Are the Media Gaslighting the USA?

[bubbabgone]

And the result of his ruling was ballots that had already been segregated were formally required to be segregated.

Do you have something further?

It's still an attempt to disenfranchise eligible voters on a technicality, and doesn't represent anywhere near enough votes to matter.

Look! A windmill! Go go go!

Your problem is that when you find something to your liking you stop thinking.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito issued a temporary order requiring counties in Pennsylvania to segregate ballots that arrived after 8 p.m. on Election Day. The late ballots are to be kept in a secure, sealed container — to be counted separately, if at all.
Pennsylvania election officials were already supposed to be separating the late ballots, but Republicans say they did not do this. The person in charge of overseeing vote-counting in Pennsylvania is Democrat secretary of state, Kathy Boockvar — who has publicly declared her anti-Trump animus on Twitter.
Bream explained: “This segregating/securing was already supposed to be happening. PA GOP told SCOTUS today that neither it nor the PA Secretary of Commonwealth could get all the county boards of election to confirm they were actually complying. Now there’s a SCOTUS Order.”
Hours later, the Pennsylvania Democrat Party filed their opposition to Alito’s order.
They claim that the Pennsylvania GOP offered no evidence “that county boards failed to follow” the directive from the Pennsylvania [secretary of state] to segregate/secure votes received after 8 p.m. on election day.”

SCOTUS judge orders Pennsylvania to segregate late ballots after county boards refused to confirm compliance

Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito issued an order requiring Pennsylvania counties to segregate late ballots that arrived after 8 p.m. on Election Day.

www.bizpacreview.com

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'll leave you to the live action version of The Turner Diaries going on in your mind.

Reality's more boring perhaps, but the rants are shorter.

The what?

Reality is what I said, as long as decent people have the comforts of home they will do nothing.

Of course democrats have their terrorist troops out regardless, the left is violent - always.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

The what?

Reality is what I said, as long as decent people have the comforts of home they will do nothing.

Of course democrats have their terrorist troops out regardless, the left is violent - always.

Sure, thats why the Michigan Gov had a death squad targeting her, because that RW militia are decent, law abiding members of a democracy!

It's ironic how you show just who has been gaslighted.

 

[AJG]

Currently we are being "gaslighted" by the MSM, which has "called" the election for Joe Biden. This despite the fact that there have been challenges in six or seven States regarding the voting results...AND that as of today (11/11/20) NONE of the results have been certified.

Yes, the MSM has projected that Joe Biden is the winner based on their mathematical models, just like they've done in previous elections. As far as I know, they are following the same procedure as they always have. Do you really think if these results happened in a previous election they would call it any differently? They projected that Trump was the winner of the last election even though the margins were closer and the results hadn't been certified either. Why is it gaslighting this time around when it wasn't in 2016?

 

[mrjurrs]

Let's first define the term:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/gaslighting

That is the basic definition when applied to a specific case. I suggest that this applies to our entire society when practiced by the class of political and wealthy elite insiders known colloquially as "The Swamp" who control the Main Stream Media, Big Tech, and government agencies. Especially when acting in conjunction to persuade the general population that down is up, and vice versa.

For example, here are a couple of interesting articles on the subject:

10 Ways The Media Is Gaslighting You

Focusing on women and celebrating what makes them so unique, Evie Magazine helps women seek truth and find beauty...the kind that really matters.

www.eviemagazine.com

The Utter Gaslighting by Media About 'Unidentified' Feds Detaining 'Protesters,' 'Trump Occupation'

redstate.com

What Is Gaslighting and How Does The Media Use it to Distort Our Reality? - Vision Launch Media

What is Gaslighting? The term originates in the systematic psychological manipulation of a victim by her husband in Patrick Hamilton’s 1938 stage play Gas Light, and the film adaptations released in 1940 and 1944. In the story, the husband attempts to convince his wife and others that she is...

visionlaunch.com

Currently we are being "gaslighted" by the MSM, which has "called" the election for Joe Biden. This despite the fact that there have been challenges in six or seven States regarding the voting results...AND that as of today (11/11/20) NONE of the results have been certified.

Ladies and gentlemen, the MSM does not decide who wins. NO, that is done by election rules and starts only after each State's voting tallies have been certified. Even then, it remains for the Electoral College to actually VOTE. BTW, anyone recall all those efforts back in 2016 to encourage unfaithful electors?

