Evidence is evidence, voter fraud by state

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

5 hours ago, Jeffrey Brown said:

I guess great minds think alike.  Interestingly enough, this GOP Congressmen compares the delusional nutcases in his own party, who are drinking the Trump Kool-Aid, to folks hunting for Big Foot. 

As Trump Unravels, GOP Rep. Blasts 'lunatics' In Party

https://youtu.be/N3x_78bcw3Q

As Trump’s assault on democracy triggers infighting within the GOP, one Republican congressman rejects the election denialism and his party’s extremism, saying it’s “a constant fight in the Republican Party" to try to "stop the lunatics from taking over the asylum."

Denver Riggleman, the very definition of RINO. Maybe he's still butt hurt about being reprimanded by the RNC for officiating at a gay marriage. I guarantee he'll switch parties one day officially

[Jeffrey Brown + 207]

Axios:  Trump's favorite paper turns its back

President Trump personally fed the N.Y. Post's "Page Six" when he lived in Manhattan, and reached for that Post first once he moved to D.C. Rupert Murdoch — co-chair of Fox Corp. and executive chair of News Corp, which includes the Post — became a Trump confidant.

Murdoch had grown exasperated with Trump, and now it's divorce. The Post, which endorsed Trump, says in an editorial:

If you insist on spending your final days in office threatening to burn it all down, that will be how you are remembered. Not as a revolutionary, but as the anarchist holding the match.

[Jeffrey Brown + 207]

15 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Denver Riggleman, the very definition of RINO. Maybe he's still butt hurt about being reprimanded by the RNC for officiating at a gay marriage. I guarantee he'll switch parties one day officially

Funny how the number of "RINO's" has been increasing at a pretty steady, and apparently accelerating rate since this summer.  For example, the co-founder of the Federalist Society.  And for what it's worth, I strongly supported the Lincoln Project* during the election.

*The Lincoln Project is holding accountable those who would violate their oaths to the Constitution and would put others before Americans.

Axios:  Federalist Society co-founder calls Trump's tweet about delaying election “fascistic” (7/30/20)

Steven Calabresi, co-founder of the Federalist Society, called President Trump's suggestion to delay the November election "fascistic" and grounds for the president’s impeachment, in a New York Times op-ed on Thursday.

Why it matters: The Federalist Society is an extremely influential conservative and libertarian organization that advocates for a text-based and originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. Calabresi said he voted for Trump in 2016 and defended the president during the Mueller investigation and impeachment trials.

What he's saying: "I am frankly appalled by the president’s recent tweet seeking to postpone the November election. Until recently, I had taken as political hyperbole the Democrats’ assertion that President Trump is a fascist," Calabresi wrote.

 

• "But this latest tweet is fascistic and is itself grounds for the president’s immediate impeachment again by the House of Representatives and his removal from office by the Senate."
• "Election Day was fixed by a federal law passed in 1845, and the Constitution itself in the 20th Amendmentspecifies that the newly elected Congress meet at noon on Jan. 3, 2021, and that the terms of the president and vice president end at noon on Jan. 20, 2021."

The big picture: Calabresi called on every congressional Republican to tell Trump he cannot postpone the election and added that those who say otherwise "should never be elected to Congress again."

 

Edited December 28, 2020 by Jeffrey Brown

[Kirk + 12]

Biden won by 7 million votes even with Trump’s postmaster tossing out mail in ballots and republican cheating. 

[Jeffrey Brown + 207]

Meanwhile, Trump, being a self-described genius, managed--heading into the Senate elections in Georgia next week--to make an unassisted triple play. He put the  Congressional Republicans on record as opposing bigger stimulus checks, he delayed the $600 checks and he caused supplemental unemployment payments to temporarily lapse.  

Someone on Facebook wondered if Trump's advisors got him to sign the stimulus bill, under the mistaken impression that he was actually pardoning a serial killer. 

Trump backs down, signs stimulus package

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/27/congress-stimulus-deal-450380

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Sunday night he will attempt to pass $2,000 checks in the Senate but he is all but guaranteed to face objections from some Republicans. The Senate is scheduled to return Tuesday to begin the process of overriding Trump’s veto of the annual defense bill.

It’s the latest whiplash for the 116th Congress, which began with an epic 35-day government shutdown and will end with twin public health and economic crises.

