How the November Election was probably stolen...without a trace

[Lastamender]

Give it a friggin rest OP. You all just come across as pathetic losers.

And you and others come across as Communists.

 

[sealybobo]

The problem wasn't Trump's claims. The problem was the resolutions. Courts had no interest in tossing out any legitimate votes along with any illegitimate votes. What Trump should have sued for was clarification and verification of votes in any state in which the rules were changed or election laws violated by officials.

Like mailing everyone an absentee ballot? Come on it was during a pandemic. You wanted long lines? With trump supporters who refuse to wear masks?

 

[sealybobo]

Give it a friggin rest OP. You all just come across as pathetic losers.

And you and others come across as Communists.

Oh here we go with the comey crap.

You come across as ignorant as Archie bunker

 

[Mac-7]

"Blinded". Ironic.

You are the one who is blind

Being of the conservative point of view the Federalist may not be your cup of tea.

but it is several steps up from ordinary trump voters like myself who you most likely view as cultists

you have to be really eaten up with partisanship to dismiss the Federalist so casually out of hand

 

[sealybobo]

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

"Probably" ? The election was stolen.

Probably is a way to say anything you want. It’s like when rush used to say , “what if”. Then he makes up whatever premise he wants and republicans are brainwashed idiots.

The election was stolen. Period.

You’re just confirming my feelings about conservatives. Facts don’t matter. You only confirm my belief I should never vote republican. Because it’s the party for idiots like you

 

[sealybobo]

"Blinded". Ironic.

You are the one who is blind

Being of the conservative point of view the Federalist may not be your cup of tea.

but it is several steps up from ordinary trump voters like myself who you most likely view as cultists

you have to be really eaten up with partisanship to dismiss the Federalist so casually out of hand

Libertarians, tea baggers, bush republicans, trump republicans. There’s another one I’m forgetting. But republicans keep trying to rebrand the same bullshit. The libertarians were ok with smoking dope. Tea party was big on cutting government spending. Trump republicans are against taxes free trade and for tariffs. All of them make the rich richer and hurt middle class. Trump had the best message in my opinion but I saw the scam.

The president shouldnt believe he is above the law

 

[sealybobo]

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

I can show you more evidence republicans stole 2000. And republicans tried to steal this years election with many of the same tactics including in 2000 republicans started a riot and stopped the Florida recount.

Only this time trump lost five states. It was too big to rig.

This thread is not about 2000 election.

In a way it is. Trump says dominion voting machines were hacked. No proof. But it was proven Diebold voting machines were hacked.

Trump claims democrats threw out votes. No evidence. But we know republicans threw out black votes for hanging chads.

You started a riot this year just like you did in Florida. Those who don’t know their history are doomed to repeat it.

 

[MarcATL]

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

The rightwing/Republican/Conservative narrative is slowly changing from "probably", in due time (guessing by midterms), to "never was."

 

[Rogue AI]

The problem wasn't Trump's claims. The problem was the resolutions. Courts had no interest in tossing out any legitimate votes along with any illegitimate votes. What Trump should have sued for was clarification and verification of votes in any state in which the rules were changed or election laws violated by officials.

Like mailing everyone an absentee ballot? Come on it was during a pandemic. You wanted long lines? With trump supporters who refuse to wear masks?

I'm talking about the verification/certification of those absentee ballots. If anyone was paying attention, it was the very swing states in which decided the election that just happened to change/violate their election laws, and none of them purged their voter rolls. Oddly enough, there were statistical anomalies in large urban areas in those very same swing states. The cheating was out in the open, particularly given the fact that duplicate ballots are not investigated, we know people went to vote in person only to be told they had already voted by mail.

 

[Quasar44]

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

You had key states make illegal voting changes without going through the state legislatures ( this violates the Constitution)
You had millions of votes with zero signatures, zero signature verifications and zero postal dates
Not to mention the mass amount of votes being destroyed or lost for Trump on top of the inaccurate voting rolls

 

[Lastamender]

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

"Probably" ? The election was stolen.

That claim that the election was rigged has already been debunked. You should start a thread if you’re serious. You won’t be the first but they usually only last a couple pages. No evidence. So probably is a way to wonder aloud without evidence. To ponder. Republicans do this a lot.

Nothing has been debunked. The agencies, the MSM, and politicians that told us the elections were fair have 0 credibility.

 

[AFrench2]

Oh, this topic again.

 

[Quasar44]

Biden is an illegitimate swine

 

[Whodatsaywhodat.]

Some say this coup might have had a better chance of being pulled off if the lawyers were slicker. So I reminds me of when trump said he would surround himself with the best and brightest.

And it’s not just Rudy and a couple other cooky loyers. Trump has had falling outs with hundreds of people in four years. If he only surrounds himself with the best why all the falling outs and firings?

Psychopaths seem wonderful from a distance. Hanging around one on a regular basis will cause you to stop liking them.

