obsrvr, I never pretended to be an election fraud/irregularity expert. I don’t know what you think you are pointing out, here. Do I have trust in the U.S. justice system? Yes, to a large degree. Blind faith? No. What is the purpose of all your ranting?
My point is to point out that YOU are “ranting” - not simply providing evidence for your case other than whatever MSM has presented to you.
You are ARGUING but only with blind faith - “the system can’t be wrong”. And the Earth can’t be round, I guess.
Right…I’m the one ranting
I guess because I think it’s more reasonable to believe x than y, that means I have blind faith. Good point.
I can tell that you know what providing evidence means because you did so. Arguing that something is true merely because you were told by what you believe to be a faithful source is NOT providing evidence. It is blind faith.
So if we ignore your rants about what you seem to think is obvious flawed argument from the Trump side. And instead we look at exactly the only evidence we both agree on - that those affidavits were presented - you and I can see if there actually was evidence or not.
But if we do that it will be clear that illegal activity was in fact witnessed (and in fact one person has been arrested). And that really is evidence that should be heard in a court. Yet the courts refused to have such a hearing.
So assuming that you and I closely examined those affidavits and conclude there really is legitimate evidence of fraud, what would you say next?
You would have to conclude that “the system” really hasn’t worked properly or - what?
My point was never that I closely examined every claim, every affidavit. My point in this thread wasn’t about me debunking claims. Re-read my first post. It was this:
I never required because it isn’t needed, that you read EVERY affidavit. - “strawman”
If that is what you were wondering, that is what we are addressing.
You might also wonder why Mr Zuckerberg spent $500 million paying for the Dominion counting machines, the ballot collection boxes, and all equipment in the processing along with paying the polling employees and giving them instructions on how to conduct the election in those 6 contested states. He literally spent more than the entire US government and merely on those contested states.
And also as I told you - the simple fact that they refuse to hear the testimony in courts or allow the machines to be examined, even though it would HELP BIDEN (if they were false) is all but an admission of guilt. Have you wondered about that?
As I first told you - this election is much much bigger than merely another US Presidential election. You are riding through a modern age World War - and sleeping.
That’s not what I’m saying. I already said some affidavits could be plausible… But my point isn’t that I know for a fact they’re all bunk, it’s that the courts didn’t seem to be persuaded. Been trying to tell you you’re completely missing my point.
What does that have to do with a court hearing evidence? That link is about an effort from the Trump team to “fast track” to SCOTUS. And that reminds me that a part of the RNC strategy was to go through the lower courts as fast as possible so that SCOTUS would have to hear the case. So republican judges were happy to obliged.
There was a hearing. 12 witnesses testified in court. Check the link again: “The court heard from 12 different witnesses during Thursday’s hearing.”
You said “Not one single court hearing has been allowed.”
Here’s the bottom-line, you can’t “fake” the algorithms they found on the voting machines from state-to-state.
If you want to blind yourself to the evidence, testimonies, affidavits, and more that have been posted countless times already, literally a mountain of evidence, then that’s on you at this point.
You’re not the first, nor the last Liberal-Lefty-Commie around here that buries your head in the sand.
Do your homework and if you have an open-mind (but you don’t) then you will side with Trump and the Conservative-Right. But, let’s be honest here, you’re a liar along with the rest of em.
Thanks for bringing this up, I missed this. It’s a good question. And we should make a distinction between voter fraud, mass voter fraud (i.e. tens of thousands of fraudulent votes - enough to swing an election), and election fraud (systematic fraud where election workers or voting machines coordinate to throw off the votes). The dispute isn’t about whether any isolated case of voter fraud ever happens. It happens in every national election. Significantly, the Trump campaign is claiming mass voter fraud and election fraud. To my knowledge, none of their fraud claims have been proven in court. I think there were a couple of Trump election-related cases that could be considered wins but they didn’t have to do with fraud – one had to do with counting certain mail-in ballots separately from others in Pennsylvania.
The first thing the courts have to decide upon is whether the Trump team (and scores of private citizens) have a legal standing to take the states to court. If they do, then the courts can look at the evidence and make a determination; if they don’t, then the case is thrown out without going any further.
This is what happened to all (except one) of the cases I checked out a little while back. The judges said the states have the legal right to run the election process according to state laws so long as they abide by the federal legal requirements.
In other words, the states can continue counting after the deadline if the state has deemed the postmark on the envelope to be the cut-off date and not the time of arrival. The states can corral all the people who were there to verify the process, into a corner of the room 60 feet away so long as they filled the federal legal requirement to be in the same room.
The courts gave the same response to a myriad of other complaints including the destruction of envelops, family members working as witness to other family members, halting the counting and sending everyone home, then starting up again without anyone verifying the process and dozens of other ‘irregularities’. Texas’ complaint was thrown out for the same reason i.e. Texas has no legal right to complain about how other states run a federal election.
The one case I saw where the courts actually saw evidence of fraud, the courts wanted to know the numbers of ballots that were in question and whether that number would have changed the outcome for that state. Because the state wouldn’t allow the Trump team to check, the case was dismissed.
