This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021  (Read 21205 times)

KingCheops

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 975
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #495 on: January 19, 2021, 10:58:07 AM »
And just to pile on: no court has actually ruled on the merits of the lawsuits made regarding the election. Yes, the suits have been repeatedly thrown out -- on procedural or standing grounds, NOT on a review of the evidence.

So yeah, the whole 'oh that's been disproven' is a bald faced lie and people who say it should feel bad about themselves.

The Sean Parnell suit in PA was especially hilarious.  He specifically waited until after the election because prior to the election there would have been no harm from the unlawful change to the election and therefore no remedy.  He brings it after harm is caused and the judge is like "why didn't you bring this up before the election?"  People were vocal about it before the election and were told "Covid will KILL everyone who goes to a polling station you murdering white supremacist!"

To those unfamiliar.  The "covid changes" to the election process in PA violated the procedures required by the Constitution of Pennsylvania to change the election processes.  So they literally broke the law in order to make it possible to commit election fraud.  That's how desperately the NeoCons and NeoLibs wanted DJT out.

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #496 on: January 19, 2021, 11:27:04 AM »
And just to pile on: no court has actually ruled on the merits of the lawsuits made regarding the election. Yes, the suits have been repeatedly thrown out -- on procedural or standing grounds, NOT on a review of the evidence.

So yeah, the whole 'oh that's been disproven' is a bald faced lie and people who say it should feel bad about themselves.

The Sean Parnell suit in PA was especially hilarious.  He specifically waited until after the election because prior to the election there would have been no harm from the unlawful change to the election and therefore no remedy.  He brings it after harm is caused and the judge is like "why didn't you bring this up before the election?"  People were vocal about it before the election and were told "Covid will KILL everyone who goes to a polling station you murdering white supremacist!"

To those unfamiliar.  The "covid changes" to the election process in PA violated the procedures required by the Constitution of Pennsylvania to change the election processes.  So they literally broke the law in order to make it possible to commit election fraud.  That's how desperately the NeoCons and NeoLibs wanted DJT out.

I think my personal favorite was the "It wasn't enough to change the outcome" based on a sampling of ballots in the precinct/district/area.
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8682
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #497 on: January 19, 2021, 12:21:51 PM »
Well, concerning 2020 Election fraud, irregularities, and corruption--what is the point in me, personally, arguing it here? People either already understand that fraud and corruption occurred, and is present. People that do not agree that there has been fraud and corruption are not going to be suddenly swayed into seeing the light now because of anything I have said.

Well, what's the point of any of us talking here on this forum about any topic? If we're going to discuss anything, I think the evidence of election fraud is the most critical thing to discuss. Sure, there are a lot of people utterly fixed and unwilling to even entertain changing their preconceptions, but there are at least a few posters who won't change their whole outlook, but are willing to concede or modify some points.


As a Racap--

Testimonies and Affidavits--you either believe they are on the whole worthy and should be investigated thoroughly, or not. Several hundred, perhaps more than 1,000 witnesses signing affidavits supporting their testimonies of witnessing fraud and corruption.

What's telling here is that you paint this as black and white - either believe all the witnesses, or don't. This is an exact parallel to the liberal mantra "believe all women" -- as "believe all fraud". But I don't buy either of these. Witnesses can potentially lie, and their credibility needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis. Having corroborating evidence is crucial as well. I believe they should be investigated, and indeed they *have* been investigated. Their testimony has been given in court, and in some cases repeated their testimony in front of special legislative committee sessions.

Just citing the *number* of witnesses isn't convincing, especially when you don't even know that number. What matters is how believable any of them are. The eyewitness I have seen the most of is Melissa Carone, though I've scanned a number of others. If there is a more credible witness than her, then I'd be open to look up more about it. What I've seen is even less credible witnesses, including an *anonymous email* read in court.


Mathematical Analysis--Experts have claimed that Biden's win is impossible. Some here disagree with that assessment.

Computer Analysis--Lots of problems have been identified with algorithms and programs, etc. Not my wheelhouse, but people are screaming that there were lots of problems.

