Is the FBI Finally Looking Into Voter Fraud?

NightHawkeye said:

Fortunately, almost everyone knows that fraud was rampant in the 2020 election. A CNBC poll a week or so back revealed that only 3% of Trump voters thought Biden won the election. A larger percentage of Biden voters claim that Biden won, but even many of them also know about the fraud.

Click to expand...

I believe that larger percentage of Biden voters that thought he won was "99%". I don't know of anyone, except hard-core Trump voters that think this was a fraud. Not in person. Not in any online interaction I've seen.

NightHawkeye said:

So you think that election observers were present in all precincts, no dead people voted and no out-of-state votes were tallied?

Click to expand...

You have a problem with out-of-state votes? You have a problem with the military, then.

Kenny'sID said:

Apparently, as simple as I made it, it still was not clear to you, but I will try again just for you.

Click to expand...

How Kind of you.

Kenny'sID said:

The prevous months were what they used to convince themselves it is now worth a look at. See? Easy peasy.

Click to expand...

But that's not what your article says.

"Braynard now says the FBI has reached out to him and his team asking for them to hand over evidence underlying their findings."

Given that LOTS and LOTS of people (trump, Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, Sydney Powell, various US Republican Senators and Representatives, various Republican state Senators and Representatives, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, etc.) have been claiming for quite some time now that voter fraud has been occurring and/or they have evidence of voter fraud, not just Braynard, it's interesting that they are only now finally interested in what Braynard has to show.

Was Braynard the ONLY one with access to this evidence that the FBI is interested in?

NightHawkeye said:

So you think that election observers were present in all precincts, no dead people voted and no out-of-state votes were tallied?

Click to expand...

Lol. So you think election observers were present in no precincts, only dead people voted, and only out-of-state votes were tallied?

So's law. Excellent stuff.

NightHawkeye said:

So you think that election observers were present in all precincts, no dead people voted and no out-of-state votes were tallied?

Click to expand...

Did a few people request ballots for recently deceased relatives? Yeah. A few of them have been caught.

Did a few people who moved out of state vote when they shouldn't have? Probably. (A number of these claims have been shown to be people who had the right to vote from temporary locales.)

Election observers. The number and access of various types of election observers varies from state to state. But an election isn't invalid if there are no observers present. In the last 20 years I have *never* seen a party/candidate observer at the local polling place. Not once. All of those complaints are very dependent on local rules and interpreting them without that knowledge is precarious and prone to coming to false conclusions. Did counting not get paused when an a necessary observer took a bathroom break or something. Probably. I don't know. I've seen no egregious violations of any monitoring rules.

NightHawkeye said:

Fair enough.

We're just arguing about the extent of the fraud. Thanks for the clarification.

Click to expand...

What is lacking on the "Trump" side is evidence of any fraud that goes beyond dumb things a few individuals did. (Like voting for their dead mother, or voting in the state they left in early October.)

NightHawkeye said:

100,000 illegal ballots isn't enough to declare massive fraud?

Click to expand...

Where and show the evidence?

Yttrium said:

You have a problem with out-of-state votes? You have a problem with the military, then.

Click to expand...

Which as always is pretty dumb if you're trying to steal an election

NightHawkeye said:

So you agree that Trump is entitled to his day in court.

Excellent point of agreement!

Click to expand...

So you agree no evidence has been presented yet?

Excellent, another point of agreement!

You really are giving So's law a run today NHE.

NightHawkeye said:

So you agree that Trump is entitled to his day in court.

Excellent point of agreement!

Click to expand...

Not until he's indicted. We need to be fair to him.

NightHawkeye said:

100,000 illegal ballots isn't enough to declare massive fraud?

Click to expand...

100,000 ballots is a specific claim, but not quite complete.

Where were these ballots illegally cast?
What is the evidence that this occurred and that it was illegal?

(Secret, unrevealed evidence is useless.)

Hans Blaster said:

(Secret, unrevealed evidence is useless.)

Click to expand...

The voter fraud evidence is being hidden by da gubmint in the same place as where they're hiding the area 51 alien bodies, the giant nephilim skeletons, the photographs from space proving the Earth is flat, and the evidence for Noah's big barge.

It's all a big conspiracy, dontcha know?

NightHawkeye said:

Fortunately, almost everyone knows that fraud was rampant in the 2020 election. A CNBC poll a week or so back revealed that only 3% of Trump voters thought Biden won the election. A larger percentage of Biden voters claim that Biden won, but even many of them also know about the fraud.

Click to expand...

I’m sure a sizeable number of people will continue to believe the election was fraudulent, even after the FBI declares no case to pursue, and Trump’s lawsuits are rejected at every judicial level. What can he said about that? No a lot really. People aren’t rational creatures.

NightHawkeye said:

You might start by reading Sidney Powell's Georgia lawsuit, that's a good primer. After that, look at her Michigan lawsuit which alleges even greater levels of fraud.

You still interested in seeing her evidence?

Click to expand...

I’m genuinely curious, what leads or motivates you to take her lawsuit seriously? It isn’t even intended to be, as can easily seen by how shoddily put together it is, not to mention it contains no actual coherent allegations (Trump’s lawyers, once actually before judges rather than in any public forum where they can basically say whatever they like without having to bother with silly things like actually being truthful or accurate, admit freely that there is no case of fraud to answer - there is no fraud, that is exactly what Trump’s lawyers are saying in court, check it out) but just a load of random nothingness. None of it amounts to anything at all, but that isn’t the point - the point is to create an illusion of a fire behind the smoke, to delude people into believing something illegal actually happened. So, I can see why someone might think ‘wow that’s clever, it might be unethical, but it works’, but what would actually motivate someone to actually believe there is something true in it? That’s the most interesting question.