In Pennsylvania, a batch of 600,000 votes went 99.5% for Biden

antontoo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
18,135
Reaction score
2,909
Points
290
That didn’t happen either.
Why do you all insist on straight up lying about this? It’s embarrassing for you.
It's funny that you are lying...or so brainwashed
You know, for someone that gets caught spreading so much bullshit you really ought not say things like that.
Me? Or the other guy? He does spread around the cow manure.
You Eric. You.
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
3,461
Points
930
You have a knack of saying people are wrong, and then posting a citation proving they were right.

Recalculate.
note, shit for brains, it says " would therefore violate the Florida Election Code." You posted "They said that states intended to use the "safe harbor.' Wrong. Only Florida did.

In other words, you are wrong.
Not just Florida, so once again I was right.


some states put the safe harbor provision into their own laws

Note it says STATES - plural.

You lose again.
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
3,461
Points
930
note, shit for brains, it says " would therefore violate the Florida Election Code." You posted "They said that states intended to use the "safe harbor.' Wrong. Only Florida did.

In other words, you are wrong.
Only Florida? Well you were wrong again.


... Indiana, Iowa, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia specify deadlines for contests related to presidential electors

In Tennessee, contests for presidential electors must be decided before the last day of November

In most of the five states, the deadline to decide a contest is tied to the “Safe Harbor” deadline.
 

j-mac

Nuthin' but the truth
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
4,921
Reaction score
2,517
Points
940
Location
South Carolina
Its not illegal to lie in the ballroom of a hotel. Maybe they put it down on an affidavit, maybe they don’t. Even if they do, it’s only if you can prove they were lying.

To which the most easily believable defense they have is that they’re just idiots, not liars.
Yeah... it’s only if you can prove they were lying. You do realize that it's a few people vs a whole lot right? How many were in that ballroom, and how many that testified? If they are lying, should be pretty easy to prove it.

You are like the male version of Dana.
Nobody was under oath, there was no testimony. Just bizarre rantings from face drip and others who spew all this bile but won't bring any of it into a court of law. You should question that.
Affidavits are taken under oath, moron.
I'm referring to the hotel ballroom meeting, seems pretty obvious.

About those affidavits, how many of them have been presented in any court cases? What exactly do all those affidavits say anyway? You should question that.

Also, rarely is anyone charged when submitting an untruthful affidavit.
So, Let me understand what you are saying here...The evidence (that's what affidavits are) to date, over 200 of them, are all lying? And, to you it is totally proper that in PA where they closed off counting, (Something I've NEVER seen happen in my lifetime), while during that timeframe, they came up with over a half a million votes for Biden? And that seems all above board, and proper to you?
Are they lying? You'd have to give me an example of one first. Quote the text, when it was filed in court and what the outcome was of that court case and I think you'll find an answer to your question but don't put words into my mouth.

Man, I just don't what to say to that...
To something I never said? I don't blame you. My only point is that an affidavit by itself doesn't mean a whole lot.

I think most people know that during this challenge phase, a civil proceeding, we are in the process of "discovery", which will then be presented to the court...You people seem to think that the lawyers for the Trump campaign should show their hand at every step of the way...That's NOT how it works...You're going to have to exhibit patience, that is if you really want the truth.
Dude, states are being certified, Trump's crack team of ambulance chasers has yet to prove or even make a serious accusation of voter fraud. In the meantime states are certifying, time is running out and even the GSA sees the writing on the wall. I'm not really sure what you're expecting.
First, I find it hard to believe that someone, would lie under penality of purjury...So, affidavits do mean something, they are first hand eyewitness accounts. But, I can't provide what hasn't been revealed in court, so I guess we will both have to wait..

Second, Time is not running out..That states are certifying counts that may contain fraudulent ballots is something I think we may see end up in the SCOTUS....But, we haven't gotten there yet...Although it is true that as counts are certified it does make it harder to overturn...A court, or the SCOTUS may be reluctant to overturn it unless there is compeling evidence of outright cheating that is proven. I hope that is the case, but I also know that Democrats are notorious cheaters, and they are damned good at covering their tracks...So, it's a long shot, but we need to let the process play out....
Except that the affidavits are vague, conspiratorial or inadmissible. They don’t actually allege concrete examples of fraud, but represent their paranoid suspicions.

That’s why Trump’s lawyers have to keep stating to judges that the lawsuits do not allege fraud.
And what exactly are your qualifications to make that determination?
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
68,710
Reaction score
22,592
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
In Pennsylvania, in the middle of the night, after they stopped counting votes and sent everyone home, they found a batch of 600,000 votes, and 99.5% of them were for Biden.

I think I'm detecting just a wee little bit of fraud here.

The mainstream media hasn't reported this, as far as I'm aware.

Nope. Nothing to see here folks. This is not the voting fraud you are looking for. Move along. Move along.






That's the Democrat party way.
 
OP
Drop Dead Fred

Drop Dead Fred

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2020
Messages
562
Reaction score
1,081
Points
498
Funny how all the "spikes" in vote counting happened exactly in the critical swing states where they were needed.

