Author Topic: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.  (Read 594924 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Cruz brings the Trump hot air balloon in for a landing
« Reply #1550 on: January 02, 2021, 10:12:56 PM »
https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=5541&fbclid=IwAR2ko2JYrpgfDZxfG1r6VMEXpZXUECeuGr3KmhedH0KsqpYbP-PDO7hB_SU

The letter:

"America is a Republic whose leaders are chosen in democratic elections. Those elections, in turn, must comply with the Constitution and with federal and state law.

"When the voters fairly decide an election, pursuant to the rule of law, the losing candidate should acknowledge and respect the legitimacy of that election. And, if the voters choose to elect a new office-holder, our Nation should have a peaceful transfer of power.

"The election of 2020, like the election of 2016, was hard fought and, in many swing states, narrowly decided. The 2020 election, however, featured unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.

"Voter fraud has posed a persistent challenge in our elections, although its breadth and scope are disputed. By any measure, the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes.

"And those allegations are not believed just by one individual candidate. Instead, they are widespread. Reuters/Ipsos polling, tragically, shows that 39% of Americans believe ‘the election was rigged.' That belief is held by Republicans (67%), Democrats (17%), and Independents (31%).

"Some Members of Congress disagree with that assessment, as do many members of the media.

"But, whether or not our elected officials or journalists believe it, that deep distrust of our democratic processes will not magically disappear. It should concern us all. And it poses an ongoing threat to the legitimacy of any subsequent administrations.

"Ideally, the courts would have heard evidence and resolved these claims of serious election fraud. Twice, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to do so; twice, the Court declined.

"On January 6, it is incumbent on Congress to vote on whether to certify the 2020 election results. That vote is the lone constitutional power remaining to consider and force resolution of the multiple allegations of serious voter fraud.

"At that quadrennial joint session, there is long precedent of Democratic Members of Congress raising objections to presidential election results, as they did in 1969, 2001, 2005, and 2017. And, in both 1969 and 2005, a Democratic Senator joined with a Democratic House Member in forcing votes in both houses on whether to accept the presidential electors being challenged.

"The most direct precedent on this question arose in 1877, following serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct in the Hayes-Tilden presidential race. Specifically, the elections in three states-Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina-were alleged to have been conducted illegally.

"In 1877, Congress did not ignore those allegations, nor did the media simply dismiss those raising them as radicals trying to undermine democracy. Instead, Congress appointed an Electoral Commission-consisting of five Senators, five House Members, and five Supreme Court Justices-to consider and resolve the disputed returns.

"We should follow that precedent. To wit, Congress should immediately appoint an Electoral Commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. Once completed, individual states would evaluate the Commission's findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote, if needed.

"Accordingly, we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not ‘regularly given' and ‘lawfully certified' (the statutory requisite), unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed.

"We are not naïve. We fully expect most if not all Democrats, and perhaps more than a few Republicans, to vote otherwise. But support of election integrity should not be a partisan issue. A fair and credible audit-conducted expeditiously and completed well before January 20-would dramatically improve Americans' faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President. We owe that to the People.

"These are matters worthy of the Congress, and entrusted to us to defend. We do not take this action lightly. We are acting not to thwart the democratic process, but rather to protect it. And every one of us should act together to ensure that the election was lawfully conducted under the Constitution and to do everything we can to restore faith in our Democracy."

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Hayward on Lin Wood
« Reply #1551 on: January 02, 2021, 10:31:07 PM »
Steven F. Hayward  (twitter)
@stevenfhayward
·
Dec 30, 2020
Starting to think Lin Wood is a double agent planted to discredit any reasonable doubts about the vote count.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Hayward on Lin Wood
« Reply #1552 on: January 02, 2021, 10:40:17 PM »
Steven F. Hayward  (twitter)
@stevenfhayward
·
Dec 30, 2020
Starting to think Lin Wood is a double agent planted to discredit any reasonable doubts about the vote count.

Can't say that's not the case.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1553 on: January 03, 2021, 02:48:38 AM »
Agreed.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1554 on: January 03, 2021, 03:29:44 AM »
Putting GM's post of post election violence to good use!

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Post-Election violence coverage globally
« Reply #1555 on: January 03, 2021, 06:34:23 AM »
Pretty amazing post, bringing this forward.

Let me see if I have this right. It's terrible and a threat to our democracy that Republicans are making LEGAL challenges to the obvious and unexplainable anomalies in this election, but if Trump had won fairly in the vote counts same opponents were promising to burn down the whole country literally. Which side again is recklessly threatening the peaceful transfer of power?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/stores-brace-for-post-election-unrest-and-possibility-of-violence-damage-to-businesses-after-presidential-results/ar-BB1aC9N5

From Vox (Official website of below average IQ leftists):

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/2/21546327/boarded-up-business-election-day-protests

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/02/nyregion/nyc-election-unrest.html

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1719045/national-guard-standby-shops-boarded-us-election-violence/

https://www.kboi.com/news/retailers-brace-for-election-day-violence-board-up-stores/

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/01/politics/extremism-violence-election-preparations-invs/index.html

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2020/nov/02/las-vegas-gun-stores-brace-for-worst-on-election-d/

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/10/people-are-already-being-targeted-america-braces-for-violence-as-election-day-draws-closer/

https://www.kitv.com/story/42856427/as-mainland-businesses-brace-for-election-day-violence-hawaii-lawmakers-are-confident-the-aloha-spirit-will-prevail

https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/fashion-beauty/article/3106622/fashion-stores-increase-security-fearing-us-election

https://turkishpress.com/us-cities-businesses-brace-for-post-election-violence/

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/atlanta-businesses-brace-possible-unrest-following-election-results/7LT6YRRJ5VA2BPKJQ5PZYIRSLM/

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54788626

https://www.newyorker.com/news/current/washington-dc-braces-for-election-night

https://www.cbs17.com/news/your-local-election-hq/as-some-prep-for-election-night-violence-in-raleigh-faith-leaders-call-for-calm/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8882091/Texas-prepares-send-1-000-troops-DC-begins-board-stores-ahead-election.html

https://www.ibtimes.com/election-violence-fears-rise-california-prepares-civil-unrest-walmart-pulls-guns-3072900

