrote the law stating you had to file a written request in order to receive an absentee ballot.
You are a fucking idiot.
Blogger Achilles said: Despite clear law to the contrary and the express objections by Petitioners to the inclusion of the ballots identified in the Recount totals, the Milwaukee County and Dane County Boards of Canvassers improperly included those ballots in their Recount totals. The Milwaukee County and Dane County Boards of Canvassers' decisions are in direct conflict with applicable Wisconsin Statutes and case law and implicate an urgent matter of state-wide and national importance.
The two Wisconsin counties don't give a shit about the rest of the state. Madison is governed by unqualified arrogance, and Milwaukee is now a cesspool of crack, heroine, and fentanyl that you can have delivered like uber eats. It's a great symbiotic relationship. It keep Madison in its protected Ivory Tower (the #1 place to retire), while everyone else supports them.
Most of Milwaukee is too drugged up and stupid to even pay attention. But Madison, and its residents know exactly what their town/county has done, and they are perfectly ok with it, or too afraid to speak up. Even if they have a law degree. There are pensions to protect.
By Any Means Necessary. Hmm just how would that apply. A theoretical. I'll include that on a quiz!
Blogger Stephen said...
The anatomy of lunacy, on display among Althouse's commentators.
This guy is obviously in on the fraud. To say there is "no" evidence after the State legislature testimony is just dishonest and ignorant.
Everyone knows there was massive fraud. The residents of Madison, WI know there was fraud perpetuated by their community. It's just a matter of 1) whether or not you like the outcome of the fraud, 2) are scared to too self-absorbed to to see it, or 3) you're a part of it.
Kevin said...
This was in my inbox from the WSJ this morning. Bold text in the original.
William Barr says there is no evidence of voter fraud. The attorney general, a strong ally of the president, directly contradicted Trump's allegations that the election was stolen from him, dealing a blow to fresh legal claims to contest the results.
************
That statement is idiocy.
The DOJ and FBI have not undertaken a formal investigation....so how could Barr know?
And since when is an off-the-cuff statement made by the AG during a TV interview "evidence" of anything in a legal sense? What judge would accept those out-of-court statements, which are a pure example of legal hearsay?
It's clowns, it's clowns all the way down.
Nobody is starting a civil war. Get over it.
You already started the Civil War.
We are just choosing when to end it.
Nope. Nobody has started a civil war. You ain't ending shit. You are an unhinged weirdo blowing off steam on the internet by making violent threats. Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you: Trump's base.
So many people are compromised, they're everywhere. Must be like, half the country. Maybe even more!
D.D. Driver said...
Nope. Nobody has started a civil war. You ain't ending shit. You are an unhinged weirdo blowing off steam on the internet by making violent threats. Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you: Trump's base.
BLM.
Antifa.
6 months of looting and burning.
While governors in various states supported the looting and burning and used COVID to shut down our businesses and continued to get hair cuts and have their lobbyist parties.
No you started it.
And Trump's base has a lot more people that Biden's base. It will be a lot more fun when Bernie's base temporarily joins our base when Biden inevitably kicks them to the curb.
Democrats are - have been - suing to get Trump's legal team disbarred.
Seriously. Not for anything real, just for filing suits about fraud. The complaint is that there was no fraud, so they're being dishonest and should be disbarred.
But steve uhr and our other lefties are confident that the judicial system will reach an objective, impartial answer.
And everything they do to make that impossible, and to harass and threaten the livelihoods of anyone trying to present evidence of fraud, doesn't count.
Because that's what innocent people always do.
As I've mentioned here before, I divide my time between the bluest of blue America in the San Francisco East Bay and the Occupied State of Jefferson in deep red rural Northern California, and in neither place have I ever heard a single person utter a single word that could be construed as a desire to murder their fellow citizens in a Second Civil War over political disagreements.
The only time people talk like that is when they're anonymously writing dopey blog comments.
This is happening now.
Lin Wood bothers me. He is a lawyer and he sounds like it. He is moderating this event. I have trouble listening to these people. He talks too much.
But everyone here should just listen so they can hear the crowd. It wont take long. The tea party did similar things. The IRS went after us.
The trend lines are not towards unity. You can take a snapshot now and pretend the inevitable isn't coming.
Have fun pretending this will all just go away.
OK, cross Dobbs my list of people to read or listen to. He's a nut.
Lin Woods is auditioning to be the next Trump.
Meh.