In most democratic countries, the national government forces the states to abide by federal laws. One set of laws applies to all states. In America – which is a union of powerful, sovereign states – the states seem to have the freedom to decide on what to count and how to count and this is what you end up with.
.
This is the article your link points to -
Nothing about witnesses.
Oh never mind. The “original” was posted way down below adverts -
Reading the actual court findings 2 issues were prevalent in making the decision -
- court finds that this election wasn’t any more fraudulent than our usual
- claimants didn’t witness the systemic fraud taking place so their claims are rejected
This case was presented as a case of fraud rather than of illegal activity that allows for unseen fraud. Either would actually invalidate the election. But the judge chose to go with “evidence of systemic fraud directly witnessed and sufficient to overturn”. A witness would have to say, “I saw 33.500 ballots being reversed” in order to satisfy the judge. All other evidence was dismissed even though the other evidence makes it clear that the election was illegally processed and fraud was witnessed.
The witnesses were testifying to improper procedures with only a few cases of fraud actually witnessed. Each observer can only actually see very few actual fraud incidences. So no amount of observers would be able to testify to “systemic fraud” directly witnessed.
Many of the witnesses were analysts. Some where former election officials testifying to improper procedures. Only a few were witnesses to direct fraud. The ask was to nullify the electoral certification.
But ok. I concede that there was one court hearing allowed in Nevada.
heres a wiki that sums up a lot of the cases and you can go to democracy docket and see active ones with updates, read the complaints etc.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-elec … l_election
when its all said and done some 12% of the country will honestly believe that the deep state took over the judicial branch to screw trump and that there was a massive conspiracy no matter what the facts actually are.
Published today -
Angry at the Failure of His Election Challenges, Trump Calls His Own SCOTUS Nominees Cowardly and Incompetent reason.com/2020/12/27/angry-at- … competent/
The last part mirrors my point. The next logical step for Trump and his supporters to maintain any kind of coherence is to claim that the justice system itself is corrupt.
Or consider that something has gone wrong on their end.
Some people are willing to go examine the original source. Some people merely believe whatever they are told is true. The Thinkers and The Sheelpe.
obsrvr,
My point was about the meta question: “if Trump’s election fraud claims were true, why didn’t the courts rule that way?” I was never saying the mere fact alone that they didn’t rule in Trump’s favor proves the claims false. Is the difference not clear?
You and I also discussed a Pennsylvania court case in detail in another thread some weeks ago, where I focused specifically on the details of a particular case, citing the court’s decision and interpreting it. So it’s a bit peculiar of you to posture as the only one who goes to the source or the only one who argues at a level above blind faith.
Is it not clear that the reason was given to you along with the evidence to back it up? - “the system” is broken - corrupt. Just look at the top players - most have been proven to be actual proven criminals yet never indicted. That alone tells you what is going on and that it is very wide spread and thorough. Between China, Russia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, EU, UK, Globalists, MSM, and George Soros America has been thoroughly corrupted so much that the average American can’t even believe it. Yet the proof is there for those with the courage and mind to look.
You saw those affidavits. In them you saw criminal activity (if you didn’t recognized it, I can explain it to you). So why isn’t anything being done about all of that? Why aren’t people being indicted?
There is only one answer - * the same as why the bad-actors in the Russian Hoax haven’t been indicted -
- the same reason the Epstein assassin wasn’t indicted -
- the same reason Hillary and Bill Clinton haven’t been indicted -
- the same reason Swalwell is still on the US Congress intel commitee overseeing China -
- the same reason Sen Feinstein had a Chinese spy as a driver for 20 years -
- the same reason Zuckerberg could spend $500 million on election rigging -
- the same reason George Soros spent a $billion+ on campaigns for corruptible officials in the US -
- the same reason Google, Facbook, Twitter, and MSM consistently tell lies without repudiation -
- the same reason MSM and social media keep trying to hide the Hunter story -
- the same reason they NEVER asked Mr Hidin, Lyin Biden even one single potentially embarrassing question while relentlessly attacking Mr Trump -
- the same reason they keep stoking hatred in the US -
- the same reason they are letting criminals out of jail -
- the same reason they don’t prosecute Left wing rioters -
- the same reason the Left does everything to defend China and blame COVID on Mr Trump -
- the same reason they are doing everything they can to destroy the middle class -
- the same reason they push for endless wars in the Middle East -
- the same reason they want the US to go into debt for $100 trillion to pointlessly fight climate -
- the same reason the population elected Mr Trump to DRAIN THE SWAMP!
- on and
- on and
- on -
Over the decades the system has been slowly corrupted with the intention of destroying the nation for sake of Globalism.
I was expecting to discuss the particulars in this one too. But you didn’t go there. I pointed out that those affidavits exposed actual eyewitness criminality and why. Where was your argument against that?
You simply kept repeating that ALL of those courts can’t be wrong - ALL of those Flat Earthers years ago couldn’t be wrong either. I think they call that “argumentum ad populum” or something like that. That has been your entire argument. And that is also called “blind faith” - and the doom of your nation and the world - straight into Orwellian communism.
Read it and weep, fuse. Oh, wait… you’re a liberal-leftie. Your mind is already made up, but here pretending you’re open-minded. Carry on.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU5tQDwjOF8[/youtube]