I thought this was already sussed out. Big tech, China, central Democratic cabal, the media, Dominion, Venezuela and Chavez, the governor of Georgia…did I miss anyone out? So all we need is the evidence to tie all this together. How’s that going so far?
The farce is in the denial of every possible instance of fraud as “not evidence” no matter how credible the evidence or testimony. Someone is working very hard to try to stop people from thinking that any fraud happened at all. That denial is itself very interesting.HarryStotle:
I thought this was already sussed out. Big tech, China, central Democratic cabal, the media, Dominion, Venezuela and Chavez, the governor of Georgia…did I miss anyone out? So all we need is the evidence to tie all this together. How’s that going so far?
Guiliani’s pulling out all the stops. We have video of one of his star witnesses here:
The judge in one of the cases said she is in no way credible. I don’t know what gave him that idea. Just watch a few minutes and take on board that she is someone that Giuliani has considered to be a great example of the ‘evidence’ he has. Tell me it’s not embarressing.
At what point do you realise how much of a farce this?
Worth a listen as to why the retraction is bogus.HarryStotle:
This wasn’t a Twitter or Facebook takedown. This was a local decision by the John Hopkins editors to retract the article for the reasons they cited. No need to invent a boogey man here!LeafByNiggle:
Nah, it has been retracted because everything has been politicized by the left and big tech who will not permit anything that goes against the narrative that we are being coerced and bullied to accept.
Trump is the one in denial and anyone who believes him.The farce is in the denial of every possible instance of fraud as “not evidence” no matter how credible the evidence or testimony. Someone is working very hard to try to stop people from thinking that any fraud happened at all. That denial is itself very interesting.
So you didn’t bother to listen to what he had to say, but merely judged what you wouldn’t hear based upon shallow irrelevancies like his microphone and flannel shirt?
If the guy in the red flannel shirt were seated before me and I could engage with him on his points, I would. But he is not. I will engage with you if you want to except from his video the points you want to make your own. Then I will be engaging with HarryStotle, not with red flannel shirt guy. See how it is supposed to work?LeafByNiggle:
So you didn’t bother to listen to what he had to say, but merely judged what you wouldn’t hear based upon shallow irrelevancies like his microphone and flannel shirt?
Keep talking, you are revealing more about your capacity to discuss significant issues with each post.
If all of the states still in contention were to follow the simple Constitutional requirement of authenticating each vote by signature matching to voter registrations, following the law on chain of custody and disallowing votes by those unqualified to have voted, Biden will not be president in 2020.HarryStotle:
Trump is the one in denial and anyone who believes him.The farce is in the denial of every possible instance of fraud as “not evidence” no matter how credible the evidence or testimony. Someone is working very hard to try to stop people from thinking that any fraud happened at all. That denial is itself very interesting.
There was no more fraud in this election than every other election in the past.
There certainly was no widespread fraud or irregularities or anything that would change the result of the election.
Everyone should wake up and smell the coffee.
NO WIDESPREAD FRAUD. NO EVIDENCE OF SUCH.
Biden will be inaugurated on January 20. End of story.
Trump and his “supporters” are simply sore losers.
Whoa! That is an original and compelling take on the situation that I had not considered before. It will take me weeks and months to unravel the intricacies of the argument that you have laid out there.HarryStotle:
Trump and his “supporters” are simply sore losers.
Biden won a fair and free election.
Get over it!
When are you going to realise that the evidence is not there. In thirty odd cases presented in court, no credible evidence has been produced. That’s as in none. As in zero. As in nada. And as for testimony, do you watch any of the star witness Giuliani put forward in his court of public opinion in the video to which I linked? That’s the best they’ve got. The best. And I couldn’t tell the difference between that and an SNL sketch.Freddy:
The farce is in the denial of every possible instance of fraud as “not evidence” no matter how credible the evidence or testimony.
Strike 2…
Well it seems you have a hard time dealing with reality!Whoa! That is an original and compelling take on the situation that I had not considered before. It will take me weeks and months to unravel the intricacies of the argument that you have laid out there.
My mother in laws neighbour had her grandkids around a few weeks back (in the UK). Schools weren’t closed in their area. One of them was asymptomanic. She’s now dead. And her husband is in IC.