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-luxury-buildings-armed-guards-election-day-unrest

https://www.kbc.co.ke/us-businesses-brace-for-election-unrest/

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/us-election-business-leaders-disputed-result-calm-security-13447762

https://www.policemag.com/581259/american-law-enforcement-braces-for-election-riots

https://www.deccanherald.com/international/world-news-politics/anxious-americans-brace-for-election-day-with-faces-masked-stores-boarded-up-910759.html

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/marion-county/2020/11/02/indiana-election-2020-downtown-indianapolis-braces-unrest/6126603002/

https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30396714

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/election-results-2020-riots-trump-biden-b1700559.html

https://www.dawn.com/news/1588233

https://gizmodo.com/facebook-gears-up-for-possible-election-chaos-with-tool-1845479148

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1556 on: January 03, 2021, 07:50:22 AM »
Yes!  This is a huge point and one that we need to be making emphatically.

Great work by our GM!




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
The Cheat in Plain Sight
« Reply #1560 on: January 03, 2021, 03:42:03 PM »
This sort of stuff is a gap for me, and the source is not, IMHO, first tier; but FWIW here it is:

https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2021/01/03/the-cheat-in-plain-sight-n2582470



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1563 on: January 04, 2021, 08:55:51 AM »
https://www.theepochtimes.com/6-person-team-briefed-hundreds-of-state-senators-on-election-theft-evidence-navarro-says_3641503.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-01-04


Thumbs up on that.  Next, what is wrong with the idea of a 10 day audit that does not change the inauguration date or hinder the transition?  Didn't Democrats demand one more week investigation on Brett Kavanaugh, because it was a 'lifetime appointment'?  This election determines who makes the lifetime appointments.  Verifying the honesty and accuracy of the election does not undermine democracy. 

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: January 04, 2021, 02:56:07 PM by Crafty_Dog »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
NRO vs. Hawley and Cruz
« Reply #1565 on: January 05, 2021, 03:11:41 AM »
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/01/the-folly-of-the-cruz-eleven/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202021-01-04&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Josh Hawley is nothing if not a leader.

The Missouri Republican’s announcement last week that he would object to Biden electors from Pennsylvania immediately caused another eleven Republican senators, organized by Ted Cruz, to play catchup and declare they’d object to Biden electors from all the battleground states Trump is contesting.

Like Hawley, the Cruz group cites the precedent of 2005, when Senator Barbara Boxer joined objecting House Democrats to force a debate over whether to count George W. Bush electors from Ohio, the state that provided Bush’s margin of victory.

MORE IN ELECTORAL COLLEGE
A Week That Will Change America
Trump’s New Year’s Resolution: ‘Find 11,780 Votes’ in Georgia
Wednesday’s Electoral College Debate: All Eyes on Pence
It has always been axiomatic that Republicans shouldn’t emulate the former progressive senator from California, and never more so in this case. If the Cruz-led objectors somehow actually got their way, they’d trample federal law and state sovereignty and blow a hole in the hull of American democracy.

The Cruz eleven issued a statement justifying their position. Like Hawley’s statement last week, it doesn’t directly say that the election was stolen — the only possible basis for contesting the counting of electors. Presumably written carefully to allow the signatories plenty of wiggle room if their conduct doesn’t wear well, it instead says only that “the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes.”

NOW WATCH: '$600 Stimulus Relief Checks May Be Added to New Coronavirus Relief Proposal'

Of course, this is true only because the sitting president of the United States is amplifying such allegations every day, without regard to their truthfulness or connection to reality. The allegations themselves aren’t so different from those that fueled Democratic doubts about the outcome in Ohio in 2005 — e.g., voting machines have been used to switch votes. The difference is that back then, the losing candidate wasn’t promoting the outlandish charges, with many officeholders in his own party too frightened or cynical to contradict him.

Cruz et al. must know that nothing can be reasonably done to put the allegations to rest because Trump would keep repeating them until the election was overturned and he was awarded a second term (and even then, he still wouldn’t stop decrying the alleged crimes perpetrated against him on November 3).

The letter from the Cruz eleven states that “ideally, the courts would have heard evidence and resolved these claims of serious election fraud.” In point of fact, federal courts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Nevada did consider the Trump campaign’s claims on the merits, and they all found them wanting. The letter laments that the Supreme Court didn’t take up the factual questions, but the highest court in the land isn’t a random fact-finding body. The most prominent suit that landed on its desk was an attempt by Texas to throw out the results in key battlegrounds won by Biden. The court declined to hear the suit because it was so flagrantly constitutionally flawed.

The letter cites the contention over the notorious 1876 presidential election between Democrat Samuel Tilden and Republican Rutherford B. Hayes. Trying to draw an analogy to today, it refers to “serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct” in 1876, but this significantly understates it.

ALSO FROM
THE EDITORS
Britain’s Brexit Triumph
The Preposterous Louie Gohmert Lawsuit
A Necessary Relief Bill


In 1876, there weren’t just allegations; there was honest-to-God evidence of bribery and ballot stuffing on both sides in the chaotic atmosphere of Southern states still under Reconstruction. There were rival slates of electors from Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina. Black voters were subjected to horrific violence and intimidation to keep them from the polls.

To compare any of this to today is perverse. In Georgia, for instance, machine and hand recounts have confirmed the results, while a signature audit has found no evidence of endemic mismatches. Yet, the president of the United States is still calling the Republican secretary of state of Georgia to try to browbeat him into awarding him victory in the state based on misinformation and conspiracy theories.

JOIN THE TUESDAY
Get Kevin D. Williamson’s newsletter delivered to your inbox each Tuesday.