The three I'm most familiar with are Keshavarz-Nia, Ramsland, and Cicchetti. The first two, though, had blatant errors that one doesn't need to be an expert at all in to break. They referred to fraud in *non-existent places* like Edison County MI (for Keshavarz-Nia) and many townships like Audubon or Monticello in Michigan (for Ramsland). You can easily confirm those yourself by reading the testimony. Cicchetti's at least doesn't make that blatant an error, but it is still based on unsupportable assumptions.

Are you backing any of these three? Or is there some other expert that you think is convincing?

Math and science aren't successful because experts are personally infallible. They are convincing because the *process* of academic investigation means having peer review, publishing a full account of your sources and data, and having independent confirmation.


Legal and Constitutional Violations--Various lawyers and experts have pointed out how governors, secretaries of state, attorney generals, in various states have violated their own Constitutions and the US Constitution by changing voting laws and procedures--when it has been stipulated that ONLY a state legislature has such authority.

Election Analysis--bellweather counties being historically won--states like Ohio and Florida being predictors of victory--downballot voting, coattails, all of that supports Trump being the victor. Biden couldn't fill a bus with supporters, while Trump attracted stadiums full of people, even in the fucking rain! Campaign enthusiasm, and so on. According to Biden supporters, none of that matters. Really? Biden is the greatest political genius of American history, winning the Presidency by never leaving his fucking basement.

On election analysis, that's not analysis - that's feeling. I've heard much the same from many liberal friends. "How could *anyone* vote for Trump? He's so horrible!" I think people get so locked into their own partisan viewpoint, they can't hear anything else. Trump is a highly divisive candidate. He has some extreme die-hard supporters, but he also has a lot of haters. I don't think Biden is a genius - I think overwhelmingly, Biden voters were voting *against* Trump rather than *for* Biden.

The election was by an extremely close margin - far closer than anyone could predict simply by feel. And in both 2016 and 2020, the popular vote has gone against Trump by a greater margin.


Election Events--the whole six states stopping their voting procedures in the night, only to continue later on, and experience massive voting dumps where Biden who was behind Trump by hundreds and hundreds of thousands of votes--somehow, in the morning, Biden comes out as the winner. In each and every battleground state that he needed to win the election. How convenient!

I don't even see the logic here. If there were fraud going on, why would they wait until a day later to start committing fraud? The most *convenient* thing would be to have those hundreds of thousands of votes distributed throughout the process. To intentionally wait seems like some sort of Riddler type supervillain move, where they deliberately wanted to leave a clue for others to notice.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8682
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #498 on: January 19, 2021, 12:32:24 PM »
And just to pile on: no court has actually ruled on the merits of the lawsuits made regarding the election. Yes, the suits have been repeatedly thrown out -- on procedural or standing grounds, NOT on a review of the evidence.

So yeah, the whole 'oh that's been disproven' is a bald faced lie and people who say it should feel bad about themselves.

If anyone claims the Texas Attorney General's lawsuit was determined based on evidence, then that was a mistake. However, a number of the other lawsuits *did* have a review of the evidence. That's why we've seen, for example, Melissa Carone's give testimony - because her testimony was being heard in court, and later before a legislative committee. Wikipedia has a breakdown of the various lawsuits, which includes judgements on evidence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election

KingCheops

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 975
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #499 on: January 19, 2021, 01:06:17 PM »
And just to pile on: no court has actually ruled on the merits of the lawsuits made regarding the election. Yes, the suits have been repeatedly thrown out -- on procedural or standing grounds, NOT on a review of the evidence.

So yeah, the whole 'oh that's been disproven' is a bald faced lie and people who say it should feel bad about themselves.

The Sean Parnell suit in PA was especially hilarious.  He specifically waited until after the election because prior to the election there would have been no harm from the unlawful change to the election and therefore no remedy.  He brings it after harm is caused and the judge is like "why didn't you bring this up before the election?"  People were vocal about it before the election and were told "Covid will KILL everyone who goes to a polling station you murdering white supremacist!"

