There is a big difference between voter fraud and actionable (IE, a court can take corrective action) voter fraud. The various voting fraud lawsuits failed, not because the did not establish the existence, or at least the high probability, of voter fraud, but rather the fact that they could not prove the additional steps (essentially identifying specific fraudulent ballots from an essentially fungible collection of ballots) to enable a court to act. Because of our secret ballot rules, proving that latter is virtually impossible after the fact. The voting fraudsters know that if they can get a ballot into the box, it ain't coming back out.

Therefore, the only viable way to prevent voter fraud is to do it up front, beforehand. The only reason to oppose voter ID is the intention to cheat.

Plaintiff: "I have rock solid proof that there were 200,000 fraudulent ballots cast in the last election."
Court: "Which 200,000 are they?"
Plaintiff: "I don't know."
Court: "Case dismissed."

(02-18-2024 02:03 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 01:35 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-17-2024 11:55 AM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-17-2024 06:35 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-17-2024 12:09 AM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  It was a simple question, did you read the report ?

The person who wrote the report and is an election auditor says he saw no evidence of fraud, dummy. Is your stance that you know more about it than him because you read the report?

Knock, Knock. Hello, McFly?

That's real cute calling me a dummy when you won't answer a simple question. You're the one that asked for a link to the report that Carter Jones wrote and I provided the report for you to read.
I will ask you again, did you read the report?

You : I can’t tell you where or what in it proves it, but to me this proves election fraud.
The guy who wrote it : I observed the election for 270 hours and didn’t observe any dishonesty, fraud or intentional malfeasance.”

I just think it’s freaking hilarious that you think this guys experience as an election monitor is valuable enough to make his report the one thing that proves election fraud, but then completely disregard that he also reports that he saw no fraud.


The level of cognitive dissonance is astounding.

Coming from someone that won't answer a simple yes or no question. You asked me to Post a Link to the file. I did that and now you try and run and hide from a simple question, why is that. Are you scared to answer a simple yes or no question? Why all the deflection for a simple answer?

You can’t even explain what you think the report means or why it’s important. Why exactly should I read it.

I can very clearly explain what the person who wrote the report thinks, which is that he saw no evidence of fraud in Fulton county.

So what exactly do you think in that report proves fraud if the author didn’t see evidence of fraud in Fulton county after spending 270 hours with their election? Or more importantly what did the gateway pundit tell you to think about the report, since I know you aren’t sitting in your basement analyzing election reports without prompting from the MAGA propaganda arm.

(02-15-2024 07:15 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Don't forget 570,000 to 3,200 in Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania steal.

Stolen. Don't care what anybody says. I also saw what I saw that night.

All of this "election denier" bullcrap is stupid, especially since everyone on the left kept saying Trump stole the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton when it was proven time and time again that nothing happened. Here, on the other hand, is a situation where the evidence for those who are willing to look is in plain sight.

(02-18-2024 02:08 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  There is a big difference between voter fraud and actionable (IE, a court can take corrective action) voter fraud. The various voting fraud lawsuits failed, not because the did not establish the existence, or at least the high probability, of voter fraud, but rather the fact that they could not prove the additional steps (essentially identifying specific fraudulent ballots from an essentially fungible collection of ballots) to enable a court to act. Because of our secret ballot rules, proving that latter is virtually impossible after the fact. The voting fraudsters know that if they can get a ballot into the box, it ain't coming back out.

Therefore, the only viable way to prevent voter fraud is to do it up front, beforehand. The only reason to oppose voter ID is the intention to cheat.

Plaintiff: "I have rock solid proof that there were 200,000 fraudulent ballots cast in the last election."h
Court: "Which 200,000 are they?"
Plaintiff: "I don't know."
Court: "Case dismissed."