Moreover, doesn't anyone also recall that in 2000 Al Gore (whom I voted for) did not concede the election until 12/13/2000? That was with only one state in question. Currently we have issues with six or seven State results.

Or that several Democrat leaders "advised" Mr. Biden prior to this election NOT to concede (some stating under any circumstances) if the vote went Trump's way?

Yet now we are being told in no uncertain terms that Joe Biden has won this election, and that anyone who disagrees is either blinded by partisanship, or just "a crazy person."

The MSM is not telling us the truth. They haven't been doing so for years. The fact that so many people have bought into the never-ending gaslighting efforts appalls me.

My own support of President Trump came slowly over time back in 2016, as I personally reviewed the MSM allegations of racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc.. Simply go back to that period in the Forum and you will find how I personally debunked 90% of those reports as misinformation/disinformation efforts.

This has not stopped since. Studies provided in the past have shown the MSM has lied, misrepresented, and otherwise been deceiving the general public more often and to greater effect than ever before. Just look to the examples of the Covington Kids, and more recently the assertion of "mostly peaceful protests." That last trying to conflate tiny, unreported gatherings in small towns as a balance to the massive violence occurring day and night in major cities around the nation.

Wake up to the truth folks, we are still being gaslighted on a major scale regarding this election. Why? IMO because if it turns out that Trump actually won, it would lead to such violence that our nation might never recover.

Did you have that position in 2016 when the Obama administration GSA ascertained the election three hours after the election was called for djt, in spite of the fact that he won three states by a combined total of less than 100,000 votes?

 

[notquiteright]

Yes, "deflection." You assert without evidence how I "believe." Despite being provided with examples in the OP, and the facts which show the election is NOT over yet. Sooo, ANOTHER deflection. Try discussing the issue and not make it a "personal thing."

Yes deflection, many on the rabid right are trying to deflect from MASSIVE tRumpist gaslighting by accusing the Media...

Many deflect from what they believe by claiming there is no evidence to point to a belief (not unlike the idiotic claims by tRumpists of fraud that evaporates once in a court of law)

Some are clinging to the last lie, tweet, 'Patriot' website garbage and claim the election ain't over. I imagine they must also think a person isn't dead until they are 6 feet under...

The GOP will set a new record for number of court cases throw out in the first hearing. The rabid right will decry 'activist' judges and continue to claim the vote was stolen and the media brainwashed 'the masses' (never mind the general revulsion many felt watching tRump day after day)

All in all the rabid right is following communist dictators methods to a 'T'- tell a big lie often enough and it will become the truth. FRAUD! The Dead Voted!, Witnesses saw THOUSANDS of illegal votes! The media in against conservatives! tRump is the BEST president EVER!!!!!!

Or some such pile of crap... ✌

 

[lwf]

The number actually segregated is in question.
And the affect of the number of illegal ballots on the result shouldn't be a criteria that governs its tolerance.

10,000 was the highest estimate I've seen on the number of segregated ballots received after election day. The most recent estimate was 5,800, but I wanted to argue the worst case scenario.

And the effect of illegal ballots on the outcome of an election does not factor into its tolerance. Illegal ballots should not be, (and are not,) tolerated. The effect of illegal ballots on the outcome of the election should absolutely factor in to your, Republican's, and Trump's acceptance that the election is over and that the American people have decided that Joe Biden will be the next President of the United States.

 

[lwf]

Truth be told, the gaslighting is referring to Joe Biden as President-elect. He is the projected winner but that is all until the results are certified and the electors say who the President-elect is. Anything can happen between now and the electors’ decision in December and although it’s not probable that Biden won’t become President-elect it’s still possible.

No, this is not true. There is no gaslighting. "President-elect" is not an official term. The electors do not determine who the "president-elect" is, the clear results of the election do. The projected winner of the election IS the president-elect. Trump was the president-elect on November 9th when Hillary conceded. Hillary conceded because she had no path to victory. Yet her paths to victory at the conclusion of the 2016 election were less remote than Trump's are in 2020.

The loser of an election should not have the power to delay transition of power with unfounded allegations, and those who support these losers are undermining American democracy.

 

[Captain Adverse]

No, this is not true. There is no gaslighting. "President-elect" is not an official term. The electors do not determine who the "president-elect" is, the clear results of the election do. The projected winner of the election IS the president-elect. Trump was the president-elect on November 9th when Hillary conceded. Hillary conceded because she had no path to victory. Yet her paths to victory at the conclusion of the 2016 election were less remote than Trump's are in 2020.

