Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'West Mall' started by ProdigalHorn, Dec 6, 2018.
Twitter still thinks this is in dispute
There are 100s of these witnesses
It's been so weird to watch the Democrat Party become the party of the wealthy class
Most of my life, it was the opposite
Judicial Watch says 353 Counties in the US in 29 states had voter registration exceeding 100%
Here is the State Legislative breakdown for the 6 still-contested states (which represent 79 electoral votes). 5 are majority Republican (both bodies), with 2 of those also having Republican governors. NV is the only one of the 6 with straight Dem across the board
Contested States (Electoral Votes)
PA - Legislative action
AZ - Legislative hearings Mon
MI - Legislative hearings Tues/lawsuit(s)
GA - lawsuit(s)
NV - lawsuit(s)
WI - manual recount
Attkisson put together a compilation. There were so many misdeeds, its tough to pick the worst from among them
What you’ve been asking for: A (fairly) complete list of (some of) the most significant claims of 2020 election miscounts, errors or fraud. | Sharyl Attkisson
Democrats were hypocrites back then too
Thank you. Lots of work. I like that Atkisson is careful to list some issues as allegations. Still there are many things that can't be disputed.
Dems long whined on here( and maybe a RINO or2} that all Team Trump has done is say there was fraud.
She offers a good complilation of what is happening across the country.
Interesting that Dems have not countered most of these allegations. Of course it is hard for them to criticize their own who have sworn affidavits of illegal Dem action.
One question. Why is no one investigating the Judicial Watch report of more people voting than were registered?
"Officials Had Something to Hide" - There is Enough “Preponderance of Evidence” to “Doubt the Result” -- Democrat Elections Observer Weighs in On Corrupt Georgia Vote (thegatewaypundit.com)
btw his twitter account was blocked
Gee, it sounds like the evidence is coming in so fast, it's like a fire hose. Who said that?
Pennsylvania Republicans call for withdrawing election certification
Not sure if this one has been posted.
Reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling | Spectator USA
How Joe really broke his ankle
the cyber security expert testifying now in AZ said they have been looking into fraud going back to the Cruz/Beto election noting there were anomalies.
First, Navid Keshavaz-Nia is clearly qualified in this arena and should be listened too, just as Christopher Krebs as the Former United States Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Both have first hand experience in election security and/or inside knowledge.
Now let's look at Navid's claims. In your passage he's claiming all those facts "create the perfect environment" for fraud. Does he have actual evidence of fraud? He's analyzed some data and reached some conclusions but does he have actual evidence of fraud?
He says right here that all his conclusions are based on his analysis of the data, not any forensic examination of the systems. So, what conclusions was he able to reach by merely evaluating the data?
Hold up...he's making a supposition based on "TV Broadcasts" which aren't even being cited? That has nothing to do with his data analysis but is merely commentary on a rumor. He's losing credibility at this point...
That's a claim without authentication. It's evidence but pretty weak.
He's commenting on "report" (2nd hand? 3rd hand?) to use it as evidence.
I'm giving Navid the benefit of the doubt that the cryptographic key store was stolen. How do you make the leap that the "key allowed a remote operator to conduct massive attacks" based on an analysis of the data? Remember, he openly states that he has not has access to any of the 2020 voting machines. Additionally, one of the states (GA) that he's claiming the vote was rigged just had their paper ballots hand counted to confirm the count accuracy of the electronic voting machines.
Honestly, Navid is likely a wickedly smart person. "Data anomalies" need to be explained, not from New York Times data but from the states. Their mere existence does not mean "fraud" but rather something the SOS of each state should explain. As stated previously, they could simply be the process of counting absentee ballots last which we know heavily favored the candidate that encouraged them vs. the candidate that discouraged their usage.
Ultimately, much of Navid's 9-page affidavit was supposition. The volume of data analysis shared within the affidavit was extremely limited while he went off the reservation with claims Hammer and Scorecard and the stolen cryptographic keystore were used to hack the vote based on....their mere existence as facts?
It's all connected -- dead people voting, rigged machines, 3 am dumps, mail-in-voting, extended deadlines, "walking around money," no requirement of photo ID, expanded absentee voting, ballot harvesting," kicking neutral observers out of the counting facility, contracts to Dominion, Soros-funded state SoSs, Soros-funded state AGs, Soros-funded county DAs, de-emphasis on paper ballots and stiff resistance to culling bad names off voter rolls.
While they know their ideas and polices can win in high population, coastal areas, Democrats also recognize they cannot win in national elections (absent another messiah figure) with the same programs and themes. And so if they are going to win nationally, they are going to have to cheat.
Navid's one of the best and I trust his judgment. Nearly every security expert is saying the same thing as he is . There is no way mathematically for most of the large dumps that at sometimes went 95%+ to occur. The expert that testified in Pennsylvania said Biden had a run of 570,000 to 3200 for Trump(99.4%). You can be naive all you want but I won't. The science supports that this is fraud.
Glad you are qualified to say that because I'm not. I can only go off his resume to ascertain his qualifications but to say he's "one of the best" I'd be speaking out of my *** if I agreed.
"Nearly every security expert"? Really? Amateur anonymous twitter accounts need not apply.
It wasn't lost on me that you simply jumped to Navid's conclusion and didn't breakdown any of his statements. It may have been easier simply to say "Navid K-N supports my desired narrative" and leave it at that. You clearly didn't evaluate his claims against the evidence he presented.
What? Have you been paying attention to the certified experts at these hearings? Dude, you don't know what you're talking about.
Oh, you intended to say "nearly all the experts at the hearings"? Which hearings specifically? The PA charade wasn't an actual PA Legislature sanctioned hearing. Notice there were no D State legislators there. It wasn't held in Harrisburg at the State House. The meeting was a combination of R State Senators and House members asking questions.
For today's "hearing" also ask why AZ Republicans are holding the hearing offsite in a hotel as opposed to the House. There are live House hearings going on right now in the AZ Legislature yet a subset of AZ Republicans are offsite in a hotel meeting with Guiliani and clan.
Surely you can see that these are not formal hearings, right? They are Republican charades made to look like a formal hearing. Yes, some of those legislators likely want to get more information but none of this is on the level. Guiliani and crew are not being cross examined. They get to put up their "experts" who are then given a platform to state their theories without any critical questioning, like I did with Navid's affidavit above. They are PR stunts.
To my knowledge, none of these "experts" have actually testified in court. Some, like Navid K-N, have submitted affidavits which had been summarily dismissed by the courts.
Yes, they are informal hearings but the experts are real and have put out pretty damn good info. You can call them PR stunts but they are facts that are difficult to argue with. Like I said if 99.4% of a voter dump going to Biden is real in your world then more power to you. We've danced this dance before when I warned you of the malfeasance of the FBI but you kept trying to follow the MSM narrative. Sorry, but you're dead wrong here. If it wasn't for the time restraint Trump and his team would win this easily. Time is not on Trump's time.
Just because an uniformed and possibly biased judge throws something out doesn't make it reality.
If anyone can explain to me why any cheater worth their salt would NOT also cheat on the down ballot races and win enough of those to gain Senate control, I'd be willing to listen. Otherwise move on from this fundraising charad, which is all it is. Republicans like Krebs and the Georgia Sec or State are standing up for Democracy. Sadly, the leader of the party is ranting like a nut.
Currently 1-38 in court. At least a handful of them by Trump appointees. Seems significant.
Also, Four Seasons Landscaping says "what's up?" when you referred to informal hearings.
What was Bush's count before he took Florida?
We've told you why several times. Why didn't they change the House votes as well? Time, my friend. When the foremost security experts say this was fraud this is probably fraud. Dumps at 99.4% don't happen in the real world.
Btw, after the Russia conspiracy **** that you proudly spouted I don't want to heat any more from you about conspiracy nuts.
"I love it, especially if it's later in the summer. Let's schedule a meeting at Trump Tower." There's some collusion for you.