*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10638
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7960 on: December 31, 2020, 02:39:15 PM »
Quote
Also, the audit on those voting machines was pretty clear: no fraud occurred.  At best they claimed there was a potential for fraud but thats pretty obvious.

The audit said that the voting machines did not count properly.

https://www.theblaze.com/amp/dominion-forensic-audit-antrim-county-2649519847?__twitter_impression=true

Quote
Dominion forensic audit in Antrim County, Michigan, reportedly shows evidence of 'intentional' fraud, but officials are vehemently denying the claim

The audit reportedly found that machines produced a 68% error rate

The forensic audit of Dominion Voting Systems machines in Antrim County, Michigan, turned out a 68% error rate, indicating that the machines may have been "intentionally designed" to allow for fraud, according to the Trump-linked cyber analysts who inspected it.

The report, which if true raises further suspicions regarding the 2020 election, was immediately disputed by state officials and Dominion representatives.

What are the details?

The forensic audit was ordered last week by Judge Kevin Elsenheimer of the 13th Circuit Court after a county resident, William Bailey, requested it in a lawsuit challenging the integrity of the 2020 election results. Bailey's lawsuit contested the outcome of a local proposal to allow a marijuana dispensary in town. However, the audit's results were also pertinent to the presidential election, especially considering it was in Antrim County where 6,000 votes had been incorrectly switched from President Donald Trump to Democratic challenger Joe Biden in early vote tabulation, before being corrected.

The audit was conducted by Allied Security Operations Group, a cyber firm co-founded by Russell Ramsland Jr. who has been cited as expert testimony in several of the battleground state lawsuits filed by Trump's legal team. The audit was reportedly conducted in the presence of several county officials.

What does the report say?

In the newly released report, Ramsland concluded that "the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results."

"The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008%). We observed an error rate of 68.05%. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity," he stated in the report. "The results of the Antrim County 2020 election are not certifiable. This is a result of machine and/or software error, not human error."

Antrim County officials originally blamed the vote-flipping on a system glitch before later assessing that a Republican election official failed to update the system before the vote tabulation.

"It is critical to understand that the Dominion system classifies ballots into two categories, 1) normal ballots and 2) adjudicated ballots," he continued. "Ballots sent to adjudication can be altered by administrators, and adjudication files can be moved between different Results Tally and Reporting (RTR) terminals with no audit trail of which administrator actually adjudicates (i.e. votes) the ballot batch. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity because it provides no meaningful observation of the adjudication process or audit trail of which administrator actually adjudicated the ballots.

"A staggering number of votes required adjudication. This was a 2020 issue not seen in previous election cycles still stored on the server. This is caused by intentional errors in the system. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency or audit trail," the report stated. "Our examination of the server logs indicates that this high error rate was incongruent with patterns from previous years. The statement attributing these issues to human error is not consistent with the forensic evaluation, which points more correctly to systemic machine and/or software errors. The systemic errors are intentionally designed to create errors in order to push a high volume of ballots to bulk adjudication."

Videos posted to YouTube by election officials in Coffee County, Georgia, recently purported to show how ballots can be switched or filled out in the Dominion system after they are sent to adjudication.

Matthew DePerno, the attorney representing Bailey, went into further detail about how he believes the machines were designed to create fraud during an interview with reporter John Solomon.

"We found that the Dominion Voting Systems is designed intentionally to create inherent and systemic voting errors. What I mean by that is when you run a ballot through the machine, even if it's a blank ballot, it will have a 68% chance of creating an error," DePerno told Solomon. "When you create an error, this machine does not reject the ballot. What it does instead is send it to a folder and that folder will then accumulate the ballots until the time that someone decides that they need those ballots. And then those ballots will be bulk adjudicated by someone. Could be offsite, could be onsite somewhere sitting at a computer. And, without any oversight, they can click one button, lope the entire batch of ballots to one candidate and then send them back to the tabulator."
« Last Edit: December 31, 2020, 02:47:16 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10638
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7961 on: December 31, 2020, 02:51:22 PM »
Congrats, you found another sycophant using awful assumptions to try and build a valid argument. He assumes precincts across county lines but proximal to one another should have similar results. He doesn’t bother substantiating this other than to offer up 2016 results, but since 2016 and 2020 are different events with different circumstances, they aren’t directly comparable. It’s only evidence that results from one place varies from another and considering how redistributing works in the US, this should be expected rather than a surprise.

Lol. First the Justice Department is a solid source for you that there is no fraud based on something Bill Bar did not see and now they are "sycophants" because they claim fraud in opposition to your feelings of no fraud.

Do you understand how clownish this degenerating argument appears?