The loser of an election should not have the power to delay transition of power with unfounded allegations, and those who support these losers are undermining American democracy.

Let's take this one point at a time.

1. There are no "clear results" yet. That's the point of President Trump's refusal to concede the election.

2. Meanwhile, as of today (11/14/20) not a single State has "certified" their results.

3. The Media does not give the "title" of "President-Elect." NO ONE is "President-elect" until the Electoral College "elects" him/her. It does not matter what the media "report."

4. If there is an actual "loser" on election day, then of course they would not have any "power to delay transition." However, until the "loser" is factually determined, then there can't be a "transition." Do try to recall Bush v. Gore in 2000.

5. Trump does have several "paths to victory," until enough of those challenges are resolved in such a way as to eliminate them.

Now the fact that YOU believe everything you've said does not make it a sound or valid argument for the rest of us to perforce accept it.

Having said all that, I am NOT saying Trump will ultimately succeed, but I am not going to presume he will not until we know for sure.

 

[bubbabgone]

10,000 was the highest estimate I've seen on the number of segregated ballots received after election day. The most recent estimate was 5,800, but I wanted to argue the worst case scenario.

And the effect of illegal ballots on the outcome of an election does not factor into its tolerance. Illegal ballots should not be, (and are not,) tolerated. The effect of illegal ballots on the outcome of the election should absolutely factor in to your, Republican's, and Trump's acceptance that the election is over and that the American people have decided that Joe Biden will be the next President of the United States.

Whether it affects the ultimate result shouldn't matter.
That it is not tolerated should be a universally accepted position.
That fact that it might have contributed to a loss or that it might have assisted in a victory is irrelevant.

 

[lwf]

Let's take this one point at a time.

1. There are no "clear results" yet. That's the point of President Trump's refusal to concede the election.

2. Meanwhile, as of today (11/14/20) not a single State has "certified" their results.

3. The Media does not give the "title" of "President-Elect." NO ONE is "President-elect" until the Electoral College "elects" him/her. It does not matter what the media "report."

4. If there is an actual "loser" on election day, then of course they would not have any "power to delay transition." However, until the "loser" is factually determined, then there can't be a "transition." Do try to recall Bush v. Gore in 2000.

5. Trump does have several "paths to victory," until enough of those challenges are resolved in such a way as to eliminate them.

Now the fact that YOU believe everything you've said does not make it a sound or valid argument for the rest of us to perforce accept it.

Having said all that, I am NOT saying Trump will ultimately succeed, but I am not going to presume he will not until we know for sure.

Once again, this is false. Whomever is giving you these "facts" is taking you for a ride. Trump has no paths to victory, even if he wins all of his legal challenges. Trump's loss margin is greater than Hillary's was in 2016. Trump was the president-elect on 11/9/16 by the exact same logic that Biden is in 2020. State certification or the concession of the opponent is unnecessary. The results are clear that Biden has won the 2020 election. You are welcome to wait until the results are certified before you personally accept it, but it is factually inaccurate to say that Biden is not the president-elect.

 

[lwf]

Whether it affects the ultimate result shouldn't matter.
That it is not tolerated should be a universally accepted position.
That fact that it might have contributed to a loss or that it might have assisted in a victory is irrelevant.

The fact that it might have contributed to a loss or victory is relevant to accepting said loss or victory. If it is likely, then the loss or victory should not be accepted until the investigation is complete. If it is impossible, as is the case with the 2020 election, then the loss or victory should be accepted, the loser should concede, the transition should start, and the relevant authorities should still investigate whatever evidence there is for illegal voting.

 

[bubbabgone]

The fact that it might have contributed to a loss or victory is relevant to accepting said loss or victory. If it is likely, then the loss or victory should not be accepted until the investigation is complete. If it is impossible, as is the case with the 2020 election, then the loss or victory should be accepted, the loser should concede, the transition should start, and the relevant authorities should still investigate whatever evidence there is for illegal voting.

That's what's so troubling. I'm not looking at it as a win or a loss for any person.
Apparently your position is that as long as the result would have been the same despite illegal activity, then who cares.
For on thing, you have no idea if the result would have been the same until you know the extent of the illegal activity.

I'm observing that there have been some apparent, glaring, problems, large and small, that everyone should want to have resolved.
Now and for the future.
Whether the result will be different doesn't matter.

 

[eohrnberger]

Let's first define the term:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/gaslighting

That is the basic definition when applied to a specific case. I suggest that this applies to our entire society when practiced by the class of political and wealthy elite insiders known colloquially as "The Swamp" who control the Main Stream Media, Big Tech, and government agencies. Especially when acting in conjunction to persuade the general population that down is up, and vice versa.

For example, here are a couple of interesting articles on the subject:

10 Ways The Media Is Gaslighting You

Focusing on women and celebrating what makes them so unique, Evie Magazine helps women seek truth and find beauty...the kind that really matters.

www.eviemagazine.com

The Utter Gaslighting by Media About 'Unidentified' Feds Detaining 'Protesters,' 'Trump Occupation'

redstate.com

What Is Gaslighting and How Does The Media Use it to Distort Our Reality? - Vision Launch Media

What is Gaslighting? The term originates in the systematic psychological manipulation of a victim by her husband in Patrick Hamilton’s 1938 stage play Gas Light, and the film adaptations released in 1940 and 1944. In the story, the husband attempts to convince his wife and others that she is...

visionlaunch.com

Currently we are being "gaslighted" by the MSM, which has "called" the election for Joe Biden. This despite the fact that there have been challenges in six or seven States regarding the voting results...AND that as of today (11/11/20) NONE of the results have been certified.

Ladies and gentlemen, the MSM does not decide who wins. NO, that is done by election rules and starts only after each State's voting tallies have been certified. Even then, it remains for the Electoral College to actually VOTE. BTW, anyone recall all those efforts back in 2016 to encourage unfaithful electors?

Moreover, doesn't anyone also recall that in 2000 Al Gore (whom I voted for) did not concede the election until 12/13/2000? That was with only one state in question. Currently we have issues with six or seven State results.

Or that several Democrat leaders "advised" Mr. Biden prior to this election NOT to concede (some stating under any circumstances) if the vote went Trump's way?

Yet now we are being told in no uncertain terms that Joe Biden has won this election, and that anyone who disagrees is either blinded by partisanship, or just "a crazy person."

The MSM is not telling us the truth. They haven't been doing so for years. The fact that so many people have bought into the never-ending gaslighting efforts appalls me.

My own support of President Trump came slowly over time back in 2016, as I personally reviewed the MSM allegations of racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc.. Simply go back to that period in the Forum and you will find how I personally debunked 90% of those reports as misinformation/disinformation efforts.

This has not stopped since. Studies provided in the past have shown the MSM has lied, misrepresented, and otherwise been deceiving the general public more often and to greater effect than ever before. Just look to the examples of the Covington Kids, and more recently the assertion of "mostly peaceful protests." That last trying to conflate tiny, unreported gatherings in small towns as a balance to the massive violence occurring day and night in major cities around the nation.

Wake up to the truth folks, we are still being gaslighted on a major scale regarding this election. Why? IMO because if it turns out that Trump actually won, it would lead to such violence that our nation might never recover.

Yes, Only have gotten worse since the report below:

The Media Bubble Is Worse Than You Think
We crunched the data on where journalists work and how fast it’s changing. The results should worry you.
​

 

[eohrnberger]

Yes, the media is gaslighting...aka, blowing smoke up our asses.

But they aren't the only ones. So are government officials.

Here is an example of individual gaslighting:

Not only government officials, also some in Congress, apparently.

OK, so here's a great example. Jim Clyburn, a well-respected Democrat, probably one of the leading forces behind Joe Biden being president, if had not been for Jim Clyburn, stumping for support for Joe Biden in South Carolina, a very good shot to Bernie Sanders, might have been the nominee inside the Democratic Party. So Jim Clyburn was talking yesterday on CNN about the about the unwillingness of Donald Trump to declare Joe Biden the president elect.

And this is pure, ridiculous hysteria. He compares Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler. Now, quick rule of thumb, most of the things that you don't like have nothing to do with Hitler. Things can be things that are bad and also have nothing to do with Hitler. In fact, nearly everything in your entire life that you don't like will not be Hitler. It turns out that Hitler is basically Hitler and not tons of other Hitler is out there, thank God.

But here is Jim Clyburn comparing Donald Trump to Hitler for not. For not recognizing that Joe Biden is president elect of the United States. There are many historical problems with this particular narrative. One of them is that Adolf Hitler actually was elected in November of 1932 to had the largest party in the Reichstag. And then he was asked by the by the president of Germany, by Hindenburg, who is the acting head of state, to form a coalition government.

And then Hitler took power and then liquidated all of his enemies. It turns out Donald Trump hasn't done any of those things, but Jim Clyburn compares him to Hitler anyway, because if you call somebody Hitler, that means that you can do whatever the hell you want and as much as you want. I'm beginning to see what happened in Germany back in the 1930s. I never thought that could happen in this country. How do you elect a person president then all of a sudden give him the authority to be a dictator?
Who Really Rigged the Election?

 

[calamity]

Let's first define the term:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/gaslighting

That is the basic definition when applied to a specific case. I suggest that this applies to our entire society when practiced by the class of political and wealthy elite insiders known colloquially as "The Swamp" who control the Main Stream Media, Big Tech, and government agencies. Especially when acting in conjunction to persuade the general population that down is up, and vice versa.

For example, here are a couple of interesting articles on the subject:

10 Ways The Media Is Gaslighting You

Focusing on women and celebrating what makes them so unique, Evie Magazine helps women seek truth and find beauty...the kind that really matters.

www.eviemagazine.com

The Utter Gaslighting by Media About 'Unidentified' Feds Detaining 'Protesters,' 'Trump Occupation'

redstate.com

What Is Gaslighting and How Does The Media Use it to Distort Our Reality? - Vision Launch Media

What is Gaslighting? The term originates in the systematic psychological manipulation of a victim by her husband in Patrick Hamilton’s 1938 stage play Gas Light, and the film adaptations released in 1940 and 1944. In the story, the husband attempts to convince his wife and others that she is...

visionlaunch.com

Currently we are being "gaslighted" by the MSM, which has "called" the election for Joe Biden. This despite the fact that there have been challenges in six or seven States regarding the voting results...AND that as of today (11/11/20) NONE of the results have been certified.

Ladies and gentlemen, the MSM does not decide who wins. NO, that is done by election rules and starts only after each State's voting tallies have been certified. Even then, it remains for the Electoral College to actually VOTE. BTW, anyone recall all those efforts back in 2016 to encourage unfaithful electors?

Moreover, doesn't anyone also recall that in 2000 Al Gore (whom I voted for) did not concede the election until 12/13/2000? That was with only one state in question. Currently we have issues with six or seven State results.

Or that several Democrat leaders "advised" Mr. Biden prior to this election NOT to concede (some stating under any circumstances) if the vote went Trump's way?

Yet now we are being told in no uncertain terms that Joe Biden has won this election, and that anyone who disagrees is either blinded by partisanship, or just "a crazy person."

The MSM is not telling us the truth. They haven't been doing so for years. The fact that so many people have bought into the never-ending gaslighting efforts appalls me.

My own support of President Trump came slowly over time back in 2016, as I personally reviewed the MSM allegations of racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc.. Simply go back to that period in the Forum and you will find how I personally debunked 90% of those reports as misinformation/disinformation efforts.

This has not stopped since. Studies provided in the past have shown the MSM has lied, misrepresented, and otherwise been deceiving the general public more often and to greater effect than ever before. Just look to the examples of the Covington Kids, and more recently the assertion of "mostly peaceful protests." That last trying to conflate tiny, unreported gatherings in small towns as a balance to the massive violence occurring day and night in major cities around the nation.

Wake up to the truth folks, we are still being gaslighted on a major scale regarding this election. Why? IMO because if it turns out that Trump actually won, it would lead to such violence that our nation might never recover.

Nonsense.

 

[Rexedgar]

Media, been calling the race for 172 years........

EXPLAINER: Why do the media call races in US elections?

Fifty-one separate elections — one in each state and one in Washington, DC. Each with different rules and regulations, and no national elections commission to tell the world who wins.

apnews.com

Let's take this one point at a time.

1. There are no "clear results" yet. That's the point of President Trump's refusal to concede the election.

2. Meanwhile, as of today (11/14/20) not a single State has "certified" their results.

3. The Media does not give the "title" of "President-Elect." NO ONE is "President-elect" until the Electoral College "elects" him/her. It does not matter what the media "report."

4. If there is an actual "loser" on election day, then of course they would not have any "power to delay transition." However, until the "loser" is factually determined, then there can't be a "transition." Do try to recall Bush v. Gore in 2000.

5. Trump does have several "paths to victory," until enough of those challenges are resolved in such a way as to eliminate them.

Now the fact that YOU believe everything you've said does not make it a sound or valid argument for the rest of us to perforce accept it.

Having said all that, I am NOT saying Trump will ultimately succeed, but I am not going to presume he will not until we know for sure.

 

[MrPeanut]

The media is just a collection of businesses trying to make money. It isn't much more complicated than that.

 

[Antiwar]

Media

I haven't read the book but I've listened to Noam Chomsky quite a bit on the radio. In an ideological sense, Noam is left-libertarian. In a pragmatic sense, he's progressive. Intentionally and/or unintentionally, mainstream media gaslights.

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomskyarguing that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.

 

[Antiwar]

Voting

The ballot box is a black box. We don't see or know what is and what isn't going on. It's hard to trust something like that.

I don't know how or even if they track ballots.

I think there needs to be a way for voters to verify (as much as possible; trust will always be involved in large/detached elections) that their votes were:

A. Counted
B. Counted correctly

That way individuals can see it, and people can discuss it: "Yeah, I checked, my vote was properly counted."

 

[Antiwar]

Fair voting and elections

There are many nefarious factors, but the big two are:

1. Dark money, especially due to Citizens United
2. The unequal voting-power of the Electoral College (presidential elections, only)

To me, these two are integrity tests. If you're okay with or happy about these two things, then you don't understand them and/or you fail the integrity test.

The OP strikes me as a right-libertarian (the term seems to contradict itself). I'm going to guess that they are, at the least, okay with these two things.

 

[rickc]

No doubt right wing propaganda is very effective

Deplorables The most misinformed group in America

 

[lwf]

That's what's so troubling. I'm not looking at it as a win or a loss for any person.
Apparently your position is that as long as the result would have been the same despite illegal activity, then who cares.
For on thing, you have no idea if the result would have been the same until you know the extent of the illegal activity.

I'm observing that there have been some apparent, glaring, problems, large and small, that everyone should want to have resolved.
Now and for the future.
Whether the result will be different doesn't matter.

Of course the election results would be the same. The Department of Homeland Security and the election experts have deemed the 2020 election the most secure in history. That means that there are fewer illegal votes this election than there were in the 2016 election, when Donald Trump won by a smaller margin than Biden did.

I'm not saying I don't care about illegal votes. I'm saying that all illegal votes should be investigated and thrown out, and in the meantime, Trump should concede and begin the transition process because it is still mathematically impossible for Trump to win even after all the illegal votes are thrown out. This is obvious to everyone with any understanding of the American election process who is being honest with themselves. There is zero evidence of any more problems with this election than there were in 2016. The evidence, in fact, points to fewer problems. The whole "election is rigged by Democrats" story is a false narrative that is harmful to American democracy.

 

[bubbabgone]

Of course the election results would be the same. The Department of Homeland Security and the election experts have deemed the 2020 election the most secure in history. That means that there are fewer illegal votes this election than there were in the 2016 election, when Donald Trump won by a smaller margin than Biden did.

I'm not saying I don't care about illegal votes. I'm saying that all illegal votes should be investigated and thrown out, and in the meantime, Trump should concede and begin the transition process because it is still mathematically impossible for Trump to win even after all the illegal votes are thrown out. This is obvious to everyone with any understanding of the American election process who is being honest with themselves. There is zero evidence of any more problems with this election than there were in 2016. The evidence, in fact, points to fewer problems. The whole "election is rigged by Democrats" story is a false narrative that is harmful to American democracy.

The DHS can't make a statement like that because they haven't had an opportunity to investigate.
One way to do that is by comparing hand count results to the Dominion/Smartmatic machine count. (this is the one that makes it mathematically very possible)
While the hand count is being conducted they can also discard any ballots that were counted that violate the State Laws of whatever State's ballots are being counted.
Did the DHS do either of those things? I know they didn't do the 1st and it ain't likely they did the 2nd.
Did you know that the Georgia SofS had an agreement with Tracey Abrams's org (why she still would matter to him I can't imagine) that the registration sig doesn't have to match the sig on the mail-in ballot/envelope?

Making matters worse, the state of Georgia arbitrarily changed state law on signature verification of absentee ballots via a March 2020 judicial consent decree with Georgia Democrats — without ever going to the state legislature. It changed the statutory requirement that the signature must match the signature on the voter registration card to simply matching the signature on the absentee ballot application. https://thevirginiastar.com/2020/11...fication-in-georgia-damages-recount-validity/

That would make those votes illegal. Did the DHS consider such things?

 

[d0gbreath]

eviemagazine, redstate, and visionlaunch are sooooo convincing.

The media was ten times worse during the 1920-1970 period, they just weren't on 24/7.