Arizona Attorney General Blasts DOJ for Interfering with Election Audit


And those republican are in control because they won the state election you claim traitor Joe won.... With "the same" ballots....

Not true.

One of the most telling bits of evidence of election fraud were the massive numbers of ballots with no down ballot picks.

A third of the ballots that "elected" Xi's man had no selection for senate, assembly, congress, etc. They only had Biden on them.


Oh, Pam Geller is a Jew, and unlike you, smart.
 
Yeah, like I did in 2016.

Remember how Clinton conceded in 2016? I do. Here's a refresher.

Yeah, then she and the rest of the Nazi party went 4 years of promoting the ROOOOSHAN COALUSHUN conspiracy theory, including the Spanish Inquisition under Mueller.
 
Yeah, then she and the rest of the Nazi party went 4 years of promoting the ROOOOSHAN COALUSHUN conspiracy theory, including the Spanish Inquisition under Mueller.
And here I thought the rule is that you should welcome investigations if you have nothing to hide?
 

And those republican are in control because they won the state election you claim traitor Joe won.... With "the same" ballots....

Not true.

One of the most telling bits of evidence of election fraud were the massive numbers of ballots with no down ballot picks.

A third of the ballots that "elected" Xi's man had no selection for senate, assembly, congress, etc. They only had Biden on them.


Oh, Pam Geller is a Jew, and unlike you, smart.


All of the "republicans for Biden" are really Jews.

Do you still think Cheney is not Jewish?

And Romney is a Mormon, just do not check his investments from 2001.

Indeed, it is this very sub human pro israel Christian demographic who wrecked the GOP by supporting the Zionist frauds like McConnell and McCain and Paul Ryan. The subs are too stupid to understand basic math, and hence discussing debt and deficit goes nowhere. As for science, yeah, what hit the pentagon on 911?
 
Nothing says legitimate election like sending hundreds of lawyers to try to stop an election audit and using defamation to promote false information and surrounding yourself with piles of razor wire bolstered by 30,000 soldiers you openly don’t trust.



Merrick Garland is talking about enforcing election laws. What's wrong with that?

If you'll buy that, I have a bridge to sell you.
 
Yeah, like I did in 2016.

Remember how Clinton conceded in 2016? I do. Here's a refresher.

Yeah, then she and the rest of the Nazi party went 4 years of promoting the ROOOOSHAN COALUSHUN conspiracy theory, including the Spanish Inquisition under Mueller.

Sorry, that was AFTER Trump was inaugurated. And let's face it, Nazi Boy, he did all that..to himself. Why? Because he's corrupt and he's a friggin moron. No self awareness beyond the next sound bite.
 
Nothing says legitimate election like sending hundreds of lawyers to try to stop an election audit and using defamation to promote false information and surrounding yourself with piles of razor wire bolstered by 30,000 soldiers you openly don’t trust.



Merrick Garland is talking about enforcing election laws. What's wrong with that?

Someone who felt they legally won an election would welcome an audit instead of sending hundreds of lawyers to try to stop an audit.

-Someone who felt they legally won an election would accept the LEGAL opinion of the courts.
-Someone who felt they legally won an election wouldn't try to decertify the results of that election.
-Someone who felt they legally won an election would accept the result of the hand count.
-Someone who felt they legally won an election would accept the audit already conducted in this county.
-Someone who felt they legally won an election would accept the second audit already conducted in this county.
-Someone who felt they legally won an election would accept that the election board is bipartisan and as such their statement that the election was honest is sufficient.

-Someone who doesn't feel obliged to accept legal, moral, or logical reasoning would choose to not accept all the thing mentioned and instead support an audit called by a single party who chooses a company that has no experience in conducting such and whose CEO is on record defending conspiratorial election fraud theories.
 
Last edited:

Sorry, that was AFTER Trump was inaugurated. And let's face it, Nazi Boy, he did all that..to himself. Why? Because he's corrupt and he's a friggin moron. No self awareness beyond the next sound bite.

More lies from the fuckwad Nazis.


Once there was a democrat cocksucker who wasn't a pathological liar.

Oh wait, no there wasn't.
 
Cyber Ninjas have no experience in this area.
1623804609212.png
 

Sorry, that was AFTER Trump was inaugurated. And let's face it, Nazi Boy, he did all that..to himself. Why? Because he's corrupt and he's a friggin moron. No self awareness beyond the next sound bite.

More lies from the fuckwad Nazis.


Once there was a democrat cocksucker who wasn't a pathological liar.

Oh wait, no there wasn't.

Nazi Boy quotes the fuckwits from JW (it's what they drink).
No one made any hay out of Russia until he fired Comey.
If he doesn't do that, Sessions doesn't recuse himself and there's no Special Counsel appointed.
It dies right there in April of 2017.

But...Trump just can't help himself. Because he's a witless moron.
Everything that followed, he brought on himself.
 
With the audit uncovering fraud Dems are squealing like stuck pigs.
Conservative count is that they're missing around 10% of the total ballots, from boxes that were supposedly held secure from tampering.

No ballots = No votes....And the re-canvass is coming soon.

You're going to need ear plugs to squelch the ear splitting squealing to come.
 

"Ironically, meaning totally predictably, the original 1965 Voting Rights Act was necessary because Democrats were trying to prevent black people from voting. Today, Democrats are using these new “voting rights” bills to ensure that 110% of black people vote, even if they are convicted felons, don’t live in the state, didn’t actually fill out a ballot or are dead.

Actually, Arizona was bossed around by liberal activists at the DOJ for 40 years because back in 1972, it didn’t have bilingual ballots. Those weren’t instituted until 1974. They may as well have donned white hoods and burned crosses!

Oddly, Mississippi’s election laws were also subject to approval by the DOJ ... despite the fact that blacks already voted at far higher rates than whites in that state. By contrast, Massachusetts did not require oversight of its voting laws, although in that fancy liberal state, black people voted at much lower rates than whites.

(Interestingly, even after all the media demagoguery, black people still overwhelmingly support voter I.D. laws.)

It’s almost as if only red states have their voting laws nitpicked by left-wing lawyers in Washington. I wonder if that would help Democrats win presidential elections?

It wasn’t until 2013 that the Supreme Court mercifully overturned key portions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. (Citing the overwhelming Senate vote for the wonderfully named Voting Rights Act, Justice Antonin Scalia remarked at oral argument: “This is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress.”)"
 

Forum List

Back
Top