Survey Claims Half of Leftists Justify Violence Against Trump, Musk, Tesla. Is this true?

[jross]

Hey @scourge165 -  If you can't understand what has been explained repeatedly, and continue to reinterpret into your own invented point, you are willfully obtuse. 

You don't like Jack Russel terriers?  Fine, you can be the Collie or Ralph Wolf.  You are not a troll... maybe a gadfly?

[Boring]

4 hours ago, Caveira said:

Zero were charged with insurrection.  Can you have an insurrection without anyone being charged with it?    

Yup. Especially when the guy who made it happen controls the JD .

[scourge165]

11 minutes ago, jross said:

Hey @scourge165 -  If you can't understand what has been explained repeatedly, and continue to reinterpret into your own invented point, you are willfully obtuse. 

You don't like Jack Russel terriers?  Fine, you can be the Collie or Ralph Wolf.  You are not a troll... maybe a gadfly?

 

Cool.

 

Lets hear about how since there was the Spanish Flu in 1919 that somehow should impact the vote in 2020 AFTER the flu was done in an election that had a...what, 20 point margin? Not even looking, I just know it's stupid, FDR thought his political career was done and the way you weaved that nonsense into this is amazing.

 

As or the dogs, I don't particularly care for either breed either if I'm being honest. I own German Shepherds...and they're not  

 

I'm trolling though? Again, I'm pretty sure I've condemned all violence(as well as the destruction of...whatever Tesla Dealerships or Cars are damaged)...and you? Yeah...you are a Election Denier and Jan 6th was "propaganda."

[jross]

1 hour ago, Boring said:

Yup. Especially when the guy who made it happen controls the JD .

When I saw it unfold on TV, my bias saw a crowd of pissed off boomers (and Trump supporters), feeling duped about the election, without a clear path forward.  Some sheep and some critical thinkers; all a bit off kilter to attend a rally.

What I was fed was "armed insurrection" and "worst day in history."  And propaganda throughout: Peaceful protest, Antifa staged it, FBI staged it, Cops instigated, Coup Attempt, Political Prisoners, Trump's Insurrection, Trump Cheered, Cops Let Them In, ... etc. Spins, Omissions, Half truths, and Lies.

Seditious conspiracy isn't the same as insurrection but its bad enough... and ~15 radicals were convicted of it.  Like 175 assaults with intent for major harm.  Those people should still be in jail.  What's sketch is that law enforcement had pre-event knowledge and did not intercede. 

The event was a lot more nuanced than what we were told, and more continues to come out.

Edited April 9 by jross

[jross]

37 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

I'm trolling though? 

See my previous quote: "You are not a troll..."

• You: "I'm trolling though?"

See my previous quote: "J6 has so much propaganda spun throughout..."

• You: "Jan 6th is propaganda"

No reason to keep listing your inventions...

Willfully obtuse?  Accidentally obtuse?  I don't know...

I'm going with gadfly rather than troll... you deliberately annoy by misrepresenting and then criticizing those misrepresentations.

Edited April 9 by jross

[scourge165]

17 minutes ago, jross said:

When I saw it unfold on TV, my bias saw a crowd of pissed off boomers (and Trump supporters), feeling duped about the election, without a clear path forward.  Some sheep and some critical thinkers; all a bit off kilter to attend a rally.

What I was fed was "armed insurrection" and "worst day in history."  And propaganda throughout: Peaceful protest, Antifa staged it, FBI staged it, Cops instigated, Coup Attempt, Political Prisoners, Trump's Insurrection, Trump Cheered, Cops Let Them In, ... etc. Spins, Omissions, Half truths, and Lies.

Seditious conspiracy isn't the same as insurrection but its bad enough... and ~15 radicals were convicted of it.  Like 175 assaults with intent for major harm.  Those people should still be in jail.  What's sketch is that law enforcement had pre-event knowledge and did not intercede. 

The event was a lot more nuanced than what we were told, and more continues to come out.

Still don't get it's LESS about the storming the Capital and MUCH-MUCH more about how Trump was ONE person...one person complicit in his plan away from installing himself as POTUS?

 

That's all it took. For Pence to do the wrong thing and choose the illegitimate slate of electors. 