To those unfamiliar.  The "covid changes" to the election process in PA violated the procedures required by the Constitution of Pennsylvania to change the election processes.  So they literally broke the law in order to make it possible to commit election fraud.  That's how desperately the NeoCons and NeoLibs wanted DJT out.

I think my personal favorite was the "It wasn't enough to change the outcome" based on a sampling of ballots in the precinct/district/area.

You mean where they took a random sample in a single county that wasn't under dispute?  Not the county where there is video evidence of counting continuing after everyone was asked to leave the area?

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6007
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #500 on: January 19, 2021, 01:11:44 PM »
I don't even see the logic here. If there were fraud going on, why would they wait until a day later to start committing fraud? The most *convenient* thing would be to have those hundreds of thousands of votes distributed throughout the process. To intentionally wait seems like some sort of Riddler type supervillain move, where they deliberately wanted to leave a clue for others to notice.

To speculate, the opposition, believing their own narrative, didn't expect X turnout for Trump, and wanted to have enough "votes" to be plausible without pushing believablity too far, but had to push it in the swing states where Trump was winning by a slim margin in order to secure the election.

It's not even close to being like a supervillian move. It's more like a last minute move in reaction to a tight election.
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1194
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #501 on: January 19, 2021, 02:00:35 PM »
And just to pile on: no court has actually ruled on the merits of the lawsuits made regarding the election. Yes, the suits have been repeatedly thrown out -- on procedural or standing grounds, NOT on a review of the evidence.

So yeah, the whole 'oh that's been disproven' is a bald faced lie and people who say it should feel bad about themselves.

If anyone claims the Texas Attorney General's lawsuit was determined based on evidence, then that was a mistake. However, a number of the other lawsuits *did* have a review of the evidence. That's why we've seen, for example, Melissa Carone's give testimony - because her testimony was being heard in court, and later before a legislative committee. Wikipedia has a breakdown of the various lawsuits, which includes judgements on evidence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election
I'm not sure why you would say this, since I'm going through the Wikipedia page now (hardly the gold standard for objectivity anyways) and I keep seeing 'dismissed because it should've been filed earlier' or 'dismissed due to lack of standing'.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8682
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #502 on: January 19, 2021, 02:34:52 PM »
If anyone claims the Texas Attorney General's lawsuit was determined based on evidence, then that was a mistake. However, a number of the other lawsuits *did* have a review of the evidence. That's why we've seen, for example, Melissa Carone's give testimony - because her testimony was being heard in court, and later before a legislative committee. Wikipedia has a breakdown of the various lawsuits, which includes judgements on evidence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election
I'm not sure why you would say this, since I'm going through the Wikipedia page now (hardly the gold standard for objectivity anyways) and I keep seeing 'dismissed because it should've been filed earlier' or 'dismissed due to lack of standing'.

Your claim is that *every* case was dismissed with no review of the evidence -- but many were not. Six of the lawsuits had rulings against rather than dismissal, and many of the dismissals included a judgement of the evidence, not just dismissal for lack of standing. For example, from the Arizona case Bowyer et al. v. Ducey et al., here are some of the findings in the ruling:

Quote
Plaintiffs first “describe specific violations of Arizona law” to support their fraud claims.16 In doing so, they attach declarations from poll watchers that observed election officials during the November General Election. (Doc. 1 ¶¶ 46–53). As Intervenor-Defendant Maricopa County points out, these are the only declarants offered by Plaintiffs with first-hand observation of the election administration. (Doc. 36 at 4). But these four declarants do not allege fraud at all. (See Doc. 1-10 at 18–24). Instead, they raise objections to the manner and process by which Arizona election officials matched signatures on absentee ballots (Doc. 1 ¶¶ 46–48); to the process and role assigned to poll referees in settling unresolved disputes between adjudicators (Id. at ¶ 49); to “irregularities” with the voting machines on Election Day and before (Id. at ¶¶ 50–52); and to the certification of the Dominion voting system on November 18, 2020 (Id. at ¶ 53).
Quote
Plaintiffs’ expert Mr. William Briggs (“Briggs”), for example, concludes that “troublesome” errors by Arizona election officials “involving unreturned mail-in ballots [] are indicative of voter fraud” and that the election should consequently be overturned. (Doc. 1 at ¶ 54). Briggs relies on data provided by an unknown person named “Matt Braynard,” a person who may or may not have tweeted a “Residency Analysis of ABS/EV Voters” on his Twitter account on November 20, 2020 (Doc. 1-2 at 14, Ex. 2); (Id. at 52, Ex. 3). Apart from a screenshot of Mr. Braynard’s tweets that day, Plaintiffs offer nothing further about Mr. Braynard’s identity, qualifications, or methodologies used in conducting his telephone “survey.”
Quote
The Complaint is equally void of plausible allegations that Dominion voting machines were actually hacked or compromised in Arizona during the 2020 General Election. Plaintiffs are clearly concerned about the vulnerabilities of voting machines used in some counties across Arizona and in other states. They cite sources that attest to knowledge of “well-known” vulnerabilities, have included letters from concerned citizens, Arizona elected officials, and United States senators. (...) These concerns and stated vulnerabilities, however, do not sufficiently allege that any voting machine used in Arizona was in fact hacked or compromised in the 2020 General Election. Rather, what is present is a lengthy collection of phrases beginning with the words “could have, possibly, might,” and “may have.”
Quote
Not only have Plaintiffs failed to provide the Court with factual support for their extraordinary claims, but they have wholly failed to establish that they have standing for
the Court to consider them.  Allegations that find favor in the public sphere of gossip and innuendo cannot be a substitute for earnest pleadings and procedure in federal court. They most certainly cannot be the basis for upending Arizona’s 2020 General Election. The Court is left with no alternative but to dismiss this matter in its entirety.

Source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-azd-2_20-cv-02321/pdf/USCOURTS-azd-2_20-cv-02321-0.pdf

The eyewitness evidence *was* reviewed and *was* judged, and the case was dismissed with both a judgement of the evidence and a lack of standing.

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2609
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #503 on: January 19, 2021, 02:40:17 PM »
You don't think that in any country, the minority would try to take over the government by force?

There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

EOTB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1173
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #504 on: January 19, 2021, 03:31:59 PM »
As the AZ quoted demonstrate, if the state resists non-state audits of the primary data, judges can say “there’s a lot of ‘could-be’ in this complaint - denied”

I do agree there’s little point in talking about it.  The various states fought against demands for unprecedented transparency in a time of unprecedented suspicion.  They achieved their goal in that regard, and one outcome of that is suspicion will now likely persist similarly to other controversial events.
A framework for generating local politics

https://mewe.com/join/osric A MeWe OSRIC group - find an online game; share a monster, class, or spell; give input on what you'd like for new OSRIC products.  Just don't 1) talk religion/politics, or 2) be a Richard

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8682
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #505 on: January 19, 2021, 03:58:17 PM »
I don't even see the logic here. If there were fraud going on, why would they wait until a day later to start committing fraud? The most *convenient* thing would be to have those hundreds of thousands of votes distributed throughout the process. To intentionally wait seems like some sort of Riddler type supervillain move, where they deliberately wanted to leave a clue for others to notice.

To speculate, the opposition, believing their own narrative, didn't expect X turnout for Trump, and wanted to have enough "votes" to be plausible without pushing believablity too far, but had to push it in the swing states where Trump was winning by a slim margin in order to secure the election.

It's not even close to being like a supervillian move. It's more like a last minute move in reaction to a tight election.

But in plenty of other instances, it's been said that the Democrats have been plotting fraud for months or years.

As a hypothetical, let's imagine there was no difference between early and late voting. Then *that* could be cited as an inconsistency that suggests fraud. "The Democrats spent months squealing about how they wanted vote-by-mail, then *mysteriously* there was no absolutely no boost for Democrats in vote-by-mail. Are we really supposed to believe that Democrats went to the polls just as much?"

Mistwell

  • Smarter than Arduin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3549
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #506 on: January 19, 2021, 04:35:52 PM »
It occurs to me that a legitimately elected President would not need 30,000 soldiers to make sure that he gets sworn in.

