Joe Biden defeats Trump to win US election

Status
Not open for further replies.

buka001

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
10,250
if you want to pretend the volume and veracity of irregularity claims with this election were par for the course that's your problem

anyone who was paying any attention at all will instinctively know that can't be possible
Veracity of the claims?

Of the 66 cases, only some of them alleged fraud. Some of them looked to kick out votes due to procedural matters, relating largely to mail in voting.

Some courts did hear the claims of voter fraud and still chucked them out as baseless.

A summary from back in December shows what the alleged merits were -


Most of the cases that actually allege fraud were withdrawn by the plaintiff. Quite a peculiar decision by the plaintiff, if they have such a wealth of evidence?

In Michigan the case of voter fraud was heard by 7 judges and was kicked out.

Another case was denied for inadmissible hearsay upon hearsay evidence.

A vote fraud case in Wisconsin was heard and the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case.

In a Sydney Powell fraud case the judge said this -

The allegations they put forth to support their claims of fraud fail in their particularity and plausibility. Plaintiffs append over three hundred pages of attachments, which are only impressive for their volume. The various affidavits and expert reports are largely based on anonymous witnesses, hearsay, and irrelevant analysis of unrelated elections."

It goes on.

Why did they not take the evidence to the police? In PA two Trump voters were caught voting twice and were referred to the police.

Sooooo you are being disingenuous with your regurgitated Qanon claims. A fair margin of cases did not allege fraud, where they related to efforts to wipe out votes cast by mail and similar means. They were mostly kicked due issues like jurisdiction and time related matters. Mainly because such cases needed to come before the election and in many cases they were in accordance with the very rules set by the Republicans who were now trying to overturn their own rules.

The cases that did allege fraud mostly resulted in plaintiffs withdrawing. Some cases did reach a judge and were evaluated on their merits and kicked for lack of evidence.

It begs the question why withdraw your owncase of fraud, when you have sooooo much evidence of the largest scale of voting fraud in American history ...

You largely ignore the fact that actual cases of fraud can be reported to the police and justice department, as was done in PA and investigated, which led to the arrest of two people, for voting on behalf of their dead mothers.

The Justice Department, run by Trump appointee, William Barr has explicitly stated that they have not encountered any large scale cases of fraud, as alleged.
 

AfricanTech

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
36,316
Veracity of the claims?

Of the 66 cases, only some of them alleged fraud. Some of them looked to kick out votes due to procedural matters, relating largely to mail in voting.

Some courts did hear the claims of voter fraud and still chucked them out as baseless.

A summary from back in December shows what the alleged merits were -


Most of the cases that actually allege fraud were withdrawn by the plaintiff. Quite a peculiar decision by the plaintiff, if they have such a wealth of evidence?

In Michigan the case of voter fraud was heard by 7 judges and was kicked out.

Another case was denied for inadmissible hearsay upon hearsay evidence.

A vote fraud case in Wisconsin was heard and the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case.

In a Sydney Powell fraud case the judge said this -



It goes on.

Why did they not take the evidence to the police? In PA two Trump voters were caught voting twice and were referred to the police.

Sooooo you are being disingenuous with your regurgitated Qanon claims. A fair margin of cases did not allege fraud, where they related to efforts to wipe out votes cast by mail and similar means. They were mostly kicked due issues like jurisdiction and time related matters. Mainly because such cases needed to come before the election and in many cases they were in accordance with the very rules set by the Republicans who were now trying to overturn their own rules.

The cases that did allege fraud mostly resulted in plaintiffs withdrawing. Some cases did reach a judge and were evaluated on their merits and kicked for lack of evidence.

It begs the question why withdraw your owncase of fraud, when you have sooooo much evidence of the largest scale of voting fraud in American history ...

You largely ignore the fact that actual cases of fraud can be reported to the police and justice department, as was done in PA and investigated, which led to the arrest of two people, for voting on behalf of their dead mothers.

The Justice Department, run by Trump appointee, William Barr has explicitly stated that they have not encountered any large scale cases of fraud, as alleged.

Belief, instinct...
 

Tofu

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
353


John Sullivan was there as a video journalist. The tea party have always been nutjobs though.
 

Aquila ka Hecate

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Messages
6,067
Veracity of the claims?

Of the 66 cases, only some of them alleged fraud. Some of them looked to kick out votes due to procedural matters, relating largely to mail in voting.

Some courts did hear the claims of voter fraud and still chucked them out as baseless.