This is the conclusion from a very long article, which has lot of math, graphs, and charts.


This report studies 8,954 individual updates to the vote totals in all 50 states and finds that four individual updates — two of which were widely noticed on the internet, including by the President — are profoundly anomalous; they deviate from a pattern which is otherwise found in the vast majority of the remaining 8,950 vote updates. The findings presented by this report [28]suggest that four vote count updates — which collectively were decisive in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia, and thus decisive of a critical forty-two electoral votes — are especially anomalous and merit further investigation.

In particular, the finding that the broader data follows general patterns and our ability to measure just how much any individual vote update does — or doesn’t — follow this pattern allows us to make concrete claims about both how extreme any given vote update is and about what any particular vote update might have looked like, had it been less extreme one one axis or another.

We further find that if these updates were only more extreme than 99% of all updates nationally in terms of their deviation from this generally-observed pattern, that, holding all else equal, Joe Biden may very well have lost the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia, and that he would have 42 fewer Electoral votes — putting Biden below the number required to win the Presidency. Either way, it is indisputable that his margin of victory in these three states relies on four most anomalous vote updates identified by the metric developed in this report.

We once again note that this analysis is largely restricted to four individual vote updates out of a sample of nearly 9,000. This report by no means suggests stopping investigations in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, or elsewhere; it is merely that these four key ballot updates are both profoundly anomalous with respect to a metric which removes any component of different states having different partisan leanings or a different number of voters. Furthermore, this analysis does not require that we regard the final vote totals in any of these states (or counties thereof) as suspicious, nor, critically, does it require that we accept that the observed data should follow any particular distribution a priori. We merely show that the data, adjusted appropriately to remove differences in size and political leaning between states, does follow a certain pattern, and that four key vote updates deviate profoundly from that pattern.

It is our belief that the extraordinarily anomalous nature of the studied vote updates here, combined with the staggering political implications, demands immediate and thorough investigation.
 
OP
Drop Dead Fred

Drop Dead Fred

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2020
Messages
562
Reaction score
1,081
Points
498
In the states where no cheating is suspected, Biden's percentage of the mail in vote remains consistent among different bathces within the same state. If one batch of mail in votes in one state went 70% for Biden, then all the other batches of mail in votes in that same state also went 70% for Biden.

But not in the critical swing states.

In the critical swing states, after they stopped counting votes in the middle of the night, and then resumed counting later on, the percentage of mail in votes for Biden was way, way higher than it was in earlier batches within that same state.

You can read a detailed article about this at this link:

 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
3,461
Points
930
Funny how all the "spikes" in vote counting happened exactly in the critical swing states where they were needed.

This is the conclusion from a very long article, which has lot of math, graphs, and charts.


This report studies 8,954 individual updates to the vote totals in all 50 states...
Maybe you should read the footnotes before concluding something suspicious.

[12] Restricted to updates where the vote count for both candidates was positive.


The social media claims were accompanied with screenshots of vote tallies showing an addition of 138,339 votes for Biden, but none for anyone else.

"So while everyone was asleep and after everyone went home, Democrats in Michigan magically found a trove of 138,339 votes, and all 138,339 of those 'votes' magically went to Biden?

A typo, and a correction

The clerical error occurred in Shiawassee County and was quickly quickly caught, the New York Times reported. "All it was is there was an extra zero that got typed in," Abby Bowen, the election clerk, told the Times, according to reporter Jack Nicas. Bowen told the Times that a state official noted the error, contacted the county in about 20 minutes and the typo was fixed.

Of course by the footnote, that spike remained in their data as one of the four suspicious spikes.
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
3,461
Points
930
Funny how all the "spikes" in vote counting happened exactly in the critical swing states where they were needed.

This is the conclusion from a very long article, which has lot of math, graphs, and charts.


This report studies 8,954 individual updates to the vote totals in all 50 states...

The jump in Biden’s tally came when the central count facility in Milwaukee completed its tally of the mail-in votes around 3:30 a.m., reporting those all at once. That led to a long-predicted spike in Biden’s favor since Democrats are more likely to use vote absentee and Milwaukee is a heavily Democratic area.


From 3:26 to 3:44 a.m. in the Associated Press election reporting stream, the vote for former Vice President Joe Biden jumped by 149,520 (9.2% of Biden's total votes) and Trump's vote jumped by 31,803 votes (2% of his total votes). Milwaukee County accounted for most but not all of that jump.

These votes were all reported together because Milwaukee and 38 other communities used a central count location. Other communities counted absentee ballots at the polling places, and reported them along with their in-person vote totals.
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
26,832
Reaction score
3,349
Points
290
Its not illegal to lie in the ballroom of a hotel. Maybe they put it down on an affidavit, maybe they don’t. Even if they do, it’s only if you can prove they were lying.

To which the most easily believable defense they have is that they’re just idiots, not liars.
Yeah... it’s only if you can prove they were lying. You do realize that it's a few people vs a whole lot right? How many were in that ballroom, and how many that testified? If they are lying, should be pretty easy to prove it.

