It is Not Over

[Skylar]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud who can provide no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out.

These are the same dipshits that are still waiting for Trump to release his 'investigation' into Obama's birth certificate in Hawaii. An 'investigation' with tons of evidence that....that of course, Trump never produced.

Trump is not a creative man. The 'stolen election' schtick is a rehash of the birther conspiracy. Down to 'not trusting the REepublican governor becaues they work for the democrats' and 'the State can't be trusted to produce reliable documents' batshit.

This time swapping out Hawaii for Georgia.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.

 

[Kilroy2]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

 

[Kilroy2]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party

Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

 

[Lastamender]

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: The Same Clandestine Companies Involved in the Certification of Dominion Voting Systems and the 2020 Results in Georgia Were Chosen for the Upcoming Arizona 'Audit' | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft

What we found is very strange. What is going on? Arizona’s Maricopa County Board of Supervisors finally agreed to an election audit this week of its 2020 results. The county officials approved only two companies to perform their ballot audit, both which certified Dominion voting systems...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

The same company that did the audits in GA connected to Dominion is going to be used in AZ. The audit will mean nothing because the results are predetermined. This company will not find fraud because Dominion has told them not to.

This is NOT an independent audit. This is a fix, a cover up.

The Board of Supervisors, whom many believe are covering up election corruption due to their actions since the 2020 election, decided to pass on expert Jovan Pulitzer, who has a thorough and independent method to review the ballots and results. Instead the Maricopa Board, after suing the Arizona Senate for ordering an audit be performed, eventually agreed to an audit but only if they could choose the auditors. The county officials then limited their choices to Pro V&V and SLI Compliance.



On Wednesday we took a look at these two organizations – Pro V&V and SLI Compliance.

Pro V&V was also selected by Georgia’s corrupt Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger for a recent sham audit there.


Secretary of State Raffensperger used Dominion-linked Pro V&V, an Alabama-based testing laboratory, to do the Georgia audit of the Dominion machines. The company announced it “found no evidence of the machines being tampered.” This should tell you something:

 

[Lastamender]

It appears that Pro V&V and SLI Compliance are basically shell companies with little support for their work. They also don’t appear to be currently accredited by the USEAC and there is no evidence SLI ever was accredited other than their statement on their website that they are. Despite all of this, the politicians in Maricopa County just selected these two companies to ‘audit’ the likely corrupt results in their county. They claimed to select Pro V&V and SLI because the companies were accredited.


In Arizona the Board of Supervisors in Maricopa county prefer using companies connected to Dominion voting systems claiming they are accredited so their election result will be certified no matter how corrupt the results may be.

The people in Arizona should NEVER approve this latest effort to hide the true results from the election in Maricopa County.

Are the people going to get an independent audit? It does not look like it. More admission of guilt and an obvious cover up.

 

[Kilroy2]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

 

[Lastamender]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

He is not gone and America first is going to grow even if he was. The Communists in power now stole the election. The censorship makes it more than obvious.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

 

[Kilroy2]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

"Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question."

WHAT?????


Let me translate that….wait ‘til I get my Rosetta Stone.

 

[Kilroy2]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

"Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question."

WHAT?????


Let me translate that….wait ‘til I get my Rosetta Stone.

"And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads."

Believe me if you can't get over Trump lost because of election fraud then the original Rosetta Stone may be out of your league. But them again you may want to learn a new language.

so translate the above quote in Russian and it still will mean nothing.

 

[candycorn]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

"Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question."

WHAT?????


Let me translate that….wait ‘til I get my Rosetta Stone.

"And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads."

Believe me if you can't get over Trump lost because of election fraud then the original Rosetta Stone may be out of your league. But them again you may want to learn a new language.

so translate the above quote in Russian and it still will mean nothing.

She can't get over the threshold to the kitchen...which is why she had the super of her flop house move the refrigerator next to her bed.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

"Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question."

WHAT?????


Let me translate that….wait ‘til I get my Rosetta Stone.

"And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads."

