Stealing a Federal Election

[Danderman123]

13 hours ago, impulse said:

 

So, it was really just 1999 Mules, and they were forced to take it down because they got one wrong.

 

If even 10% of the malfeasance shown in those documentaries was true, that would have been enough to change the election results.

The premise of 2000 Mules was wrong.

 

There is no way to drop fake ballots into drop boxes and have them counted.

 

And there was no proof that it happened.

[Danderman123]

3 hours ago, Guitar God said:

Trump supporters claimed there was widespread outcome-determinate fraud so they poured $10 million dollars and spent eight months doing a full audit, full hand recount and viewed hundred of hours of security video in the state they thought it would be the easiest to prove fraud, Arizona. 
 

What were the results? Absolutely no evidence of voter fraud and in the end they found that Biden received 384 votes that hadn’t been counted initially. 
 

It’s pretty obvious that the Trump supporters were repeatedly lied to by Trump and that they’re all really poor losers. 

Any Trumpers here think that Biden stole the election in Arizona?

[gamb00ler]

2 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Any Trumpers here think that Biden stole the election in Arizona?

As is usually the case the countervailing facts fade away very quickly from their memory leaving only their hatred and despair.

[Will B Good]

20 hours ago, LetsGoJoe said:

The documentary, '2000 Mules' makes a somewhat compelling case towards electoral fraud in the 2020 election, even though the doc. has apparently been "debunked", by of course Left-wing agencies.

If Trump doesn't get taken out before Nov. from at this point what may need to be a Nuke, then I'd bet dollars to donuts that 'punch-drunk' Kamala will be destroyed at the polls and that the 2020 election fraud topic will be forever cast into the sewer of speculation.

America will once again be re-born and 'Made Great Again' 😁

 

Compelling case my ……...

 

 

2000 Mules has played a role in perpetuating false claims of election fraud, but it has been widely discredited by election officials and experts who have stated that it lacks any credible evidence to support its core allegations.

[GroveHillWanderer]

12 hours ago, impulse said:

That was in 2021, and those judges (including SCOTUS) didn't rule on the merits or the facts. Just the standing. It's been going mostly the other direction since then.

I'm not sure why you just keep on posting things that are so easily shown to be false.

 

While it's true that the many of the cases were dismissed on procedural grounds (including some for lack of standing) that's not true of all the cases.

 

As the article below states: 

 

Quote

Some, as referenced by Rep. Cheney, were withdrawn by the Trump team before the courts ever ruled or dismissed on procedural grounds. But many were decided on the merits.

 

Results of Lawsuits Regarding the 2020 Elections

 

The article lists, and gives the details of, "Post-Election Cases Decided on the Merits"

 

Also, why do you keep repeating this lie about cases "going mostly the other direction since"?

 

All of the 2020 election cases have been decided and none of them found that there was any evidence of fraud.

 

If you think there are other cases that have been decided since, and that have found evidence of fraud in the 2020 election, then go ahead and provide links to them.

[impulse]

36 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

I'm not sure why you just keep on posting things that are so easily shown to be false.

 

While it's true that the many of the cases were dismissed on procedural grounds (including some for lack of standing) that's not true of all the cases.

 

As the article below states: 

 

 

Results of Lawsuits Regarding the 2020 Elections

 

The article lists, and gives the details of, "Post-Election Cases Decided on the Merits"

 

Also, why do you keep repeating this lie about cases "going mostly the other direction since"?

 

All of the 2020 election cases have been decided and none of them found that there was any evidence of fraud.

 

If you think there are other cases that have been decided since, and that have found evidence of fraud in the 2020 election, then go ahead and provide links to them.

 

Once again, you link to a completely outdated list of cases.  None after 2020 on the link.  There have been dozens since then, and there will be more, for years.

 

Here's one that went against your narrative, just last week.  They don't refer to it as "fraud",.  But against the rules that were passed by the legislature, but violated by the election board.  As called out in the TX vs PA lawsuit.  Dismissed in 2020 because Texas didn't have standing.  Not because they were wrong.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/pennsylvania-supreme-court-mail-ballots-incorrect-dates-rcna170819

 

On an aside, I wonder why your link (and their embedded link)  quit compiling data after 2020?  Maybe because the narrative didn't go the way they preferred?

 

 

[Danderman123]

3 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Once again, you link to a completely outdated list of cases.  None after 2020 on the link.  There have been dozens since then, and there will be more, for years.

 

Here's one that wen against your narrative, just last week.  They don't refer to it as "fraud",.  But against the rules that were passed by the legislature, but violated by the election board.  As called out in the TX vs PA lawsuit.  Dismissed in 2020 because Texas didn't have standing.  Not because they were wrong.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/pennsylvania-supreme-court-mail-ballots-incorrect-dates-rcna170819

 

On an aside, I wonder why your link (and their embedded link)  quit compiling data after 2020?  Maybe because the narrative didn't go the way they preferred?

