Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Okay...Unconstitutionally.
apnews.com
Remember when we could trust the media to report honest news without bias, spin or unscrupulous framing device, making alternate media redundant?
Nope... me either...
Six feet apart X 800 people standing in line is what, a mile long line? Does that sound remotely practical to you?
PS: Many states (Texas included) changed election rules for good reason.... And it was done by executive decree.
Weak insults and no substance. Is that you Joe Biden?You seem to have a lot of mental issues....I'm not surprised.
Here is some interesting information on mail-in ballots:Yes there is... There is a record of every mailed ballot. What are you talking about? Link to any state that mailed ballots to everyone (ps...where would they get the names and addresses)?
www.worldtribune.com
Lets be honest you say anyone that doesn't bow to Trump is Progressive Socialist Communist.Garland was pushed as a moderate for the Supreme Court. He is another Progressive Socialist Communist.
That's what all the Progressive Socialist Communists say....you say anyone that doesn't bow to Trump is Progressive Socialist Communist.
That line is getting very tired...
That's not "uncanny", it's statistically impossible.Note the uncanny similarity of the blue lines for both of these states. Those vertical spikes represent vote dumps over the internet.
Here is some interesting information on mail-in ballots:
223,000 mail-in ballots mailed to wrong Nevada addresses; Pre-filled ballots hit Fairfax County, Va
by WorldTribune Staff, August 7, 2020 The potential for significant problems with mass mail-in voting was highlighted in Nevada, where more than 200,000 ballots were sent to wrong addresses, and Vi…
1.8 million absentee ballots were mailed out for the 2020 election in Pennsylvania, but 2.5 million were counted, according to testimony at a Pennsylvania state hearing.
One incident recorded on video indicates 2,600 to 2,700 votes were not initially counted, that “ballots didn’t transfer over like they should have.” The voting machine company, Dominion, was troubleshooting, but nobody could explain.
Dominion Voting Systems’ executives canceled a planned appearance at a hearing in Pennsylvania on Nov. 20.
Read More
Read More
Registered Republicans requested 165,412 ballots that ultimately were not returned or counted. A statistical analysis determined up to nearly 54,000 ballots were improperly requested by someone other than the registered voter and sent to people who did not request them; and Republicans mailed up to nearly 45,000 ballots that did not ultimately get counted.
Additionally:
Also from the same article:
For Michigan
View attachment 518992
For Wisconson
View attachment 518993
Note the uncanny similarity of the blue lines for both of these states. Those vertical spikes represent vote dumps over the internet.
Michigan sent even numbers of Republicans and Democrats to the House. Any thoughts on why the supposed voting fraud elected 7 republicans to the House?You're not actually listening to a source for political reporting that is called ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com, right?
As for the graphs...they counted the mail in votes after the electronic votes were tallied as they have done for years. "Vote counts over the internet"....straight out of conspiracy theory friction. Michigan sent even numbers of Republicans and Democrats to the House. Any thoughts on why the supposed voting fraud elected 7 republicans to the House?
Wisconsin sent 5 republicans and 3 democrats. Again, any thoughts on why the fraudsters would send more republicans to the House than Democrats from Wisconsin.
Cases have been refused for a variety of reasons. They don't all of a sudden become valid because of it. In fact it invalidates them.Evidence is evidence whether it is presented in court or not. Some courts have refused to hear cases based on lack of standing. Their refusal does not negate any evidence.
Don't twist what I say into your own misguided perception of what I say. I have never rejected the need to resolve claims in court. The dismissal of a suit based on lack of standing does not invalidate the suit or the evidence that would have been presented in that court. It merely means that the litigants have no legal right to bring that particular suit to that particular court.Cases have been refused for a variety of reasons. They don't all of a sudden become valid because of it. In fact it invalidates them.
As for the nature of evidence. You are asserting that voter fraud happened and that evidence leads you too that conclusion? Yet at the same time you reject the need to actually be able to prove any of it in court, or for that matter source the evidence when it is requested ?
