Sydney Powell's "Excuse" puts the BIG LIE of election fraud to rest...

[Faun]

Nobody can hear you over the sound of all the poor howling puppies around you.

Bye Bye. You are now on IGNORE. Fuck off, dipshit. I won't have you first mock evidence you haven't even studied, refute evidence with nothing to even support that position, then try to take over my own structured debate so you can try to blow it up before it even begins. I will PROVE Biden and the democrats/left stole the election and I'm going to shove it right down your throat.

You're the same dumb motherfucka that thought Obama was a Muslim, Michelle a man, and believed pizza-gate, the most irrational illogical BS ever.

You have proven yourself retarded. Everything you say is complete BS.

If Trumps tells you to jump, you say how high. Any lie Trump tells you, you believe.

Dumb motherfuckers like you will continue to live the lie for ever. You don't care about truth, because the lies are easier for you to handle.

Sometimes in life the truth can be a tough pill for an idiot Trumper to swallow, so you chose to live the lie.

Here is the Evidence

Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.

hereistheevidence.com

That's not evidence, it's claims.

This is for aggregating publicly available items of evidence that would be admissible in court, not general election news stories or updates.
Yes it is. The courts refused to hear it. There was massive fraud. The cover up has failed and Trump is not about to let anyone forget the election was stolen.

LOL

It matters not what they claim it could be used for. I found one claim on there by someone claiming they saw dead bodies rising from graves to go vote. So no, those are not claims that can be presented in a court of law. Actual claims were and were dismissed due to lack of merit.

Get real troll. Massive fraud took place.

LOLOLOL

So much fraud, you've not yet been able to prove a single case of fraud.

 

[Faun]

You have proven yourself retarded.

SHUT UP you stupid, drooling, braindead pustule. In four years you've never been able to beat Trump at anything much less ever prove a single thing you've said against him, so all you've got left is to rig the elections to steal it against the wishes of America then to lie about him while attacking anyone who doesn't sidle up to your fascist, doxxing BS because you can't ever actually beat them on the MERITS of your argument!

LOLOL

Never beat Trump?? We beat him in the election last year. Biggest loss of his life and utterly dissolved much of his base into mindless jellyfish.

The fraud strengthened his base and got him more support. Try again.

Uh, no, it didn't. Polling reveals he lost a chunk of his base since the election.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Section 1. Equal protection under the law.

It’s not. As long as everyone has to follow the same rules in a state, there is no violation.

The rules must be legislated.

There’s always details that are left to the election boards and administration to sort out. No legislature makes a law for everything.

Obviously.

The constitution stipulates that any election rules changes must go through the state legislature.
PA didn’t do this. Left wing judges and non-left wing judges refused to consider any cases. The non-left wing judges due to fear of attack by democrat fascists who destroyed cities all year.

It doesn’t say that. It says the manner of the election is determined by the legislature. That’s not the same thing.

But it is the same thing. Read what you wrote.
No honest person would accept the numbers of this election. An audit was warranted but not granted due to bias and/or fear of reprisal.
Ox-Bow election.

It’s not. Method and means are not quite the same.

The numbers are legitimate. The people who don’t want to accept them merely can’t come to terms with losing.

The numbers are suspicious to say the least. Only dishonest people believe otherwise.

When you decided before the election that Trump won, then any number that doesn’t result in that outcome would seem suspicious.

That doesn’t mean it is.

My interpretation is rooted in results and figures.
Anyone who doesn’t question the veracity of the 2020 election is dishonest.

So the only reason a person could come to the conclusion that the 2020 election was fair is dishonesty?

You don't think the fact that it was monitored by members of both parties could make you draw that conclusion?

Or the fact that widespread voter fraud wasn't even alleged in court besides that is by Powell. Something she now claims was done in jest.

Or the fact that the lawsuits that were actually filed by Trump were shot down almost across the board.

A few weeks ago I had a discussion with my brother about believing something to be true because it sounds logical. It took me giving an example of giving a logical but different explanation for something he believes, before he realised that theirs a difference between believing something to be true and it actually being true.

No dishonesty is required to believe something different than what you believe.