I will actually agree on that, Achilles. I've had doubts about Lin Wood myself for some time. Loose cannon. Anything from him that isn't backed up by Powell, I'm reserving judgment on.
Mr. Barr has not changed. He is not and never was a Trump loyalist. He is and always has been a lawyer who follows the law and the evidence where they go. That is why future historians will see him as one of our greatest attorneys general, notwithstanding the flak he's taking today from both the left and the right.
He said he wanted to fix DOJ, which had become politicized and had pursued criminal cases based on novel and stretched theories of the law (e.g., Manafort and Cohen) or had pursued enemies without regard for their guilt (Flynn). He said his team wouldn't do that. That's why he's not going to fabricate cases of sedition based on the political calculation that "the process is the punishment." If the evidence supports a charge based on a long accepted understanding of the law, he'll bring it, otherwise not.
Last point. Mr. Barr is a strong supporter of executive authority. A strong executive branch needs discretion to pursue potential national security threats, even if they turn out to be nothing burgers. So, don't expect indictments of Obama era officials for improperly exercising their national security discretion to investigate the Trump campaign. If Mr. Durham has developed evidence of bad faith -- proof beyond a reasonable doubt that former officials knew (actual knowledge, not constructive knowledge) the claims about Trump were bullshit and went ahead anyway out of political animus - then maybe you'll see an indictment. There may be such evidence somewhere, but my guess is that the officials were too smart to leave fingerprints. So maybe there will be indictments for leaking, or for lying to Congress, if we're lucky, but probably not for targeting President Trump. Now you may prefer that Mr. Barr were more political, more willing to bring weak charges for the collateral political benefits to President Trump. I'm certain that's what President Trump would prefer. But that's not how Mr. Barr rolls.
Nope. Nobody has started a civil war.
So the months upon months of rioting, shootings, looting and violence by your fellow, leftist thugs was just my imagination?
Good to know.
Thing is, people like you will have no idea what hit you ... until it's too late.
And I won't care.
I'm not moving to disbar anybody. And besides, realistically no one is ever disabarred for filing a frivolous claim. The bigger problem is that you are exposed as a cheater to the judges who will hear your next case, and the one after that. Rudy Giuliani blew up his credibility as a lawyer sky high with his presentation in the Pa case, and the "hearings" are not helping it; the only people who are persuaded by his antics now are those who literally can't face the truth. Powell looks to be headed for a similar fate.
And to repeat my request, does anyone know where Powell's complaints can be found?
"I'm not moving to disbar anybody. "
Oh! So the process isn't being subverted, because Stephen didn't do it himself personally, and besides, it hardly ever works. It's not like it's possible that just being *delayed* dealing with *that* frivolous lawsuit in the current situation won't have any effect on how this all turns out.
"Rudy Giuliani blew up his credibility as a lawyer sky high with his presentation in the Pa case"
No, it's the PA Supreme Court that has destroyed their credibility. Filed before election? No standing! Filed after election? Wasn't in a timely manner! Never mind that it's their own actions that are being judged - unconstitutionally rewriting election law - how the hell are they not obligated to recuse themselves?
---the officials were too smart to leave fingerprints [Douglas]
Welcome back to the country, Douglas! That must have been some long vacation you took; you missed an awful lot. You can start with the FISA applications or the perjurious testimonies. You will enjoy getting caught up, and you may be a little surprised when you do.
"So many people are compromised, they're everywhere."
I'm very careful--lifelong apparatchiks like Barr are the only ones who need to be compromised; the D's have plenty of experienced and uncompromisable (because Racism) volunteer and professional dirty-tricksters to mobilize in all elections, and Barr doesn't have any particular incentive to tackle something systemic like that now--if he ever did, really.
Messrs. Barr and Durham, Esqs., should shit or get off the pot.
Narr
And let the looting begin in earnest!
So the months upon months of rioting, shootings, looting and violence by your fellow, leftist thugs was just my imagination?
Your mistake is believing the violence was directed at you. In fact it was directed at the left-wing establishment of American cities that have been devoid of Republicans for fifty years.
Qwinn said...
I will actually agree on that, Achilles. I've had doubts about Lin Wood myself for some time. Loose cannon. Anything from him that isn't backed up by Powell, I'm reserving judgment on.
I don't have any objections to him personally. He has been brave and taken on tough cases the against the elites on behalf of the persecuted.
He just has the same problem as Ted Cruz. Another good guy that says the right stuff.
