The Election Fraud Challenge

[Omar]

Do we only enforce the Constitution and election law if it might affect the outcome of an election?

Personally, I thought they should have pursued this more aggressively before the election, until waiting until afterward when it was too late.

I still think that if Trump had won, the Dems would have raised many of the same objections Trump's team did. The main difference is the news media wouldn't have refused to cover it, they would have been shouting it from the rooftops, and Big Tech wouldn't have been squashing all talk of election fraud. The Dems probably would have blamed the whole thing on Russian interference, and probably would have impeached Trump for it two or three times lol.

[TheLiquidGuy]

Then you contradict the very presupposition of your OP inquiry, the very possibility of fraud and/or lawlessness. Thus, none of your elaboration of that contradiction counts for anything.

I am not sure I am following you here.

I may have misspoke when I said "Anyone who says the election was stolen as a matter of fact, is a liar."

I meant to say "Anyone who says the election was stolen as THOUGH IT WERE a matter of fact, is a liar."

That is to say, anyone saying they know for a fact or saying with a demeanor of certainty that the election was stolen is lying. No one can know such a thing yet. They are essentially professing divine knowledge of fraud, most likely for the purpose of building political support, and not to inform people. They are just lying.

That does not mean there wasn't massive consequential fraud. It just means we are still looking for a confirmed smoking gun and a gun of massive consequence, a smoking BFG. That's what the thread is about.

It simply demonstrates you are one and the same with the left and the media in their determination not to accept any fraud or lawlessness in the election. You will never unify the country when you reject, as Rand puts it, that every story has two sides.

I am constantly subjected to ad hom attacks. Its old, it's fruitless, and it just goes to show that the person launching the attack is struggling. Don't do it. You are wrong about me on this and you are wasting both your and my time.

I have always called for investigations since November 3. I love the idea. It's a win-win. no matter the findings. I have always said that there must be some amount of fraud in a country with 330 million people in it.

But if you are gonna promote the idea of a stolen election to the point where people are mounting attacks on the seat of democracy with calls to murder Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi, causing death in the process, you better damn well have more substantiation than a bunch of internet anecdotes that have alternate explanations. If they are gonna stage a deadly coup d'état, they better meet a far higher legal standard. They better have proof positive. Anything less and they deserve a proportional charge up to and including treason.

You cannot keep dismissing the incrementally increasing transgression of authoritarians or fascists. One day Donald is gonna crawl back out of whatever hole he burrowed into, probably when Parler eventually comes back online. And because he cannot help himself, he is gonna raise hell again. He will say and do anything to anger and incite people again. And it will be worse. And he will use the yet unproven mythology of a stolen election as the pretext. I just want the truth out before he has the opportunity to start spinning his own truth again.

[Chris]

I am not sure I am following you here.

I may have misspoke when I said "Anyone who says the election was stolen as a matter of fact, is a liar."

I meant to say "Anyone who says the election was stolen as THOUGH IT WERE a matter of fact, is a liar."

That is to say, anyone saying they know for a fact or saying with a demeanor of certainty that the election was stolen is lying. No one can know such a thing yet. They are essentially professing divine knowledge of fraud, most likely for the purpose of building political support, and not to inform people. They are just lying.

That does not mean there wasn't massive consequential fraud. It just means we are still looking for a confirmed smoking gun and a gun of massive consequence, a smoking BFG. That's what the thread is about.







I am constantly subjected to ad hom attacks. Its old, it's fruitless, and it just goes to show that the person launching the attack is struggling. Don't do it. You are wrong about me on this and you are wasting both your and my time.

I have always called for investigations since November 3. I love the idea. It's a win-win. no matter the findings. I have always said that there must be some amount of fraud in a country with 330 million people in it.

But if you are gonna promote the idea of a stolen election to the point where people are mounting attacks on the seat of democracy with calls to murder Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi, causing death in the process, you better have a more substantiation than a bunch of internet anecdotes that have alternate explanations. If they are gonna stage a deadly coup d'état, they better meet a far higher legal standard. They better have proof positive. Anything less and they deserve a proportional charge up to and including treason.

You cannot keep dismissing the incrementally increasing transgression of authoritarians or fascists. One day Donald is gonna crawl back out of whatever hole he burrowed into, probably when Parler eventually comes back online. And because he cannot help himself, he is gonna raise hell again. He will say and do anything to anger and incite people again. And it will be worse. And he will use the yet unproven mythology of a stolen election as the pretext. I just want the truth out before he has the opportunity to start spinning his own truth again.

"I am not sure I am following you here." Why not? Go read your OP. You express interest in hearing about these things. Was that faked? Seems so when you don't bother listening but just try to shoot down everything.

"I am constantly subjected to ad hom attacks." Not my problem. Maybe it's the way you say things.

"But if you are gonna promote the idea of a stolen election...." Exactly what I mean as I didn't promote that at all. Your stawman is constructed of ready-made leftist media talking points.

[TheLiquidGuy]

"I am not sure I am following you here." Why not? Go read your OP. You express interest in hearing about these things. Was that faked? Seems so when you don't bother listening but just try to shoot down everything.

I simply meant I wasn't 100% sure I understood what you were saying. I took a guess and tried to respond.

It wasn't fake. What did you say that I didn't bother listening to? I explained in my response that I want to listen. I WANT investigations. Did you not read it?

"I am constantly subjected to ad hom attacks." Not my problem. Maybe it's the way you say things.

It's not your problem. I only bring that up to let you know I am used to it and I know they lead nowhere.

"But if you are gonna promote the idea of a stolen election...." Exactly what I mean as I didn't promote that at all. Your stawman is constructed of ready-made leftist media talking points.

It was a collective "you" not you personally.



Are you gonna respond to the meat of my post now?

[Chris]

I simply meant I wasn't 100% sure I understood what you were saying. I took a guess and tried to respond.

It wasn't fake. What did you say that I didn't bother listening to? I explained in my response that I want to listen. I WANT investigations. Did you not read it?


It's not your problem. I only bring that up to let you know I am used to it and I know they lead nowhere.



It was a collective "you" not you personally.



Are you gonna respond to the meat of my post now?

Are you gonna respond to the meat of my post now?

Soon's you respond to that of mine, post #15.

[TheLiquidGuy]

Soon's you respond to that of mine, post #15.

I did. post#16

[Dr. Who]

Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have only voted for a Republican President once in the last 20 years - all in 2016. So in 5 out of the last 6 elections they have consistently voted Democrat. The anomaly in the voting pattern is 2016, not 2020. A suspicious mind viewing that and wondering whether everything about the 2016 election was above board would do so with more justification than questioning every aspect of the 2020 election in those states where they resumed their traditional voting pattern.

Now I can see that the fact that Arizona and Georgia flipped for the first time in 20 years is an anomaly, but Georgia was subjected to multiple manual recounts because of the narrow margin and Arizona was challenged because they continued counting votes after election day, as if that is somehow abnormal. You continue counting until all the ballots have been counted. You don't stop at midnight. At the end of the day however, neither Georgia or Arizona was needed for Biden to win. Perhaps the game changer in those Republican strongholds was the fact that mail-in ballots enabled more voters who won't line up at polling stations, to vote or perhaps more people simply voted to remove Donald Trump because they don't like him.

The only real reason that the results of the 2020 election were challenged is because Donald Trump started raising the specter of electoral fraud when it became clear that mail-in ballots would be used to allow people at high risk from CV-19 to avoid polling stations. Not surprisingly, this coincided with a decline in his approval ratings as CV-19 was proving to be more than just the latest flu outbreak. He framed it as a plot by Democrats to steal the election and planted that notion in minds of all of his supporters, including the poll watchers who looked at everything through a lens of suspicion and interpreted what they saw accordingly, imputing wrongdoing to anything that they didn't understand or didn't comport with their uninformed preconceived notions.

There was undoubtedly incidental fraud in the 2020 election - there is in every election, but I believe that the entire controversy about the 2020 election was deliberately created by Donald Trump because he was afraid that he would lose the election and was hoping to steal it back by trying every possible avenue to invalidate the results.

However, if every ballot in every state needs to be recounted and every video reviewed, have at it. I don't believe that anything will be found that will have any material affect on the results.

[Cletus]

If a court of law throws out case upon case, for me there is no solid proof.

That is because you are not the sharpest knife in the drawer and even though you will never admit it, no matter how much evidence you are presented, you would never acknowledge it. You are a female version of Liquid Guy. The only real difference is you don't try to disguise your hatred by pretending to be objective.

[DGUtley]

tPF Thread Ban - Note: Please see this announcement if clarification on tPF is required. Additionally, see Rule 10 for further details.

@Mister D tb'd by OP per tpf thread rules - bad faith posting.

[Captdon]

Hold on a second. Rand Paul kept putting words the hosts mouth. He wasn't calling anyone who disagrees a liar.

But I will. Anyone who says the election was stolen as a matter of fact, is a liar. There is no proof to honestly take such a position.
Likewise, anyone who says the was zero fraud is also a liar. There is no way to know everything that happened everywhere. Three questions need answering:
1) how much fraud was there?
2) was it more than the usual amount of fraud
3) was it enough to change the election.
I predict the answers will be (1) some (2) only very slightly (3) No


I think media doesn't want to give oxygen to unfounded conspiracy theories and contribute to more confusion and possibly even more violence when all authorities have come out saying "no fraud"

Congress cant investigate for sh!t. It will turn into a circus.

The FBI should investigate. They will likely find only a handful of fraud cases. That fraud should not be artificially magnified to make it seem as though it was more than it was. It should not be used to impose further restrictions on voting. Not unless there was something massively wrong. It should be noted first and foremost that fraud happened in 2016 and 2012 and 2008 and 2004...

In the unlikely event that some massive fraud is discovered, good for the country to know and fix. If not, it's a good reality check for over zealous fraud conspiracy theorists .

You aren't the one to use the word liar.

FBI? Seriously. Hell, turn it over o the DNC. You'd get the same result.