Writes Michelle Cottle, in "What Is J.D. Vance’s Angle?" (NYT).
২৬ সেপ্টেম্বর, ২০২৩
"Asked specifically about Mr. Trump’s election fraud lies, which [J.D.] Vance has at times promoted, the senator again shifted into slippery explainer mode."
"'I think it’s very easy for folks in the press to latch onto the zaniest election fraud or stolen election theories and say, "Oh this is totally debunked,"' he said. 'But they ignore that there is this very clear set of institutional biases built into the election in 2020 that — from big tech censorship to the way in which financial interests really lined up behind Joe Biden. People aren’t stupid. They see what’s out there,' he said. 'Most Republican grass roots voters are not sympathetic to the dumbest version of the election conspiracy. They are sympathetic to the version that is actually largely true.'
Except that, as evidence of what is 'actually largely true,' Mr. Vance pointed to a 2021 Time article detailing a bipartisan effort not to advance a particular candidate but to safeguard the electoral system. More important, the 'dumbest' version of the stolen election conspiracy is precisely what Mr. Trump and his enablers have been aggressively spreading for years.... Mr. Vance may want to believe that most Republicans are too smart to buy such lunacy, but he is too smart not to recognize the damage to American democracy being wrought by that lunacy."
এতে সদস্যতা:
মন্তব্যগুলি পোস্ট করুন (Atom)
৮৭টি মন্তব্য:
Who gives a rat's ass what Michelle Cottle thinks about anything.
As long as the Democrats keep pretending that they're not the kind of people who'd steal an election, I'll suspect they did.
bipartisan effort? Yeah, right. Are we supposed to fall for that? And that makes it okay? The election was stolen. That’s what the Dems do.
No intelligent person believes Biden got 81 million real votes. Occam’s Razor.
Election fraud lies.
Oh, if only the election wasn't fraudulent.
Jonathan wants to be a woman like Cottle wants to be a journalist.
You don't have to ask what Michelle Cottle's angle is, do you?
Gotta stop that man!
Ms. Cottle, now do Al Gore in 2000, Hillary Clinton in 20216, and COVID-19. For COVID, devote sections to government-versus-data for: (1) masking, (2) lockdowns, and (3) vaccines. Be sure to compare Sweden's approach and outcome to the most hardcore strategies of China, Australia, New Zealand, Austria, etc.
Career global bureaucrats have "colluded" to defend their power, defend obvious failures, and defend conflicts of interest for a very long time.
Michelle is a apparently a bought-and-paid-for puppet.
“actually largely true” is still false.
Too bad. So sad.
Chaning one word: a bipartisan conspiracy not to advance a particular candidate but to safeguard the electoral system.
Seems like solid evidence if even the NYT agrees it happened. That’s before we get into the double standard that $100,000 buy for mostly BLM ads is proof of Russian election interference, but social media censoring conservatives on request by Democrats is “safeguarding the electoral system” and “preventing disinformation”.
Her ignorance makes me ill and angry.
I was a stolen election agnostic.
I now know it was grand theft election.
Since GOPe did nothing, it will happen again.
Four people on Biden's election campaign?
Don't make me laugh
Trump had argued that we stould "terminate" the Constitution and install himself the winner. Of course Trump has been promoting the stupid version.
Trump is telling the truth about the 2020 election. The NYTs is lying.
If you look at the influx from the southern border, and the wasted billions going to Ukraine while Americans live check to check...it is clear we are being governed by and unaccountable executive branch. Unaccountable because Biden was installed, not elected. He doesn't have to answer to anybody. The divine right of the king.
Mr. Vance pointed to a 2021 Time article detailing a bipartisan effort not to advance a particular candidate but to safeguard the electoral system.
The "shadowy cabal" one, in which the participants, under the flag of "fortifying democracy," did everything they could to advance a particular candidate?
Even if we give them the benefit of the doubt (my favorite phrase these days, it seems) and assume that their intentions really were to "safeguard the electoral system," why did they think it needed safeguarding? Maybe because of "one particular candidate"? They'd never done before what they were about to do, after all. And in what way did vastly expanding eligibility for absentee voting, dramatically extending voting time, reducing to nothing the process of ballot verification, weakening or eliminating chain of custody for the unprecedented tens of millions of mailed-in ballots, ballot harvesting, and deplatforming voices all on one side of the electoral question, "safeguard the electoral system"?