They are just lawyers that have human-repellent oozing from their skin. It works if you are a lawyer in a court room.
"Your mistake is believing the violence was directed at you. In fact it was directed at the left-wing establishment of American cities that have been devoid of Republicans for fifty years."
If this was true, they'd have spent a lot more time at the Democrat state houses, and a lot less time at Footlocker and Target.
It's not going to be the left-wing establishment of those cities that ends up paying for the riots, looting and arson. It's going to be the customers of Footlocker and Target. Us.
The antidote to left-wing revolutionary cosplay is not right-wing revolutionary cosplay.
@Kai Akker: As you may recall, Horowitz was unable to conclude that the FBIs acted in bad faith. It's possible that Durham, with the benefit of a grand jury and subpoena power, will find evidence that was beyond Horowitz's reach. I hope so, but as my grandfather used to say, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
"Kai Akker: As you may recall, Horowitz was unable to conclude that the FBIs acted in bad faith"
Unable. Unwilling. Poh-tato. Po-tah-to.
Steven said: the ones who claim that the Democrats are child pornographers.
As far as I am concerned, those who participate in voter fraud are worse than child pornographers and should be treated as such. Without fair elections and a system people can believe in, child pornography will work its way into the edge of the mainstream, sorta like riots that include setting businesses afire and assaulting and killing people became "peaceful protests." The MSM is complicit and those journalists who contribute to it deserve nothing more than the worse society can offer them.
THEOLDMAN
Earnest Prole said...
The antidote to left-wing revolutionary cosplay is not right-wing revolutionary cosplay.
You are right.
Cosplay is a mistake.
Revenge is a dish best served cold. I make no overt threats against individuals. That's a criminal offense known in most states as "simple assault". But fucks that have stolen from me in the past have had bad things happen to them. Might have been karma, who knows.
THEOLDMAN
Howard: ‘That's easy. Your fake lawyers never presented the "mountain of fraud evidence" in an actual court court.’
Stupidity meets ignorance.
Affidavits, sworn testimony (in legislatures) and statistical offerings from experts are not really evidence. /s So Trump was impeached without evidence since the House is not a court court. Of course the bullshit hearsay used against Trump would never have been inadmissible in court court.
It is apparent how a demented, grifting, old turd like Biden could be nominated for President.
John Wayne dodged serving in WWII. Just sayin'.
(Bad) Hombre: None of it submitted to or accepted by the courts. Trial by PR campaign won't work to sway State legeslatures or SCOTUS.
The dingo ate my pleadings is no longer available for use as a reason to overturn an election.
---Your mistake is believing the violence was directed at you. In fact it was directed at the left-wing establishment of American cities that have been devoid of Republicans for fifty years. [EProle]
Aha, thank you for explaining that. I've been wondering. And that's why their demands always featured one to add more Republicans to city government? How could I have missed it.
It's not going to be the left-wing establishment of those cities that ends up paying for the riots, looting and arson. It's going to be the customers of Footlocker and Target. Us.
Speak for yourself. Target is dead to me after its transgender lunacy. I’ve never been in a Footlocker but it appears they exist for the sole purpose of being looted (no pun intended).
@Douglas: Horowitz?!
He made sure no apple carts were upset. If you'll recall, he didn't find, and he didn't not find. Even Freud is ahead of that, I'm pretty sure.
Earnest Prole said...
So the months upon months of rioting, shootings, looting and violence by your fellow, leftist thugs was just my imagination?
Your mistake is believing the violence was directed at you. In fact it was directed at the left-wing establishment of American cities that have been devoid of Republicans for fifty years.
Your mistake is not noticing that Bernie Supporters and Trump supporters have a common enemy.
The antidote to left-wing revolutionary cosplay is not right-wing revolutionary cosplay.
You are right.
Cosplay is a mistake.
Uh-oh. Someone's burning his Hawaiian shirt.
I wonder what would be considered real evidence to those believing there was no fraud. I hope one of you has the courage of your convictions to answer these:
1) If you keep all else the same and simply change the apparent winner from Biden to Trump, what would you be saying right now. Would there be sufficient evidence for you to say Trump stole it?
2) If there was in your mind, what would you want done about it?
3) If there was indisputable evidence presented that Biden's win was fraudulent, what do you want done about that, or is it OK with you?
I doubt anyone will answer those with anything other than some snark bullshit for obvious reasons.
@Howard re 4:09: “Evidence” obviously doesn’t mean what you think it means.