Email Address
The Cruz eleven call for an electoral commission on the model of the one that determined the outcome in 1877. Never mind that this commission was a travesty. The original idea was that the commission of five senators, five representatives, and five Supreme Court justices would be split 7–7 between Republicans and Democrats with Justice David Davis, an independent, providing the decisive vote. As it happened, though, the Illinois legislature elected Davis to the Senate, and his spot on the commission was taken by the Republican justice Joseph Bradley, who reliably voted with his GOP colleagues, giving Hayes an 8–7 victory on every contested question to get him the 20 additional electoral votes he needed to win. Hayes served only one term, which was overshadowed by the odor of the backroom deals that ensured his election.

Trump may like this model, assuming it is stacked in his favor. The problem is that, in reaction to the debacle of 1877, Congress adopted a statute giving states a “safe harbor” for their electors, i.e., assurance that they’d be considered conclusive by the federal government, if appointed six days prior to the Electoral College. All the contested states (except for Wisconsin) met this standard. No competing slate of electors was appointed by any legitimate body of any state government. The Cruz eleven propose to call into doubt the sole slate of state-appointed electors in each state anyway, and to essentially attempt to usurp what is supposed to be the state function of appointing electors. The federalists among the Cruz eleven know all this — at least they do when they aren’t currying favor with Donald Trump.

The Cruz eleven realize that their effort isn’t going anywhere. Both houses of Congress would have to vote to uphold objections to electors. Neither will, and neither should. If all they want to do is signal that they are upset that Biden won, this isn’t the manner or the forum to do it. Nor is this the proper way to examine underhanded electoral practices that did not alter the outcome, or to propose election reforms, however needed.

Barbara Boxer shouldn’t be a conservative role model.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Trump makes his vote fraud case
« Reply #1566 on: January 05, 2021, 09:00:41 AM »
In the middle and throughout his speech in Georgia last night, Trump laid out his case of vote fraud that swung the election.

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-speech-transcript-dalton-georgia-senate-runoff-election
... We won Iowa by 8.2%. Nobody’s ever won those three States and lost. Never happened before. It’s almost impossible unless people do a lot of … Either get very lucky or they cheat. We’re up 293,000 votes in Michigan, 112,000 votes in Washington. In Wisconsin we were way up, 356,000 votes. In Georgia, 356,000 and 700,000 votes in Pennsylvania. It was over. I should have run up to the podium and said, thank you very much for this wonderful victory. Then maybe they wouldn’t have had time to close those booths, the counting rooms, and do what they did. But then it all started to disappear. I tell this story because we can’t let this happen tomorrow, Kelly. So keep your eyes open. Since the election, we have put forth indisputable evidence documenting the rampant fraud, which will be announced on Wednesday as you know.

And I want to thank Senator Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz and all of the incredible senators that have stepped up to fight, because they’ve seen what happens. They know it’s a fraud and not just here. I watched some of the people on Fox. I had no choice. I had no choice. I had to. I didn’t have enough channels. And they said, “Why is he fighting for Georgia? It’s not enough.” And I need three. I’m fighting in eight, actually, but six and we’re going to win them all. But they said, “Why?” So one of the people, a very fine woman actually, but she said, “Why is he fighting Georgia? It doesn’t get him there.” I said, “No, but Georgia and Pennsylvania and one other get me there. And we have six and maybe eight, if you look at them and we were leading all of them by a lot, until, like a miracle, it started to quickly disappear.”

Right here in Georgia there were tens of thousands of illegal votes cast and counted. You know that. And here are just a few examples. Watch this for tomorrow. We were up 10,315 ballots were cast by individuals whose name and date of birth matches a Georgia resident who died in 2020 prior to the election. Then your wacky secretary of state said two people, two people. Now, I don’t know how many people are on that list, but it’s a lot of people. 2,506 ballots were cast by individuals whose name and date of birth matches an incarcerated felon in a Georgia prison. Maybe they aren’t all there, but they did a lot of work. They paid a lot of money to a lot of people. I can tell you that. 4,502 illegal ballots were cast by individuals who do not appear on the state’s voter rolls. Well, that’s sort of strange. 18,325 illegal ballots were cast by individuals who registered to vote using an address listed as vacant according to the postal service. At least 86,880 ballots were cast by people whose registrations were illegally backdated. Oh, I can’t believe that happened.

66,000 votes … You have to understand, we’re down by a little more than 11,000. So every one of these is determinative. 66,000 votes in Georgia were cast by people under the legal voting age. At least 15,000 ballots were cast by individuals who moved out of the state prior to the November 3rd election, or maybe they moved back in. I don’t know. I mean, I can’t tell. They moved out, ah, let’s go back. Usually takes a little time, right? We moved out. Let’s go back, darling. Georgia’s absentee ballot rejection rate went from an average of 3% in 2016, and then went down very low to almost zero now. Think of it, almost zero. If you multiply that out. And this is with many, many more ballots pouring in. Went to almost zero. 48 out of 159 counties in Georgia rejected no ballots at all. These absentee ballot rejection rates prove that the tens of thousands of illegitimate ballots were counted. There were more absentee ballots in 2020 than ever before by [inaudible 00:53:36]. But magically far fewer ballots were rejected. This alone is more than enough to swing the election to us. This one thing. I’m going over individual. In all of the swing States. Now they’ll check this out and that’s fine, but you take a look at it. Officials, egregiously violated state laws in order to solicit, facilitate and promote cheating and theft on a scale never seen before. These crooked and incompetent official suspended signature verification. I said, I want you to go to Fulton County to check the signatures, because hundreds of thousands of ballots came in. I want you to check the signature to see if it compares to somebody that lived there two years, four years or six years ago. They don’t want to do it. The secretary of state and your incompetent governor. Although he thinks I’ve been a great president. They illegally flooded their States with absentee ballots and they deployed hundreds of elicit ballot drop boxes and corrupt Democrat run cities, among many other flagrant violations of law.

They put these drop boxes there. And in a number of they’d be gone for three days. They’d take them up and where are they? Where are they? They were gone. Georgia secretary of state agreed to a litigation settlement, which is something that nobody’s ever seen one like this. I want to just tell you that Stacey Abrams took him to the cleaners. That drastically and illegally changed the states election procedures. They never got the mandated approval from your state legislature, who, by the way, you have some great people in your legislature. Some great, great people who agree with what we’re saying and even more so.