 

 

Your example has nothing to do with voter fraud in 2020, or any other time.

 

Please provide proof of large scale voter fraud in 2020.

[Danderman123]

It would be trivial for a Trump fan to post proof of 2020 election offered by a litigant after the 2020 election. Except, there isn't any.

 

To quote Rudy Giuliani "we have plenty of theories, just no evidence".

[gamb00ler]

30 minutes ago, impulse said:

Dismissed in 2020 because Texas didn't have standing.  Not because they were wrong.

LOL .... this post is definitely a contender.

 

If you have a car body with no engine.... you don't have a car.  And you'll never know if it can be used for transportation.

 

If you have evidence, theory and motive for a case but don't have standing.... you don't have a case and no judge will waste anytime on it.  Any decision on the merits will be just smoke and in no way enforceable.  Needless to say... judges don't have time to waste on such failures.

[Danderman123]

46 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

LOL .... this post is definitely a contender.

 

If you have a car body with no engine.... you don't have a car.  And you'll never know if it can be used for transportation.

 

If you have evidence, theory and motive for a case but don't have standing.... you don't have a case and no judge will waste anytime on it.  Any decision on the merits will be just smoke and in no way enforceable.  Needless to say... judges don't have time to waste on such failures.

And Texas never offered any proof.

[Masterton]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

And Texas never offered any proof.

 

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about (as usual). It is common knowledge that Pensylvania violated the terms of their own constitustion when they illegally changed their voting laws leading up to the election. No 'proof' was required by Texas to offer in order to raise the case. Just because the courts refused to hear the case, does not mean Texas were wrong to pursue it. Many legal minds absolutely disagree that Texas did not have standing, it is just one of the many injustices related to the 2020 election farce.

[Danderman123]

22 minutes ago, Masterton said:

 

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about (as usual). It is common knowledge that Pensylvania violated the terms of their own constitustion when they illegally changed their voting laws leading up to the election. No 'proof' was required by Texas to offer in order to raise the case. Just because the courts refused to hear the case, does not mean Texas were wrong to pursue it. Many legal minds absolutely disagree that Texas did not have standing, it is just one of the many injustices related to the 2020 election farce.

You are still not offering any proof of voter fraud. I suspect you don't know what voter fraud is.

[Masterton]

7 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You are still not offering any proof of voter fraud. I suspect you don't know what voter fraud is.

 

Says the person who still doesn't understand the difference between evidence and proof. Both are meaningless if they are not allowed to be presented in a court case. As others have repeatedly pointed out to you, most of the cases with merit were refused on procedural and standing grounds. And once again, you do not seem to understand that the thread is about the 2020 election being stolen, and as I pointed out previously, there were other factors involved in addition to 'voter fraud' which you can't seem to be able to see past. The deliberate and co-ordinated suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story in itself was enough to sway the election. Stop blabbering on about voter fraud and proof, you are clearly trolling and are not worthy of any further response.

[Danderman123]

On 9/20/2024 at 9:10 AM, johng said:

 You tell me  you're the expert "poll watcher"

You claimed that there was voter fraud in 2020, but when I asked you for proof, you went into Deflection Mode. Which is your way of acknowledging that you have no proof.

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, Masterton said:

 

Says the person who still doesn't understand the difference between evidence and proof. Both are meaningless if they are not allowed to be presented in a court case. As others have repeatedly pointed out to you, most of the cases with merit were refused on procedural and standing grounds. And once again, you do not seem to understand that the thread is about the 2020 election being stolen, and as I pointed out previously, there were other factors involved in addition to 'voter fraud' which you can't seem to be able to see past. The deliberate and co-ordinated suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story in itself was enough to sway the election. Stop blabbering on about voter fraud and proof, you are clearly trolling and are not worthy of any further response.

You don't seem to understand the concept of voter fraud, which can be fake voters voting, or fake ballots being submitted.

 

The issues you are talking about are not voter fraud. You are welcome to start your own topic about that stuff.

 

But, you got nuttin' about voter fraud.

[Inderpland]

38 minutes ago, Masterton said:

 

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about (as usual). It is common knowledge that Pensylvania violated the terms of their own constitustion when they illegally changed their voting laws leading up to the election. No 'proof' was required by Texas to offer in order to raise the case. Just because the courts refused to hear the case, does not mean Texas were wrong to pursue it. Many legal minds absolutely disagree that Texas did not have standing, it is just one of the many injustices related to the 2020 election farce.

'It is common knowledge......'

 

This one always cracks me up.🤣

 

[Danderman123]

Trumpers!

 

There was a tiny amount of voter fraud in 2020, mostly isolated cases, and mostly caused by Republicans. Here's proof:

 

Georgia Republican official and outspoken election denier caught voting illegally 9 times

 

Can't you find any proof for your claims?

[Masterton]

1 minute ago, Inderpland said:

'It is common knowledge......'