So a lot of these guys who like trump and go to work for him quickly realize he’s a mad man and they run. Or get fired if they push back. Books will be written.

Everone knows the election wad stolen .. why deny it at this point.

 

[Mac-7]

"Blinded". Ironic.

You are the one who is blind

Being of the conservative point of view the Federalist may not be your cup of tea.

but it is several steps up from ordinary trump voters like myself who you most likely view as cultists

you have to be really eaten up with partisanship to dismiss the Federalist so casually out of hand

Libertarians, tea baggers, bush republicans, trump republicans. There’s another one I’m forgetting. But republicans keep trying to rebrand the same bullshit. The libertarians were ok with smoking dope. Tea party was big on cutting government spending. Trump republicans are against taxes free trade and for tariffs. All of them make the rich richer and hurt middle class. Trump had the best message in my opinion but I saw the scam.

The president shouldnt believe he is above the law

So democrat election fraud is ok since its for a good cause?

And in any case it makes you and Mac1958 happy?

 

[sealybobo]

"Blinded". Ironic.

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

Not stolen. You’re all just pathetic sore losers. That kind of immaturity and childishness goes with being republican.

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

I can show you more evidence republicans stole 2000. And republicans tried to steal this years election with many of the same tactics including in 2000 republicans started a riot and stopped the Florida recount.

Only this time trump lost five states. It was too big to rig.

A fraud case that big would've attracted better lawyers than Sidney and Rudy.

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

You're a special kind of stupid.

Hmmm...weird.
Lots of LefTard participation yet no rational response or logical refutation.
More of the filthy same.

I can only tell you this. If you truly believe this election was rigged that makes me so happy because for 21 years I’ve been screaming the 2000 election was stolen in the very same way and no one would listen.

Republicans have a different take on this but gore won Florida. Even with all the hanging chads. And it was the supreme Court who screwed us. So it’s fitting that now you believe the Supreme Court screwed you. Deep state republicans. Trump doesn’t know the Supreme Court picks he made. He was told who to nominate. And those people are for life so they have no problems tossing trump out when the loss was in 5 states. If it was one state maybe they could have helped trump but it wasn’t even close.

And your evidence is weak.

 

[sealybobo]

Some say this coup might have had a better chance of being pulled off if the lawyers were slicker. So I reminds me of when trump said he would surround himself with the best and brightest.

And it’s not just Rudy and a couple other cooky loyers. Trump has had falling outs with hundreds of people in four years. If he only surrounds himself with the best why all the falling outs and firings?

Psychopaths seem wonderful from a distance. Hanging around one on a regular basis will cause you to stop liking them.

So a lot of these guys who like trump and go to work for him quickly realize he’s a mad man and they run. Or get fired if they push back. Books will be written.

Everone knows the election wad stolen .. why deny it at this point.

In five states?

What about the Georgia special election after the general election? Democrats won. Was that rigged too?

 

[sealybobo]

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

"Probably" ? The election was stolen.

That claim that the election was rigged has already been debunked. You should start a thread if you’re serious. You won’t be the first but they usually only last a couple pages. No evidence. So probably is a way to wonder aloud without evidence. To ponder. Republicans do this a lot.

Nothing has been debunked. The agencies, the MSM, and politicians that told us the elections were fair have 0 credibility.

I knew that in 2001. Welcome to my world. Now you know. Oh but it didn’t happen this election. But what you claim to have happened actually did in 2000.

 

[sealybobo]

The problem wasn't Trump's claims. The problem was the resolutions. Courts had no interest in tossing out any legitimate votes along with any illegitimate votes. What Trump should have sued for was clarification and verification of votes in any state in which the rules were changed or election laws violated by officials.

Like mailing everyone an absentee ballot? Come on it was during a pandemic. You wanted long lines? With trump supporters who refuse to wear masks?

I'm talking about the verification/certification of those absentee ballots. If anyone was paying attention, it was the very swing states in which decided the election that just happened to change/violate their election laws, and none of them purged their voter rolls. Oddly enough, there were statistical anomalies in large urban areas in those very same swing states. The cheating was out in the open, particularly given the fact that duplicate ballots are not investigated, we know people went to vote in person only to be told they had already voted by mail.

Prove that.

 

[Lastamender]

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.

There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.

The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"

I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.

"Probably" ? The election was stolen.

That claim that the election was rigged has already been debunked. You should start a thread if you’re serious. You won’t be the first but they usually only last a couple pages. No evidence. So probably is a way to wonder aloud without evidence. To ponder. Republicans do this a lot.

Nothing has been debunked. The agencies, the MSM, and politicians that told us the elections were fair have 0 credibility.

I knew that in 2001. Welcome to my world. Now you know. Oh but it didn’t happen this election. But what you claim to have happened actually did in 2000.

Here is the Evidence

Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.

hereistheevidence.com