That’s not what is going on here. True the Vote made very specific claims of election fraud, then when Georgia tried to investigate they asked to withdraw their complaint. Georgia then subpoenaed them to provide the information and their response to very specific questions like “you claim to have found non-governmental organizations you claim were hubs of ballot harvesting, what is the identity of these organizations” and the TTV response was “we don’t have ****”.

Georgia has tried to investigate all the claims brought to it.

So TTV got their 15 minutes of fame in Trumpland with 2000 Mules but when law enforcement actually tried to investigate their claims they had crap. Like most things like this lately this org seems to be fueled by grift or disinformation distribution. Since Arizona is trying to get them investigated by the IRS I’m guessing grift.

(02-18-2024 03:01 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 02:03 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 01:35 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-17-2024 11:55 AM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-17-2024 06:35 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  The person who wrote the report and is an election auditor says he saw no evidence of fraud, dummy. Is your stance that you know more about it than him because you read the report?

Knock, Knock. Hello, McFly?

That's real cute calling me a dummy when you won't answer a simple question. You're the one that asked for a link to the report that Carter Jones wrote and I provided the report for you to read.
I will ask you again, did you read the report?

You : I can’t tell you where or what in it proves it, but to me this proves election fraud.
The guy who wrote it : I observed the election for 270 hours and didn’t observe any dishonesty, fraud or intentional malfeasance.”

I just think it’s freaking hilarious that you think this guys experience as an election monitor is valuable enough to make his report the one thing that proves election fraud, but then completely disregard that he also reports that he saw no fraud.


The level of cognitive dissonance is astounding.

Coming from someone that won't answer a simple yes or no question. You asked me to Post a Link to the file. I did that and now you try and run and hide from a simple question, why is that. Are you scared to answer a simple yes or no question? Why all the deflection for a simple answer?

You can’t even explain what you think the report means or why it’s important. Why exactly should I read it.

I can very clearly explain what the person who wrote the report thinks, which is that he saw no evidence of fraud in Fulton county.

So what exactly do you think in that report proves fraud if the author didn’t see evidence of fraud in Fulton county after spending 270 hours with their election? Or more importantly what did the gateway pundit tell you to think about the report, since I know you aren’t sitting in your basement analyzing election reports without prompting from the MAGA propaganda arm.

"Why exactly should I read it"

So I guess, No I did not read the Report.

(02-18-2024 03:13 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:01 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 02:03 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 01:35 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-17-2024 11:55 AM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  That's real cute calling me a dummy when you won't answer a simple question. You're the one that asked for a link to the report that Carter Jones wrote and I provided the report for you to read.
I will ask you again, did you read the report?

You : I can’t tell you where or what in it proves it, but to me this proves election fraud.
The guy who wrote it : I observed the election for 270 hours and didn’t observe any dishonesty, fraud or intentional malfeasance.”

I just think it’s freaking hilarious that you think this guys experience as an election monitor is valuable enough to make his report the one thing that proves election fraud, but then completely disregard that he also reports that he saw no fraud.


The level of cognitive dissonance is astounding.

Coming from someone that won't answer a simple yes or no question. You asked me to Post a Link to the file. I did that and now you try and run and hide from a simple question, why is that. Are you scared to answer a simple yes or no question? Why all the deflection for a simple answer?

You can’t even explain what you think the report means or why it’s important. Why exactly should I read it.

I can very clearly explain what the person who wrote the report thinks, which is that he saw no evidence of fraud in Fulton county.

So what exactly do you think in that report proves fraud if the author didn’t see evidence of fraud in Fulton county after spending 270 hours with their election? Or more importantly what did the gateway pundit tell you to think about the report, since I know you aren’t sitting in your basement analyzing election reports without prompting from the MAGA propaganda arm.

"Why exactly should I read it"

So I guess, No I did not read the Report.

So why should I? What exactly makes you think this report is the smoking gun?

If you can’t muster up the brainpower to lay that out there is no hope that you are correctly comprehending whatever it is you are reading.

