Could Texas Lawsuit Overturn Presidential Election?
Texas Files Multi-State Election Lawsuit, Ensuring That Fraud Is Heard By SCOTUS Now
On Monday, just before midnight, the State of Texas filed a lawsuit that is far more important than all of the others surrounding the presidential election of November 3rd.
Texas brought a suit against four states that did something they cannot do: they violated the U.S. Constitution in their conduct of the presidential election. And this violation occurred regardless of the amount of election fraud that may have resulted. The four defendant states are Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
https://conservativedailypost.com/texas … cotus-now/Not sure, but I am sure it will work to get some of the evidence into a court to be considered. And we also will see how these states rushed to get through voting rule changes that well appeared to increase fraud. I think it would be wonderful if this all ends up in the Supreme Court. I think it is also wonderful that Ted Cruz has stepped up to head up the case in Penn. if it reaches the SC. He is brilliant...
Not sure about the Overturning Part....
But, it may invalidate the electoral votes from those states, which would lead to no candidate reaching the 270 threshold...and pushing things to Congress doing a contingent vote.The effort is being backed by 17 or 18 states last I heard.
Against the four states that violated Constitutional law and changed their elections against the will of their legislative bodies.
It just so happens that those 4 states are states that Trump was said to be winning at one point, especially PA and GA, and then those very changes made to the election process allowed for him to lose those states.
These continued attacks on our fair and free election system are beyond meritless, beyond reckless -- they are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican party to disregard the will of the people-- and name their own victors. https://t.co/RZsznlMTsJ
- AG Josh Shapiro (@PAAttorneyGen) December 8, 2020
And Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul (D) tweeted, "I feel sorry for Texans that their tax dollars are being wasted on such a genuinely embarrassing lawsuit. Texas is as likely to change the outcome of the Ice Bowl as it is to overturn the will of Wisconsin voters in the 2020 presidential election."
You folks never give up in the attempt to subvert democracy just so that your candidate can be coronated. We will continue to resist with all energy as you must be made to fail in this endeavor.
Better hurry, though, Time is running out
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurk … n-lawsuit/We know time is running out. We are hurrying.
I would respond that it is against the rule of law to elect a president using fraudulent votes. That decreases faith in the voting system and worse. You can't have half the population of a country believing the voting system is rigged for the Democrat party. The rule of law must prevail.
“The Texas suit is clear, and it presents a compelling case. The four offending states each violated the U.S. Constitution in two ways.
First, they violated the Electors Clause of Article II of the Constitution when executive or judicial officials in the states changed the rules of the election without going through the state legislatures. The Electors Clause requires that each State “shall appoint” its presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”
The second constitutional violation occurred when individual counties in each of the four states changed the way that they would receive, evaluate, or treat the ballots. Twenty years ago, in the landmark case of Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court held that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when one Florida county treated ballots one way, and another Florida county treated ballots a different way. Voters had the constitutional right to have their ballots treated equally from county to county. ”"You can't have half the population of a country believing the voting system is rigged for the Democrat party. The rule of law must prevail."
-----------
And what about the other half of the country that says otherwise, Mike?
They represent the majority of the electorate, are we to ignore them?
Texas does not have any standing to propose such a suit attacking the electoral processes of other states.
Your 2 points are well stated. Did the violation in your point one occur for all 5-6 states in the swing catagory? But outside Trump's loss, GOP candidates did well, you will have to prove in the environment of the Coronavirus that the change of procedures,at least one permitted by the state Supreme Court, represented irrefutable harm to Trump's candidacy and would be of a magnitude to change the total outcome of the election. I will pull up a ringside seat for that show.
The question is not about irregularities, but magnitude. To disenfranchise the will of 80 million voters compared to 72 million will not set well with the rest of us. So prepare for a grueling conflict and for the sake of your side, it had better be good."They represent the majority of the electorate, are we to ignore them?"
The majority of the electorate or the majority of the votes? That would seem to be the question, as a great number of those votes are being reported as illegal for one reason or another.
Does it make those illegal votes legitimate because your chosen candidate won with them? Not to me.
"you will have to prove in the environment of the Coronavirus that the change of procedures,at least one permitted by the state Supreme Court, represented irrefutable harm to Trump's candidacy and would be of a magnitude to change the total outcome of the election."
Now this is just plain untrue. The Constitution, setting the requirements for the EC does not mention Coronavirus. Nor does it say that illegal activities can only be challenged if the would change the election.
Finally, no, it IS about irregularities. Liberals have claimed for years that only Conservatives attempt any kind of fraudulent voting activity; it coming to the front that the primary offenders are liberals. Who would have thought, after all those years of declaring the opposite?
I would have to say that for the sake of YOUR "side" your defense of the events had better be good. It is YOUR party that stands to quietly disappear into the mists of time if even half of the accusations being made are true.Oh really? We will just see, in the time remaining, who will prevail.
You can continue to speculate until the cows come home, but better prove it in court and do it fast.....
Like I told you before, Wilderness, for your side and its outlandish claims, its checkmate.There is little doubt that the socialist faction in the country (that's the liberals) will prevail. Right now, the balance of power is very much on their side, what with the vast media support.
I must admit, I haven't been following the detail of the lawsuits, but from what I've seen, the accusations seem to related to thousands of votes, or even tens of thousands of votes in some cases.
I dont doubt there was some election fraud (probably on both sides, to be fair) - but if you add all the lawsuits up, how many fraudulent votes are we talking about, over the whole country? Is it really enough to change the result?This is a major problem for sure. But I take the view that although 10,000 votes might be found, say in Pennsylvania) that were wrong that does NOT mean that is all there is. It would take many months and a great deal of effort to check that EVERY ballot was legal AND counted correctly. I don't have a clue what the law says about that - it would be impossible in the necessary time frame to do all the research needed.
But if you find that an illegal procedure was used that's another kettle of fish entirely. Then, it seems to me, that the residents of Pennsylvania forfeit their right to vote because of the illegal procedure.
A very thorny issue, seems to me, and the cries that all the lawsuits are bogus and should be thrown out (because we all know there is no fraud in American elections!
) is ridiculous.
I think your numbers are off because so much of the Biden vote was based on fraudulent votes. I think is significantly less. I believe much of Biden's support is an illusion.
The lawsuit is not about proving illegal voting. It's about states violating the constitution. You can't have 46 states follow the constitution and 4 believe it doesn't apply to them.
According to a friend who is a lawyer, if the Texas lawsuit (Missouri has joined Texas) is successful, the electoral votes from these states will be invalidated. President Donald Trump will then serve another four years.
The faith in the election system is at stake.If you will let me jump in, your closing point seems an important one.
"The question is not about irregularities, but magnitude. To disenfranchise the will of 80 million voters compared to 72 million will not set well with the rest of us."
Why is the question not about irregularities? Your point seems to say that if enough people will be upset, or appeased, by the judging of those irregularities, then they, (the irregularities), really don't matter. Is that a fair assessment of your comment?
I have the luxury of addressing this point without enough information to judge the validity of the claimed "irregularities," but I don't think I need that information to question your perspective.
You speak of "magnitude." Is it your contention that a little wrong is okay as long as it doesn't change what you want, but if that "little" wrong does change the game then it is wrong to judge it?
Also, if this process does bring legitimacy to the election process, how is that disenfranchising 80 million voters? It sounds like you are saying it doesn't matter if the election process changes were legit or not because they yielded the result you desired. Does that shoe fit both feet?
GAJump in any time....
Irregularities does not mean systemic voter fraud that is identified over several states. There cannot be expected a perfect election process with over a 150 million people going to the polls.
There is always going to be a little wrong as part of the very scope of the election process. The question is: does the GOP claim of systemic fraud over several states have merit, and does it rise in magnitude to levels where millions of votes are to be discarded as a remedy. That, as of now, has yet to be proven. This amounts to much more than a "little wrong".
What I am saying is that the integrity of the system is the most important, but that the Republicans are playing partisan politics and their claims remain unfounded. I insist on irrefutable Proof, period.
Your last paragraph reminds me more of the Republican position, and you want to talk to me about kumbaya in Washington?I am not sure how my last paragraph left you with a "Republican" impression, I just thought it to be a claim of right is right and wrong is wrong.
Otherwise, I agree with your comment up to that point. The integrity of the election process is what is most important—regardless of which side of the fence you are viewing it from.
GA
The Texas lawsuit is gaining momentum.
Missouri joins ‘fight’ alongside Texas to challenge election before Supreme Constitutional scholar discusses Texas claiming four battleground states violated Constitution with election management.
Eric Schmitt, the attorney general from Missouri, announced on Twitter late Tuesday that his state is “in the fight” after Texas announced its election challenge that would invalidate the 62 Electoral College votes from four battleground states and award President Trump with a second term.
“Election integrity is central to our republic,” Schmitt, a Republican, tweeted. “And I will defend it at every turn. As I have in other cases—I will help lead the effort in support of Texas’ #SCOTUS filing today. Missouri is in the fight.”
https://usa.timesofnews.com/breaking-ne … court.htmlBIG NEWS
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Texas Lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin
This will determine the election.
"It is being reported that a Texas lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin regarding alleged voter irregularities has been officially taken up (docketed) by the Supreme Court of the United States. This means it has been docketed, and we will report further on the progression of this case.
This gives no sense of what type of decisions they will make on the case but it is a huge deal in a sense because they are indeed actually taking it seriously."
https://mediarightnews.com/supreme-cour … y-lawsuit/I must say I will be very disappointed if Trump's allegations are not heard by the SC. These allegations are serious, and these whistleblowers need to be heard. Otherwise, our voting system will remain useless to honest citizens.