Believe me if you can't get over Trump lost because of election fraud then the original Rosetta Stone may be out of your league. But them again you may want to learn a new language.

so translate the above quote in Russian and it still will mean nothing.

나는 두 가지 언어를 사용합니다 .... 둘 다 잘합니다.

 

[Kilroy2]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

"Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question."

WHAT?????


Let me translate that….wait ‘til I get my Rosetta Stone.

"And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads."

Believe me if you can't get over Trump lost because of election fraud then the original Rosetta Stone may be out of your league. But them again you may want to learn a new language.

so translate the above quote in Russian and it still will mean nothing.

나는 두 가지 언어를 사용합니다 .... 둘 다 잘합니다.

if you say you speak two languages and do it well but you still languish under the believe that it matters and ruin what intelligence you may have by repeating conspiracies based on hearsay.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

"Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question."

WHAT?????


Let me translate that….wait ‘til I get my Rosetta Stone.

"And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads."

Believe me if you can't get over Trump lost because of election fraud then the original Rosetta Stone may be out of your league. But them again you may want to learn a new language.

so translate the above quote in Russian and it still will mean nothing.

나는 두 가지 언어를 사용합니다 .... 둘 다 잘합니다.

if you say you speak two languages and do it well but you still languish under the believe that it matters and ruin what intelligence you may have by repeating conspiracies based on hearsay.

Everything I post is linked, sourced, and documented.....

....and 100% true, correct and accurate.

Everything.

 

[Kilroy2]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

"Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question."

WHAT?????


Let me translate that….wait ‘til I get my Rosetta Stone.

"And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads."

Believe me if you can't get over Trump lost because of election fraud then the original Rosetta Stone may be out of your league. But them again you may want to learn a new language.

so translate the above quote in Russian and it still will mean nothing.

나는 두 가지 언어를 사용합니다 .... 둘 다 잘합니다.

if you say you speak two languages and do it well but you still languish under the believe that it matters and ruin what intelligence you may have by repeating conspiracies based on hearsay.

Everything I post is linked, sourced, and documented.....

....and 100% true, correct and accurate.

Everything.

All your saying is you found a source and posted it and therefore it must be true, correct and accurate. Is that another circular argument.

I am not doubting your ability to copy and paste.

I am doubting your source and the accuracy of Rand. How he interprets information.

I mention already how he got the signature issue confused

Now even his statement that Demo Ag refused to purge voter name based on a lawsuit is misleading

The state election board and judicial watch wanted them to remove names of voter who have not voted in awhile. They had no proof that they were dead but they just want to remove them because they have no voted. It doesn't represent voter fraud just how you manage the voter roll.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The boxes under the table happen but it was not fraud. They explained that that is the process that they use. put boxes under the table until they are needed for the next phase of the process.

The guy who made the statement of delivering boxes is the word of one man who didn't bother to take pictures of this evidence. The same guy who claims he sees ghosts and takes videos of his search for ghosts. Yeah you seem to want to believe this guy story. Why because it sound convenient. Still one person word is not proof. where is the evidence. But I can understand if you can relate to him as he sees ghosts.

Saddest thing is that you might actually believe this.

The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad.

Pictures of boxes under the table being record by video and that is proof enough for you. I would say it is sad but it is about par when someone desperately needs to believe something and they take the easy way out. Someone told me it was true.

Carone the star witness Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenn on November 13 concluded that Carone’s “allegations are simply not credible

There are police reports accusing Mellissa Anne Wright of crimes. Online databases show Carone has used the name Mellissa Carone-Wright

One lawsuit claimed that Carone sent “pornographic videos of herself” and her current boyfriend, the father of the other woman’s child, and then told police the other woman had hacked into her email and stolen the videos.

I can see why she is so believable to the right.

Ask yourself this Anne, why has there been no convictions of all the incidents you have pasted and copied. If it is a crime then take it to court.



Ask yourself why is it run in every right wing outlet. Well I will answer it for you. Because news outlets do not require proof only someone making a statement.

"The saddest thing is that you do believe the word of one man that there is fraud with no proof. The only proof you have is it appeared on television. Now that is sad. "

No proof????

