For the love of aardvark booty!!! Will somebody PLEASE give us the damn EVIDENCE??? Nothing but baseless allegations!!! BASELESS!!!

[Skylar]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

There are only two ways to prove, with out a doubt, in court, this allegation to be true. An audit of a paper trail, which there are none, and a review of the source code.


Bulldog assures me that he is sure they have gone over the source code. Not sure why he is sure, but he is sure.

Breaking News - Rudy is presenting his evidence, legal arguments to the people.

Why can not all Americans agee that we can not have one person one vote without first addressing ALL of the situations where there is alleged fraud? That's actually kind of retarded. First, you have to PROVE FRAUD, not just allege it. Secondly, you have to show that the Fraud made a...

www.usmessageboard.com

Otherwise, everything all the posters on the left are telling you? Is correct.

A problem with that claim:

You assume that Trump's supporters would accept the result of any audit. As the Georgia recount demonstrates, they'll just make up a brand new conspiracy.

You can't use evidence to convince people that don't use evidence.

 

[MisterBeale]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

There are only two ways to prove, with out a doubt, in court, this allegation to be true. An audit of a paper trail, which there are none, and a review of the source code.


Bulldog assures me that he is sure they have gone over the source code. Not sure why he is sure, but he is sure.

Breaking News - Rudy is presenting his evidence, legal arguments to the people.

Why can not all Americans agee that we can not have one person one vote without first addressing ALL of the situations where there is alleged fraud? That's actually kind of retarded. First, you have to PROVE FRAUD, not just allege it. Secondly, you have to show that the Fraud made a...

www.usmessageboard.com

Otherwise, everything all the posters on the left are telling you? Is correct.

A problem with that claim:

You assume that Trump's supporters would accept the result of any audit. As the Georgia recount demonstrates, they'll just make up a brand new conspiracy.

You can't use evidence to convince people that don't use evidence.

Personally?

I have been looking over the exit polling. . . I am more and more inclined to believe two things;

1) Yes, Biden did win,

2) There was substantial fraud in the computerized voting system. . . toward Trump.

But these folks would not want to hear this. The only way it could be otherwise is if those voting for Trump were lying about who they voted for AFTER they had already voted for them, and if they did? Then they do not understand the importance of being honest in exit polling. These type of polls are the type that have traditionally been the most accurate polls to gauge whether an election was fraudulent or not.

The only other option is if those companies polling the voters are just flat out lying, which is really not likely, since other institutions and companies exit polling would show that.

The exit polling has shown that Biden won, by larger margins than the vote count. . . so, something is definitely fishy going on, but not in the way most Trump voters believe.

The only other way to verify the results would be to audit it, and that would take into February.

2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION TABLE – TDMS|RESEARCH

 

[Aletheia4u]

Massive Bombshell! Supreme Court Preparing To Certify Trumps Reelection

Alex Jones breaks down Trump's path to victory, via through the Supreme Court

79days.news

 

[Skylar]

Massive Bombshell! Supreme Court Preparing To Certify Trumps Reelection

Alex Jones breaks down Trump's path to victory, via through the Supreme Court

79days.news

Says Infowars.

Backed by nothing.

Is this really it, guys?

 

[Slade3200]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

You can call them lies or you can say he’s mistaken or you can say he is making assumptions of possible fraud and not actually pointing to evidence of fraud. I think all can apply but take your pick

Making assumptions?
Did you read what he wrote? He spells out clearly what he believed, in his expert opinion, occurred. I wouldn’t call that an assumption and dismiss it like that. He can’t physically prove it without access to the machines, but he pretty clearly lays out the evidence he has for making the statements he does.
Could he be wrong? Possibly.
Could he be right? possibly.
To just dismiss this as some people seem to do is foolish.

You quite literally just explain how his statements are assumptions. Then you backed it up by saying that he doesn’t yet have access to the evidence. So when he and Yrump go out and make claims that Biden stole the election because if fraud and whatever wild conspiracies they’ve come up with, without the evidence to prove it then it is wildly irresponsible and just plain wrong. Rudy and Sid should lose their law licenses and Trump should never be allowed to work in public service again after the disgraceful unsubstantiated statements they are making

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

You can call them lies or you can say he’s mistaken or you can say he is making assumptions of possible fraud and not actually pointing to evidence of fraud. I think all can apply but take your pick

Making assumptions?
Did you read what he wrote? He spells out clearly what he believed, in his expert opinion, occurred. I wouldn’t call that an assumption and dismiss it like that. He can’t physically prove it without access to the machines, but he pretty clearly lays out the evidence he has for making the statements he does.
Could he be wrong? Possibly.
Could he be right? possibly.
To just dismiss this as some people seem to do is foolish.

You quite literally just explain how his statements are assumptions. Then you backed it up by saying that he doesn’t yet have access to the evidence. So when he and Yrump go out and make claims that Biden stole the election because if fraud and whatever wild conspiracies they’ve come up with, without the evidence to prove it then it is wildly irresponsible and just plain wrong. Rudy and Sid should lose their law licenses and Trump should never be allowed to work in public service again after the disgraceful unsubstantiated statements they are making

I want to see what the defense expert witness says about all this.

That's going to be very interesting.

(most likely none will even bother)

 

[Skylar]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

You can call them lies or you can say he’s mistaken or you can say he is making assumptions of possible fraud and not actually pointing to evidence of fraud. I think all can apply but take your pick

Making assumptions?
Did you read what he wrote? He spells out clearly what he believed, in his expert opinion, occurred. I wouldn’t call that an assumption and dismiss it like that. He can’t physically prove it without access to the machines, but he pretty clearly lays out the evidence he has for making the statements he does.
Could he be wrong? Possibly.
Could he be right? possibly.
To just dismiss this as some people seem to do is foolish.

You quite literally just explain how his statements are assumptions. Then you backed it up by saying that he doesn’t yet have access to the evidence. So when he and Yrump go out and make claims that Biden stole the election because if fraud and whatever wild conspiracies they’ve come up with, without the evidence to prove it then it is wildly irresponsible and just plain wrong. Rudy and Sid should lose their law licenses and Trump should never be allowed to work in public service again after the disgraceful unsubstantiated statements they are making

I want to see what the defense expert witness says about all this.

That's going to be very interesting.

(most likely none will even bother)

The first thing that's going to be asked....is where did the numbers for the analysis come from.

The affidavit is super vague.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

Problem is all that statistical noise does not prove there was massive voter fraud going on..just asserted 'anomalies' by some guy.

Does your dismissal of statistical evidence apply to covid cooties too?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

Problem is all that statistical noise does not prove there was massive voter fraud going on..just asserted 'anomalies' by some guy.

Does your dismissal of statistical evidence apply to covid cooties too?

The "party of science" right?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

Problem is all that statistical noise does not prove there was massive voter fraud going on..just asserted 'anomalies' by some guy.

Does your dismissal of statistical evidence apply to covid cooties too?

The "party of science" right?

The party of "convenience"

 

[colfax_m]

The "party of science" right?

Republicans may need to go back to school so they can be the party of basic US geography.

Trump lawsuit confuses Michigan and Minnesota locations in affidavit claiming voter fraud

Trump, his legal team, and his supporters have continued to tout unsubstantiated claims of voting fraud.

www.usatoday.com

This genius mixed data from Michigan and Minnesota to come up with his claims about voter participation being "abnormal".

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The "party of science" right?

Republicans may need to go back to school so they can be the party of basic US geography.

Trump lawsuit confuses Michigan and Minnesota locations in affidavit claiming voter fraud

Trump, his legal team, and his supporters have continued to tout unsubstantiated claims of voting fraud.

www.usatoday.com

This genius mixed data from Michigan and Minnesota to come up with his claims about voter participation being "abnormal".

I give you a D....for turbo, thermonuclear, weapons grade DEFLECTION.

You're a dumb fuck.

 

[colfax_m]

The "party of science" right?

Republicans may need to go back to school so they can be the party of basic US geography.

Trump lawsuit confuses Michigan and Minnesota locations in affidavit claiming voter fraud

Trump, his legal team, and his supporters have continued to tout unsubstantiated claims of voting fraud.

www.usatoday.com

This genius mixed data from Michigan and Minnesota to come up with his claims about voter participation being "abnormal".

I give you a D....for turbo, thermonuclear, weapons grade DEFLECTION.

You're a dumb fuck.

Deflection? I literally just provided an article demonstrating that the affidavit you decided to make an entire thread on is riddled with basic errors.

My post was about the fucking affidavit. Did you forget what you made this thread about?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The real question is going to be which city will democrats burn down first after the dem cheating is proven and litigated and trump retains office.

 

[Skylar]

This is all FAKE, right? This guy is LYING!!!

Liar.

Problem is all that statistical noise does not prove there was massive voter fraud going on..just asserted 'anomalies' by some guy.

Does your dismissal of statistical evidence apply to covid cooties too?

The "party of science" right?

The party of "convenience"

Perhaps you guys need to grab those traditional family values by the pussy a little more often.

 

[Skylar]

The real question is going to be which city will democrats burn down first after the dem cheating is proven and litigated and trump retains office.

What cheating?

You'll definitely need to factually establish a solid answer for that question before yours becomes remotely relevant.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The real question is going to be which city will democrats burn down first after the dem cheating is proven and litigated and trump retains office.

What cheating?

You'll definitely need to factually establish a solid answer for that question before yours becomes remotely relevant.

The suspicion is clear and worthy of speculation. Your denial is totally dishonest.

 

[Skylar]

The real question is going to be which city will democrats burn down first after the dem cheating is proven and litigated and trump retains office.

What cheating?

You'll definitely need to factually establish a solid answer for that question before yours becomes remotely relevant.

The suspicion is clear and worthy of speculation. Your denial is totally dishonest.

The suspicion of cheating? There's no evidence of wide spread voter fraud or a 'stolen' election.

Making your hypothetical uselessly unlikely. And thus, disingenuous.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The real question is going to be which city will democrats burn down first after the dem cheating is proven and litigated and trump retains office.

What cheating?

You'll definitely need to factually establish a solid answer for that question before yours becomes remotely relevant.

The suspicion is clear and worthy of speculation. Your denial is totally dishonest.

The suspicion of cheating? There's no evidence of wide spread voter fraud or a 'stolen' election.

Making your hypothetical uselessly unlikely. And thus, disingenuous.

Then you’re just dishonest.

 

[Skylar]

The real question is going to be which city will democrats burn down first after the dem cheating is proven and litigated and trump retains office.

What cheating?

You'll definitely need to factually establish a solid answer for that question before yours becomes remotely relevant.

The suspicion is clear and worthy of speculation. Your denial is totally dishonest.

The suspicion of cheating? There's no evidence of wide spread voter fraud or a 'stolen' election.

Making your hypothetical uselessly unlikely. And thus, disingenuous.

Then you’re just dishonest.

Your hypothetical is astronomically unlikely. Making it disingenuous.