But think of it. They never got the approval. You have to, by law, under the constitution, you can’t just do these deals and not get the approval and your secretary of state or whoever it was, made this horrible consent decree, horrible, which got rid of so much safety. It’s a disgraceful thing. And it was only approved by your local politicians, him, and local judges. You can’t do that. You have to have your state legislatures do it. That’s true with all States. Tens of thousands of votes are missing. We go all over the world telling people how to run their elections and we don’t even know how to run ours. The most unhappy person right now, anywhere in the United States is Hillary Clinton. Because she’s asking the Democrat party, why the hell didn’t you do this for me? True. Why didn’t you do it for me? Why the hell didn’t you? You notice how quiet she’s been? I shouldn’t have said that, not tonight Jill. But you notice how quiet … she’s furious, because she said, “Don’t forget, I won Michigan by 10,000 votes.” We did much better. As I said, this time. Much, much better, but I won Michigan from her by 10,000 votes. I won Wisconsin by a small … I mean, they could have done that one and not get caught. We caught him, we caught him.

And I say to people like Mike Lee, that here at Lindsey, I say, if they got approved and verified, they use the word verified, votes that are fraudulent. And then we find out after, because you can’t do it that quickly. It doesn’t go that quickly. It’s a lot of work and a lot of votes and a lot of people. And then we find out that they were frauds like in one state where you had, let’s say you lost by 25,000 votes. They verify it. And that’s supposed to be the end. But shortly thereafter, we find out that we actually won the state by 250,000 votes. Does that mean that that state plus others adds up to being your president? I don’t think it should. I don’t think it should. I don’t think that Kelly feels it should. I don’t think that Marjorie feels it should. In Wisconsin over 90,000 ballots where illegally harvested. Can’t do that. Not allowed to.

Through so-called human drop boxes and over 500 illegal unmanned drop boxes were put out statewide. In addition, over 170,000 absentee votes were counted that are blatantly illegal under Wisconsin law and should never have been included in the tally. By the way, I lost the … It was razor thin. There’s 170,000 votes. The margin in Wisconsin is only 20,000 votes. So this issue alone would have won that state for us many times over, we were leading at 10 o’clock in the evening by a lot. In Pennsylvania, there were 205,000 more ballots cast than there were voters. How do you get around that one?

Which remains completely unexplained. You have great senators and representatives there and nobody can explain it, but think of that. And in other places too, you had more ballots than you had voters. You had more votes, think of it, then you had voters by a lot. In addition, Democrats, state Supreme court judges and Democrat secretary of state effectively abolished the signature verification process right here. They counted ballots cast after deadlines and they allowed ballots to be illegally fixed in Democrat controlled areas. And I say this because you can’t let this happen tomorrow. And I hope all the politicians are listening. There’s an unexplained 400,000 vote discrepancy between the number of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania sent out reported on November 2nd, 2020. And the number reported on November 4th. They can’t explain it. 400,000 previously unreported mail-in ballots, magically appeared. They couldn’t explain it. And all of a sudden they just happened to find 400,000. That’s a lot of people.

Amazing. And the Pennsylvania legislature is not happy. Pennsylvania also had an estimated 8,000 dead voters, 55,000 ballots received back before they were even sent. How about that? The ballots were received, but they weren’t sent yet. Oh, get them out fast please. Many more with no mail date and 14,000 ballots illegally cast by out of state voters. Those are the numbers and those are the numbers we got from them. So they can’t say, Oh, the numbers aren’t so good. In Clark County, Nevada, over 130,000 ballots, this is far, just so you know, all these numbers, these are far more than we need, we’re processed on machines where the signature matching threshold was intentionally lowered to a level that you could sign your name, Santa clause, and it wouldn’t pick it up. Didn’t pick up anything. More than 42,000 people in Nevada double voted. That’s more than we needed, by far.

In Arizona more than 36,000 votes were cast by non citizens. And there were 11,000 more ballots than there were voters. It seems to be a trait, doesn’t it? This was like at the Super Bowl, where you have 15 cameras and they’d say camera number four, you’re on. Camera number three, you’re on. In Michigan, according to one analyst, over 35,000 ballots listed no address, over 13 ballots were cast by non-residents and an estimated 17,000 ballots were cast by dead people. Some dead people, by the way, also requested an application through. Those are the ones that really bothered me. They not only vote, but they request an application. That’s a double. In addition, there is the highly troubling matter of Dominion voting machines.

And I want you to watch this very carefully tomorrow everybody, you have to watch it carefully. I want to read you from a letter from Georgia state Senator William Ligon. You know who he is, right? Highly respected guy. “Dear Mr president, as chairman of the Georgia Senate judiciary committee on elections. I request that you immediately send an outside team of cyber experts to investigate potential hacking and other irregularities associated with Dominion voting systems, scanners, ballot marking devices, ballots, polling pads used in the 2020 general election in Georgia.” You don’t hear this from your secretary of state and you don’t hear this from your governor and you do have a great legislature. I have to tell you, but the governor won’t let him hold the session to decertify. On December 30th, 2020, the committee held a hearing investigating potential fraud and other irregularities during Georgia’s 2020 general election.

The committee first unanimously approved a report dated December 17th, 2020, discussing a myriad of voting irregularities and potential fraud in Georgia 2020 general election, disgusted in an earlier hearing held on December 3rd. Notably the committee stated in the executive summary that the November 3rd 2020 general election was chaotic and reported results must be viewed as untrustworthy. They are untrustworthy, despite the line of crap that you hear from these people that represent you. I don’t know where they come from. The committee then heard, and this is from one of your most highly respected political representatives, the committee then heard additional testimony concerning voting irregularities during the 2020 general election, including testimony and a real time test demonstrating serious irregularities with Dominion’s voting machines. Three events discussed at this hearing standout and require a forensic auditor of the Dominion voting machines in Georgia to be immediately conducted.