Unless what you mean by "the electoral system" is "the ability to control and deliver electoral outcomes." For one side.
Seems to me Vance did a pretty good job of explicating the 2020 electoral integrity weakening that Democrats (and some Trump-fearing Republicans, hence the "bipartisan" in her slippery un-explanatory formulation) in leadership, media, and business worked so hard to achieve. "Slippery explainer mode," my *ss.
Michelle Cottle frequently contradicts J.D. Vance's statements, but at least she included good quotes in her article. Give her credit for that.
We learn that J.D. Vance can work with Democrats, but he isn't frightened when corporate media tries the "conspiracy theory" charge to discredit him. There was a lot wrong with the election that brought Biden into office. We have congressional testimony on that.
From Mitt Romney, “I don’t know that I can disrespect someone more than J.D. Vance,”
Cottle must be a J.D. Vance supporter, that Romney quote is too perfect. That captures exactly why conservatives call Mitt a RINO. His greatest wrath is always directed at fellow Republicans.
Mr. Vance's comments sound like mealy-mouthed rubbish. Most Republicans are much too smart to believe the Sole Approved Version of the Election that Democrats are trying to enforce for the sake of their franchise.
What little I could get of the NYT article was the reporter Cottle psychoanalyzing Vance. Cute, but utterly without interest. She had her patronizing experience and wisdom on display, though.
If the knowledge that the election was fraudulent is so awful to possess, then protect the Republic with better election-security rules. The Democrats would rather be slippery explainers of how wonderful they are and how stupid the rest of the world is, however.
I like to think of myself as a decently intelligent and rational person and I just can't shake the feeling that election changing vote count cheating occurred that gave us Joe Biden as president.
Last night, I was thinking of the Bush administration mantra of "we fight them over there (referring to Iraq and Afghanistan) so we don't have to fight them here". Now with Biden's open border policy, we have 5 to 7 million people who have illegally crossed our border. Many of them are unvetted young men who are military soldier age. We could be fighting "them" over here. This open border should concern all our citizens.
Did Cottle link to or quote the Time article at all? The one that literally says it looks like they rigged the election? Let me quote:
"That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it. And they believe the public needs to understand the system’s fragility in order to ensure that democracy in America endures."
"Influence perceptions... steer media coverage and control the flow of information"-by, for example, suppressing the 100% correct Hunter Biden laptop story.
"Change rules and laws" to make sure that this was the least secure election in American history.
They drove the Green Bay registrar of voters out of her office and put in a Democrat get out the vote machine replacement.
Let me quote from the article again: had Trump won, ..."the left was ready to flood the streets." Considering that Antifa was involved, this would have been a true, national insurrection.
The Time article is a confession and is damning when read that way.
We have a handfull of judicial findings across several States showing cities and counties violated the law by using election procedures, in conflict with legislation enacted into law.
100's of thousands of vote were illegal and the law required they be rejected, rather than counted. Signature verification, illegal drop boxes, illegal mailing out ballotts not requested, no chain of custody documents. Lots of laws were ignored.
The NYT continues to beclown itself. Tens of thousands fake ballots don’t just appear in deep blue cities. Just admit the election was stolen. And we have an imbecile as commander in chief.
Have any of President Emeritus Trump's charges been proven untrue in any court?
Not that I know of but perhaps someone can correct me.
John Henry
All those laws broken? Judges refused to consider the claim. Inventing legal technicalities to avoid ruling on the evidence.
The left has learned that the election laws have no teeth, and election officials are free to cheat to their hearts content.
I don’t think Michelle even read Molly’s long detailed confession of the cabal in Time, and that weirdly bipartisan glosss she puts on it is completely undermined by the facts of Zuckbucks being concentrated on specifically getting democrat votes in 2020. Less than 5% of their “assistance” went to districts that lean republican. Gee if Cottle can’t be trusted with the facts in Ball’s article how can we believe her take on mail in ballots and dropboxes? Forget the hit on Vance, Michelle. You have no credibility left.
It's not a "lie" unless there's proof that that it's incorrect. In fact it's lying to call it a lie.
What is the NYT's angle?
To ask is to know.
Stacy Abrams, HIllary Clinton.... all election deniers.
Did you see the big study on free speech?
Most Democrats are anti-free speech.
Most democrats are for speech and thought censorship.
