OK, now we descend into the STOLEN election

[unixed]

Gabriel Sterling, a Republican who is the Georgia Voting System Implementation Manager, was desperate to convince Republican voters that they should vote ahead of the senatorial elections -- some were saying it was a pointless exercise since the outcome was a foregone conclusion -- you can see he made a sterling effort.
When you say "voter fraud" you're saying someone is performing it, someone is allowing it, someone can't prevent it, someone is colluding etc. His staff were turned into targets.
If you don't understand something or someone on this forum can't answer your question to your satisfaction, that does not then provide the logical basis for you to conclude that fraud occurred, could have occurred or could go undetected. You can contact him, he'll be able to answer your questions.

As it happens some people did make specific allegations, and they are being sued by the voting machine companies. If they can't back up their claims when billions are at stake then you know what their claims are worth. This is beating a dead horse, someone else earlier in the thread has listed the people and organisations who have vouched for the integrity of the elections. People like Gabriel Sterling have earned my admiration in this whole saga -- he knew the election was fair, he would not say otherwise under immense pressure, he wants as many people to vote as possible and wanted the Republican Party to win. In contrast these latest measures by many* State Republicans perpetuate the unfounded claims that the elections weren't fair by introducing "counteractive" measures that seek to entrench power by limiting voting rather than winning over voters by being the better Party.

*edit: Republican Kentucky state legislators who actually expand voting access by themselves force me to include this qualification. Backbones of steel, just like the Appalachians that run through their State.

[pkiff]

And all of this with evidence of almost no voter fraud in the current system.

This is not a correct statement. Maybe "almost no evidence of voter fraud" is more correct. Then again, you do realize that in virtually all the cases where "Team Trump had failed to provide evidence" it was because the courts did not allow them to present evidence? They simply refused to even consider the case way before the stage of presenting evidence. Probably because they would rather keep a broken system, rather than shed light on how badly broken this system is.

For a moment there, I thought perhaps we had just about finished with dealing with claims of election fraud in this thread. But I admit, I have been missing digging into some of these rabbit holes. This claim that the courts did not allow Trump's team to present evidence is one that I've not followed up on. It does not sound at all defensible to me? Yes, admittedly, Trump had terrible lawyers, some of whom barely could write in complete sentences from what I could tell. But the idea that the courts prevented them from presenting evidence that would prove their case seems very very fishy to me!

[ajkula66]

As it happens some people did make specific allegations, and they are being sued by the voting machine companies. If they can't back up their claims when billions are at stake then you know what their claims are worth.

And the voting machine companies are about to be sued back. None of this will go anywhere. It's a charade.

This is beating a dead horse,

Agreed, although I disagree with most of your other opinions expressed in this post.

someone else earlier in the thread has listed the people and organisations who have vouched for the integrity of the elections.

Who will vouch for integrity of these people and organizations, though ?

[pkiff]

This is not a correct statement. Maybe "almost no evidence of voter fraud" is more correct. Then again, you do realize that in virtually all the cases where "Team Trump had failed to provide evidence" it was because the courts did not allow them to present evidence? They simply refused to even consider the case way before the stage of presenting evidence. Probably because they would rather keep a broken system, rather than shed light on how badly broken this system is.

For a moment there, I thought perhaps we had just about finished with dealing with claims of election fraud in this thread. But I admit, I have been missing digging into some of these rabbit holes. This claim that the courts did not allow Trump's team to present evidence is one that I've not followed up on. It does not sound at all defensible to me? Yes, admittedly, Trump had terrible lawyers, some of whom barely could write in complete sentences from what I could tell. But the idea that the courts prevented them from presenting evidence that would prove their case seems very very doubtful!

Seriously, if there really is "evidence" that they could not present, then why didn't they present it to the court of public opinion? I would take a look at it. Others would love to see it, I'm sure. We've been waiting on all this supposed evidence since November.

[ajkula66]

But the idea that the courts prevented them from presenting evidence that would prove their case seems very very fishy to me!

Well, SCOTUS didn't want to take the Texas case. It was dismissed on procedural grounds. This was arguably the most important case that side had.

Seriously, if there really is "evidence" that they could not present, then why didn't they present it to the court of public opinion? I would take a look at it. Others would love to see it, I'm sure. We've been waiting on all this supposed evidence since November.

Some of it is publicly available but you'll have to dig for it and Google won't be your friend there...

What I think about the whole debacle doesn't really matter. Where I end up moving my kids to does.

[pkiff]

Seriously, if there really is "evidence" that they could not present, then why didn't they present it to the court of public opinion? I would take a look at it. Others would love to see it, I'm sure. We've been waiting on all this supposed evidence since November.

Following up on my own post. My interpretation of what happened is that Guiliani's team decided on their own not to make certain arguments about "fraud" in court because the bar for evidence in a fraud case is significantly higher than the bar for the crap they were putting into the docket. They kept back arguments because they didn't want their cases to have to meet the evidence threshold demanded by claims of fraud, not because they had some great hidden evidence that they couldn't present. And even then, with the bar so low that they barely needed to provide any evidence at all, they still couldn't win a case. Am I wrong?

[pkiff]

But the idea that the courts prevented them from presenting evidence that would prove their case seems very very fishy to me!

Well, SCOTUS didn't want to take the Texas case. It was dismissed on procedural grounds. This was arguably the most important case that side had.

OMG, you're kidding me. That was never even a case. I have to go now but will write something about that later!

[ajkula66]

OMG, you're kidding me. That was never even a case. I have to go now but will write something about that later!

I'm not kidding but hey, if you see the things the same way that SCOTUS did - that TX didn't have stands to make the claim of being an injured party by election shenanigans committed elsewhere - I'm certainly not going to blame you for it.

As I said earlier, I'm done debating this matter. There are much more important decisions in my life to be made right now, largely as a result of everything that had transpired over the past year.

[pkiff]

OMG, you're kidding me. That was never even a case. I have to go now but will write something about that later!

I'm not kidding but hey, if you see the things the same way that SCOTUS did - that TX didn't have stands to make the claim of being an injured party by election shenanigans committed elsewhere - I'm certainly not going to blame you for it.

I admit that I do indeed see things the way SCOTUS did. But I didn't mean to be hyperbolic about it. I am legitimately interested in where people form their opinions about these things and what evidence sways them.

To give you an idea of where my views were formed, I'll point to one source that I've found instructive.

Why the Texas Election Suit Was Doomed (And Why They Filed It Anyway):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6MyImeCKlk
This is an analysis by this slightly smarmy - okay, you're right, very smarmy Youtube lawyer guy. I haven't re-watched it since December, but I have generally found this smarmy lawyer guy to be helpful in understanding many of these election cases.

There are two particular things that bother me about the Texas case. First, that it seems to depend on the idea that somehow you can just throw away MILLIONS of votes on the basis of....what??? Basically nothing that I could see. And Second, what is with a neighbouring STATE controlling the election in ANOTHER STATE? What??? That seems to go against all the other "Republican" arguments about how states should be able to control their own affairs.

[dr_st]

Way too much to spend time rebutting, but on this one, wow! First, you're saying we should ditch the tradition of free and fair elections.

Nope, you are just working very hard to twist my words. I just think your current system does not guarantee fair elections. Too easy to cheat.

What do I need to do in Israel in order to vote?

Show up at the polling point designated to you, based on your place of residence, with a valid ID (state ID, driver's license or passport) and vote. A card indicating designated polling poll location is sent to every eligible voter (any citizen over 18) a few weeks prior to the elections, and if you don't get yours for some reason - you can check online. Public transportation to and from polling points is free on election day. But, for most residents, they are within walking distance from their place of residence.

This claim that the courts did not allow Trump's team to present evidence is one that I've not followed up on. It does not sound at all defensible to me? Yes, admittedly, Trump had terrible lawyers, some of whom barely could write in complete sentences from what I could tell. But the idea that the courts prevented them from presenting evidence that would prove their case seems very very doubtful!

Here is a website that is tracking all this, with links to the actual cases:
http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2 ... _Cases.htm

[exTPfan]

Cor! you guys are still at it. The reason Trump's lawyers chose not present "evidence" to the courts is that lying to a judge is a felony. Lying to the American people isn't.

[mpcook]

Cor! you guys are still at it. The reason Trump's lawyers chose not present "evidence" to the courts is that lying to a judge is a felony. Lying to the American people isn't.

This! (and more)

[TonyJZX]

Your goal is to find a life partner who loves you as much as these guys here love trump.

[Cigarguy]

^^This. Love of a legacy of hate and lies. The Orange Koolaid can do no wrong and cures all.

[TPFanatic]

But- but private emails (Hillary's, not Trumpkins') and gas prices

[BillMorrow]

Hello gentlemen..
after a small cooling off period i unlocked this thread..
i did not lock it, another person did, because the conversation was getting a little heated..
HERE on this forum THERE WILL BE NO CENSORSHIP, unlike the left censoring of factual news..
now i know the word fasctual will get some pushback which i will ignore..

would all who are overly excited please keep it cordial..
say what you wish, but no personal attacks or incitement to riot..

now i will try to merge a post that was moved for moderation..
if unsuccessful i will just put it back in moderation and apologize to the author..

[unixed]

now i know the word fasctual will get some pushback which i will ignore..

covfefe

[akahra2001]

Trump got robbed...These Technocrats have rigged voting machines...I was watching votes getting flipped in real time on CNN...20,000 votes subtracted from Trump and 20,000 votes added to Biden within 15-20 seconds...Dominion Software allowed these people to hack the votes

[BillMorrow]

Cor! you guys are still at it. The reason Trump's lawyers chose not present "evidence" to the courts is that lying to a judge is a felony. Lying to the American people isn't.

This! (and more)

dropped it and saw this so i HAD to remark, if so, then why is comey, hillary, and so many pother FBI, CIA, ELITE types NOT before a judge to explain WHY they lied, like to thecourt i can't think of the name of, just now..
i must be having a biden moment but at least i can still walk up a flight of stairs..

[BillMorrow]

Your goal is to find a life partner who loves you as much as these guys here love trump.

must say i don't LOVE trump, he is a flawed guy, like all of us, i love HIS love of America and our former land of liberty..

[unixed]

i must be having a biden moment but at least i can still walk up a flight of stairs..

Ha ha, "Senior" Admin humour! What your "news" sources didn't show you was that Biden was walking another of his dogs that pulled him off his feet, Ghost.

[mpcook]

i must be having a biden moment but at least i can still walk up a flight of stairs..

Ha ha, "Senior" Admin humour! What your "news" sources didn't show you was that Biden was walking another of his dogs that pulled him off his feet, Ghost.

With a partially healed broken foot.

[BillMorrow]

Ha ha, "Senior" Admin humour! What your "news" sources didn't show you was that Biden was walking another of his dogs that pulled him off his feet, Ghost.

With a partially healed broken foot.

WAIT..! what..?
news sources..? i 'don need no steenkin news sources.. it was flim at 11.. film..!
good 'ol china joe was trying to look athletic when he stumbled unable to lift his left foot to the top of the stair tread.. twice..
what really got me was no one rushed to his aid..
i'm sure camela is waiting at the bottom of the stairs to catch joe.. so sure i'll bet money on it.. and choke the remaining life out of his body..

[unixed]

Ah, that explains it. It's hard to see Ghost even when you're wide awake. He blends right in, but he's a good dog and hardly bites, doesn't even break the skin.

[cadillacmike68]

Certainly. And there is plenty of time to take care of that before the next round of elections. It seems that the US considers that it is reasonable to require a government-issued ID to fly, but not to vote. To me this sounds ridiculous. Then again, many things in many countries will sound ridiculous to foreigners.

I think you are not familiar with the details of how it works here, but okay. More details than can be explained in a post, varying by state.

And also note, these bills do not require any local/state efforts to help people qualify who need assistance, elderly, without a car, etc. And voters should not have to pay to be able to vote. That is why this is suppression, and not just qualification. We are regressing, not progressing. And all of this with evidence of almost no voter fraud in the current system.

There are almost NO "elderly", with or without a vehicle, in this country, who never drove. and every state offers a DL equivalent ID that has the SAME validity as a DL. I have a niece and nephew who do not drive; they have state issued non DL IDs.

[cadillacmike68]

Cor! you guys are still at it. The reason Trump's lawyers chose not present "evidence" to the courts is that lying to a judge is a felony. Lying to the American people isn't.

The current admin is well aware of this fact.

[cadillacmike68]

i must be having a biden moment but at least i can still walk up a flight of stairs..

Ha ha, "Senior" Admin humour! What your "news" sources didn't show you was that Biden was walking another of his dogs that pulled him off his feet, Ghost.

He was walking his dog up the steps to AF 1???

[mpcook]

I think you are not familiar with the details of how it works here, but okay. More details than can be explained in a post, varying by state.

And also note, these bills do not require any local/state efforts to help people qualify who need assistance, elderly, without a car, etc. And voters should not have to pay to be able to vote. That is why this is suppression, and not just qualification. We are regressing, not progressing. And all of this with evidence of almost no voter fraud in the current system.

There are almost NO "elderly", with or without a vehicle, in this country, who never drove. and every state offers a DL equivalent ID that has the SAME validity as a DL. I have a niece and nephew who do not drive; they have state issued non DL IDs.

Data says different. Over 3 million Americans do not have a photo id valid for voting, mostly poor, inner city or rural, elderly, and/or minority. Glad to hear your niece and nephew are doing well.

[unixed]

Ha ha, "Senior" Admin humour! What your "news" sources didn't show you was that Biden was walking another of his dogs that pulled him off his feet, Ghost.

He was walking his dog up the steps to AF 1???

That was a joke in response to a joke. I apologize if you realize this, but it would cease to be funny if I continued with "you didn't see it too?" and so on if you don't. Bill's joke is that in lieu of "I must be having a senior moment" he uses biden as the adjective and follows with a quip about still being able to negotiate a flight of stairs though. That is funny, If you look under his name on the right, you'll see '"Senior" Admin', another funny joke and the reason Bill can make jokes about someone's age without being offensive -- Bill is older than Biden. This post I do take exception to however and is the reason I first post in this thread immediately after without reference to his dig at Bill's age which is irrelevant to the poster's wrong claim that Bill is misusing his forum.
My joke requires some context -- Biden has two dogs, Champ and Major (German Shepherds, also known throughout the rest of the world as Alsatians) -- Major pulled Biden off his feet recently and he injured his foot. These are not poodles and he could pull most people off their feet.
If you look at the footage of Biden going up those steps, it would look similar if a powerful dog were straining on the leash when climbing (with a foot not fully healed as mpcook points out) -- a ghost dog named ... Ghost.
Also Biden covers for Major who went for an unfamiliar WH security staff member, saying inter-alia that he was a good dog, it wasn't much of a bite, 85% of WH staff love him ... in case you don't get my subsequent post.

[TonyJZX]

Sydney Powell does a great job of accurately describing people in this forum.

Releasing the "Kraken" all right....