If you don't get how THAT was the threat...and the rest while disgusting at our Nations Capital, but not the threat Trump was and how close the guardrails came that day...then you're not going to get it. 

[Offthemat]

17 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

That's all it took. For Pence to do the wrong thing and choose the illegitimate slate of electors.

That’s not what happened.  Officials from Pennsylvania, and maybe a few other states, and Trump, asked Pence to delay the count for about a week to ten days to allow them to investigate reports of problems in the vote and count.  
 

You are consistent in your historical revisions.  Like @jross said, you make misrepresentations and then rave about how wrong the thing that never happened was. 

[Caveira]

1 hour ago, Boring said:

Yup. Especially when the guy who made it happen controls the JD .

He did for the last 4 years or he didn’t?   Same jd tried their ballz off to put orange man in prison.  If they could have punished j6 for insurrection they would have boss.  

[scourge165]

19 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

That’s not what happened.  Officials from Pennsylvania, and maybe a few other states, and Trump, asked Pence to delay the count for about a week to ten days to allow them to investigate reports of problems in the vote and count.  
 

You are consistent in your historical revisions.  Like @jross said, you make misrepresentations and then rave about how wrong the thing that never happened was. 

Donald Trump asked Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to certify the results of the 2020 Presidential Election on January 6, 2021, which many legal experts believe would have been illegal for several reasons.

1. The Constitution's Role of the Vice President: The U.S. Constitution grants the Vice President a ceremonial role in the certification of Electoral College results. In the 12th Amendment, the Vice President is described as the President of the Senate and has the responsibility to open and count the electoral votes. However, this role does not give the Vice President the power to alter or reject the results. The Constitution does not provide for the Vice President to make decisions about the legitimacy of votes or to overturn the outcome of the election.

2. No Legal Authority to Reject Electoral Votes: Trump's request for Pence to refuse to certify certain electoral votes, particularly from battleground states where Trump claimed there was fraud, was based on the argument that Pence could unilaterally decide which electoral votes should be counted. However, there is no legal or constitutional basis for this claim. The Vice President's role is purely procedural and does not allow for independent action to reject votes or delay certification without a clear and legitimate reason.

3. Violation of the Electoral Count Act: The Electoral Count Act of 1887 sets forth a process for certifying electoral votes, and it does not give the Vice President the power to arbitrarily reject votes or prevent the certification process. Trump's pressure on Pence to not certify the election results was seen as an attempt to undermine this process and interfere with the law, which is what the act was designed to prevent.

4. Potential Violation of Federal Laws: Trump's actions were also examined under federal laws that prohibit interference with elections and the certification process. Legal experts have considered whether Trump's actions amounted to attempting to incite or coerce a public official (Pence) to violate his duties. That could fall under statutes like those related to conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, or attempting to alter the outcome of an election through improper means.

In essence, what Trump asked Pence to do was seen as illegal because it attempted to subvert the lawful process of certifying the election results, which is a key part of upholding the integrity of U.S. elections. The Vice President had no legal authority to reject electoral votes, and by trying to convince Pence to take such an action, Trump was pushing for a constitutional violation.

[scourge165]

19 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

That’s not what happened.  Officials from Pennsylvania, and maybe a few other states, and Trump, asked Pence to delay the count for about a week to ten days to allow them to investigate reports of problems in the vote and count.  
 

You are consistent in your historical revisions.  Like @jross said, you make misrepresentations and then rave about how wrong the thing that never happened was. 

On top of the AI that you love, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO ASK FOR A DELAY. 

They were the LEGAL electors and it was Jan 6th. "A week to 10 days." This is AFTER Trump wouldn't cooperate with the transition team(Which Obama and Biden did with Trump). 

 

You are consistent in your consistently wrong.

As for Smoot-Hawley, argue with Reagan or Sowell, I'm done with that. 