D.D. Driver said...
"Trump had argued that we stould "terminate" the Constitution and install himself the winner. Of course Trump has been promoting the stupid version."
You're throwing firebombs D.D.. What part of the constitution? Give the quote in it's entirety. "Of course" nothing. Defend what assert.
You have a position. Defend it. That's what this blog is all about.
I routinely engage is a similar technique with my partners, when I refer to “false allegations of my snoring”. She will try to lie her way out of it with a claim that she recorded it on the phone. Ok, play it!, I say, knowing that someone who can’t figure out text messaging, and esp her address book on her phone, hasn’t figured out yet how to record something on it, and even more, how to find that recording. The great thing there is that the discussion has turned from her falsely accusing me of snoring, to her incompetence in dealing with electronic devices.
Pretty much every time you see this sort of thing by the Dems, you know that they are trying to pull a fast one on you. They don’t want to debate election fraud, because they know they will lose, and, thus have no interest in the subject.
Lol. It was fortifying the election, not stealing it. Lol
" Mr. Vance pointed to a 2021 Time article detailing a bipartisan effort not to advance a particular candidate but to safeguard the electoral system..."
Safeguard the system from the voters. "IT's not what it looks like, honey! I swear!"
… too nuanced for them, eh?
His answer was perfect.
Trump declared the vote rigged LONG before election night. He laid the framework of "election fraud" before the 2016 election! His whole life has been "if I didn't come out on top, someone rigged it all!"
Looking forward to when Trump releases his “Large, Complex, Detailed but irrefutable REPORT on the Presidential Election Fraud in Georgia”. LOL
Rich - Is it illegal to even think that the lying liars who lie on the left-> cheated? Fortified the vote for old crook Joe - basement dweller deluxe. Illegal thoughts? Is that were you loyal authoritarian leftists are going?
No better or worse than Hillary Clinton or Stacy Abrams’ denialism.
NYT whining about being slapped in the face with their own words. I wonder how many times they've wished they never told the truth about this.
@Kevin at 7:20
Thread winner
How dare you THINK democratic leftists would cheat as they install a total crook and puppet as president.
To the gulag!
@Althouse, so what were election officials doing after they got rid of the Republican observers, if not engaging in that old Democrat tradition of ballot-box stuffing? And if everything they did after the Republican observers left the premises was legal and above board, then why did they need to use subterfuges to get rid of the Republican observers?
After the election you argued strongly that, for the sake of our democracy*, the loser should follow Nixon’s lead and accept the results with good grace. And I accepted your argument at the time. However, in stark contrast with JFK, Joe Biden has been corrupt, stupid, malicious, and a legitimate threat to displace James Buchanan as the worst President in the history of the United States. So I think you were wrong, and I was wrong to accept your argument. For the past 18 or more months my position has been that — given the use of subterfuges to remove the the people who were present to ensure integrity — federal judiciary was mistaken in not taking the cases and moreover they should have ruled that no votes should have been counted after observers departed the premises. If able to go back to the point where counting had been temporarily halted to run the observers out of the building, then restart the counts from there with observers present this time. If unable to do so, then disqualify all votes counted from those locations. (I am aware of at least one precedent.)
____________
* This was probably the first time “our democracy” actually meant “a government run exclusively by Democrats.”
"Trump declared the vote rigged LONG before election night"
I am sure you have a quote and a link to the full context of whatever snippet you have seized on.
The MSM Doesn't investigate or report they just chant the latest the DNC slogan.
"There was NO election fraud (except in 2016)"
"Anyone who thinks that is crazy"
"we didnt need to investigate or audit the votes"
"Anyone who thinks that is crazy"
"Where is your proof? Show us the election fraud! There was none"
"That's not proof. Only crazy people would think that's proof".
Just file it with: There is no open border. The economy is fine. The was no BLM/Antifa violence, just peaceful protests, Ukraine is winning the war, and J6 was an insurrection.
"American democracy" is code for 'if you question 2020, you're an insurrectionist'.
Rich - Trump estimated there would be election fraud... and? Considering how desperate the Left hate Trump - why not? Seems like a fair estimate to me.
ooooo lookie
“Violent extremists” would be “very willing to take action” on Jan 6, the FBI correctly predicted two months before the riots the Bureau helped organize and instigate.