(02-18-2024 02:08 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  There is a big difference between voter fraud and actionable (IE, a court can take corrective action) voter fraud. The various voting fraud lawsuits failed, not because the did not establish the existence, or at least the high probability, of voter fraud, but rather the fact that they could not prove the additional steps (essentially identifying specific fraudulent ballots from an essentially fungible collection of ballots) to enable a court to act. Because of our secret ballot rules, proving that latter is virtually impossible after the fact. The voting fraudsters know that if they can get a ballot into the box, it ain't coming back out.

Therefore, the only viable way to prevent voter fraud is to do it up front, beforehand. The only reason to oppose voter ID is the intention to cheat.

Plaintiff: "I have rock solid proof that there were 200,000 fraudulent ballots cast in the last election."
Court: "Which 200,000 are they?"
Plaintiff: "I don't know."
Court: "Case dismissed."

And this is why a million of our illegal aliens will cast votes in the presidential election. “We don’t know who they voted for so we can’t disenfranchise legal voters.” Muh dEmocRcy!!!!!

(02-18-2024 03:10 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 02:08 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  There is a big difference between voter fraud and actionable (IE, a court can take corrective action) voter fraud. The various voting fraud lawsuits failed, not because the did not establish the existence, or at least the high probability, of voter fraud, but rather the fact that they could not prove the additional steps (essentially identifying specific fraudulent ballots from an essentially fungible collection of ballots) to enable a court to act. Because of our secret ballot rules, proving that latter is virtually impossible after the fact. The voting fraudsters know that if they can get a ballot into the box, it ain't coming back out.

Therefore, the only viable way to prevent voter fraud is to do it up front, beforehand. The only reason to oppose voter ID is the intention to cheat.

Plaintiff: "I have rock solid proof that there were 200,000 fraudulent ballots cast in the last election."h
Court: "Which 200,000 are they?"
Plaintiff: "I don't know."
Court: "Case dismissed."

That’s not what is going on here. True the Vote made very specific claims of election fraud, then when Georgia tried to investigate they asked to withdraw their complaint. Georgia then subpoenaed them to provide the information and their response to very specific questions like “you claim to have found non-governmental organizations you claim were hubs of ballot harvesting, what is the identity of these organizations” and the TTV response was “we don’t have ****”.

Georgia has tried to investigate all the claims brought to it.

So TTV got their 15 minutes of fame in Trumpland with 2000 Mules but when law enforcement actually tried to investigate their claims they had crap. Like most things like this lately this org seems to be fueled by grift or disinformation distribution. Since Arizona is trying to get them investigated by the IRS I’m guessing grift.

81 million votes and Tommie Bois says he didn’t even vote for potato head. Yeah, perfectly fair election. Nothing to see here.

Not to mention the censorship of the Hunter laptop by none other than the FBI twisting arms and threatening tech and social media operators. The election was stolen with absolute certainty by that action alone.

(02-18-2024 03:10 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  That’s not what is going on here.

Like hell it's not. They don't have anything actionable because they can't identify specific ballots. Without that, claims of voter fraud cannot be pursued.

(02-18-2024 04:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:10 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  That’s not what is going on here.

Like hell it's not. They don't have anything actionable because they can't identify specific ballots. Without that, claims of voter fraud cannot be pursued.

Did you read what the state asked them for? The state didn’t ask them which ballots were fraudulent. They asked them things like “you said John Doe claimed x and z happened and that showed fraud, provide the identity of John Doe so we can investigate that claim”. They claimed they identified 10 hubs of ballot harvesting in Atlanta, but when subpoenaed they suddenly couldn’t provide the address of the 10 hubs to investigate. They claimed that three non-governmental agencies were coordinating ballot harvesting but when subpoenaed couldn’t provide the names of those organizations.

If they actually wanted these claims investigated then they would provide the details to the state to investigate them, especially under subpoena. They suddenly don’t want these claims investigated (they even withdrew their complaint) probably because they fabricated them for $$$.