 

This one always cracks me up.🤣

 

 

You have a point. Anyone who gets their news from the Democrat Propaganda fake news media will of course have no knowledge of these facts, nor will they possess the intellectual curiosity to research it.  

[Danderman123]

Just now, Masterton said:

 

You have a point. Anyone who gets their news from the Democrat Propaganda fake news media will of course have no knowledge of these facts, nor will they possess the intellectual curiosity to research it.  

The various court battles over election procedures in 2020 were well documented.

 

So, do you have any proof of election fraud, or are you just going to deflect?

[Inderpland]

Just now, Masterton said:

 

You have a point. Anyone who gets their news from the Democrat Propaganda fake news media will of course have no knowledge of these facts, nor will they possess the intellectual curiosity to research it.  

Well, after making such an astonishing claim you surely can back it up with links to credible sources.

If not then you should probably get back under your bridge.

[Masterton]

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You don't seem to understand the concept of voter fraud, which can be fake voters voting, or fake ballots being submitted.

 

The issues you are talking about are not voter fraud. You are welcome to start your own topic about that stuff.

 

But, you got nuttin' about voter fraud.

 

I suggest you change the title and content of the original post to be exclisively about voter fraud instead of continuously trying to deflect to that topic every time someone posts about potential ways the election could've been / was stolen. 

 

Just a suggestion to save and/or not waste anyone's time further. 

[Danderman123]

2 minutes ago, Masterton said:

 

I suggest you change the title and content of the original post to be exclisively about voter fraud instead of continuously trying to deflect to that topic every time someone posts about potential ways the election could've been / was stolen. 

 

Just a suggestion to save and/or not waste anyone's time further. 

So, no proof of voter fraud?

 

Rudy Giuliani: I Have “Scientific Evidence” the 2020 Election Was Stolen From Donald Trump

 

This sounds a lot like some of the claims Trumpers make here. Rudy never presented any evidence, just like the Trumpers here.

[Inderpland]

3 minutes ago, Masterton said:

 

I suggest you change the title and content of the original post to be exclisively about voter fraud instead of continuously trying to deflect to that topic every time someone posts about potential ways the election could've been / was stolen. 

 

Just a suggestion to save and/or not waste anyone's time further. 

You have not yet suggested that aliens were behind this - BECAUSE THEY ARE. Obviously, their HQ is in that pizza resto and that's where they control the space lasers from!

[Masterton]

Just now, Inderpland said:

Well, after making such an astonishing claim you surely can back it up with links to credible sources.

If not then you should probably get back under your bridge.

 

The claim is only "astonishing" to you because of your chosen "news" sources not reporting on it in order to further their narrative. How about using some of that intellectual curiosity to educate and inform yourself? It is not my job to eduate you, if you want to engage in a discussion about ways in which the 2020 election was stolen, then I suggest you better inform yourself. 

 

In any event, dwell in ignorance or not, I will not be responding further.

[Inderpland]

3 minutes ago, Masterton said:

 

The claim is only "astonishing" to you because of your chosen "news" sources not reporting on it in order to further their narrative. How about using some of that intellectual curiosity to educate and inform yourself? It is not my job to eduate you, if you want to engage in a discussion about ways in which the 2020 election was stolen, then I suggest you better inform yourself. 

 

In any event, dwell in ignorance or not, I will not be responding further.

Imagine my surprise!

[Danderman123]

On 9/20/2024 at 8:53 PM, impulse said:

I know that the OP isn't really interested.  If he was, I'd suggest watching the following:

 

Absolute Proof

 

Absolute Proof is a 2021 political propaganda film directed by and starring Mike Lindell.

 

You know that Mike Lindell is crazy, right?

 

More to the point, his movie had no proof.

[parallelman]

On 9/21/2024 at 7:01 PM, Danderman123 said:

Because the Trumpers are claiming that the 2024 election will be stolen. But have no proof.

If such people are claiming as you say then why didn't you say so originally? Hmmm

[morrobay]

12 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

If true, I would have a great deal of difficulty using the word parallel since the universe that suffered a Trump victory would be headed in a distinctly different direction than this one.

Amen Let us not forget Salvation 

[Danderman123]

12 hours ago, parallelman said:

If such people are claiming as you say then why didn't you say so originally? Hmmm

From the OP:

 

"because I am inviting the Trumpers to show proof that the 2020 election was stolen (implying that the 2024 election could be stolen, as well).".

 

What are you on about?  Got any proof that the 2020 election was stolen?

[Patong2021]

19 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Absolute Proof is a 2021 political propaganda film directed by and starring Mike Lindell.

 

You know that Mike Lindell is crazy, right?

 

More to the point, his movie had no proof.

 

Perhaps Mr. Lindell incurred brain damage from his days as a cocaine and crack drug addict? It could have impaired his ability to think rationally.  It certainly hasn't helped him with some of his fashion choices like his hair color dye.