Do you actually have a source other than citing yourself as an authority?

Which authority are you citing to oppose this document? Anything more valid than citing your own personal hastily written internet excuses?
« Last Edit: December 31, 2020, 04:14:22 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6488
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7962 on: December 31, 2020, 03:04:45 PM »
A quote from someone who says that they didn't see something isn't positive evidence in your favor.

Well, not just someone.
The AG and the head of cyber security.
And Donald Trump called it the most secure election in US history.

I don’t need to provide any positive evidence.
You are the claimant.
You are claiming fraud but have provided no credible evidence. Not because I say so, because all the people I’ve mentioned say so.

Quote
now you have more evidence against you.

And yet, despite all this “evidence” all 50 States have certified their election results, the Electoral College has voted and in a few weeks Biden is going to be inaugurated.
I’m sorry that upsets you, but there it is.

Why did the Democrats steal the Presidential Election and not the Senate one on the same ballots? The fact you have no answer to this shows the embarrassing weakness of your position.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10638
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7963 on: December 31, 2020, 03:14:13 PM »
I don’t need to provide any positive evidence.

Lets make things clear. You admit that you are believing in something based on no positive evidence.

Instead, you are relying on what Bill Barr once said that he didn't see and a statement from someone who was fired. Amazing evidence there.

Please preface your arguments with "I have no actual positive evidence in my favor but..." It would be more helpful for all involved.

Arguing that the burden of proof is on others to provide evidence only works if there is no evidence. Evidence has been provided against you, yet you keep claiming burden of proof. That argument doesn't work when there is contradictory evidence against you.

Please do keep repeating that you have no evidence in your favor and do keep arguing why you don't need to provide it. It just diggs you into a deeper, desperate hole.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2020, 07:29:09 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6488
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7964 on: December 31, 2020, 03:48:38 PM »
Evidence has been provided against you
It has.

And it has all been found to be false, unreliable or irrelevant. Which is why all 50 states certified their results, the electoral college voted for Biden and in a few weeks he will be inaugurated President.
I know that upsets you, but that is the reality.

It was the most secure election in US history, according to the outgoing President.

Your continued inability to answer why the Presidential election was stolen but the Senate one, on the same ballots, was not is noted.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2020, 04:38:00 PM by AllAroundTheWorld »
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Snupes

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
  • Counting wolves in your paranoiac intervals
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7965 on: December 31, 2020, 04:42:45 PM »
Don’t worry, guys, I’m not sure why you’re arguing so much. We’ll know that Biden’s president within the next couple weeks when, still, no decision has been forced.

Quote from: Снупс
@Tom: Roughly when do you think the election results will be overturned? Do you think it'll happen within the next few months? The next year? Genuinely curious.

It's all probably going to drag on until sometime shortly before Jan 20, when some decisions will be forced.
There are cigarettes in joints. You don't smoke it by itself.

Rama Set

Re: Trump
« Reply #7966 on: December 31, 2020, 05:03:00 PM »
Congrats, you found another sycophant using awful assumptions to try and build a valid argument. He assumes precincts across county lines but proximal to one another should have similar results. He doesn’t bother substantiating this other than to offer up 2016 results, but since 2016 and 2020 are different events with different circumstances, they aren’t directly comparable. It’s only evidence that results from one place varies from another and considering how redistributing works in the US, this should be expected rather than a surprise.

Lol. First the Justice Department is a solid source for you that there is no fraud based on something Bill Bar did not see and now they are "sycophants" because they claim fraud in opposition to your feelings of no fraud.

Feel free to engage with what I actually said rather than making up shit.

Quote
Do you understand how clownish this degenerating argument appears?

Do you actually have a source other than citing yourself as an authority?

You love deferring to authority. No wonder you want Trump to turn the US in to a Banana Republic. 

Quote
Which authority are you citing to oppose this document? Anything more valid than citing your own personal hastily written internet excuses?

Why is a source necessary? The paper fails on it’s face? Why don’t you tell me why comparing results from previous years and different counties are actually an accurate way to examine Fulton County’s results?

*

Offline Iceman

  • *
  • Posts: 1825
  • where there's smoke there's wires
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7967 on: December 31, 2020, 06:06:50 PM »
Arguing that the burden of proof is on others to provide evidence only works of there is no evidence.

TFES in a nutshell?


So much positive evidence of fraud has been put forward! Books of affidavits that consist primarily of blank pages... sworn testimony by cyber security experts, er, mechanics and day drunk witnesses, videos of ballot counters...counting ballots.

All the positive evidence for 'widespread massive voter fraud' in the 'most secure election ever' have been laughed out of almost every court at every level.

