U.S. attorney in Georgia: ‘There’s just nothing to’ claims of election fraud

[dave8383]

You've clearly lost the debate.

Apparently not:

 

[Fledermaus]

And now you're simply repeating your irrelevant diversions ad nauseam.

Your post 281 to which you keep narcissistically alluding is merely an obviously false premise excuse you've created to fallaciously conclude "there was no election fraud". Your post does not prove that in any way, shape, or form. Your message in post 281 is a form of sophistry.

If the EVIDENCE is so overwhelming it should be easy to post a link to it.

Note the word EVIDENCE.

 

[Fledermaus]

Then keep an open mind until a full investigation has been held, or until someone presses the Armageddon button, hopefully the former.

What "full investigation" will you accept?

Considering you have rejected every full investigation presented to you so far.

 

[Fledermaus]

We live in frightening times, and many have their heads in neutral!
BLM an organisation financed by George Soros!
Stock markets manipulated breaking and destroying the pound by George Soros, who himself netted over a billion pounds profit. Destroying the lives of the nations of these islands. But he was loaned money by the IMF to destroy the pound so it was well orchestrated.

<Snipped irrelevancy>

George Soros with lord Malloch Brown, who runs dominion, your voting machines. Of course you can trust him, and the vileness he is surrounded, Biden......!

I bolded the irrelevant BS.

 

[Paradoxical]

You descend to his level and he complains!

I think that is reportable too. Good thing for you two that I think only sissies report people.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Though he did want to win and he thought he did win legally based on the many, many, many eyewitness documentation of voter fraud in both the professional and social media, Trump made it crystal clear that he would abide by whatever the thorough, accurate investigations/audits into every ballot and state policy in every contested state revealed.

Sadly, the leftist Democrats in Congressional power, puppeted by BLM, refused to authorize such investigations/audits.

So the election fraud cheating remains hidden.

It's understandable Trump didn't want to stick around and "smile" at the cheaters yesterday as they stole the White House.

Judges that saw Donald's manufactured evidence called it "gossip" and " innuendo". Your entire argument is based on "gossip" and " innuendo". The evidence doesn't warrant further investigation. The matter is closed. Biden was sworn in yesterday. Where have you been?

 

[Lursa]

Again, your argument is quantity of witness statements without any regard for quality of witness statements. That is a huge flaw in any reasoning. State exactly which witnesses or documents indicate voter fraud so that those specific ones can be examined.

It's reductio ad absurdum, extreme intentional oversimplification (well we hope it's intentional, otherwise it indicates a rather low IQ) when someone doesnt want to confront the inconvenient truths about their position. They just keep banging away at the high level stuff they can grasp and that appears on the surface, to support their preconceived beliefs.

 

[Lursa]

heh heh. You and Lursa! I'm still laughing.

And you're still wrong and unable to explain how we are.

Post 281 for reference

 

[Paradoxical]

Jesus haven't popped my head in this thread for a while - are you still playing that tired game?

Why don't you tell us exactly how many were filed by the Trump campaign and lost. A dozen? Two? Three even? Even if it's a half, a third or a quarter of that figure it's still a yuuge loss for Trump and it still means he lost the election and couldn't pwove fraud.

It doesn't matter if the same number again were filed by "other" supporters: they still all lost too - his and theirs - and all for the same reasons: improper filing, lack of evidence, late to court and lack of evidence and even more lack of evidence.

And now he's licking his wounds and crying into a bucket of chicken at Mar-a-largo.

A simple “I don’t have an erring clue“ would have saved you lots of time.

 

[Lursa]

Sorry, but each case is different because each legislature has passed different laws.

If you'd read the SCOTUS decision in post 281, you'd see that's not necessarily true at all.

 

[Lursa]

And now you're simply repeating your irrelevant diversions ad nauseam.

Your post 281 to which you keep narcissistically alluding is merely an obviously false premise excuse you've created to fallaciously conclude "there was no election fraud". Your post does not prove that in any way, shape, or form. Your message in post 281 is a form of sophistry.

