• 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!

Trump's phone call with the GA SOS about finding votes to overturn the election

What do you think of Trump's phone call to the GA SOS?

  • Last straw, I'm changing my support from Trump to Biden

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    97
  • Poll closed .
Trump And His Allies Have Lost Nearly 60 Election Fights In Court (And Counting)

Buzzfeed??? LMAO>

His allies are private individuals acccording to buzzfeed?? WTF???

Here's from PA:


Unfortunately, the many unlawful actions undertaken by the Pennsylvania Governor's office, the Secretary of State, and what has been described as a rogue Pennsylvania Supreme Court exceeded and circumvented the state legislature's clear constitutional authority.



“The unlawful actions include, but are not limited to:

  1. Accepting ballots past 8:00 pm on Election Day
  2. Not properly requiring signatures to match those on mail-in ballots or requiring dates
    1. Meanwhile, the matching of signatures was required at a polling site
  3. Authorizing the curing of mail-in ballots with less than a 24-hour's notice
    1. Only some counties were informed and adhered to this order leaving voters treated unequally from county to county
  4. Authorizing the use of unsecure drop boxes, which is not permitted in statute
  5. Prohibiting certified poll watchers overseeing the canvassing of ballots in Philadelphia
 
I never claimed 'by Trump.' Please read better:

~60 FAILED legal challenges and The Donald-appointed DHS head of cyber security and AG Barr claim no widespread evidence of fraud? And why did so many Republican governors, secretaries of state, and election officials agree? And why so many federal judges appointed by The Donald, including 3 on SCOTUS, not buy into it either? And again...why no Senate hearings or investigations?​

😄 😄

So, now you realize I didnt lie...please acknowledge that and then:

Please answer my question: Who would you trust to investigate and adjudicate the election?
Now you're back tracking. You were caught once again.
 
No worries, he just got Pwned.

I wrote: ~60 FAILED legal challenges😄
Just in from PA:

Unfortunately, the many unlawful actions undertaken by the Pennsylvania Governor's office, the Secretary of State, and what has been described as a rogue Pennsylvania Supreme Court exceeded and circumvented the state legislature's clear constitutional authority.



“The unlawful actions include, but are not limited to:

  1. Accepting ballots past 8:00 pm on Election Day
  2. Not properly requiring signatures to match those on mail-in ballots or requiring dates
    1. Meanwhile, the matching of signatures was required at a polling site
  3. Authorizing the curing of mail-in ballots with less than a 24-hour's notice
    1. Only some counties were informed and adhered to this order leaving voters treated unequally from county to county
  4. Authorizing the use of unsecure drop boxes, which is not permitted in statute
  5. Prohibiting certified poll watchers overseeing the canvassing of ballots in Philadelphia
 
Just in from PA:

Unfortunately, the many unlawful actions undertaken by the Pennsylvania Governor's office, the Secretary of State, and what has been described as a rogue Pennsylvania Supreme Court exceeded and circumvented the state legislature's clear constitutional authority.



“The unlawful actions include, but are not limited to:

  1. Accepting ballots past 8:00 pm on Election Day
  2. Not properly requiring signatures to match those on mail-in ballots or requiring dates
    1. Meanwhile, the matching of signatures was required at a polling site
  3. Authorizing the curing of mail-in ballots with less than a 24-hour's notice
    1. Only some counties were informed and adhered to this order leaving voters treated unequally from county to county
  4. Authorizing the use of unsecure drop boxes, which is not permitted in statute
  5. Prohibiting certified poll watchers overseeing the canvassing of ballots in Philadelphia

Translation: Those officials actually let black people vote, that is illegal!
 
I never claimed 'by Trump.' Please read better:

~60 FAILED legal challenges and The Donald-appointed DHS head of cyber security and AG Barr claim no widespread evidence of fraud? And why did so many Republican governors, secretaries of state, and election officials agree? And why so many federal judges appointed by The Donald, including 3 on SCOTUS, not buy into it either? And again...why no Senate hearings or investigations?

😄 😄

So, now you realize I didnt lie...please acknowledge that and then:

Please answer my question: Who would you trust to investigate and adjudicate the election?

Now you're back tracking. You were caught once again.
Haaa haaa haa! Let's see where I ever mentioned ~60 Trump lawsuits! LOL Come on...post number, quote? PROVE IT.

No backpedaling on my part, that was my original quote to you. You got caught lying. Or...prove it.

Look at you scramble and spin spin spin! :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

Post 182 for reference: the original 😃
 
Once again, the MSM which you guys are indoctrinated by, is 100% wrong. How many times can they be wrong till you folks figure out you been had?
LOL, that's not evidence. And you presenting bullshit from Newsmax doesn't make it any more trustworthy, nor does it make anything Trump said correct or something he should have done.
 
LOL, that's not evidence. And you presenting bullshit from Newsmax doesn't make it any more trustworthy, nor does it make anything Trump said correct or something he should have done.
The View is better than Newsmax?
 
Ratffensperger going for the throat...

 
The View is better than Newsmax?
Never watched The View. Suppose you must think those are equivalent though, since you compared them.

I actually listened to the tape of the call. I have the affidavits (many of them, definitely the main ones). I pay attention to what Trump has put out as well as fact checks and information actually being put out by the people involved in the process. Trump is an idiot. He makes bullshit claims and expects everyone to believe them because his loyal followers are fooled by every one of them.
 
Ratffensperger going for the throat...


This makes me both glad that Trump tweeted his usual lies so that he did release that tape, but also kinda disappointed in the SoSGa. While he certainly was doing the right thing when it comes to standing up for the legal votes, against Trump and his conspiracy theories and lies, at the same time, I don't think it would have been right to keep this to himself forever, especially not since there really are some serious implications in this call.
 