My question then becomes, "What is the difference between actual evidence and a badly conceived conspiracy theory?" If you aren't willing to test, or even give for investigation, evidence how is anyone supposed to reach an informed conclusion?
If I misunderstood you I'm sorry, although it seems to me that your position here is exactly as advertised. You can not both claim that evidence remains valid even if it is not presented in court and at the same time claim this.Don't twist what I say into your own misguided perception of what I say. I have never rejected the need to resolve claims in court. The dismissal of a suit based on lack of standing does not invalidate the suit or the evidence that would have been presented in that court. It merely means that the litigants have no legal right to bring that particular suit to that particular court.
Those 2 positions are directly contradictory.The determination of the validity and appropriate weight to be assigned to evidence is determined in court either by a jury, a judge, or a panel of judges or justices.
No need for sorrow. My position IS exactly as advertised...by me...not by what you may have incorrectly inferred from it or by any paraphrasing of it. I do not recall claiming that evidence remains valid. I claimed that evidence remains evidence whether presented in court or not. I then claimed that the validity of the evidence and the appropriate weight to be assigned to it is determined IN COURT...If I misunderstood you I'm sorry, although it seems to me that your position here is exactly as advertised. You can not both claim that evidence remains valid even if it is not presented in court and at the same time claim this.
No they are not.Those 2 positions are directly contradictory.
I believe both.I will now continue on the presumption you believe the second.
I have no interest in reversing the election results with intent to depose Biden and insert Trump. 2024 may do that. My hope is that a court will examine the evidence of statistical impossibilities that are evident from professional investigations of post-election ballot counting and internet activities that show sufficient interference from foreign nations manipulating the vote counts to have reversed the results prior to Jan 6 certification.forkup said:I went through all the lawsuits brought by Trump or those who have an interest in reversing the election results Post-election lawsuits related to the 2020 United States presidential election from Pennsylvania - Wikipedia. Lack of standing was cause for dismissal in a handful of cases, none of those cases allege to have proof of voter fraud. The closest they got was this suit. Pearson v. Kemp - Wikisource, the free online library In which they claimed to have noticed "alleged mathematical and statistical anomalies in the vote count." that would require them to. "There, the plaintiffs’ counsel explained that the evidence the plaintiffs hoped to collect from Georgia’s voting machines" This invalidates any claim the anomalies constitute proof of fraud.
In fact, exactly zero of the lawsuits filed provide actual evidence of voter fraud.
www.heritage.org
www.heritage.org
In fact, exactly zero of the lawsuits filed provide actual evidence of voter fraud.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
forkup
It appears that my reservation was proper. Here's another article on the court cases.
BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Accurate List of 2020 Election Fraud Cases Shows 81 Cases Total, 30 Still Active - And NOT ONE SINGLE COURT Has Allowed Evidence to be Argued | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft
The 2020 election will go down as arguably the greatest fraud in world history. The tremendously popular incumbent candidate, President Trump, was easily winning the race on election night in a landslide and then suddenly multiple states took a break, quit counting, and by the end of the week...
The 2020 election will go down as arguably the greatest fraud in world history. The tremendously popular incumbent candidate, President Trump, was easily winning the race on election night in a landslide and then suddenly multiple states took a break, quit counting, and by the end of the week the election was flipped to Joe Biden.
Then, as the President and his team attempted to address the fraud and alleged abnormalities, the courts refused in any case evidence to be brought before a court of law.
We’ve heard over and over from Big Media that President Trump and his team lost numerous court cases linked to the 2020 election. But this is not accurate.
Here’s what we identified from our research of an accurate and updated list of court cases:
(clip)
- There are 81 court cases to date based on the 2020 election
- In 45 cases President Trump was the plaintiff
- In 34 cases President Trump is not the plaintiff
- In 2 cases President Trump is the defendant
- In 72 cases illegal voting is alleged
- In ZERO of the 72 cases where illegal voting is alleged has evidence been allowed to be presented
- 30 cases remain active
This is demonstrably false.In ZERO of the 72 cases where illegal voting is alleged has evidence been allowed to be presented
why do you do that?People make up things on the Internet so weak minded people can believe them and keep repeating...
Keep repeating..
exactly as I have stated.forkup
It appears that my reservation was proper. Here's another article on the court cases.
BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Accurate List of 2020 Election Fraud Cases Shows 81 Cases Total, 30 Still Active - And NOT ONE SINGLE COURT Has Allowed Evidence to be Argued | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft
The 2020 election will go down as arguably the greatest fraud in world history. The tremendously popular incumbent candidate, President Trump, was easily winning the race on election night in a landslide and then suddenly multiple states took a break, quit counting, and by the end of the week...
The 2020 election will go down as arguably the greatest fraud in world history. The tremendously popular incumbent candidate, President Trump, was easily winning the race on election night in a landslide and then suddenly multiple states took a break, quit counting, and by the end of the week the election was flipped to Joe Biden.
Then, as the President and his team attempted to address the fraud and alleged abnormalities, the courts refused in any case evidence to be brought before a court of law.
We’ve heard over and over from Big Media that President Trump and his team lost numerous court cases linked to the 2020 election. But this is not accurate.
Here’s what we identified from our research of an accurate and updated list of court cases:
(clip)
- There are 81 court cases to date based on the 2020 election
- In 45 cases President Trump was the plaintiff
- In 34 cases President Trump is not the plaintiff
- In 2 cases President Trump is the defendant
- In 72 cases illegal voting is alleged
- In ZERO of the 72 cases where illegal voting is alleged has evidence been allowed to be presented
- 30 cases remain active
They have, as pointed out in the last ruling I posted.is that a court will examine the evidence of statistical impossibilities that are evident from professional investigations of post-election ballot counting and internet activities that show sufficient interference from foreign nations manipulating the vote counts to have reversed the results prior to Jan 6 certification.
As of now, we have bipartisan election boards, judges appointed by presidents of both parties, the Trump-led DOJ, with at his head an AG who openly asserted voter fraud would happen pre-elections, lawyers pleading cases FOR Trump when asked in court, all saying that they have no knowledge of any voter fraud on a scale even close to affecting the outcome of the elections.I also have hopes that the courts will not strike down the efforts of state legislatures to curtail voter fraud with restrictions on activities that enable illegal voting, thus strengthening legal voter's confidence in the fairness of the election system.
I didn't talk about all lawsuits, I was talking about lawsuits actually asking for relief by overturning election results, you know the 80 plus lawsuits your article is talking about. Including every case of voter fraud in an attempt to say large-scale voter fraud happened is stupid. I just so happen to use that heritage foundation database quite a lot here myself. Mostly by pointing out how exceedingly rare voter fraud is in relation to actual votes cast going by that database.I disagree with your last sentence with some reservation. I am not aware of all the evidence that has been presented in any lawsuits that have made it into any court and presented in the lawsuit IN THE COURTROOM. There is certainly evidence of voter fraud. There have been convictions for same in some state courts.
This is demonstrably false.
Stoddard v. City Election Commission of the City of Detroit - Wikisource, the free online library
However, plaintiffs have made only a claim but have offered no evidence to support their assertions.
This judge asked the plaintiff to offer evidence.
One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.
Another judge did so here.
Wayback Machine
One might expect that this solemn request would be paired with evidence of serious errors tied to a substantial and demonstrated set of illegal votes. Instead, the evidentiary support rests almost entirely on the unsworn expert report1 of a former campaign employee that offers statistical estimates based on call center samples and social media research. This petition falls far short of the kind of compelling evidence and legal support we would undoubtedly need to countenance the court-ordered disenfranchisement of every Wisconsin voter.
And here
The list provided in the article about the status of the cases has as its last date December 25th, 2020 2 months after the election. Outdated to say the least.
As I said I would only argue a source is unreliable if I could point to specific points to contest within an article. I have done so. In fact, I have invalidated the entire premise by giving you the actual court rulings in which judges are pleading with the plaintiffs to actually offer evidence.
| (Public Version 7-20-21) |