"The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Texas Lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin."
I do not think that is an accurate statement.How is it inaccurate? The case has been put on the Supreme Court's docket. They will be hearing the case.
I cannot find a single additional news report saying the SC has agreed to hear the case.
Neither can I. I also note that the link to MediaRight said that "It is being reported" that SCOTUS will hear the case; I have to wonder is "reporting" that tidbit and what they are using as a source.
Yes, that is why I think it is probably not true. From what I have read, it seems doubtful that the Supreme Court will hear the case.
From my (extremely limited) understanding, they almost have to as it is required when states sue each other. Could be very wrong there, however.
I think the law is that the SCOTUS does not HAVE to hear any case. I think there is probably pressure to hear this one because it involves several states.
I have not found any reports that claim the case has been taken either.
Do you honestly feel Trump has a chance in the SC? To my mind it's all over bar the shouting.
Okay...I asked someone I know and they clarified the situation.
The SCOTUS did not deny the Texas case outright. So, there is a good chance they will hear it. ALSO, they asked for the states to respond to the Texas lawsuit, this is also a strong indication they will take the case.
So, once the states respond is when the case will or will not be officially put on the SCOTUS docket.
"SCOTUS issues *deadline* to Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin & Georgia to respond to Texas lawsuit charging states with violating the U.S. Constitution with unlawful state elections."
https://ussanews.com/News1/2020/12/09/s … s-lawsuit/WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday handed a defeat to Republicans seeking to throw out up to 2.5 million mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania as they try to undo President Donald Trump's election loss, with the justices refusing to block the state from formalizing President-elect Joe Biden's victory there.
-----------
After this, what chance is there that the Supreme Court will take seriously any related claims from Texas regarding this matter? Is it now a potential 20 electoral votes that are now off of the table?Do they have a choice? It is not an individual, it is a state suing another state. Not sure SCOTUS can reject the claim outright.
From what I have read, they can refuse to hear it if they choose.
You are absolutely right. SCOTUS is not required to hear any case.
With an AG from one of the largest states and 17 AGs from other states supporting this...I think the pressure is on for them to hear the case.
BUT...you are right. They don't have to take the case.I'm confident that if there is a legitimate reason for them to hear it, they will. I actually hope they will so we can put this issue to bed once and for all.
While a refusal to hear the case is also putting the issue to bed, I have a feeling hard-core Trumpers would not see it that way.You're probably right - when 1/3 of the states of the union formally request that SCOTUS examine the constitutionality of actions, and they refuse to do so, it would not set well with those "Trumpers". Of course, it should not set well with anyone else either, but given that it might produce a loss of the WH I don't expect the Trump haters to care about something so mundane as the Constitution and the law.
You would not trust the ruling of a predominantly conservative Supreme Court?
While it is important to you to have a politically biased Supreme Court, I don't find it to be advantageous to the country. I see the current SCOTUS to issue judgements primarily based on the Constitution rather than personal beliefs and agendas. Opinions such as Bader/Ginsburg's on ObamaCare are dwindling and that is a good thing.
Which means that if they refuse to hear a Constitution question, after being requested to by over a third of the states compromising this union, it means they are NOT fulfilling their job description. No, I would not be pleased, whether you label the individuals as conservative or something else.Sigh....when have I ever said I prefer a politically biased Supreme Court? I don't. Sheesh.
So your answer is "no."Really? Yet you were adamant that Trump not seat SCOTUS members...because he wouldn't pick liberal ones, choosing instead "constitutionalists" that would render verdicts based on the constitution.
That doesn't fit will with "I don't prefer a politically biased SCOTUS".Lol, I think you have me confused with someone else. I never questioned Trump's right to select SC justices. I did question Mitch's denial of Obama's pick but, hey, he set the new precedent for the future now, didn't he?
In any case, we now know that you will not accept the SC decision unless it agrees with what you want.I want them to follow the law, and I want them to ensure that others do so as well. Take that as you will; pretty sure you will twist it into something it is not.
I want them to follow the law, too. I have no reason to doubt the lawfulness of any decision they might make. I don't have the expertise to judge something like that. The only reason I might doubt them would be if there were an outcry from a vast majority of constitutional experts. I would never, on my own sole judgment, presume that the Supreme Court did not follow the law.
Cred, they didn't refuse to hear this case because of its merits. They didn't hear it because the lawsuit wasn't filed in a timely manner. They provided no ruling on the merits of the case.
Well, Mike, I understand your point of view, here is mine as expressed by, I confess, a progressive oriented website, but an article that well expands on a view held by much of the Black community and the progressive left in general.
https://www.salon.com/2020/12/09/trump- … nt-a-coup/Cred,
There is a lot wrong with this article. First, there is no attempt to identify the reason's Republicans believe this and to provide an alternate view. It simply states opinions and backs up those opinions. This is extremely unbalanced and just an opinion.
I don't think this is a view held by Black conservatives. I believe progressives would have this opinion.Black conservatives? The tally of the amount of votes given to Biden over Trump in the Black Community would seem to indicate that there are not a great many of those.
Opinion? Yes, it is just a different opinion from your own.It's interesting that your link gives the (strong) indication that progressives feel that ignoring and violating election laws is fine...as long as the desired result is achieved. That IS what the SCOTUS request is about - violating the Constitution and state laws in order to find more voters casting ballots for the liberal candidate. It is a telling point, at least in my eyes.
It is a telling point before my eyes as well, Wilderness
1. Neither Texas nor any combination of states have any legal right to challenge the electoral processes of other states, it all reeks of dirty right wing partisanship.
2. All 4 states in question were satisfied with their processes. Georgia, controlled by Republicans and after several recounts, says their numbers were accurate.
3. At stake are hundred of thousands of votes cast by those that were following the instructions of their respective states as to how to cast their ballots. Could the Supreme Court be expected to trash all of these votes and voters so that your precious clown can claim victory?
4. It would be foolish for the court to get involved in partisan politics just to favor a loser candidate and his insane supporters. And it WILL NOT STAND
I'll bet you that the Supreme Court will fundamentally dismiss the entire suit."Neither Texas nor any combination of states have any legal right to challenge the electoral processes of other states, it all reeks of dirty right wing partisanship."
Actually, this isn't true. They do have a right to challenge the four states following the constitution as 46 other states have followed. There is now 17 states with Texas joining the lawsuit. They have a legal right because its the actions of these four states that have impacted the presidential election.
It's the inability of these four states to follow the Constitution that has led to such significant voter fraud.It is irrelevant, as I have stated in posts prior, Trump will not be allowed to remain in office.
So, whether States like PA and GA had hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes cast for Biden or not, it is irrelevant.
Whether how those states held their elections and counted the votes was Constitutional (legal) or not is irrelevant.
Trump is being ousted by forces more powerful that our "free" elections and our "legal" system.
Arguing over it will change nothing. The legitimacy of the election will change nothing. Trump will be removed and the changes to come globally, economically, etc. are going to come.
And to be honest Credence, if you had 100% proof that you believed that the election was stolen in those states you wouldn't care... anyone who wants "change" and wants Trump out and believes in their "cause" is willing to accept whatever it took to make it happen.
There is no place for honest elections and liberty for all in a global society controlled by international conglomerations, corporations and banks.Although all you said makes very clear sense. You may want to realize many in the country are very much not only shocked but angry. We are at a crossroads, a great divide. Many just may be willing to fight to keep our Constitution intact.
I guess the first question would be, who are those people going to fight?
The second question would be, what support do they have, what sources of wealth or power are behind them?
Or another way to look at it, who is supporting Trump?
Social Media giants like Facebook, Google and Twitter do not support him or his supporters... in fact they censor the President and all in his Administration.
The MSM news sources select what they report and how they report it, and none of them support Trump.
What allies does Trump have in DC? Maybe a handful of Republicans, a select few serving in his Administration, the rest of DC is set against him.
He won't be getting any support from China whom he has attacked consistently, the EU whom he badgered about NATO contributions and unfair trade agreements, he has had similar acrimonious relationships with Mexico, Canada, etc.
International Corporations and International Agencies aren't particularly fond of him, the UN stands opposed to his Nationalism... Trump has almost no allies, and those who would support him (IE - Israel, UK) will support Biden as well.You have laid out some real common sense, scary, very realistic opinions. Hard to even argue your logic. I can't... It seems we have a very grime future unless we in some fashion step up to the plate in some fashion.
Just popping in to say that we think alike in at least one way. When I see my friends on social media claim they are ready to take up arms to "save" America, I really want to ask them "Who, exactly, are you going to kill? Which of your neighbors are such a dangerous enemy that you are willing to shoot them?"
Of course, I don't do it because I save my social media for pleasant things like cat videos and family photos, but I often wonder what they would say.
Ken,
I guess you continue to misjudge me. I am progressive and as such, I have to subscribe to the idea that "fair is fair". I dislike Trump in a way far beyond any previous Republican President. But even with that, I support the current electoral system. If Trump can prove in an irrefutable way that fraud had occurred and it is substantiated by the Supreme Court, I have to go along. But, why would I think that when over 50 law suits put forth by Trump and company in regard to this matter have been dismissed, that there is so much as a scintilla of merit to Trump and the GOP complaints?
Unlike Republicans and Rightwingers, we on the left still try to play by the rules. The GOP has yet to prove systemic fraud over several states, and proof is what is required before I budge an inch.
I guess I will go que cera, que cera..... with what ever comes next.