Hilarious they think the misdemeanor against Ray Epps is passing the smell test.
oh no.. Mind Crime alert --- Mind Crime! call the de-funded police!
Spraying out absentee ballots all across the land and sending out politiqueros to harvest them is the new definition of "secure and fair." I could get 81 million votes under this system (but only if I'm a Democrat).
"Our Democracy™" = "Our Gerontocracy" = "Our Oligarchy."
Trump's flailing doesn't change facts.
Mail-in ballots and vote harvesting inherently corrupt same-day secret-ballot elections.
Several states violated their own election laws, cuz Covid.
The only way in the world that Joe Biden got 81 million votes was by vote manipulation. 2020 was a stolen election and so was 2022. They're manipulating the computers so that democrat party members are awarded votes that should go to republican candidates. The ballot stuffing and mail-in voting is just for the show. Democrat Party members know damn well too,obviously.
The indictment was careful to say that the charges are for crimes based on lies, not the lies themselves. If Trump had run his mouth but not tried to tamper with actual election results, he probably would have escaped accountability altogether.
Tamper... tamper... How on earth did he tamper? That's just more hot garbage from the collective left.
"Mail-in ballots and vote harvesting inherently corrupt same-day secret-ballot elections.
Several states violated their own election laws, cuz Covid."
Needed = more covid.
millions of people think 2020 was a fraud.
What are you leftists going to do, Rich?
Put us all in the gulag? do we need some re-education?
A secret cabal to " change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information" ?
SO why wasn't such a honorable patriotic bi-partisan honest sincere legal well-coordinated effort out in the spotlight, taking bows and proclaiming itself a champion of "our democracy" UNTIL AFTER the election?
Like, if the public at the time knew the media information was "controlled" they'd be upset? But now, knowing what we know, we're supposed to be okay with it?
Link to the "Bipartisan effort" to "safeguard" the election:
The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election
"The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President. Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors. The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its founding.
Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears. They executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction. After Election Day, they monitored every pressure point to ensure that Trump could not overturn the result. “The untold story of the election is the thousands of people of both parties who accomplished the triumph of American democracy at its very foundation,” says Norm Eisen, a prominent lawyer and former Obama Administration official who recruited Republicans and Democrats to the board of the Voter Protection Program."
Too many Republicans did highlight the unlikely version of election fraud- electronic manipulation of the numbers. I wrote the day after the election that the 81 million Biden votes exist on 81 million real ballots- the fraud was the saturation on the ground with mail in ballots in the cities- ballots that were then hoovered up by Democrat operatives, filled out, signatures forged or fully fabricated, and sent back for the count. This was the fraud- probably anywhere from 2-6 million fraudulent mail-in-ballots produced country-wide, most especially in the states where the Democrats controlled the offices directly responsible for election supervision, which in most states is the Secretary of State office, and most concentrated in the states that were predicted to swing the election. The only other thing that had to be done was remove signature verification, which was done openly in state after state.
Mail-in-voting is an open invitation to electoral fraud unless the ballot has to returned with valid photo ID that must be checked against the voter registration list. If all you require is a signature, that is going to be gamed relentlessly by fraudsters, and it is most easily done in cities which are almost 100% controlled by Democrats politically.
You really have to be some kind of knucklehead to believe the 2020 election was not rigged.
Republicans need to stop being intimidated by the likes of the NYT whose readers will never vote for them.
“We have a lot of theories— but no evidence.” ~ the Althouse commentariat
@rusty
Here you go:
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/109449803240069864
There is an easy way to settle this matter- take the security envelopes that were used to return the mail-in ballots and compare the signatures on those envelopes to the signatures in the voter registration files. Signature verification is done all the time in the legal profession if there is any doubt at all about the authenticity- it is even possible these days to automate the process with optical scanning. I guarantee you will find that millions of ballots from the last two election cycles, 2020 and 2022, were counted where the signature isn't even a close call on being fraudulent.
That is the one thing Trump and his team never got in their court challenges- the chance to examine the ballot verification process. There were some small-scale studies done in one Arizona county that suggested up to 10% of the accepted mail-in-ballots should have been rejected based on fraudulent signatures in the 2022 election- some cases where the "voter" misspelled their own damned name or used an entirely different one for the given address and would have been rejected had they shown up in any election prior to 2020. Signature verification is a lousy way to secure balloting already and is even worse if you abandon the standards of authentication.
