2020 Election Commentary

[Mistwell]

The line that the postal worker recanted came out of Adam 'shifty' Schiff's office. Some of you should know better than that.

It came from the investigators themselves.

[Mistwell]

$10 says he is full of shit.

"Show me proof!'
*proof*
"No, that doesn't count!!!!!!!!"

This is getting pathetic...

It's not proof that he changed his mind in public to raise cash but in private he told investigators he made it all up. But more importantly you have a bet offer on the table and have not responded to it. So pucker up, buttercup. If you think this is "proof" it should be an easy bet, right? It can be done as a donation to the others preferred charity, if that's how you want to do it. Hell we can scrap the money and make it just the winner chooses the losers avatar for a month, if that's what you want. But are you willing to take the bet?

[oggsmash]

The line that the postal worker recanted came out of Adam 'shifty' Schiff's office. Some of you should know better than that.

It came from the investigators themselves.

Who remained anonymous correct?  I say that because anonymous sources also gave us awesome stuff like hooker pee and such.

[Hawkwing7423]

Mistwell, just carrying water for your team. Even if this one person turns out to be a weak link, there are hundreds of sworn affidavits.

https://gellerreport.com/2020/11/sworn-affidavits-from-nevada-michigan-detail-massive-voter-fraud-details.html/

Trump gets his day in court whether you like it or not.

[Brad]

It's not proof that he changed his mind in public to raise cash but in private he told investigators he made it all up. But more importantly you have a bet offer on the table and have not responded to it. So pucker up, buttercup. If you think this is "proof" it should be an easy bet, right? It can be done as a donation to the others preferred charity, if that's how you want to do it. Hell we can scrap the money and make it just the winner chooses the losers avatar for a month, if that's what you want. But are you willing to take the bet?

You're legitimately pathetic. Seriously.

[Mistwell]

Remember the video of the postal worker who says he helped commit fraud to help Biden, posted earlier in this thread? You know, the one that Project Veritas was all over?

Yeah, he admits now he made the whole thing up. Link

Gee, who could have possibly seen that coming? Oh right.

LOL https://youtu.be/ibU5KVFCg4Y

$10 says he is full of shit.

But *never* Bezos's blog or the Carlos Slim Times, amirite?!  Trump's been a Russian agent since 1983! 

"Losing" has never been this much fun.  Everywhere the gaslighting machine plants its flag, it gets shit on its face.  It is very upset that people don't uncritically believe certain things anymore, as this is apparently necessary for democracy as they envision it.

Meanwhile Biden voters can't stop wailing about a sense of impending doom.

And the Left keeps reminding the Lincoln Project it didn't even promise to eat them last, as envisioned.

I've never once said or implied Trump is in bed with Russia. You must have me confused with someone else. I just think he lost the election.

[Mistwell]

It's not proof that he changed his mind in public to raise cash but in private he told investigators he made it all up. But more importantly you have a bet offer on the table and have not responded to it. So pucker up, buttercup. If you think this is "proof" it should be an easy bet, right? It can be done as a donation to the others preferred charity, if that's how you want to do it. Hell we can scrap the money and make it just the winner chooses the losers avatar for a month, if that's what you want. But are you willing to take the bet?

You're legitimately pathetic. Seriously.

So the answer is no, you're a coward, and you are not even willing to back up your convictions with a simple bet concerning avatars. Gotcha. Exactly what I thought.

[jhkim]

Affidavits from named people putting their reputations on the line are total horseshit compared to nebulous allegations from an unnamed source who overheard a conversation of someone else talking about a telephone call they overheard across the room. Gosh!

Two years ago here on this forum, many posters vehemently argued that sworn affidavits didn't even count as evidence, because it's human nature for people to lie. (This was during the Kavanaugh hearings.)

I'll say the same thing I did then - sworn affidavits are not absolute proof, but they are evidence. They come down to how trustworthy the person in the affidavit is. A convicted drug addict or sex offender is going to be less believable than a respected officer or judge. There should be an investigation to to some basic vetting of the affidavits on both sides, and if it's believable, then there should be a hearing to weigh the testimony.