The governor will not let us do it. We’ve been asking them now since November 4th, the day after the election, he won’t let us do it. Why won’t he let us do it? There’s only one reason I can think of. First the Dominion voting machines employed in Fulton County. That’s the home of Stacey. Had an astounding 93.67 error rate. 93.67 error rate in the scanning of ballots requiring a review panel to adjudicate or determine the voters intent. So they’re going to a voter intent. What did the voter mean by this vote? Somebody votes for Trump. I think that voter meant something other. He doesn’t want Trump. Let’s just switch it around.

Think of that. They’re trying to determine the voters intent in over 106,000 ballots out of a total of 113,000 ballots. This is from your representative, highly respected. The national average for such an error rate is far less than 1.2%. So, that was 93%. The source of this astronomical error rate must be identified to determine if these machines were set up were designated to allow for a third party to disregard the actual ballot cast by the registered voter. This is what I have. There was no way. Look at this crowd we have here. Biden came here. He had nobody.
...
Second, again from this very respected political leader, second, there is clear evidence that tens of thousands of votes were switched from president Trump to former vice president Biden in several counties throughout Georgia. For example, in Bibb County, anybody live in Bibb County? Bibb, Bibb, B-I-B-B. President Trump was reported to a 29,391 votes at 9:11 PM, while simultaneously former vice-president Joe Biden was reported to have 17,000 to 18. Minutes later at the next update these vote numbers switched with president Trump now having 17,000. And Biden now having 29,391. That was a switch of over 12,000 votes. It was like a miracle. Third, during this hearing, a presenter demonstrated that a Dominion Poll could be hacked into in real time because it was connected to the internet. Now, anything connected to the internet, that’s not good, but this demonstration proved that these machines could allow votes to be siphoned off or added during the voting process because they’re connected to the internet.

Cybersecurity experts agree that voting machines should not be connected to the internet at any time and in any way, shape or form. Did you see that during the hearing? This guy sitting there. Well, can you connect into the machines? Yes. How do you do that? Within about 25 seconds, he controlled the internet. Former vice-president Biden led Georgia by only 11,779 votes. Every one of the things I told you about almost is more votes than what we’re talking about. The crime that was committed in this state is immeasurable and immediate forensic audit of an appropriate sampling of Dominion’s voting machines and related equipment is critical to determine the level …

… Machines and related equipment is critical to determine the level of illegal fraudulent ballots, improperly counted in Georgia during the 2020 general election and during tomorrow’s race. You’ve got to be very careful. And, let me also quickly read a letter from Mark Finchem, chairman of the Arizona House, a very respected man, Federal Relations Committee. “Dear Mr. President, subsequent to the election, members of the legislature were inundated with complaints from constituents relating to the intensity of the general election, and the integrity more important than anything else, and the accuracy of canvassed results.” “In many instances, constituents reported that their earlier in-person ballots may not have been correctly processed, or tabulated in Maricopa County officials.” “Members of the legislature have conducted two public hearings in recent weeks during which significant evidence of fraudulent and illegal voting in Arizona has been demonstrated through expert and eyewitness testimony, for example, in Pima County and Maricopa County, it appears that 143,000 illegal votes were actually injected into the ballot system.” Think of that. No, but think of this.

Also, the press won’t report this, they probably turn it off, oh, we don’t like this. They don’t like this. They don’t want to talk about numbers. They talked about my phone call. They don’t like my phone call, everyone loved my phone call. They don’t like talking about numbers, because nobody knew the numbers were so egregious. Also, an expert mathematician concluded that the only explanation for the actual voting results in Arizona is that 100%… Think of this, 130% of Democrats voted for candidate Biden, and a negative 30% voted for President Trump. Now, think of that. In order to get to the numbers 130% of the voters, that’s a little tough to get, okay, had to vote for him, and minus 30 had to vote for me, and that gets you to a 100%. And, nobody has a 100% voting.  ...
------------
I can't pull it up but Wash Post 'Fact Check' says this speech contains nearly 20 falsehoods.  But all too often, the debunk is the bunk.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Was there signature verification in GA?
« Reply #1567 on: January 05, 2021, 10:03:51 AM »
GA had two recounts without signature verification.  Now I am hearing it asserted that after the recounts there was a signature verification that showed everything was fine.  True or false?

======================

https://townhall.com/columnists/markdavis/2021/01/05/as-the-electoral-challenge-approaches-dishonesty-abounds-on-both-sides-n2582564
« Last Edit: January 05, 2021, 11:33:16 AM by Crafty_Dog »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Was there signature verification in GA?
« Reply #1568 on: January 05, 2021, 02:49:57 PM »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
finger pointing begins
« Reply #1570 on: January 06, 2021, 06:24:08 AM »



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1573 on: January 07, 2021, 05:59:49 AM »
Looks like yesterday marks the season finale of the 2020 election fraud investigations.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Electoral process, vote fraud? Take it back to the State Lergislatures
« Reply #1574 on: January 07, 2021, 09:47:35 AM »
Congress just certified this election and sent the election system fraud system back to the state legislatures where it should have been fought in the first place.

Posted yesterday, 30 state legislatures are controlled by Republicans. 
https://ballotpedia.org/Partisan_composition_of_state_legislatures
Unfortunately, not all are run by the right Republicans.  Minnesota has a divided legislature.  The State Senate has the power to withhold their authorization for a lot of other things until change and compliance is enacted and enforced. That makes 31 states.  In the other 19 states, we are losing the elections there anyway, no need to cheat.

Phoenix, Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Milwaukee are Democrat-run cities in Republican controlled or partly controlled states.  There is no excuse for any of this to happen there again!

State legislatures have 'standing' under the constitution, as I understand it, to ensure the election is conducted exactly as they prescribe.  It's time to do that!  Not after the next cheat.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Cong. Dan Crenshaw
« Reply #1575 on: January 08, 2021, 09:13:21 AM »
It would have been nice if he mentioned the Dems objecting in 2001 and 2005, but the rest reads pretty well:


On Wednesday the Capitol of the most powerful nation the world has ever known was stormed by an angry mob. Americans surely never thought they’d see such a scene: members of Congress barricaded inside the House chamber, Capitol Police trampled, and four Americans dead. A woman was shot near the elevator I use every day to enter the House floor. It was a display not of patriotism but of frenzy and anarchy. The actions of a few overshadowed the decent intentions of many.

