Reporting: Georgia finds 30,000 fake ballots

hislegacy said:

Why would that matter?

Click to expand...

It only matters to Trump if he gained votes.

mmksparbud said:

It only matters to Trump if he gained votes.

Click to expand...

“..11,780 votes” to be specific.

hislegacy said:

it is just a question. A what if situation. Wow! I did not intend to cause this much stress.

Click to expand...

What stress? I provided my proposal. Which part do you disagree with?

hislegacy said:

Probably, I was approaching from a more generic perspective. Because it isn’t proven fact, I was asking on a hypothetical basis.

Click to expand...

Hypothetically, whenever a crime is committed, we want to know who, how, and why they did it. Why wouldn't we?

Besides, as this is a "what if?" scenario, I'm working on the assumption that it actually happened.

The why is easy enough -- there are only two reasons to stuff a ballot box: you either want someone to win, or you're out to sabotage the system itself.

Regarding "who," it's obvious that no one person just walked in with 30,000 fake ballots hidden in their back pocket, so we're looking at a group. But which group? We can eliminate a few of the usual suspects depending on who the ballots were for:

If the fake ballots were for Donald, i think we can safely rule out BLM or AntiFa. On the other hand, if the ballots were for President Biden, we can cross off the Proud Boys or Oathkeepers from the list of usual suspects -- agreed?

Now what if the fake ballots were split between the two candidates? Now were looking for someone who's not out to influence the election, but who wanted to undermine American faith in the entire process... which, btw, means those ballots were meant to be found and cause a brouhaha.

If that's the case, there are plenty if organizations, foreign and domestic, who benefit from a little U.S. electoral chaos. We should start looking into them.

I certainly can’t on a factual basis because there are no established facts as of yet. That is why I highlight in bold red letters in the OP.

I speaking of a scenario, not personalities.

Click to expand...

You're speaking of a very specific scenario which some people are claiming has actually happened. Real people, not "personalities," are already involved.

Your question was, If (notice I said if), this is accurate and 20% of the ballots are proven as not real - what is the next step?

Obviously the next step is, as I said, to determine who did it and how it happened. Examining the evidence (including who the bogus ballots were cast for) seems extremely obvious.

RocksInMyHead said:

I would imagine the next step would be to determine the source of those fake ballots and prosecute those responsible.

Click to expand...

The next step is to investigate the alleged inconsistencies of the b̶a̶l̶l̶e̶t̶s̶ ballots to determine they're authenticity.

hislegacy said:

30,000 fake ballots found In Georgia audit… ‘They’re not real’…

“Six affidavits now, we had four, now it’s six. Six affidavits of veteran election officials are alleging that up to 30,000 of these 147 [thousand] ballots are fake,” said Fredericks. “Somebody printed them up on a machine and ran them through the vote counting machines. They’re not real. They’re not attached to anybody.” Another revelation was that the ballots were unfolded and printed on a different paper than the regular absentee ballots, according to Fredericks.
​

BREAKING: Veteran Election Officials Say 30,000 Fake Ballots Found In Georgia Audit, ‘They’re Not Real’

“Number one, they’re on different paper. What kind of paper are they on? Why isn’t it the same paper that everything else is on? Number two, they’re not folded. Well, what do you mean they’re not folded? In order to get an absentee ballot, you have to get it in the mail,” said Fredericks. “Which means that the Department of Elections in Georgia machine folded the ballot, you can’t have a ballot in an envelope that you mail back, or dropbox back, that’s not folded. You either got it folded, or you send it back folded, or both with an envelope. So why aren’t they folded?”
​

I fully understand that only the right is reporting this and there is a right bias in the sources - that is a given.

Question for this thread:

If (notice I said if), this is accurate and 20% of the ballots are proven as not real - what is the next step?

Here is a correlating article from Forbes:

Georgia Set For Another Election Audit After Judge Unseals 145,000 Absentee Ballots

Click to expand...

So just a blurb in a far right news blog with no details as to even what counties the ballots are in. Clearly it's the MSM that is unreliable.

Also no word on why random sampling or the hand count by the republican led election committee didn't show any anomalies before this.

LockeeDeck said:

So just a blurb in a far right news blog with no details as to even what counties the ballots are in. Clearly it's the MSM that is unreliable.

Also no word on why random sampling or the hand count by the republican led election committee didn't show any anomalies before this.

Click to expand...