Never watched The View. Suppose you must think those are equivalent though, since you compared them.

I actually listened to the tape of the call. I have the affidavits (many of them, definitely the main ones). I pay attention to what Trump has put out as well as fact checks and information actually being put out by the people involved in the process. Trump is an idiot. He makes bullshit claims and expects everyone to believe them because his loyal followers are fooled by every one of them.
If you did then you know that Trump was asking him to root out the fraud.
 
This makes me both glad that Trump tweeted his usual lies so that he did release that tape, but also kinda disappointed in the SoSGa. While he certainly was doing the right thing when it comes to standing up for the legal votes, against Trump and his conspiracy theories and lies, at the same time, I don't think it would have been right to keep this to himself forever, especially not since there really are some serious implications in this call.
Funny that the tape proves Trump is right and in bizzarro world, the Goebbels say it was the opposite. George Orwell is proud of you folks.
 
Judge to Trump lawyers and grifters: What is your complaint?
Trumpsters: Massive fraud and corruption your honor, everywhere we looked and we looked everywhere especially in the areas that the did not vote for Trump.
Judge: Where is your proof?
Trumpsters: We have sworn affidavits from thousands of patriots proving our case your honor.
Judge: Bring them to me now and put them under oath.
Trumpsters: Yes your honor. Bring in the first witness, Joan the hairstylist.
Judge: What did Joan have to do with the election?
Trumpsters: Along with the other thousands we interviewed, Joan watches OAN and Newmax and is a frequent Reddit follower of TheDonald your honor.
Judge: Do they have first hand knowledge or hearsay evidence?
Trumpsters: They saw it all on youtube and on TV your honor.
Judge: Bailiff, whack his pee pee, this case is dismissed.
 
Last edited:
Are the ballots in color now?
The View is better than Newsmax?
More spinning and no winning! 👆 Not a direct answer to be found LOL

Still waiting for you to prove I lied...or admit I didnt. (Not holding my breath, it's more a reflection on your "credibility.")

And then we still have this outstanding, related question: Who would you trust to investigate and adjudicate this election?

Post 182
for reference.
 
Funny that the tape proves Trump is right and in bizzarro world, the Goebbels say it was the opposite. George Orwell is proud of you folks.
No, it actually proves he is wrong and believing conspiracy theories spread across the Internet. For example, he cited multiple times that there were other states with more votes than voters. Not true. He is going off the rumors spread based on bad math. He was corrected several times by SoSGa and his lawyer, but he swears his info is correct.

You can make all the claims you want, but it doesn't make Trump info correct or factual. It is still all just conspiracy crap.
 
If you did then you know that Trump was asking him to root out the fraud.
Not necessarily all the fraud, just the fraud in 11780 votes. :p
 
Why has suit been filed, then?
Actually, the suit was filed beforehand and this information was corrected. There is no suit against Raffensperger regarding this phone call. There was a suit filed on Dec 31st regarding the election, making many of the same claims made in this call and that is what he is refuting and most likely why his lawyer was present. But there is no evidence of any sort of agreement to confidentiality and the presence of Meadows negates the claim that it was confidential.


Correction: This story has been clarified to reflect that no new lawsuits have been filed over the recording of the phone conversation between Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and President Donald Trump. Georgia GOP Chairman David Shafer’s tweets below reference existing litigation filed before Saturday’s conversation.
 
More spinning and no winning! 👆 Not a direct answer to be found LOL

Still waiting for you to prove I lied...or admit I didnt. (Not holding my breath, it's more a reflection on your "credibility.")

And then we still have this outstanding, related question: Who would you trust to investigate and adjudicate this election?

Post 182
for reference.
In the proud boys we trust:)
 
Geez, Cap'n... You know that the heart of conspiracy theories lies in the fact that you can't prove a negative, right? Give me EVIDENCE that Bigfoot does not exist. Give me EVIDENCE that 9/11 wasn't an inside job. Give me EVIDENCE that the Illuminati wasn't at the heart of my last hemorrhoid flare up.

You're asking for a desperate, ridiculous claim, that no court in your country has seen fit to give credibility to, to be proven inaccurate. Honestly, bud, if the fact that it's coming out of Trump isn't proof enough, I must wonder how you feel after your four year long nap...hehe...

Here's the problem.

We have assertions of evidence showing fraud. Almost NONE of this evidence has been evaluated on the merits in Court. Which brings us to the constant meme "60 failed challenges," where the vast majority were neither filed by the Trump campaign, nor were they dismissed on the merits. In most cases they were dismissed on procedural grounds without any examination of the evidence. Therefore, when I see members exulting over legal losses, I shrug because the evidence was never given a fair hearing in Court.

Then there were the original claims by the MSM, Social Media, and political talking heads of no fraud, which quickly turned into no evidence of "widespread" fraud. This because it was soon shown there WAS evidence of various forms of fraud, which had to quickly be countered by the assertion "insufficient to affect the election."

Now my problem is this. What is the fear of allowing the evidence a fair hearing?

I think the answer is this. IMO this one-way effort by Courts to avoid dealing with the issues happened because hearing the cases would threaten their existence. We already saw arguments being made by the Democrats/Progressives/Socialists seeking to "stack the Court(s)" for political purposes. Having a fair hearing of evidence which might actually show the election was not "fair" would not only destroy any faith in our election system, but the Judicial system as well.

That is of concern to me, because the more people are led to believe the system is not "fair and equitable," the more rapidly it is likely to fail, and that would mean the failure of our nation's continued existence.
 
Back
Top Bottom