 

The plan to get "alternate" slates of electors to sign certificates declaring that Donald Trump won key battleground states in the 2020 election was part of a broader strategy aimed at overturning the results of the election, despite Joe Biden's clear victory. This plan, often referred to as the "fake electors" scheme, was devised by Trump’s allies to create an alternate set of electors that could be used in an effort to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to reject the legitimate electors during the certification process on January 6, 2021. Here’s a breakdown of how it was supposed to work:

1. Creation of "Alternate" Electors

Trump's allies in key battleground states (like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) sought to have "alternate" slates of electors selected and submitted. These electors would be made up of people loyal to Trump, instead of those who had been legitimately chosen through the election process (who were pledged to Joe Biden). The idea was that these alternate slates would declare that Trump had actually won the state, even though Biden had won both the popular vote and the electoral vote in those states.

2. Pressure on State Legislatures and Local Officials

In some states, Trump’s allies attempted to convince state legislators or Republican Party officials to certify and submit the alternate slates. They argued that the election had been "stolen" and that the legitimate election results should not be recognized, despite no evidence of widespread fraud. In other states, these alternate electors were simply asked to meet in state capitals and submit fraudulent certificates claiming Trump won.

3. Use of Fake Electors in the Certification Process

The ultimate goal of the fake electors was to create confusion during the certification of the Electoral College votes in Congress on January 6, 2021. If Trump’s allies could present these alternate slates of electors, they hoped it would give Vice President Pence a reason to reject the legitimate electors and potentially allow the Trump team to claim victory. The plan involved submitting the fake electors' certificates to Congress, despite them having no legal standing.

4. The Role of Vice President Pence

The fake electors were intended to create a pretext for Vice President Mike Pence to delay or reject the certification of Biden's electoral victory. Trump's allies argued that Pence, as President of the Senate, could use the alternate electors to refuse to count the legitimate electoral votes from contested states. Pence, however, stated that he did not believe he had the constitutional authority to reject certified electors, and he refused to comply with this plan.

5. Legal Implications

The creation of alternate electors was widely regarded as an attempt to subvert the democratic process. In some cases, the certificates submitted by these fake electors were fraudulent, and the scheme raised concerns about election interference, conspiracy, and potential violations of federal election laws. The individuals involved in this scheme could face legal consequences, including charges of fraud or obstruction.

6. The Public and Legal Fallout

The scheme to create fake electors was exposed publicly and drew significant criticism from both legal experts and politicians. Many viewed it as an undemocratic attempt to manipulate the certification process and undermine the will of the voters. In subsequent legal investigations, including congressional hearings and criminal inquiries, the involvement of Trump’s allies in the fake elector scheme became a focal point. The plan ultimately failed, but it remains a key part of the broader narrative surrounding efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

In essence, the fake electors plan was a coordinated effort by Trump’s allies to undermine the legitimate election outcome by attempting to replace Biden’s electors with pro-Trump electors in contested states. This was a crucial part of the broader strategy to prevent Joe Biden's victory from being certified, and it became one of the key aspects of the investigation into attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

[JimmySpeaks]

According to accounts on CNN and MsNBC they were with in 40 feet of Pence. If they wanted to get him they could have.  Instead they were too busy taking pictures with their feet up on Pelosis desk.   A bunch of idiot anarchists like during the summer riots 

[Offthemat]

43 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

On top of the AI that you love, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO ASK FOR A DELAY. 

They were the LEGAL electors and it was Jan 6th. "A week to 10 days." This is AFTER Trump wouldn't cooperate with the transition team(Which Obama and Biden did with Trump). 

 

You are consistent in your consistently wrong.

As for Smoot-Hawley, argue with Reagan or Sowell, I'm done with that. 

 

The plan to get "alternate" slates of electors to sign certificates declaring that Donald Trump won key battleground states in the 2020 election was part of a broader strategy aimed at overturning the results of the election, despite Joe Biden's clear victory. This plan, often referred to as the "fake electors" scheme, was devised by Trump’s allies to create an alternate set of electors that could be used in an effort to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to reject the legitimate electors during the certification process on January 6, 2021. Here’s a breakdown of how it was supposed to work:

1. Creation of "Alternate" Electors

Trump's allies in key battleground states (like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) sought to have "alternate" slates of electors selected and submitted. These electors would be made up of people loyal to Trump, instead of those who had been legitimately chosen through the election process (who were pledged to Joe Biden). The idea was that these alternate slates would declare that Trump had actually won the state, even though Biden had won both the popular vote and the electoral vote in those states.