(02-18-2024 04:48 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 04:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:10 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  That’s not what is going on here.

Like hell it's not. They don't have anything actionable because they can't identify specific ballots. Without that, claims of voter fraud cannot be pursued.

Did you read what the state asked them for?

Do you understand that it doesn't matter? If you can't get to specific identification of ballots, you can't get a court to gice you any relief.

(02-18-2024 05:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 04:48 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 04:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:10 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  That’s not what is going on here.

Like hell it's not. They don't have anything actionable because they can't identify specific ballots. Without that, claims of voter fraud cannot be pursued.

Did you read what the state asked them for?

Do you understand that it doesn't matter? If you can't get to specific identification of ballots, you can't get a court to gice you any relief.

Nothing is going to change the 2020 election, but if true the vote actually cared about what they claim to care about they would provide the evidence so their claims can be investigate and GA can prosecute people and change policies. Instead they made a movie for $$$ and can’t produce any evidence when subpoenaed to court, which means all the 2000 mules videos touted around here were complete BS.

(02-18-2024 06:44 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  Nothing is going to change the 2020 election, but if true the vote actually cared about what they claim to care about they would provide the evidence so their claims can be investigate and GA can prosecute people and change policies. Instead they made a movie for $$$ and can’t produce any evidence when subpoenaed to court, which means all the 2000 mules videos touted around here were complete BS.

If it is not going to change the 2020 (or 2022) election, why bother?

(02-18-2024 03:20 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:13 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:01 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 02:03 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 01:35 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  You : I can’t tell you where or what in it proves it, but to me this proves election fraud.
The guy who wrote it : I observed the election for 270 hours and didn’t observe any dishonesty, fraud or intentional malfeasance.”

I just think it’s freaking hilarious that you think this guys experience as an election monitor is valuable enough to make his report the one thing that proves election fraud, but then completely disregard that he also reports that he saw no fraud.


The level of cognitive dissonance is astounding.

Coming from someone that won't answer a simple yes or no question. You asked me to Post a Link to the file. I did that and now you try and run and hide from a simple question, why is that. Are you scared to answer a simple yes or no question? Why all the deflection for a simple answer?

You can’t even explain what you think the report means or why it’s important. Why exactly should I read it.

I can very clearly explain what the person who wrote the report thinks, which is that he saw no evidence of fraud in Fulton county.

So what exactly do you think in that report proves fraud if the author didn’t see evidence of fraud in Fulton county after spending 270 hours with their election? Or more importantly what did the gateway pundit tell you to think about the report, since I know you aren’t sitting in your basement analyzing election reports without prompting from the MAGA propaganda arm.

"Why exactly should I read it"

So I guess, No I did not read the Report.

So why should I? What exactly makes you think this report is the smoking gun?

If you can’t muster up the brainpower to lay that out there is no hope that you are correctly comprehending whatever it is you are reading.

Posted Link to a Report that Elvis asked for. Elvis "why should I read the Report" Elvis then wants to have an argument about what in the Report that he hasn't read. What Elvis wants is someone to read the Report to him so he can scream at the sky and tell someone that's not true what was in the Report.
I'm not going to spoon feed you information like you're a little baby. If you decide to read the Report get back to me and perhaps we might be able to have a discussion.

Why would you want to have a discussion with an imbecile?

(02-18-2024 07:28 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:20 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:13 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 03:01 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 02:03 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:   Coming from someone that won't answer a simple yes or no question. You asked me to Post a Link to the file. I did that and now you try and run and hide from a simple question, why is that. Are you scared to answer a simple yes or no question? Why all the deflection for a simple answer?

You can’t even explain what you think the report means or why it’s important. Why exactly should I read it.

I can very clearly explain what the person who wrote the report thinks, which is that he saw no evidence of fraud in Fulton county.

So what exactly do you think in that report proves fraud if the author didn’t see evidence of fraud in Fulton county after spending 270 hours with their election? Or more importantly what did the gateway pundit tell you to think about the report, since I know you aren’t sitting in your basement analyzing election reports without prompting from the MAGA propaganda arm.

"Why exactly should I read it"

So I guess, No I did not read the Report.

So why should I? What exactly makes you think this report is the smoking gun?

If you can’t muster up the brainpower to lay that out there is no hope that you are correctly comprehending whatever it is you are reading.

Posted Link to a Report that Elvis asked for. Elvis "why should I read the Report" Elvis then wants to have an argument about what in the Report that he hasn't read. What Elvis wants is someone to read the Report to him so he can scream at the sky and tell someone that's not true what was in the Report.
I'm not going to spoon feed you information like you're a little baby. If you decide to read the Report get back to me and perhaps we might be able to have a discussion.

Not my fault you can’t explain why you think a report proves fraud when the author doesn’t. Doesn’t say much for your reading comprehension skills.

(02-18-2024 11:09 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Why would you want to have a discussion with an imbecile?

I ask myself that every time I answer your posts.

(02-18-2024 03:10 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 02:08 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  There is a big difference between voter fraud and actionable (IE, a court can take corrective action) voter fraud. The various voting fraud lawsuits failed, not because the did not establish the existence, or at least the high probability, of voter fraud, but rather the fact that they could not prove the additional steps (essentially identifying specific fraudulent ballots from an essentially fungible collection of ballots) to enable a court to act. Because of our secret ballot rules, proving that latter is virtually impossible after the fact. The voting fraudsters know that if they can get a ballot into the box, it ain't coming back out.

Therefore, the only viable way to prevent voter fraud is to do it up front, beforehand. The only reason to oppose voter ID is the intention to cheat.

Plaintiff: "I have rock solid proof that there were 200,000 fraudulent ballots cast in the last election."h
Court: "Which 200,000 are they?"
Plaintiff: "I don't know."
Court: "Case dismissed."

That’s not what is going on here. True the Vote made very specific claims of election fraud, then when Georgia tried to investigate they asked to withdraw their complaint. Georgia then subpoenaed them to provide the information and their response to very specific questions like “you claim to have found non-governmental organizations you claim were hubs of ballot harvesting, what is the identity of these organizations” and the TTV response was “we don’t have ****”.

Georgia has tried to investigate all the claims brought to it.

So TTV got their 15 minutes of fame in Trumpland with 2000 Mules but when law enforcement actually tried to investigate their claims they had crap. Like most things like this lately this org seems to be fueled by grift or disinformation distribution. Since Arizona is trying to get them investigated by the IRS I’m guessing grift.

Arizona has bigger problems than disqualifying brain rotted president, illegals are pouring in daily with no line of defense

Dumbazzes in Blue are waiting for someone to step up and enforce SCR in Texas

Not gonna happen

In the meanwhile people from all over the globe are making their way here unabated. No line of defense

Thugs in gangs are telling their comrades on social media in their secret ways

America is fading fast


Vote Dem and reap the rewards

(02-18-2024 06:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-18-2024 06:44 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  Nothing is going to change the 2020 election, but if true the vote actually cared about what they claim to care about they would provide the evidence so their claims can be investigate and GA can prosecute people and change policies. Instead they made a movie for $$$ and can’t produce any evidence when subpoenaed to court, which means all the 2000 mules videos touted around here were complete BS.

If it is not going to change the 2020 (or 2022) election, why bother?

If true the vote hadn’t made this crap up and could prove it then they would want to make sure people were prosecuted and processes were changed so it doesn’t happen again.

Instead they made a movie with a bunch of wild claims and then when Georgia said “give us this info so we can investigate and prosecute this voter fraud you allege happened” they could produce crap.

If this actually happened why wouldn’t you want to prosecute people even if it didn’t change the outcome?

What is accurate is that Biden lost in just about every swing state on Election Day

Cook the books with mail in votes revived the corpse and not for our betterment