Then your logic is flawed if that's where it led you. You're arguing if you can persuade a small minority to take up arms against an overwhelming majority causing that majority to have troops on standby to defend the majority, that by definition that means their election was not legitimate. That's not sound logic. In fact it means anyone with enough funds to buy some mercenaries can delegitimize any election by that bad logic you're using.

EOTB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1173
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #507 on: January 19, 2021, 05:14:49 PM »
First we reduce the other argument to absurdity; then we wonder why we convince fewer and fewer people over time; finally we say “don’t need ‘em anyway” and put up the razor wire while discussing how to handle them as domestic enemies 
A framework for generating local politics

https://mewe.com/join/osric A MeWe OSRIC group - find an online game; share a monster, class, or spell; give input on what you'd like for new OSRIC products.  Just don't 1) talk religion/politics, or 2) be a Richard

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1194
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #508 on: January 19, 2021, 06:54:46 PM »
If anyone claims the Texas Attorney General's lawsuit was determined based on evidence, then that was a mistake. However, a number of the other lawsuits *did* have a review of the evidence. That's why we've seen, for example, Melissa Carone's give testimony - because her testimony was being heard in court, and later before a legislative committee. Wikipedia has a breakdown of the various lawsuits, which includes judgements on evidence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election
I'm not sure why you would say this, since I'm going through the Wikipedia page now (hardly the gold standard for objectivity anyways) and I keep seeing 'dismissed because it should've been filed earlier' or 'dismissed due to lack of standing'.

Your claim is that *every* case was dismissed with no review of the evidence -- but many were not. Six of the lawsuits had rulings against rather than dismissal, and many of the dismissals included a judgement of the evidence, not just dismissal for lack of standing. For example, from the Arizona case Bowyer et al. v. Ducey et al., here are some of the findings in the ruling:

Quote
Plaintiffs first “describe specific violations of Arizona law” to support their fraud claims.16 In doing so, they attach declarations from poll watchers that observed election officials during the November General Election. (Doc. 1 ¶¶ 46–53). As Intervenor-Defendant Maricopa County points out, these are the only declarants offered by Plaintiffs with first-hand observation of the election administration. (Doc. 36 at 4). But these four declarants do not allege fraud at all. (See Doc. 1-10 at 18–24). Instead, they raise objections to the manner and process by which Arizona election officials matched signatures on absentee ballots (Doc. 1 ¶¶ 46–48); to the process and role assigned to poll referees in settling unresolved disputes between adjudicators (Id. at ¶ 49); to “irregularities” with the voting machines on Election Day and before (Id. at ¶¶ 50–52); and to the certification of the Dominion voting system on November 18, 2020 (Id. at ¶ 53).
Quote
Plaintiffs’ expert Mr. William Briggs (“Briggs”), for example, concludes that “troublesome” errors by Arizona election officials “involving unreturned mail-in ballots [] are indicative of voter fraud” and that the election should consequently be overturned. (Doc. 1 at ¶ 54). Briggs relies on data provided by an unknown person named “Matt Braynard,” a person who may or may not have tweeted a “Residency Analysis of ABS/EV Voters” on his Twitter account on November 20, 2020 (Doc. 1-2 at 14, Ex. 2); (Id. at 52, Ex. 3). Apart from a screenshot of Mr. Braynard’s tweets that day, Plaintiffs offer nothing further about Mr. Braynard’s identity, qualifications, or methodologies used in conducting his telephone “survey.”
Quote
The Complaint is equally void of plausible allegations that Dominion voting machines were actually hacked or compromised in Arizona during the 2020 General Election. Plaintiffs are clearly concerned about the vulnerabilities of voting machines used in some counties across Arizona and in other states. They cite sources that attest to knowledge of “well-known” vulnerabilities, have included letters from concerned citizens, Arizona elected officials, and United States senators. (...) These concerns and stated vulnerabilities, however, do not sufficiently allege that any voting machine used in Arizona was in fact hacked or compromised in the 2020 General Election. Rather, what is present is a lengthy collection of phrases beginning with the words “could have, possibly, might,” and “may have.”
Quote
Not only have Plaintiffs failed to provide the Court with factual support for their extraordinary claims, but they have wholly failed to establish that they have standing for
the Court to consider them.  Allegations that find favor in the public sphere of gossip and innuendo cannot be a substitute for earnest pleadings and procedure in federal court. They most certainly cannot be the basis for upending Arizona’s 2020 General Election. The Court is left with no alternative but to dismiss this matter in its entirety.

