Does this person exist?

[Lastamender]

Sorry, it's just too much trouble trying to keep up with all your constantly growing list of conspiracy theories.

No it is too easy for you to call then conspiracy theories without knowing one thing about them. That and projection is all you have.

 

[toobfreak]

1. If you aren't a MAGA, to put it in Mortimer's terms, you wouldn't have any problems passing for one.

Why? What does that mean? You mean I'm still a (gasp) MAGA despite criticizing Trump and hating the GOP? Hmm.

2. The election wasn't stolen.

Just waiting now for your proof claiming so. I mean, you are so certain, you must have some pretty solid proof!

3. I can easily be convinced to change my mind.

That's good to hear as most any change at all would be an improvement.

 

[BULLDOG]

No it is too easy for you to call then conspiracy theories without knowing one thing about them. That and projection is all you have.

So narrow it down. You said Mi was proof. To what about the state of Mi are you referring?

 

[BULLDOG]

Why? What does that mean? You mean I'm still a (gasp) MAGA despite criticizing Trump and hating the GOP? Hmm.


Just waiting now for your proof claiming so. I mean, you are so certain, you must have some pretty solid proof!


That's good to hear as most any change at all would be an improvement.

All states certified the election results. None of the claims porporting to prove widespread cheating have been found to be credible by any governing body.

 

[toobfreak]

All states certified the election results.

You mean just like any good autocrat might do with him the only candidate? Lie, cheat, steal, then swear to it? Maybe you don't know that several states have admitted that many of the special election rules they used in 2020 were not legal because they were not voted on nor changed by the only bodies in the state with the authority to do so? But hey, it isn't HOW you get there, just so long as you WIN, right, Buttercup?

None of the claims porporting to prove widespread cheating have been found to be credible by any governing body.

And of course, we all know all the evidence, about 90% of it was never actually adjudicated in court but just dismissed up front on grounds of standing, time of filing etc., because no judge wants his court and his career hinging on changing the outcome of a national election! Just like the Congress, Petunia, just keep passing the buck and let the next poor schmuck deal with it!

 

[Lastamender]

So narrow it down. You said Mi was proof. To what about the state of Mi are you referring?

Fake registrations. Reported before the election. Plenty of proof GBI did it in 20 states. The FBI never investigated.

 

[elektra]

OK.Lets go through this particular claim one more time. Where and when do you think republican poll watchers were kicked out but counting continued?

It is well known, documented, witnessed. It has been thourly explained in many threads.

Further, some states violated the constitution, article 2, sect 1, para 2, prior to the election

Democrats cheated and got away with it

Democrats broke the law and got away with it

 

[BULLDOG]

It is well known, documented, witnessed. It has been thourly explained in many threads.

Further, some states violated the constitution, article 2, sect 1, para 2, prior to the election

Democrats cheated and got away with it

Democrats broke the law and got away with it

Is there a single credible sourse that agrees with you, or are they all conspiracy theory sites?

 

[Dragonlady]

No it is too easy for you to call then conspiracy theories without knowing one thing about them. That and projection is all you have.

You have no evidence that anything that Trump told you was real, really happened, and a whole lot of evidence that Trump made it all up.

NONE.

 

[Lastamender]

You have no evidence that anything that Trump told you was real, really happened, and a whole lot of evidence that Trump made it all up.

NONE.

There is evidence Russia was a hoax. It was true he was spied on, which he said. There are many many more. You are unbelievably stupid.

 

[jknowgood]

Sure. If you can get them to change the laws so that carrying more than 1 ballot is a thing, you'll be all set.

Law says you can only drop 1 ballot off at a time. Unless you loons changed it.

 

[jknowgood]

You have no evidence that anything that Trump told you was real, really happened, and a whole lot of evidence that Trump made it all up.

NONE.

Russian collusion proved that you loons will make anything up. Time for you to fade away.

 

[scruffy]

So many crazy accusations.

So much blatant leftard corruption.

 

[emilynghiem]

It was a landslide victory for Biden. And that's not my standard I'm using when I say landslide. That is Trump's standard which he used in 2016 when he defeated Clinton without winning the popular vote. He called that a landslide.