You shouldn't believe someone just because they said it, but neither should it be dismissed. All too often, people jump in and immediately believe testimony if it's what they want to hear - which was certainly the case with many liberals during the Kavanaugh hearings.

[EOTB]

I've never once said or implied Trump is in bed with Russia. You must have me confused with someone else. I just think he lost the election.

Unless you believe you're the personification of Bezos's blog or Slim's rag, it would be hard to think someone made a claim about what you said.  Of course anything's possible with a lawyer and a sophist (but I repeat myself)

[EOTB]

Why don't all "gimme proof" people simply come clean that they're exploiting a colloquial/technical gap.

The gimme proof people are asking for Proof, the technical term.  They are not asking for evidence, the technical term, which concerned posters are using "proof" for in the colloquial sense - which is perfectly fucking appropriate on a forum that is not a court room. 

So the gimme proof people are sitting back like smug little betas and waiting to slap down whatever evidence people bring forward because it's not "proof".  They're very happy to let this misunderstanding happen, because they're not objective and simply want to fuck with your heads.  (Because they know that proof is beyond the reasonable capability of anyone here, even it the concerns turn out to be true and valid)

[Brad]

So the answer is no, you're a coward, and you are not even willing to back up your convictions with a simple bet concerning avatars. Gotcha. Exactly what I thought.

I posed a video of the guy DIRECTLY DISPUTING what you said. There is no "bet". None. You have lost, and even if Jesus himself came from the heavens, you'd insist you were correct. So kindly go fuck yourself, shill.

Two years ago here on this forum, many posters vehemently argued that sworn affidavits didn't even count as evidence, because it's human nature for people to lie. (This was during the Kavanaugh hearings.)

Oh so now you're bringing up Kavanaugh? Do you just post this shit because you honestly believe it, or are you being paid? Paid off shill who has zero recollection of an alleged event, can't even give a specific fucking year, much less date, is not the same as many, many people coming forward with the same exact story. And since you brought up Kavanaugh, fucking tons of people said Ballsy-Ford was 100% full of shit, on the record, and yet their claims were dismissed instantly.

So again, you're legitimately stupid. I mean it.

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Well, it seems to me that with all of the many claims of fraud and corruption concerning the election, we have a duty to ensure they are thoroughly and diligently investigated. If there is no fraud and corruption proven, then good. If, however, fraud and corruption from the Democrats is proven through court proceedings, then the wheels of justice need to crush them, and they need to fucking pay. Every last one of the weasel, cock-sucking bastards.

Then, there's the thought that even if the Democrats are not caught defrauding and stealing our national election--that doesn't mean that they didn't use fraud and corruption to subvert a lawful election of the people--they just slime their way through and avoid getting caught.

Regardless of whatever is demonstrated in court, I cannot shake the feeling that the Democrats have through various ways instituted fraud in this election. Biden couldn't fill a high school gym with supporters, while Trump had thousands and thousands of people standing in long lines for HOURS at rallies, sometimes even in the rain, to attend a Trump Rally. Everywhere I look, there are trump stickers, banners, and flags. The enthusiasm for President Trump is sky fucking high, at record levels. Throughout politics, ground level campaign enthusiasm has always been viewed as a critical factor--such has been so with every political contest forever.

But somehow, the Democrats want everyone to believe that Biden won this election, and is more popular than any presidential candidate in American history? I just don't buy it. In state after state, as of Midnight or so on election night, President Trump was strongly ahead of Biden in most states, and certain to achieve victory. Then, somehow, at 0400 in the morning, in several key electoral states, boxes and boxes of votes are mysteriously found--all in support of Biden, and strangely, by the morning, Biden now had all these key states won, providing him with the victory.

And none of the fucking Democrats supporters find any of that suspicious? Any conservative that just looks at the basic sequence of events and some of the relevant details, and wants investigations made--is somehow un-American, unpatriotic, and a bitter, sore loser?

