DOJ finds no evidence of fraud that’d change election outcome: Attorney General Bill Barr

Belk said:

Just so we are clear here. You have no information from any source that an investigation did not happen. You likewise have no information that an investigation did happen. From that you feel it is appropriate to make a definitive claim that there was no investigation?

Click to expand...

Do you even hear yourself? Look at what you just posted!

super animator said:

For a guy who "didn't vote for him" the lengths that you went to bat for him is just plan embarrassing.

Seriously, NH where is the evidence of fraud?

Click to expand...

The argument is gradually becoming well, there was some fraud, maybe enough to need most of your fingers to count the cases on, as there has been in every previous election, so Trump was right. No joke.

Arc F1 said:

It's our distaste for the lifetime politicians and their actions that drove the Trump vote.

Click to expand...

And we got four years of Donald.

We took our consequences -- now it's his turn.

Arc F1 said:

Where have you been? Thought maybe you were taking a nice vacation on a warm beach someplace.

Click to expand...

Nice to know someone noticed. I was under cover investigating alleged vote fraud in the local Thanksgiving dessert contest. Thanks to my intrepid investigative skill, there will be a runoff later this month.

I know, evidence means whatever one wants to believe. I can't keep up with all the ever changing definitions anymore.

Click to expand...

Evidence means what the court believes.

Arc F1 said:

Idk. You are the one that said it's made its way to the courts. All I've seen are state investigations.

Click to expand...

Also, it would seem that the loyal leftists are conflating specific court rulings, (when it suits their needs), with DoJ investigations.

Arc F1 said:

Idk. You are the one that said it's made its way to the courts. All I've seen are state investigations.

Click to expand...

So... no court cases.

Arc F1 said:

Where have you been? Thought maybe you were taking a nice vacation on a warm beach someplace.

I know, evidence means whatever one wants to believe. I can't keep up with all the ever changing definitions anymore.

Click to expand...

It's not that complicated, to be able to establish fraud Trump's lawyers would need to present coherent allegations with supporting evidence. What they have done instead is make a series of unfounded claims in public venues, where there is no need to back them up with anything real, but when before a judge have admitted that they have no actual evidence or even anything that could be considered an actual allegation of some actual thing that might have actually happened, and the story changes to yes we know there is no fraud but maybe someone, somewhere maybe might have made a mistake. All of this information is freely available.

VirOptimus said:

I have no idea, and neither do you.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. I really don't know with 100% certainty.

Let me put it another way. I haven't seen a case where any of the affiants had been interviewed by the DoJ, nor arrested for lying under oath. Have you?

Arc F1 said:

I watched plenty of first hand testimony but that doesn't count I guess. Honesty is no longer valued in society any more. Society has shifted to more of an ungodly set of values.

Click to expand...

I doubt if you saw any actual testimony. As a rule court cases are not videoed and made public. But please link to any actual evidence that you have.

TheBear said:

Fair enough. I really don't know with 100% certainty.

Let me put it another way. I haven't seen a case where any of the affiants had been interviewed by the DoJ, nor arrested for lying under oath. Have you?

Click to expand...

Why ask silly questions with bad assumptions in them?

TheBear said:

Fair enough. I really don't know with 100% certainty.

Let me put it another way. I haven't seen a case where any of the affiants had been interviewed by the DoJ, nor arrested for lying under oath. Have you?

Click to expand...

No, but there is serious problems with the affiants credibility. See court rulings.

Tom 1 said:

The argument is gradually becoming well, there was some fraud, maybe enough to need most of your fingers to count the cases on, as there has been in every previous election, so Trump was right. No joke.

Click to expand...

The number of court cases that trump had lost is around 40 times.

TheBear said:

Do you even hear yourself? Look at what you just posted!

Click to expand...

OK. I looked at it. Now can you either answer it or tell me what you object to about my question?

Arc F1 said:

I know, evidence means whatever one wants to believe. I can't keep up with all the ever changing definitions anymore.

Click to expand...

Creationist Playbook, page 2.

Equate EVIDENCE with "belief", as if they were the same thing or interchangable.

Desk trauma said:

Vote counts and election law do not care about your feelings.

Click to expand...

Actually they do for there's laws that poll watchers are to have the freedom to do their jobs so the public can FEEL the election is legit.

essentialsaltes said:

“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr told the AP.

Click to expand...

The people who actually "saw" fraud and/or illegalities occur...

were the ones who were there, with their own eyes in the counting rooms, on Election night

e.g.

Bobber said:

Actually they do for there's laws that poll watchers are to have the freedom to do their jobs so the public can FEEL the election is legit.

Click to expand...

Pls beware spin

"Fraud" is stronger claim than "illegal", and merely proving the latter would already be enough to overturn results:

BREAKING: Trump's Lawsuit in WI - Jordan Sekulow on Newsmax - YouTube

Erik Nelson said:

The people who actually "saw" fraud and/or illegalities occur...

were the ones who were there, with their own eyes in the counting rooms, on Election night

e.g.

Dominion Contractor Drops a BOMBSHELL

Poll Observer: Dem Operative From California Worked at Pima County Polling Place on Election Day to ‘Turn Arizona Blue’ - American Greatness (amgreatness.com)​

Click to expand...

The court had already deemed the dominion woman not credible.

Is it the argument of anyone here that if the corruption wasn't actually necessary because it wasn't enough corruption to have changed the result of one particular election then we should not try to uncover and punish corruption at all?

MIDutch said:

Creationist Playbook, page 2.

Equate EVIDENCE with "belief", as if they were the same thing or interchangable.

Click to expand...

What's on page 3