Why?

Perhaps we should ask our Founders. They were not oracles, but they were borderline prophets. In Federalist No. 68, Alexander Hamilton lays out the purpose of the Electoral College, arguing that an independent and decentralized body of electors should elect the president. “The choice of several, to form an intermediate body of electors, will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements.” According to Hamilton, the only people in America who should not be allowed to be named an elector would members of the House and Senate and any “other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States.” Electors would “exclude from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office.”


Our Founders thought it crucial to entrust a temporary body with electing the president for the simple reason that a standing body like Congress would face enormous pressure from voters, officeholders and interest groups. That could be, for example, pressure from a president or from 10,000 protesters outside the Capitol. For this reason, the Founders opted to diffuse responsibility to electors from each state.


They sought to avoid the exact situation we saw on Jan. 6. Millions of Americans were falsely led to believe that the final say in the election of our next president lay with a single body, Congress. And so it was no surprise that thousands showed up to make their voices heard. But the belief that Congress has any say whatever in the “certification” of electoral votes has never been true. It has always been unconstitutional and against our Founders’ intent, as it was when Democrats attempted the same stunt in 2005.

Article II of the Constitution lays out a clear role for Congress. “The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” It does not say “certify.” It does not say “object if you disagree.” It does not say “object and decertify if you feel the state’s certification is wrong.” The only contingency the Constitution provides is in the case of a failure of any candidate to reach an electoral majority.


The right of objection that members of Congress now invoke is derived from a misreading of the Electoral Count Act of 1887. It was passed in the wake of the disastrous presidential election of 1876, in which states certified competing slates of electors and sent both to Congress; a governor might send one slate and the legislature another. The 1887 law was meant to allow members of Congress to object to one of the competing slates of electors. But no state after the 2020 election has approved multiple slates, nor has any state legislature petitioned Congress to consider different electors. In fact, the law clearly states that so long as the final determination of electors is “made at least six days prior to the said time of meeting of the electors,” that slate of electors “shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution.” Thus the objections being considered on Jan. 6 had no legal basis.

The real cause of Wednesday’s unrest was that many officeholders and commentators misled millions of Americans to believe that the vote count was their final chance to have a say, and their last, best chance to fight for election integrity. Millions were lied to and told they had to fight at our Capitol or all would be lost. But Jan. 6 was merely ceremonial—with or without the protesters, the unconstitutional right of objection some lawmakers invoked would have resulted in nothing more than a couple of hours of debate.

The good news for those millions of Americans is this: It wasn’t your final say. It wasn’t your last chance. In our system of government, it never is. The concerns about election integrity are real, and they must be heard. The merits of these objections are real and substantive. There have been countless examples of states engaging in irresponsible and unverifiable election practices, casting doubt on election outcomes. Whether it is unverified signatures on mail-in ballots or lax voter-ID laws, a refusal to update registration rolls or a refusal to allow partisan observers to witness counting, there are many practices that must be changed.

The fight for these changes must be America’s greatest priority, because faith in democracy is our most urgent need. Republicans must champion these changes in the states, which the Constitution invests with primary responsibility for conducting elections. That is where our fight is. That is the hard work. And that must be our priority.

Mr. Crenshaw, a Republican, represents Texas’ Second Congressional District.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Very good piece on electoral college
« Reply #1576 on: January 09, 2021, 04:02:00 AM »
he Electoral College Saved the Election
From the 2020 primaries to the post-election furor, the founders’ system of election by states proved its democratic value.
By Christopher DeMuth
Jan. 8, 2021 2:22 pm ET

Scholars, pundits and progressives widely despise the Electoral College. They think it antiquated, irrational and undemocratic and argue for scrapping it in favor of a national popular vote.

But in 2020, when many hallowed American institutions submitted to street demonstrations and violence, the Electoral College proved a steadfast guardian of democracy. It can’t solve our problems on its own, but has given us a measure of stability to try for ourselves. A national popular election in 2020 would have made our problems immeasurably worse.

The essential feature of the Electoral College is voting for president by states. Each state has electoral votes equal to its delegation in the U.S. Congress—representatives (one for Vermont, 14 for Michigan, 53 for California, etc.) plus two senators. State legislatures determine the “manner” of casting their electoral votes, and 48 of them allocate those votes on a winner-take-all basis to the national ticket that receives the highest state popular vote. Maine and Nebraska select two electors by statewide vote and the remainder by congressional district.

As part of this design, states manage presidential elections along with those for other offices. They establish standards and procedures for voter eligibility, candidate ballot listing, mail-in voting, vote counting, challenges and recounts. The Constitution sets Inauguration Day as Jan. 20; federal statutes set a uniform Election Day in early November and a careful sequence of intermediate dates—for states to certify their election results and cast their electoral votes in December, and for their receipt by a joint session of Congress Jan. 6. To be elected president, a candidate must receive a majority of the electoral votes—at least 270 of the total 538.

Electoral votes are cast individually by electors, who gather in their state capitals in December. The Constitution’s framers conceived of electors as intermediaries between voters and candidates, but political parties soon assumed this role, choosing party stalwarts as electors pledged to their candidates. That has made the Electoral College assemblies largely ceremonial (there have been occasional “faithless electors,” but states can replace or penalize them). Still, newspapers ran many stories about electors who trekked to their state capitals to cast their votes on Dec. 14—diligently engaged in a constitutional practice that runs back to the election of George Washington in 1789.

The main complaints against the Electoral College are that it can elect someone who didn’t win the nationwide popular vote and that it causes candidates to campaign heavily in “battleground states” while ignoring those they think they are certain to carry or not. The winner almost always finishes first in the popular vote but has failed to do so a few times, including in 2000 and 2016.