Anyone who doesn’t believe that election deserves an audit is dishonest.
The anomalies are too conspicuous to ignore.

I have no problem with auditing an election. I have a problem with claiming voter fraud happened even after audits happen. I have a problem with demanding other people having to carry the burden of paying for an audit when the margins in the election in states have a zero chance of changing the results.
I have a problem with demanding audits when no credible reason for it can be established in a court of law.

There are several safeguards in place to ensure voter fraud is minimal. Measures that are enforced by members of both parties. Measures that allow an aggrieved party to challenge the election result. Measures that are arbitrated by the judicial system that is equally bipartisan.

If after all those safeguards have been applied you still are not satisfied that is just tough and by no means dishonesty on the part of those that have been satisfied.

Anyone who doesn’t request an audit on that election is dishonest.
That you’re too easily satisfied with election results with those anomalies suggests that you’re dishonest.

The fact that you aren't disputing the election was monitored by both parties and arbitrated by the judicial system and that no instances of large-scale voter fraud have been credibly alleged. And the fact that despite those facts you are still insisting you have reason to believe the election where stolen speaks more to your honesty than mine. (and no I don't think you're being dishonest just biased to a point that you can't rationally examine the facts.)

Ask yourself this. What would you accept as credible proof of an honest election? I highly doubt there is anything you would accept. Since audits, manual recounts, lawyers for Trump saying it there was no voter fraud, lawyers for Trump saying they claimed voter fraud in jest, the AG (a very partisan AG) saying there was no voter fraud, judges nominated by Trump saying there is no evidence for voter fraud, certification of the election result by Republican officials, certification of the election results by congress apparently aren't sufficient.

I would accept a thorough examination and verification of mail-in ballots.
That can’t happen because the verification elements have largely been destroyed.
I would then discount every unverifiable mail-in vote and/or every mail-in vote cast in violation of constitutional standards.
Until and unless that happens, no honest person should accept these results.

Do you mean checking the signature in mail-in ballots to the signature in a voter registration form, or against the signature on your driver's license or other government-issued ID? Or check it against your address? Guess there is no reason to doubt the results then.
VOPP: Table 14: How States Verify Voted Absentee Ballots (ncsl.org)

As to constitutionality. Who do you imagine the CONSTITUTION designated the arbitrate if the constitutional standards are followed? I'll give you a hint it starts with a c and ends in ourt. And before you come with the argument that the courts didn't rule on all the constitutional objections filed by Trump. Know that ruling to not weigh in on an argument in itself is a RULING.

The problem is not that mail-in ballots haven't been thoroughly examined or that they don't follow the constitutional standards, the problem is that YOU don't accept the conclusions of those examinations or accept the rulings of those the constitution empowered to judge on constitutionality.

And for the love of god please stop throwing the word honesty around, your bias prevents you from recognizing honesty.

Judges refused to even look at the evidence. They wouldn’t take up the cases.
The concern for the veracity of mail-in votes was shot down months before the election. It was anticipated that the votes were subject to fraud because of the ease and lack of accountability. Lo and behold, the anomalies were blatant and obvious as predicted. But dishonest people refused to audit. You are dishonest.

You are a tool and have proved my point. As I said there is nothing that would satisfy you. You don't accept the court's ruling constitution be damned and you don't accept the verification of mail-in ballots that did occur.

There was no legit verification of mail ins.
An audit is necessary but can’t happen because the matching paperwork is gone.
Judges refused to hear the arguments.
A 3-time loser and a running mate rejected by 96% of democrats combined with few campaign events attended by scores or dozens at most is not the type of ticket to break a voting record by 17%.
60% of Biden votes were mail in but his voting base had practically zero need to mail in.
Only one incumbent gained in votes and lost and that was Cleveland in 1888. He won the popular vote. FDR gained by 22% in his second election and won the EC by 523-8. Trump increased his numbers by 17%.
Those facts and stats demand election scrutiny but no one would have it. And you think it’s all OK.
Dishonest.

I linked the mail in verification process by state. Every single state verifies them, every state has a procedure for it. Audits outside the standard process have been done in some states. The Trump campaign has payed for some more. Unless and until a CREDIBLE assertion of large scale voter fraud is made, something that is denied EVEN by TRUMP lawyers in court there is absolutely no reason to pay BILLIONS to audit every single election.