Party leaders were forced to make plans quickly after Trump called the coronavirus package a “disgrace” and demanded $1,400 more per stimulus check. But several noted that Trump has also expressed frustration with legislation that he then proceeded to sign, including a $1.3 trillion spending bill in 2018.

In a video message last week, Trump criticized the stimulus bill for “wasteful spending,” even though he previously approved the spending levels. In an effort to appease the president, McCarthy suggested revisiting funding levels for state and foreign operations, but Senate Republicans don’t appear to have much appetite for renegotiation.

“Frankly if you start opening part of the bill up, it's hard to defend not opening the whole bill up,” said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo), the No. 4 GOP leader. “It took us a long time to get to where we are, I think, reopening that bill would be a mistake.”

Trump’s eleventh-hour demands came after he largely stayed out of negotiations, leaving much of the deal making to Mnuchin. The president is instead focusing on a futile effort to overturn the results of Nov. 3 election and is lashing out at Republicans, including McConnell and Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) for recognizing Joe Biden as president-elect.

 

Edited December 28, 2020 by Jeffrey Brown

[0R0 + 6,251]

1 hour ago, Kirk said:

Biden won by 7 million votes even with Trump’s postmaster tossing out mail in ballots and republican cheating. 

The Biden "win" is not in voters but in ballots with no record of votes backing it. Voter registries account for 68 million possible votes for Biden. Machine generated flipped votes from Trump to Biden are in the 5 to 7 million range, but in the key swing states just from state level data, it is 500k. Totals are likely to be around 81 mil Trump, 63 mil Biden.

That anyone thinks they can flog off the blatant brazen fraud and the alignment of corruption to uphold it as anything less than a well organized and financed coup conducted by China through its commercial and political partners, is an admission of complicity and alignment with the CCP.

The assertion of innocence of the election is not at all meeting the burden of proof that an actual election was held, not to speak of the count being representative of it's voter's choices. The burden of proof is on the election officials, not the challengers. So long as those officials prevent forensic audit, the one thing we know with certainty is that the results of the election counts do not come close to representing the actual vote.

Anyone who is interested in the facts can access them. This and particularly the long electoral college count threads present plenty of evidence to show how fake the election is.

 

 

 

[Jeffrey Brown + 207]

54 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

the long electoral college count threads present plenty of evidence to show how fake the election is.

To quote the New York Post editorial, "Stop the Insanity--You lost the election." 

The Post says: Give it up, Mr. President — for your sake and the nation’s

https://nypost.com/2020/12/27/give-it-up-mr-president-for-your-sake-and-the-nations/

Excerpt:

Mr. President, it’s time to end this dark charade.

We’re one week away from an enormously important moment for the next four years of our country.

On Jan. 5, two runoff races in Georgia will determine which party will control the Senate — whether Joe Biden will have a rubber stamp or a much-needed check on his agenda.

Unfortunately, you’re obsessed with the next day, Jan. 6, when Congress will, in a pro forma action, certify the Electoral College vote. You have tweeted that, as long as Republicans have “courage,” they can overturn the results and give you four more years in office.

In other words, you’re cheering for an undemocratic coup.

You had every right to investigate the election. But let’s be clear: Those efforts have found nothing. To take just two examples: Your campaign paid $3 million for a recount in two Wisconsin counties, and you lost by 87 more votes. Georgia did two recounts of the state, each time affirming Biden’s win. These ballots were counted by hand, which alone debunks the claims of a Venezuelan vote-manipulating Kraken conspiracy.

Sidney Powell is a crazy person. Michael Flynn suggesting martial law is tantamount to treason. It is shameful.

We understand, Mr. President, that you’re angry that you lost. But to continue down this road is ruinous. We offer this as a newspaper that endorsed you, that supported you: If you want to cement your influence, even set the stage for a future return, you must channel your fury into something more productive.

Edited December 28, 2020 by Jeffrey Brown

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

1 hour ago, 0R0 said:

The Biden "win" is not in voters but in ballots with no record of votes backing it. Voter registries account for 68 million possible votes for Biden. Machine generated flipped votes from Trump to Biden are in the 5 to 7 million range, but in the key swing states just from state level data, it is 500k. Totals are likely to be around 81 mil Trump, 63 mil Biden.

That anyone thinks they can flog off the blatant brazen fraud and the alignment of corruption to uphold it as anything less than a well organized and financed coup conducted by China through its commercial and political partners, is an admission of complicity and alignment with the CCP.