If you want to preserve mail-in-ballots- this is what you have to do- have the voter return the ballot to the precinct and present a photo-ID to a team composed of members of each major party- selected by the political parties themselves and by no one else. If you can't support this method, then you are a vote fraud supporter by definition.
And nobody knows "slippery explainer mode" like Michelle Cottle.
The corrupt Putin-esque KGB left must safeguard everyone from wrong-thoughts.
JD Vance is on deck. Guilty! Guilty!
Goebbels is alive and well at the NYT. "Trump's election lies" can smear an endless number of Republicans who agree with a majority of voters that the election was rigged.
That NYT/DNC lie can set the stage for another election theft.
as the song says, '81 million votes my ass'. why is it always democrats counting the votes?
He laid the framework of "election fraud" before the 2016 election!
Oh, you mean the Clinton-funded "Russia collusion" pee tape thing? Why, you're right! He did draw attention - such attention as he could, anyway - to that.
Want to talk about 2020 now? Why is it that those who claim that Trump is or was "lying" about election tampering in 2020 have no answer for the, you know,election tampering that has been factually established?
Before the election of 2020, we knew about and argued against the state-level election process changes weakening electoral integrity that were implemented, sometimes (often?) extra-legally according to the laws of those states. During the broadly extended election period, we learned of the anomalies in counting and in observation of counting, and there are still no explanations for them that are supported by evidence (show me the "broken water pipe" and contemporaneous pictures of the water leaking and...). We learned quickly of the grossly relaxed ballot verification standards and chain of custody lapses that made a meaningful audit of ballot integrity impossible.
We watched as judges disqualified legal questions about election integrity on procedural grounds, disallowing the presentation of arguments or evidence. We learned that the major social media platforms were working in concert with Democrat leadership to take down specific posts and whole accounts that deviated from their approved messages. We learned directly from the NYT that there has been a concerted effort to "fortify" the election in ways that gave a systemic advantage to Democrats, and against any claim Trump might make that he won, regardless of its merit.
What of any of this do you contest?
The people that think the election was stolen are some of the dumbest people alive. Intelligent people need evidence to come to a particular conclusion. There is no evidence only lies. Elections have consequences. Trump lost. Your tears are delicious though.
Most of my substantive responses have already been addressed by previous comments, so I just want to say that when I read this part of the excerpt "Except that, as evidence of what is 'actually largely true,' Mr. Vance pointed to a 2021 Time article detailing a bipartisan effort not to advance a particular candidate but to safeguard the electoral system. " I literally laughed out loud. So much so that it startled the dog.
"Vance pointed to a 2021 Time article detailing a bipartisan effort not to advance a particular candidate but to safeguard the electoral system."
Gaslighting has a really funny smell when Michelle Cottle tries to do it.
D.D. Driver said...
"@rusty
Here you go:
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/109449803240069864"
Good enough.
He w2as correct about one thing theough. Our founders could not have considered vote fraud on the scale we witnesses in the last election.
"There is an easy way to settle this matter- take the security envelopes that were used to return the mail-in ballots and compare the signatures on those envelopes to the signatures in the voter registration files."
Exactly! This shit is *easy* to prove. That's been my point all along. It's easy as snot to prove and Trump still can't prove it. You don't think anyone has TRIED to find forged signatures? Like NOBODY but you has thought of it? OF COURSE the Trump team tried to find this evidence. The fact that there is NO evidence like this after recounts and years of investigations leads me to think the evidence does not exist. It's probably hidden in the same file cabinet as the pee video (something else that does not exist).
“We have a lot of theories— but no evidence.”
We know that signature verification was jettisoned in the Arizona election - the reaction of the secretary of state's office to obvious forgeries was to go after the candidate who showed the forgeries in public. The justice system said (probably wisely) that it's none of their business, you guys figure it out.
It's not a theory, but I guess it doesn't count as "evidence" unless somebody steps up and says "Yeah, I did that."
Some guy named Tony said there was no election fraud.
Questions?
I didnt think so.
They only need to manufacture bogue ballots in a few key counites in a few key states to pull off the heiwt.
"Exactly! This shit is *easy* to prove. That's been my point all along."
Then why can't we audit the votes in just those contested states?
How do I know there was vote fraud? I'm from Chicago. It's baked into the system. And besides. It's never zero.
They only needed to manufacture bogus ballots in a few key counties in a few key states to pull off the heist.
