• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Pa Case goes to SCOTUS

You are wrong.

Whether you are intentionally lying or simply ignorant, you are wrong.

this is a proven lie

 
- An affidavit is nothing more than a statement that a person makes that they believe to be true.
- Other evidence may or may not support the statement in an affidavit.
- When other evidence does not support a persons affidavit statement does not mean the person lied in the affidavit. It just means what they stated is what they believe happened is wrong.

Team Trump needs to do more than spout "affidavits". The State/County have demonstrated the vote was correct.

" Although witnesses can often be very confident that their memory is accurate when identifying a suspect, the malleable nature of human memory and visual perception makes eyewitness testimony one of the most unreliable forms of evidence.
The Trouble with Eyewitness Identification Testimony in Criminal Cases | Trends (ncsc.org)

Why Science Tells Us Not to Rely on Eyewitness Accounts - Scientific American
It's funny that some people have trouble understanding this because of My Cousin Vinny. I find it rather funny that Giuliani brought up that movie because it basically helps to show why his "evidence" is not worth what he and others claim. The very movie he brought up shows that witnesses can in fact be very wrong, whether eyewitnesses or experts. Each eyewitness was shown why he/she was wrong about parts of their statements (glasses lady needed new glasses because she definitely could not see as well as she thought)(grits guy has no sense of time)(skinny redneck dude had too much in his line of sight to seriously see what he claimed).

Like the link above shows, eyewitnesses, witnesses can be confident about their wrong observations, but that does not mean they can't be wrong. It doesn't mean they are lying either though. It just means they are wrong.
 
You weren’t present nor bothered to read any of the 60 court cases in which the Trump legal team didn’t charge fraud, and were thrown out, BUT you have certainly read the literally thousands of complaints and can confirm they are substantially proven true?

This is the problem with this conversation in general: ya’ll just keep insisting your made up bullshit needs to stand in place of real world things that took place.

Lou Dobbs had to run an entire segment on his show the other night written by Fox’s lawyers retracting every word about the voting machine company because they were about to be sued out of existence. Know why? They can’t prove any of it. None. Nada.

Weird that every time a Trump-facing person is threatened with having to swear by this stuff under oath they croak up.

Not a single word or thought about the Texas Case?
 
Which did not happen at the same location as the alleged counting after the watchers had left occurred.

What are you citing as a different location?

Are you saying it was a different room, a different address, a different city, state or country?

The toilet was in the sports facility in Georgia in which the counting was stopped.
 
Not a single word or thought about the Texas Case?

It was rejected by the SC. What would you like to discuss about it?

From your last post: I’m still curious how you can insist that we can’t know why all 59 cases were dismissed but you personally know that thousands and thousands of claims have been “proven true”

How?
 
Like, 60 judges are “politically motivated” but the Gateway Pundit has it cold.

They’re so locked in their OANN and Breitbart bubbles they forget when they talk to non-trumpkins, we think this stuff is just batshit crazy.

Did you think the entire Russia, Russia, Russia crap was batcrap crazy?
 
That sentence explains it all. Nothing can ever be satisfactory explained to a conspiracy theorist if that explanation tends to disprove their claim because they just know they are right. It is the very nature of being an unbridled conspiracy theorist.

The stopped was stopped legally by the officials overseeing the counting.

The video recordings show that the counting continued.

Explain.
 
Considering the sliver of facts you hold from the wealth of facts available, I suppose you could legitimately hold that misconception.
Another concession

This is too easy
 
Like I said, most of these people could not be charged with perjury because almost all of them are stating nothing but subjective opinions. Your opinion can be wrong but still not be a lie. So no, they are not opening up themselves to charges of perjury because perjury requires that you prove someone lied, not just that they were wrong.


With respect, prosecutors say they can indict a ham sandwich.

Saying that anyone CANNOT be charged with anything seems a bit far fetched. Especially in light of the last 5 year fiasco in our legal systems ongoing abuses.
 
They haven't been explained to your satisfactory level because you wish to believe the conspiracy, not that they weren't telling the truth nor that they did anything wrong or even out of the ordinary.

The counting was ordered to be stopped by the people overseeing the counting.

The counting continued.

Explain.
 
Did you think the entire Russia, Russia, Russia crap was batcrap crazy?

Why would I? Mueller Vol 1 deetails the attempts at collusion; we know Russia did indeed interfere in 2016.

THus far, all the conspiracy theories related to the election from the right requires a rational, non-political person to believe:

-Brian Kemp and SoS of Ga are aligned with judges of all political stripes across the country, along with Trump’s own SC, have colluded to deprive him of a second term. And not only did they deprive him, they did it to the tun of TENS OF MILLIONS OF VOTES. Ya’ll aren’t even using a fig leaf of a “close election” to pretend a twist here or there changes the outcome. Nope. It’s full Trump batshit: he not only won, but WON IN A LANDSLIDE. Because of course he did. Donald Trump cant even lose a CLOSE election, he only wins by landslides!

It’s just unserious bullshit trolling from the right. No matter how many cases get tossed, no matter how many judges issue opinions detailing the flaws in the case(s), no matter how many times Lou Dobbs has to retract statements about voting machine companies because he’s afraid of getting sued, ya’ll keep coming at us with the same story. There isn’t even a moment when any of you have taken a beat to consider if maybe Biden just simply won. Instead, each new setback is more proof of a rigged election.

Your arguments aren’t batshit crazy cause you’re conservatives. Your arguments here are batshit crazy because there is zero real world proof of anything you’re saying. 1-59 in court. Trump’s SC rejected the BIG ONE. At what point do do even you allow that non-Trump voters, non-LIRBRULMARXISTCHICOMS rightfully think your arguments are either totally insane or totally insincere and malicious in motive?
 
The toilet was in the sports facility in Georgia in which the counting was stopped.
this is a proven lie, as I've already shown you.
 
The stopped was stopped legally by the officials overseeing the counting.

The video recordings show that the counting continued.

Explain.
the counting never stopped, stop lying.
 
The counting was ordered to be stopped by the people overseeing the counting.
this is a proven lie, as I've shown you.

The counting continued.

Explain.
the explanation is that you are lying, and have been proven to be lying.
 
With respect, prosecutors say they can indict a ham sandwich.

Saying that anyone CANNOT be charged with anything seems a bit far fetched. Especially in light of the last 5 year fiasco in our legal systems ongoing abuses.
Doesn't mean they can. You are making claims that do not match reality to try to bolster how others should believe these affidavits simply because they are claims being made, not because they are actually credible or more than just opinions or personal beliefs.

I didn't say no one could be charged with anything. Most cannot.

For example, you cannot charge someone for perjury for instance for saying that they believed that most servicemembers voted Republican, would vote for Trump, and then that they saw, but didn't actually count to verify, an estimated 80% of military votes coming in for Biden (in Detroit) and felt this was suspicious. That is an opinion based on some stereotypes and beliefs, but it isn't most likely a lie. No prosecutor in their right mind would go after that person for perjury because there is no way to prove he lied unless you got him on tape or something saying he made those numbers up. Even then, it likely wouldn't be worth it.
 
The counting was ordered to be stopped by the people overseeing the counting.

The counting continued.

Explain.
It wasn't and you have provided no evidence that it actually was (do not even bother posting links to sites like gatewaypundit or other alt right sources, I am not going to take their word on it).
 
The stadard of evidence was that no evidence of ANY Alien visit has ever been presented.

Here is evidence that 4 dead people voted.

<snip>
All 4 of these people are older than the oldest person on the face of the earth. And they voted this cycle. Absentee.

That’s quite a turnout operation!

Here are their names.

Here was the list…

ballot-600x126.jpg

<snip>

Like I said, what are the others?
 
Considering the sliver of facts you hold from the wealth of facts available, I suppose you could legitimately hold that misconception.
You do understand that "alternative facts" are not actual facts, right?

Those of us who don't do alternative facts do indeed have a "narrow sliver" of the facts upon which your alternate reality is based

Your alternative reality is whiny and completely fear based, involves worshipping an idiot

You can keep it. We do not want any of it. We'll stick with consensus reality, Messy as it is it's nowhere near as stupid as yours.

And I don't need to be so afraid I'm grasping at straws to save the only person who stands between and my manufactured nightmares.
 
It was rejected by the SC. What would you like to discuss about it?

From your last post: I’m still curious how you can insist that we can’t know why all 59 cases were dismissed but you personally know that thousands and thousands of claims have been “proven true”

How?

Did I say "thousands and thousands of claims"?

Did I say "proven true"?
 
Did I say "thousands and thousands of claims"?

Stop stalling and answer the question. You made the declaration as part of your fact pattern. Back it up, counselor.
 
Back
Top Bottom