It's like claiming every home in the US needs to be protected against a zombie apocalypse. I think you would agree that before that demand can be made first we would need to establish that a zombie apocalypse is an actual danger.

And you can’t prevent electioneering where mail-ins exist. No-excuse mail-ins.
60% of Biden votes were mail-ins.
This election was a total ripoff and you know it.
You’re dishonest.

 

[Faun]

Section 1. Equal protection under the law.

It’s not. As long as everyone has to follow the same rules in a state, there is no violation.

The rules must be legislated.

There’s always details that are left to the election boards and administration to sort out. No legislature makes a law for everything.

Obviously.

The constitution stipulates that any election rules changes must go through the state legislature.
PA didn’t do this. Left wing judges and non-left wing judges refused to consider any cases. The non-left wing judges due to fear of attack by democrat fascists who destroyed cities all year.

It doesn’t say that. It says the manner of the election is determined by the legislature. That’s not the same thing.

But it is the same thing. Read what you wrote.
No honest person would accept the numbers of this election. An audit was warranted but not granted due to bias and/or fear of reprisal.
Ox-Bow election.

It’s not. Method and means are not quite the same.

The numbers are legitimate. The people who don’t want to accept them merely can’t come to terms with losing.

The numbers are suspicious to say the least. Only dishonest people believe otherwise.

When you decided before the election that Trump won, then any number that doesn’t result in that outcome would seem suspicious.

That doesn’t mean it is.

My interpretation is rooted in results and figures.
Anyone who doesn’t question the veracity of the 2020 election is dishonest.

So the only reason a person could come to the conclusion that the 2020 election was fair is dishonesty?

You don't think the fact that it was monitored by members of both parties could make you draw that conclusion?

Or the fact that widespread voter fraud wasn't even alleged in court besides that is by Powell. Something she now claims was done in jest.

Or the fact that the lawsuits that were actually filed by Trump were shot down almost across the board.

A few weeks ago I had a discussion with my brother about believing something to be true because it sounds logical. It took me giving an example of giving a logical but different explanation for something he believes, before he realised that theirs a difference between believing something to be true and it actually being true.

No dishonesty is required to believe something different than what you believe.

Anyone who doesn’t believe that election deserves an audit is dishonest.
The anomalies are too conspicuous to ignore.

I have no problem with auditing an election. I have a problem with claiming voter fraud happened even after audits happen. I have a problem with demanding other people having to carry the burden of paying for an audit when the margins in the election in states have a zero chance of changing the results.
I have a problem with demanding audits when no credible reason for it can be established in a court of law.

There are several safeguards in place to ensure voter fraud is minimal. Measures that are enforced by members of both parties. Measures that allow an aggrieved party to challenge the election result. Measures that are arbitrated by the judicial system that is equally bipartisan.

If after all those safeguards have been applied you still are not satisfied that is just tough and by no means dishonesty on the part of those that have been satisfied.

Anyone who doesn’t request an audit on that election is dishonest.
That you’re too easily satisfied with election results with those anomalies suggests that you’re dishonest.

The fact that you aren't disputing the election was monitored by both parties and arbitrated by the judicial system and that no instances of large-scale voter fraud have been credibly alleged. And the fact that despite those facts you are still insisting you have reason to believe the election where stolen speaks more to your honesty than mine. (and no I don't think you're being dishonest just biased to a point that you can't rationally examine the facts.)

Ask yourself this. What would you accept as credible proof of an honest election? I highly doubt there is anything you would accept. Since audits, manual recounts, lawyers for Trump saying it there was no voter fraud, lawyers for Trump saying they claimed voter fraud in jest, the AG (a very partisan AG) saying there was no voter fraud, judges nominated by Trump saying there is no evidence for voter fraud, certification of the election result by Republican officials, certification of the election results by congress apparently aren't sufficient.

I would accept a thorough examination and verification of mail-in ballots.
That can’t happen because the verification elements have largely been destroyed.
I would then discount every unverifiable mail-in vote and/or every mail-in vote cast in violation of constitutional standards.
Until and unless that happens, no honest person should accept these results.