Only imbeciles like you are still claiming 'no proof.'

Actually, your side has admitted it.




The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.


View attachment 449328

Radical and unhinged. Keep it up and stay focused on Trump lost the election. Admit that Trump lost and the only issues is that he attempted to commit election fraud when he called the AG for more votes. Talked with repub congressman to change the electoral vote so that he would win.

Also he got political chic, Rudy, and that other lawyer to make his case. Proof of election fraud is not the same as saying there is election fraud.

Of course there was fraud, a stolen election.....


.....that's why you are so panicked.


Let's review the details:

Sen. Rand Paul Joins ABC's "This Week" - January 24, 2021 describing what we know of the election



SENATOR RAND PAUL, (R-KY): Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

There were several states in which the law was changed by the secretary of state and not the state legislature. To me, those are clearly unconstitutional…



Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it.



I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat secretary of state, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the roles of illegal voters.





In Wisconsin, tens of thousands of absentee votes had only the name on them and no address. Historically those were thrown out, this time they weren't. They made special accommodations because they said, oh, it’s a pandemic and people forgot what their address was.

So they changed the law after the fact. That is wrong, that's unconstitutional…. I won’t be cowed by liberals in the media who say, there's no evidence here and you're a liar if you talk about election fraud.

I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law, and I believe if that ever will get a real hearing in the Supreme Court, it was denied for standing. It wasn’t actually taken up. If it were taken up, I do believe that the Supreme Court would overrule and say that they did break the law illegally.



It was never studied.

Should we investigate the fact that tens of thousands of absentee ballots did not have addresses on them and normally were disqualified, but this time, they were counted? Should we examine that?



I think there was great deal of evidence of fraud and changing of the election laws illegally. And I think a thorough investigation is warranted.”

… I want to look at election fraud and I want to look at secretaries of state who illegally changed the voter laws without the permission of their state legislatures. That is incontrovertible, it happened.

And you can't just sweep it under the rug and say, oh, nothing to see here, and everybody is a liar and you're a fool if you bring this up.”

'This Week' Transcript 1-24-21: Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Vivek Murthy

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Vivek Murthy were on "This Week" Sunday, January 24. This is a rush transcript and may be updated.

abcnews.go.com

Did that upset you????

Excellent.

That hardly upset me. Rand offers no proof and it just his opinion and like Trump does not understand anything. Guess he will be running in 2024 as the younger version of Trump

Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question.

Most of the cases well that implies some cases were heard. So show me the fraud based on those cases heard


Lack of standing

Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.

Lingo for you

Don't waste our time because you will lose your case in the end. So get lost The case you submitted does not show fraud. Your just keeping Trump happy by submitting suits on his behalf.

Legal question about whether states can do what they did. Well one suit was heard and the judge did throw it out. Saying if you were against it why didn't you file a case when it became changed. Why are you waiting years later and bringing the suit because your guy lost.

Legal question about the election process will be determined in a court of law. Not the court of right wing sites and detractors. Show me a case where something was overturned. Do not quote Rand a know Trump wannabe who is speaking to his boys.

Rand said the problem was that in Wisconsin the ballots had the name but no address. That was wrong. It was the witness who signed and had some address errors of the witness. It was not the voter. Republican made this suggestion to have a witness address and if it was in error how it should be cured.

Big mistake if you can't even articulate the reason or understand the reason why ballots should be thrown out.

The law in Wisconsin. Voters have to registered. To request mail in ballots they have to show ID. Exception are for those who are sick and cannot go to locations to show ID. They will also need a witness sign the mail in ballot.

Still it was the repubs in Wisconsin who proposed the remedy of witness address errors. Such as they didn't fill out the municipality. Clerks can rectify simple errors like that instead of throwing ballot out. The STATE required the witness signature and then because of some minor issues with address then the voter ballot gets thrown outt. No way Jose. If the clerk can remedy by looking up the municipality then it is all good. That is the humane thing to do.

That is how Trump got elected




I believe in Pennsylvania, they broke the law

Well what you believe is not the law.