The assertion of innocence of the election is not at all meeting the burden of proof that an actual election was held, not to speak of the count being representative of it's voter's choices. The burden of proof is on the election officials, not the challengers. So long as those officials prevent forensic audit, the one thing we know with certainty is that the results of the election counts do not come close to representing the actual vote.

Anyone who is interested in the facts can access them. This and particularly the long electoral college count threads present plenty of evidence to show how fake the election is.

 

 

 

Actually what you may find interesting would be Trump actually lost the electoral college win by fewer than 150,000 votes. 

 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

2 hours ago, Jeffrey Brown said:

Funny how the number of "RINO's" has been increasing at a pretty steady, and apparently accelerating rate since this summer.  For example, the co-founder of the Federalist Society.  And for what it's worth, I strongly supported the Lincoln Project* during the election.

*The Lincoln Project is holding accountable those who would violate their oaths to the Constitution and would put others before Americans.

Axios:  Federalist Society co-founder calls Trump's tweet about delaying election “fascistic” (7/30/20)

Steven Calabresi, co-founder of the Federalist Society, called President Trump's suggestion to delay the November election "fascistic" and grounds for the president’s impeachment, in a New York Times op-ed on Thursday.

Why it matters: The Federalist Society is an extremely influential conservative and libertarian organization that advocates for a text-based and originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. Calabresi said he voted for Trump in 2016 and defended the president during the Mueller investigation and impeachment trials.

What he's saying: "I am frankly appalled by the president’s recent tweet seeking to postpone the November election. Until recently, I had taken as political hyperbole the Democrats’ assertion that President Trump is a fascist," Calabresi wrote.

 

• "But this latest tweet is fascistic and is itself grounds for the president’s immediate impeachment again by the House of Representatives and his removal from office by the Senate."
• "Election Day was fixed by a federal law passed in 1845, and the Constitution itself in the 20th Amendmentspecifies that the newly elected Congress meet at noon on Jan. 3, 2021, and that the terms of the president and vice president end at noon on Jan. 20, 2021."

The big picture: Calabresi called on every congressional Republican to tell Trump he cannot postpone the election and added that those who say otherwise "should never be elected to Congress again."

 

Orange man bad. Got it. 

Tell me how good Biden is. You can't.  Fine, the fix was in and Biden cheated his way to "victory". What then? Business as usual? With his phony mandate and 85 million pissed off voters who didn't vote for him? That how democracy works for you, just because orange man bad? 

Edited December 28, 2020 by Selva
insults

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

This is utter nonsense. What does denying election fraud accomplish?

Quote

There were voluminous reports, from eyewitnesses and experts, of widespread election fraud in the so-called battle states and beyond.  Specific allegations were made, and evidence of election rules violations and statistical anomalies were collected.  Yet the courts refused to listen to virtually all witnesses and experts, rejected most of the evidence, and refused to subpoena more evidence requested by the plaintiffs.  Many state government officials and some top representatives of companies supplying voting machines and software categorically denied any election fraud.

So, on the one hand, there is plenty of evidence strongly suggesting that the widely observed election fraud took place during the 2020 presidential elections.  On the other hand, all we have are assurances of the election fraud–deniers that there was no election fraud, which were later changed to admissions that although election fraud did take place, it wasn't large enough to sway the results.  No verifiable facts that would clearly invalidate the specific election fraud allegations were presented to the public as of time of this writing, while quite a lot of obstruction of investigations, like denials to subject the vote-counting software and hardware to examination by independent experts, took place.  Some of this obstruction had all appearances of a cover-up.

I must say that anyone who, knowing the above, claims that Joe Biden has received required majorities of legitimate votes to become a duly elected president is either stupid or willing to cover up the truth about the rigged elections that we have allowed to continue in America.

I am not going to analyze the stupid.  However, I would like to look into possible reasons why an intelligent observer would opt for cover-up of election fraud if it did take place.

 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

Quote

Reason 1: The election fraud–denier wanted President Trump to be removed from the Oval Office.

There were many individuals and groups who for more than four years have been desperately trying to stop Mr. Trump from becoming the president in 2016 and then, after his inauguration, to remove him by any means available.  False charges of his collusion with Russia and other impeachable offenses were being thrown on him and investigated vigorously for most of his term as the president, to the tune of mass propaganda from the majority of the "mainstream" media portraying him as a monster, a dictator, a profiteer, a destroyer of the world order, and such.  Obviously, the anti-Trumpers are not going to allow anybody to question the validity of the election of Mr. Joe Biden.

