Significance of 6/1

[forkup]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

 

[forkup]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

I agree with you, O Dyslexic One. Is it too late to fix all those 6/1 dates?

Nah, I will just have to live with this living reminder of my own stupidity. On the other hand, humility is good for the soul I've been told... usually by my wife who reminds me often that I'd be probably well served with some more of it.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

 

[OldLady]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

I agree with you, O Dyslexic One. Is it too late to fix all those 6/1 dates?

Nah, I will just have to live with this living reminder of my own stupidity. On the other hand, humility is good for the soul I've been told... usually by my wife who reminds me often that I'd be probably well served with some more of it.

Dyslexics aren't stupid! I hope your wife doesn't let you near the checkbook though.

 

[forkup]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

Why? It has been OK for every election so far. What makes this one different?

By the way, how do you disprove electioneering by conducting an audit? Illegal electioneering is established DURING the actual voting period, not by an audit after it. That's why you have all those poll watchers. Hell, it's not even illegal, just restricted from state to state.

As to determining who voted and from where. The same can be achieved by sampling.

What strikes me, is that 1, you didn't seem aware that there were actual audits performed, and 2, seem to believe that simply by claiming that a certain type of voter fraud is possible you are not required to be able to even establish probable cause before asking for an audit, regardless of what evidence that has been provided that argue against voter fraud actually having occurred.

 

[forkup]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

I agree with you, O Dyslexic One. Is it too late to fix all those 6/1 dates?

Nah, I will just have to live with this living reminder of my own stupidity. On the other hand, humility is good for the soul I've been told... usually by my wife who reminds me often that I'd be probably well served with some more of it.

Dyslexics aren't stupid! I hope your wife doesn't let you near the checkbook though.

I won't blame it on dyslexia. I have to blame it on me being European and this being my fourth language.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

Why? It has been OK for every election so far. What makes this one different?

By the way, how do you disprove electioneering by conducting an audit? Illegal electioneering is established DURING the actual voting period, not by an audit after it. That's why you have all those poll watchers. Hell, it's not even illegal, just restricted from state to state.

As to determining who voted and from where. The same can be achieved by sampling.

What strikes me, is that 1, you didn't seem aware that there were actual audits performed, and 2 seem to believe that simply by claiming that a certain type of voter fraud is possible you are not required to be able to even establish probable cause before asking for an audit, regardless of what evidence that has been provided that argue against voter fraud actually having occurred.

This one is different because of the no-excuse mail-ins.
Any mail-in that can’t be specifically traced to a legit voter should be trashed. That would result in trump’s actual landslide victory.

 

[Chillicothe]

• ".....some even theorize that Babbit herself, being ex-military was a crises actor, that whole thing being pulled off --with squibs and is now in witness protection."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And right there, folks.......is exactly why I occasionally visit this particular Dew Drop Inn.
I can read the most nutso crazoid theories found in this galaxy.

With the above suggestion by Mr. Beale, one could speculate, I suppose, that Ms. Babbitt may be part of the repertoire of 'crisis actors' who pretended to be dead at Sandy Hook.
Of course, those were child actors and are likely on a different Guild scale than Ashli.

Can you inform us a little more on that, Mr. Beale?

 

[forkup]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

Why? It has been OK for every election so far. What makes this one different?

By the way, how do you disprove electioneering by conducting an audit? Illegal electioneering is established DURING the actual voting period, not by an audit after it. That's why you have all those poll watchers. Hell, it's not even illegal, just restricted from state to state.

As to determining who voted and from where. The same can be achieved by sampling.

What strikes me, is that 1, you didn't seem aware that there were actual audits performed, and 2 seem to believe that simply by claiming that a certain type of voter fraud is possible you are not required to be able to even establish probable cause before asking for an audit, regardless of what evidence that has been provided that argue against voter fraud actually having occurred.

This one is different because of the no-excuse mail-ins.
Any mail-in that can’t be specifically traced to a legit voter should be trashed. That would result in trump’s actual landslide victory.

Mail-ins have been legal for what, 40 years? Why all of a sudden should they be trashed because in SOME states an actual reason to request one is no longer required?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

Why? It has been OK for every election so far. What makes this one different?

By the way, how do you disprove electioneering by conducting an audit? Illegal electioneering is established DURING the actual voting period, not by an audit after it. That's why you have all those poll watchers. Hell, it's not even illegal, just restricted from state to state.

As to determining who voted and from where. The same can be achieved by sampling.

What strikes me, is that 1, you didn't seem aware that there were actual audits performed, and 2 seem to believe that simply by claiming that a certain type of voter fraud is possible you are not required to be able to even establish probable cause before asking for an audit, regardless of what evidence that has been provided that argue against voter fraud actually having occurred.

This one is different because of the no-excuse mail-ins.
Any mail-in that can’t be specifically traced to a legit voter should be trashed. That would result in trump’s actual landslide victory.

Mail-ins have been legal for what 40 years. Why all of a sudden should they be trashed because in SOME states an actual reason to request one is no longer required?

No-excuse mail-ins are new to this election because of the CCP bio attack. Completely different dynamic. What’s more, any increase in mail-ins due to the bio attack would benefit republicans since older people, who are more vulnerable to the virus and would consequently need mail-ins more, vote republican. Yet 60% of Biden votes were mail-in.
Beyond elephant-in-the-room.

 

[bripat9643]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

Wrong, turd. Algore did the exact same thing. He still maintains that he actually won.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

That's all Democrat Reich propaganda. The only thing your post proves is that Dem NAZIs will lie until doomsday.

 

[bripat9643]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

Why? It has been OK for every election so far. What makes this one different?

By the way, how do you disprove electioneering by conducting an audit? Illegal electioneering is established DURING the actual voting period, not by an audit after it. That's why you have all those poll watchers. Hell, it's not even illegal, just restricted from state to state.

As to determining who voted and from where. The same can be achieved by sampling.

What strikes me, is that 1, you didn't seem aware that there were actual audits performed, and 2 seem to believe that simply by claiming that a certain type of voter fraud is possible you are not required to be able to even establish probable cause before asking for an audit, regardless of what evidence that has been provided that argue against voter fraud actually having occurred.

This one is different because of the no-excuse mail-ins.
Any mail-in that can’t be specifically traced to a legit voter should be trashed. That would result in trump’s actual landslide victory.

Mail-ins have been legal for what, 40 years? Why all of a sudden should they be trashed because in SOME states an actual reason to request one is no longer required?

Short answer: yes. After this election mail-ins should be allowed period. If you are out of the state, tough.

 

[forkup]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

Why? It has been OK for every election so far. What makes this one different?

By the way, how do you disprove electioneering by conducting an audit? Illegal electioneering is established DURING the actual voting period, not by an audit after it. That's why you have all those poll watchers. Hell, it's not even illegal, just restricted from state to state.

As to determining who voted and from where. The same can be achieved by sampling.

What strikes me, is that 1, you didn't seem aware that there were actual audits performed, and 2 seem to believe that simply by claiming that a certain type of voter fraud is possible you are not required to be able to even establish probable cause before asking for an audit, regardless of what evidence that has been provided that argue against voter fraud actually having occurred.

This one is different because of the no-excuse mail-ins.
Any mail-in that can’t be specifically traced to a legit voter should be trashed. That would result in trump’s actual landslide victory.

Mail-ins have been legal for what 40 years. Why all of a sudden should they be trashed because in SOME states an actual reason to request one is no longer required?

No-excuse mail-ins are new to this election because of the CCP bio attack. Completely different dynamic. What’s more, any increase in mail-ins due to the bio attack would benefit republicans since older people, who are more vulnerable to the virus and would consequently need mail-ins more, vote republican. Yet 60% of Biden votes were mail-in.
Beyond elephant-in-the-room.

Even if they are new, you still haven't answered why they would be less accurate than the mail-in ballots that have been cast for decades.

