The Election WAS Stolen

[Faun]

Thanks for you admission that Democrats have indeed cried about stolen elections, many times over.

And still, never indoctrinating a cult to the point of storming the U.S. Capitol to prevent the peaceful transfer of power. In large part to 12 minutes for all Democrats combined not being comparable to 2 months of hourly complaints by Trump or his attorneys.

 

[BackAgain]

So she conceded the election when it was called by the networks and never asked her supporters to rally behind a claim that the Dirty Don was illegitimate, that she made years later, nor did she whine incessantly about how US elections are the problem....... for years.

She made it much much sooner than years later. Stop lying, Poo.

And she did whine about rigged elections for years, you imbecile.

 

[BlindBoo]

In no case, were their objections debated. That makes their objections nothing more than howling at the moon.

1 in 2005

When it came time to count the state's votes, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, rose to object and said she had a senator.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., concurred, saying she was acting "to cast the light of truth on a flawed system which must be fixed now," according to a New York Times account of the challenge.

The objection failed 1-74 in the Senate and 31-267 in the House, and Republicans dismissed the complaint as sour grapes.

Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, called it Democrats’ "quadrennial crying wolf," as his colleagues ridiculed stories of disenfranchisement as “Hollywood inspired.”

Newspaper investigations identified real concerns and led officials to concede problems.

The Washington Post reported that 5,000 to 15,000 frustrated voters may have turned away from the polls without voting. Columbus-area officials also conceded they did not allocate enough voting machines to handle higher-than-expected turnout in urban precincts.


The newspaper also reported that poorly trained poll workers in Cleveland gave faulty instructions to voters that resulted in thousands of provisional ballots being rejected.

The New York Times identified other problems with outdated voting machines and “improperly calibrated touch screens” in one county that pushed an unknown number of votes to Bush before the problem was caught.

However, there problems were not deemed sufficient to question Bush's 118,000-vote victory.

Congress has objected to Electoral College votes before. Here’s a look at past efforts:

Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley has led the charge to challenge Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory in Congress Wednesday.

www.news-leader.com

 

[Faun]

1 in 2005

When it came time to count the state's votes, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, rose to object and said she had a senator.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., concurred, saying she was acting "to cast the light of truth on a flawed system which must be fixed now," according to a New York Times account of the challenge.

The objection failed 1-74 in the Senate and 31-267 in the House, and Republicans dismissed the complaint as sour grapes.

Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, called it Democrats’ "quadrennial crying wolf," as his colleagues ridiculed stories of disenfranchisement as “Hollywood inspired.”

Newspaper investigations identified real concerns and led officials to concede problems.

The Washington Post reported that 5,000 to 15,000 frustrated voters may have turned away from the polls without voting. Columbus-area officials also conceded they did not allocate enough voting machines to handle higher-than-expected turnout in urban precincts.


The newspaper also reported that poorly trained poll workers in Cleveland gave faulty instructions to voters that resulted in thousands of provisional ballots being rejected.

The New York Times identified other problems with outdated voting machines and “improperly calibrated touch screens” in one county that pushed an unknown number of votes to Bush before the problem was caught.

However, there problems were not deemed sufficient to question Bush's 118,000-vote victory.

Congress has objected to Electoral College votes before. Here’s a look at past efforts:

Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley has led the charge to challenge Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory in Congress Wednesday.

www.news-leader.com

Thanks, I didn't know about that one.

 

[Independent thinker]

Contrary to known reality.

Their objections were not heard unless joined by a Senator. In 2001 it went something like this:

The VICE PRESIDENT. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from California (Ms. WATERS) rise?
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Vice President, I rise to object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electorial votes.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Is the objection in writing and signed by a Member of the House and a Senator?
Ms. WATERS. The objection is in writing, and I do not care that it is not signed by a Member of the Senate.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair will advise that the rules do care, and the signature of a Senator is required. The Chair will again put that part of the question: Is the objection signed by a Senator?
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Vice President, there are gross violations of the Voting Rights Act from Florida, and I object; and it is not signed by a Senator.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair thanks the gentlewoman from California. On the basis previously stated, the objection may not be received

Election denials are elections denials. Democrats have been doing it for decades. They also accuse the other side of vote suppression and yet recently, Stacy Abrams couldn't prove even one case of vote suppression in court.

 

[Independent thinker]

In no case, were their objections debated. That makes their objections nothing more than howling at the moon.

Ummmmmm, in case you haven't heard, Biden won the 2020 election and has been in office as president for over two years now. Everything from the right has been nothing but "howling at the moon".

 

[Faun]

Election denials are elections denials. Democrats have been doing it for decades. They also accuse the other side of vote suppression and yet recently, Stacy Abrams couldn't prove even one case of vote suppression in court.