1. That is flatly untrue. Should those practices violate the Constitution, or even the applicable state law, other states have not only the right but the obligation to challenge it. Our voting must remain inviolate, not subject to arbitrary changes by bureaucrats.
2. That they were "satisfied" does NOT mean they were legal. That's kind of the point, after all.
3. True. Thousands stand a chance, however small, of being disenfranchised. And whose fault is that? Those that illegally changed the rules midstream or those that require legal elections? My vote is the latter - what's yours?
They may dismiss. Or not - those many states trying to protect constitutional law are pretty telling."1. That is flatly untrue. Should those practices violate the Constitution, or even the applicable state law, other states have not only the right but the obligation to challenge it. Our voting must remain inviolate, not subject to arbitrary changes by bureaucrats.,
-----------
That has yet to be proven that that stupid claims by Texas and the pathetic red state regions are in fact as they allege. Lets see if the Supreme Court finds violations of Constitutional law to the magnitude of just giving the Presidency to Trump as a remedy?
If Trump gets his way, these other voters WILL be disenfranchised, and that is going to be trouble in River City for the Republicans. So, what is your answer, just dismiss urban voters and give the Presidency to Trump by fiat?
You know that it is strange that more than the 4 states listed in the suit made COVID-19 related adjustments to their election procedures.
What was it about Texas allowing motor voting in Harris County (Houston)? Funny the only states that have been singled out are swing states that Trump needed for victory. How crass and obvious a ploy is this? Do you not think that the Supreme Court won't take this into consideration?
I think that Trump, Texas and its accomplises are "dead in the water"."That has yet to be proven that that stupid claims by Texas and the pathetic red state regions are in fact as they allege."
Uhh...that's why we have courts. To see if stupid claims by pathetic people have a legal basis. We don't decide if they do or not by not entertaining the suit.
"So, what is your answer, just dismiss urban voters and give the Presidency to Trump by fiat?"
Honestly, I don't know. What do you think - should we allow illegal votes because if we don't then people too stupid to follow directions don't get counted? Or because their own stupid bureaucrats failed to plan ahead as they should have, resulting in an illegal election? Should we ignore the law in order to maintain a Biden presidency?
At least you [i]hope[i] they are dead in the water. So far the liberals have, I think, successfully denied a full investigation into the nuts and bolts of the election, but this one is straightforward and requires no investigation at all. Either the states in question followed the law or they didn't; no need to search hundreds of thousands of ballots and verify each one. But the very simplicity of this claim of illegal voting makes it quick and easy for SCOTUS to rule on."If Trump gets his way, these other voters WILL be disenfranchised, and that is going to be trouble in River City for the Republicans. So, what is your answer, just dismiss urban voters and give the Presidency to Trump by fiat?"
How about if the bumbling old fool known as Biden became president on fraudulent voting? How about all the people who voted honestly being disenfranchised because their state decided to negate their vote with fraudulent votes?
The Democrats in these four states did this...they brought it on themselves. If Democrats are angry, they should be angry at those responsible or it...the Democrat leadership. It show they knew they would have lost should they have not tried to use fraudulent voting.
". It would be foolish for the court to get involved in partisan politics just to favor a loser candidate and his insane supporters. And it WILL NOT STAND"
You may be right Cred. However, given the exact same circumstances, but with the parties reversed, would you feel the same about this process? If the states' changed election processes favored Pres. Trump, would you still hold to your same justifications of their validity?
GAHow is it that any state's election process favored Biden over Trump?
Hmm . . . I didn't intend for that to be the context of my comment, but I will try to answer your question.
As I understand what is currently going on, the Republicans are saying that several states' election processes, ie. extended acceptable receiving dates, ballot drop boxes, the dismissal of signature or postmark ballot validations, etc. etc. (surely you are familiar with the Republicans multiple legal challenge rationales), favored the ballots of Biden voters.
I am not endorsing that claim, just reiterating it. So, if the same claims were made by Democrats, (in the alter-world of a Trump win), would a Democrat, (in this case, Cred), hold the same view that it would be foolish for the Courts to get involved to favor a "losing" candidate?
However, to throw in my 2-cents, I do think Pennsylvania's Court-mandated 3-day extension of ballot acceptance was technically unconstitutional, and since it seems an accepted fact that Democrats more strongly favor mail-in balloting, it seems an easy correlation that increased mail-in balloting favors Biden. I don't think it would change the results, but I do think it was wrong.
GAI think for any of those arguments to be valid, it would have to be proved that the process, whatever it may be, was directed at one party over another or one particular demographic over another. Anyone can mail in a ballot, so I fail to see how that decision unfairly targeted specific voters. I do understand how the three-day extension being made so late in the election cycle could have the appearance of favoring Democrats over Republicans.
Just for the sake of argument—because, since I don't think a correction would change that state's results, I can live with it, consider this argument for the matter of 'proof'.
I have heard that historical data shows more Democrats vote mail-in/absentee than Republicans. So if the 3-day extension provided for more mail-in ballots to be received, isn't it a fair assumption that this would benefit Democrats more than Republicans? And wouldn't it also be fair to say folks know this?
Then, couldn't it be said that any effort to increase mail-in ballot quantity would be a direct benefit to Democrats?
Remember now, I am just arguing the logic as I see it, not some conspiracy theory of nefarious dealings, but that logic leads me to the next question; "How far is that "appearance of favoring Democrats" from the reality of historical numbers that say it really does benefit Democrats—most simply by their majority use of mail-ins?
There might be a groan or two left in this horse, but maybe we should let it pass on peacefully. ;-)
GAYou have a valid argument. It's similar to the argument that certain Republican states benefited Republicans by shutting down polling places in certain areas.
"I have heard that historical data shows more Democrats vote mail-in/absentee than Republicans. So if the 3-day extension provided for more mail-in ballots to be received, isn't it a fair assumption that this would benefit Democrats more than Republicans? "
You want logic? Then lets' think about this. Never before has it been permitted to have mail in ballots be counted 3 days after an election.
The mail in ballots have no time stamp on them...so there is no way to show when or if they've been mailed.
There is no process in place to verify the mail in ballots with legally registered voters.
So...using logic...this makes it possible for election night to see who is leading. It is then possible to create the necessary number of mail in ballots to be counted for up to three days after the election. Since the election is over and the number of votes needed is then determined...and there is no time stamp or verification...the number of necessary fraudulent mail in ballots can then be created and utilized as necessary. Using logic, this is a method that could explain why a 700,000 vote lead with 65 % of the vote counted can evaporate in Pennsylvania. This could explain why an incumbent president who did better than he did in his first election lost. It also explains how Biden's campaign was able to get more votes at higher levels than even obama's first election. It explains why vote counting was stopped on the night of the election...presumably to create the necessary fraudulent ballots. It explains how the results seem fraudulent.
Lets not get into the voting machines that turn out Biden with a 29% lead when it is given the same number of ballots for President Donald Trump and Biden.
We'll even forget the numerous eye-witnesses that have signed affidavits to what they saw and experienced.
Using logic...you can not conclude anything other than the Democrats used the most extensive fraud scheme to win an election in the history of the United States.I guess I left that door wide open, didn't I Mike?
I would bet we both get our information from Google sources, and since I couldn't find any credible sources that support your contentions I am hopeful you will clue me into the sources that make you so confident in your claims.
For instance; your Dominion 29% vote switching claim. What I found seems to debunk that claim, (it was attributed to several conservative sites: Mediaite, Thegatewaypundit, thedonald.win, etc.).
It seems all of them cited an Edison Research report for their information, but Edison Research denies it ever gave such a report. So what are your sources that convince you the voting machines did this?
You are right that the 3-day extension was historic, but so were the efforts to deal with an election during a pandemic, (remember that I was also critical of that extension. The difference seems to be that I don't think it affected enough votes to make a difference).
However, your statement that "It is then possible to create the necessary number of mail in ballots to be counted for up to three days after the election. " is much more of a stretch than I would consider realistic. Do you understand that every county's ballot is different? Can you imagine the magnitude of sophistication that would be required to do what you are implying was done? That logic certainly does not work for me to explain how ". . . a 700,000 vote lead with 65 % of the vote counted can evaporate . . ." Consider the intricacies; how many different county-specific ballots, how many voters in each county, etc. etc. Nope, I don't see any logic in that Mike. But I am open to being persuaded. What is your proof?
I also wouldn't put a lot of faith in the "eye witnesses" that I have seen presented in the media. How about the truck driver that claimed to deliver 28 pallets of ballots—in October*— from New York to Pennsylvania? He claimed he was able to see some of the text on the ballots, (at least enough to recognize that they were ballots), as the pallets were wheeled by him as he watched the pallets being loaded onto his trailer. Think about that; pallets of ballots; how were the ballots loaded on the pallet, in open-topped boxes, (how else would he be able to see the text)? That doesn't seem logical to me, that boxes of ballots would be stacked on pallets with no tops on them. That would be a lot of boxes. Did they buy them from an office supply store without tops that would make them more sturdy, or make rounds of local grocery stores asking for empty boxes?
*It is important to note that October date claim, (I think I recall he said it happened on Oct. 21). Can you imagine the required sophistication, (yep, I used that word again), to prepare hundreds of thousands, (millions? how many ballots can you pack on 28 pallets?), of fraudulent votes., 'just in case you needed them',two weeks before an election?
(ps. I watched that clip on the news, but I bet you can find the truck driver's interview on youtube to see it for yourself)
Almost all of your claims sound like the conservative sites' talking points, and none that I have seen, so far, have been supported by credible evidence. Is just the source of the claim enough for you to deem them credible?