Yet 60% of Biden votes were mail-in.
Beyond elephant-in-the-room.

You don't think it is possible that Trump claiming the virus was not really a problem and that mail-in ballots were insecure BEFORE a vote was cast may be a reason why his constituents chose to go to the ballot box and elect not to use mail-in ballots as they previously did?

 

[forkup]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

Wrong, turd. Algore did the exact same thing. He still maintains that he actually won.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

That's all Democrat Reich propaganda. The only thing your post proves is that Dem NAZIs will lie until doomsday.

Oh goody, our resident toddler has arrived.
Run along little boy.

 

[Faun]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

Why? It has been OK for every election so far. What makes this one different?

By the way, how do you disprove electioneering by conducting an audit? Illegal electioneering is established DURING the actual voting period, not by an audit after it. That's why you have all those poll watchers. Hell, it's not even illegal, just restricted from state to state.

As to determining who voted and from where. The same can be achieved by sampling.

What strikes me, is that 1, you didn't seem aware that there were actual audits performed, and 2 seem to believe that simply by claiming that a certain type of voter fraud is possible you are not required to be able to even establish probable cause before asking for an audit, regardless of what evidence that has been provided that argue against voter fraud actually having occurred.

This one is different because of the no-excuse mail-ins.
Any mail-in that can’t be specifically traced to a legit voter should be trashed. That would result in trump’s actual landslide victory.

In most states with no-excuse ballots, Registered voters request them. So yes, ballots are tied to actual registered voters.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

Lighten up, Francis.
Real Americans want an accountability of that obviously fraudulent election. That means an audit.
Those who accept those election results on their face are dishonest. They’re the ones who truly threaten a functioning democracy.

I don't accept election results on their face. I accept them after they are counted. After legal challenges have been adjudicated and after the various bipartisan election boards have certified the results.

Your "obviously fraudulent" elections went through that entire process, including recounts and several audits.

This kind of touches on the premise of the OP.

You are perfectly happy completely disregarding what it means to live in a representative Democracy, namely adherence to how the law provides for the challenging of election results.

Bullshit. No audits. Just recounts of fraudulent votes. Everything else was dismissed either out of partisan concerns or safety concerns.

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId=

https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/Cobb%20County%20ABM%20Audit%20Report%2020201229.pdf

These aren't audits?

Maricopa audit is ongoing.

No, the third audit is ongoing. I gave you the 2 previous ones.

Apparently they weren’t thorough.

Oh? Can you give me a reason for that statement?

They didn’t provide checks of vote sources. They can’t disprove electioneering.
You provide an audit that clearly shows who voted and from where and we’ll have real proof.
Merely checking off as OK is insufficient.

Why? It has been OK for every election so far. What makes this one different?

By the way, how do you disprove electioneering by conducting an audit? Illegal electioneering is established DURING the actual voting period, not by an audit after it. That's why you have all those poll watchers. Hell, it's not even illegal, just restricted from state to state.

As to determining who voted and from where. The same can be achieved by sampling.

What strikes me, is that 1, you didn't seem aware that there were actual audits performed, and 2 seem to believe that simply by claiming that a certain type of voter fraud is possible you are not required to be able to even establish probable cause before asking for an audit, regardless of what evidence that has been provided that argue against voter fraud actually having occurred.

This one is different because of the no-excuse mail-ins.
Any mail-in that can’t be specifically traced to a legit voter should be trashed. That would result in trump’s actual landslide victory.

Mail-ins have been legal for what, 40 years? Why all of a sudden should they be trashed because in SOME states an actual reason to request one is no longer required?

Short answer: yes. After this election mail-ins should be allowed period. If you are out of the state, tough.

I think you left out ‘not’.

 

[Dadoalex]

What happened on June 1st?

Does it have anything to do with what happened during the elections? I'm not all that interested in whataboutisms. Please answer the premise or don't respond at all. Thank you.

Well, since you've gotten mildly snooty with me, permit me to set you straight on a couple of points.

First, don't tell me what to do. You're just not that guy.

Second, I didn't offer any "whataboutisms", so it's stupid for you to even bring it up.

Lastly, here in the States, when we express a date with only numbers, generally speaking the month comes first, then the date, then the year.

Kinda like this; June 1 of this year would be expressed as "6/1/21" or "6/1/2021".

Now, I don't know where in the world you are, but understand that this forum is predominantly American. So, when you go writing "What happened on 6/1?", people are going to start looking at June on their calendar.

You may go now...

So you were unable, from the context, to determine the date?
No wonder you're unable to discuss the topic.

Yes, I could easily decipher what the post was referring to. My initial comment, regarding the date, was tongue in cheek.

Then the OP decided to get pissy and, well, fuck that...

NO, not "tongue in cheek," just a troll.
If you don't want to discuss the topic just fly away,

Fuck off, dickhead...

And still unable to discuss the topic.

 

[Canon Shooter]

What happened on June 1st?

Does it have anything to do with what happened during the elections? I'm not all that interested in whataboutisms. Please answer the premise or don't respond at all. Thank you.

Well, since you've gotten mildly snooty with me, permit me to set you straight on a couple of points.

First, don't tell me what to do. You're just not that guy.

Second, I didn't offer any "whataboutisms", so it's stupid for you to even bring it up.

Lastly, here in the States, when we express a date with only numbers, generally speaking the month comes first, then the date, then the year.

Kinda like this; June 1 of this year would be expressed as "6/1/21" or "6/1/2021".

Now, I don't know where in the world you are, but understand that this forum is predominantly American. So, when you go writing "What happened on 6/1?", people are going to start looking at June on their calendar.

You may go now...

So you were unable, from the context, to determine the date?
No wonder you're unable to discuss the topic.

Yes, I could easily decipher what the post was referring to. My initial comment, regarding the date, was tongue in cheek.

Then the OP decided to get pissy and, well, fuck that...

NO, not "tongue in cheek," just a troll.
If you don't want to discuss the topic just fly away,

Fuck off, dickhead...

And still unable to discuss the topic.

Go fuck yourself, dipshit...

 

[bripat9643]

What happened on June 1st?

Does it have anything to do with what happened during the elections? I'm not all that interested in whataboutisms. Please answer the premise or don't respond at all. Thank you.

Yeah, we know you don't like having your blatant hypocrisy pointed out. That's all you've said.

 

[bripat9643]

I've seen a lot of people on this board, including me putting their 2 cents in on what happened on 6/1. A few days ago I came to a bit of a weird realization for myself.

I came to realise that by focusing on the very visible, spectacular and tragic events, the true meaning of what occured has been missed.

In my opinion it's not all that important if 6/1 was a coup, insurgency, riot, demonstration or picnic. In fact 6/1 is not the most important thing that should be remembered.

What should be remembered is the precedent set by Trump. For the first time in the history of the US, the losing candidate of a presidential campaign didn't just fail to concede he lost, but actively tried to get those of his party to ignore those results and try to get power that way.

Wrong, turd. Algore did the exact same thing. He still maintains that he actually won.

He tried to get the Georgia Secretary of State to "find him votes". He tried state assemblies to designate electors with the express purpose of getting them to elect him and not the winner of the certified election results. He tried to get his own VP to refuse to certify the results and tried to get the house and senate to do the same.

This bears repeating. Trump tried in almost every way to get him and not the winner of the election to take power.

II know that many of you believe the election was fraudulent. I obviously don't agree. I want you to realise though that if you support the precedent that as long as you claim the election was fraudulent the loser of an election can take steps to ignore those results other than actually making your case in court, the US will no longer be a functioning Democracy.

That's all Democrat Reich propaganda. The only thing your post proves is that Dem NAZIs will lie until doomsday.

Oh goody, our resident toddler has arrived.
Run along little boy.

You mean the person you're the most afraid of, don't you?