All the statistical analyses that purportedly showed the fraud have been "deEbOoNkED" by numerous mathematicians, political science experts, and millions of people with a shred of common sense, who know that you cant just apply statistical methods to whatever sets of data you like - there must be a valid reason and justification that the data populations share traits.

These have been feeble attempts to flip the script and corner all those radical lefties... positive evidence that the outcome was valid exist in every exit poll, lead up poll, all the audits of certified election results, the fact that the same ballots that got Biden elected still gave a mandate for Republicans to dominate the senate... but you've ignored all these and have resorted to this most recent charade of demanding proof that fraud didnt occur instead of addressing all the facts that have led this discussion to its sad current state.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10638
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7968 on: December 31, 2020, 06:14:22 PM »
Quote from: Rama Set
Feel free to engage with what I actually said

I'll help you out. Compare your internet excuse to the abstract. I'll bold the key phrases:

Quote from: Rama Set
Congrats, you found another sycophant using awful assumptions to try and build a valid argument. He assumes precincts across county lines but proximal to one another should have similar results. He doesn’t bother substantiating this other than to offer up 2016 results, but since 2016 and 2020 are different events with different circumstances, they aren’t directly comparable. It’s only evidence that results from one place varies from another and considering how redistributing works in the US, this should be expected rather than a surprise.

Abstract:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3756988

Quote
This study provides measures of vote fraud in the 2020 presidential election. It first compares Fulton county’s precincts that are adjacent to similar precincts in neighboring counties that had no allegations of fraud to isolate the impact of Fulton county’s vote-counting process (including potential fraud). In measuring the difference in President Trump’s vote share of the absentee ballots for these adjacent precincts, we account for the difference in his vote share of the in-person voting and the difference in registered voters’ demographics. The best estimate shows an unusual 7.81% drop in Trump’s percentage of the absentee ballots for Fulton County alone of 11,350 votes, or over 80% of Biden’s vote lead in Georgia. The same approach is applied to Allegheny County in Pennsylvania for both absentee and provisional ballots. The estimated number of fraudulent votes from those two sources is about 55,270 votes.

Second, vote fraud can increase voter turnout rate. Increased fraud can take many forms: higher rates of filling out absentee ballots for people who hadn’t voted, dead people voting, ineligible people voting, or even payments to legally registered people for their votes. However, the increase might not be as large as the fraud if votes for opposing candidates are either lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate. The estimates here indicate that there were 70,000 to 79,000 “excess” votes in Georgia and Pennsylvania. Adding Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, the total increases to up to 289,000 excess votes.

And from the document:

"Thus, this estimate uses three ways to account for differences in Trump’s share of the absentee ballot
vote: geographic closeness for relatively small areas, differences in Trump’s share of the inperson vote, and differences in the demographics registered voters."

...

"Table 3: 2020 Difference in Trump’s share of the Absentee Ballot Vote after adjusting for
Racial and Gender Demographics of Registered voters"

...

"Table 4: 2020 Difference in Trump’s share of the Absentee Ballot Vote after adjusting for
Racial and Gender Demographics of Registered voters and the difference in the in-person
vote"

---

They are talking about an excess of votes in regards to the number of registered voters.

So you don't know what you are talking about. I would recommend finding a credible source rather than writing internet opinion and championing your internet analysis.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2020, 07:12:18 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Iceman

  • *
  • Posts: 1825
  • where there's smoke there's wires
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7969 on: December 31, 2020, 06:22:27 PM »
Quote from: Rama Set
Feel free to engage with what I actually said

I'll help you out. Compare your invalid internet excuse to the abstract. I'll help you out by bolding the key phrases:

Quote from: Rama Set
Congrats, you found another sycophant using awful assumptions to try and build a valid argument. He assumes precincts across county lines but proximal to one another should have similar results. He doesn’t bother substantiating this other than to offer up 2016 results, but since 2016 and 2020 are different events with different circumstances, they aren’t directly comparable. It’s only evidence that results from one place varies from another and considering how redistributing works in the US, this should be expected rather than a surprise.

Abstract:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3756988

Quote
This study provides measures of vote fraud in the 2020 presidential election. It first compares Fulton county’s precincts that are adjacent to similar precincts in neighboring counties that had no allegations of fraud to isolate the impact of Fulton county’s vote-counting process (including potential fraud). In measuring the difference in President Trump’s vote share of the absentee ballots for these adjacent precincts, we account for the difference in his vote share of the in-person voting and the difference in registered voters’ demographics. The best estimate shows an unusual 7.81% drop in Trump’s percentage of the absentee ballots for Fulton County alone of 11,350 votes, or over 80% of Biden’s vote lead in Georgia. The same approach is applied to Allegheny County in Pennsylvania for both absentee and provisional ballots. The estimated number of fraudulent votes from those two sources is about 55,270 votes.