Laws changed in another state are unconstitutional. Wow that is a big word. Take it to court instead of using big words that have no meaning as they still exist and have not been struck down. He is not a lawyers or judge and it is just his opinion.

Still that does not show voter fraud. It just making excuses for why Trump lost. Instead of the obvious Truth that he was voted out of office by the opposition.


Wisconsin. How can he say vote fraud when he can not even define what the issue is.
The problem was with the address of the witness Yet this policy was used in the 2016 election. I didn't hear Trump or Rand complain then. Did you annie?

well general this procedure was place in 2016 which allow the clerks wait to remedy the situation of witness address problems

Trump did a lawsuit and they heard the case and they ruled against Trump based on the claim of the witness address problems. The court ruled that the procedure that they had in place in 2016 was the same one that was used in 2020. The were not going to throw out votes in 2020. If it was a problem then Trump should have contested it in 2016 when they did the same thing. The trump team could not explain why now it is a problem now when it wasn't a problem before.

If you and rand thing that it is a problem now then now is the time to bring a suit about how they process witness address problem. Explain why it should be done away with or illegal.

Break it down for you



This is not voter fraud, it is just procedural ways they do things.

Don't cry Annie.

Stop worrying.

You got away with stealing the election.....even you can't be dumb enough to imagine that 80 million voted for Biden.


Now we have to see how pleased you are with this:

Let’s check.

Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate. On day one he signed EO's: —Letting biological men take over women's sports & locker rooms —Calling for amnesty for millions of illegals —Ending deportations —Killing thousands of good paying jobs Is anyone surprised?



In less than 72 hours, Joe Biden: —Killed 70,000+ jobs —Eliminated women's sports —Invaded Syria —Left the National Guard to freeze in a garage —Admitted he doesn't have a plan to fight COVID —Broke his own mask mandate EO —Ended US energy independence Do you miss Trump yet?"
Here We Go: Text Messages Reveal Biden Voters Already Regret What They’ve Done | Tea Party





View attachment 450178




Remember this?

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

We one the election using the same rules that Trump won his elections. Do not worry Trump is gone for good.

Despite the thread title it is over

That is why your changing the subject to what Biden is doing now

"We one (sic) the election..."


And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads.

Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question. You just love conspiracies and will believe them because it suits you or you all have nothing else to stand on but lies.

Show me a conviction based on your proof.

And stop trying to connect the dots as someone needs to take away your crayons.

"Your argument is no different that when you all support Obama citizenship question."

WHAT?????


Let me translate that….wait ‘til I get my Rosetta Stone.

"And so, inadvertent proof of everything I have ever said about Democrat voters and government school grads."

Believe me if you can't get over Trump lost because of election fraud then the original Rosetta Stone may be out of your league. But them again you may want to learn a new language.

so translate the above quote in Russian and it still will mean nothing.

나는 두 가지 언어를 사용합니다 .... 둘 다 잘합니다.

if you say you speak two languages and do it well but you still languish under the believe that it matters and ruin what intelligence you may have by repeating conspiracies based on hearsay.

Everything I post is linked, sourced, and documented.....

....and 100% true, correct and accurate.

Everything.

All your saying is you found a source and posted it and therefore it must be true, correct and accurate. Is that another circular argument.

I am not doubting your ability to copy and paste.

I am doubting your source and the accuracy of Rand. How he interprets information.

I mention already how he got the signature issue confused

Now even his statement that Demo Ag refused to purge voter name based on a lawsuit is misleading

The state election board and judicial watch wanted them to remove names of voter who have not voted in awhile. They had no proof that they were dead but they just want to remove them because they have no voted. It doesn't represent voter fraud just how you manage the voter roll.

Everyone knows the truth.....even a liar like you.


Here's your sort edging closer and closer to admitting it.

The progression that proves the premise:

No evidence of voter fraud!
No evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven!
Not enough evidence of widespread voter fraud has been proven that would change or alter the election!

It's pretty much their admission that they stole the election from the man who actually won it, and gave it to the bought and paid for servant of Communist China.


But they might have this much in their argument: not widespread......but targeted voter fraud- in the swing states.