Reason 2: The election fraud denier-wanted a Democrat to be elected as the president.

Although any individual voter is free to vote for whomever he wants, when government officers let their personal political preferences override their official duty, then prerequisites for corruption are met.  For instance, if judges or election officials refuse to seriously consider election fraud because of their affiliation with or support of the Democrat Party, then corruption has taken place.  Not that the Democrat Party has a monopoly on this kind of wrongdoing, but it has gained notoriety as the party who cheats the most and the best.

Reason 3: The election fraud–denier was afraid of violence that investigation of election fraud may lead to.

Unfortunately, many of those in positions of power who could order serious and impartial investigations of the alleged election fraud and possible overturning of the results, if proven fraudulent or invalid, were concerned with a threat of violent riots of left's militant organizations, like BLM and  Antifa. Some could have been trying to save our country a civil war or something equally horrible, while others were afraid for their own safety.  As much as I disagreed with their decision to support the cover-up of election fraud, their position had a dose of rationality.

Imagine that you are a judge or a justice, and you have a family to feed and protect.  Wouldn't you be concerned that your controversial judgment may irritate BLM or Antifa into bringing their "protests" to your neighborhood and trying to harm your spouse and your children or burn down your home?  It seems likely that without violence by BLM and Antifa earlier this year, the well orchestrated election fraud would not have stood a chance to be left uninvestigated.  If a thorough investigation proved that the results were invalid, Mr. Joe Biden would not stand a chance of being declared the winner.

The above realization implies that we are seeing a dawn of mobocracy in the U.S. as a replacement for our Constitutional Republic as a form of government.  That spells out bad news for virtually everyone, including even the mobsters.  We need brave leaders who will put the safety of law-abiding Americans in front of these leaders' personal safety and political interest.

Reason 4: The election fraud–denier wants to be "pragmatic" — that is, to accept whatever happened and go along with whatever comes out of it.

By doing so, the election fraud–denier makes himself a perfect target for all kinds of predators, social parasites, and control freaks.  He does not realize that losing a battle does not require capitulation of the war, and that losing a war does not require surrendering the nation to the hostile power that waged it.  Some election fraud–deniers of this kind go even as far as to insist that if we cannot (or don't want to) fight them (the election fraudsters and power-grabbers), then we may as well join them.  That may be a nice little trick that may work, to some extent, in low-stage games, but not when submission of once free people to the power of the government that is not accountable to them is at stake.  Such submission is almost always permanent, and the longer it lasts, the more difficult it is to abolish. Clearly, if the president is determined not by the will of the people, as prescribed in the Constitution, but by rigged elections under control of determined and ruthless cabal, then the president, and other elected officials, is accountable to the cabal and not to the voters.

Reason 5: The election-fraud denier was concerned that any serious investigation of election fraud might erode public trust in our elections.

Surely, many politicians who were not enthusiastic about how the elections 2020 were carried on, wanted to protect a"higher good," a public trust that our elections are free, fair, and honest.  As much as such may seem on its surface a noble concern, it is based on a fallacy. It presupposes that public trust in elections integrity is far more important that the actual integrity of the elections, which it is not.  For why would We the People agree to be cheated of our right to elect the president of our choice just to maintain appearances that we were not cheated of that fundamental right? True, our Constitutional Republic has not been perfect, yet so many of us wholeheartedly support it. But among other strengths, it has an exceptional ability to self-repair.   That is definitely not a feature of any rigged election system; once in place, it has a natural tendency to get worse and worse until it is overthrown by its victims — a costly and destructive option that is less than certain to deliver the desirable results.

Moreover, concerns that any serious investigation of election fraud might erode public trust in our elections are in many cases hypocritical, as they often come from the very groups and individuals who were not concerned with weakening of the presidency by endless investigations of false charges against him or who spread the mass anti-Trump propaganda that grossly undermined public trust in the Office of the President of the U.S.

Why would we, without serious and thorough investigation, accept categorical assurances by election fraud–deniers despite mounting evidence that organized election fraud took place in 2020 and was widespread, while President Trump'S categorical assurances that he did not collude with Russians were deemed not enough so that all the false allegations against him had to be seriously and thoroughly investigated?

There is no good reason for us to accept these assurances. The Constitutional laws and processes that make for this Republics have been weaponized to facilitate a grab of sweeping power by the transnational cabal that has long considered the U.S. as an obstacle in imposition of their rule over the world. Never mind that American $20+ trillion a year economy for grabs by the said control freaks would have been a sufficient reason in its own right. Now, it's up to us, the American people, to resist the cabal and defend our freedom and the Constitution that stands for it.

As George Orwell wrote in 1984, "[w]e know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it."  So will our future rulers not relinquish the power they grabbed with 2020 election fraud, if we let them have their wa

 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

The mendacious aren't going to be convinced by truth or evidence. The very definition of mendacious explains why. 

For the rest of us simply science. 

BTW what he talks about here has been requested by lawyers but secretaries of states and judges have refused to provide the material. No court has allowed inspection of ballots. Why the hell not? Guilty

 

[Gregory1972 + 30]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

This is utter nonsense. What does denying election fraud accomplish?

 

Technically, all you have are allegations of fraud - none have been proven in a court of law. 

 

[Jeffrey Brown + 207]

5 minutes ago, Gregory1972 said:

Technically, all you have are allegations of fraud - none have been proven in a court of law. 

 

And actually, I don't think that the most recent dismissed cases that Trump's lawyers filed even alleged fraud, but the Trump Kool-Aid drinkers persist in at least claiming to see that which does not exist. 

Donald Trump And His Lawyers Are Making Sweeping Allegations of Voter Fraud In Public. In Court, They Say No Such Thing

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no-evidence-fraud/

Excerpt:

 

Nearly two weeks after the election was called for President-elect Joe Biden, Donald Trump and his legal team continue to advance spurious and dangerous claims that the election was “rigged.” In a press conference on Nov. 19, Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani called the election a “massive fraud,” while an attorney for the Trump campaign, Sidney Powell, alleged without evidence a wide-ranging scheme perpetrated by “massive influence of communist money.” She also appeared to suggest a revolution, comparing this moment to “the 1775 of our generation and beyond.”

But Trump and his allies’ public allegations stand in stark contrast to what his lawyers are actually claiming— bound by professional ethics rules—in election-related cases in court. In three separate lawsuits in Pennsylvania and cases in Arizona and Nevada, Trump’s lawyers have jettisoned sweeping claims of fraud, instead focusing on relatively small-bore complaints.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

7 minutes ago, Gregory1972 said:

Technically, all you have are allegations of fraud - none have been proven in a court of law. 

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, did it still make a sound? 

Not one court has heard the evidence! The DNC pre placed 600 lawyers in the battleground states before the election! What honest broker does that? How about Criminal enterprise? Courts and lawyers have been threatened and intimidated. This also is in the public record. Witnesses have been attacked, whistle-blowers have been fired (illegally) and you're sitting there with a straight face saying nothing to see here? Really? 

[Jeffrey Brown + 207]

Rudy Giuliani to Judge: "This Is Not a Fraud Case"

 

[0R0 + 6,251]

3 minutes ago, Jeffrey Brown said:

And actually, I don't think that the most recent dismissed cases that Trump's lawyers filed even alleged fraud, but the Trump Kool-Aid drinkers persist in at least claiming to see that which does not exist. 

Donald Trump And His Lawyers Are Making Sweeping Allegations of Voter Fraud In Public. In Court, They Say No Such Thing

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no-evidence-fraud/

Excerpt:

 

Nearly two weeks after the election was called for President-elect Joe Biden, Donald Trump and his legal team continue to advance spurious and dangerous claims that the election was “rigged.” In a press conference on Nov. 19, Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani called the election a “massive fraud,” while an attorney for the Trump campaign, Sidney Powell, alleged without evidence a wide-ranging scheme perpetrated by “massive influence of communist money.” She also appeared to suggest a revolution, comparing this moment to “the 1775 of our generation and beyond.”

But Trump and his allies’ public allegations stand in stark contrast to what his lawyers are actually claiming— bound by professional ethics rules—in election-related cases in court. In three separate lawsuits in Pennsylvania and cases in Arizona and Nevada, Trump’s lawyers have jettisoned sweeping claims of fraud, instead focusing on relatively small-bore complaints.

Trump has two paths, and a backup option that pulls the rug from under the entire election fraud conspiracy by China and will happen whether he obtains good legal outcomes or does not.

One is the legal one that covers unconstitutional acts which leads to the Supreme court and requires no additional evidence beyond the public record. Fraud is a backup issue demonstrating the damage of unconstitutional elections

Powell, and a possible special counsel is on the Fraud issue, which is a factual issue than needs discovery and would result in major prosecution of Reps and many Dems alike.

The other parallel is the DIA NSA and military that have concluded already that the election fraud and the media assault are a Chinese conspiracy to overthrow the US government and subject the USA to Chinese rule. They are sitting aside taking notes as to who is doing what, and will act regardless of legal outcomes. Bad outcomes  for Trump will result in their acting earlier suddenly and at once. Good outcomes for Trump allows them to act more slowly and less extensively. Among their targets for mass prosecution are FBI DOJ and CIA.

The analysis you are putting up is both irrelevant and unfactual because it is without context.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

3 hours ago, Jeffrey Brown said:

Trump backs down, signs stimulus package

Of course he did.  What a joke.

[Jeffrey Brown + 207]

Let's see, Ward Smith linked to the following article, "What Denying Election Fraud Accomplishes."  

Gregory pointed out that fraud had not been proven in court, and I pointed out that Trump's lawyers were not even alleging fraud.  How again is that not relevant?  Seems like the only thing you guys drinking the Trump Kool-Aid can agree on is that there must be some way to keep Dear Leader in power. 

In any case, the clock is ticking down, and in 23 days you guys can go back to hunting Big Foot, instead of chasing non-existent election fraud. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

3 minutes ago, Jeffrey Brown said:

And actually, I don't think that the most recent dismissed cases that Trump's lawyers filed even alleged fraud, but the Trump Kool-Aid drinkers persist in at least claiming to see that which does not exist. 

Donald Trump And His Lawyers Are Making Sweeping Allegations of Voter Fraud In Public. In Court, They Say No Such Thing

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no-evidence-fraud/

Excerpt:

 

Nearly two weeks after the election was called for President-elect Joe Biden, Donald Trump and his legal team continue to advance spurious and dangerous claims that the election was “rigged.” In a press conference on Nov. 19, Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani called the election a “massive fraud,” while an attorney for the Trump campaign, Sidney Powell, alleged without evidence a wide-ranging scheme perpetrated by “massive influence of communist money.” She also appeared to suggest a revolution, comparing this moment to “the 1775 of our generation and beyond.”

But Trump and his allies’ public allegations stand in stark contrast to what his lawyers are actually claiming— bound by professional ethics rules—in election-related cases in court. In three separate lawsuits in Pennsylvania and cases in Arizona and Nevada, Trump’s lawyers have jettisoned sweeping claims of fraud, instead focusing on relatively small-bore complaints.

Technically, they don't need nor want to claim fraud. That's not their job, they only need to demonstrate reasonable doubt that the proper election process was not followed. Sidney Powell is the one arguing fraud, and she's not working for Trump but "We the People". Low IQ journalists and the low IQ people who follow them have conflated the two. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

It's not too late to talk about why Trump was impeached by the Demoncrats in the House is it? Not now that the sht is literally hitting the fan? 

Full transcript Here. But the know nothing crowd won't look, because Greatest Candidate Ever! 

Edited December 28, 2020 by Ward Smith
Added link

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

Sidney Powell is the one arguing fraud, and she's not working for Trump

You keep repeating that lie. They are distancing themselves from her (probably because she is doing illegal things) but she clearly is working for him.

I want to see a long list of people disbarred for this not so funny joke.

 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

It's not too late to talk about why Trump was impeached by the Demoncrats in the House is it?

 

Way to late to go back to the campaign trail.

[0R0 + 6,251]

22 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

You keep repeating that lie. They are distancing themselves from her (probably because she is doing illegal things) but she clearly is working for him.

I want to see a long list of people disbarred for this not so funny joke.

 

Yes, and when Powell showed participation of Reps in the election fraud ring, her fraud project was taken out of the Trump team.

 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

1 hour ago, 0R0 said:

Yes, and when Powell showed participation of Reps in the election fraud ring, her fraud project was taken out of the Trump team.

 

My team is the team fighting against the clear and present corruption. They're not all working for the same person and many many cases have been brought to court including cases from congressmen who clearly saw irregularities taking place. 

The law is clear, the counting of votes is to occur before witnesses of both parties. Does this picture look legit to you @Jeffrey Brown? If so please explain. Use your own words, don't keep hiding behind paid propagandists posing as "journalists".