Second, vote fraud can increase voter turnout rate. Increased fraud can take many forms: higher rates of filling out absentee ballots for people who hadn’t voted, dead people voting, ineligible people voting, or even payments to legally registered people for their votes. However, the increase might not be as large as the fraud if votes for opposing candidates are either lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate. The estimates here indicate that there were 70,000 to 79,000 “excess” votes in Georgia and Pennsylvania. Adding Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, the total increases to up to 289,000 excess votes.

And from the document:

"Thus, this estimate uses three ways to account for differences in Trump’s share of the absentee ballot
vote: geographic closeness for relatively small areas, differences in Trump’s share of the inperson vote, and differences in the demographics registered voters."

...

"Table 3: 2020 Difference in Trump’s share of the Absentee Ballot Vote after adjusting for
Racial and Gender Demographics of Registered voters"

...

"Table 4: 2020 Difference in Trump’s share of the Absentee Ballot Vote after adjusting for
Racial and Gender Demographics of Registered voters and the difference in the in-person
vote"

---

They are not talking about 2016 vs 2020. They are talking about an excess of votes as compared to the number of registered voters.

So you don't know what you are talking about. I would recommend finding a credible source rather than writing internet opinion and championing your internet analysis.

These arguments fall along a remarkably similar line to those underpinning the Benford's Law and the 'one-in-a-bazillion' claims...

I will be keen to hear what other experts have to say about the assumptions made in trying to correlate absentee ballots with in-person ballots w.r.t demographics.

Rama Set

Re: Trump
« Reply #7970 on: December 31, 2020, 07:04:50 PM »
At best all this paper does is get to anomalous results (it doesn’t), and still shows no evidence of fraud. It’s sad that Tom and the deluded be calls brethren can’t move on.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7654
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7971 on: December 31, 2020, 08:57:54 PM »
Quote
Also, the audit on those voting machines was pretty clear: no fraud occurred.  At best they claimed there was a potential for fraud but thats pretty obvious.

The audit said that the voting machines did not count properly.

https://www.theblaze.com/amp/dominion-forensic-audit-antrim-county-2649519847?__twitter_impression=true

Quote
Dominion forensic audit in Antrim County, Michigan, reportedly shows evidence of 'intentional' fraud, but officials are vehemently denying the claim

The audit reportedly found that machines produced a 68% error rate

The forensic audit of Dominion Voting Systems machines in Antrim County, Michigan, turned out a 68% error rate, indicating that the machines may have been "intentionally designed" to allow for fraud, according to the Trump-linked cyber analysts who inspected it.

The report, which if true raises further suspicions regarding the 2020 election, was immediately disputed by state officials and Dominion representatives.

What are the details?

The forensic audit was ordered last week by Judge Kevin Elsenheimer of the 13th Circuit Court after a county resident, William Bailey, requested it in a lawsuit challenging the integrity of the 2020 election results. Bailey's lawsuit contested the outcome of a local proposal to allow a marijuana dispensary in town. However, the audit's results were also pertinent to the presidential election, especially considering it was in Antrim County where 6,000 votes had been incorrectly switched from President Donald Trump to Democratic challenger Joe Biden in early vote tabulation, before being corrected.

The audit was conducted by Allied Security Operations Group, a cyber firm co-founded by Russell Ramsland Jr. who has been cited as expert testimony in several of the battleground state lawsuits filed by Trump's legal team. The audit was reportedly conducted in the presence of several county officials.

What does the report say?

In the newly released report, Ramsland concluded that "the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results."

"The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008%). We observed an error rate of 68.05%. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity," he stated in the report. "The results of the Antrim County 2020 election are not certifiable. This is a result of machine and/or software error, not human error."

Antrim County officials originally blamed the vote-flipping on a system glitch before later assessing that a Republican election official failed to update the system before the vote tabulation.

"It is critical to understand that the Dominion system classifies ballots into two categories, 1) normal ballots and 2) adjudicated ballots," he continued. "Ballots sent to adjudication can be altered by administrators, and adjudication files can be moved between different Results Tally and Reporting (RTR) terminals with no audit trail of which administrator actually adjudicates (i.e. votes) the ballot batch. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity because it provides no meaningful observation of the adjudication process or audit trail of which administrator actually adjudicated the ballots.