Part of the issue is that the random sampling was done in Cobb County, where it was claimed these same things occurred. Cobb was the more "suburban" county where Biden got about 8% more of the total vote in 2020 than Hillary Clinton had in 2016. Of course, after nothing was found in Cobb County, all of the sudden the conspiracies changed to have occurred in Fulton County instead.

paul1149 said:

If fraud on that level is verified in any one state, the next step will be for the other swing states to open their own tallies for audit. For some reason that is the last thing the Left wants

Click to expand...

I'm not on the left, but I'd be happy to see a thorough investigation into voting irregularities in, say NC.

paul1149 said:

The division makes me ill. Would you agree that pursuing justice would be to properly audit an election that many think had major fraud? Because some are doing all they can to prevent that from happening.

Click to expand...

We already did that. We've counted, recounted, counted by hand, counted standing on our heads.

Trump lost.

DamianWarS said:

The next step is to investigate the alleged inconsistencies of the ballets to determine they're authenticty.

Click to expand...

I bet the ballet dancers are really upset.

OB

hislegacy said:

please be careful my friend, someone could interpret such comments as inherently racist.

it is an understandable mistake, people in the North tend to characterize people living in the south as sub par, country hicks etc. you may want to re think your statement before someone takes offense to it.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the friendly reminder. I must say we have a difference of understanding what is “racist”.

To me, asking the first African American President to prove his citizenship and show his birth certificate again and again is racist.

To me, asking first Indian African American VP to prove her US citizenship is racist.

To me, shooting seven times on the back of an unarmed African American man and then say “nothing to see here” is racist.

To me, cry out voter fraud in predominantly African American area, but not a single peep in predominantly white neighborhood about voter fraud is racist.

Saying people in the south drink moonshine is not racist. It is like calling it racist when people say to me I eat lots a “brats and sauerkraut”. I am from Wisconsin , “brats and sauerkraut” is main food in any summer gathering.

hislegacy said:

please be careful my friend, someone could interpret such comments as inherently racist.

Click to expand...

Is that someone a person whose opinion matters?

it is an understandable mistake, people in the North tend to characterize people living in the south as sub par, country hicks etc. you may want to re think your statement before someone takes offense to it.

Click to expand...

"Southern" is not a race, so the comment cannot be racist.
Therefore, anyone who claims it is is talking out of their hat, and can be ignored.

expos4ever said:

Here is the problem. Trump supporters can appear to be reasonable when they argue "we only want to ensure things were fair - why would anyone be opposed to investigating all claims of voter fraud?"

How is it not obvious that repeated "investigations" like this, on the basis of either no evidence or exceedingly flimsy evidence, directly undermine confidence in democracy?

Since this is really quite obvious, I suggest it is disingenuous of Trump supporters to make it appear that they are only interested in fairness.

Imagine that every time a doctor issued a prescription, an "investigation" was launched, based on no credible evidence whatsoever, into whether that doctor had faked his medical school credentials.

Is this really about fairness and responsible investigation of voting fraud? How come this never came up when Clinton or Carter or Obama won?

Click to expand...

Here is my problem with this thread. Election is over, every vote was counted, court was involved more then 50 times, audit and recount was done again and again and the result is same- Joe Biden won the election.

This outcome is not acceptable to 75% republicans. So they will cry out voter fraud until 2024 or beyond until their chosen candidate win the election.

In post #32 the OP ask “What IF Situation” . The OP wants rest of us to engage in “What if” situation to fuel these conspiracy to justify their conspiracy theory. The more people talk about “what if” , the more fuel to carry on with these conspiracy theory . If you don’t engage in “what if” , then they will turn around and say “ you are not open minded”.

You can’t convince them that Joe Biden is legitimately elected President. Just like even after providing Obama’s Birth Certificate, you couldn’t convince Trump and 20% republicans that Obama was born in America. They don’t want to talk about Birth Certificate any more because they realized that’s not a winning strategy but they don’t believe Obama was born in US. They just don’t want to talk about it.

So here is rest of us needs to do. Completely ignore these kind of conversation.

TLK Valentine said:

Hypothetically, whenever a crime is committed, we want to know who, how, and why they did it. Why wouldn't we?

Besides, as this is a "what if?" scenario, I'm working on the assumption that it actually happened.

The why is easy enough -- there are only two reasons to stuff a ballot box: you either want someone to win, or you're out to sabotage the system itself.

Regarding "who," it's obvious that no one person just walked in with 30,000 fake ballots hidden in their back pocket, so we're looking at a group. But which group? We can eliminate a few of the usual suspects depending on who the ballots were for:

If the fake ballots were for Donald, i think we can safely rule out BLM or AntiFa. On the other hand, if the ballots were for President Biden, we can cross off the Proud Boys or Oathkeepers from the list of usual suspects -- agreed?