You are like the male version of Dana.
Nobody was under oath, there was no testimony. Just bizarre rantings from face drip and others who spew all this bile but won't bring any of it into a court of law. You should question that.
Affidavits are taken under oath, moron.
I'm referring to the hotel ballroom meeting, seems pretty obvious.

About those affidavits, how many of them have been presented in any court cases? What exactly do all those affidavits say anyway? You should question that.

Also, rarely is anyone charged when submitting an untruthful affidavit.
So, Let me understand what you are saying here...The evidence (that's what affidavits are) to date, over 200 of them, are all lying? And, to you it is totally proper that in PA where they closed off counting, (Something I've NEVER seen happen in my lifetime), while during that timeframe, they came up with over a half a million votes for Biden? And that seems all above board, and proper to you?
Are they lying? You'd have to give me an example of one first. Quote the text, when it was filed in court and what the outcome was of that court case and I think you'll find an answer to your question but don't put words into my mouth.

Man, I just don't what to say to that...
To something I never said? I don't blame you. My only point is that an affidavit by itself doesn't mean a whole lot.

I think most people know that during this challenge phase, a civil proceeding, we are in the process of "discovery", which will then be presented to the court...You people seem to think that the lawyers for the Trump campaign should show their hand at every step of the way...That's NOT how it works...You're going to have to exhibit patience, that is if you really want the truth.
Dude, states are being certified, Trump's crack team of ambulance chasers has yet to prove or even make a serious accusation of voter fraud. In the meantime states are certifying, time is running out and even the GSA sees the writing on the wall. I'm not really sure what you're expecting.
First, I find it hard to believe that someone, would lie under penality of purjury...So, affidavits do mean something, they are first hand eyewitness accounts. But, I can't provide what hasn't been revealed in court, so I guess we will both have to wait..
Rarely are people convicted of anything when lying in an affidavit. But does anyone need to really lie in order for those affidavits to be meaningless anyway? You don't even know what the majority of them have said since Trump's legal brain trust hasn't shared most of their contents with you. The ones presented in court have overturned absolutely zilch about the election result because the judges have found them either to be meaningless or without merit.

Second, Time is not running out..That states are certifying counts that may contain fraudulent ballots is something I think we may see end up in the SCOTUS....But, we haven't gotten there yet...Although it is true that as counts are certified it does make it harder to overturn...A court, or the SCOTUS may be reluctant to overturn it unless there is compeling evidence of outright cheating that is proven. I hope that is the case, but I also know that Democrats are notorious cheaters, and they are damned good at covering their tracks...So, it's a long shot, but we need to let the process play out....
There has to be evidence of fraudulent votes and Trump's legal team in court is saying they are not stating fraud has been committed. Most of the relevant swing states have certified their votes and you're going to have a hell of a time finding a court to invalidate a state's certification on shitty conspiracy theories.

This is nothing more than a huge wing-ding and I love it.
 

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
36,911
Reaction score
5,162
Points
1,140
That didn’t happen either.
Why do you all insist on straight up lying about this? It’s embarrassing for you.
It's funny that you are lying...or so brainwashed you actually believe what claim, when all the facts of this
stolen election point to cyber theft of the presidency.

I hope you are aware of what an ass you are making of yourself. I guess that's how you want it.

Be sure to keep up when the Supreme Court
begins hearing this case. I can't wait, myself. I just cannot wait!
It will be glorious, like watching Jesus ascending from heaven.
Which of the 30+ dropped case is going to SCOTUS ?! Please enlighten us
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
134,340
Reaction score
26,423
Points
2,180
in all my years, not one year went by without knowing who won, at the latest, the next day...EVER... now in 2020, all of this fraud going on, and you retarded demonRATs dont want the TRUTH? thats what you get when you watch your fake news channels. i hope TRUMP gives the demonRATs what they want, and lock the country down. then, you should all be cheering.
Dumbfuck, the 2000 election took more than a month to declare a winner. So unless you're younger than 20, your statement is bullshit.
The first count in every state and the first recount in FL was done in 24 hours, moron.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
134,340
Reaction score
26,423
Points
2,180
You have a knack of saying people are wrong, and then posting a citation proving they were right.

Recalculate.
note, shit for brains, it says " would therefore violate the Florida Election Code." You posted "They said that states intended to use the "safe harbor.' Wrong. Only Florida did.

In other words, you are wrong.
Not just Florida, so once again I was right.


some states put the safe harbor provision into their own laws

Note it says STATES - plural.

You lose again.
I quoted the actual SC ruling, moron. You quoted some opinion piece by a leftwing hack.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
134,340
Reaction score
26,423
Points
2,180

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
3,461
Points
930
some states put the safe harbor provision into their own laws

Note it says STATES - plural.

You lose again.
I quoted the actual SC ruling, moron. You quoted some opinion piece by a leftwing hack.
I was quoting reality. There were five states with "safe harbors" in their election laws.

The SC squoted Florida, but I was quoting reality.
 

conserveguy877

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
5,613
Reaction score
1,583
Points
195
BREAKING FROM THE NEWSMAKER CONTROL DESK The election is too close to call. - New PA court case stalls inevitable Trump victory
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top