04 Dec 20
@shavixmir saidWhy do you think it was so [inaudible]?
Her name is Ondick?
Denise Ondick?
Okay. Nothing funny about that.
Republicans can't even say it without swallowing it.
04 Dec 20
@dood111 saidNot a problem make a note in your diary for November 2024, but if you do win don’t expect the Dem candidate to concede or 80 million dem voters to accept the result.
Democrats stole the election through fraud and we need to have another HONEST one.
If the republicants ever win the White House again it can only be on account of massive voter fraud the figures are very clear on that.
04 Dec 20
@earl-of-trumps saidIt could Maybe be counted as evidence if the Family Name was not [inaudible] so that anyone could run the test. What is the source of the transcript. Did the persion in the know put that into a court Action? (The Trump Team had far weaker "evidence" why would they have not been on this as a prime exmpale?)
So there ya go!!
they b'yotch for evidence of voter fraud, you show them, they call BS and a lot of other diversionary stuff
way to go, brain trust. How to address an issue - with intimidation, ad hominems, and ignorance.
Of course, I could have predicted this from this cast of chracters
@suzianne saidYou had years of investigation and came up with SQUAT.
No, you know what actually deserves investigation? Donald Trump. For corruption, if nothing else. We tried to investigate him and tried to impeach him and tried to get him removed from office for his way-more-than-obvious corruption. The right fought us tooth and nail all the way, even going so far as to make up 'moral' fairy tales, talking about how Democrats were tryin ...[text shortened]... wn "coup d'état" by reversing that same fair election.
Republicans. Best hypocrites EVAR!!!!1!!1
then you impeached Trump because he **suggested** an investigation be conducted of Hunter Biden, a most crooked and corrupt individual.
hypocrite isn't quite the word.
04 Dec 20
@metal-brain saidAnybody can claim to be anybody on this site that’s the joy of it and I can judge for myself the veracity of their assertion.
I am an American from Michigan. You calling me a Russian bot is a lie. If you continue this harassment and slander I will lobby to have you banned from posting on this site for 1 month.
I’ve already started alerting the mods to your constant spamming threads regarding unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud. It’s getting to the point where every other thread is you attacking the very concept of democracy.
That’s your privilege, but surely a couple of threads would suffice if it’s not a coordinated spoiler campaign.
@earl-of-trumps saidIt's the same case your link referred to, Earl. I find the case of deceased Denise strangely moving, and at the same time deeply symbolic of everything that is profoundly troubling about Trump's presidency.
Moonbus,
I don't think it needed discussion at all, as it has nothing AT ALL to do with what I posted, nor does finding resolution in *your* case resolve a FOOKING thing in the case I posted.
Chessplayer, you are. Logical Detective - not so much.,
First of all, we have an old woman, dying of cancer; she hasn't long to live, perhaps even knows this herself (I am speculating here, of course), so she gets a mail-in ballot, and she votes, perhaps the most sacred right and duty of a citizen of the world's showcase democracy. But she doesn't make it to the mail box, she's too ill, too feeble. Now here's the terrible irony of it: if that ballot had been posted before she died, it might even have been counted before she died — but Trump decried the pre-counting of mail-in ballots, Trump insisted that early votes NOT be counted early. So, Denise's dying wish is denied, for a purely arbitrary reason. Why in heavens name should a valid ballot cast on time not be counted?
Second, Denise's daughter finds the ballot and mails it, on time. It arrives on time to be counted, but, alas, after the death of the person who cast the vote. So, according to state law, the ballot is no longer valid, though it was when Denise cast it. Bad luck. Sorry. But the story gets really bizarre now: that ballot is held up by Trump's legal team as evidence of widespread voter fraud to steal the election. Whoa! She voted FOR TRUMP, and Trump's legal team thinks this is evidence of Democrats stealing the election FROM Trump?? Somebody's asleep at the wheel there. This sort of anti-logic has been a hallmark of Trump's whole presidency ('we have so many cases because we do so much testing' -- as if testing caused cases !!).
I doubt Denise's daughter and her mother were part of a widespread conspiracy to defraud the US electoral system and steal the election (from Biden) by casting an illegal vote for Trump. I believe that Denise's daughter was simply trying to fulfil her deceased mother's last wish and almost certainly had no idea she was breaking the law in doing so. Fraud my arse. It was an honest mistake. Trump and his team chronically hysterically inflate and over-interpret simple things into "massive fraud," "widespread fraud," "they are stealing the election," and so on. It's so bizarre, it's like a bad acid trip.
Third, and most troubling, is Trump's repeated use of personal lawyers to pursue investigations of alleged crimes, both abroad (e.g., trying to turn up dirt on the Bidens in Ukraine) and domestically (suspected vote fraud). These are matters for the justice department, for government professionals, the police and the FBI, for state and local election commissioners, not people like Rudy Giuliani and Ms Powell. Trump's repeated use of personal lawyers for government investigative matters is a clear degradation of the rule of law and a slide down the slippery slope to a strongman type of regime where an autocrat's whim is the rule of the day.
04 Dec 20
@kevcvs57 saidAnybody can allege unsubstantiated claims. It doesn't make it true. You alert me to the mods because you are incapable of proving me wrong. If you were capable of that you would have done it by now.
Anybody can claim to be anybody on this site that’s the joy of it and I can judge for myself the veracity of their assertion.
I’ve already started alerting the mods to your constant spamming threads regarding unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud. It’s getting to the point where every other thread is you attacking the very concept of democracy.
That’s your privilege, but surely a couple of threads would suffice if it’s not a coordinated spoiler campaign.
You are a liar. Voter fraud exists in the USA and that is a fact. I NEVER claimed to know how much voter fraud there is. I have said nobody knows several times.
Prove I am wrong instead of trying to get my posts censored for being right. Some people on here have the courage to debate instead of troll and snitch on people for telling the truth and you not liking the truth.
If one of my posts is censored without just cause I respond by by doing the very opposite of what you would like. Don't expect that to change. You are the very reason I spam more of it. You are the very reason I respond that way making you believe I am a Russian bot. Unjust censorship results in exactly what you hate.
04 Dec 20
1 edit
@Earl-of-Trumps
Spoken like a gentleman. Accepted, gracefully. No hard feelings, man. And, for record, Earl beat me at chess.
@metal-brain saidWell, that's just the problem here. Unsubstantiated claims stand in need of proofs. The more improbable the claims, the more needful the proofs be sound and well attested. If your point is that someone somewhere sometime committed some fraud or other, it's trivial. There's no point to it, and no point in disputing it either.
Anybody can allege unsubstantiated claims. It doesn't make it true. You alert me to the mods because you are incapable of proving me wrong. If you were capable of that you would have done it by now.
You are a liar. Voter fraud exists in the USA and that is a fact. I NEVER claimed to know how much voter fraud there is. I have said nobody knows several times.
Prove ...[text shortened]... that way making you believe I am a Russian bot. Unjust censorship results in exactly what you hate.
Furthermore, it is not needful to prove the opposite impossible, as you seem to think. Not only in law (innocent until proved fraudulent), but in logic as well: the claimant must prove that a fact is so or that an alleged event took place, the other side need not the prove the fact or event impossible. I don't have proof that fairies, kobolds, flying pigs, Sasquatches, and Zeus are impossible, nor do I need any such proof of impossibility; those who claim that such things exist have the burden of proof.
04 Dec 20
@moonbus saidTrump does have proof. I already proved he does.
Well, that's just the problem here. Unsubstantiated claims stand in need of proofs. The more improbable the claims, the more needful the proofs be sound and well attested. If your point is that someone somewhere sometime committed some fraud or other, it's trivial. There's no point to it, and no point in disputing it either.
Furthermore, it is not needful to prove the oppo ...[text shortened]... ed any such proof of impossibility; those who claim that such things exist have the burden of proof.
How much voter fraud does he have to prove? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000?
It isn't a trick question. How much?
04 Dec 20
@Earl-of-Trumps
Totally ignoring the fact Trump held back 400 million in already approved military aid to the Ukraine.
When you are being a hypocrite, try telling the whole story. Trump WAS impeached.
The senate without balls are so afraid of a nasty tweet they let him off.
If it had been Obama doing the 400 million dollar grift,
OFF WITH HIS HEAD.
Poster boy for hypocrite.
Especially Moscow Mitch.
@metal-brain saidNo one number is the right answer. That isn't an evasive answer. Trump would need to show enough fraud and miscounts in each of several states to get the electoral commissions of several states to change the result from Biden to Trump. How much depends on Biden's lead in each state. In GA roughly 11,000, in WI roughly 20,000, in PA about 80,000, in MI about 150,000. No proof of that magnitude has been presented; what's been presented are a few sporadic incidents, which are almost without exception explainable as glitches, counting errors (within tolerance of 0.5% or whatever as defined by state law), honest mistakes, misinterpretations of facts, or other anomalies which have already been corrected -- nowhere near enough to justify a re-assignment of the result in even one state. Several federal judges, at least one of whom was appointed by Trump himself, have dismissed his cases as "meritless" -- why? Because his allegations are not backed by anything like 'proof' which would stand up in court.
Trump does have proof. I already proved he does.
How much voter fraud does he have to prove? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000?
It isn't a trick question. How much?
Below are the stats by state:
https://www.bbc.com/news/election/us2020/results