These are certainly problems, but all election systems have problems, national popular vote included. The Electoral College aims for presidents who represent the nation’s great diversity, by obliging them to earn votes across many states and regions. It frequently bestows a broad-based majority mandate on a candidate who has won only a plurality of the national popular vote, which is particularly important in messy elections with three or more candidates. Abraham Lincoln received only 40% of the popular vote in 1860—but 59% of the Electoral College. Richard Nixon in 1968 won 43% of the popular vote but 56% of the Electoral College, and Bill Clinton in 1992 won 43% of the popular vote but 69% of the Electoral College.

Election by national popular vote would dispense with the need for continental diversification. Campaigns would focus on large, voter-rich metropolitan areas and media markets, and on appeals to national demographic and occupational groups. Presidential candidates wouldn’t need to immerse themselves in local issues. States, battleground or not, would disappear from the electoral calculus. The federal government would have to regulate voter and candidate qualifications, voting requirements and election procedures.

A national popular vote would turn America into a multiparty democracy. The two-party system, which took form as soon as Washington left the stage, is an artifact of the Electoral College and the states’ winner-take-all rules: Third parties have no chance of winning the electoral vote, and symbolic parties (the Libertarians) and personal crusaders ( Ross Perot, Ralph Nader ) hurt the major-party candidate closest to their own views. To achieve real influence, issue-driven groups make peace with one or both of the major parties, knowing that their candidates will need to compete for the nation’s political center in the general election. With a national popular vote, ideological movements and ambitious personalities would seek independent electoral mandates through distinctive, unmuddled parties. Incentives for party creation would be reinforcing: Each additional party would reduce the popular plurality needed to win the White House.

This problem has been a perennial stumbling block for national popular vote advocates. Their standard solution is a runoff election between the top two candidates. But a second national election would be costly and polarizing. Candidates would differentiate themselves with adamant appeals in the first election, and then, in the period before the runoff, bargain with the two frontrunners for support in exchange for cabinet appointments and policy commitments. But without a runoff, we are left with the miserable prospect of presidents with narrow parochial pluralities in elections with large majorities voting for others.

In 2020, the Electoral College began showing its stuff in March, when Joe Biden, who had done poorly in early primaries, suddenly emerged from a pack of far more vivid candidates to become the presumptive Democratic nominee. Party elders, led by Barack Obama, realized the key to the general election would be moderate suburban voters, including Trump-weary Republicans—many of whom were terrified of Bernie Sanders’s socialism and Elizabeth Warren’s economic populism. Mr. Biden’s opponents soon abandoned their campaigns.

A national popular vote would have accentuated rather than moderated the zealous enthusiasms roiling the Democratic Party. Mr. Sanders, Ms. Warren and Mike Bloomberg could have run as standard-bearers for their own parties in November, with bold platforms and energized followers clashing with each other and with Mr. Biden. With a multicandidate race looming, with or without a runoff, others would have been tempted to join the fray—perhaps Pete Buttigieg as millennial problem-solver, Tom Steyer as Green Party candidate, or Kamala Harris as Black Lives Matter champion.

These particulars are pure speculation. The important point is that the Electoral College consolidated and steadied a raucous, unsettled political situation, while a national popular vote would have given rein to the divisions and confusions of a stressed-out nation, including those in the Republican Party. Mr. Biden presented a public face of moderation, someone who could manage his party’s left wing and calm the streets. His campaign emphasized a return to presidential normalcy.

The great puzzle of 2020 is that President Trump didn’t follow the Electoral College logic. He certainly understood its power. As an outsider in 2016, he had spied a strategic minority in the Midwestern battleground states—disenchanted working-class voters, prominently white men, who had been left behind by globalization and ignored by both parties. Their pivotal role converted Mr. Trump, once a popular-vote advocate, to the Electoral College.

But he reprised his 2016 strategy without seeming to realize that circumstances had changed. His base was rock solid, and the swing voters were now the upmarket suburban moderates, especially women, in the states that proved decisive in 2016. Broadly speaking, these voters appreciated Mr. Trump’s record on the economy and employment (before the pandemic), judicial appointments and breakthrough policies toward China and the Middle East—but were offended by his rowdy, abusive comportment and exhausted by his incessant tweeting and 24/7 domination of national life.

The Electoral College strategy would have been for Mr. Trump to adopt a thoroughly presidential mien as an incumbent who had outfoxed a hostile political establishment, delivered many policy successes, learned from his mistakes and earned a second term. The brilliant GOP convention in August—with its emphasis on opportunity, diversity and faith—pointed the way to an optimistic campaign rather than an angry one. But the president stuck with his rancorous persona. He ended up doing better than in 2016 with his working-class base and with black and Latino voters—but decisively worse with suburban Republicans and independents and in middle-class communities across the battleground states.

The Electoral College—having done all it could do to mediate the campaign, having delivered in classic fashion on Election Day—saved its strongest performance for last. In the days following the election, Mr. Trump proclaimed he had won in a landslide only to have victory snatched away by massive election fraud. Many of his supporters—aware that the Democrats, media, and permanent government were willing to play dirty—rallied boisterously to his side.

The president’s claims were then adjudicated over several weeks in scores of local forums by hundreds of state and local election officials and state and federal judges, in six battleground states whose initial returns had gone narrowly for Mr. Biden—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The Trump team won a few procedural rulings, but ultimately lost every significant claim, drawing sharp rebukes for the flimsiness of its claims from several judges, including Trump appointees.
As the court losses mounted, Mr. Trump called on Republican legislatures to cast their states’ electoral votes directly for him, and on state governors and election officials to recalibrate their election results in his favor. In every case, he was firmly rebuffed. The states certified their final election results, and the 538 electors, meeting on Dec. 14, elected Mr. Biden, 306–232. Their votes were counted before a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6-7, where vote challenges were rejected on grounds of constitutional deference to the state certifications, even as a mob of Trump partisans stormed the Capitol, incited by the president’s mad claim that the session might reverse the election result.

This was the Electoral College system of diversified, independent, state-centered authority in action—steering sturdily through gales of hysteria, settling an election in an exceedingly dangerous storm. There had been more than the usual election irregularities, arising from lax procedures for mail-in voting and late counting introduced shortly before the election, and these certainly justify a commission of inquiry and tighter procedures in future elections. But if enough fraud and chicanery had existed to steal the election, hard evidence would have turned up somewhere. The most conspicuous irregularities were Mr. Trump’s own egregious efforts to subvert the Electoral College’s structure and procedures, which are ending his presidency in ruination and disgrace.

It wasn’t a pretty picture—but consider the picture under a national popular vote with national election standards and procedures. Incentives for vote rigging would be nationwide rather than limited to battleground states, and any recount would have to be nationwide as well. Election administration would perforce be vested in an executive-branch agency headed by the president. The agency might be a bipartisan commission with lengthy terms of office, but to be effective it would need a tie-breaking vote, cast by an official from one party or the other (or from one of multiple parties). It would be widely assumed that the president exercised significant control—and a president who would publicly berate state legislators and governors, and the Supreme Court and his own attorney general, as Mr. Trump did, would certainly try to exert such control.

We can only guess where such a spectacle might lead. Clearly, however, the settlement of a tumultuous election against a defiant incumbent shouldn’t be left to the government he leads. Even in more-normal times, a uniform national election would give Washington troublesome leverage over the succession of the country’s presidency. Succession is a difficult problem in a fractious democracy, but no one has come up with a better approach than the dispersed local stewardship embodied in the Electoral College. It is, indeed, one of our strongest defenses against the centralization of power in the federal capital and the administrative state, which is an important source of our current distempers.

Mr. DeMuth is a distinguished fellow at the Hudson Institute. This article draws on his essay, “The Electoral College by Dawn’s Early Light,” appearing in the Winter 2020–21 issue of the Claremont Review of Books.
Comments


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« Reply #1578 on: January 09, 2021, 11:17:02 AM »
".In the code hanky panky in VA"

yes how can it be the vote totals go down rather then up during the count

unless someone erases them ?


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: FBI comes to DC elite rescue again
« Reply #1580 on: January 10, 2021, 07:07:14 AM »
got to preserve democracy!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/breaking-fbi-claims-jurisdiction-yesterday-took-control-shredded-ballots-analyzed-georgia-sends-back-shredder/


"The FBI demanded that they had jurisdiction of the review of ballots in Georgia.  Then yesterday the FBI took control of the shredding truck and materials and demanded the shredding operation be completed."

I thought the point of the failed federal legal challenges was that these election are state run.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: FBI comes to DC elite rescue again
« Reply #1581 on: January 10, 2021, 08:14:04 AM »
https://www.justice.gov/usao-nh/pr/federal-election-fraud-fact-sheet

If only there were some federal laws that the DOJ/FBI could use to investigate/prosecute electoral/vote fraud....


got to preserve democracy!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/breaking-fbi-claims-jurisdiction-yesterday-took-control-shredded-ballots-analyzed-georgia-sends-back-shredder/


"The FBI demanded that they had jurisdiction of the review of ballots in Georgia.  Then yesterday the FBI took control of the shredding truck and materials and demanded the shredding operation be completed."

I thought the point of the failed federal legal challenges was that these election are state run.



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
"Ballot harvesting charges in Texas"
« Reply #1584 on: January 14, 2021, 05:22:11 AM »
amazing
buy votes for *$5 *. !!!!

multiply that by $50,000.
that would be enough for 10,000 illegal votes

OF COURSE this election was stolen!
And judges paying her to get name on ballots too.

YET ->

The zucker news mafia reply:

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/01/13/cnns-tapper-questions-double-amputee-purple-heart-recipient-gop-rep-masts-commitment-to-democracy/


« Last Edit: January 14, 2021, 05:41:03 AM by ccp »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
election fraud , or not?
« Reply #1585 on: January 15, 2021, 12:53:02 PM »
https://populist.press/bombshell-fulton-county-elections-caught-on-video-discussing-stealing-votes/

I have to admit after watching and reading the subtitles
I cannot say with any degree of certainty
that these polls workers are talking about falsifying ballots

they might be .

I can't tell .  Am I missing something ?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: election fraud , or not?
« Reply #1586 on: January 15, 2021, 01:03:55 PM »
Well, the dems are insisting on a serious investigation of all allegations of electoral/voting fraud, right? After all, they won fair and square, so of course they are demanding one, right?

https://populist.press/bombshell-fulton-county-elections-caught-on-video-discussing-stealing-votes/

I have to admit after watching and reading the subtitles
I cannot say with any degree of certainty
that these polls workers are talking about falsifying ballots

they might be .

I can't tell .  Am I missing something ?


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: election fraud , or not?
« Reply #1588 on: January 15, 2021, 02:44:35 PM »
They're crooked.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: election fraud , or not?
« Reply #1589 on: January 15, 2021, 04:16:40 PM »
They're crooked.

At least we still have the constitution!

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: GA signature verification audit
« Reply #1593 on: January 17, 2021, 05:24:04 AM »
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/audit-of-georgia-countys-15-000-absentee-ballot-signatures-turns-up-zero-fraud-01609368663?fbclid=IwAR1Dr_eaNjdSDjMoi-OZbXpowWEuKMVJW2qOQrXMoJBPpXevIiFYePuM_f0

Does this mean an end to this issue for GA?

That's a start. Let's hunt down and prosecute every incident of vote fraud after every election.  The investigation is the deterrent.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: GA signature verification audit
« Reply #1594 on: January 17, 2021, 10:27:37 AM »
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/audit-of-georgia-countys-15-000-absentee-ballot-signatures-turns-up-zero-fraud-01609368663?fbclid=IwAR1Dr_eaNjdSDjMoi-OZbXpowWEuKMVJW2qOQrXMoJBPpXevIiFYePuM_f0

Does this mean an end to this issue for GA?

That's a start. Let's hunt down and prosecute every incident of vote fraud after every election.  The investigation is the deterrent.

Dem controlled AG/DA offices will do no such thing.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Lindell thinks he has "proof" of machine fraud
« Reply #1597 on: January 17, 2021, 11:20:50 AM »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Coup
« Reply #1599 on: January 18, 2021, 02:01:52 PM »