Start with the easy one Mike, show me the source of the Dominion voting machines claim that convinced you it is true.
Otherwise, yes, I certainly can use "logic" to determine your claims that the Democrats stole the election are not supported by evidence.
GAIn regard to Dominion machines, the witness Col Waldron gives his testimony on the system. His testimony is very straight forward in regards to the Dominion system, and what can be done to commit fraud very easily on the system. If you listen to his testimony you may be very shocked at what can be done, and what he feels was done even in one case the time it was done. Up to you to listen. And when you hear what he has to say you may ask yourself, why is his testimony not be reported on or taken seriously. I have listened to several witnesses at the actual hearing in full. The importance of listening to them in full is important. I truly believe fraud was committed, many witnesses had records they kept with ballot numbers that could be easily looked into. At this [point it's all swept away under a carpet. But there was a fraud... And if Col Waltron is correct we may have had fraud by hundrens of thousands.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNX_ygC9p2s
Jesse Morgan was the driver that drove ballots from New York to Penn.
His full testimony is also very straightforward, and if you hear his full account you can answer your questions in regards to what he did and saw.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kMcK0TTEZYThanks for the links Sharlee.
Starting with the Col. Waldron link;
Well damn! If I were inclined to believe the fraud claims, the Col.'s testimony in that hearing was both persuasive and damning and would be proof enough for me.
If I were not inclined to believe the fraud claims, I would think that this is just one man's testimony—where is the review of his IT claims? Also there were a couple iffy points; such as the internet connection thing. It sounded like he was saying the "User's Manual" said the machines had that connectivity capability, but I couldn't be sure I heard him confirm that the voting machines actually were connected to the internet. Or, that the fraudulent vote tally changes actually did occur—versus that they were possible.
There was a lot of could, maybe, and possible in the witness's explanations that a doubter could pick at, (although they would be pluses to a believer).
And then, I must admit that for many people, I think an association with Guiliani is an automatic negative. I would have to wonder why, with all the specific number details the Col. was able to provide, no other entity has looked at the allegations, ie. the DHS Election Security detail, or any Arizona Election Offices' security review details.
Now I seem to have the choice of believing one man—Col. Waldron, or all of the other governmental entities, (not talking about the media), responsible for securing and determining our election process integrity.
You have introduced a seed of doubt. It is only a seed, but obviously, I need to dig deeper before thinking I know who is telling the truth. I certainly don't want to stand on 'what everybody says, or "knows"' as support for what I believe.
The Waldron hunt is enough for now., I will look at your truck driver link later.
GAThe Dominion voting System is a closed system they are not networked not connected to the Internet.
"I need to dig deeper before thinking I know who is telling the truth. I certainly don't want to stand on 'what everybody says, or "knows"' as support for what I believe."
Wise thought, but as a rule do we not listen to persons that have expertise in a given field? Who are we to believe, a computer security expert or governmental entities? I would have thought one of these states in question would have given Col. Waldron the permission to audit a few of the machines he had pointed out that fraud "could" have occurred. He did not make any clear accusations of fraud only suspicion in a few cases.
He did claim if fraud was committed he would be able to point it out and even what time it occurred if he could examine the machine. I am unsure if fraud was committed with any of the Dominion Machines. Although I do feel that the 250 citizens that stepped up with accusations of irregularity and possible fraud should have their accusations looked into, and if anyone broke the law purposely they should be charged accordingly.
I can't be sure if any of their accusations would have changed the outcome or if the Dominion system was responsible for the Biden win. I can say one thing for sure I am very unhappy we will actually continue to uses these machines. But this is the new America, I had a better-become custom to not asking questions, and march a straight line.
And you know what, I must ask, is it wise to do any further digging? I did tons of digging, and it only frustrated me. GA, in the end, it really doesn't matter, it may just be one more thing that will warrant us to look the other way. I am becoming very accustomed to doing that.Yep, you always dig until you are comfortable with what you think is true. Whether it frustrates or not. Otherwise, how can you ever speak an opinion with confidence?
I may make an idiotic statement, but at least I have researched it enough for it to be honestly idiotic, vs. just partisan idiocy. ;-)
GAGood for you, GA.
I think a lot of people think they "dig", but they only research on sites which they already trust, which means (in this case) that Republicans only "dig" in right-biased sources and Democrats only "dig" in left-biased sources, so naturally enough, everything they read only solidifies their belief.
You can't make a judgment unless you hear from both sides.Sometimes the truth (facts) is reported, is there for you to see.
It may come from the "Right" or it may come from "Left" sources.
But more often than not it is buried, marginalized, misreported.
This is very much the way of MSM in America, it is almost all biased, and being reported by people that have very little idea of what is going on in the world or why.
There are a lot of MSM sources, controlled by just a few Corporations.
Just like there are only a few Social Networking sites... which you may have noticed, worked with one another this past election to "censor" what they felt was not true.
And as an American you are free to chose what to believe... the election was legitimate and Biden got 80+ million votes (millions more than any President in history)... the election was stolen by computers and mail-in ballots... or whatever you believe...
It doesn't change the fact the Biden will be President and the Paris Accord, Global Compact on Migration, Agenda 2030, etc. is all going to move forward.
Just as the Pandemic caused changes on a global scale, we will see new technologies and economic realities come into being in the next few years, and that requires a political body (including the President) willing to see those changes through.I shared this forensic audit yesterday, but it was pretty much ignored. It was sent to me, I didn't "dig" for it. Don't think I'd label it, right or left, Republican or Democrat, just a report which shouldn't be dismissed, because I, a conservative, shared it.
https://www.scribd.com/document/488105156/Antrim-C...Wel damn ABWilliams . . . as if I didn't already have a full plate.
That is a very credible-looking link.
GA
I will give you an 'Amen' to that thought Marissa. And it is recognized by both sides, (although both sides think it only applies to the other side), when the language masters refer to "Confirmation Bias."
Whoppee! A Kewpee doll to the linguistic masters. It is much more explanatory to just say we believe something we read because it agrees with something we already believe.
As a side note, I have frequently found that if one follows the internal links, (or at least Googles the claims), in articles they believe in, they can find more accurate sources and more of the essence' of the claims that are stroking their "confirmation bias."
GA
Some hearings were held in large rooms due to COVID. In Michigan, the legislative meeting was held in the usual venue the legislators use for hearings. https://www.wxyz.com/news/michigan-sena … t-counting
OK --- This will sound crazy, but 100% true. My son co-owns a software company, that develops software, and works with companies mainly SAP as well as other large software companies. They are hired to more or less tweak a given software to accommodate a given business's needs. Yesterday I bugged him enough to agree to listen to Col Waldron's testimony. And I was almost sorry I did, I got an ear full of technology stuff I do not understand. Bottom line he told me after looking just a bit into Dominion and their claims of not being on the internet. "This is true until --- someone for system convenience simply connected to the internet connecting Ethernet to the router."
My son claimed backs up Waldron's claim that the system can be easily connected to the internet, and the Col explanation that there are multiple points it could have been connected and the system easily manipulated, even simply with a USB device.
He had a quick look at Dominion as a company, he said they have a very "marred reputation". in his opinion. And then told me to "just stop it, drop it ", He stated it is likely no one is going to be given access to the voter machines, and as easy as they could be manipulated to commit fraud they can be wiped clean of that fraud. He felt that Col. Waltron gave very sound information and that he raised some very valid concerns in regard to the Dominion system. And he summed it up by, "Hey we live in America, and they are actually behind in what can be accomplished in regards to cheating in an election.. "
So, this leaves me so frustrated you can't imagine. And I am going to take his advice, I will drop it. Would seem silly for me to continue even considering any form of fraud because it is a dead issue.
My Son Eric's credentials
https://www.linkedin.com/in/estajda
His Company
https://leverx.com/company/aboutI'm not frustrated Sharlee, I'm pissed off. Can I say that on HP? I don't really care.
Ha! I share your feelings of frustration. Everywhere I turn I find, "Yes, this is a reasonable evaluation," and "No, this is just partisan bunk from partisan players."
Every time I find a "debunk" I find an equally impressive, (like ABWiliams ASOG report link), supporting link.
But, I am a bit stubborn. To the detriment of my "normal off-line life", I will keep chewing on these bones until I find enough marrow to know what to think is a legitimate determination of who is telling the truth.
GAAs yourself from these forums I research to learn and form a viewpoint. Just to add to your research here is the link to Dominion where they offer information on their version of setting the record straight. You can further explore their site with links at the top of the page.
Dominon says setting the Record Straight
There is a lot of interesting information to counter claims. They have links to specific claims for different states. And, one regarding Sidney Powell's claim, which seems close to Col. Waldron's.
Hope this offers some insight.I would listen to independent evaluators before I would give any value to what Dominon says about their machines. I believe it is highly unlikely a company would come out and say "Yeah, our machines were geared toward a Biden win. We programmed them that way." I think the company's statements about their machines should be completely ignored.
It was meant as one source. Do as you wish that is a choice. I will continue to research all sources I discover from all perspectives.
I agree with you Mike. I too would look to independent sources first. And as mentioned to tsmog, so far, all that I have found support Dominion's claims of legitimacy.
GA
Thanks for the link tsmog. So far, everything I have found, (and I have looked at literally dozens and dozens of pro and con sources), validate what your Dominion link says.