2. Pressure on State Legislatures and Local Officials

In some states, Trump’s allies attempted to convince state legislators or Republican Party officials to certify and submit the alternate slates. They argued that the election had been "stolen" and that the legitimate election results should not be recognized, despite no evidence of widespread fraud. In other states, these alternate electors were simply asked to meet in state capitals and submit fraudulent certificates claiming Trump won.

3. Use of Fake Electors in the Certification Process

The ultimate goal of the fake electors was to create confusion during the certification of the Electoral College votes in Congress on January 6, 2021. If Trump’s allies could present these alternate slates of electors, they hoped it would give Vice President Pence a reason to reject the legitimate electors and potentially allow the Trump team to claim victory. The plan involved submitting the fake electors' certificates to Congress, despite them having no legal standing.

4. The Role of Vice President Pence

The fake electors were intended to create a pretext for Vice President Mike Pence to delay or reject the certification of Biden's electoral victory. Trump's allies argued that Pence, as President of the Senate, could use the alternate electors to refuse to count the legitimate electoral votes from contested states. Pence, however, stated that he did not believe he had the constitutional authority to reject certified electors, and he refused to comply with this plan.

5. Legal Implications

The creation of alternate electors was widely regarded as an attempt to subvert the democratic process. In some cases, the certificates submitted by these fake electors were fraudulent, and the scheme raised concerns about election interference, conspiracy, and potential violations of federal election laws. The individuals involved in this scheme could face legal consequences, including charges of fraud or obstruction.

6. The Public and Legal Fallout

The scheme to create fake electors was exposed publicly and drew significant criticism from both legal experts and politicians. Many viewed it as an undemocratic attempt to manipulate the certification process and undermine the will of the voters. In subsequent legal investigations, including congressional hearings and criminal inquiries, the involvement of Trump’s allies in the fake elector scheme became a focal point. The plan ultimately failed, but it remains a key part of the broader narrative surrounding efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

In essence, the fake electors plan was a coordinated effort by Trump’s allies to undermine the legitimate election outcome by attempting to replace Biden’s electors with pro-Trump electors in contested states. This was a crucial part of the broader strategy to prevent Joe Biden's victory from being certified, and it became one of the key aspects of the investigation into attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

GIGO never fails. 
 

They weren’t Trump allies, they were State Congressmen.  They weren’t fake electors, each state has at least two slates of electors, and in this case they were making themselves readily available to vote should the need arise.  The idea that the request was unconstitutional or unlawful is repudiated by the fact that Congress rewrote the procedures post event. 

[jross]

If the candidate is convinced the election was rigged, but the legal window’s tight and the system isn’t built to catch fraud, what’s next?  This explains a lot of otherwise irrational behaviors.  It doesn't help that an article was published that laid out with hubris how the election was stacked.

It is narrow minded to ignore a rational skepticism...

There were so many oddities...

[Caveira]

1 hour ago, scourge165 said:

On top of the AI that you love, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO ASK FOR A DELAY. 

They were the LEGAL electors and it was Jan 6th. "A week to 10 days." This is AFTER Trump wouldn't cooperate with the transition team(Which Obama and Biden did with Trump). 

 

You are consistent in your consistently wrong.

As for Smoot-Hawley, argue with Reagan or Sowell, I'm done with that. 

 

The plan to get "alternate" slates of electors to sign certificates declaring that Donald Trump won key battleground states in the 2020 election was part of a broader strategy aimed at overturning the results of the election, despite Joe Biden's clear victory. This plan, often referred to as the "fake electors" scheme, was devised by Trump’s allies to create an alternate set of electors that could be used in an effort to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to reject the legitimate electors during the certification process on January 6, 2021. Here’s a breakdown of how it was supposed to work:

1. Creation of "Alternate" Electors

Trump's allies in key battleground states (like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) sought to have "alternate" slates of electors selected and submitted. These electors would be made up of people loyal to Trump, instead of those who had been legitimately chosen through the election process (who were pledged to Joe Biden). The idea was that these alternate slates would declare that Trump had actually won the state, even though Biden had won both the popular vote and the electoral vote in those states.

2. Pressure on State Legislatures and Local Officials

In some states, Trump’s allies attempted to convince state legislators or Republican Party officials to certify and submit the alternate slates. They argued that the election had been "stolen" and that the legitimate election results should not be recognized, despite no evidence of widespread fraud. In other states, these alternate electors were simply asked to meet in state capitals and submit fraudulent certificates claiming Trump won.

3. Use of Fake Electors in the Certification Process

The ultimate goal of the fake electors was to create confusion during the certification of the Electoral College votes in Congress on January 6, 2021. If Trump’s allies could present these alternate slates of electors, they hoped it would give Vice President Pence a reason to reject the legitimate electors and potentially allow the Trump team to claim victory. The plan involved submitting the fake electors' certificates to Congress, despite them having no legal standing.

4. The Role of Vice President Pence

The fake electors were intended to create a pretext for Vice President Mike Pence to delay or reject the certification of Biden's electoral victory. Trump's allies argued that Pence, as President of the Senate, could use the alternate electors to refuse to count the legitimate electoral votes from contested states. Pence, however, stated that he did not believe he had the constitutional authority to reject certified electors, and he refused to comply with this plan.

5. Legal Implications

The creation of alternate electors was widely regarded as an attempt to subvert the democratic process. In some cases, the certificates submitted by these fake electors were fraudulent, and the scheme raised concerns about election interference, conspiracy, and potential violations of federal election laws. The individuals involved in this scheme could face legal consequences, including charges of fraud or obstruction.

6. The Public and Legal Fallout

The scheme to create fake electors was exposed publicly and drew significant criticism from both legal experts and politicians. Many viewed it as an undemocratic attempt to manipulate the certification process and undermine the will of the voters. In subsequent legal investigations, including congressional hearings and criminal inquiries, the involvement of Trump’s allies in the fake elector scheme became a focal point. The plan ultimately failed, but it remains a key part of the broader narrative surrounding efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

In essence, the fake electors plan was a coordinated effort by Trump’s allies to undermine the legitimate election outcome by attempting to replace Biden’s electors with pro-Trump electors in contested states. This was a crucial part of the broader strategy to prevent Joe Biden's victory from being certified, and it became one of the key aspects of the investigation into attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

Your chat gpt account … is it busy Much?

[mspart]

mspart

[scourge165]

1 hour ago, Offthemat said:

GIGO never fails. 
 

They weren’t Trump allies, they were State Congressmen.  They weren’t fake electors, each state has at least two slates of electors, and in this case they were making themselves readily available to vote should the need arise.  The idea that the request was unconstitutional or unlawful is repudiated by the fact that Congress rewrote the procedures post event. 

That's a lie, they have absolutely NO authority to be there. The States Certified the vote, THAT is why they're being prosecuted now...

 

Actually...I realize now how easy this is. It's why jross comes off as a pseudo intellectually but then asks about the voter turnout in an election that was 60-34% and AFTER the Spanish Flu was considered over!

 

It was illegal for Donald Trump and his allies to attempt to create and submit a second slate of electors on January 6, 2021, for several key reasons rooted in U.S. law, particularly the U.S. Constitution and federal statutes governing the election process. Here’s why:

1. No Legal Basis for Alternate Electors

The U.S. Constitution and federal laws clearly outline how the Electoral College works, including how electors are selected and certified. The legitimate electors for each state are chosen through the state’s electoral process, based on the popular vote (except in rare circumstances where the state legislature might step in to choose electors, which did not occur in 2020).

The problem with the second slate of electors is that it had no legal basis. These alternate electors were chosen without any legal authority or support from state legislatures, and they did not reflect the results of the actual election. The electors Trump’s allies tried to create were intended to falsely claim that Trump had won states where Joe Biden was the legitimate winner. This was a direct attempt to circumvent the lawful process.

2. Electoral Count Act of 1887

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 establishes the procedure for counting and certifying electoral votes. According to this law, electors must be chosen in accordance with the laws of each state, and those electors must then meet and send their votes to Congress. There is no provision in this law for creating alternate slates of electors, especially when those electors do not reflect the results of the election.

The idea behind creating a fake set of electors was that if the legitimate electors could be rejected, the alternate slate might be used instead, allowing Trump to have a chance to win. However, the Electoral Count Act does not allow for this kind of manipulation. The law only provides for the rejection of electors under very limited circumstances (such as if they were determined to have been illegally chosen or invalidated), but the alternate slates created by Trump’s allies were not legitimate electors under the law.

3. Violation of the Certification Process

The certification of electoral votes is a solemn, constitutionally mandated process. Under the 12th Amendment, once the electors’ votes are cast and sent to Congress, the Vice President (in his role as President of the Senate) opens and counts those votes. Congress may object to specific votes or states, but the process is designed to be a ceremonial one, and only in the case of legitimate issues (such as clear fraud or error in the election process) could votes be excluded.

Trump and his allies' efforts to have an alternate slate of electors was an attempt to create a fraudulent challenge to the certification process. The attempt to replace legitimate electors with fraudulent ones was a direct attempt to undermine the proper constitutional process. Such actions are seen as a violation of the law because they subverted the election process and sought to interfere with the lawful certification of the election results.

4. Potential Charges and Legal Implications

By trying to create a false set of electors, Trump and his allies were involved in a scheme to defraud the public and the U.S. government. In legal terms, this could amount to conspiracy to defraud the United States under federal statutes. The key issue is that the alternate electors were attempting to falsely present themselves as the legitimate electors, with the goal of subverting the lawful results of the election.

Creating fraudulent certificates and attempting to have them submitted to Congress (and potentially used in place of legitimate electors) is a crime under various laws, including those prohibiting the use of false documents or false statements in a federal election. The fraudulent electors did not represent the true will of the voters in those states and were an attempt to illegally alter the outcome of the election.

5. The Role of the Vice President

Another key point is that Vice President Mike Pence had no legal authority to reject the legitimate electors and choose the fake ones in their place. The idea behind the alternate slates was that Pence could use them to refuse to certify the legitimate election results on January 6. However, as Pence repeatedly stated, his role was strictly ceremonial, and he did not have the authority to unilaterally change the results of the election. Any attempt to force him to do so would have been a violation of his constitutional duty.

Conclusion:

In summary, the creation of alternate electors on January 6, 2021, was illegal because it was an attempt to falsely present a different outcome than the one determined by the lawful and legitimate electoral process. The move violated both the U.S. Constitution and the Electoral Count Act of 1887, which governs the process of certifying electoral votes. The scheme was designed to subvert the democratic process and undermine the certification of the election results, which is illegal under U.S. law.

[scourge165]

1 hour ago, jross said:

If the candidate is convinced the election was rigged, but the legal window’s tight and the system isn’t built to catch fraud, what’s next?  This explains a lot of otherwise irrational behaviors.  It doesn't help that an article was published that laid out with hubris how the election was stacked.

It is narrow minded to ignore a rational skepticism...

There were so many oddities...

The system is VERY much built to catch fraud. They went and audited the votes how many times and there were like 3 illgal votes. A Trumper who voted by mail for his dead Mother in Law, a women in TX who was days within being off probation and told it was legal to vote and then a 3rd Trump voter who tried to vote in multiple states because...Trump literally told them to. 

 

The oddities are not worth talking about. Just look at the stupidity with the Spanish Flu. 2  seconds. Over by the election.
Not a tightly contested election(26 point win). 

"People saw stuff," was another argument. And they were heard and it was nonsense. 

 

 

But the part in bold. Basically if he loses, but HE believes he won(we now know he KNEW he did not win, Bill Barr, Sidney Powell among others were crystal clear on that point)....but if he loses and the LAW doesn't work, what else is he supposed to do but cheat?

[Boring]

18 hours ago, Caveira said:

He did for the last 4 years or he didn’t?   Same jd tried their ballz off to put orange man in prison.  If they could have punished j6 for insurrection they would have boss.  

No, that's the reason hundreds of the low IQ scum that Trump incited ended up in prison, finally. Of course the traitor pardoned them immediately on taking office again. 

[Caveira]

28 minutes ago, Boring said:

No, that's the reason hundreds of the low IQ scum that Trump incited ended up in prison, finally. Of course the traitor pardoned them immediately on taking office again. 

Give me one good reason your boy Biden didn’t have his jd try or charge anyone for insurrection.

[jross]

14 hours ago, scourge165 said:

The system is VERY much built to catch fraud.

Fine, it is "built" to catch fraud, but it's design cannot work in practice.  Fraud is, by its nature, hard to detect and measure and the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

• Mail is lost (on purpose or accident?)
• No voter ID laws
• Humans suck at verifying signatures, let alone thousands in rapid order
• Ballot harvesting is legal
• No end to end verification

It is interesting what The California Institute of Technology and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology wrote from the 2000 election guidance for a more secure, reliable, robust system of recording election preferences.  Search on fraud and read the repeated criticisms of mail in ballots.

• https://web.archive.org/web/20081120004337/http:/www.vote.caltech.edu/media/documents/july01/July01_VTP_Voting_Report_Entire.pdf

[jross]

Georgia’s mail in ballot rejection rate fell from 6.4 percent in 2016 to 0.36 percent in 2020.  Hmm... the same state that refuses to allow independent ballot inspection.

The left-leaving Washington Post tells you that ballots are "less secure"

• https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/12/13/dont-be-shocked-by-the-north-carolina-fraud-allegations-absentee-ballots-are-much-less-secure-than-polling-places/

North Carolina ballot fraud in 2018 was caught because of whistleblowers... rather than the 'secure' process.  Fraud that had been ongoing for years.

Interesting...

• https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/

There are many such cases that turn this post into a wall of noise.

[jross]

15 hours ago, scourge165 said:

But the part in bold. Basically if he loses, but HE believes he won(we now know he KNEW he did not win, Bill Barr, Sidney Powell among others were crystal clear on that point)....but if he loses and the LAW doesn't work, what else is he supposed to do but cheat?

Donald Trump lost to Joe Biden, and he’s aware of that. He thought the process was shady and unethical (rigged, stolen), if not illegal.  His actions make sense in regards to that view.

[jross]

27 minutes ago, jross said:

It is interesting what The California Institute of Technology and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology wrote from the 2000 election guidance for a more secure, reliable, robust system of recording election preferences.  Search on fraud and read the repeated criticisms of mail in ballots.

• https://web.archive.org/web/20081120004337/http:/www.vote.caltech.edu/media/documents/july01/July01_VTP_Voting_Report_Entire.pdf

Specifically page 41 from the Absentee and Early Voting section.  

restrict or abolish on-demand absentee voting in favor of in-person early voting.

Quote

First, restrict or abolish on-demand absentee voting in favor of in-person early voting. The convenience that on-demand absentees produces is bought at a significant cost to the real and perceived integrity of the voting process. On the face of it, early voting can provide nearly equal convenience with significantly greater controls against fraud and coercion. Traditional absentee procedures for cause are still valuable for the limited situations* they were originally intended for. States should return to those practices.

*(e.g., military, disabled voters)

 

...based on... Caltech and MIT researchers (computer scientists, human factors engineers, mechanical engineers, and social scientists) collected data from around the country and met with leading election officials, researchers, and industry representatives... over the course of a six month project.

 

So leading election officials recommended to back off mail-in ballots based on the 2000 election... and instead we doubled the most mail-in ballots ever for the 2020 "Most Secure Election In History." /s

Edited Thursday at 01:36 PM by jross

[red viking]

ZERO evidence of any significant fraud. NEVER enough to overturn an election. Not even close.  Anecdotes of one person here and one person there, and even then, those were generally procedures that weren't followed, not people that weren't legally allowed to vote. 

These voter id laws are very simple. Simply an attempt to make it more difficult for poor people to vote. They lie and make up bs excuses about wanting to stop "fraud." They can't ever be honest about their true motives. 

[jross]

27 minutes ago, red viking said:

ZERO evidence of any significant fraud. NEVER enough to overturn an election. Not even close.  Anecdotes of one person here and one person there, and even then, those were generally procedures that weren't followed, not people that weren't legally allowed to vote. 

These voter id laws are very simple. Simply an attempt to make it more difficult for poor people to vote. They lie and make up bs excuses about wanting to stop "fraud." They can't ever be honest about their true motives. 

hyperbole and assumptions... goes both ways.
 

That's the problem with mail-in ballots.