Now what if the fake ballots were split between the two candidates? Now were looking for someone who's not out to influence the election, but who wanted to undermine American faith in the entire process... which, btw, means those ballots were meant to be found and cause a brouhaha.

If that's the case, there are plenty if organizations, foreign and domestic, who benefit from a little U.S. electoral chaos. We should start looking into them.



You're speaking of a very specific scenario which some people are claiming has actually happened. Real people, not "personalities," are already involved.

Your question was, If (notice I said if), this is accurate and 20% of the ballots are proven as not real - what is the next step?

Obviously the next step is, as I said, to determine who did it and how it happened. Examining the evidence (including who the bogus ballots were cast for) seems extremely obvious.

Click to expand...

Nice reasoning, but I would add a possible scenario. We might find easy to spot fake ballots for candidate X. It might be someone who expected candidate X to win with a slim margin, but wished to win candidate not-X. This somebody might then stuff the ballot box with ballots for candidate X in order to legitimize a fair victory of candidate X and falsely claim a victory for candidate not-X

Tiberius Lee said:

Here is my problem with this thread. Election is over, every vote was counted, court was involved more then 50 times, audit and recount was done again and again and the result is same- Joe Biden won the election.

This outcome is not acceptable to 75% republicans. So they will cry out voter fraud until 2024 or beyond until their chosen candidate win the election.

In post #32 the OP ask “What IF Situation” . The OP wants rest of us to engage in “What if” situation to fuel these conspiracy to justify their conspiracy theory. The more people talk about “what if” , the more fuel to carry on with these conspiracy theory . If you don’t engage in “what if” , then they will turn around and say “ you are not open minded”.

You can’t convince them that Joe Biden is legitimately elected President. Just like even after providing Obama’s Birth Certificate, you couldn’t convince Trump and 20% republicans that Obama was born in America. They don’t want to talk about Birth Certificate any more because they realized that’s not a winning strategy but they don’t believe Obama was born in US. They just don’t want to talk about it.

So here is rest of us needs to do. Completely ignore these kind of conversation.

Click to expand...

I just want to point out that you failed at your last suggestion.

driewerf said:

Nice reasoning, but I would add a possible scenario. We might find easy to spot fake ballots for candidate X. It might be someone who expected candidate X to win with a slim margin, but wished to win candidate not-X. This somebody might then stuff the ballot box with ballots for candidate X in order to legitimize a fair victory of candidate X and falsely claim a victory for candidate not-X

Click to expand...

I was very confused here until I realized you meant "delegitimize a fair victory of candidate x."

This is a possible scenario, albeit an implausible one.

It's a very elaborate plan, and anyone with the resources to pull it off must realize that elaborate plans can fail elaborately.

Simply put, what if the "easy to spot" fake ballots weren't spotted? The people behind this would have to know that the race was going to be a close one, that candidate x was indeed going to win by a slim margin, and that there was going to be a hand recount in which the fake ballots were going to be detected.

Any of that doesn't happen, and the scheme backfires.

Rather than walk the tightrope of fake ballots authentic enough to pass an initial election but fake enough to be spotted in a recount, wouldn't it be a better use of this group's time and resources to make good fake ballots for candidate not-x, thus handing them the election?

TLK Valentine said:

I was very confused here until I realized you meant "delegitimize a fair victory of candidate x."

This is a possible scenario, albeit an implausible one.

It's a very elaborate plan, and anyone with the resources to pull it off must realize that elaborate plans can fail elaborately.

Simply put, what if the "easy to spot" fake ballots weren't spotted? The people behind this would have to know that the race was going to be a close one, that candidate x was indeed going to win by a slim margin, and that there was going to be a hand recount in which the fake ballots were going to be detected.

Any of that doesn't happen, and the scheme backfires.

Rather than walk the tightrope of fake ballots authentic enough to pass an initial election but fake enough to be spotted in a recount, wouldn't it be a better use of this group's time and resources to make good fake ballots for candidate not-x, thus handing them the election?

Click to expand...

Not if these elections were the most secure of the American history, and it turns out to be nearly impossible to make good fake ballots, while making easy to spot fake ballots can be much more easy.

Occams Barber said:

I bet the ballet dancers are really upset.

OB

Click to expand...

Nothing worse than a fake Swan Lake.

driewerf said:

Not if these elections were the most secure of the American history, and it turns out to be nearly impossible to make good fake ballots, while making easy to spot fake ballots can be much more easy.

Click to expand...

Then the fake ballots would've been spotted during the initial count, and not, as is alleged, in the audit.