74 Georgia Counties Cannot Produce Original Ballot Images

[bodecea]

Nobody calls it the big lie besides the Sleepy joe who has the worst approval rating in history.

So, you don't pay attention....so surprise you're a cultist.

 

[bodecea]

Your big lie is dead. Remember, half the country does not believe you. Deal with it, and release the ballots.

Your Big Lie is dead..... You really don't get what you just said, do you?

 

[meaner gene]

Well,.. the 2020 election was a circus anyways.

That "circus" was counted, recounted, and even counted completely by hand. Each count matched the previous one.

Then as a real slap in the face. The senate election of January 5th 2021, which was probably the closest watched election in American history, resulted in a BIGGER democratic victory margin than the vote for the president.

So how to you account for such a closely watched election resulting in even more votes for the democrats than the one you claim was a free for all.

 

[Lastamender]

Your Big Lie is dead..... You really don't get what you just said, do you?

Your big lie is dead. Half the country knows there was fraud. To this day GA. is still trying cover it up.

 

[meaner gene]

Your big lie is dead. Half the country knows there was fraud. To this day GA. is still trying cover it up.

Republicans refuse to admit they lost.

Step one, hold a statewide election in Georgia.
Result, the democrat won.
Step two, allege massive fraud, and that the election wasn't allowed to be monitored.
Step three, hold another election, with close monitoring. Closer than ever before.
Result, the democrats won by even more.
Step four, ignore the Georgia results, because it disproves election fraud.

 

[Lastamender]

And? (they were seen)

No they weren't. They would not be in court if they were you dumbass.

 

[Lastamender]

Republicans refuse to admit they lost.

Step one, hold a statewide election in Georgia.
Result, the democrat won.
Step two, allege massive fraud, and that the election wasn't allowed to be monitored.
Step three, hold another election, with close monitoring. Closer than ever before.
Result, the democrats won by even more.
Step four, ignore the Georgia results, because it disproves election fraud.

Stacy Abrams put the election workers into place for that Senate election. It was just as phony as the presidential election.

 

[meaner gene]

Stacy Abrams put the election workers into place for that Senate election. It was just as phony as the presidential election.

It was also the most closely watched, and closely monitored by people both in state and from out of state. Republicans called for people to monitor the election from stem to stern.

They got to watch those counting the vote from "closer than 6 feet" as court ordered. And the result, with all those eyes watching what happened?

 

[Lastamender]

It was also the most closely watched, and closely monitored by people both in state and from out of state. Republicans called for people to monitor the election from stem to stern.

They got to watch those counting the vote from "closer than 6 feet" as court ordered. And the result, with all those eyes watching what happened?

And they were pushed away because of Covid. They ignored the court like they did the laws. Stop lying that election was stolen.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And they were pushed away because of Covid.

That did not happen in the Ga senate election, quit lying.

 

[Lastamender]

That did not happen in the Ga senate election, quit lying.

Prove it did not. And a real source would be nice. You won't find one.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Prove it did not. And a real source would be nice.

Dude, it is your claim, support it or it gets added to all your other lies you cannot support.

it is impossible to prove it did not happen as one cannot prove a negative.

 

[meaner gene]

And they were pushed away because of Covid. They ignored the court like they did the laws. Stop lying that election was stolen.

Nobody is claiming fraud in the January 5th election.
And the result was a democdratic victory 4 times as big as the one in November.

An election under the magnifying glass, resulted in an even bigger democratic victory. Explain that?

 

[Road Runner]

Have you ever looked into any of these claims for yourself to see if they are valid? When you read these stories do you the do your own leg work and see if they are telling you the truth?

Can you give me any supporting evidence to the contrary?

 

[Lastamender]

Dude, it is your claim, support it or it gets added to all your other lies you cannot support.

it is impossible to prove it did not happen as one cannot prove a negative.

Maintenance Mode

Site will be available soon. Thank you for your patience!

djhjmedia.com

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Can you give me any supporting evidence to the contrary?

You did not answer the question...funny how that happens.

But it seems some others have done that. The bigger question is why you do not do these things for yourself.

For example I watched some of the early hearings on the election and possible theft, I was open to the idea it could have happened.

The one held at the hotel in Michigan by the Michigan senate started with a Dem senator asking if the witnesses would be sworn in, she was told she was out of order and it was not necessary.

Then I watched Rudy say that more ballots were mailed back in Pa than were mailed out. I thought, wow that is a smoking gun. Then I did my own research and it took less than 5 min to find out he lied.

Then I watched the hearings in Ga, where they has real life data analyst (my profession by the way). He talked about statistical anomalies. He said that an individual precinct going more than 75% for one candidate was rare and that a precinct going more than 90% for one candidate was a sure sign of fraud. This sounded pretty compelling so I did my own research. I looked at the 2016 results for Atlanta, Salt Lake City and Austin Tx. What I found was that not only is one precinct going 90% for one candidate not proof of fraud, it is pretty common, for candidates from both parties. So, this guy was either really bad at his job or he lied.

And then I watched the first Az hearings, and they put up a guy they called an "expert mathematician", he used a lot of words but did not really say anything except a few lies. Imagine my shock when I found this same guy's profile on LinkedIn and found out he was not a mathematician, that he had not training nor education is math or analytics. Turns out he is a financial planner that loves conspiracy theories. I am not sure if the Repubs in Az were dishonest or incompetent and did not check his credentials.

Have you ever bothered to do anything like that to see if what you were being told was true?

 

[Lastamender]

You did not answer the question...funny how that happens.

But it seems some others have done that. The bigger question is why you do not do these things for yourself.

For example I watched some of the early hearings on the election and possible theft, I was open to the idea it could have happened.

The one held at the hotel in Michigan by the Michigan senate started with a Dem senator asking if the witnesses would be sworn in, she was told she was out of order and it was not necessary.

Then I watched Rudy say that more ballots were mailed back in Pa than were mailed out. I thought, wow that is a smoking gun. Then I did my own research and it took less than 5 min to find out he lied.

Then I watched the hearings in Ga, where they has real life data analyst (my profession by the way). He talked about statistical anomalies. He said that an individual precinct going more than 75% for one candidate was rare and that a precinct going more than 90% for one candidate was a sure sign of fraud. This sounded pretty compelling so I did my own research. I looked at the 2016 results for Atlanta, Salt Lake City and Austin Tx. What I found was that not only is one precinct going 90% for one candidate not proof of fraud, it is pretty common, for candidates from both parties. So, this guy was either really bad at his job or he lied.

And then I watched the first Az hearings, and they put up a guy they called an "expert mathematician", he used a lot of words but did not really say anything except a few lies. Imagine my shock when I found this same guy's profile on LinkedIn and found out he was not a mathematician, that he had not training nor education is math or analytics. Turns out he is a financial planner that loves conspiracy theories. I am not sure if the Repubs in Az were dishonest or incompetent and did not check his credentials.

Have you ever bothered to do anything like that to see if what you were being told was true?

Who told you Rudy lied? Who told you that guy in AZ. liked conspiracy theories?

 

[ConserveGuy]

So, you don't pay attention....so surprise you're a cultist

I'm definitely paying attention more than you think. The real cultists are the ones who hate Trump and his supporters each day. I laugh at people like you. Mainly because President Trump won and he can win again lol

 

[meaner gene]

Maintenance Mode

Site will be available soon. Thank you for your patience!

djhjmedia.com

You should add that the republican GOP picks half the election workers who actually count or verify the ballots.

 

[Road Runner]

You did not answer the question...funny how that happens.

Ironically neither did you.