How to un-rig our election process and restore election integrity.

[Catsnmeters]

They haven’t been, so they don’t.

Did Gore have indictments?

Those weren’t Trump.

They worked for Trump.

Gore lied Repeatedly.

Lying is not a crime.
http://Pewresearch.org/journalism/2000/07/27/gore-as-a-liar/

Of course. And the democrats would defend it. I have an issue with Trump saying it, for that matter.

Then why do you dismiss it?

It wouldn’t be a crime though, just because someone would “have an issue with it.”

Didn't say it was but it does showcase the dubious lengths Trump attempted to overturn an election he had no proof of, according to the courts.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Did Gore have indictments?

No, because the GOP did not attempt to criminalize disagreement.

They worked for Trump.

So? He doesn’t control every word that comes out of their mouths.

Lying is not a crime.
Gore as a Liar

Al Gore is grateful for that.

Then why do you dismiss it?

I don’t. I just said I have a problem with it.

Didn't say it was but it does showcase the dubious lengths Trump attempted to overturn an election he had no proof of, according to the courts.

Same for Al Gore.

 

[Catsnmeters]

No, because the GOP did not attempt to criminalize disagreement.

Neither did Democrats.

No indictments exist for disagreement exist.

So? He doesn’t control every word that comes out of their mouths.

Not responsible?

He repeated the same messages and had meetings with these people.

They worked with the RNC.

Al Gore is grateful for that.

Everyone is grateful for that.

I don’t. I just said I have a problem with it.

It sure speaks to Trump's state of mind to me.

What if Barr would have said yes?

Same for Al Gore.

What do you think Gore did in regards to the election that was dubious?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Neither did Democrats.

No indictments exist for disagreement exist.

Nor indictments for actual crimes. The indictments are fake, the fakery motivated by politics.

Not responsible?

He repeated the same messages and had meetings with these people.

They worked with the RNC.

He did not control them.

Everyone is grateful for that.

Gore more so than others.

It sure speaks to Trump's state of mind to me.

What if Barr would have said yes?

No way to know, but I thank you for saying “would have” instead of “would of,” which is like nails on a chalkboard to me.

What do you think Gore did in regards to the election that was dubious?

Desperately tried to overturn the results after he conceded.

 

[leftwinger]

The indictments, if proven, contradict that.

Even without indictments; Rudy admitted he lied, Sydney Powell admitted she lied, Fox admitted they lied...and paid for it, Newsmax admitted they lied.

Can you cite examples of similar behavior on behalf of Gore?

Why do you refuse to answer this question?

Are you saying if it was uncovered that after Trump won, Obama told his AG to "Just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the democrat congressmen,” that you nor the right wing pundits would have issue with it?

you have no clue. If you were facing 20 yrs for a crime you did not commit and years of Costly Deep State Trials......then they said.....$5000 fine and read this statment with no jail.

Go back to be child. you have no business up in here.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Nor indictments for actual crimes. The indictments are fake, the fakery motivated by politics.

That's absurd. The indictments are real for real crimes as determined by a jury.

Which specific indictment do you think isn't a crime?

He did not control them.

No. He did not control them. They could have refrained from lying but they didnt. He worked with them. He collaborated with them. Rudy himself was Trump's lawyer.

Gore more so than others.

I disagree.

No way to know, but I thank you for saying “would have” instead of “would of,” which is like nails on a chalkboard to me.

It was a hypothetical question for certain. It is fortunate that Barr refused Trump's request.

Desperately tried to overturn the results after he conceded.

That isn't dubious.

What did Gore do specifically that you think was dubious?

 

[Catsnmeters]

you have no clue. If you were facing 20 yrs for a crime you did not commit and years of Costly Deep State Trials......then they said.....$5000 fine and read this statment with no jail.

Go back to be child. you have no business up in here.

I am not interested in debating your conspiracies.

They lied. They admitted they lied. Now they are paying the price.

 

[Seymour Flops]

That's absurd. The indictments are real for real crimes as determined by a jury.

I’ve read them carefully multiple times, and none of them list the criminal statute Trump supposedly violated nor what specific actions violated it.

Which specific indictment do you think isn't a crime?

In light of what I said above, which do you think is?

No. He did not control them. They could have refrained from lying but they didnt. He worked with them. He collaborated with them. Rudy himself was Trump's lawyer.


That isn't dubious.

What did Gore do specifically that you think was dubious?

Tried to sue his way to the White House when the vote counts went against him. Asked for rules to be changed in his favor

 

[22lcidw]

Neither did Democrats.

No indictments exist for disagreement exist.



Not responsible?

He repeated the same messages and had meetings with these people.

They worked with the RNC.



Everyone is grateful for that.



It sure speaks to Trump's state of mind to me.

What if Barr would have said yes?


What do you think Gore did in regards to the election that was dubious?

We all believe what we want. Progs started that a long time before Deplorables. It would help if the Prog dominated media/entertainment wing of the power elite took their foot of the endless propaganda spiels.

 

[Faun]

Nor indictments for actual crimes. The indictments are fake, the fakery motivated by politics.

To pepper your post with some perspective -- you also b'lieve the assailant who broke into the Pelosi home and assaulted Paul Pelosi with a hammer was really Paul Pelosi's lover.

So you're not exactly playing with a full deck, if ya know what I mean.

 

[Seymour Flops]

To pepper your post with some perspective -- you also b'lieve the assailant who broke into the Pelosi home and assaulted Paul Pelosi with a hammer was really Paul Pelosi's lover.

So you're not exactly playing with a full deck, if ya know what I mean.

Jesus, Faun!

How’d you get off my ignore list?

I often suspect the mods do that to stir up debate. Good idea, but I won’t play along.

Bye!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

To pepper your post with some perspective -- you also b'lieve the assailant who broke into the Pelosi home and assaulted Paul Pelosi with a hammer was really Paul Pelosi's lover.

So you're not exactly playing with a full deck, if ya know what I mean.

Nah, Frannie doesn't believe any of that nonsense. This is how he gets attention.

 

[Catsnmeters]

I’ve read them carefully multiple times, and none of them list the criminal statute Trump supposedly violated nor what specific actions violated it.

A small portion of the indictments are pasted below.

I am not sure how you could miss this after reading it carefully multiple times...?

Read the indictment

Read the indictment against Donald Trump in the 2020 Election investigation

apnews.com

The Defendant and co-conspirators used knowingly false claims of election fraud to get state legislators and election officials to subvert the legitimate election results and change electoral votes for the Defendant's opponent, Joseph R. Biden, Jr., to electoral votes for the Defendant. That is, on the pretext of baseless fraud claims, the Defendant pushed officials in certain states to ignore the popular vote; disenfranchise millions of voters; dismiss legitimate electors; and ultimately, cause the ascertainment of and voting by illegitimate electors in favor of the Defendant.

The Defendant and co-conspirators organized fraudulent slates of electors in seven targeted states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), attempting to mimic the procedures that the legitimate electors were supposed to follow under the Constitution and other federal and state laws. This included causing the fraudulent electors to meet on the day appointed by federal law on which legitimate electors were to gather and cast their votes; cast fraudulent votes for the Defendant; and sign certificates falsely representing that they were legitimate clectors. Some fraudulent electors were tricked into participating based on the understanding that their votes would be used only if the Defendant succeeded in outcome-determinative lawsuits within their state, which the Defendant never did. The Defendant and co-conspirators then caused these fraudulent electors to transmit their false certificates to the....


Vice President and other government officials to be counted at the certification proceeding on January 6.

The Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to use the power and authority of the Justice Department to conduct sham election crime investigations and to send a letter to the targeted states that falsely claimed that the Justice Department had identified significant concerns that may have impacted the election outcome; that sought to advance the Defendant's fraudulent elector plan by using the Justice Department's authority to falsely present the fraudulent electors as a valid alternative to the legitimate electors; and that urged, on behalf of the Justice Department, the targeted states legislatures to convene to create the opportunity to choose the fraudulent electors over the legitimate electors.

The Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to enlist the Vice President to use his ceremonial role at the January 6 certification proceeding to fraudulently alter the election results. First, using knowingly false claims of election fraud, the Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to convince the Vice President to use the Defendant's fraudulent electors, reject legitimate electoral votes, or send legitimate electoral votes to state legislatures for review rather than counting them. When that failed, on the morning of January 6, the Defendant and co-conspirators repeated knowingly false claims of election fraud to gathered supporters, falsely told them that the Vice President had the authority to and might alter the election results, and directed them to the Capitol to obstruct the certification proceeding and exert pressure on the Vice President to take the fraudulent actions he had previously refused.

After it became public on the afternoon of January 6 that the Vice President would not fraudulently alter the election results, a large and angry crowd- including many individuals whom the Defendant had deceived into believing the Vice President could and might change the election results- violently attacked the Capitol and halted the proceeding. As violence ensued, the Defendant and co-conspirators exploited the disruption by redoubling efforts to levy false claims of election fraud and convince Members of Congress to further delay the certification based on those claims.

All of the above is illegal. You really missed it?

In light of what I said above, which do you think is?

See above.

Tried to sue his way to the White House when the vote counts went against him. Asked for rules to be changed in his favor

Links please.

 

[Catsnmeters]

We all believe what we want. Progs started that a long time before Deplorables. It would help if the Prog dominated media/entertainment wing of the power elite took their foot of the endless propaganda spiels.

I don't believe what I want. I believe facts even if I don't like them.

You really believe what you want?

Fox paid for their propaganda spiels.

Imagine, telling lies because you know if you don't, your viewers will watch something else.

 

[Seymour Flops]

A small portion of the indictments are pasted below.

I am not sure how you could miss this after reading it carefully multiple times...?

Read the indictment

Read the indictment against Donald Trump in the 2020 Election investigation

apnews.com

The Defendant and co-conspirators used knowingly false claims of election fraud to get state legislators and election officials to subvert the legitimate election results and change electoral votes for the Defendant's opponent, Joseph R. Biden, Jr., to electoral votes for the Defendant. That is, on the pretext of baseless fraud claims, the Defendant pushed officials in certain states to ignore the popular vote; disenfranchise millions of voters; dismiss legitimate electors; and ultimately, cause the ascertainment of and voting by illegitimate electors in favor of the Defendant.

The Defendant and co-conspirators organized fraudulent slates of electors in seven targeted states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), attempting to mimic the procedures that the legitimate electors were supposed to follow under the Constitution and other federal and state laws. This included causing the fraudulent electors to meet on the day appointed by federal law on which legitimate electors were to gather and cast their votes; cast fraudulent votes for the Defendant; and sign certificates falsely representing that they were legitimate clectors. Some fraudulent electors were tricked into participating based on the understanding that their votes would be used only if the Defendant succeeded in outcome-determinative lawsuits within their state, which the Defendant never did. The Defendant and co-conspirators then caused these fraudulent electors to transmit their false certificates to the....


Vice President and other government officials to be counted at the certification proceeding on January 6.

The Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to use the power and authority of the Justice Department to conduct sham election crime investigations and to send a letter to the targeted states that falsely claimed that the Justice Department had identified significant concerns that may have impacted the election outcome; that sought to advance the Defendant's fraudulent elector plan by using the Justice Department's authority to falsely present the fraudulent electors as a valid alternative to the legitimate electors; and that urged, on behalf of the Justice Department, the targeted states legislatures to convene to create the opportunity to choose the fraudulent electors over the legitimate electors.

The Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to enlist the Vice President to use his ceremonial role at the January 6 certification proceeding to fraudulently alter the election results. First, using knowingly false claims of election fraud, the Defendant and co-conspirators attempted to convince the Vice President to use the Defendant's fraudulent electors, reject legitimate electoral votes, or send legitimate electoral votes to state legislatures for review rather than counting them. When that failed, on the morning of January 6, the Defendant and co-conspirators repeated knowingly false claims of election fraud to gathered supporters, falsely told them that the Vice President had the authority to and might alter the election results, and directed them to the Capitol to obstruct the certification proceeding and exert pressure on the Vice President to take the fraudulent actions he had previously refused.

After it became public on the afternoon of January 6 that the Vice President would not fraudulently alter the election results, a large and angry crowd- including many individuals whom the Defendant had deceived into believing the Vice President could and might change the election results- violently attacked the Capitol and halted the proceeding. As violence ensued, the Defendant and co-conspirators exploited the disruption by redoubling efforts to levy false claims of election fraud and convince Members of Congress to further delay the certification based on those claims.

All of the above is illegal. You really missed it?



See above.

Thanks for cutting and pasting something I’ve already read. Just saying “its all illegal” wont stand up.

A criminal Statute and an action that violated that statute is needed for a crime.

Links please.

Research it yourself, it’s old news.

 

[johnwk]

Tammany Hall is all yous losers gots? Lolololol

"...yous losers gots?"
Is that your takeaway after reading Victoria Collier's article?

I can assure you, Victoria Collier, a progressive sympathizer, presented far more than Tammany Hall, in her article in 2012.



Seems to me, Victoria Collier, when authoring How to Rig an Election . . . The G.O.P. aims to paint the country red, laid out the very blueprint which the Democrat Leadership later followed in the 2020 election, and in key battleground states, while her accomplices in our big progressive sympathizing media, mocked any republican who asserted Collier’s identified tools for election rigging were being used in the election.

Aside from that, what is absolutely interesting to note is, the company Victoria Collier is in bed with at the National Election Defense Council, where she serves as Executive Director, and exhibits a list of who’s who in left wing activism, e.g., Rainbow Push (Rev Jesse Jackson; The Brennan Center for Justice; Transformative Justice Coalition; Public Citizen; Common Cause, and others to mention a few. And you, by indirection, project an attack on her and her allies?

Have you finally seen the light and joined the Republican party?

 

[Catsnmeters]

Thanks for cutting and pasting something I’ve already read. Just saying “its all illegal” wont stand up.

A criminal Statute and an action that violated that statute is needed for a crime.

Research it yourself, it’s old news.

I am starting to think you are a disengenius poster.

The statutes are listed on the very top of the indictments page (see previous link) you claimed to have read multiple times very carefully.

Really?

 

[dudmuck]

Thanks for cutting and pasting something I’ve already read. Just saying “its all illegal” wont stand up.

A criminal Statute and an action that violated that statute is needed for a crime.

Research it yourself, it’s old news.

The four statutes are described here


18 USC 371 conspiracy to defraud US
18 USC 1512k conspiracy to obstruct official proceeding
18 USC 1512c2 obstruction of official proceeding
18 USC 241 conspiracy against rights

 

[Seymour Flops]

I am starting to think you are a disengenius poster.

The statutes are listed on the very top of the indictments page (see previous link) you claimed to have read multiple times very carefully.

Really?

If I’m a disingenuous poster, you are more than welcome not to read my post. It seems like you want to talk about everything in the world except name in the actions by Trump that violated specific criminal statues.

I know it seems like something I just pulled out of my rear end to you I guess. But believe it or not, that is how prosecutor prove crimes in every other case.


Except that, they also have to prove that the defendant actually did those actions. None of the cases against Trump have any chance of conviction. There’s been enough prosecutorial, misconduct, and bias decisions by judges to throw it out, even if there was strong evidence against him.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Just naming the statues isn’t enough.

The four statutes are described here


18 USC 371 conspiracy to defraud US
18 USC 1512k conspiracy to obstruct official proceeding
18 USC 1512c2 obstruction of official proceeding
18 USC 241 conspiracy against rights

Just naming the statues isn’t enough. What part of the statute did what action of Trump violate?