Yes, that's right...I fallaciously created the Election article and clause of the Constitution that I posted AND the SCOTUS decision that defined its application.

The very same ones that you either cannot or will not address specifically. I get it. You lost, it hurts. Your feelings dont change the facts...the legal ones either.

Post 281 for reference.

 

[pamak]

If you'd read the SCOTUS decision in post 281, you'd see that's not necessarily true at all.

I understand the point you make (and I even gave a thumbs up earlier as you can see). I also talked about the issue of consequences (disenfranchising people)

.....




Each case is different, and this includes filing time and the possible consequences of a judicial review such as making decisions that will disenfranchise people ...

but here I go along with his position to show that EVEN if there is not any of the issues that your post mentions (and which he ignores), he failed to provide any support that Alito's statement about the supposedly unconstitutional process in PA is correct and is shared by three additional judges.

 

[Lursa]

i agree with your post. There are experts that counter what the rigged/fraud experts say happened. Some choose to ignore the facts.

Debating or discussing the election is similar to debating/discussing with those who believe 9/11 was an inside job and the towers were taken down by controlled demolition. They have their experts and it does not matter to them that evidence and other experts disagree with them. Similar to the 9/11 discussion when asked specific questions regarding the election the fraud believers have no answers. I am still waiting for someone to explain how a server in German can receive real time data from a stand alone voting machine that is not hooked up to anything, manipulate the data and then send it back to change the votes.

They cannot, or will not, answer the most basic of question (bold below):

~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 additional Senate hearings or investigations?​

After all that, who would you trust to investigate and adjudicate the 2020 presidential election?

 

[Lursa]

Debating or discussing the election is similar to debating/discussing with those who believe 9/11 was an inside job and the towers were taken down by controlled demolition.

This is exactly what it has come down to. They are just like those nutters at this point.

But even sadder, those 9/11 conspiracy nutters are STILL out there. 20 years later. Boy, that's a lot of butthurt delusion for The Donald's followers to look forward to. I hope someday they realize that they have a choice.

 

[Lursa]

I understand the point you make

I dont think you do. The SCOTUS decision provides a broad legal resolution which makes this irrelevant:

Sorry, but each case is different because each legislature has passed different laws.

Or perhaps you are just trying to make some other point with that poster but again, that decision covers it when it comes to whether or not ANY of those state election law changes should be upheld.

"The U.S. Supreme Court has said the framers intended the clause as “a grant of authority to issue procedural regulations, and not as a source of power to dictate electoral outcomes, to favor or disfavor a class of candidates, or to evade important constitutional restraints.”

 

[pamak]

I dont think you do. The SCOTUS decision provides a broad legal resolution which makes this irrelevant:
Or perhaps you are just trying to make some other point with that poster but again, that decision covers it when it comes to whether or not ANY of those state election law changes should be upheld.

As I said, I play along with his position (so, I ignore the point you made) just like I also ignored the other point I made about the number of the ballots in question which cannot change the election outcome in PA, so there is no reason to invalidate the result. The point is to show that his position fails at multiple levels.

 

[jpn]

No, everyone knows there was election fraud, likely massive .. even you, I'm guessing.

"Likely massive?" Nope. And pretending there was incites insurrection, as we've seen.

 

[jpn]

No, "structural"/"institutional"/"systemic" racism simply does not exist in America, and obviously so.
You can't site one example in existence today of "structural"/"institutional"/"systemic" racism .. because it doesn't exist.