GA
I am at this point watching the Senate hearing on voter fraud as I write. They are presenting witnesses, hopefully, they will have a software expert to answer questions on the Dominion system. I once again had a conversation with my son on the subject, it was all too technical to understand. He actually has an employee that works for Dominion. But he refused to ask him questions! I asked him why the hell have the states purchased such a voter system -- he said it boils down to cost and a good salesperson. He suggests I let it go, due to the Federal Government more or less not caring about what went on with the Dominion system.
OMG, I am so disgusted.If it might offer any consolation Sharlee, everything I have found to be credible—so far, supports the 'official' declaration that this was a secure election.
Almost all of the controversial claims of fraud, (such as your Arizona "hearing" link, and AbWilliams "ASOG" report link), have been countered by what I consider reasonable explanations. I have to conclude that that "seed of doubt" planted by your original "hearing" link has turned out to be a sterile one.
I can find no evidence, beyond the clams themselves, of the fraud that is being so sincerely proclaimed.
GA
I am still on the trail Sharlee, but . . . in reference to my concern that none of the 'official' high-powered IT entities have embraced Col. Waldron's claims, and relative to your comment: "Wise thought, but as a rule do we not listen to persons that have expertise in a given field? Who are we to believe, a computer security expert or governmental entities? ", I ran across this blurb from a Georgia Elections official:
"We have partnered with the Department of Homeland Security, the Georgia Cyber Center, Georgia Tech security experts, and wide range of other election security experts around the state and country so Georgia voters can be confident that their vote is safe and secure.” Source: Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger
This may be an honest indication that Col. Waldron's claims have been legitimately examined. It seems this may be a case of computer expert vs. computer expert and our choice is who to believe.
Relative to Col. Waldron, I have not yet found a hook to grab to examine his credentials, (his only reference to his 'company' seems to be his reference to "my team" and "our White Hat hackers."
But I did find the credentials of the IT teams used in Georgia to investigate Col. Waldron's claims in the state of Georgia, (from the same link mentioned previously)::
"Pro V&V, based in Huntsville, Alabama is a U.S. Election Assistance Commission-certified Voting System Test Laboratory (VSTL), meaning the lab is “qualified to test voting systems to Federal standards.” VSTL certification is provided for under the Help America Votes Act of 2002. Pro V&V’s accreditation by the USEAC was also recommended by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the U.S. government’s physical science laboratory dedicated to creating standards and measures that would help America be the leading science innovator in the world. NIST contributes regularly to the development of cybersecurity and elections security standards for the U.S. and the world."
As I said, "I am still on the trail," (I think continued digging is always the right way to go—frustration or not), but it is not looking good for my opinion of Col. Waldron or that initial seed of doubt your link planted.
GAGA, actually all I needed to see is, and your article provided it.
"(ATLANTA) - Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger last week ordered Pro V&V, a U.S. Election Assistance Commission-certified testing laboratory, to do an audit of a random sample of machines to confirm no hack or tamper: “Pro V&V found no evidence of the machines being tampered.”
“We are glad but not surprised that the audit of the state’s voting machines was an unqualified success,” said Secretary Raffensperger. “Election security has been a top priority since day one of my administration. We have partnered with the Department of Homeland Security, the Georgia Cyber Center, Georgia Tech security experts, and wide range of other election security experts around the state and country so Georgia voters can be confident that their vote is safe and secure.”
It would well appear an audit was done, and that IT experts determined the machines did not show fraud.
It certainly does not IMO go to say Col. Waldron or even my own son's claim that this system is capable of easily being manipulated to commit fraud.
However, I am satisfied to take Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger at his word, that machines were audited, Should we need to audit these machines every election or perhaps just used a better system?
I will leave that up to the Federal Government.It seems we have both reached a satisfying conclusion. I am glad to now be comfortable with my own opinion.
GAI am also comfortable that the machines were not manipulated. I am concerned that they can be manipulated. However, I would well think no one would dare due to all the media play the Dominion system has received. Perhaps some states will procure new voting systems? You will laugh --- My son has become somewhat interested in my query, even after telling me to forget about it.
Last night he called and asked me --- "Do you know which states if any did for convenience put the Dominion system online for statewide convenience?" OMG like I would know! I had heard of only one that I can remember, and that was Georga.
Now he has me thinking. A new can of worms.
"Dominion CEO John Poulos also testified that:
Dominion tabulators are not connected to the Internet. In some jurisdictions, though not in Antrim, cellular modems are used for very brief periods, after the polls are closed, to transmit unofficial results from the precincts to the county headquarters. "
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politi … 906017001/
And then there is this report that makes claims many were online the night of the election... "'Online and vulnerable': Experts find nearly three dozen U.S. voting systems connected to the internet"
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/electi … g-n1112436
I can only hope my son talks with the man that worked for Dominion and get some info. But I don't think he will, due to most sign contracts not to discuss anything once they leave a company. What a crock.I am not opening any more cans on this Dominion topic. I need a break. I will just go and see if Peoplepower or My Esoteric left me anything to poke at. ;-)
GA
As I dig deeper, I will offer what I find. Whether it grows that "seed of doubt" or tamps it down.
Here is the first confirmation of one point of Col. Waldron's testimony. It appears the polling machines were connected to the internet. A poll worker encountered problems and called the Help desk in Colorado and they were able to remotely solve her problem. As a note; I don't know anything about airtv.com, but the point mentioned is from Col.Waldron himself, not one of their reporters, so source bias, (unless attributed to Col. Waldron, is not an issue).
Newsweek claimed the hearing, (of the video), was a "staged" hearing that took place at a Phoenix, Arizona hotel. I will leave it up to you to decide if this matters, but it is true. This was not an 'official' hearing at any Arizona government facility, (like their capital building?).
This, if true, (I am still checking it out), is a big negative for me. (That seed is getting stomped on) The original video presented this as an Arizona State hearing. Is the truth that it was really a pro-Trump event held at a hotel facility instead of an Arizona state facility?
oh gawdddd . . . This is worse than a tennis match where you get a 'crik' in your neck from following the back and forth of the ball. In this video, from The Epoch Times, a notably conservative biased source, but . . . it is still a video testimony, not a reporter's slant, Col. Waldron speaks to Pennsylvania voting machine voter report spikes. Unless you are an ardent ' there was no fraud' thinker, there is some meat to chew on in this video testimony.
Then, wrenching your neck back to the other court . . .Smartmatic, (the voting software company), claims it is a completely different entity from the Dominion voting machine company, (as does Dominion), and its software is not licensed to Dominion. Hmm . . . this directly contradicts Col Waldron's testimony. Who is telling the truth?
Then there was this tidbit about the Michagan voting machine errors that Co; Waldron said was his "team's" first efforts regarding the dominion voting system.
"In the two Michigan counties that had mistakes, the inaccuracies were because of human errors, not software problems, according to the Michigan Department of State, county officials and election-security experts. Only one of the two Michigan counties used Dominion software." Source: NYT, I know, I know. Who can trust the NYT. But, following their internal links seemed to validate their reporting. Col. Waldrton's claims seemed to be logically explained as human errors—not nefarious hacker/software manipulations. And, this seems to be an instance where state IT experts examined the claims of Col. Waldron and found them to be inaccurate. So, one must decide who to believe. At this point, Col. Waldron's credentials aren't proven to me. I would go with the state's IT team.
And then there is more . . . relative to Col. Waldron's claims that Dominion and Smartmatic are essentially one symbiotic system developed in Venezuela, each company's statements that they are separate companies, and their incorporation dates, (2000 and 2004), that seem to be accurate argue against his statements. Col. Waldron's Chavez family member statements' don't seem credible to me. But of course, this is a matter of belief. A believer will find plenty of credibility in the Venezuela/Chavez link, I find it not credible.
There is more. But the first big negative red flag for me was the claim that the original Col. Waldron testimony was at an Arizona State Senate hearing. As it turns out, it was at an event at a hotel that was described as a Senate hearing when the fact appears that it was just an event sponsored by Trump supporters at a hotel conference center—not a Senate-sanctioned hearing.
I will keep digging Sharlee, I do want to be sure of my opinion, but so far your original link that seems to be proof, turns out to be a lot less than it was reported to be. That alone reduces its credibility in my mind.
And so, all this reduces the question to one of believing Col. Waldron, (whom I suspect of having an agenda), and all the other security entities, (who, unfortunately, may also have an agenda). I haven't found, (yet?), anything that would have me as convinced of Col. Waldron's proof as you apparently are.
So, on this, we disagree. You did plant a seed. But it failed to yield any fruit in my mind.
GADamn! Remembering this comment actually woke me up in the middle of the night.
My response was based on viewing video testimony by Col. Waldron, (as linked to). And I may have gotten it wrong, (I don't think so)
What bothered me was what I wrote: A Georgia, (by reference, not specifically stated), poll worker called the help desk in Colorado to get the problem sorted out.
Geesh, what a dummy. Why would a Georgia poll worker call a Colorado help desk? And why would a Colorado help desk have the information, codes, and access to address Georgia voting machines.
I may have missed something. Maybe Colorado is the home base for Dominion U.S.-based services, (but I don't know this), or maybe the Col. just misspoke.
To be safe, I think that part of my response should be ignored until someone else offers clarification. Otherwise, Col. Waldron's statement doesn't make sense.
GA
Ah, well therein lies the problem. What sources do you believe?
Its hard to determine who to believe, when there is plenty of evidence of bias from almost all presenters of "facts" including the "fact checkers".
And it has never been worse than now... irreparable damage has been done to the reputations of all MSM sources IMO, be they print or cable, because they chose sides, and time and again got caught fabricating or misrepresenting or taking out of context what they reported.
How this election was covered and in what context is no different.This was included in one of my articles. I've highlighted only a portion to share so I am not accused of "promoting" myself again. (what a joke) I digress.
From the Georgia Star News story:
Bombshell: Trump Legal Team Witness Alleged That Ware County Audit Results Revealed Dominion Machine Flipped Ballots from Trump to Biden
December 5, 2020 Corinne Murdock
An elections expert alleged that the Dominion tabulating machine flipped votes from President Donald Trump to Democratic candidate Joe Biden in Ware County. It was estimated that the percentage of misapplied votes, if distributed across the rest of the state, would be slightly greater than Biden’s lead over Trump.
Constitution Party of Georgia Elections Director and Voters Organized for Trusted Election Results in Georgia (VOTERGA) Co-Founder Garland Favorito was called to testify this information during the State Senate hearing this week.
Favorito obtained an *email from Ware County Elections Supervisor Carlos Nelson, confirming that the audit discovered 37 votes that were incorrectly assigned to Biden instead of Trump.
In an interview with The Georgia Star News, Favorito explained that the information didn’t indicate which machine flipped the votes – just that the mistake occurred.
“We did find that they had flipped votes – we didn’t have to obtain the machine to figure that out. The hand count showed that they had flipped votes somewhere in that county,” he said.
Favorito explained that he’d been slated as a top ten witness for Trump’s legal team during Thursday’s State Senate hearing. Just before he was called to the stand, Favorito told The Star that an administrative assistant for the committee informed him that he was bumped to the bottom of the list “at the chairman’s discretion.”
During an interview with The John Fredericks Show, Favorito claimed that he later discovered why he’d been moved down the witness list.
“My testimony would’ve exposed the Secretary of State of Georgia, the Elections Director of Georgia, and the legal counsel of Georgia all for wrongdoing,” Favorito said. “And, being an independent, I expose corruption on both sides of the political spectrum.”
Vote flipping occurred previously in Antrim County, Michigan, with thousands of votes given to Biden instead of Trump. Multiple outlets and officials have cited the incident as “human error.”
Favorito shared that his organization is pushing for the Dominion machines to be preserved – not wiped, as Raffensperger is expected to do ahead of the runoff election. He added that they are pressing the State Senate for another hearing.
*https://voterga.files.wordpress.com/2020/11/ware-c...
Also, how do you prove or disprove that thousands of ballots, discovered in the dark of night in GA, which ONLY include one darkened circle on the entire ballot and that one darkened circle, on each and every ballot is for Joe Biden, are legitimate or illegitimate? You must have multiple local poll workers needing to clear their conscience, what else can you do? We certainly can't say, none of it computes, our common sense rejects it, National favoritism selected Trump, the odds were against a Biden win early on, on election night ....The Georgia Star story mentions Antrim County, Michigan, CHECK THIS OUT:
https://www.scribd.com/document/4881051 … ing-System
You are right about that Ken. "What sources to believe?"
Sharlee's reply illustrates that point.
GA
"It seems all of them cited an Edison Research report for their information, but Edison Research denies it ever gave such a report. So what are your sources that convince you the voting machines did this?"
No...a forensic test was conducted on voting machines in Antrim County, Michigan and found the voting machines DID indeed commit fraud.
Do a little research on your own. There are MANY stores about the Dominion voting machine fraud on the web. Not all of them are "right wing."
"It is then possible to create the necessary number of mail in ballots to be counted for up to three days after the election. " is much more of a stretch than I would consider realistic. Do you understand that every county's ballot is different"
I don't think for a minute this is a stretch. Nobody can explain the numbers. They don't make any sense. If you think that Biden's campaign generated more excitement and energized more people to vote for him than did obama's first presidential campaign...I think you are mistaken. I think we can use some logic here.
You cited one witness. How about the dozens who signed affidavits and went under oath at hearings? That is a more dedicated kind of witness.
https://www.wnd.com/2020/12/exceptional … ing-votes/"I don't think for a minute this is a stretch. Nobody can explain the numbers. They don't make any sense. If you think that Biden's campaign generated more excitement and energized more people to vote for him than did obama's first presidential campaign...I think you are mistaken. I think we can use some logic here."
--------------
It was not Biden's campaign that generated so much excitement, Trump lost from many key demographics. Look at the election, more people voted for either candidate than any candidate prior to this. There is no doubt that the excitement was there on both sides. We on the left were driven and determined to dispense with Trump. Biden did well enough with the usual constituencies, but that in itself may not have been enough to dislodge an incumbent president. I think that Trump, himself, turned off enough people, Republicans, who would have otherwise voted for him. While getting rid of Trump was not shown to be the mandate I would have hoped for, Biden's victory was still decisive. Those votes that were peeled off, made the difference.
There were forces at work, not fraud, that made it possible to turn both Arizona and Georgia, notorious Red states, Blue. Much the same pattern that has occurred in Colorado and Nevada. Those same forces that will affect Texas sometime later within this decade.There were forces at work.
On this we agree...evil forces!
Mike, I am in the middle of a search to address your, and Sharlee's claims. I hope you will see my responses to Sharlee, as many of the points also address your claims.
As a brief note, relative to your Antrim county issues—so far, everything I find is contradictory to your claims—as derived from an 'apparently' discredited Allied Security Operations Group audit.
My plate is already full in the tracking of stuff addressed in Sharlee's Col. Waldron link, but a shallow dive has so far yielded no credibility to the ASOG group's claims.
I could be very wrong in short-shrifting my research into that group, but what I have seen so far doesn't indicate that danger.
Just to be clear, you should be aware by now that I very much do do my research before making a claim. I won't claim your Antrim county claim to be debunked, (yet), but I will say that what I have found so far puts the ASOG audit very much in doubt.
Yes, I did only address one witness. I will probably address more as this thread proceeds, but at this point, the one I did address seems the most obvious candidate for doubt. I probably will never get to the point of addressing the claimed "250 witnesses," but I will try to examine the most serious ones, (or the most outrageously egregious ones).
GA
Yes, I would feel the same. If I had every law suit put forth by my side dismissed by the courts at all levels and through the sheer number of suits and variety of judicial forums, I could eliminate the possibility of partisan bias, I would have to stand down.
Why would anyone talk about Electoral processes favoring one candidate or another? It seems like suppressing votes is a pastime Republicans readily engage in? Everybody should have the opportunity to cast a ballot and we should be encouraging more participation in the process not less. It is only Republicans and the Right that fear more access to the ballot by more registered voters, I wonder why that is? I think that I already know.Hmm . . . damn them nasty Republicans. Some day they may learn that 'trust' is all you really need.
GA
The Texas case is gaining momentum. 17 AGs from other states have joined the lawsuit. It is getting big enough the Supreme Court will have to rule on it.
"Today 17 states filed an amicus brief in support of the Texas lawsuit.
The seventeen states include Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.
As noted in the supportive filing: “The States have a strong interest in preserving the proper roles of state legislatures in the administration of federal elections, and thus safeguarding the individual liberty of their citizens.”
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/20 … n-lawsuit/Oh gosh Ken, I'm trying to remain optimistic and ready/willing to fight for this Republic of ours and you are pointing out what does seem to be the obvious, but I can't give up and accept it! Over half of this country can't and won't, we will have secession before that happens. I don't know anyone that wants that, but what other alternatives are there?
I wouldn't lose hope over Ken's sweeping statemdents, made without any substance or proof. He stops by occasionally to wax poetic about powerful forces (unseen to us ordinary folks who lack vision , of course) that are controlling us behind the scenes. Proof? What's that?
So long as order can be maintained and society still function the legitimacy of the election and what individual states want, will be irrelevant.
The bulk of people in America just want to live their lives in peace, so long as enough stability can be maintained during this time of transition (America's transition as well as transition from Trump to Biden). You should not expect any 'civil war' or even serious 'unrest'.
Many may wish they had done something well after the change, but by then of course it is too late.
Understand there is no power behind Trump, the money, the International bodies and foreign nations like China, and even most of our government (DC) want him out.So, this is what Democracy looks like, AB?
What about the other half, are you folks the only ones entitled to have your way? Rubbish, I won't hear of it.
The Right and Republicans don't get their way, so the miserable red states want to secede, but with the looks of some of them, I wouldn't miss them.
We did not speak about such things during Trump's Reign of Terror.I would not miss the Dem states. in fact I would be delighted if they would secede. This seems so simple, how do we get it done? LOL
Well Cred, when I speak of over half of this Nation, that would include Dems and Independents, not just Republicans and Conservatives. I believe lovers of the U S come from all parties, I don't believe for one second that ALL Dems hate America or approve of these fraudulent, sellout measures taken, used against the people, in order to have more control over the people.
We all love America, it is just that we have a different ways to express it. No we don't approve of fraud and cheating, when it is proven to be such. It could be that we don't approve of fraud and cheating as part of process of claiming fraud and cheating in the election.
With the advent of computers tabulating the votes without any paper trail, the majority of States today are compromised and open to fraud.
The addition of allowing for mail in ballots without any oversight when those ballots are tallied after Election Day (as occurred in places like PA) also ads to the opportunity for fraud.
That said, there is a transition occurring in the world, much of it has to do with technology, and much also has to do with China becoming the dominant economic engine in the world, surpassing America... and within a decade I believe India will as well.
Both those nations have populations far in excess of America. Both those nations have far greater ability to manufacture at an affordable price.
I have given links before to what is planned, in short we are to fade into the background on the International stage and become a lesser economic force in the world, while at the same time being incorporated into a North America (Mexico, Canada & the US)(NAFTA) akin to the EU.
In general we will be a poorer nation and as in most European nations people will get by with less, the nation will become more socialized and multi-cultural.When I visited Europe, Ken, people as a rule are generally less wasteful, not so much as they felt deprived.
Are you associating a more socialized and multicultural America with its decline? Quite frankly, I see no solution to the changes being brought to international scene. China is taking it place on the world scene without boasting about its nuclear arsenals and without firing a shot.
So, how do you stop the sun from rising in the morning?I am not really taking any stance on these issues as to whether they are right or wrong... largely because as you noted you can't "stop the sun from rising in the morning".
The advancement of Solar Power and Electric Vehicles, in the way that Tesla is advancing them, means that the oil industry and Internal Combustion Engine making car companies will be displaced.
The Rise of China as the world's leading economic force means that America will have a diminished role and a diminished economy, as will it's citizens (and then compounding the matter will be India).
There is an effort to move away from the Dollar as the World's Reserve, to move away from physical money, to move away from a world with Borders.
It doesn't matter whether I think these things are right or wrong, they are occurring.
Trump has set his policies and his efforts against these things, he has tried to strengthen borders, Nationalism, the oil and coal industries, he has backed away from International efforts made by the UN, WHO, WB, and treatise like the Paris Accord agreement.
Along with his trade battles with China, Germany, Mexico, etc. it all but ensured he would be a one term president.
- Marisa Writesposted 3 years ago
0It's also true that there are large numbers of Democrats - the majority, I suspect - who don't believe there was any significant voter fraud, and that it's the Republicans who are making up false allegations and shameless lies in order to hang onto power.
And Republican supporters can't say, "But the Republican Party would never stoop to such disgraceful behavior", because they are convinced that the Democrat Party is stooping to disgraceful behavior.
One side is telling the truth, the other is lying through their teeth. It's that simple, and neither Party has evidence to prove which is which. All they've got is a lot of accusations, so far.I think there are corrupt, owned politicians from both sides of the aisle.
Exactly. That's what I'm saying. I'm seeing Republican supporters behaving as though everything their politicians says MUST be true, even though they've presented very little evidence - implying their side are all honest as the driven snow, and the Democrats are all crooks. There is endless cynicism about anything a Democrat says, but everything Trump says must be true. That's naive.
I don't know anyone quite that gullible Marisa, but I do know that too many are ready and willing to give up our sovereignty for globalism (or much worse) and they reside on the left side of the aisle.
I STILL trust President Trump and most Republicans over any of the llhan Omar's, the AOC's, the Nancy Pelosi's, the Chuck Schumers, the Eric Swalwell's, the Biden/Harris'........
- PrettyPantherposted 3 years ago0
Just now: The case is rejected due to lack of standing for Texas.
Are we done now?
I'm bringing mine out when Trump is actually gone. He will never concede and I won't be surprised if he super glues his ample @ss to the Oval Office desk chair. It'll take a crane to pull him out.
Now that there is funny. I don't care who you are, that is a mental image that has to make you chuckle. If it doesn't, then you are taking life too damn seriously.
GA
This might take an article!
We are a Republic here in the U.S. and we have a Constitution. Both designed to keep our Government limited, in order for the best interest of the people to never be infringed upon!
In order for the people to never become subjects.
In order for the people to never be ruled over!
Somewhere along the way, Dems have forgotten this...maybe they've never grasped it or understood it.
Not all, but many elected, see it as having power. That 'power' has gone to their heads. I know that the same could be said about a few Republicans, but as a political party, they still have faith in the American people. They still believe in the RIGHT to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They aren't the ones who have put themselves in the position to justify just about anything! Including how to properly end the life of a baby which has survived an abortion attempt!
Republicans still give us credit for utilizing our common sense, for having the ability to make our own way and our own decisions when it comes to us and our families.
They understand that those rights come from God, not from Government!
Dems, such as those mentioned and so many more Governors and Mayors, for example, are treating their citizens as subjects, denying them their constitutional rights, they are doing so, under the guise of a virus. A virus which has a nearly 100% recovery rate!! They, these so-called leaders, have cost people their lives and/or their livelihoods. A virus didn't do that, these men and women who get off on control did that! They could/would control the business-owning, hard-working, law-abiding citizen, but looked the other way and would not even stand up to the bullies and thugs, allowed to run their streets like wild animals, destroying everything in their path!
If you saw any of this in the news over the past few months those were cities run by (or should I say rundown by) Democrats!!!
We have always prided ourselves on our entrepreneurial spirit, it is very common to start from the ground up, own and operate our own businesses. They are always more successful when Government stays out of the way!
Of course Dems, such as our former President, Obama, Democrat, told us that if we had businesses, we didn't build that. We get no credit from him nor any Dem for building up our businesses, working hard to make them succeed, contributing something to, not taking from, this Nation! Not all succeed in start-ups, it is trial and error, but, if at first you don't succeed, you try and then you try again....Dems don't seem to understand this. They don't seem to understand much of anything...when it comes to "we the people".With the end of the Texas lawsuit...Biden will now become president.
I do wonder if he actually has a mandate by the people to be their leader.
It seems a majority of Americans believe he stole the election from President Donald Trump. This is something that has never before happened in our country's history.
According to a poll from Rasmussen, many Democrats as well as Republicans believe Biden stole the election.
"As Trump has not conceded to his Democrat opponent Joe Biden, and his legal team continues to press ahead with challenges to results in several states, a new Rasmussen poll revealed that not only do many Republicans believe the election was stolen, so do a large number of Democrats."
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/11/21 … mp-998438/"A majority"?
Most voters say this year’s unprecedented level of mail-in voting was largely successful and continue to think President Trump should concede the presidential race. Republicans, however, strongly believe Democrats are likely to have stolen the election.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters think mail-in voting worked well for the most part. Thirty-nine percent (39%) disagree and say it led to unprecedented voter fraud in this election.
Also virtually unchanged from the earlier survey are the 60% of all voters who think Trump should concede the election to Biden. Thirty-four percent (34%) disagree.
LinkA LARGE percentage of voters believe Senile Biden stole the election. You can't have numbers of "very Likely" voters like this and successfully govern.
"But an eyebrow-raising number of Democrats are also agreeing with the president’s assessment according to the poll which showed that nearly a third of them also believe the election was stolen from him. It the numbers are almost half...there are real problems.
Huge: “How likely is it that Democrats stole votes or destroyed pro-Trump ballots in several states to ensure that Biden would win?”
Democrats – 30% – 20% say Very Likely (VL)
Unaffiliated – 39% – 29% say VL
Republicans – 75% – 61% say VL
All Voters – 47% – 36% say VL
— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) November 20, 2020Damn! I didn't even make the list. Again!
GA :-)
Mail-in voting worked miraculously well! When you consider there's only a 0-1% rejection rate of ballots and that number has always been in the double digits in the past. How else can it be described?
I think we have heard the last word on this subject. What is left ?
A detailed investigation to discover the details of the election fraud and a televised hearing before the US Congress concerning the findings as well as a final report of everything that occurred.
I have closely followed this thread. And yes many good points have been shared. Lots of stats, lots of words.
So, one thing always stands out to me in regards to alleged fraud in our election. Do we as American's dismiss over 250 American citizens' accusations of fraud? Do we only believe what we prefer to believe?
Why in the world would so many step up and give their own firsthand experiences in the form of under oath affidavits?
It would appear many have become very jaded or hypocritical to dismiss this huge body of whistleblowers.
It would seem many conversations here divert back to the courts. With claims that the courts have tossed out each case due to lack of evidence. Yes, in some cases Judges have entered lack of evidence in their final judgment. However, the majority have given various opinions as to why they would not take up the given case. In actuality, these multiple cases have not made it as far as the evidentiary phase. So, is it fair to say there is no evidence of voter fraud?
Only a few whistleblowers have been heard in Legislative hearings. Most giving very full detailed testimony that never reached the ear of the people. Yes, bits and pieces have been carefully constructed and reported. But, much was twisted carefully and reported out of context. Full content matters, and is out there if one is concerned enough to look for it, and take the time to listen.
I am not sure if the amount of fraud would change this election, but I can honestly say I believe fraud was committed to a larger extent than we have ever witnessed.I agree Sharlee 100%, not a doubt in my mind or gut!
It's a symbolic gesture with not much behind it, but I applaud these Republicans for keeping the attention on the fraud that was committed during this past presidential election.
"Republican electors in Pennsylvania, Georgia cast votes for Trump, hoping for court victories
While Democratic electors in Pennsylvania and Georgia cast their states' electoral votes for Joe Biden on Monday, slates of Republican electors in those states cast votes for President Trump just in case legal challenges succeed."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republ … -for-trump
I think the Biden Harris Administration should be considered the "Fraudulent" White House."Voting machines used in Arizona’s Maricopa County may now be subject to inspection following action by a state legislator on Monday to begin the process of seizing the machines.
The action by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Eddie Farnsworth came after a six-hour hearing concerning the election and the ability of Arizona residents to trust the results, according to KJZZ-FM."
“Since shortly before the 2020 election a number of my colleagues and I have been examining potential fraud pathways and illegal actions through which our 2020 election could become tainted,” Finchem said.
https://www.westernjournal.com/developi … p2ftAP3_lsI am not sure how much more we can progress in most areas....progressives have a plan for finishing off babies that have survived abortion. How can you progress that any further, aborting them up to two years? Teen years? God has already been kicked to the curb, how about we set up golden images to worship, many already do, not sure how diverse it is, but it is progressive.
The only way the playing field could be any more FAIR for some, as I bid/estimate projects - future work for our employees, is for me to be taken out the equation all together! That's progressive, right?
Hundreds of thousands of small businesses have closed down, so big corporations will have it all to themselves, one big monopoly... that's progressive, not diverse, but definitely progressive.As for the abortion issue, stick with the provisions of Roe vs Wade as I think that is a fair compromise for choice of the mother giving due regard to the child inside her. It is just that conservatives keep hacking at its provisions making that landmark ruling ever more restrictive in practice.
How do you make a woman carry a child to term that she does not want?
----------
Your God may not be my God, we all have different beliefs. There can be no religious establishment as part of a secular Government. You can worship who it is you want as long as I am not compelled to worship or give obeisance in any prescribed manner.
----------
Why is it always with conservatives the attitude of a zero sum game? Ever heard of win/win? The folks that have been coming after monopolies the most tend to be liberals and progressives. The left is not responsible for the closing of small business, the fallout from the pandemic has been responsible for that.I hope that any sexually active woman knows where babies come from. How about we start there if they don't.
It would be wonderful if stat were kept on women that have abortions, how many-- on, two, five... Let me share when caring for a woman that came in with a four-month miscarriage. Question on admission -- how many live births? How many miscarriages? How many abortions? Zero live births, Zero miscarriages, three abortions --- here's where it sickened me. She asked me about the sex of the fetus. She actually knew the sex of the babies she aborted. --- I told her, I didn't look... It was a boy. Yes, would be wonderful if we could start there.
It's sad! I have childhood friends that used abortion as birth control and they live with regret, it has aged them so.... I pray for their peace of mind often!
In this modern age {which is in the process of consuming us}...there's certainly no good reason to not practice safe birth control.
Merry Christmas Sharlee!
I am taking a little break. See you next year.
Yes, very sobering. I should say sobering to some...
There is only one God and one savior, Jesus Christ!
The left is 100% responsible for the closing of small business...the pandemic was/is an excuse.Like, I said I already know that it is futile to express my views to those firmly entrenched on the Right.
We will have to agree to disagree, that is what happened last November 3rd.
--
"There is only one God and one savior, Jesus Christ!"
---
It might be strange to you, but I believe with that as well. But rather than beat people over the head with the Bible, I am a progressive that recognizes that people if they come to that conclusion must of their own volition and accord or it all means nothing.
Since this cannot be proven in any objective way, the belief or lack of same by my neighbor is as valid as my beliefs. Conservatives can never deal with shades of gray in life very well.I write about politics, so I definitely haven't been beating anyone over the head. It's a simple message to accept or decline!
Merry Christmas!
See ya'll back here in 2021.
Do you celebrate Christmas? If so, Merry Christmas. If not, happy winter.
I am taking a little break from HP.THOUSANDS of non-citizens voted in Nevada.
"Information obtained via subpoena by the Nevada Republican Party from the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles revealed that thousands of non-citizens not only were registered to vote, but actually cast ballots in the 2020 election.
The fraudulent votes were cast thanks to the DMV’s registering of all those who applied for driver’s licenses. Since legal and illegal “non-citizens” can hold driver’s licenses in the state, it’s easy for them to get registered to vote if the DMV employees “do their due diligence.”
The information obtained under a subpoena displayed green-card holders and non citizens who had obtained driver’s licenses. Based on the official data set, the Nevada GOP “compared this detailed information against the county voter records in Nevada” and “discovered that 6,260 non citizens were registered to vote and 3,987 non-citizens had voted.”
https://thenewamerican.com/no-evidence- … -election/It's sad really. Before this election, I think many other countries looked at the US as an advanced, highly developed nation.
What this election has revealed, if the Republican claims are true, is that whoever designed your voting systems was totally incompetent; your elections are utterly disorganized; a large number of your electoral officials are either corrupt or inept; and your election systems lack the most basic security safeguards which are taken for granted even in less developed countries. Needless to say, it has not done America's reputation any good at all.Thank you for your honesty.
I hope more Americans read your words.
Especially, Democrats.All of that is true only when Republicans don't win, Mike?
"All of that is true only when Republicans don't win, Mike?"
You'd have a difficult time proving that statement.
Never before in the history of our country was a President accused of working with a foreign power to win an election. The accusation proved to be false.
Never before in the history of our country has there been such blatant fraud in a presidential election and such an extensive effort by politicians and the media to cover it up.
Democrats need to own what they've done. It's time they develop the courage to admit to what they've done.
I really believe Democrats actually have no idea what they done.Blatant fraud?
What this all proves is that Trump supporters will believe anything. They don't need any proof. They just believe whatever suits them.
Meanwhile, Trump tosses out blatant falsehoods on Twitter in an effort to destroy democracy and America. His so-called "star" witnesses turn out to be drunks, registered sex-offenders, and military cyber-security experts with no actual cyber-security experience.
Let me ask you a question. If you hired a lawyer to defend you in a sexual assault trial and he brought an expert witness on your behalf who said he was a witness to your innocence but turned out to be a circus clown, would you keep that lawyer? How would you feel about that lawyer after you were prosecuted and thrown in jail?
The incompetence is beyond comical.Col. Philip Waldron (US Army-Retired) served over 30 years as a U.S. Military Intelligence Officer specializing in cybersecurity-focused on election manipulation. Waldron is considered an expert on automated voting machines, who, as part of his training and experience, knows exactly how voting machines can be corrupted.
Col. Waldron served the bulk of his career with the 305th Military Intelligence Battalion – a group long known in military circles as “The Kraken.”
It would seem to be a disgusting habit to insult someone just because you can...No idea what you're talking about or how it applies to this situation. Seriously...I have no idea.
But the Republicans are every bit as guilty, if not more so, from where I'm standing
Really? How so? They aren't the ones who would have caused the fraud in this presidential election.
I have worked for more than one politician over the years during their campaigns. Everything from a Senator to Congressman to State races and more. I've done this in three different states.
I can tell you this from experience...Democrats cheat at elections. Democrats ALWAYS cheat at elections. When a Republican runs for office they have to calculate, based on history, how sever the Democrat cheating will be and accommodate for it.
This is how it's been for years.
This presidential election with the mail-in ballots was expertly designed for Democrat fraud. This is the absolute worst I've ever seen...and I've seen a lot.
So, looking at our elections from the outside things may seem to be one way. When you're directly involved with them, you gain an entire new perspective.
I do appreciate your comments.
Our elections have been flawed for many years, and corruption has only grown. Hopefully some good will come from all the finger-pointing Trump is doing. However, not likely. You see we do very little to fix things, we just look the other way. You are very perceptive and hit the nail on the head.
You have zero valid evidence for any belief in election fraud.
Also, I was writing about Joshua Merritt - otherwise known as "Spyder", Sidney Powell's "secret" witness.
His so-called "star" witnesses turn out to be drunks, registered sex-offenders, and military cyber-security experts with no actual cyber-security experience.
EXPERTS --- Plural. Perhaps you could have mentioned a name. I have not in any respect been following Ms. Powell's case.Again, there's this thing called Google. However:
Melissa Carone
Joshua Merritt
Daryl Brooks
All "star" witnesses. Can you imagine if Trump's lawyers represented you in some case and they brought these people as expert witnesses? You'd fire those lawyers on the spot. Such incompetence is pretty embarrassing.
Related Discussions
- 13
The Supreme Court Tossing Out the Texas Case To Oppose Biden's Victory
by Santiago Salinas 3 years ago
It has been a month since the election results were set and stone. Joe Biden and his running mate, Kamala Harris, were announced the winners of the 2020 presidential election. However, there have been many claims, especially from Trump and his supporters, about voter fraud in the election that...
- 37
Wisconsin Assembly Votes to Reclaim Wisconsin’s Electors for President
by Readmikenow 2 years ago
Could this be a growing trend?"Last night, the Wisconsin Assembly has unanimously voted to withdraw its 10 electoral votes that contributed to the certification of Joe Biden’s controversial victory following the hotly contested 2020 Presidential...
- 713
The Disatorous Ramifications of the Deadly Reversal of Roe vs Wade.
by Scott Belford 2 weeks ago
The Conservatives on the Supreme Court stuck a knife in the back of all Americans with their decision to ignore stare decises and overturn Roe. Besides stripping women of a fundemental right to control their own body (now, in some states, a 13-year old rape victim with be FORCED to carry the...
- 382
Donald Trump Supporters/Voters Disenfranchised in Colorado, Who's Next
by Angie B Williams 4 months ago
Which State will be next to decide that their leaders and their State's Supreme Court are more mighty, more powerful than the U.S. Constitution and the Power, which, by design and by LAW, belongs with the American people? That's what this is.....right? A power trip? Let's be the one to outdo all...
- 36
The Electoral College - State Voters Won't Count
by ga anderson 5 years ago
Let me channel Jake for a moment...BIG BREAKING NEWS! Bombshell announcement! A CONSTITUTIONAL crisis!Deleware has voted to join eleven other states in awarding their 3 electoral college votes to the national popular vote winner!The votes of state voters in these 12 states no longer matter! YOUR...
- 49
Democrats who won't accept Presidential election results
by Readmikenow 4 years ago
If you want to know what Democrats are guilty of...simply see what they are accusing others of doing. THAT is what they're guilty of doing."Will Democrats accept election loss? New report says no.But there is another, equally pressing question: Will Democrats accept the results of the...