Do you mean checking the signature in mail-in ballots to the signature in a voter registration form, or against the signature on your driver's license or other government-issued ID? Or check it against your address? Guess there is no reason to doubt the results then.
VOPP: Table 14: How States Verify Voted Absentee Ballots (ncsl.org)

As to constitutionality. Who do you imagine the CONSTITUTION designated the arbitrate if the constitutional standards are followed? I'll give you a hint it starts with a c and ends in ourt. And before you come with the argument that the courts didn't rule on all the constitutional objections filed by Trump. Know that ruling to not weigh in on an argument in itself is a RULING.

The problem is not that mail-in ballots haven't been thoroughly examined or that they don't follow the constitutional standards, the problem is that YOU don't accept the conclusions of those examinations or accept the rulings of those the constitution empowered to judge on constitutionality.

And for the love of god please stop throwing the word honesty around, your bias prevents you from recognizing honesty.

Judges refused to even look at the evidence. They wouldn’t take up the cases.
The concern for the veracity of mail-in votes was shot down months before the election. It was anticipated that the votes were subject to fraud because of the ease and lack of accountability. Lo and behold, the anomalies were blatant and obvious as predicted. But dishonest people refused to audit. You are dishonest.

You are a tool and have proved my point. As I said there is nothing that would satisfy you. You don't accept the court's ruling constitution be damned and you don't accept the verification of mail-in ballots that did occur.

There was no legit verification of mail ins.
An audit is necessary but can’t happen because the matching paperwork is gone.
Judges refused to hear the arguments.
A 3-time loser and a running mate rejected by 96% of democrats combined with few campaign events attended by scores or dozens at most is not the type of ticket to break a voting record by 17%.
60% of Biden votes were mail in but his voting base had practically zero need to mail in.
Only one incumbent gained in votes and lost and that was Cleveland in 1888. He won the popular vote. FDR gained by 22% in his second election and won the EC by 523-8. Trump increased his numbers by 17%.
Those facts and stats demand election scrutiny but no one would have it. And you think it’s all OK.
Dishonest.

I linked the mail in verification process by state. Every single state verifies them, every state has a procedure for it. Audits outside the standard process have been done in some states. The Trump campaign has payed for some more. Unless and until a CREDIBLE assertion of large scale voter fraud is made, something that is denied EVEN by TRUMP lawyers in court there is absolutely no reason to pay BILLIONS to audit every single election.

It's like claiming every home in the US needs to be protected against a zombie apocalypse. I think you would agree that before that demand can be made first we would need to establish that a zombie apocalypse is an actual danger.

And you can’t prevent electioneering where mail-ins exist. No-excuse mail-ins.
60% of Biden votes were mail-ins.
This election was a total ripoff and you know it.
You’re dishonest.

Moron...

Trump Votes By Mail (Again) Despite Months Of Voter Fraud Claims

The former president used a mail-in ballot to cast his vote in a Florida municipal election held Tuesday.

www.forbes.com

 

[AFrench2]

^^^ another recount, not an audit.

wat

 

[Lesh]

And don't waste ANYONE'S time with what you consider "irregularities".
FRAUD or illegal activity.
Proven

So I now should throw out all circumstantial evidence (upon which many a murder is based) and anything else not already proven in a court of law therefore not debatable?

Congrats, Lash, you've managed to create conditions in someone else's thread that no one could possibly meet so that you can automatically win by default!

You're obviously not serious about this and are again just trying to play some preconceived game here toward your own desired outcome rather than as is my and the Debate's intent: TO GET AT THE ACTUAL FACTS AND TRUTH AS MUCH AS IS POSSIBLE, or at the very least being as much an ass as possible so that I will just abandon the idea so you can then go around claiming you "called my bluff" and I folded unable to prove anything, so maybe I should just call it off with you and put you on IGNORE where all idiot trolls belong.

ROFLMAO

That didn't take long.

Well yea it kinda did. Two days of promises of evidence that were never going to appear ...

I demand facts and proof and you

A. Admit you have none of either

B. Begin calling names (Lash)

You had no intention of doing anything but blasting out nonsensical garbage and the minute you realized this would not be acceptable...you bail.