Source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-azd-2_20-cv-02321/pdf/USCOURTS-azd-2_20-cv-02321-0.pdf

The eyewitness evidence *was* reviewed and *was* judged, and the case was dismissed with both a judgement of the evidence and a lack of standing.
Is this a finding of fact, jhkim? Actually, no, it's not. That court document is strange reading.

For example, page 6:
Quote
Plaintiffs allege in Count One that Defendants violated the Elections and Electors
Clauses and 28 U.S.C. § 1983 by, among other things, losing or destroying absentee ballots,
and/or replacing those ballots with “blank ballots filled out by election workers, Dominion
or other third parties” sending thousands of absentee ballots to someone besides the
registered voter that “could have been filled out by anyone.” (Doc. 1 at 41). Defendants
argue that Plaintiffs do not have standing to assert such a claim. (Doc. 40 at 8–9).
Wait, defendants aren't arguing that the plaintiffs are full of crap, they're arguing that the plaintiffs don't have standing to assert it? Am I misreading this?

See, this is what I'm talking about. There hasn't been audits. There hasn't been analysis. There's been sweeping under the rug, and hoping people will just settle down, and hiding behind laches, standing, and 'you're too early/too late'.

Sorry, no. Dance more. And pray to whatever deity you venerate we don't have a hot civil war over this.

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6007
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #509 on: January 19, 2021, 08:01:39 PM »
I don't even see the logic here. If there were fraud going on, why would they wait until a day later to start committing fraud? The most *convenient* thing would be to have those hundreds of thousands of votes distributed throughout the process. To intentionally wait seems like some sort of Riddler type supervillain move, where they deliberately wanted to leave a clue for others to notice.

To speculate, the opposition, believing their own narrative, didn't expect X turnout for Trump, and wanted to have enough "votes" to be plausible without pushing believablity too far, but had to push it in the swing states where Trump was winning by a slim margin in order to secure the election.

It's not even close to being like a supervillian move. It's more like a last minute move in reaction to a tight election.

But in plenty of other instances, it's been said that the Democrats have been plotting fraud for months or years.

I don't know about those other instances. I do think that the Democrats and the Anti-Trump Republicans wanted Trump out at any cost, and have been working on it since 2016. All the pushback and narrative spinning that has been done during Trumps presidency is right there, pushed by the mainstream media.

Quote
As a hypothetical, let's imagine there was no difference between early and late voting. Then *that* could be cited as an inconsistency that suggests fraud. "The Democrats spent months squealing about how they wanted vote-by-mail, then *mysteriously* there was no absolutely no boost for Democrats in vote-by-mail. Are we really supposed to believe that Democrats went to the polls just as much?"

Vote by mail is the root of that issue, regardless of who wins, the other side is going to find discrepancies. Especially since this was the largest amount of voting by mail due to Covid, and implemented with short notice by the states and districts that hadn't previously done it.

I have no evidence. My suspicion is that we're not seeing top down co-ordinated voter fraud. I think we're seeing bottom-up voter fraud, only organized by the shared understanding that people who hate Trump think he's worse than Hitler and saving us from the Orange Holocaust was worth a little shenanigans.

The last minute voting shutdowns and Biden's miraculous last second wins in the states he needed seems more top down, but again, I don't have smoking gun evidence, and I don't think we'll ever get it. And the denials and obsfucation from politicans and media personalities who were dead certain the Russians handed Trump the 2016 election is a cherry on the shit sundae.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2021, 08:04:46 PM by Ratman_tf »
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung