Analysis of Ballot Images in Georgia County Shows ‘Provable Fraud’ in Audit: Election Integrity Group

[humbolt]

Perhaps you have forgotten it was the Trump appointed Republican acting AG who called for a Special Counsel and appointed Mueller to look into Russsian interference into the election.

I don't think I have forgotten. Neither have I forgotten what it became in very short order.

 

[US&THEM]

I don't think I have forgotten. Neither have I forgotten what it became in very short order.

Or the fact Mueller spared TRUMP.

 

[humbolt]

Yes to vet trump on whether he was corrupt. America moved on very quickly from the 2016 election results and any scheme to change the results.

It is a Republican narrative that the Dems investigated trump to overturn the election, absolutely not.

Trump had a corrupt past, corrupt persons around him, the investigation needed to happen and not for Hillary becoming POTUS on August 13 2016.

As someone said earlier in this thread, the onion is unpeeling, but with the New Kremlin documents, it's on the Donald/ Putin relations 2015.

Nice try. The Mueller investigation quickly became an investigation in search of a problem, as I said. And your willingness to swallow Rusdian "information" is cute.

 

[humbolt]

Or the fact Mueller spared TRUMP.

He wouldn't have, but Weissmann just couldn't find anything to prosecute. Pretty much a failure, since taking out Trump was the objective.

 

[Cardinal]

He wouldn't have, but Weissmann just couldn't find anything to prosecute. Pretty much a failure, since taking out Trump was the objective.

If that was the objective then Mueller had the procedural means available to him to do it. But he didn't.

 

[Callen]

I don't think I have forgotten. Neither have I forgotten what it became in very short order.

Neither have I forgotten what it became....an unethical whitewash by Barr.......none of which has anything to do with these bogus, fringe claims of mass election fraud. Nive try at a diversion though.

 

[Sand Castle]

Nice try. The Mueller investigation quickly became an investigation in search of a problem, as I said. And your willingness to swallow Rusdian "information" is cute.

Wrong that's what was revealed in the actual findings, not the Barr spin conveniently used by Republicans

 

[Sand Castle]

Neither have I forgotten what it became....an unethical whitewash by Barr.......none of which has anything to do with these bogus, fringe claims of mass election fraud. Nive try at a diversion though.

Exactly a diversion, I mean how can a poster complain that there were unnecessary 2016 investigations while promoting 2020s.

The ridiculous part 2020 has been investigated and certified.

 

[US&THEM]

He wouldn't have, but Weissmann just couldn't find anything to prosecute. Pretty much a failure, since taking out Trump was the objective.

Untrue and Mueller could have point blank stated Trump was chargeable. Donny Jr too, he signed the payoff check that Cohen went to jail for and do not forget Donny instructed Cohen to pay her (unindicted co-conspirator). Also Hannity was using Cohen as an attorney too. How dumb do you believe the public to be?

 

[Schweddy]

Except the search for fraud has long since transformed into the "God of the Gaps" argument: wherever science hasn't looked, that's where God is. Likewise, wherever we haven't investigated for fraud, that's where the fraud that handed the election to Biden is.

That's why you'll never be satisfied that Biden won legitimately. It's not physically possible to investigate infinity places, and you already feel that the election was illegitimate.

Edit: actually I'd say that the election fraud position was a "God of the gaps" argument the moment Trump said "Frankly, we did win this election". From that moment forward, the feeling that he won was baked in.

Another challenge I have would be to convince you that I believe that fraud potentially happened on all "sides".

There are very likely places that Trump is labeled as the 'winner' but should not have. This isn't unique to this election, but why not fix the errors now that it has the long needed attention?

You are also forgetting the logical fallacy of "my team won" so it must have been correct and perfect.

 

[Cardinal]

Another challenge I have would be to convince you that I believe that fraud potentially happened on all "sides".

There are very likely places that Trump is labeled as the 'winner' but should not have. This isn't unique to this election, but why not fix the errors now that it has the long needed attention?

You are also forgetting the logical fallacy of "my team won" so it must have been correct and perfect.

1)“Trump didn’t actually win in 2016” isn’t and never was a Democrat position, so this isn’t a both sides thing. (This is an unsubtle difference from “trump used dishonest tactics to win.”)

2) We are not contesting the states where trump won in 2020, because there’s no rational basis for doing so. If we were cynical we’d be challenging Senate results, but we’re not because, again, we have no rational basis for doing so.

3) The claim by the right is that fraud on a level to change an election outcome happened. There is zero rational basis for thinking this, or that the .002% fraud that was found was statistically different than in any other election cycle.

Try this: without using your feelings as a foundation, why do you believe or suspect something that there is zero rational basis for believing or suspecting, and why didn’t you believe that thing until now?

 

[gbg3]

I don't know what percentage of voters think Trump won - but I do know the majority of those polled think there was likely significant fraud in the 2020 election. I would guess that many, like me, wonder who "won".

Provide evidence for this, because there is nothing to prove this, definitely not reliable polling.

I said "majority of those polled think there was likely significant fraud in the 2020 election". The poll was specifically worded as very or somewhat likely that cheating affected the outcome.

 

[ecofarm]

Tucker Carlson did a report that lays it all out,

Tucker claimed, in court, no reasonable person would take his show seriously. It's for entertainment only. No facts. That's what he claims.

 

[Luckyone]

Keep peeling the onion and truth arises.
——————

A group seeking to ensure that elections are run fairly said this week that an in-depth analysis of mail-in ballot images obtained through a court order shows that the hand-count audit in Fulton County, Georgia, last year “was riddled with massive errors and provable fraud.”

The analysis turned up at least 36 batches of mail-in ballots, containing 4,255 votes, that were added redundantly to the audit results, according to Voters Organized for Trusted Election Results in Georgia (VoterGA). Nearly 3,400 were for Democrat Joe Biden.

The team examining the ballots also found seven audit tally sheets (pdf) they believe were falsified to contain fabricated vote totals. In one example, the group said, a batch containing 59 ballot images for Biden and 42 for former President Donald Trump was reported as 100 for Biden and zero for Trump.

Analysis of Ballot Images in Georgia County Shows ‘Provable Fraud’ in Audit: Election Integrity Group

m.theepochtimes.com

You continue to come up with news sources that have proven to have a far right media bias as well as consistent fact check failures

• Overall, we rate The Epoch Times Right Biased and Questionable based on the publication of pseudoscience and the promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, as well as numerous failed fact checks.

In searching through Google, there is no "other" news media outlets that have the same information as the Epoch Times have.

You keep trying to offer "your own bias facts" without checking for the validity of them.

You have proven yourself to be a person that does not seek truth, just seeks to prove your own biases. Such a person offers no value to the search for knowledge and truth, which is what reality is all about.

When I was a kid, I wanted to live in this world:



but then I grew up. You should try to do the same.

 

[Cardinal]

I said "majority of those polled think there was likely significant fraud in the 2020 election". The poll was specifically worded as very or somewhat likely that cheating affected the outcome.

View attachment 67343098

30% of Democrats believe it’s likely that Democrats stole the election? Yeah…no.

 

[jnug]

I said "majority of those polled think there was likely significant fraud in the 2020 election". The poll was specifically worded as very or somewhat likely that cheating affected the outcome.

View attachment 67343098

Rasmussen....ah-huh. Come back when you can post up an organization that knows how to conduct polls. What is the margin for error for this poll? Let me guess....not shown!

What other queries were part of this poll? Where are they? I seriously doubt they called and polled on two questions only.

 

[gbg3]

Sadly, the misinformation campaign is working. I live in Massachusetts, of course considered Liberal, at work there is persons actually saying: "The liberal media is lying to you, there was a lot of election fraud".

It's not only Massachusetts where many people are questioning the integrity of the election. Millions of people nationwide are and that's a very big problem in itself. When Dems say it was fair yet adamantly fight audits, it only escalates the lack of voter confidence.

 

[ModG23]

I said "majority of those polled think there was likely significant fraud in the 2020 election". The poll was specifically worded as very or somewhat likely that cheating affected the outcome.

View attachment 67343098

Belief in disinformation doesn’t make it true. That is what TC and Trump media and Trump polls are pushing. Faux news! if you are looking for confirmation bias it is certainly being peddled by them. If you want facts snd truth break out of the bubble.

 

[roguenuke]

I said "majority of those polled think there was likely significant fraud in the 2020 election". The poll was specifically worded as very or somewhat likely that cheating affected the outcome.

View attachment 67343098

And of course you use Rasmussen, which has been shown to lean conservative, and pro-Trump. They are not a reliable poll.

Pollster: Rasmussen Research has a pro-GOP bias

Rasmussen Reports uses research techniques that make its polls favor Republicans, Ipsos Public Affairs research director Mallory Newall said Monday during an appearance on “What America’s Thin…

thehill.com

And this isn't an election poll, which would just deal with voters, since this shouldn't be a poll just in regards to voters. Also note the large amount of "unaffiliated" that amazingly seem to support that claim despite so many other polls showing unaffiliated or Independents going a different way. That indicates that their "unaffiliated" lean much more heavily Republican or conservative than the average person who is unaffiliated or Independent.

Also, that does not ask the question you claimed, that significant voting fraud was to blame. The closer one to your claim is actually the one showing 47%, and again that is from the highly skewed Rasmussen. The same questions were not asked, yet they compare them. There is a lot missing from this poll.

 

[ModG23]

It's not only Massachusetts where many people are questioning the integrity of the election. Millions of people nationwide are and that's a very big problem in itself. When Dems say it was fair yet adamantly fight audits, it only escalates the lack of voter confidence.

Again. fake audits to stir rage and distrust are what the Republicans are doing to reinforce Trumps big lie.
There was no substantial voter fraud in the real world.

 

[roguenuke]

It's not only Massachusetts where many people are questioning the integrity of the election. Millions of people nationwide are and that's a very big problem in itself. When Dems say it was fair yet adamantly fight audits, it only escalates the lack of voter confidence.

No it really isn't a big problem except that we know it is because they are gullible and believe the lies that are being spread from the person who they wanted to win. They need justification for why others do not feel the same way they do, did not choose the same person. Those people feel that if they convince themselves they are in the majority, they must be right.

 

[roguenuke]

It's not only Massachusetts where many people are questioning the integrity of the election. Millions of people nationwide are and that's a very big problem in itself. When Dems say it was fair yet adamantly fight audits, it only escalates the lack of voter confidence.

No it really isn't a big problem except that we know it is because they are gullible and believe the lies that are being spread from the person who they wanted to win. They need justification for why others do not feel the same way they do, did not choose the same person. Those people feel that if they convince themselves they are in the majority, they must be right.

But they are not in the majority.

Tracking Voter Trust in the American Electoral System

An ongoing survey research project to gauge how voters are responding to unprecedented electoral conditions

morningconsult.com

Other, much more reliable polls for this sort of question show that most people do trust that the last election was free and fair.

 

[bubbabgone]

1)“Trump didn’t actually win in 2016” isn’t and never was a Democrat position, so this isn’t a both sides thing. (This is an unsubtle difference from “trump used dishonest tactics to win.”)

2) We are not contesting the states where trump won in 2020, because there’s no rational basis for doing so. If we were cynical we’d be challenging Senate results, but we’re not because, again, we have no rational basis for doing so.

3) The claim by the right is that fraud on a level to change an election outcome happened. There is zero rational basis for thinking this, or that the .002% fraud that was found was statistically different than in any other election cycle.

Try this: without using your feelings as a foundation, why do you believe or suspect something that there is zero rational basis for believing or suspecting, and why didn’t you believe that thing until now?

Here's a fun fact.
Allowing for that 30,000 foot level analysis, that .002% fraud when applied to Biden's total would be over 150,000 fraudulent votes.
And it would only have taken around 30,000 votes in a few States to swing the election.
Keep in mind, before accepting there was a serious attempt at an election fraud like that, one has to accept that the D Party would come prepared with that information beforehand so a "widespread" effort wouldn't be necessary. Just a focus on the heavy D areas with heavy D control in those target States.
Someone who isn't prepared to accept that possibility would post comments like you just did.

 

[ModG23]

No it really isn't a big problem except that we know it is because they are gullible and believe the lies that are being spread from the person who they wanted to win. They need justification for why others do not feel the same way they do, did not choose the same person. Those people feel that if they convince themselves they are in the majority, they must be right.

It is definitely more a case of Trumpers trying to confirm they were right rather than actually seeking the truth. As long as they keep repeating the talking points instead of searching for facts they can think they are right. Trump lost and he is pulling the wool over their eyes snd they are hanging ito the string therep was cheating done by the Democrats. It is sad they can’t admit Trump is Playing them like a violin.

 

[roguenuke]

Here's a fun fact.
Allowing for that 30,000 foot level analysis, that .002% fraud when applied to Biden's total would be over 150,000 fraudulent votes.
And it would only have taken around 30,000 votes in a few States to swing the election.
Keep in mind, before accepting there was a serious attempt at an election fraud like that, one has to accept that the D Party would come prepared with that information beforehand so a "widespread" effort wouldn't be necessary. Just a focus on the heavy D areas with heavy D control in those target States.
Someone who isn't prepared to accept that possibility would post comments like you just did.

That fraud goes both ways. You would have to show that the entirety of the .002% of fraud was in a single spot, and all for Biden.