Fuck you people that believe that! That's just bullshit. There's something wrong here, it doesn't seem right, and full investigations need to be made. And until all of these crucial details are ironed out, Biden isn't fucking anything, and can sit the fuck down and wait. The Liberal fucking media and their cock-sucking shills can gargle with glass, too. This is the most important election in our lifetime, and you damn bet Conservatives and supporters of President Trump are going to demand investigations, down to every last vote and detail.

All the shrill whining coming from the cock-sucking Democrats that have been shrieking like bitches about Trump every day for the last four years, demanding investigations, trials, and litigation without end--such smug bastards and hypocrites! Fuck them! Yeah, every goddamned vote, every goddamned detail and procedure needs to be vetted and investigated. EVERY DAMN THING!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[jhkim]

Why don't all "gimme proof" people simply come clean that they're exploiting a colloquial/technical gap.

The gimme proof people are asking for Proof, the technical term.  They are not asking for evidence, the technical term, which concerned posters are using "proof" for in the colloquial sense - which is perfectly fucking appropriate on a forum that is not a court room.

I have been asking for and looking into evidence. I gave a list earlier of claims that I have looked into so far. My beef is that no one seems to be arguing against me regarding any of the claims. Instead, they tend just post new claims. I would love it if someone would actually argue over the evidence of a prior claim. Here are ones I've looked into so far (slight repeat from a while back):

1) The Antrim County glitch that caused 6000 votes to count towards Biden. I do not believe that this constitutes evidence of fraud. It was caught by cross-checks, and no one official has claimed that it was intentional fraud. That county is Republican dominated, and the local officials are Republican.

2) Crowder's video showing bringing a wagon and luggage into a building in Detroit where ballot counting is happening. I watched and didn't see any proof that there was any illegal activity. There was nothing on video to indicate that either the wagon or the luggage contained ballots, or that either got into the ballot-counting area without being checked.

3) A quote supposedly from a sworn affidavit of an election monitor in Michigan, posted by jeff37923, posted in Reply #691, claiming major problems in the process. jeff37923 was asked for a link to show that, but he himself said that the link was no longer there and to take it with a grain of salt. Until more evidence shows up to confirm that this the affidavit exists, I'd also say that this is not evidence.

4) A statistical analysis from RedState author Scott Hounsell. I tried looking into it, but it didn't give any sources for it's numbers and doesn't seem to have any cross-checks by anyone else. Until there is more offered here, this is also a dead end. I'll revisit it if anyone can provide corroboration or sources for the claims.

5) The claim that there were more votes than registered voters in Wisconsin, advanced by Brad, followed by the claim that it was ludicrous that 90% of registered voters had voted. I don't believe this claim is warranted or constitutes fraud. The initial claim was wrong, and the idea that 90% is ludicrous doesn't add up given that 2016 had 87% nationally.

6) The Benford's Law analysis claim. I don't have a conclusion yet on this. This at least gives it's sources as well as code - which is good. It claims a statistical anomaly, but it doesn't give a likelihood or explain why it chose the three districts that it did.

7) GameDaddy's claim in Reply #789 that the odds of PA, GA, and AZ were 308 to 1 that it was valid. That calculation of odds is based on the assumption that each state's vote is a random throw, and that 3% for Biden, 50% for Biden, and 97% for Biden were all equally likely. I believe this is a false assumption - which Pat also backed up.

8 ) The countering claims regarding Pennsylvania postal worker Richard Hopkins. This does constitute evidence and should be followed up on, I agree. If true, the postal manager should absolutely be prosecuted.

[Ratman_tf]

< - - - >

[jhkim]

But somehow, the Democrats want everyone to believe that Biden won this election, and is more popular than any presidential candidate in American history? I just don't buy it.

I haven't seen anyone claim this. Biden currently looks to be getting 50.8% of the popular vote - that's about the same as George W. Bush (50.7%). It's more than Trump (46.1%) and Bill Clinton (43.0% and 49.2%) -- and less than Obama (51.0% and 52.9%) or George H.W. Bush (53.4%). That's nowhere near the most popular in history. It's slightly below average among all presidents.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_popular_vote_margin

I agree that there should be investigation.