It is beyond belief that you would parade your ignorance of the term and the likelihood of admissibility on a blog hosted by a law professor and populated in significant part by lawyer commenters.
As I said a 4:00: you are where “stupidity meets ignorance.” But it’s just part of being a lefty, so carry on with your fatuity.
1) If you keep all else the same and simply change the apparent winner from Biden to Trump, what would you be saying right now. Would there be sufficient evidence for you to say Trump stole it?
I cannot speak for anyone else, but I certainly would feel exactly the same way as I do now. I know this because the dems blamed HRC's loss to various conspiracy theories, including voting machine fraud. I didn't buy it then, and I haven't seen anything to change my mind. Prove it in court and I'll believe it.
2) If there was in your mind, what would you want done about it?
It depends. I think we should define what we mean by "voter fraud." When I use the term voter fraud, I am referring to ineligible people voting, people voting twice, people stealing the vote of another. (This is distinct from the process-based claims that Trump has alleged in his lawsuit--some of which I think are quite strong even if I don't think throwing out the election is the correct remedy.)
First-every single person that commits voter fraud should be prosecuted. Democrats. Republicans. It's a crime.
Next, ballots that are proven to be fraudulent should be discarded and the remaining votes should determine the winner. But the voter fraud has to be proven. Not affidavits. Testimony before a trier of fact with cross-examination and the rules of evidence. But, I don't believe anyone but Sidney Powell has filed bona fide fraud cases. (Neither, the Pa case nor the Wisconsin case that Troupis filed are "fraud" cases.)
Personally, I will 100% respect the outcome of the court cases (even if I might disagree with them). I sense that Trump supporters will only accept the outcome if they agree with it. Hope I'm wrong about this.
3) If there was indisputable evidence presented that Biden's win was fraudulent, what do you want done about that, or is it OK with you?
Nope. The fraudulent ballots should be discarded and the legal ballots should be counted.
When has a midnight run ever favored a Republican?
Why do the Democrats always fight scrutiny? Of everything!?
Why is it the Democrat strongholds that have counting delays?
Who believes an old fool like Biden, Obama’s life insurance, could out poll Obama, even with blacks.
When has a midnight run ever favored a Republican?
I don't know.
Why do the Democrats always fight scrutiny? Of everything!?
So they can cheat.
Why is it the Democrat strongholds that have counting delays?
So they can cheat.
Who believes an old fool like Biden, Obama’s life insurance, could out poll Obama, even with blacks.
I don't know.
D.D. Driver said...
I cannot speak for anyone else, but I certainly would feel exactly the same way as I do now. I know this because the dems blamed HRC's loss to various conspiracy theories, including voting machine fraud. I didn't buy it then, and I haven't seen anything to change my mind. Prove it in court and I'll believe it.
If the PA Supreme Court throws out all cases before the election for standing, and follows that up by throwing out all cases after the election because they weren't filed in a timely manner... what do you think the likely result is going to be?
Do you think people will accept it because it wasn't proven in court?
This is the kind of logical box canyon that specialists like lawyers just run right down without thinking of the broader context.
Bagoh,
If Trump had won in the manner that Biden did, by the same margins, that is with the same margin in the EC that Trump characterized in 2016 as a "landslide" and a 6-8 million margin in the popular vote I would absolutely not support Biden in saying and doing the things that Trump has done. I would think it was wrong and indefensible, just as it is for Trump to do so now. I would not have supported Hillary in making such an argument in 2016, even though she won the popular vote by a significant margin.
2. If I were inclined in my mind to think that there might have been fraud, I'd listen to what folks who ran the election had to say, particularly folks in my party. If the Democratic election officials all said there was no fraud, as the Republican election officials are saying now, I'd believe it. If a Democratic attorney general, a Democratic Department of Homeland Security, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama all said there had been no fraud, as the Republican versions of the same folks are doing now, that would matter to me too. Bottom line: I wouldn't fret about fraud, or let alone encourage Biden to keep screaming fraud or filing lawsuits, if all those folks said that there was no fraud, and the best that someone could come up with is ravings about Dominion.
3. If there were indisputable evidence that there was fraud that swung enough votes in the swing states to Biden to change the outcome in the EC, then Biden should not be the next President. The easiest route to that for Trump would be to show fraud in Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona. But no one has been able to find any significant fraud in those states, and not for want of trying.
The lefty concern trolls are really settling in.
If the PA Supreme Court throws out all cases before the election for standing, and follows that up by throwing out all cases after the election because they weren't filed in a timely manner... what do you think the likely result is going to be?
Do you think people will accept it because it wasn't proven in court?
No. Of course not! I think partisans are deranged. I am 100% certain that if the Court overturns the election, democrats will never accept it. They will insist that the Court was bought off by the Koch brothers or some such bullshit. And, if the Court refuses to overturn the election, Trump supporters will insist that its because George Soros got to them first. They're in on it! There is no scenario where a partisan will accept the fact that they lost an election. The Trumpers and the proggies suffer from different strains of the exact same virus.
So people rejecting the election results, unfortunately, is an inevitability. If its the proggies we have to worry about Antifa burning down cities. If its the Trumpers, now we have to worry about the Boogaloo Bois popping out of the woodwork around here going out and shooting people. There is an unavoidable risk of violence from fringe element no matter what. Toxic partisanship has ensured that we are fucked either way.
D.D. Driver said...
No. Of course not! I think partisans are deranged. I am 100% certain that if the Court overturns the election, democrats will never accept it. They will insist that the Court was bought off by the Koch brothers or some such bullshit. And, if the Court refuses to overturn the election, Trump supporters will insist that its because George Soros got to them first.
How do you avoid situations like this?
They're in on it! There is no scenario where a partisan will accept the fact that they lost an election. The Trumpers and the proggies suffer from different strains of the exact same virus.
This is absolutely incorrect. We have been doing this for over 200 years.
What changed in 2016? What changed in 2020?
Dobbs was concerned about Dominion way back when Dems, CNN and CBS were.
Not long ago, Barr was deeply concerned about mail-in voting.
He gets deeply concerned about many things.
I'd like to hear his explanation for the interstate urinal overflow/pause that refreshed and observers being obstructed and ejected.
Deeply concerned, I'll bet.
Let's not forget his prior aversion to making statements that might influence the election.
PA legislature will overturn their election and select electors.
AZ legislature will overturn their election and select electors.
That leaves probably GA is the likely state to switch.
Either way this goes, 80 million Americans will believe the president is illegitimate.
Stephen,
How do YOU splain the pause that refreshed and the multitudes of affidavits re fraud and abuse?
Not all elections are the same.
Have you watched any of the "ordinary" citizens of Michigan recounting shit they went through just trying to properly volunteer?
I don't recall hearing about that in 2016.
I remember the Black Panther dudes staking out Philly polling place in 2012, I believe.
Howie invokes "meat puppet" after voting for one.
Semper Fud.
D.D. Driver said...
No. Of course not! I think partisans are deranged. I am 100% certain that if the Court overturns the election, democrats will never accept it. They will insist that the Court was bought off by the Koch brothers or some such bullshit. And, if the Court refuses to overturn the election, Trump supporters will insist that its because George Soros got to them first.
See, DD, that's why we have rules and standards:
1: You don't stop counting on Election night until you've counted every ballot you have
2: You give the poll watchers full access to everything the poll workers are doing
3: You fully and rigidly enforce all election laws
Because when you do that, everyone knows that it was a fair election, even though their side lost
But, when you don't do that, when you in fact aggressively violate all teh rules and standards of a valid election, you guarantee that the people on the other side will never accept it if your side "wins".
If the US Supreme Court were to simply throw out the results in NV, AZ, GA, WI, MI, and PA, and award everything disputed to the Republicans, I'm sure the Democrats would be upset.
But they would have no legitimate right to be upset. Because their side repeated violated the rules of vote handling, making it impossible for a sane person to believe that the Dems actually won.
Because when you're winning, you don't act like you're trying to steal the election.
What I want is for the US SC to announce the following:
1: The election results in NV, AZ, GA, WI, MI, and PA are all cancelled
2: All those States will have a re-vote on 12/15
3: Any candidate who was ahead in the Election Day votes, and who also won when all the "votes" were counted, is a winner
4: Any candidate who was ahead in the Election Day votes, but lost when all the "votes" were counted, has the right to challenge the results, and have their race be part of the 12/15 election
5: The ONLY people who get to vote absentee are members of the military who can not make it to the polls that day (because, for example, they're deployed overseas, or in another State)
6: The US Military will be responsible for getting ballots to those soldiers. The soldier will sign, and will an O3 or above, in that person's chain of command, who swears that the ballot was legally voted by the person whose name is on the envelope
7: Anyone else who wants to vote, votes on Election Day, in person, and must show a Driver's License or State ID card from that State, that was issued on or before 11/3/2020. No exception
You're sick, you're confined to your home, you're out of the State on business? Sorry, you can't vote. If you have a problem with that?
Take it out on the Democrats who so severely corrupted mail in voting and vote counting that it simply can't be trusted
This is absolutely incorrect. We have been doing this for over 200 years.
What changed in 2016? What changed in 2020?
I don't know. I think ever since Bush v. Gore, the election loser has refused to accept the outcome of the election. The many dems were certain that Diebold (now Dominion) flipped Kerry votes to Bush. In 2008, the many republicans refused to accept the outcome of the election of a "Kenya-born" president.
In 2012, Mitt Romney sucked and everyone knew it so no fraud allegations. But, in 2016 the Russians hacked our (again illegitimate) elections only to be outhacked by Venezuela in our once again illegitimate 2020 elections.
Can you really not see why anyone would be even the slightest bit skeptical given this ridiculous history of nonsense and paranoia? You don't have to agree with me, but can you not even see why someone would be skeptical?
I remember Sam Donaldson getting all upset about something reported in the press. It was funny because Donaldson should have been the first to know that the press was, um, unreliable.
D.D. Driver said...
Can you really not see why anyone would be even the slightest bit skeptical given this ridiculous history of nonsense and paranoia? You don't have to agree with me, but can you not even see why someone would be skeptical?
If they believed your revisionist history sure.
In 2008, the many republicans refused to accept the outcome of the election of a "Kenya-born" president.
This is the best you have?
One side is doing this. Your post even admits this.
One.
You just are not being honest. Every argument you have put up that we have torn down is because you start from a dishonest position.
"3. If there were indisputable evidence that there was fraud that swung enough votes in the swing states to Biden to change the outcome in the EC, then Biden should not be the next President. The easiest route to that for Trump would be to show fraud in Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona. But no one has been able to find any significant fraud in those states, and not for want of trying."
Except for those people testifying under oath that there was massive fraud. And Joe Biden who stated that he had the best vote fraud machine in history.
Other than that?
"3. If there were indisputable evidence that there was fraud that swung enough votes in the swing states to Biden to change the outcome in the EC, then Biden should not be the next President. The easiest route to that for Trump would be to show fraud in Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona. But no one has been able to find any significant fraud in those states, and not for want of trying."
WI: 150k+ people were allowed to register and vote w/o showing any photoID. When the WI PhotoID case went to the US SC, one of the reasons why it failed was the plaintiffs could not find a single person in WI who couldn't get the PhotoID to vote.
The "Covid means you're permanently isolated, so can vote w/o photo ID" ruling came froth WEC, in essentially a violation of the law as written by the State legislature.
All 150k of those votes are invalid, and we can be highly confident that 90%+ of them were pure fraud. Biden's "margin of victory" is 20k. So WI is a clear flip
GA: Fulton County announced they were stopping vote counting at 10:30 PM. Sent most of the workers and the GOP poll watchers home. Then kept on counting until at least 1 AM.
Every ballot that was handled during those 2+ hours is now invalid. GA had an NYT vote dump at 1:30 AM of 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump. That beats the 12k margin.
PA: Almost all the mail in ballots were illegal. The PA Constitution explicitly states there are only 4 reasons why someone can get an absentee ballot. To change that required a constitutional amendment, not a law. PA changed it with a law.
Trump won easily on Election Day. Flip those 20 EC votes
So, flip those three and it's 278 Trump. Thank you for the re-election
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/nevada-fraud-1-500-dead-voters-42-248-voted-multiple-times-rv-camps-as-homes
The Trump campaign on Wednesday unveiled a tranche of information it plans to present to a Nevada state court Thursday that suggests there were thousands of fraudulent votes cast — possibly enough to overturn Joe Biden’s win there by 33,569 votes.
Officials said that among the evidence and expert testimony to be presented in Carson City are indications that over 1,500 ballots were cast by dead voters, that 42,248 people voted “multiple times,” data on a huge spike in incomplete voter registrations, and home addresses in temporary RV camps and casinos.
They also plan to present polling that 1% of Nevada voters shown to have voted never did and 2% of those shown to have voted by mail never got a ballot.
So, that's another 6 EC votes to flip, now we're at Trump 284. Which means even if you flip WI back to Biden, Trump still wins
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा