Voter Fraud !

by Sea Breeze 70 Replies latest social current

  • millie210
    millie210

    I think Biden will be President.

    I think one good thing is the next election will be much more fraud proof. Whoever wins it is going to have to really win it.

  • pistolpete
    pistolpete

    I think Biden will be President.

    I think one good thing is the next election will be much more fraud proof. Whoever wins it is going to have to really win it.

    I was thinking the same thing. Imagine now every Democrat that wants to run for President and is aware of how to commit Fraud in Presidential elections. They know how it works. And Every Republican now knows that if you want to win, you need to prepare against fraud.

    It's simple survival instincts. If someone breaks into my home and beats me to a pulp, and hurts my family, and we all survive, it would be stupid and idiotic on our part to do absolutely NOTHING. Might as well just leave all the windows open at night and get rid of the doors completely.

    Instead a reasonably person will prepare for the next break-in. Extra locks on all windows, strong doors, security system in place, Bright lights to shine on everything outside to see the danger coming from far away.

    If Republicans don't fix the elections process and prepare for next election, then they just deserve to lose. Heaven forbid if someone with that type of attitude running the Country and sees all the signs that North Korea is getting ready to attack American and they do absolutely nothing. Then when they finally see 30 mushrooms clouds in the 30 biggest cities of the USA they start crying----NOT FAIR---NOT FAIR!.

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    From today's news-conference : Here are the major claims that the Trump legal teams says they can back up:

    1. Observers were allegedly prevented from watching mail-in ballots being opened. Giuliani said that many mail-in ballots were opened without observers being able to check that they were properly signed, a key protection against fraud. Those votes, he said, were “null and void,” especially where the envelopes had been discarded, making recounts useless.

    2. Allegedly unequal application of the law in Democratic counties. In Pennsylvania, whose state supreme court created new, relaxed voting rules before the election, Giuliani alleged that absentee voters in Democratic counties were allowed to “cure” defects in their ballots, while voters in Republican counties, which obeyed the state law as written, were not.

    3. Voters allegedly arrived at the polls to discover other people had voted for them. Giuliani said that many provisional ballots cast in Pittsburgh were submitted by people who showed up to vote in person, only to be told that they had voted already. He alleged that Democrats had filled out absentee ballots for other people, hoping they would not show up.

    4. Election officials were allegedly told not to look for defects in ballots, and to backdate ballots. Giuliani cited an affidavit from an official who swore she was told not to exclude absentee ballots for defects, and to backdate ballots so they would not appear to have been received after Election Day, to avoid a Supreme Court order to sequester those ballots.

    5. Ballots casting votes for Joe Biden and no other candidates were allegedly run several times through machines. Giuliani said that there were 60 witnesses in Michigan who would attest to ballots being “produced” quickly and counted twice or thrice. He said that a minimum of 60,000 ballots, and a maximum of 100,000 ballots, were allegedly affected.

    6. Absentee ballots were accepted in Wisconsin without being applied for first. Giuliani noted that Wisconsin state law was stricter regarding absentee ballots than most other states are, yet alleged that 60,000 absentee ballots were counted in the Milwaukee area, and 40,000 in the Madison area, without having been applied for properly by the voters who cast them.

    7. There were allegedly “overvotes,” with some precincts allegedly recording more voters than residents, among other problems. Giuliani said there was an unusually large number of overvotes in precincts in Michigan and in Wisconsin, which he alleged was the reason that Republicans on the Wayne County Board of Canvassers had refused to certify the results there this week. He also alleged that there were some out-of-state voters in Georgia, and people who had cast votes twice there.

    8. Voting machines and software are allegedly owned by companies with ties to the Venezuelan regime and to left-wing donor George Soros. Sidney Powell argued that U.S. votes were being counted overseas, and that Dominion voting machines and Smartmatic software were controlled by foreign interests, manipulating algorithms to change the results. Powell noted specifically that Smartmatic’s owners included two Venezuelan nationals, whom she alleged had ties to the regime of Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro. The legal team alleged that there were statistical anomalies, such as huge batches of votes for Biden, that could not be explained except as manipulation — which, they alleged, happened in the wee hours of the morning as vote-counting had stalled. (The companies have disputed these allegations vigorously.)

    9. The Constitution provides a process for electing a president if the vote is corrupted. Jenna Ellis argued that the media, had usurped the power to declare the winner of the election. She made the point, citing Federalist No. 68, that the constitutional process of selecting a president had procedural safeguards against corruption and foreign influence.
    Giuliani said that the campaign believed that enough votes were flawed — more than double the margins between Biden and Trump in key states — that the president had a path to victory.

    Giuliani presented evidence in the form of sworn affidavits, citing two and noting that the campaign had many more from private individuals.

    He noted that several lawsuits that had been dismissed had been filed by private individuals, not the campaign directly. He said lawsuits might be filed in Arizona, and that the campaign was also examining irregularities in New Mexico and Virginia, though he said he did not think there were enough disputed votes in the latter.

    Giuliani also took on the media, arguing that they had provided misleading information and condoned threats against Trump’s legal team.

  • RickJones
    RickJones

    So maybe there wasn't voter fraud happening or a minuscule amount nothing really to effect the overall vote count from State to State ?

    Shocking !!!

  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    Here in the U.K we are assured that no fraud takes place. But in our General Election in Dec. '19 there were a lot more than normal Postal Votes, The BBC Political Reporter Laura Kuennsberg (spelling ?) blabbed out that they were in the majority Votes for the Conservative ( = Republican) Party, BEFORE THE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT !

    Now, how did she know ? The count of all Votes was done by a Company that was owned by Conservatives and was set up shortly before the G.E and was wound up a few days after the G.E.

    But we are assured Voter fraud or similar did not happen. ?? We have just received a letter from our Conservative leader of our Conservative County Council urging us to Vote by Post and enclosing the Forms.

    Nothing suspicious about this move either, which has never ever been done before, I suppose ?

  • Funky
    Funky
    Here are the major claims that the Trump legal teams says they can back up

    Well, if they can back it up, why haven't they done so?

    Dozens - literally DOZENS of cases have been laughed out of court because The Gang That Couldn't Sue Straight can't back it up.

    Sigh....one more time:

    Allegations presented by sweaty, hair-dye-dripping attorneys in a press conference are, now follow me here, not really evidence.

    If there is evidence, produce in court. Otherwise, just shut up already.

    *Spoiler alert* There is no evidence.

    *Spoiler alert 2* If your case depends on tying voting machines to a South American dictator who's been dead for 7+ years....you might not have a very strong case.

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    Well, if they can back it up, why haven't they done so?

    If there is evidence, produce in court

    They are in the process of doing this.

    Investigations of vote fraud don't go along at the pace you'd personally prefer. ;)

    *Spoiler alert* There is no evidence - this isn't for you to decide, sunshine. Let the lawyers and judges do their jobs.

  • TD
    TD

    So have followed any of these cases LUHE?

    They're all pretty mundane compared to the wild conspiracy theories those who believe YouTube is a credible source seem to accept.

    The last one left in my state is the claim that ballots filled out with a felt tip pin could not be read by the machine, which is probably going to be laughed out of court too.

  • Funky
    Funky
    Investigations of vote fraud don't go along at the pace you'd personally prefer.

    I'm not an attorney, nor do I play on TV, but I've seen enough episodes of "Law and Order" to understand that investigations are typically done prior to presenting a case in court.

    There have been 30+ court cases - if I were a judge, and one side's attorney said to me "I'd love to answer your question, your honor, but we're still investigating", I'd pitch that attorney out of court.

    As has been done 30+ times (and counting).

    Let the lawyers and judges do their jobs.

    They have been.

    All the opposing attorneys and judges say the exact same thing - "no evidence".

    Bloody hell, Trump's own lawyers admit that there was no fraud in some of the cases being tried for, erm, fraud.

    If you can point me to a specific particular case, and a judge who has agreed that there is indeed evidence worthy of consideration, by all means, provide me with a link. I'd love to read it.

  • Funky
    Funky
    Exhibit 3,857 from The Gang That Couldn't Sue Straight:

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/11/do-trumps-lawyers-know-what-they-are-doing.php?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=sw&utm_campaign=sw

    Trump's team <snort> Ha...ha...<guffaw>...they....har....oh I can't go on....

    They have submitted an affadavit from someone purportedly identifying "irregularities" from a series of precincts & towns in Michigan.

    Ooops, wait a minute...

    Here’s the problem: the townships and precincts listed in paragraphs 11 and 17 of the affidavit are not in Michigan. They are in Minnesota.
    Evidently a researcher, either Mr. Ramsland or someone working for him, was working with a database and confused “MI” for Minnesota with “MI” for Michigan. (The postal code for Minnesota is MN, while Michigan is MI, so one can see how this might happen.) So the affidavit, which addresses “anomalies and red flags” in Michigan, is based largely, and mistakenly, on data from Minnesota.
    This is a catastrophic error, the kind of thing that causes a legal position to crash and burn. Trump’s lawyers are fighting an uphill battle, to put it mildly, and confusing Michigan with Minnesota will at best make the hill steeper. Credibility once lost is hard to regain. Possibly Trump’s lawyers have already discovered this appalling error, and have undertaken to correct it. But the Ramsland Affidavit was filed in Georgia just yesterday.

    Oh my stars.

    I just...there aren't even words....

    Well maybe there is one. Rhymes with "Fustercluck".

    EDIT: Oh, one more thing.

    In anticipation of this site's resident geniuses either coming up with "Oh, you're quoting some liberal blog" or "well, they got the states mixed up but they still uncovered fraud":

    Powerline is a reliably pro-Trump site. They really believe fraud "must have" taken place. The article is bewailing the ineptitude (is that the understatement of the year?) of Trump's legal team.

    And, even though the author really believes there is fraud "somewhere out there", here is what he himself writes:

    A postscript: has Mr. Ramsland inadvertently stumbled across evidence of voter fraud in Minnesota? I seriously doubt it. The venues in question are all in red Greater Minnesota, not in the blue urban areas where voter fraud is common.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit