- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,609
- Reactions
- 7,490
I don't think they will find enough evidence or votes to change it. Saying "Fraud" is the easy part. Proving it would be difficult. In fact I would say near impossible.Trump will stay in
Voter Fraud evidence will be laid out shortly.
"Massive Election Fraud" is Provable Says Trump CampaignThe left is clutching at straws...
.
I never realised you were privy to such information bellanuit.I have yet to see any evidence of wide scale or even minor corruption of the voting system. Even the governments own director of the agency in charge of the election stated that it was an extremely secure election.
So supposing that there was a means of altering votes as is now claimed. Why was it never raised as an issue prior to the election and why has Trump and the GOP who controlled most of the election processes during his presidency done nothing to shore up any weaknesses?
As far as I can see, they only things they have ever tried to do is to invent means to disenfranchise those they know that were likely to vote Democrats.
I never realised you were privy to such information bellanuit.
I have never seen any evidence that Ivan milat was a mass murderer... But that damned pesky and inconvenient prosecutor dredged up something up from somewhere
The only ones "clutching at straws" is Trump and his true believers.Trump will stay in
Voter Fraud evidence will be laid out shortly.
The left is clutching at straws...
Comments that start around the 7 minute mark are good.Silly comparison. They have had ample opportunity to show the evidence and have always failed to produce anything of consequence. Unlike Milat where there wasn't anyone in authority vouching for his innocence, in the case of the election, not only has the director responsible for overseeing the election (a Trump appointee), but those responsible at a state level for the states in dispute have also vouched for the accuracy of their data.
Even Tucker Carlson of Fox found the White House lawyer who is at the forefront of the claims completely unwilling to back up her claims and he also stated that other white house personnel have had the same silence from her. A huge difference from the Milat case.
They won't make their claims of fraud in front of a judge because they know that would be a serious offence if proven to be made up. They simply want to throw dirt around to throw doubt on the legitimacy of Biden's presidency. It too will fade like the Hunter Biden allegations.
Jump to the 2:40 mark if you find it difficult, like most sane people do, to listen to the hypocritical s**** he dishes up in the pre-amble
The only ones "clutching at straws" is Trump and his true believers.
Interesting to check out Judge Branns background. Very centrist. Worked for the Republican Party. Active in The Federalist Society which has the more conservative legal views.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?