And still, not one of them inspired a cult to storm the Capitol to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

 

[Faun]

Ummmmmm, in case you haven't heard, Biden won the 2020 election and has been in office as president for over two years now. Everything from the right has been nothing but "howling at the moon".

Storming the Capitol to prevent the peaceful transfer of power was not howling at the moon.

 

[BlindBoo]

Thanks, I didn't know about that one.

Of course, there was no angry mob outside the Capitol fed by some crazy bastards of one of the parties either. Also they pointed out legitimate issues in the Ohio election, not wild and unproven allegations of fraud.

 

[Independent thinker]

And still, never indoctrinating a cult to the point of storming the U.S. Capitol to prevent the peaceful transfer of power. In large part to 12 minutes for all Democrats combined not being comparable to 2 months of hourly complaints by Trump or his attorneys.

We had about two years of summer's long George Floyd riots where all kinds of violence happened and protesters took over US territory and turned them into lawless zones. And what happened? We let them do it with no consequences and allowed them to have autonomous lawless zones. That's more than an insurrection. That's outright invading US territory and taking it over and we did nothing about it.

 

[Independent thinker]

And still, not one of them inspired a cult to storm the Capitol to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

see post #290

 

[Faun]

We had about two years of summer's long George Floyd riots where all kinds of violence happened and protesters took over US territory and turned them into lawless zones. And what happened? We let them do it with no consequences and allowed them to have autonomous lawless zones. That's more than an insurrection. That's outright invading US territory and taking it over and we did nothing about it.

Has absolutely nothing to do with claims of stolen elections.

Do you often wander out on meaningless tangents?

 

[Independent thinker]

Storming the Capitol to prevent the peaceful transfer of power was not howling at the moon.

And invading US territory and annexing it into your own personal autonomous lawless zones are not howling at the moon either. But Democrats refused to do anything about those.

 

[Faun]

And invading US territory and annexing it into your own personal autonomous lawless zones are not howling at the moon either. But Democrats refused to do anything about those.

Again, has absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about. I accept your tacit concession.

 

[BackAgain]

Yeah right. immediately in 2019. Lets see, she conceded in Nov. 2016, and immediately claimed in Sept of 2019 that the Orange lardass was illegitimate........what a maroon!

You’re an asshole. Where do you go to find fraudulent “facts?” You just pull them out of your ass? You’re particularly unpersuasive when you resort to fiction.

To clarify, Shrillary first mentioned the prospect of a Russian-based stolen election in September of 2017.

Clinton opens door to questioning legitimacy of 2016 election | CNN Politics

Hillary Clinton, in an interview that aired Monday on NPR, said she "would not" rule out questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election if Russian interference is deeper than currently known.

www.cnn.com

Thereafter, she became more and more aggressive in spreading her disinformation.

 

[BlindBoo]

Election denials are elections denials.

Democrats have not attacked the electoral system as the Novell Republicans have. Furthermore the only objection to a EC count ever debated prior to 2020 was over legitimate issues with the 2004 vote in Ohio, not widespread unproven allegations like were made by Trumpyberra and his Neo-GOP in 2020.

 

[BlindBoo]

You’re an asshole. Where do you go to find fraudulent “facts?” You just pull them out of your ass? You’re particularly unpersuasive when you resort to fiction.

To clarify, Shrillary first mentioned the prospect of a Russian-based stolen election in September of 2017.

Clinton opens door to questioning legitimacy of 2016 election | CNN Politics

Hillary Clinton, in an interview that aired Monday on NPR, said she "would not" rule out questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election if Russian interference is deeper than currently known.

www.cnn.com

Thereafter, she became more and more aggressive in spreading her disinformation.

Is that the best you got? 10 months after the election she answered a question that has the term in it?

NPR’s Terry Gross asked Clinton directly during the interview whether she would “completely rule out questioning the legitimacy of this election if we learn that the Russian interference in the election is even deeper than we know now?”

“No. I would not,” Clinton said.

Gross asked: “You’re not going to rule it out?”

“No,” Clinton said. “I wouldn’t rule it out.”

Now if she did something like that after the networked called it and before she conceded you might have a point. You don't. If she had performed like this asshole piece of shit......

 

[Independent thinker]

Again, has absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about. I accept your tacit concession.

In other words, you only want to talk about insurrections from the right while allowing insurrections from the left. Double standard.

 

[Independent thinker]

Democrats have not attacked the electoral system as the Novell Republicans have. Furthermore the only objection to a EC count ever debated prior to 2020 was over legitimate issues with the 2004 vote in Ohio, not widespread unproven allegations like were made by Trumpyberra and his Neo-GOP in 2020.

Did you watch the twelve minutes?

 

[Faun]

In other words, you only want to talk about insurrections from the right while allowing insurrections from the left. Double standard.

No, in this thread, I only want to talk about the claims of a stolen election. That you feel the need to divert about unrelated topics reveals to me you've exhausted your position.