Joe Biden Wins

[A_Thinker]

I have repeatedly been told where is the “ evidence of fraud “ I posted an admittedly long video of a in depth look at an actual lawsuit filed. It pointed out both strengths and weaknesses. To long to watch watch was the response. I posted a much shorter video of an actual eye witness under oath with No comment . I can only conclude very few people here really want truth most are blinded by hatred for Trump.

Perhaps some are keeping their eyes open for real, ... AND significant, fraud ...

 

[Postvieww]

Persons can be legally "stripped" of their rights.

For instance, prisoners ...

I was explaining the context in which I used the words.

 

[Postvieww]

See you on January 20 ...

I can’t wait. Some will be eating a lot of crow. We will know then if not before.

 

[Postvieww]

If not Trump's Attorney General, than WHO will carry out the investigation that you seek ?

State legislatures and the Supreme Court.

 

[Postvieww]

No fraud has been found in the investigations carried out since the election, ... that is significant enough to change the certified results.

Do you really believe the people seeking to ignore or cover up this will do a real investigation?

 

[Postvieww]

Perhaps some are keeping their eyes open for real, ... AND significant, fraud ...

How can one know that if they refuse to look at facts placed before them?

 

[A_Thinker]

State legislatures and the Supreme Court.

The states are saying that their results are good (i.e. certified) ... and the Supreme Court does not do investigations. They adjudge based upon the evidence and arguments brought before them.

 

[A_Thinker]

Do you really believe the people seeking to ignore or cover up this will do a real investigation?

According to you, there are, at least, 50% of Americans who aren't seeking to ignore or cover possible problems with the election.

Can't we count upon them to expose any significant issues with the vote ?

 

[A_Thinker]

How can one know that if they refuse to look at facts placed before them?

At this point, the only eyes that really matter are those of judges.

And the judiciary is, pretty consistently saying, ... there is nothing being presented to them which would compel them to do something which would affect the results of the election ...

 

[Archivist]

Maybe true. No “widespread” fraud, but fraud in a few crucial counties is a fact. The same in other swing states.

But not enough to swing the election to Trump.

 

[Archivist]

The attorney general has not conducted an in depth investigation. The msm’s investigation consisted of calling states and asking if there was “widespread” fraud and when they were told no fraud here they proceeded to tell the American people no fraud here. We need a real investigation for real facts.

There have been investigations. None has shown widespread fraud.

 

[Archivist]

No one wants elections until Trump wins. He already won and when the fraud is rooted out he will be president fairly and rightly. Stayed tuned until the Supreme Court speaks and the swearing in.

Trump did not win, except perhaps in your little fantasy world...

 

[Archivist]

Abolished=taking by legal legislation. Stripped = taken by illegal means.

Source of your definitions? I looked in several dictionaries and found none that defined stripped as "taken by illegal means."

 

[Archivist]

This was debunked in post #546

Here is post 546: "Read your quote carefully. The question was about 592 specific ballots not the entire election. Some ballots are challenged not because of fraud but for other reasons.I say he was telling the truth about those 592 specific ballots. Are you trying to imply with this quote there is no charge of fraud in any way? I sure hope not." That does not explain why Trump lawyers told judges that they had no evidence of voter fraud. That's been said by more than one lawyer in more than one court.

 

[Albion]

The attorney general has not conducted an in depth investigation. The msm’s investigation consisted of calling states and asking if there was “widespread” fraud and when they were told no fraud here they proceeded to tell the American people no fraud here. We need a real investigation for real facts.

But as you know, the other side is simply desperate not to allow that, intent as it is upon talking down any evidence that shows fraud and to keep saying "there is none, there is none, there is none".

If there were not, we would not be hearing any of this and they would, in confidence, simply wait until the recounts, investigations, and etc. had run their course according to our laws.

 

[Postvieww]

But not enough to swing the election to Trump.

Be patient this ain’t over.

 

[Postvieww]

Here is post 546: "Read your quote carefully. The question was about 592 specific ballots not the entire election. Some ballots are challenged not because of fraud but for other reasons.I say he was telling the truth about those 592 specific ballots. Are you trying to imply with this quote there is no charge of fraud in any way? I sure hope not." That does not explain why Trump lawyers told judges that they had no evidence of voter fraud. That's been said by more than one lawyer in more than one court.

I saw one quote from one court presented. If you have more show your proof as I have been asked to do.

 

[Postvieww]

According to you, there are, at least, 50% of Americans who aren't seeking to ignore or cover possible problems with the election.

Can't we count upon them to expose any significant issues with the vote ?

I saw one poll that said 75% of Republicans and 30% of Democrats believe there was fraud.30% of your own party disagrees with you and others on this thread. Amazing!

 

[Albion]

That's really something, isn't it? Almost 1/3 of Democrats admitting to the reality of vote fraud.

 

[Archivist]

I saw one quote from one court presented. If you have more show your proof as I have been asked to do.

Perhaps you should start reading newspapers or watching the news.

In Bucks County, Pennsylvania, "lawyers for the Trump campaign agreed to sign documents saying that there was zero evidence of fraud or misconduct when it came to said ballots."

Mayor Rudy Giuliani told a Federal judge in Pennsylvania “This is not a fraud case.” In the same case Trump lawyer Linda Kerns told the judge that she was "not proceeding” with allegations of fraud.

In Arizona, Trump campaign lawyer Kory Langhofer told a judge, “This is not a fraud case. It is not a stealing-the-election case.”

GOP Lawyer Forced To Publicly Admit There Was No Fraud (bipartisanreport.com)

Trump lawyers suffer embarrassing rebukes from judges over voter fraud claims - The Washington Post

In Court, Trump's Lawyers Aren't Claiming 'Massive' Fraud