"A staggering number of votes required adjudication. This was a 2020 issue not seen in previous election cycles still stored on the server. This is caused by intentional errors in the system. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency or audit trail," the report stated. "Our examination of the server logs indicates that this high error rate was incongruent with patterns from previous years. The statement attributing these issues to human error is not consistent with the forensic evaluation, which points more correctly to systemic machine and/or software errors. The systemic errors are intentionally designed to create errors in order to push a high volume of ballots to bulk adjudication."

Videos posted to YouTube by election officials in Coffee County, Georgia, recently purported to show how ballots can be switched or filled out in the Dominion system after they are sent to adjudication.

Matthew DePerno, the attorney representing Bailey, went into further detail about how he believes the machines were designed to create fraud during an interview with reporter John Solomon.

"We found that the Dominion Voting Systems is designed intentionally to create inherent and systemic voting errors. What I mean by that is when you run a ballot through the machine, even if it's a blank ballot, it will have a 68% chance of creating an error," DePerno told Solomon. "When you create an error, this machine does not reject the ballot. What it does instead is send it to a folder and that folder will then accumulate the ballots until the time that someone decides that they need those ballots. And then those ballots will be bulk adjudicated by someone. Could be offsite, could be onsite somewhere sitting at a computer. And, without any oversight, they can click one button, lope the entire batch of ballots to one candidate and then send them back to the tabulator."

Unless the machines were brand new, then logically this should have happened in prior years as well if the machines were designed this way.  And why would you design a machine to do a bad job?  You are literally dooming your business. 

Also, did you READ THE AUDIT?  Most of those errors were "BALLOT SIZE MISMATCH".  Do you know why?  Because that's in the report.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Rama Set

Re: Trump
« Reply #7972 on: December 31, 2020, 09:42:55 PM »
The 65% error rate is also extremely misleading. 65% of the ballots flagged for review had errors. Derp

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7654
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7973 on: December 31, 2020, 10:52:57 PM »
The 65% error rate is also extremely misleading. 65% of the ballots flagged for review had errors. Derp

Oh no, it really was 65% of all ballots had errors.
Mostly " Ballot size mismatch" cause they forgot to change the expected ballot size.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4183
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7974 on: January 01, 2021, 01:31:23 AM »
It’s sad that Tom and the deluded be calls brethren can’t move on.

It's frightening that 70% of Republicans would be perfectly happy with the country being a dictatorship. That's a significant amount of the population that's against democracy right now. Tom really just represents the freakiest of them, as that's essentially his character here, but there are plenty of people who otherwise seem perfectly sane who would be perfectly happy crowning Trump emperor for life, even if they don't realize that's what they're supporting (they are really just so gullible). All because a bunch of government officials chose to put their unwavering loyalty behind him (a hallmark of totalitarian leadership, of course), giving the air of legitimacy to every baseless claim he's made.

Trump is a tumor, and the cancer has already spread.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7654
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7975 on: January 01, 2021, 07:50:52 AM »
It’s sad that Tom and the deluded be calls brethren can’t move on.

It's frightening that 70% of Republicans would be perfectly happy with the country being a dictatorship. That's a significant amount of the population that's against democracy right now. Tom really just represents the freakiest of them, as that's essentially his character here, but there are plenty of people who otherwise seem perfectly sane who would be perfectly happy crowning Trump emperor for life, even if they don't realize that's what they're supporting (they are really just so gullible). All because a bunch of government officials chose to put their unwavering loyalty behind him (a hallmark of totalitarian leadership, of course), giving the air of legitimacy to every baseless claim he's made.

Trump is a tumor, and the cancer has already spread.

^ this

Its how people like Putin and Fidel Castro, the syrian leader, and whoever else can get and keep power.
Just get enough people who agree with you and think you need to "ensure" the vote is correct.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2021, 09:58:56 AM by Lord Dave »
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.


*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7654
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #7977 on: January 01, 2021, 10:08:38 AM »
https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/on-mike-pences-behalf-doj-tells-court-that-louie-gohmerts-attempt-to-sue-vp-is-a-walking-legal-contradiction/

Pence living that RINO life.

Its frightening how people like Tom are literally demanding that this kind of unchecked power is allowed.  Like, what does he think would happen?  Trump would get 4 more years then they'd undo all that new, unchecked power?
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Re: Trump
« Reply #7978 on: January 01, 2021, 03:03:39 PM »
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Rama Set

Re: Trump
« Reply #7979 on: January 01, 2021, 05:19:53 PM »
so it turns out that lin wood is actually literally insane

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/lin-woods-ex-law-partners-claim-he-was-taped-admitting-to-assaults-asserting-he-may-be-christ-coming-back-for-second-time/

Which explains why he so passionately defends the seaworthiness of the sinking ship that is the GOP.