Fine.
--Racial minorities are more likely than white students to be suspended from school, to have less access to rigorous math and science classes, and to be taught by lower-paid teachers with less experience, according to comprehensive data released Friday by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights.
--The real estate industry contributed to racial inequality and segregation in housing, an “outrage” that merits a historic apology, the incoming president of the National Association of Realtors (NAR) said. Home equity is the biggest source of household net worth, according to Federal Reserve data, putting minorities at a disadvantage generation after generation. Black homebuyers continue to face hurdles, such as lower credit scores and less money for down payments, which limit their ability to get on the American Dream escalator of homeownership. A “Black tax” averages $13,464 during the life of their home loans to cover such costs as mortgage insurance and higher interest rates, according to a study by a Massachusetts Institute of Technology group.
--How the GI Bill's Promise Was Denied to a Million Black WWII Veterans. (My dad was drafted in October, 1941. He got out in fall, 1945. He used the GI Bill to help him put himself through college. He was white. Of course. Because he had to be to qualify for the GI Bill).
--Body cams reveal U.S. police use less respectful language with black drivers
--If a Black person and a white person each commit a crime, the Black person has a better chance of being arrested. It’s also true that, once arrested, Black people are convicted more often than white people. When Black people are convicted, they are about 20% more likely to be sentenced to jail time, and typically see sentences 20% longer than those for whites who were convicted of similar crimes.

 

[Ontologuy]

Apparently not:

View attachment 67314678

Meaningless, obviously, within the confines of our debate.

 

[Ontologuy]

If the EVIDENCE is so overwhelming it should be easy to post a link to it.

Note the word EVIDENCE.

Your logic is flawed, obviously.

Examples of the eyewitnessed election fraud was posted all over this forum last year. We have a great search feature here. Do your research, I'm not going to do it for you.

Evidence admissible in court can only be obtained by the investigation/audit Trump was seeking .. which was denied him by the Constitution, as only state legislatures as urged by Congress can compel such an investigation/audit.

But the many, many, many confirmed eyewitness accounts of voter fraud made it clear that was likely the tip of the tip of the iceberg and logically there could be massive degrees of voter fraud.

That's undeniable.

 

[Ontologuy]

Judges that saw Donald's manufactured evidence called it "gossip" and " innuendo". Your entire argument is based on "gossip" and " innuendo". The evidence doesn't warrant further investigation. The matter is closed. Biden was sworn in yesterday. Where have you been?

A judge's ideological editorializing is irrelevant.

The bottom line remains they all knew Trump had no Constitutional standing to get results from his 65-something cases.

The matter will never be closed, I assure you. Too many people witnessed the voter fraud to ever let it go.

There will be a reckoning.

 

[Ontologuy]

Yes, that's right...I fallaciously created the Election article and clause of the Constitution that I posted AND the SCOTUS decision that defined its application. The very same ones that you either cannot or will not address specifically. I get it. You lost, it hurts. Your feelings dont change the facts...the legal ones either. Post 281 for reference.

As I said before, your continued narcissistic reference to your Post 281 is your attempt at denial of the reality of likely massive voter fraud .. your reaction is emotional, and your construct of legaleze is an attempt at denying that reality.

 

[Jetboogieman]

A judge's ideological editorializing is irrelevant.

The bottom line remains they all knew Trump had no Constitutional standing to get results from his 65-something cases.

The matter will never be closed, I assure you. Too many people witnessed the voter fraud to ever let it go.

There will be a reckoning.

Your logic is flawed, obviously.

Examples of the eyewitnessed election fraud was posted all over this forum last year. We have a great search feature here. Do your research, I'm not going to do it for you.

Evidence admissible in court can only be obtained by the investigation/audit Trump was seeking .. which was denied him by the Constitution, as only state legislatures as urged by Congress can compel such an investigation/audit.

But the many, many, many confirmed eyewitness accounts of voter fraud made it clear that was likely the tip of the tip of the iceberg and logically there could be massive degrees of voter fraud.

That's undeniable.

Stunning as usual divorce from reality with you.

Why you bother to type so much, to say nothing at all and lie with every word you say is beyond me.

 

[Ontologuy]

"Likely massive?" Nope. And pretending there was incites insurrection, as we've seen.

The only insurrection ongoing right now is by BLM followers, as BLM is a Marxist communist organization, un-American, and thus of an insurrectionist nature. All the rioting they did and looting and destroying cities and monuments and attacking the police and federal government buildings .. no, the only current insurrection right now is BLM, and obviously so.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

There will be a reckoning.

There already was "a reckoning" at the Capital. The reckoning failed.