A summary from back in December shows what the alleged merits were -


Most of the cases that actually allege fraud were withdrawn by the plaintiff. Quite a peculiar decision by the plaintiff, if they have such a wealth of evidence?

In Michigan the case of voter fraud was heard by 7 judges and was kicked out.

Another case was denied for inadmissible hearsay upon hearsay evidence.

A vote fraud case in Wisconsin was heard and the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case.

In a Sydney Powell fraud case the judge said this -



It goes on.

Why did they not take the evidence to the police? In PA two Trump voters were caught voting twice and were referred to the police.

Sooooo you are being disingenuous with your regurgitated Qanon claims. A fair margin of cases did not allege fraud, where they related to efforts to wipe out votes cast by mail and similar means. They were mostly kicked due issues like jurisdiction and time related matters. Mainly because such cases needed to come before the election and in many cases they were in accordance with the very rules set by the Republicans who were now trying to overturn their own rules.

The cases that did allege fraud mostly resulted in plaintiffs withdrawing. Some cases did reach a judge and were evaluated on their merits and kicked for lack of evidence.

It begs the question why withdraw your owncase of fraud, when you have sooooo much evidence of the largest scale of voting fraud in American history ...

You largely ignore the fact that actual cases of fraud can be reported to the police and justice department, as was done in PA and investigated, which led to the arrest of two people, for voting on behalf of their dead mothers.

The Justice Department, run by Trump appointee, William Barr has explicitly stated that they have not encountered any large scale cases of fraud, as alleged.
Thank you for detailing this.
I know - anyone who follows current affairs knows - that this was the case, but it seems trumpanzees and the like live in a differnent plenum.
PS: even my initially Trump-supporting partner knows this. His brain is still intact, I guess.
 

Gnarls

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
3,983
Mueller was appointed by the deputy AG. The actual Attorney General that had this to say about the election...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...4dcaa8-340a-11eb-8d38-6aea1adb3839_story.html




Surely it's up to the attorney general to decide if a special prosecutor for an investigation is to be appointed based on their being sufficient evidence to support an investigation?

Yeah, but there was no evidence of Russian Collusion, and yet there was a special investigation to investigate claims of collusion. Just trying to use consistent logic.

You don't understand. Trumpets expect these people to do an investigation to find evidence for the QAnon conspiracy theory claims that they themselves have no evidence for.

Could you please stop trying to explain my position for me? Your opinion on what you think I expect is hopelessly wrong. As @Cray asked me, what is it with you and the collective. Who said I ever believed QAnon?
 

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
21,952
Yeah, but there was no evidence of Russian Collusion, and yet there was a special investigation to investigate claims of collusion. Just trying to use consistent logic.



Could you please stop trying to explain my position for me? Your opinion on what you think I expect is hopelessly wrong. As @Cray asked me, what is it with you and the collective. Who said I ever believed QAnon?




 

SlinkyMike

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
7,320
Regarding Trump not wanting to pay Giuluani, I wonder if it is that Trump really believed what Giuliani was selling him, namely that Giuliani would have the election results overturned, but that Trump now realises that he was duped, and has buyer's remorse?

I think it was Giuliani who was grifted bro. Who goes into an agreement with a notorious bilker on the basis of 'we'll sort it out at the end' dumb-dumbs, all the way down.
 

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
21,952
Why, so you can present me with a wall of gifs. No thanks.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
42,635
Only tangentially related to the elections, but this study is fascinating:


Vancouver Gave Homeless People $5,800. It Changed Their Lives.​

A single infusion of cash helped recipients pay their rent, get to work — and put their lives back on track.


For Zhao, a major takeaway is the potential cost savings of a program like this for the government. Because of the reduced nights spent in emergency shelters, each cash recipient saved the government roughly $8,000 over the course of the year. Less the cost of the cash transfer, each cash recipient produced a net savings of more than $600 — and were substantially further along the path of pulling themselves out of poverty, experiencing a much more balanced life than they might have in the shelter system. While the pilot project was funded by Foundations for Social Change, which is primarily supported by foundation grants, Zhao says this evidence points to an obvious policy solution.
 

The Trutherizer

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
4,271

John Sullivan was there as a video journalist. The tea party have always been nutjobs though.
I think her death is tragic, considering the misguided reasons why she was there, but she did choose to attempt to cross a line that security would not let anybody cross at any cost.
She tried to cross the ultimate line there on that day, and paid the ultimate price for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top