PREDICTABLE AS HELL

No, you're predictable as hell. If the proof that Trump's case were so baseless and empty, it would be an EASY thing to prove, media and all would be plainly pointing it out, and I first wouldn't have to chase 25-30 of you a-holes around to even discuss the matter, nor would you then suddenly demand to be part of the debate and demand special rules and restrictions of your own.

LET ME BE CLEAR:

1. It's not your thread.
2. It's not up to you to set limits and conditions.
3. You have no say at all other than to abide by whatever rules I set up that as I present evidence in support of the fraud that you show us decisively how it is all wrong! And be able to back up any statements, claims you make.
4. Period.
5. You don't get to whine or have anything your way.

Because you're a slimy asshole and I don't like you, I'm going to put you on IGNORE now. The subject is not up for debate nor deliberation. Once I'm free of current responsibilities and I can devote myself to the matter fully and have organized all materials to be presented, you'll be contacted to join the thread or not.

My guess is that as always, you're all talk, were planning to just hijack the thread, and like the pussy you are, you WON'T join or participate, much less show how any of Trump's case for fraud is wrong.

It’s not up to me to to “prove” anything beyond the fact that your insane claims are pointless . If you ever get around to trying to make those idiotic points

And you don’t own shit here

 

[forkup]

Section 1. Equal protection under the law.

It’s not. As long as everyone has to follow the same rules in a state, there is no violation.

The rules must be legislated.

There’s always details that are left to the election boards and administration to sort out. No legislature makes a law for everything.

Obviously.

The constitution stipulates that any election rules changes must go through the state legislature.
PA didn’t do this. Left wing judges and non-left wing judges refused to consider any cases. The non-left wing judges due to fear of attack by democrat fascists who destroyed cities all year.

It doesn’t say that. It says the manner of the election is determined by the legislature. That’s not the same thing.

But it is the same thing. Read what you wrote.
No honest person would accept the numbers of this election. An audit was warranted but not granted due to bias and/or fear of reprisal.
Ox-Bow election.

It’s not. Method and means are not quite the same.

The numbers are legitimate. The people who don’t want to accept them merely can’t come to terms with losing.

The numbers are suspicious to say the least. Only dishonest people believe otherwise.

When you decided before the election that Trump won, then any number that doesn’t result in that outcome would seem suspicious.

That doesn’t mean it is.

My interpretation is rooted in results and figures.
Anyone who doesn’t question the veracity of the 2020 election is dishonest.

So the only reason a person could come to the conclusion that the 2020 election was fair is dishonesty?

You don't think the fact that it was monitored by members of both parties could make you draw that conclusion?

Or the fact that widespread voter fraud wasn't even alleged in court besides that is by Powell. Something she now claims was done in jest.

Or the fact that the lawsuits that were actually filed by Trump were shot down almost across the board.

A few weeks ago I had a discussion with my brother about believing something to be true because it sounds logical. It took me giving an example of giving a logical but different explanation for something he believes, before he realised that theirs a difference between believing something to be true and it actually being true.

No dishonesty is required to believe something different than what you believe.

Anyone who doesn’t believe that election deserves an audit is dishonest.
The anomalies are too conspicuous to ignore.

I have no problem with auditing an election. I have a problem with claiming voter fraud happened even after audits happen. I have a problem with demanding other people having to carry the burden of paying for an audit when the margins in the election in states have a zero chance of changing the results.
I have a problem with demanding audits when no credible reason for it can be established in a court of law.

There are several safeguards in place to ensure voter fraud is minimal. Measures that are enforced by members of both parties. Measures that allow an aggrieved party to challenge the election result. Measures that are arbitrated by the judicial system that is equally bipartisan.

If after all those safeguards have been applied you still are not satisfied that is just tough and by no means dishonesty on the part of those that have been satisfied.

Anyone who doesn’t request an audit on that election is dishonest.
That you’re too easily satisfied with election results with those anomalies suggests that you’re dishonest.