Meanwhile, Biden won 7 million more votes than Trump.

Landslide.

That's with HOW MANY MILLIONS of unnotarized "mailin ballots" that violated rules in many key states requiring a VOTE of state legislatures before changing the election rules to allow this.

Trump is the only President who didn't get re-elected AFTER WINNING EVEN MORE VOTES than he got when elected for the first term! (one estimate is 10 million more in 2020 than in 2016) Trump Got 10 Million More Votes This Election. Where Did They Come From?

Sadly, with the key states that DIDN'T legally vote to change the rules to allow MILLIONS in unnotarized mailin ballots,
we can never prove (1) first that those states' policies did or did not reflect the representation of their citizens and voters
(2) second that the unnotarized ballots were or were not valid or invalid. Thus fraud can never be proven or disproven.

The Election results remain faith based due to these two things that can never be proven or disproven to be valid
representation of those states' citizen populations.

The only thing that makes the Election results legal is the certified vote by Congress, unless this is proven to be "an establishment of religion that doesn't reflect the consent of the public."

I say two out of three makes it disputable.
But if people accept the certified vote of Congress as legitimate, then that is what is used to justify public consent to the election results as voted on by Congress.

I still believe the other two points are legitimate objections and justifications for people who don't agree to have
the results imposed on them by vote of Congress since those votes and election rule changes remain faith based.

The last point that is still faith based is whether the Courts denying to hear the lawsuits due to "lack of standing"
means the objections are overruled or just not addressed by government but still valid points that could be proven
to have violated national election laws.

So that's really 3 points of objection, not proven either way but still faith based,
compared with 1 process that is proven (the vote of Congress that is documented as approved by majority of Reps).

1. First the election rules were changed in key states WITHOUT the vote of legislators as required by federal election laws
2. This caused MILLIONS of mailin ballots to be accepted as votes WITHOUT legal ability to prove or disprove validity
3. And when states sued on behalf of citizens, but the Courts denied to even hear the cases by arguing lack of standing,
this prevented the other two issues from being presented at all.

versus:
4. The only vote proven on record to justify the election results is the vote by Congress to certify the UNPROVEN votes (again because (point 2) millions per state lacked notarization under penalty of perjury, and (point 1) the changes to the election rules that ALLOWED such unprovable/unnotarized ballots in the millions can also NEVER BE PROVEN to reflect the consent of citizens in those states since no vote was taken on record as required by national election laws. Plus point 3: the courts never addressed these complaints of election laws being violated due to the unresolved dispute over standing and state vs federal jurisdiction)

 

[struth]

Sure there was cheating. There is always cheating. Never a lot. Never enough to effect the outcome in any way, and mostly right wingers doing it.

Glad you admit there was cheating

 

[elektra]

Is there a single credible sourse that agrees with you, or are they all conspiracy theory sites?

Oh, they are all conspiracy theory sites.

We ALL know the only credible site is sites democrats agree with.

Could you PLEASE give me a list of credible sites.

 

[BULLDOG]

Oh, they are all conspiracy theory sites.

We ALL know the only credible site is sites democrats agree with.

Could you PLEASE give me a list of credible sites.

No. I'll leave that to your disgression. Sights that are known for stories like gay frogs, or Qanon conspiracies will be disallowed.

 

[elektra]

Is there a single credible sourse that agrees with you, or are they all conspiracy theory sites?

Are you not a bit premature with your bigotry, calling my source a conspiracy theory website before I mention how I know what I know or where I got my information.

Give us a list of credible websites. You ran your mouth, it is your op, back up your comment with acceptable websites.

 

[BULLDOG]

Are you not a bit premature with your bigotry, calling my source a conspiracy theory website before I mention how I know what I know or where I got my information.

Give us a list of credible websites. You ran your mouth, it is your op, back up your comment with acceptable websites.

Nope. Not gonna play that game. Any reasonable sourse is fine. Just none of the batshit crazy ones.

 

[elektra]

Nope. Not gonna play that game. Any reasonable sourse is fine. Just none of the batshit crazy ones.

So, you make a claim but are unable to tell us what you will accept.

You prove yourself to be full of dogshit