Jan 6 committee rescinds Trump subpoena

[Mike Parrish]

Just now, jross said:

Election fraud conviction is exceedingly rare.  How do you prove that fraud is exceedingly rare?

Start here.

https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/ensure-every-american-can-vote/vote-suppression/myth-voter-fraud

[jross]

Will you share how the evaluation was performed for 1-2 studies, and do they address my question? 

I don't question that little evidence of convictions has been found or that few reports of fraud exist.  For example, these are small numbers in Texas since 2005

• 534 - Successfully prosecuted election fraud offenses against 155 individuals by the Office of the Attorney General since 2005.
• 510 - The number of pending offenses against 43 defendants, currently pending prosecution.
• 386 - The number of currently active election fraud investigations.

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/initiatives/election-integrity

How can any study discover what fraud occurs that is not reported?

How likely is it that the older citizens were thankful for the good citizen Rachel for collecting their ballet, helping them 'pick the preferred' candidate, and to be friendly with gifts?  How many of the 7000 citizens reported concerns of fraud?

In my workplace, observability data informs me which product users are frustrated by application disruption.  Once, I proactively called to inform a customer of a problem and its resolution.  The customer was unaware and got back to me that its 900-employee user base was unable to use the product feature for several days.  The customer help desk had taken a couple of calls and had not opened a ticket with my company.  Even when people know there is a problem, they are hesitant to report the problem to the right people.  There is another type of error, the silent error, where a function fails in the back-end system, and no human is notified.  The percentage of errors reported back to my company is near zero percent.  Does the lack of customer-reported incidents mean the errors did not occur? 

As a citizen that wants election integrity, can I validate who the system counted my vote for so that I have confidence in election integrity and can report concerns?

Edited December 31, 2022 by jross

[Mike Parrish]

Perhaps you could post some information from someone who doesn't have as many legal issues as Ken Paxton?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Paxton#Legal_issues

[Ban Basketball]

Very frankly,  this crybaby crap of "rigged" and subsequent voting restrictions is getting tedious and has run its course. 

Start adapting your messages and stances and then see if elections start "going your way. " In the meantime,  "rigged" needs to go. 

[Crotalus]

1 hour ago, jross said:

 

Important: Partisan election interference through big tech, covertly and overtly, has a massive influence and should be taken seriously.  

Fraud:  The secret voting process reduces the risk of voter coercion.  It is, unfortunately, complex to audit and identify fraud.  Fraud does happen.  Are you aware of the story of Rachel Rodriguez in Texas, who admitted on video that she knew she was illegally affecting up to 7,000 votes?   https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/ag-paxton-san-antonio-election-fraudster-arrested-widespread-vote-harvesting-and-fraud

/Pausing here.  Thoughts?  Can you prove that fraud does not occur?  Does that mean that fraud does not occur?  Is 7,000 votes a lot for a single person to influence?  Is it reasonable to believe she was the only person that committed fraud in the 2020 election?  Is it reasonable to believe that fraud only would occur for one candidate?

You guys have been addressing the big tech election impact in another thread. I'm more concerned with foreign government interference, much of which happens on social media, and requires some sort of censorship of misinformation on those platforms. 

As I said, fraud has occurred in every US election ever. I don't believe fraud at a level that would impact the results of the election has happened any time in the recent past. With no evidence of such, claiming it is a possibility is just being a sore loser (didn't expect any better out of Trump). It's much more likely that folks didn't want four more years of Trump than there was a nationwide conspiracy to commit election fraud at a level that would cause him to lose so badly without any (legitimate) evidence left behind. 

[Mike Parrish]

8 minutes ago, Crotalus said:

You guys have been addressing the big tech election impact in another thread. I'm more concerned with foreign government interference, much of which happens on social media, and requires some sort of censorship of misinformation on those platforms. 

As I said, fraud has occurred in every US election ever. I don't believe fraud at a level that would impact the results of the election has happened any time in the recent past. With no evidence of such, claiming it is a possibility is just being a sore loser (didn't expect any better out of Trump). It's much more likely that folks didn't want four more years of Trump than there was a nationwide conspiracy to commit election fraud at a level that would cause him to lose so badly without any (legitimate) evidence left behind. 

Like this?

https://theintercept.com/2022/12/30/russia-china-news-media-agreement/

[Ban Basketball]

46 minutes ago, Crotalus said:

I don't believe fraud at a level that would impact the results of the election has happened any time in the recent past. 

"Fraud" may not be the proper term,  but the 2000 "presidential election" was the closest thing that I've seen and that includes the Russian/Deuce fraud of 2016.

Their 5-4, 14th Amendment ruling,  brought on by them not Bush,  and then subsequently order that the vote counts stop and throw out thousands of votes and declare Bush the "winner" was as fraudulent as I've seen. 

No one ever taking up Vincent Bugliosi's $100,000 offer at the time to splain the consistency in the ruling should tell us something. 

[BerniePragle]

 

The only source of information on Trump that I need:

 

 

[Plasmodium]

Here is an example of successfully executed election rigging.  Dowless had to take one for the team and go to to prison but in the end,  they got their seat.   https://www.npr.org/2019/07/30/746800630/north-carolina-gop-operative-faces-new-felony-charges-that-allege-ballot-fraud

[jross]

Before the election.
 

 

[Bigbrog]

Voter fraud/tampering/whatever you want to call it, does happen and on both sides.  The fact that some can argue against one sides claim the other side does it, then justify that by showing how someone on the other side of the political isle got arrested in a voter tampering case just shows your political bias and clearly shows it happens. 

Again, it happens on both sides...both of the last two presidential candidates claimed shenanigans when they lost...both the lefties and the righties squaked when it happened to their candidate, yet said it didn't happen to the other side when their candidate won.  Funny how people have such short memories.

As for the original topic, all a political smoke screen and witch hunt.  Trump is an idiot and sure we all can play armchair quarterback as to what the idiot should or shouldn't have done after the fact.  Not to stick up for the dumba$$ but he probably had no idea the stupid mob of people would take it as far as they did.  Sort of like all the other politicians (including the president) didn't do enough to stop the rioters across the country burning and destroying court houses, small business, homes, and police stations...point being it is crazy on how people have selective outrage.

[mspart]

On 12/31/2022 at 1:15 PM, Ban Basketball said:

"Fraud" may not be the proper term,  but the 2000 "presidential election" was the closest thing that I've seen and that includes the Russian/Deuce fraud of 2016.

Their 5-4, 14th Amendment ruling,  brought on by them not Bush,  and then subsequently order that the vote counts stop and throw out thousands of votes and declare Bush the "winner" was as fraudulent as I've seen. 

No one ever taking up Vincent Bugliosi's $100,000 offer at the time to splain the consistency in the ruling should tell us something. 

This is an interesting question that comes up now and again.   Florida Supreme Court violated state law numerous times.   In the next to last ruling from SCOTUS, they told FLSC that very thing and it was ignored.   So SCOTUS took action.  

FLSC were allowing votes to count that by law should not have counted.   FLSC was allowing recounts only in certain counties, not all counties.   It was a real logical issue that FLSC was doing.   A forensics team of media reporters found that Bush won the election later and that was not published much.  

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/media-jan-june01-recount_04-03

In the first full study of Florida’s ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin.

mspart

 

[Ban Basketball]

On 1/4/2023 at 5:41 PM, mspart said:

This is an interesting question that comes up now and again.   Florida Supreme Court violated state law numerous times.   In the next to last ruling from SCOTUS, they told FLSC that very thing and it was ignored.   So SCOTUS took action.  

FLSC were allowing votes to count that by law should not have counted.   FLSC was allowing recounts only in certain counties, not all counties.   It was a real logical issue that FLSC was doing.   A forensics team of media reporters found that Bush won the election later and that was not published much.  

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/media-jan-june01-recount_04-03

In the first full study of Florida’s ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin.

mspart

 

This was all separate from the 5-4 ruling and the inconsistency of the 14th Amendment claim, meanwhile choosing to stop the vote count and thrown ballots out.  That was the offer that Bugliosi made, to which no one took him up on it.

How does anyone know what the vote count would be, when they were ordered to be thrown out into dumpsters?