The fact that you aren't disputing the election was monitored by both parties and arbitrated by the judicial system and that no instances of large-scale voter fraud have been credibly alleged. And the fact that despite those facts you are still insisting you have reason to believe the election where stolen speaks more to your honesty than mine. (and no I don't think you're being dishonest just biased to a point that you can't rationally examine the facts.)

Ask yourself this. What would you accept as credible proof of an honest election? I highly doubt there is anything you would accept. Since audits, manual recounts, lawyers for Trump saying it there was no voter fraud, lawyers for Trump saying they claimed voter fraud in jest, the AG (a very partisan AG) saying there was no voter fraud, judges nominated by Trump saying there is no evidence for voter fraud, certification of the election result by Republican officials, certification of the election results by congress apparently aren't sufficient.

I would accept a thorough examination and verification of mail-in ballots.
That can’t happen because the verification elements have largely been destroyed.
I would then discount every unverifiable mail-in vote and/or every mail-in vote cast in violation of constitutional standards.
Until and unless that happens, no honest person should accept these results.

Do you mean checking the signature in mail-in ballots to the signature in a voter registration form, or against the signature on your driver's license or other government-issued ID? Or check it against your address? Guess there is no reason to doubt the results then.
VOPP: Table 14: How States Verify Voted Absentee Ballots (ncsl.org)

As to constitutionality. Who do you imagine the CONSTITUTION designated the arbitrate if the constitutional standards are followed? I'll give you a hint it starts with a c and ends in ourt. And before you come with the argument that the courts didn't rule on all the constitutional objections filed by Trump. Know that ruling to not weigh in on an argument in itself is a RULING.

The problem is not that mail-in ballots haven't been thoroughly examined or that they don't follow the constitutional standards, the problem is that YOU don't accept the conclusions of those examinations or accept the rulings of those the constitution empowered to judge on constitutionality.

And for the love of god please stop throwing the word honesty around, your bias prevents you from recognizing honesty.

Judges refused to even look at the evidence. They wouldn’t take up the cases.
The concern for the veracity of mail-in votes was shot down months before the election. It was anticipated that the votes were subject to fraud because of the ease and lack of accountability. Lo and behold, the anomalies were blatant and obvious as predicted. But dishonest people refused to audit. You are dishonest.

You are a tool and have proved my point. As I said there is nothing that would satisfy you. You don't accept the court's ruling constitution be damned and you don't accept the verification of mail-in ballots that did occur.

There was no legit verification of mail ins.
An audit is necessary but can’t happen because the matching paperwork is gone.
Judges refused to hear the arguments.
A 3-time loser and a running mate rejected by 96% of democrats combined with few campaign events attended by scores or dozens at most is not the type of ticket to break a voting record by 17%.
60% of Biden votes were mail in but his voting base had practically zero need to mail in.
Only one incumbent gained in votes and lost and that was Cleveland in 1888. He won the popular vote. FDR gained by 22% in his second election and won the EC by 523-8. Trump increased his numbers by 17%.
Those facts and stats demand election scrutiny but no one would have it. And you think it’s all OK.
Dishonest.

I linked the mail in verification process by state. Every single state verifies them, every state has a procedure for it. Audits outside the standard process have been done in some states. The Trump campaign has payed for some more. Unless and until a CREDIBLE assertion of large scale voter fraud is made, something that is denied EVEN by TRUMP lawyers in court there is absolutely no reason to pay BILLIONS to audit every single election.

It's like claiming every home in the US needs to be protected against a zombie apocalypse. I think you would agree that before that demand can be made first we would need to establish that a zombie apocalypse is an actual danger.

And you can’t prevent electioneering where mail-ins exist. No-excuse mail-ins.
60% of Biden votes were mail-ins.
This election was a total ripoff and you know it.
You’re dishonest.

Assertions by you aren't even close to an argument, you need something called... proof. You have any?

 

[ElmerMudd]

Trump lawyer, Sidney Powell, says fraudulent election claims would not be believed by a reasonable person. These are claims she made with Rudy Giulani on behalf of Donald Trump.
She is being sued for the claims made on the voting machines. Rather than say she was telling the truth, she says no reasonable person would believe me.
She is saying the Trump minions are not reasonable people. She is correct.
The Trump minions are played for fools by the Trump team. How can the Trump minions not realize they are being conned.

Ex-Trump lawyer Powell asks judge to toss voting machine company's $1.3 billion lawsuit

Sidney Powell, a lawyer who advised President Donald Trump's campaign, asked a judge on Monday to throw out a $1.3 billion lawsuit accusing her of spreading false conspiracy theories about the November presidential election.

www.reuters.com

 

[Mac1958]

The Trump minions are played for fools by the Trump team. How can the Trump minions not realize they are being conned.

No doubt they've long since come up with some kind of justification for this, most likely something involving a conspiracy.

Didn't slow them down a bit. They're still as conned as ever.

 

[odanny]

Trump supporters are likely confused by Powell's defense.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Trump supporters are likely confused by Powell's defense.

There should not be confusion. Those who bought into the Trump voter fraud claims were being lied to, knowingly, by the Trump team. They are being conned by the best. But you have to beyond stupid to keep believing the con. The Trump supporters will get what they desserve.

 

[idb]

It's closely allied to the Alex Jones Defence.

However, Randall Wilhite, Mr Jones’s attorney, said the behaviour was merely an act.

“He’s playing a character. He is a performance artist.” Mr Wilhite said, according to the Austin-American Statesman.


Mr Wilhite said that using Mr Jones’ on-air persona to judge him as a father would be like judging Jack Nicholson in a custody dispute based on his performance as the Joker in Batman.

Alex Jones' lawyer admits the one thing we all already knew

But his ex-wife says he is 'not a stable person'

www.independent.co.uk

 

[LA RAM FAN]

It is over, there was no election fraud, and no evidence of fraud.
They made it up.
Powell made it up.
Trump made it up.

And you dumb fucks believed it...

"No reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact"

This could be the most ridiculous excuse in the history of excuses, but either way she has said it. NO FRAUD.

Sidney Powell Says She's Not Guilty of Defamation Because 'No Reasonable Person' Would Have Believed Her 'Outlandish' Election Conspiracy Theory

The former Trump campaign lawyer insists her allegations about systematic voting fraud were not "statements of fact."

reason.com

this coming from a troll who can never admit when he has been proven wrong that both parties are corrupt and one in the same and Obama was as much a mass murderer as Bush and that the dems have had their hands in most of the major wars started as well as the fact thousands of Americas are felling the corrupt dem party.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The fraud was massive and obvious. End of story.

best damn post on this thread, says it all.

the biden lovers can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey trolls they are.

they cant counter this with their babble when they tried so best thing to do is when they lie to try and get around these facts,dont reply,

 

[mamooth]

When I gather everything together maybe in a month when I have a lot of free time, I'll contact you and we can set up the Structured Debate.

So, it's been almost a month. Got anything?

Of course you don't. You were just making empty threats out of rage and butthurt, and everyone knows it. You have absolutely no evidence for any organized fraud, because there is no such evidence.

Don't worry. Everyone expected you to chicken out, so you didn't disappoint anyone.

 

[The Banker]

When I gather everything together maybe in a month when I have a lot of free time, I'll contact you and we can set up the Structured Debate.

So, it's been almost a month. Got anything?

Of course you don't. You were just making empty threats out of rage and butthurt, and everyone knows it. You have absolutely no evidence for any organized fraud, because there is no such evidence.

Don't worry. Everyone expected you to chicken out, so you didn't disappoint anyone.

These people are level 5 wackos !

 

[StormAl]

It is over, there was no election fraud, and no evidence of fraud.
They made it up.
Powell made it up.
Trump made it up.

And you dumb fucks believed it...

"No reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact"

This could be the most ridiculous excuse in the history of excuses, but either way she has said it. NO FRAUD.

Sidney Powell Says She's Not Guilty of Defamation Because 'No Reasonable Person' Would Have Believed Her 'Outlandish' Election Conspiracy Theory

The former Trump campaign lawyer insists her allegations about systematic voting fraud were not "statements of fact."

reason.com

Election fraud is a lie and done with.

If the GOP campaigns on it, the GOP will lose even more bigly than if it did not.

 

[cnm]

These people are level 5 wackos !

Don't misunderestimate them...