Nine useful articles and data points showcasing 2020's election theft

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TepeyacTraveler said:
Where have you been the last 4 years?
Click to expand...
Living 15 miles from the White House.
TepeyacTraveler said:
Winners don’t have to prove they won lol?!?!
Click to expand...
That’s what I said!
TepeyacTraveler said:
The embarrassing lies and games that Trump has had to put up with over the last 4 years?!?!
Click to expand...
You mean his own 20,000 lies? Yes, he owns them. They’re his.
TepeyacTraveler said:
All of these demonstrable lies and cheating and you see no problem with it. Videos, eye witness accounts, and manipulated data. You have no issue with any of it.
Click to expand...
It’s all conspiracy-theory -laden ramblings. All thrown out by the courts, where one has to have facts.
TepeyacTraveler said:
Just that it was a fair election.
Click to expand...
I think it had the normal amount of shenanigans, which means not that much.
TepeyacTraveler said:
I better not go on since then we get into “Fear Mongering” territory because that is some people’s default when confronted with an uncomfortable truth.
Click to expand...
I’m extremely uncomfortable that some people believe the conspiracy theories.
 
Last edited:
Pufi said:
Hátaztán!”, which means “So what?” in Hungarian.
Click to expand...
The suffix “istan” or “stan” means “land.” It looks like you may have switched to a different suffix there.
 
PaulinVA said:
Did he at any point say that he was the only Republican watcher at any of these places?
Click to expand...
Did you not read the article too?

He was identified as an independent.
He is a Political Independent and was a Detroit Poll Challenger.

“When you walked in you could feel the tension in the air.”
Click to expand...
On the other hand many of the obvious leftists evidently lied and identified themselves as “independents” so that may not mean much.
Giacobazzi, an engineer by trade, said he encountered several “independent” lawyers and law students who expressed far-left political leanings during his service at the TCF Center. “I remember multiple people telling me they couldn’t wait to go work on behalf of CHAZ / CHOP,” he said, referring to the deadly anarchist takeover of downtown Seattle (Capital Hill Autonomous Zone / Occupied Protest) in the Summer of 2020. “They [the poll workers] liked the idea that you wouldn’t prosecute people for rioting.”
Click to expand...
Giacobazzi believes the poll challengers and staff were on the same side, and that they were colluding to obstruct Republican poll challengers and have them removed from the facility. “It was like they were professional agitators,” he said. “They all seemed to be on one side. They all seemed to be ready to cheer as soon as a GOP staffer got kicked out of the room.” He said he did not see any Democrats kicked out of the TCF Center.
Click to expand...
HE SAW A BIN WITH WHAT LOOKED LIKE EMPTY BALLOTS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROOM, during the period of time that GOP Poll Challengers were suspiciously kicked out of the counting area, and during the period of time where the City of Detroit ordered the windows covered SO NO ONE COULD SEE IN .
Click to expand...
Giacobazzi was not locked out with the Republicans. (Again. He was an Independent.)

That only came later when he attempted to do his job honestly ("ejected from the facility for challenging a ballot.). No doubt under some other pretext. Probably “corona”.
Giacobazzi noticed when the facility decided to lock out the Republicans from being able to observe the vote count. From that point on, things got “more and more contentious.”
Click to expand...
Despite his own diplomatic approach, Giacobazzi told The Gateway Pundit that he was ultimately ejected from the facility for challenging a ballot. “The whole room cheered, clapped, made snide remarks, and said ‘Yeah, get him the h#*% outta here! ‘” he said.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
Resurrection (which is a true doctrine), or the Darbyist “Rapture” (which is a false doctrine).
Click to expand...
Pufi’s response?
Pufi said:
And the difference is, that you believe in one, but ot the other. Simple!
Click to expand...
No Pufi.

Apart from you telling me what I believe, one, The Resurrection, is Catholic doctrine.

Two, the other (the Darbyist Rapture) goes against Catholic doctrine.

They are not equivalent. Especially they are not to be presented as “equivalent” on a Catholic Forum.

It goes far beyond what you think my beliefs are.
 
Last edited:
“Nine useful articles”? Just one single article with one single indisputable bit of evidence would have been more convincing. You see, the thing about nine articles is that it is an obvious play to substitute quantity for quality. If one were to point out an obvious deficiency is one these articles, the expected response from the true believers is “but what about the rest of it? It can’t all be wrong, can it?” The ploy is clear. Logical reasoning is subverted by the appearance of quantity of allegations. (“Where is so much smoke, there must be fire”, which is spoken by the very ones creating all the smoke.) My challenge to all those who think the election was won only through massive fraud is this: Sort through all your supposed evidence and select the very best one bit of data - the one that is most convincing - the one that is most authoritative - and let your entire case rest on that one bit of evidence. And when that one bit of evidence has been analyzed by those who say the election is fair, and if you can’t support it, promise not to say “but what about all these others?”
 
I have explained all these point before Leaf. Or pretty much all of them.

Do you have anything else?
 
I’d like to put out a Missing Persons report for Attorney General Bill Barr. During this entire Election fiasco, I’m not aware of even one thing that he has done.

Even in the unlikely scenario that there is not enough provable fraud to declare Trump the winner, all fraudsters must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The survival of a Democracy depends on fair Elections.
 
1cthlctrth said:
I’d like to put out a Missing Persons report for Attorney General Bill Barr. During this entire Election fiasco, I’m not aware of even one thing that he has done.
Click to expand...
Barr had a chance to go down in history as a great Attorney General.

When he decided to “pretend” on seeking justice regarding spying on the Trump Campaign, he not only threw that away, but he will go down in history as another “average AG” or worse.
 
1cthlctrth said:
Even in the unlikely scenario that there is not enough provable fraud to declare Trump the winner, all fraudsters must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The survival of a Democracy depends on fair Elections.
Click to expand...
There is no provable evidence right now. Not a shred. Just a clown show.

If there is fraud, it should be investigated and the perpetrators brought to justice.

However, a month after the election, there is nothing.
 
Cathoholic said:
Would you consider eyewitness testimony under oath “nothing”?
Click to expand...
I consider forty court cases thrown out to be nothing.

Or really something. Depends on how you look at it.

No. Credible. Evidence.
 
Come to think of it, how do we know Trump won in 2016? Maybe that was rigged as well?

It certainly looks to me like all these people claiming the election was a ‘fiasco’ know full well it wasn’t, and are just sad and angry that their preferred candidate lost, and so are groundlessly besmirching the election - blaming the messenger of you will - to feel better about it. Emotions are driving this, not facts or rational thought.
 
Last edited:
I would consider eyewitness testimony under oath as proof that they believe what they are saying. Just like many 2 year-olds believe in the Santa Claus as defined by Coca-Cola.
 
I was wondering the same thing. Did Trump prove he won??? Or did he take Hilary’s word for it? And why would anyone believe her?
 
Cathoholic said:
But that isn’t what I asked is it?
Click to expand...
The witnesses they are trotting out are either the same people as filed affidavits or the stories are similar. So, technically, I was answering your question.

There have been no witnesses with credible evidence of fraud. Just stories - I wouldn’t even call them allegations.

Remember, credible evidence of voter fraud should be given to the appropriate law enforcement authorities. Frankly, all of these lawsuits are trying to do is stop the counting or the certification to allow Trump’s crack legal team to come up evidence of fraud. A month later, they are empty handed. They can’t even get the injunctions to give them time.
 
PaulinVA essentially stating he does not think sworn testimony is “credible evidence”. (Or is it just in this case Paul?)

.
PaulinVA said:
There have been no witnesses with credible evidence of fraud.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top