TEXTILE GUY
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2012
- Messages
- 12,486
Veracity of the claims?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
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."
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 -
![]()
Trump's election fight includes over 50 lawsuits. It's not going well.
"Calling an election unfair does not make it so," one ruling said.www.nbcnews.com
Most of the cases that actually allege fraud were withdrawn by the plaintiff.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.
Tea Party nutjobs...
Thank you for detailing this.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 -
![]()
Trump's election fight includes over 50 lawsuits. It's not going well.
"Calling an election unfair does not make it so," one ruling said.www.nbcnews.com
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
Ooh... Precrime.Collusion Greg, collusion and the point was before the investigation there was no evidence. Thanks for playing.
Ooh... Precrime.
Tell me more, Gnarlio.
Why, so you can present me with a wall of gifs. No thanks.
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.![]()
'I Don't Think She Deserved to Die': Black Activist Who Filmed Ashli Babbitt Shooting Speaks Out
Activist and video journalist John Sullivan describes how he captured raw, comprehensive footage of the chaos and violence at the storming of the U.S. Capitolwww.rollingstone.com
John Sullivan was there as a video journalist. The tea party have always been nutjobs though.
On second thought, this could work. After all, she personally created 14 million jobs out of 6.3 million jobs created in USA. If she scales this to voters, we have a winner.I wonder if Ivanka Trump may run in 2024? She may actually not be that bad a president. Overall she seems to be a sensible person.
No going to lie, I'm absolutely loving the online citizen-sleuthing that's identifying so many of these f**kers.