@frenchy, fixed it for you.
"Then why can't we audit the votes in just those contested states?"
We don't need to audit the votes because the people who counted the votes say there was no fraud. Or enough fraud to matter. Or there wasn't significant, widespread fraud, anyway. Or something. If you can't take the word of a Democrat at face value when it comes to election fraud, who can you trust?
There are several judicial findings of election laws ignored. Ballots tabulated that should have never been certified.
That is evidence.
Arizona had signature verification happening at the rate of 1 per second. That is human, not scanner.
That is evidence.
D.D.Dipshit wrote:
"Exactly! This shit is *easy* to prove. That's been my point all along. It's easy as snot to prove and Trump still can't prove it. You don't think anyone has TRIED to find forged signatures? Like NOBODY but you has thought of it? OF COURSE the Trump team tried to find this evidence. The fact that there is NO evidence like this after recounts and years of investigations leads me to think the evidence does not exist. It's probably hidden in the same file cabinet as the pee video (something else that does not exist)."
You need a court order to get access to the security envelopes, Dipshit, and this is assuming the jurisdictions involved didn't immediately incinerate all of them. People have tried to get such court orders but keep getting denied by people like you that claim there was no fraud and thus no reason to examine them. If there wasn't fraud, Dipshit, then the Democrats and fake Republicans like you would be tripping over themselves to prove the signatures were 99.9% valid, but they and you don't do this.
There is no evidence only lies.
Funnily enough, lies also require evidence that they're lies, as someone said up thread. Got any of that? Because all we've been treated to so far is "no standing - case thrown out before discovery" and the like, and of course a while lot of how-dare-yous.
Which is, just to spell it out for you, Hag, not evidence.
Elections have consequences.
They sure do. If you're happy with what you got, you are among a dwindling number.
Trump lost.
He did. But again, funnily enough, no one ever seems to say, "Trump lost fair and square." Because they don't have to.
Your tears are delicious though.
Your crowing, seeing as it comes at the price of double-digit inflation, a doddering, corrupt figurehead in the White House, a raging culture war that has reached the point that teaching young children how to fellate adults is for your side somehow a human right, a border crisis that has Democrat mayors declaring their sanctuary cities closed, homeless and drug problems that have your cities' business districts on the ropes and everyone checking their shoes for sh*t... tastes kind of like a used ashtray into which someone has been spitting after the smokers were done. Must be awful inside your mouth; I can assure you my years are only helping me see better.
Biden stalwart Rich wants to stall any examination of Biden’s warts. The funny thing is that Biden’s continuing actions are making this harder and harder to do.
Yancey Ward said...
"If there wasn't fraud, Dipshit, then the Democrats and fake Republicans like you would be tripping over themselves to prove the signatures were 99.9% valid, but they and you don't do this."
Yancey's not wrong...
"You need a court order to get access to the security envelopes, Dipshit, and this is assuming the jurisdictions involved didn't immediately incinerate all of them."
Bro. Trump would have recieved everything in discovery in his Georgia case and he *voluntarily* dismissed it. It wasn't the justice system stacked against him. He took his bullshit and went home. Woulda coulda shoulda. Now stop being a crybaby.
Blogger Rich said...
“We have a lot of theories— but no evidence.” ~ the Althouse commentariat"
They have evidence: Daaaa I went to bed and Trump was ahead, I woke up and he was behind. Daaaa I saw it on tv. It was rigged I tell you. Plus they let Black people vote.
"Bro. Trump would have recieved everything in discovery in his Georgia case and he *voluntarily* dismissed it. It wasn't the justice system stacked against him. He took his bullshit and went home. Woulda coulda shoulda. Now stop being a crybaby."
They specifically would not have gotten access to the security envelopes in that particular lawsuit. The lawsuits addressing the mail-in-ballot authentication was thrown out. The lawsuit you are talking about was voluntarily withdrawn because the judge whittled it down to basically nothing useful by throwing out the most important parts of it.
Stop lying, Dipshit.
@Big Mike, yep, but because it's an ongoing operation fully ready for 2024, I chose the present tense.
Except that, as evidence of what is 'actually largely true,' Mr. Vance pointed to a 2021 Time article detailing a bipartisan effort not to advance a particular candidate but to safeguard the electoral system
is she really that stupid? or does she just think we are?
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন