Another Georgia Probe Finds No Evidence of Conspiracy To Steal 2020 Election
The Trump campaign's claim that two Atlanta poll workers pulled fraudulent ballots from a suitcase on election night are "false and unsubstantiated" after a two-year investigation.

In the weeks after the 2020 presidential election, Republicans including then–President Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani, one of Trump's top attorneys at the time, claimed that video footage from State Farm Arena in Atlanta confirmed that something shady happened during vote counting in Georgia.
That video footage supposedly showed two election workers pulling ballots from a "suitcase" and entering them into official counts after hours, according to reports in right-wing media like One America News Network. Giuliani testified to a Georgia legislative committee that poll workers overseeing the counting of ballots at State Farm Arena in Atlanta had engaged in blatant fraud.
Those claims were explosive—but totally wrong.
The allegations involving those two election workers—Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Wandrea Moss—were "false and unsubstantiated," Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, announced Tuesday, as his office officially closed a two-year probe into the incident. The investigation had launched at the behest of Georgia state Sen. Kay Kirkpatrick (R–East Cobb) and included the FBI and Georgia Bureau of Investigation.
The final report includes details of interviews with Freeman, Moss, and other workers present during the ballot counting at State Farm Arena on the night of the 2020 election. Those interviewed provided "a consistent account" of the ballot-counting process, and matched what investigators saw on the video footage. As for that supposedly damning video footage, "There was no evidence of any type of fraud as alleged," the report concludes, and there was "no evidence was provided to show that Freeman or Moss deviated from" the established process for storing boxes of legitimate ballots.
Additionally, the FBI interviewed the creator of an Instagram account that surfaced in December 2020 and purported to belong to Freeman. In posts to the account, the user (whose name was redacted in the final report) claimed to have participated in ballot fraud, but later admitted to the FBI that the content was fake.
Freeman and Moss reached an undisclosed settlement with OAN last year after suing the network for defamation related to its coverage of the election. In the lawsuit, the two claimed to have been subjected to intense harassment both online and in the real world.
Tuesday's report also details the extent to which state investigators double-checked the election results. Audits conducted after Election Day "did not identify any issues or discrepancies to suggest fake or fraudulent ballots were scanned and counted in the 2020 General Election results," and a subsequent recount requested by Trump's campaign "also did not identify any discrepancies to suggest fraudulent ballots were introduced and counted in the tabulation process."
"We are glad the state election board finally put this issue to rest. False claims and knowingly false allegations made against these election workers have done tremendous harm," Raffensperger said in a statement. "Election workers deserve our praise for being on the front lines."
Trump, meanwhile, continues to push the claim that the election was stolen. In an interview on Monday with Fox News' Brett Baier, Trump said he "won in 2020 by a lot" and claimed that "they were counting ballots, not the authenticity of the ballot. The ballots were fake ballots, this was a very rigged election."
That's always been an extraordinary claim that should require extraordinary evidence to be believed. To date, no firm evidence of a conspiracy to steal the election has stood up to scrutiny. On Tuesday, another piece of what little remains of Trump and Giuliani's wild claims was conclusively debunked.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Easily start receiving more than $600 every single day from home in your part time. i made $18781 from this job in my spare time afte my college. easy to do job and its regular income are awesome. no skills needed to do this job all you need to know is how to copy and paste stuff online. join this today by follow details on this page.
.
.
Apply Now Here—————————->>> https://Www.Coins71.Com
Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it what I do.....
For more detail visit the given link..........>>> http://Www.SalaryApp1.com
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
Abortion-rights proponents prevailed on all six abortion-related ballot measures last year — including in red states like Kentucky and Montana. Trump lost 3 out of 4 popular&electoral vote elections. Reset the 1972 LP platform!
No evidence is proof that a conspiracy is true.
It just goes deeper!
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,400 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link----------------------------------------->>> http://Www.OnlineCash1.Com
You’re barking up the wrong tree with Sarc. He’s a pussy. Not a faggot. Although you might get him to do gay for pay. Or moser likely gay for booze if he has a case of the shakes. Your chances go up if you’re bottoming for him, although I’m not sure if that dissociated weakling is capable of getting it up.
Have fun trying.
"Although you might get him to do gay for pay."
Sarc's definitely straight, but it's pretty obvious that he did this for booze and drugs when he was living on the streets.
Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me. I started working for them online and in a short time after I've started averaging 15k a month... The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start.
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)>>> https://www.Salarybiz.com
“when he was living on the streets.”
You man last night?
Unless the conspirator is named Trump.
It's like the Turin Shroud. Only a disloyal commie atheist would doubt that the shroud wrapped the Lazarus-levitating, water-striding, wine-watering Jeesus. That argument settles the issue just as it also proves the Trumpanzees wuz robbed.
Alternate Headline: Government Entity Investigating Itself Says Nothing Happened. Trust Them.
This is the same state that admitted to thousands of double voters and did nothing about it.
It's bohem, next to ENB he's the biggest Pravda cancerous shit head
What's Sullum, chopped feces?
Probably.
"This is the same state that admitted to thousands of double voters and did nothing about it."
Do you believe any completely irrational thing you read as long as it supports your priors?
Georgia didn't admit to any such thing. They "did nothing about it." because they can't do anything about an imaginary event.
There were proven illegal votes, with people that had moved, yet still voted as if they hadn't, and dead people.
The names were taken from USPS and Social Security records.
Georgia "investigated" but claimed that the names identified were of people, who had the same name, but didn't move, or die...every single one of, if I remember, about 80,000.
Most frightening words in the English language:
I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.
Nelson? Care to respond to retiredfire’s fact based rebuttal?
*crickets*
I have little faith when any entity investigates itself.
That video footage supposedly showed two election workers pulling ballots from a "suitcase" and entering them into official counts after hours, according to reports in right-wing media like One America News Network. Giuliani testified to a Georgia legislative committee that poll workers overseeing the counting of ballots at State Farm Arena in Atlanta had engaged in blatant fraud.
We all saw the video. If there weren't ballots in the cases, what was in them? Why were the suitcases there?
I've never seen this question posed.
There is also video of a guy entering the counting room and handing off a thumb drive quietly to a worker.
"There is also video of a guy entering the counting room and handing off a thumb drive quietly to a worker."
They spent two years investigating. Do you really think The Gateway Pundit has super-secret inside knowledge that Georgia doesn't know about? You are a random crazy man who gets his "knowledge" from sites that Georgia can also read.
Voter fraud was the same level (and type, mostly inadvertent) as past elections. There was no "stolen" election. Trump lost.
All the illegal 11th hour court decisions be damned. Or are you saying none of that happened either?
It wasn't a suitcase. It was a box for keeping ballots and was where it should be.
The irony is I swear I've seen one or two right-wing commenters here in the past week trying out the argument that we don't know what was in the boxes that are being pulled out of Trump's storeroom on video.
These "suitcases" they are super sure of. Trump's boxes, we have no idea what they were.
That irony actually cuts both ways.
"Trump’s boxes, we have no idea what they were."
There are 107 classified documents according to the indictment.
The DOJ has released pictures of at least as many boxes in bathrooms and ballrooms.
How many pieces of 8.5x11 paper fit in a single bankers box? I bet it's easily over 5000.
So why don't you and SRG tell us what was in those boxes?
Did any of those boxes have classified documents in them, or did the FBI just release pictures of Trump's stuff and infer it was classified to trick idiots? Or do you think maybe Trump stored one document per box?
You guys certainly demonstrate an inability to think critically about any narratives you're fed.
Shrike and Dee are nothing but lefty hacks.
"There are 107 classified documents according to the indictment.
The DOJ has released pictures of at least as many boxes in bathrooms and ballrooms."
Why are you assuming the documemts were all on the same box? You are making a lot of assumptions and then using those assumptions to ask the type of "I'm just asking questions" questions that conspiracy theorists always ask. And you will never accept the answers you receive, no matter how detailed or corroborated. You still think the 2020 election was stolen, don't you?
"You guys certainly demonstrate an inability to think critically about any narratives you’re fed."
Making very unlikely assumptions that miraculously support your even more unlikely priors is the opposite of critical thinking. That's your MO.
"Why are you assuming the documemts were all on the same box?"
I see you've got sarcasmic's reading comprehension skills, Jeff. Did you miss where I wrote this bit?: "Or do you think maybe Trump stored one document per box?"
So do you?
"You are making a lot of assumptions and then using those assumptions to ask the type of “I’m just asking questions” questions that conspiracy theorists always ask."
How so, Jeff? You always make these mealy-mouthed declarations with absolutely no explanation or evidence to back them up.
I'm so fucking sick of seeing your halfwit sophistry that wouldn't even fool a toddler (but you somehow think will work here), shitting up the place.
There is nothing unlikely about the FIB and the Department of Injustice phonying up what they "found".
Even the Supreme Court has sanctioned both for such things.
They didn't let Trump's lawyer in the building.
Everything they "found" should be declared unadmissible.
And we'll never know what they took, that they're not admitting to.
God wills them to believe the suit-boxes contained fake ballots placed there by Black Satan to help women escape across state lines instead of doing their duty to the Republican Party. He also wills them to believe the boxes at the Orange-Out-Tan’s bathroom are congratulations and get-well cards from when The Don miraculously resurrected himself from the Communivirus. That settles both questions. It’s God’s will.
The report says they were ballot boxes.
"At the end of the evening when a decision was made by management to continue
counting the next day, all employees began to seal the ballot bags and place them underneath the
table in a certain order, so everyone knew where to start the following day.
However, following communication between Fulton County Elections management and someone
whom she believed was from the Secretary of State’s Office, a decision was made to keep
counting that night. Some employees had already left and then had to be called back. After this
decision was made, she and the few Fulton County elections staff members that remained began
to retrieve some of the ballot boxes from underneath the tables to continue the scanning process. "
I'm curious as to why this is such a conspiracy for you guys. Recent and subsequent elections showed that Georgia was a true "Battleground State." Recent statewide elections there were close. Why the freakout over this one that didn't go your way?
If evidence is found then that's proof that the conspiracy was true.
If no evidence is found then that proves the people who did the investigation were in on it.
Well… yeah.
If evidence that’s proof that a conspiracy is true, was found and shown, then if the people who did the investigation claim there was no evidence, they're probably in on it.
I know critical (or otherwise) thinking isn’t your forte, so congratulations, Sarckles.
Are yoi really so clueless that you can't see that he was presenting the only two answers people like you and Jesse accept as possible? Or are you trying to do parody (and failing)?
Parody of what, you paid shill? I just reiterated what our town drunk said.
No, you’re just unwilling and unable to accept the truth. Such is the way of things for a democrat drone.
Do you know why election watchers exist in the electoral system?
I’ve lost track at this point, but was this the situation where the watchers testified that they were told the counting was done and to go home?
Because a pipe burst! Did you want them to drown?!?
If you want the answers to your questions, read the report. Don't ask a bunch of people on the internet.
Then why the fuck are you here?
You know why.
Fifty-cents.
" conspiracy"
Heh, he said the thing.
I have the video. They didn't put the boxes of ballots under the table to know where to start the next day. They were hidden there the entire day.
Well, this confirms a key point in the conspiracy claims: The election observers were told everything was done for the night, come back in the morning. The media were told the same thing, we have testimony from a reporter confirming it.
Then, after the observers left as they'd been told to, the workers came back and resumed work.
Why do we have election observers, again? Oh, yeah, because if you want the losers to think they lose fair and square, you have to let them watch the counting.
So, you think it's perfectly innocent that they arranged for the election observers to not witness what they were doing?
There are things you don't do if you want the losers to think they weren't cheated, and this is one of them.
Likely for the same reason that if Trump had won by a few thousand votes, and the people in the video were known to be Republicans by nature, Democrats would be howling about "found ballots" being pulled out from under tables in the middle of the night.
And the Durham probe proved that the whole Russian Collusion®™ story was a hoax!
Did it now?
Yes, it very much did. And Obama, Lynch, Comey, and Biden knew it.
Thanks for the ipse dixit!
How the ever-loving fuck did you think you could get away with claiming that there’s no proof?
Either you're retarded or you're really hoping we are.
Can’t it be both?
Wait, you think it wasn't even now?
TDS is real.
The idea that Trump was so hated it really inspired 80 million people to vote against him is extremely important to squirrel, so he will continue lying to himself because it feels good.
Makes believe a virtue of all consuming resentment and pathetic mediocrity.
So, I responded at the idiocy of believing the Russia Collusion hoax was actually real and you respond to R Mac condescending me about Trump being so hated 80 million voted for him?
And you responded to this under the guise of R Mac’s statement of TDS? Do you know how ironic that is? I mean, you provided the best example of why TDS is a two-way street.
Your unfettered allegiance to Trump will never not be amazing to me.
Keep sucking that establishment dick, soy.
Every time the bullshit election is brought up you go out of your way to make an ass of yourself and draw false equivalence to the Clinton campaign, Obama administration, and FBI literally making up a ludicrous story, and committing the greatest political crime in US history by a mile, to people who don't believe the 2020 election was legitimate. You try to both sides it so you can maintain a false sense of smugness.
Yet you never address the suspicious facts, nor the grave implications, because you're completely consumed by your resentment of Trump.
We have mountains of circumstantial, behavioral, and statistical evidence that the 2020 election result was an illegitimate farce and you don't care because you get to shit on Trump and his supporters.
You're passive-aggressively running interference for totalitarianism, and I have no respect whatsoever for such feminine bullshit.
Holy shit! The election wasn't even brought up. I was calling out someone for claiming Russia collusion was real even in the face of the obvious. Yet you went all psycho into the 2020 election like some fucking neurotic. Then you go on to accuse me of wild claims I've never made or supported.
Yes, the election wasn't stolen. Yes, fucked up shit like changes of laws occurred. Yes, winning the election was in Trump's control even with the bullshit that happened. Get fucking over it. My god.
I mean, at this point you really are one unhinged lunatic that has some serious emotional problems. And your fucked up sycophancy for Trump is off the charts concerning at this point. I hate muting people, but your lack of anything meaningful of substance and your concerning mental state has you up there with sqrsly and sevo, the only two people I've muted.
Um, no.
Trump won.
The establishment just wouldn't allow it, with the approval of your type.
No, no he didn't.
The reason this country has become a totalitarian shithole is because dickless cowards like squirrel have been given comfort unearned by their character or abilities.
Sure, whatever your unhinged self needs to believe.
Yes, Shrike, it did. Now quit sockpuppeting.
In today hearing to the Houser Committee Durham reported that there was “substantial evidence” that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election.
Interference and collusion are two separate things.
Not to TDS morons.
Because Trump!
How?
They bought a Facebook ad and hosted a couple Facebook pages.
Ask John Durham it was his statement.
So you’re just dropping an out of context quote? One that pushes Russia Russia Russia which leads to valid Ukraine intervention logic. How "moderate" of you.
What I am saying is that John Dunham acknowledges the Russian interference. It seems his argument is not so much that there was an investigation as the protocols used in the start. He has not suggested that laws were broken but rather the initiation of the investigation was sloppy.
Foreign governments always try to influence elections. Did you think that was new? The point is that Trump wasn’t working with Russia.
Although there is plenty of damning evidence that Biden has and is working with Biden. But you’re ok with that.
You made the claim so I’m asking you.
Did they explain why a toilet that overflowed at 10am was sufficient reason to shut down the count 12 hours later, send the observers out, then resume counting?
What about all the video we watched of election workers “curing” or destroying ballots?
"At the end of the evening when a decision was made by management to continue counting the next day"
Without alerting election watchers. So you see the issue.
Citation?
Won the Triple Crown in 1948.
Are you claiming the video is deepfaked, and the scrutineers are lying?
A mediocre car made by GM's Chevrolet brand in the early 1980s, known for having assembly and brake issues, but that's not important right now.
Leslie Nielsen would be proud of you.
I literally heard Leslie Nielsen’s voice in my head when I read that.
I remember video of Atlanta election workers declaring that they were there to elect Joe Biden that day. I will not be convinced by this.
Maybe share this powerfully dispositive video?
I guess the Kraken still remains locked up.
Sidney Powell: "Kraken? What kraken? What's a kraken?"
Since you’re pals with Shreek now, I’m curious. Does he share his CP with you like he tried to with everyone else here among the commentariat?
I'm still not shrike, you lying fuckwit.
I would be careful about disparaging my intellect, as you do not compare favorably in this area. And wether you’re Shreek or not, you’re a lying Marxist. So it wouldn’t be a stretch to say that you’re a sock puppet for that pedantic pederast.
More hysteric election stolen claims going down in flames.
I’m not sure why Trump supporters need this so desperately. Trump already gave them a fine victimhood narrative they can latch onto. He said during the election that the press was against him (generally probably so), that the pandemic had unfairly damaged him as the incumbent (reasonable), that he was being outspent…Wouldn’t all that be enough to explain how he could have lost an increasingly recent purple state? Why this strain for this additional bitch?
Maybe some have a sincere belief that there are problems with election integrity. I don't think that's an unreasonable position. Whatever you think about whether or not an election can be said to have been stolen, there are a lot of potential holes in the election systems, areas where fraud would be very difficult to detect or prove and many questions about the massive expansion of use of absentee ballots in 2020.
Calling half of the voting public a bunch of stupid idiots or worse for doubting the election results is not a good way to go about healing political divisions.
My point was that there's lots of reasonable factors for why Trump lost Georgia, he himself spelled them out to his supporters regularly before the election! Likewise, the "massive expansion of absentee ballots in 2020" is quite reasonably explained by the pandemic. The state in question had a GOP administration at almost all levels. At some point where does placating people who still need to conjure up stuff in this scenario have to give in to just saying "look, we know he's whipped you up into this and you want it, but it's not reasonable."?
The expansion of absentee is explained, of course. That's not what people are concerned about. People are concerned about being able to know that the person voting absentee is eligible to vote and isn't voting multiple times. In many cases it has proven impossible to check up on those things. And with the huge volume of ballots I have little confidence that proper diligence was applied in checking signatures and things like that.
Reminder: the Michigan Democrat SOS told election workers in Detroit to count absentee ballots whose signatures didn’t match. There was a court case that ruled she broke the law when she did this. She was then awarded a presidential award for her service.
Greatest election fraud organization in American history according to Biden.
I feel like ballots where the signatures don't match are ballots that should be examined more closely, as fraudulent ballots would seem more likely to have such an issue (which is not saying that all such mismatches are fraud). And also that if you have certain precincts or districts that have a much larger number of such issues it might warrant the consideration that something nefarious might have occurred. If they had found 5000 Trump votes all in the same handwriting on the envelopes and a different set of handwriting on the ballots, I would hope that they scrutinize them and perhaps discount them if it was felt they were fraudulent.
One thing I've never understood with regards to election problems is the notion that "We don't need to audit the election (any election) because there's no evidence of errors." Try telling that to the IRS, or the SEC. We audit tax returns and corporate books not *because* we *suspect* or have evidence of wrong-doing, but to preserve the confidence that there was in fact no wrong-doing. Yes, the IRS may have some some triggers, but triggers are not evidence of wrong-doing.
"He" didn't whip anyone up.
We saw it from the minute that a winning position on election night was miraculously reversed days later.
History shows that delayed counting always seems to hew to the LieCheatSteal party.
What is not stated about the "massive expansion of absentee ballots" is that, up until the polls closed, the proportion of votes for each were about equal.
After, the proportion went, heavily towards Biden.
How did all those Biden voters know when to mail in their ballots, so that they would be counted after the polls closed?
Have you ever participated in or observed the ballot-counting process?
There really are a lot of safeguards, and the people I’ve come into contact with who work the polls take their job very seriously. That’s not to say there aren’t people involved who wouldn’t be above shenanigans. More that it would be a lot more difficult than you have been led to believe.
Except Trump claimed millions of illegal votes in 2016 too. Spent a year as president, with Kris Kobach leading the investigation and came up with nothing.
So at a certain point, you're kinda of stupid if you continue to listen to the boy who cried wolf. Same goes for anyone who may still believe Hillary's Russia stole the election claim.
My point is that that doesn't matter. If enough voters believe it, you have to take it seriously or you will have big problems (like what we have now). There really are lots of problems with US election systems. It's a fucking mess. Both parties acknowledge this when they are on the losing side. This could have been an opportunity to do a real assessment of the situation and come up with some real reforms that everyone can agree on to make elections more transparent, auditable and fair. But instead of doing that we've doubled down on the political division and nastiness. Seriously, do you really think that all the people who have doubts about the 2020 and 2022 elections will be convinced that the next one is going to be OK if they are just called stupid white supremacist liars a bit more?
There is a tipping point where when enough people lose faith in the system, things get really bad really quick.
You're very right that the people who have lost faith in elections aren't being taken seriously. Unfortunately a lot of that is their own fault for not accepting answers that they don't like.
This isn't going to end well.
Seriously, do you really think that all the people who have doubts about the 2020 and 2022 elections will be convinced that the next one is going to be OK if they are just called stupid white supremacist liars a bit more?
In alignment with my other comment about rational progress in agreement with your point, how does one look at the 2020 election in the context of Hayes in 1870 or JFK in 1960 and not conclude the whole thing isn't some shining City-On-The-Hill marvel of engineering for arriving at social consensus on policy and just a bunch of banana republic monkeys flinging shit at each other? Various political factions have been trying to, in the systems engineering parlance, close the control loop for several decades and had been consistently shot down by an opposition that doesn't foresee or foresees and welcomes opportunities for external factors to FUBAR the control system.
What we learned in 2020 is there is no recourse to open corruption and tyranny, except possibly organized widespread violence.
Our system isn't democratic, it's despotic now. Our institutions conspired against we the people, and our courts abdicated their duty.
The only question now is how much subjugation and abuse we're willing to take from illegitimate rulers.
I do think there have been enough irregularities nationwide, from clerks illegally "curing" ballots to governors and/or secs of state ignoring legislatively enacted voting laws (let's just do mail-in ballots because covid! but there are laws that have to be followed to change the rules...Nope, COVID! OBEY and like it!), to dumped mail, to pizza boxes taped over windows in counting rooms, to observers being barred from counting rooms, to observers being told that counting was finished for the day the counting resumed without observers, to backdated mail, to invalid ballots being printed and mailed then recalled and corrected, to ballot being distributed without Trump/Pence on the ballot, to either computer error or human error swapping ballot totals, to ballots being "found" weeks after the election, to ballot harvesting with accusations of harvesters bullying nursing home patients, to ballots being mass-mailed to people who are dead or moved or are actually dead cats, to union members who wore their union paraphernalia to work as ballot counters, and the list goes on.
Individually, probably all of these (except the governors overreach at changing election laws by pandemic edict) are probably in the noise and may be innocent errors on overeager folks part. It's probably not a vast conspiracy to deny Trump his victory. But collectively, they do not inspire a lot of confidence in my view of the election process as a fair, transparent, honest process.
Most people can accept losing if you get beat fair and square. No one wants to play in a game where it feels like the referees calling the game have placed large bets on the other team.
"came up with nothing"
That'll happen when state governments refuse to turn over any voting or residency data
Trump claimed there were millions of illegal votes in 2016.
And, unlike those who have won elections, before, he launched an investigation into that fact.
Usually winners what to leave things as they were.
And what happened?
All the leftist states refused to share their voter information with the investigating committee, rendering the process useless.
Why do you suppose it was leftist states that didn't want an investigation into voter integrity?
Hillary and Nancy Pelosi still believe it. But never get called out as "election deniers" or conspiracy theorists.
Gary Johnson's 4 million pro-choice votes spoiled The Kleptocracy's bought-and-paid-for outcome in 13 states. Both halves of The Kleptocracy immediately circled their wagons in Defcon 3. Hordes of anarco-looters again donned libertarian drag to hack the LP platform the way they did when the Roe plank increased LP vote totals by 12% a year. We should have expected no less.
"...and many questions about the massive expansion of use of absentee ballots in 2020"
Remember how Trump urged his supporters not to use absentee ballots, but rather to vote in person? That was a calculated move. He knew that that would result in fewer absentee ballots going for him, thus giving him an excuse to claim fraud if the election didn't go his way.
And how Pennsylvania - and perhaps a few other states - had a policy of counting in-person ballots first, so that any swing to Biden later could also be taken as evidence of fraud.
Funny how you're not questioning a policy of counting essentially unverifiable ballots after easily verifiable ones.
Were mail-in ballots unverifiable?
https://apnews.com/article/archive-fact-checking-9202374126
All ballots have a series of built-in checks to verify voter identity and prevent fraud. Some states mail ballots to every registered voter, while other states only mail ballots to voters who request them. But the ballots are subject to that state’s verification requirements in either case.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/05/cybersecurity-202-more-states-now-have-paper-trails-verify-votes-were-correctly-counted/
Georgia and Pennsylvania have both shifted from having paper records for few or none of their voters in 2016 to having paper records for all votes cast in their states
That's right British Shrike, it's not the chain of custody or ballot harvesting that's the problem with mail-in/drop box voting, it was only the initial voter registration.
Sometimes, I can't even...
Sometimes, I can’t even…
Because you're a conspiracy fruitcake, suffering from pathological confirmation bias. And in fine Millerite fashion, no amount of counter-evidence can disturb your faith - instead it strengthens it.
When it comes to these election claims, you lot are like some giant Karen, unable to accept the correct answer that you've been given repeatedly, permanently asking for The Manager and threatening to escalate to corporate, a voice crying in the Walmart.
"And in fine Millerite fashion, no amount of counter-evidence can disturb your faith"
Tell us again how Russia stole the 2016 election and Trump's a Russian spy.
One aspect of mail-in ballots (and drop box ballots, for that matter), is that it makes it very easy to simply make ballots vanish.
A dyed-in-the-wool partisan postal carrier could look at each house where they picked up outgoing mailed ballots. If they see a sign in the yard for the other guy, they can put those ballots in a trashbag; but if they see a sign for their guy, they make sure those get delivered.
Same for people collecting ballots in drop boxes. Got a drop box in a neighborhood the skews heavily one way or the other, and person sent to collect the ballots can toss a bunch if the demographics skew the wrong way.
Same for ballot-harvesters and even people who can assist voters with their mail-in ballots. A nursing home admin who assists old people fill in filling out their ballots can see who they vote for and trash ballots for people who voted "wrong".
Calling half of the voting public a bunch of stupid idiots or worse for doubting the election results is not a good way to go about healing political divisions.
Or even just conducting oneself rationally. Boehm says "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." but, for decades, any time anyone has requested even ordinary ability to collect ordinary evidence they've been shouted down as racists.
Elections, especially serial implementations of election methodologies, aren't people. There is no presumption of innocence. If you're election methodology is absent of any fraud, you shouldn't have to insult another ~10% of the electorate as too stupid to find their way to the DMV in defense of it. There should be nothing to hide.
You’re obviously some kind of MAGA hat Trumptard. /s
Pandemic unfairly damaged him?
The only thing that idiot had to do was let the scientists take control and urge vaccinations that got made extremely quickly. He would've been a shoo-in for reelection even with all his other bullshit.
The only thing that damaged him was his complete fucking stupidity and corruption.
He, uh, DID that.
It was a fucking fiasco. The public health officials he ceded power to were inept morons.
And he STILL defends his vaccine as a great thing.
He did not issue a vaccine mandate for a vaccine that was, literally, just created.
Shitlunches literally just described one of my biggest complaints of Trump. Lol, these lefties are fucking clowns.
I thought the part where he was a shoo-in was laughable. Maybe there is/was a case to be had that he would've pulled down a few more independents, but he had already been green lit for impeachment (if not already impeached depending on when you think he should've done whatever pivoting is asserted) at that point and the establishment he was running against was taking the very stance raspberrydinners asserts cost Trump the election at that point. Hardly a clear or sensible shoo-in.
I'm going to have to go with damikesc on this one, Trump basically did what you are claiming he should have done.
Trump's failing during the pandemic was his atrocious and inconsistent messaging because America has sadly gotten to a place (or always was a place) that requires the president to be the moral leader and parental figure to the country.
It doesn’t help that everything has become so tribal. Doesn’t mater what the other tribe does, it’s always bad. Even if it’s what your tribe was doing ten minutes ago. It also doesn’t help that many people are drawn to a party over one issue that’s really important to them, and over time they end up adopting all the other positions of the party. They might come up with some post hoc principles, but it’s all tribalism. Because of all that, they assume that anyone who disagrees with them on one position disagrees with them on every position. When they come into contact with people who aren’t on either tribe, their brains break. They can’t comprehend it. “If you support this then you must support that. You don’t? Well, you’re wrong! Your tribe supports this so you have to as well! You’re not in a tribe? Liar! You have to be! Everyone is!” It’s fucking stupid. Makes my head hurt. Also makes me appreciate the mute feature.
And that includes the idea that not only are you not right if you disagree with me, but you are an evil, vile, moronic minion trying to push a country destroying agenda.
Of course. You either have bad intentions or you're stupid. There's no other explanation.
When in reality most people actually agree on the ends. They disagree over the means.
Most people want everyone to have food, shelter, education, health care and all of that. Yet whenever there's disagreement over the means, the accusations start to fly.
Life would be so much easier if people could actually agree that they have similar intentions. Then they could argue over the means instead of flinging poo like monkeys.
"Of course. You either have bad intentions or you’re stupid. There’s no other explanation."
This dicotomy is unfair to Sarcasmic who has both bad intentions and is rather stupid.
But talking about the boring means isn't nearly as fun as righteously lecturing people about how they are evil and wrong.
One requires intimate and nuanced knowledge, the other is the modern embrace of Dunning-Kruger.
One requires intimate and nuanced knowledge, the other is the modern embrace of Dunning-Kruger.
I wouldn't go quite that far. You don't need to be an expert to have a conversation about means. Just a little humility and openness to the possibility that you might be wrong, and the ability to disconnect intentions from results.
Eh, it might be a little hyperbolic, but I find the vast, vast majority of subjects discussed, especially on comment boards, are done with surface level and superficial talking points. I find discussion about the intricacies of issues to be quite lacking much of the time.
Ok squirrel, here’s some “surface level talking points” for you:
- the new rules for the covid “emergency” certainly could’ve provided cover for election fuckery. If one were so inclined.
- the four year temper tantrum prior inspired zero confidence that dems would not use any means necessary.
“You can’t prove it!” is the same thinking that ignores Occam’s razor and brings us wet market theories.
But you do you, Mr. deep thinker. Navel gaze until the truth doesn’t matter anymore. That’s kinda how these things work.
It’s both massively funny and massively ironic how well your comment provides an example for my point.
Thanks!
But talking about the boring means isn’t nearly as fun as righteously lecturing people about how they are evil and wrong.
How can someone have good intentions that result in bad outcomes? They must have intended the bad outcomes because they're bad people with bad intentions. Yeah.
You just described Reason’s transition to a pro-war publication perfectly.
Because the most important thing is that His Orangeness is not responsible for anything bad that happens to him. An admission that he simply failed to win would be admitting a flaw, and if there's one thing Donald Trump has never done and will never do, it's admit a flaw. The bad things happened because evil nefarious forces hate him (and his own actions had no bearing on any such hatred if it actually exists).
And unconstitutional and illegal election changes are nothing you care about. Got it.
You understand the the FBI and cia literally admitted to lying and falsifying evidence in order to get Biden elected
They really don’t care.
The only thing we’ve been desperate for is the truth. And the thing you’re most desperate is to keep the truth from coming out.
Interesting how something can be both "false" and "unsubstantiated" simultaneously.
Is it that interesting? Seems easy to me.
The Trump campaign's claim that two Atlanta poll workers pulled fraudulent ballots (unsubstantiated) from a suitcase (false).
They pulled the fraudulent ballots from wheeled storage bins.
Almost as if they've been lying the whole time and only complete idiots would ever believe them.
I know, right?
“Bat soup” actually made sense to you idiots.
Like how you faggots suck down your Marxist master’s lies, just like how you swallowed your daddy’s loads so eagerly?
But they totes wouldn't rig an election with trillions of dollars at stake...
https://twitter.com/Babygravy9/status/1671550877188911105?t=UZDdb8RmRIyhsXT-zI5uTw&s=19
This is the price of our support for the war in Ukraine: total capitulation and collapse, disguised as "reconstruction". Ukraine is being stripped, asset-mined and sold down the river. It's suffering a demographic collapse that some are likening to that of the Holodomor, the Stalin-era famine of the 1930s that killed millions, but it may never recover from the loss of so many young men and the migration of so many women and children out of the country.
We shouldn't forget that this "reconstruction" is precisely what was taking place in Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union and before the rise of Putin. Russia was defeated, humiliated and subject to predatory economic policies that put its vast assets in the hands of people who couldn't have given two shits about the Russian people and would have happily seen them suffer the fate now being prepared for the people of Ukraine.
When you ask why many Russians support Putin, it's because he brought this process to an end, however imperfectly, and restored a significant measure of national pride and independence. Putin knows that his enemies in the West want to do to Russia what they started doing in the 1990s, which is why he knows he absolutely cannot lose this war.
There will be a special place in hell for those who have sought, by any means necessary, to prolong this war and prevent the Russians and Ukrainians from coming to honourable terms.
[Link]
Russian tools gonna tool.
Still pushing that shit, Shrike?
Not wanting Ukrainian citizens to get slaughtered so that your masters can get rich makes people tools? Interesting take.
Not even just 'not get slaughtered', voluntarily separate from people with whom they share dubious national and cultural identity and, as a result, mutually prosper.
It's like every instinct they hold immutable about "free trade" in no way applies or all always apply in reverse when it comes to war.
https://twitter.com/Navsteva/status/1671531429321228297?t=ApsKPqWDnGAMje_V6EXJsQ&s=19
Gilbert Doctorow: End game in the Ukraine war approaches with lightning speed
Today Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu made an announcement that has not yet been carried in Western media but which is of the most grave nature.
According to the latest intelligence reports, Russia believes that the Ukrainian armed forces now intend to cover their failed counter-offensive in the Donbas by using US-supplied Himars multiple launch artillery and UK-supplied Storm Shadow cruise missiles, possibly in the longer range domestic version, to attack the Crimea.
If this happens, says Shoigu, Russia will consider both the United States and Britain to have fully entered the war as co-belligerents. And Russia will immediately respond to any such attack on its territory by destroying “the decision making centers” of the Kiev regime. This is a fairly transparent threat to “neutralize” their government apparatus and personnel, logically including President Zelensky.
The statement by Shoigu leaves little doubt that we are entering the final phase of the Ukraine war as a war limited to the geography of Ukraine, and are possibly heading into a wider war with unforeseeable consequences both for Europeans and (finally) for Americans.
The ball is in the court of Washington and London.
[Link]
Russia is old and incompetent, a lot like Biden. It has never been able to win outside its own borders without tons of American equipment and the devastating bombing of Germany's industrial capabilities.
There is no way that the Russians would dare to use nukes. Europe has B61 nukes far in excess of Russia's equivalents. Russian air defense is like the rest of the military, old and incompetent.
When you declare war on a country that poses no threat to you, you'd better be able and willing to kill anyone who helps your victim. The last year has demonstrated repeatedly that the Russian military lacks both will and ability. It is a question of outlasting them. They will fold just as they did in Afghanistan (and as the US did in the same region) because the enemy would not give up. Who will fold first in Ukraine? Bet on the Russians.
How many people will die in the meatgrinder before the Russians quit? Is it worth it? I don't know the answer, which is why I'm ambivalent on the subject.
Glad you went from wholeheartedly supporting the war to ambivalent. Must have been those pesky changing facts.
How many Afghans died before they were willing to quit? Obvious answer – not enough because they didn’t quit. The decision to fight or surrender is that of the combatants. When the armies start throwing down their weapons and/or desert their posts, that’s when enough will have died.
No one can seriously believe that if an armistice or peace settlement is concluded, that there will be no more fighting within the next 5-10 years. A lasting peace can only be accomplished by the surrender of one of the nations.
These are brutal truths, freedom is not bloodless, and peace requires surrender.
Well stated.
You and reality are not well acquainted
Who will fold first in Ukraine? Bet on the Russians.
He says throwing another, newly discovered, $6.2B after the previously, newly discovered, and thrown, and lost $3.2B, *after* the previous thrown, and lost $20+B…
You are worse than your own parody that even my own teens joke at each other about.
What happened in Vietnam and Cambodia after we stopped aid (euphemism for surrendered)? If the Ukrainians surrender (peace deal with stay in place as in Vietnam) how many deaths will it take for you to decide "peace" was worth it?
And what do you think a Ukrainian “victory” even looks like? Especially for ethnic Russians in the Donbas?
And are you suggesting we should have stuck it out a few more years in Nam? We’re we about to win?
Not quite. The original "found" $3.6B is now magically increased by some $2.6B in similar "undercounting", for a total of $6.2B.
Seems like originally, they had counted replacement costs for all the stuff we sent to Ukraine. Now they're counting "market" costs for depreciated items, which of course are wholly made-up numbers.
Next step is for them to say everything we sent was worthless, so had no cost associated with it, so the FULL amount appropriate can now be spent, too.
Did the White House hire some film industry accountants?
https://twitter.com/DarrenJBeattie/status/1671545641456005120?t=b87xIOgg1Jx98wmpEji-gw&s=19
Important article describing hidden US role at state, CIA, and pentagon level to secure election results for left-wing Lula in Brazil
[Link]
An interesting characterization!
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1671532240218607618?t=IMczhMqsQM_UlbjbTTDYig&s=19
Here's a new @FT report on how the Biden State Dept, the CIA and the Pentagon engaged in "very unusual" efforts to shape Brazil's 2022 presidential election, and specifically to undermine Bolsonaro's narrative about election integrity and fraud:
I really need to do a better job bookmarking shit as I get older and my memory lags, but I remember reports from a journalist in Brazil right after the election claiming the CIA was there warning them to stfu about our government’s presence there.
I'm pretty sure the bookmarks are pointless. Better to go Elvis Presley and just start shooting at the TV if not just randomly into the ether from your property. At least then there's an off chance you might actually meaningfully wound someone of consequence and worthy of wounding.
I kind of figured Biden was helping the Marxist candidate. Obama did the same shit in Honduras.
Did the probe look at anything of consequence?
The law required an audit of the signatures of mail in ballots as a part of the recount. The state actually promised it was taking place.
Then it didn't.
Anybody ever look into that? No?
Then why do you think for a second they probed anything.
If you think the off-the-top-of-the-head observations on election night are the only thing anyone should consider as possible election issues, you have been played.
Nobody did audits of signatures because they would have required a re-vote.
Why?
Because the margin was smaller than the number of signatures that would be thrown out even if everything was entirely honest.
So why did they ignore the law?
And why did a supposed investigation ignore obvious and documented violations of the law and focus on the distinction between suitcases and ballot boxes instead?
"No evidence" is pretty silly if you studiously avoid looking.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/532042-georgia-signature-audit-finds-no-fraud-in-presidential-election/
Totes plausible that signature rejection rates averaged 2.0% in the 6 previous elections but dropped to 0.2% in 2020 when mail in votes were massively increased
Same reason why Russia stole 2016 but 2020 was the fairest election ever, I suppose.
They did not perform an audit of all signatures. Only a small sample.
A real, contested audit with lawyers for both sides would be expected to toss out at least 3-5% of signatures. 2% would have swung the election.
"No widespread fraud" is not a real term.
As I said, if they had followed the law and had a real audit, they would have thrown out a small percentage of the ballots. (Historically, hotly contested races can see 15% or more tossed out as lawyers get involved)
It doesn't mean they had fake ballots. But they didn't look because they knew it would lock up the election. When they did a sample in Arizona, it showed that it would have put the result in doubt. But they didn't pursue it there either.
Same goes for the Pennsylvania courts. If they had followed the law, everything would have been in limbo for ... well, a long time. They might not have been able to have an election on election day, because they changed things outside the law and it might have been too late to change them back in time.
The whole national blind spot here is odd.
It is in a way reminiscent of 2000, when it was decided that "we have had enough maneuvering. We are stopping here."
Subsequent audits by multiple interested groups demonstrated that it didn't alter the final outcome... but people are still worked up about "selected, not elected" 23 years later.
Somebody needs to be on the side of fixing this mess and getting to a clear, secure and transparent election system. Electronic ballots that take days to count are not it. Mailing ballots to everyone is not it.
Nobody is going to trust elections as long as we keep doing things this way.
You claimed that the state didn’t do a signature audit. I showed that they did.
The state did what you claimed that they didn’t do, and when presented with that, you decided to just move the goalposts a little bit further. (“Oh, they didn’t check EVERY SINGLE signature…” No they didn’t, that is why it’s called an audit.)
The "MASSIVE FRAUD" team does this all the time. They claim massive fraud, and then when presented evidence that their claims are false, instead of reconsidering their position, they just continue screaming some more about some other wild MASSIVE FRAUD claim.
So I am done playing these games of trying to demonstrate that the election system is not nearly as bad as you all claim to make it out to be. It’s not perfect, but it’s not a fraudster’s paradise either.
Instead, why don’t you describe for us the type of election system that you think would cause you to trust the results.
"So I am done playing these games of trying to demonstrate that the election system is not nearly as bad as you all claim to make it out to be. It’s not perfect, but it’s not a fraudster’s paradise either."
I've tried and it's just an exercise in chasing goalposts.
Yup. It is like they are all reading from Jesse's script on the matter.
I wouldn’t know. I choose not to wrestle with pigs. The pig likes it and you just get dirty.
A shit-eating dung beetle like you, calling pigs dirty. That's novel.
He’s a,so a massive pussy. He’s still running away from me four months after he threatened to kick my ass. He’s a weak, broken, drunken, rotting pile of shit.
"it is like they are all reading from Jesse’s script"
Yeah, if only they were smart enough to copypaste Media Matters talking points like you, instead of listening to that smooth Svengali Jesse.
There are people who don't think there is any strong evidence of massive fraud but still find the absentee ballot thing troubling. Like me for example.
Here's some of what I'd like to see:
In person voting with photo ID for anyone able to make it to the polls. Absentee voting requires signature on file and perhaps some other means to verify that the vote was actually cast by the person the ballot was sent to. I think open source voting systems are essential. Having proprietary software on something like that is ridiculous. I think the election results and every bit of procedure of counting votes should also be completely free and open to the public. Ideally there would be a way to verify your own vote was counted properly.
“Having proprietary software on something like that is ridiculous.”
I’ve yet to hear why something as simple as reading and counting dots isn’t open source. And the fact that anyone refuses to address it makes me skeptical.
"There are people who don’t think there is any strong evidence of massive fraud but still find the absentee ballot thing troubling. Like me for example."
Oof.
There are people who don’t think there is any strong evidence of massive fraud but still find the absentee ballot thing troubling. Like me for example.
What specifically do you find troubling about "the absentee ballot thing"?
Absentee voting requires signature on file and perhaps some other means to verify that the vote was actually cast by the person the ballot was sent to.
Would you be in favor of no-excuse absentee voting?
“They did not perform an audit of all signatures. Only a small sample.”
Maybe you missed that part?
They performed a tiny, partial audit. So it’s an ‘audit’ in the same way Apple painting the word ‘iPhone’ on a brick counts as a new iPhone. And I’m sure you would endlessly argue that too.
Wouldn’t you groomer?
The first challenge by the Trump team in Arizona had a good case. They claimed that different standards were used to count the ballots in different counties, the same criteria that the Supreme Court used in Bush v Gore. That legal team was dumped by Trump and replaced with a team led by Giuliani who promptly made unsubstantiated claims of massive voter fraud.
Trump usually listens to people who praise him, no matter how stupid those people may be. Trump was destroyed by his own vanity with Giuliani and Powell as the instruments of his political suicide.
But it was the 'Deep State' and the 'Marxist globalists' who forced Trump to fire good lawyers and hire Giuliani and Sidney Powell. It's not Trump's fault! He is the victim here! Don't you understand?????????????????
Trump's simultaneous messages of "I am the ultimate winner" and "I am the ultimate victim" gives the phrase "cognitive dissonance" a whole new level of meaning.
And really, that's where Trump failed his branding. He's a winner by brand, but after the election he was not only a loser, but a loser who was the victim of every meanie person out there with absolutely no agency. He complained and complained about how unfair and awful everything was. You can't be a winner and a victim at the same time.
Great observation. I'm stealing that.
You cannot steal that which is given freely. Use it with gusto.
Of course you will pussy. Now crawl back under your rock.
He doesn't give a fuck about election integrity.
Aside from the simultaneous extra legal changes to election procedures in the battleground states, there is one really clear circumstantial piece of evidence..... the changes in Ohio and Florida.
I am particularly familiar with Florida. For decades south Florida, and Broward County in particular, were like Atlanta, Philadelphia, Detroit, etc... only worse. They were consistently the last county in the state, and usually the entire country to report results. All of Florida, Eben the panhandle where polls close an hour later, would be 100% in before Broward reported any significant results. They would be at 1-3% all night.
The state came in and replaced election supervisor Brenda Snipes a couple of elections ago. Since that time, Broward County reports on time, with the rest of the state.
And before the replacement, Florida was a toss up, with razor thin statewide elections. Magically, competent vote tallying in Broward and South Florida changed that, and ever since that change, Florida is no longer terribly close.
Nothing changed in those 2 years other than counting the votes before you know how many votes you need to change the outcome.
We have 5 states that changed election procedures immediately prior to the election in 2020. All 5 were swing states. All 5 had major urban areas that took extraordinarily long to report results. All 5 narrowly swung democrat. We had 2 states that changed election procedures a few years earlier. Those 2 states both reported results in a timely manner. Both were swing states. Both swung republican by reasonably large margins.
Is it a smoking gun? No. But it sure as heck is suspicious.
And it is even more suspicious that nobody wants to talk about why this phenomenon exists. They want to talk avoid suitcases and pipes and mysterious ex-military guys who "know about Dominion in Central America "..... again, why?
Why is nobody curious about why democrat controlled cities cannot report votes until all of the republican areas of the state have reported their tallies? That isn't normal. There should be no national pattern to this.
Yes, I know. It is very suspicious that it takes a lot longer to count ballots in election districts with lots of people, than in election districts with not a lot of people.
In fairness, Florida got horrifically embarrassed once and determined that they were going to fix it. So, in Florida, both populous locations and sparse population locations are good at counting votes and running elections.
The problem is no other state has been so embarrassed that they made it a goal to actually conduct elections competently.
However, it took over 18 years before Broward County figured it out.
Fair point.
Oh, put a sock in it, Jeffy. Election precincts are about the same size everywhere, even in places like Chicago, yet Cook County takes longer than anywhere else in Illinois to count. Given that these votes are tallied immediately as soon as the ballot is placed into the machine, counting the ballots should not take long at all.
There's a reason Cook County takes longer to count its ballots, and it's what Cyto mentioned above. They play games with it. I'll go through a case in point where games were played, yet no one can really prove anything fully definitive.
In 2006, the race for Cook County Board President was between John Stroger (D-incumbent) and Tony Peraica (R). Stroger had a stroke during the race, and his son Todd Stroger then ran in his father's stead. The race was neck and neck up to election day. After the polls closed, the ballots had to be boxed up, sealed, and sent to the county building in the Loop. Multiple boxes from the Northwest Suburbs (a Republican stronghold) were noted on camera as missing seals and having broken seals. Of course, the regime claimed they just broke in transit. Todd Stroger went on to win the election, neck and neck in the polls up to that day, by 54% to 46%.
They still play the same games against the collar counties and downstate to this day. Wait until everyone else has counted and then mysteriously find enough ballots to put their guy over the top.
Lying Jeffy pretends not to understand “per capita”. Is anyone surprised?
Wait until everyone else has counted and then mysteriously find enough ballots to put their guy over the top.
SO PROVE IT. Find the poll worker who admits to manipulating ballots or creating fake ballots. Find the company that produced the fake ballots. Find the evidence of the manipulated ballots. Find just EVEN ONE of the fake ballots. No more stories or anecdotes. SOLID PROOF.
I am tired of all of you MASSIVE FRAUD morons running around undermining elections with your tales and stories that get spread around on social media. THAT is the real "social contagion" here. A widespread belief in MASSIVE FRAUD because (1) Trump lost and (2) lurid stories on social media. That's it.
For the overwhelming number of stories that you morons post, there are perfectly reasonable explanations that do not rely on the MASSIVE FRAUD hypothesis. But those don't generate outrage or clicks or likes on social media so those don't get shared as widely.
EXAMPLE: "Why was Trump leading on election night but then, days later, as more ballots were 'mysteriously counted', the lead went away and Biden won? Hmm? SURE SOUNDS FISHY TO ME!!!!!!"
ANSWER: Trump told his voters to vote in-person on election day, and Biden told his voters to vote any way they could, including early voting or absentee voting. In many places, it is not legal to start counting ballots before election day (this is specifically true in Pennsylvania). So once the counting started, the in-person election day ballots were counted first (a Trump-heavy population of voters), and then the early/absentee ballots were counted (a Biden-heavy population of voters).
That's it. That's the answer. There is no need to manufacture tales of cheating or fake ballots.
As to your specific claim. No, not all election precincts have "about the same" number of voters. Rural precincts typically have far fewer voters in them than even the smallest urban precinct in Chicago. And as you yourself noted, in places like Chicago, the ballots are not counted precinct-by-precinct, they are counted in a centralized manner. Hence, IT TAKES MORE TIME TO COUNT LOTS OF BALLOTS AT ONCE.
So to understand why it takes a long time to count ballots in Chicago but not in Peoria, that's why. That's the reason why. Not MASSIVE FRAUD.
So, the cameras noted that there were broken seals on ballot boxes that came from the Northwest Suburbs. Hmm. Sounds suspicious. Now, I literally know nothing about this specific case, this is the first I am hearing about it. But the first thing I would ask is: if those broken seals really are the result of fraud, and not "damage during transportation", then what about the seals from boxes from the rest of the area? Did they also suffer damage? If so, then maybe it really is the result of transportation damage and not fraud. Furthermore, you are seriously expecting me now to believe the polls?
In the end, if your strongest evidence of MASSIVE FRAUD is that a Democrat won a county commissioner race in a blue county in a blue state in a particularly good year (2006) for Team Blue, then it is not very convincing.
Lol. Jeff GOES all SQRLSY. ^
Uh oh, here comes ‘Tim the Enchanter’ 2.0!
It is very suspicious when after replacing the election official it suddenly isn't a problem anymore.
Cyto is a noted conspiracy fabulist. I would require more evidence before taking his claims at face value.
You are a flat liar.
Check it yourself. Nothing is fabulated.
Look at Broward County with Snipes (who was in charge for 2000) and after.
From days to hours.
The claim that cities cannot report totals for 12 hours while difuse counties can report withing hour or two is silly.
They are digital. It takes no time to report.
Broward is one of the largest counties in the nation.
Before the new electio supervisor, it took a whole day to get a significant percentage.
After? Florida was done with the rest of the east coast.
Incompetence or malice?
How would you prove it?
When I was in Atlanta, the Republicans had video of Cynthia Mckinney bussing the same land of people to multiple polling places. At the final one they locked the republican observer out of the room for an hour after polls should have closed.
And nothing else happened.
Like, literally nothing.
It was widely reported. It was on tape. And they never even had an investigation.
Why?
How should I know. It is a corrupt area. But how you skate on that?
Must be Epstein level stuff.
Cyto, it is not a stretch to say that you indulge your fair share of conspiracy theories around here.
You are claiming a very simple cause-effect relationship - replace one administrator, and the election is run spectacularly well. My hunch is that this story, like most stories, is actually more complicated than that.
When I was in Atlanta, the Republicans had video of Cynthia Mckinney bussing the same land of people to multiple polling places. At the final one they locked the republican observer out of the room for an hour after polls should have closed.
Do you have a link to this story?
“Cyto, it is not a stretch to say that you indulge your fair share of conspiracy theories around here.”
This is the Lying Jeffy way.
Pedo Jeffy, it’s not a stretch to say that you’re an inveterate, sea, lioning, liar. You’re regularly called out on your dishonesty.
Electronic voting is a Republican plot to disenfranchise black voters, U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney said.
Lol. Yeah, the dems hated the coof vax circa 10/2020 too.
These are really shitty people we’re talking about here.
Lying Jeffy addresses none of Cyto’s points. Is anyone surprised?
It’s part of his diversionary tactics. Leftists like Jeffy excel at that sort of thing.
It is very suspicious when you pull your head out of your ass and realize that that was only the case because of the election official in charge of Broward County.
Is it a smoking gun? No. But it sure as heck is suspicious.
And, moreover, isn't strictly partisan and is a contemplated and (seemingly) consistent improvement or standardization of the system. It really is live hot swaps of untested code in an era of version control, planned obsolescence, and regular, predictable batch releases (combined with maintenance of legacy systems that have had >99% up time for over 50 yrs.).
And why did a supposed investigation ignore obvious and documented violations of the law and focus on the distinction between suitcases and ballot boxes instead?
This was the initial fact-check from the get go. It was clearly not suitcases but boxes. It appears the majority of the American people will fall for the stupidest game of changing a legit concern to an argument of suitcase vs box.
It matters less whether there was election fraud than whether people believe there was election fraud.
And they do.
Rasmussen Reports
@Rasmussen_Poll
80% of Republicans and 64% of Independents now think the 2020 election result was affected by cheating - IE election fraud. If this is their sentiment then what other single issue does
@FoxNews believe is central to their 2024 thinking? -
@BretBaier
&
@guypbenson
Be careful with that line of reasoning.
It matters less whether there is pervasive racism in society than whether people believe there is pervasive racism in society. And they do.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/11/15/black-americans-differ-from-other-u-s-adults-over-whether-individual-or-structural-racism-is-a-bigger-problem/
Racism is one of our hallowed institutions?
It matters less whether banning AR-15s would stop mass shooting events, than whether people believe that banning AR-15s would stop mass shooting events.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/parents-gun-violence-cbs-news-poll-2023-04-16/
It matters less whether the bear in your trunk is live or dead than whether people are afraid of it being unmasked.
Unfortunately that is very true. And once people lose faith in the system, things start to break down. The long-term damage from Trump's temper tantrum could be greater than anyone can imagine.
One doesn't need a poll to prove that lack of faith in the system leads to lack of faith in the results. It wouldn't take 50% +1 to lose faith in the results, either. 15-20 percent of the voting public not believing elections are transparent should be enough for the government to at least *attempt* to restore that faith. Instead, the government continues to give the typical, 'take or leave it' approach when dealing with any citizen concerns.
Instead, the government continues to give the typical, ‘take or leave it’ approach when dealing with any citizen concerns.
Slight correction and to your point about "15-20 percent of the voting public": if it *were* just 15% of the voting public and the government *were* just 'take it or leave it' it would probably be closer to 50%, but the facts are that it's some amorphous number probably closer to 5% taking unscheduled tours of the Capitol building and more than 50% asking "(Holy Fuck!) Why are we shooting *these* people for putting their feet on unsanctioned footrests after several years of people lighting the Church across the street on fire?"
Another Georgia Probe Finds No Evidence of Conspiracy To Steal 2020 Election
Come now. That just means the conspiracy goes deeper than was previously imagined.
"Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican-in-name-only, announced Tuesday," FTFY
Also, you are never going to find what you are NOT looking for.
Whether you believe this report or not (I do not), please keep in mind...Al Capone never committed a crime other than tax evasion because there was never any evidence he did. Tax evasion was the only crime they could prove.
Just because you cannot prove a crime DOES NOT mean it never occurred.
https://twitter.com/ProdigalThe3rd/status/1671535824863674368?t=BtNrOCClOoiHfjmNa-EHyw&s=19
Test scores released today show that US 13-year-olds performance
in math & reading has hit the lowest level in decades
US 13-year-olds answered an average of 51.2% reading questions correctly; lowest score since 1990
…answered an average 54.2% in math; lowest score since 2004
[Link]
Covid wrecked my son, who was in middle school at the time. He basically learned nothing for a year and a half... except for how to avoid working hard and studying.
He went from straight A's, district champion in the science fair, lead in the school play, award winner for best band student, championship travel baseball teams, etc... to struggling to keep up, no sports, no plays, no extracurriculars outside of church.....
He is finally starting to get back into sports. He is still struggling with math, but doing well in other subjects. But the arts are gone.
Covid cost him dearly.
My girls were younger and were not hit so hard, but I am sure they would have been better off learning in person and bonding with friends.
Covid was a massive hit to our kids.
Sorry to hear that.
The covid psyop was the most massive crime against humanity ever committed. Billions of people were targeted.
What was done to children was abuse.
They ruined the lives of millions of kids, in large part to get rid of Trump and the populist movement.
But falsifying an election is totes a bridge too far...
I hope your son recovers his full potential. No kid should suffer what was done to them by politically motivated lock downs.
John Holt was a teacher for years before he finally concluded that public education was harming children and was fundamentally anti-child. He was one of the first advocates of homeschooling.
Here's a link to the Wikipedia article about him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Holt_(educator)
Covid was a massive hit to our kids.
Not to make light of your child's suffering, rather the opposite, but it's a bit of a microcosm or relevant tangent. Our middle broodling is a social competitor and, unable to compete with his friends, checked out a bit during COVID. He bounced right back once school got back in and his, as well as his siblings' scores, went right back up to "above average" and beyond.
Again not to make light of the state's abuse of anyone's children, but there's still a significant question as to what exactly that "above average" even means now. Are they still performing above grade level or just performing above an average that is the same grade level as a year ago? As near as I can tell COVID, grades, test scores, remote learning, learn to code... all of it was nothing but a bunch of churned bullshit all along.
The Department of Education is obviously money well spent…….
So, here are some ideas for election reform that IMO are worthy of consideration. I am not sure I am in favor of all of them, but I can see the argument in favor of all of them at least.
1. A single nationwide standard for all voting procedures. If photo ID is mandatory in one place, it should be mandatory everywhere. If three weeks of early voting is permitted in one place, it should be permitted everywhere. If no-excuse absentee voting is permitted in one place, it should be permitted everywhere.
2. A paid professional staff for running elections. No more volunteer grandmas who can't figure out how to use an IPad.
3. Elections are run by nonpartisan agencies, not by a partisan Secretary of state office. It always astounded me that the people running elections were often the very same people running in that election.
4. Automatic voter registration once a citizen turns 18, and if a voter moves, or dies, automatic voter registration update tied to the voter's tax records.
5. Voting takes place electronically using machines running only open-source software. Results are tabulated electronically using only open-source software and final results are published within 3 days tops of election day.
6. For in-person voting, a guaranteed minimum wait time of X minutes for waiting in line to vote, where X is some relatively small number, like 5 or 10. If a potential voter has to wait more than X minutes to vote, it is presumed to be a violation of the voter's civil right to vote.
Some interesting ideas here. First by having a diversified election we are actually making cheating harder. Volunteers do a good job, we need more young people, so rather than a professional staff, have it be like jury duty where the employer must give the employee the day off to work at the polls. A 5-to-10-minute wait time is too optimistic, I would say 20 to 30 minutes is acceptable.
I like this.
But why the more permissive defaults? (Except ID)
Why not, if one state bans early voting, no early voting anywhere.
I am not sure, but it seems that month long elections favor machine politics. I don't think that is a good thing.
But then again, voting on one day gives mass media and attack ads inordinate power. It basically creates the "October Surprise" strategy.
One thing that is definitely true.... politicians are playing games with the voting rules in exactly the same way they use redistricting to game the system.
I don't know what the way out is. The people deciding "what is fair" are the exact people who are hell-bent on gaming the system.
I look at how we run elections in other countries when we try to introduce democracy. They have voter rolls, one day voting, chain of custody..... heck, in Iraq they had issues with ID and voter rolls, so they went with Methyl Blue die on a finger to prevent multiple votes. No mail, no absentee... show up, dip your finger and vote.
Yes, they used a medieval method of voting in Iraq because at that time they had a medieval level of infrastructure in Iraq to support voting. I would like to think that the US, whatever its faults, has a level of voting infrastructure that is better than medieval.
I think you need to choose your priorities, because you seem to have several contradictory goals.
You want a ban on early voting, meaning that there would be a large volume of ballots to count only on or immediately after election day; you want every ballot to be meticulously inspected for fraud; and yet you want very fast results. You can't have all three.
Sure you can. Super easy, barely an inconvenience.
But first you have to agree on goals.
Iraq a
Had a simple goal. One man, one vote. Simple. So die solves that problem 100%.
We have other goals.
Somehow, the group in charge decided that "more people voting" was the most important thing. At least, that is what they said out loud. As far as I know, very few people place that at the top of the list.
But if one man, one vote is important, then vote by mail is a bad solution.
Speed of counting votes is not remotely an issue in the era of digital processing. Kodak had a scanner that could do 10,000 pages an hour in the 90s.
In Broward, a heavily Democrat area, a million votes were cast in 2020. Yet they were counted and reported quickly.
How? Well, votes cast that day and in early voting are scanned by the voter immediately. So they push a button to get the counts. So if you went to only in person voting, the count would instant. Polls close, hit the button, results are in.
The signature audits are way less important, because if you show up in person to vote and show your ID before signing, the signature is low on the list.
In vote by mail the only security is the physical ballot (fairly low security) and the signature (low security).
There are other considerations as well. Secret ballot is crucial. Vote by mail and ballot harvesting completely break the secret ballot. I don't see a way around this problem... and we used to solve it by making absentee ballots rare. Military, overseas for business, etc. 1% of the vote isn't that significant.
But in heavily democrat areas vote by mail is over 50%. Coincidentally, these are areas where ballot harvesting is easier due to population density. It is also much easier to show up at the polls in a city versus in rural Idaho, where you might be more than a half hour drive from the polling place.
There are clues in those observations.
There are no perfect answers. "Voting month" definitely attacks the ability to dump a big lie on the voters at the last second. But it also means that anything that is real that happens late will be missed by half of the voters.... like Federman. They hid his condition (sort of) until right near the election. Early voting was already significant before the press allowed him to look slightly off.
The real problem is that the majority of action on elections is for partisan advantage, not for improving election security and voter confidence.
I'm aware of optical scanners. But how will you ensure that the scanners are scanning the ballots correctly? Will you have to have poll watchers watching the workers scan each ballot one by one? I mean, you don't really *trust* the workers to just scan 10,000 at once, do you? What if there is a legit ballot on top and 9,999 fakes right below it? These are the types of arguments that the MASSIVE FRAUD crowd make. They demand the right to inspect every single step and that slows everything down.
There is no way to have an election process that is secure AND speedy that will meet their paranoid demands.
If Florida got away with scanning all these ballots at once and no one raising a fuss, I can guarantee the only reason no one complained about it is because the "correct person" won the state.
Vote by mail and ballot harvesting completely break the secret ballot.
No it doesn't. There is typically a secrecy envelope inside the mailing envelope. When the ballot is received, and/or when it comes time to count the ballots, the outer envelope, with all the identifying information, is separated from the inner secrecy envelope.
And ballot harvesting doesn't either, provided all the ballot harvester is doing is physically delivering the sealed ballot (outer envelope with inner envelope inside) to the polling place. The harvester doesn't know the contents of the inner envelope. Now if the harvesting practice is when the harvester "helps" the voter fill out the ballot, then that is wrong and should be stopped, yes.
“But how will you ensure that the scanners are scanning the ballots correctly”
Ladies and Gentleman, the first and probably last time, Lying Jeffy will be concerned with the accuracy of vote counting machines.
Yes, the clue is that you are connecting unrelated dots so as to justify a conspiracy theory.
There's no standard for election procedures because there's no standard for elections. That's not a bad thing. That's the reality of living in a state. The rules and standards of elections can and do vary from state to state and to mandate one size fits all takes away much of the self-governing power of the citizens of the states. A lot of people, particularly those who only vote for president, forget that people do not vote for presidents, states do. The "presidential election" is simply 50 simultaneous but unrelated elections the states conduct to decide how the state will vote for President and there are virtually no constitutional rules on how this election is conducted (other than prohibitions on various kinds of discrimination). A state could, in theory, decide an election with a coin flip or a die roll (some local elections explicitly break ties this way).
That’s not a bad thing.
Yes it is a bad thing, because at the end of the day, it can lead to the result that a voter who casts a valid vote in one district in one state, if that exact same voter was in a different district in a different state, would not be considered casting a valid vote. If this voter would get the valid opportunity to choose his/her national leaders in one place, why should that *exact same voter* under the *exact same conditions* not have the same opportunity to choose his/her national leaders in some other place?
The Constitution permits Congress to set certain rules for elections:
We can still have 50 "presidential elections" in 50 states, but they would each have to follow the same standard under this proposal.
*exact same conditions*
Living in different places is not the exact same conditions. A central hallmark of living in a free society is the choice to live within it. If you don't like the laws where you live you can move to a place where the laws are more to your preference.
If the standards for voting are such that a person meets those standards in one place, but doesn't meet those standards in another place, under identical conditions, then those standards are arbitrary and should be re-examined. This is not a mere luxury consumer choice here, this is a protected civil right we are talking about.
We would never tolerate, for example, an argument of "sure, Iowa can take away your right to a speedy trial, and if you don't like it, then just move to Minnesota". We would condemn Iowa for that decision and demand that they change, not leave the impetus on the individual to choose a state that respects his/her civil rights. Same should be the case for voting.
Constitutionally, a State does not need to have an election for President at all. It could decide that the Governor will appoint its electors. Or that the Legislature will name the electors. Or that the electors will be chosen at random.
Even if holding and elections States do not need to designate all their electors for one "winner". A valid argument might be made that a state concerned about democratic representation of the votes of its citizens ought to designate electors proportional to the election results.
The different methods for designating electors is one clear reason why anyone making any claims about a "popular vote for president" is just flapping their gums.
If Newsome and the Democrats in California's legislature passed a new law that said "The Governor will appoint the electors." (based on their smug assumption that never again will California have a Republican governor), not a thing changes in the elector college count as 55 votes for Democrat will happen. But there's suddenly 12M fewer Democrat votes in the popular election compared to 6M fewer Republican votes.
I like many of those ideas. Though I'm not always in favor of making voting easier. It shouldn't be too hard. But if it's such an important and valuable thing, people should be willing to make a little effort to do it. But I'd be all for making registration easier in some way (though not automatic, people who don't choose to vote shouldn't be registered without their knowledge). Maybe make election day on the weekend or allow voting over a week or something.
With all the clever encryption stuff people can do these days, it seems like there should be some technological way to make elections more fraud-proof. For example, come up with a way that people can verify that their vote was counted properly. That might just be a better use for Bitcoin-like tech than as currency.
#6 sounds nice, but what happens if it takes too long?
But if it’s such an important and valuable thing, people should be willing to make a little effort to do it.
"If having a trial when charged with a crime is such an important and valuable thing to some people (instead of simply pleading guilty), people should be willing to make a little effort to do it, like hire their own lawyers."
We would not accept that line of reasoning for other civil rights. Why should we accept it for the civil right of voting?
You have some apples and oranges going on here.
People are expected to hire their own defense lawyers if they can afford it.
I just don't think we need to be encouraging people who are not engaged and bothered enough to get off their butts to vote. I don't really see voting as a right but a privilege of citizenship. If you want to have a say about who gets to reach into my pocket, and make laws about what I'm allowed to do or not, then I don't think it's unreasonable to expect them to expend a little thought and exertion on it.
I don't know how much more plainly to say this. Voting is a right. It is a civil right, not a natural right, but it is a right nonetheless. IMO we can't call ourselves libertarians in good faith unless we are willing to stick up for ALL rights. That is kind of our brand.
Protecting someone's right is not the same as "encouraging" the irresponsible use of that right. Sure I don't really like it that some people don't put much effort into deciding how they are going to vote. But I wouldn't want to make it purposefully difficult for those people to vote just because they haven't put in as much effort as *I* think they should have used.
The people who reach into your pocket, reach into my pocket, and reach into everyone's pockets as well.
That isn't what he is saying though.
Some people have set "everyone who is eligible should vote" as a top priority. Not "be able to", but should actually vote.
The counter argument to this is that important things are being decided. "Everyone" moves it more into the realm of a popularity contest.
Voting for a politician is always going to have a huge dose of this.
But there are also ballot initiatives. Should bumper stickers and memes decide constitutional amendments in California? That is a terrible idea. It already is really difficult to make an informed choice if you are engaged (they use odd language where they sometimes mean the opposite of what it appears). So the guy who hates politics and didn't get his GED and never read the ballot measure is voting YES because the organization pushing it spent a bunch of money on yard signs and advertisements and had a cool slogan.
Denying the right to vote and saying it would be best if only people invested in making informed choices voted are not the same thing.
Zeb wrote:
I don’t really see voting as a right but a privilege of citizenship.
And I profoundly disagree with that. Voting is a right. And we libertarians have a duty IMO to defend that right just as we defend all other rights.
Yes, important things are being decided by elections. So it would be great if all the eligible voters took the time to study the issues and make informed choices. Not everyone will, but they have the right to vote too, just as the responsible pot user has just as much right to smoke pot as the stoner who gets baked every weekend.
So the guy who hates politics and didn’t get his GED and never read the ballot measure is voting YES because the organization pushing it spent a bunch of money on yard signs and advertisements and had a cool slogan.
Welcome to modern democracy.
Another example that Lying Jeffy doesn’t even have a basic understanding of libertarianism.
You yourself admitted it’s not a natural right…
Also, democracy is 50%+1 of those mouth breathing rednecks deciding you’re dinner. Sorry, but the sheep shouldn’t be making that proposition even easier.
I consider rights to be things that apply to all people. Voting is limited to citizens over a certain age. When a certain group gets to do something that is restricted for others, that's a privilege or entitlement, not a right. In my view, democracy is not an end in itself. It is a highly flawed tool that can help prevent too much power accumulating in anyone's hands.
Just to be clear. There is not a right to vote for President. However, if your state chooses to use an election to designate its Presidential electors, certain Constitutional rights must be upheld in the course of that election.
But, again, there's not a Constitutional rule that says states must use elections to determine their electors (they all do, but it's not required). If your state chooses some other method (appointment by Governor, for example), then you simply don't get to vote for President.
Unfortunately, when you have a lot of democrats around, ‘common knowledge’ tends to trump constitutional law. Notice how there is practically no civics in school anymore. Eroded after the democrat run and staffed Department of Education got their hooks fully into the state’s school systems.
Ignoramuses insist there is a legal right to vote where there is not. Most democrats believe it to be so, even when it is not.
Politicians and their courts assert there IS a right to vote for Congress. See United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876)
With all the clever encryption stuff people can do these days, it seems like there should be some technological way to make elections more fraud-proof. For example, come up with a way that people can verify that their vote was counted properly. That might just be a better use for Bitcoin-like tech than as currency.
I completely agree. Get rid of all the signature verification crap entirely. It is too error-prone even when there is no fraud. Let people confirm their identity digitally in this way instead.
#6 sounds nice, but what happens if it takes too long?
If it were up to me, then the elections supervisor would be thrown in jail for violating the civil rights of voters.
That might just be a better use for Bitcoin-like tech than as currency.
This is exactly what blockchain can and should be used for and it would, assuming miners/consensus network servers and protocols were open to and/or controlled by the public, would be far more effective at displacing a social liberty that people generally acknowledge as dated, flawed, and perpetually controversial, rather than replacing one that's more fundamentally natural, behaviorally intrinsic, and so repeatedly-attempted to be artificially displaced.
1. A single nationwide standard for all voting procedures.
The Constitution specifically prohibits this degree of centralization. You’ll need an Amendment to achieve this. Won’t happen.
2. A paid professional staff for running elections. No more volunteer grandmas who can’t figure out how to use an IPad.
There’s already paid staff for administrating election procedure, but you absolutely don’t want the people counting the ballots to have any possibility of benefiting personally from that. An all-volunteer staff is the best way to achieve that.
3. Elections are run by nonpartisan agencies, not by a partisan Secretary of state office. It always astounded me that the people running elections were often the very same people running in that election.
Again, the Constitution says that States run elections. And, the people counting the ballots are volunteers, they aren’t running for office. There are staff who administer the process — provide the training, store the machines, etc. Those tasks aren’t affected by partisanship.
4. Automatic voter registration once a citizen turns 18, and if a voter moves, or dies, automatic voter registration update tied to the voter’s tax records.
No issues with these ideas, registrations are the weakest spot in election security.
5. Voting takes place electronically using machines running only open-source software. Results are tabulated electronically using only open-source software and final results are published within 3 days tops of election day.
Absolutely no on voting machines. Voting on scantron paper that is machine-counted is far more accurate and auditable. You cannot do a recount on voting machines. You can only do a recount when there is a human-readable record. In well-run states that use scanned paper ballots, unofficial results are typically ready within 24 hours.
6. For in-person voting, a guaranteed minimum wait time of X minutes for waiting in line to vote, where X is some relatively small number, like 5 or 10. If a potential voter has to wait more than X minutes to vote, it is presumed to be a violation of the voter’s civil right to vote.
Eh. I don’t see what good this would do, because what do you imagine would be done if there were actual “violations of the voter’s civil right”? Pull all the voters out, interview them, take statements, have them come to court to testify … ? How is that going to solve anything. In-person early voting solves this perfectly.
Voting on scantron paper that is machine-counted is far more accurate and auditable. You cannot do a recount on voting machines. You can only do a recount when there is a human-readable record. In well-run states that use scanned paper ballots, unofficial results are typically ready within 24 hours.
While I don't exactly disagree with the others, I do disagree on this one. E2E isn't a new concept and the media is irrelevant. I've never gotten my paper ballot back to know it wasn't adulterated or had hanging chads after the fact and, even if I did, I would have no way of confirming that what was actually on the paper is what turned up in the polls. Not to mention that unlike for transactions, which can occur several times a minute and take between seconds and days to settle on the details of between several bytes to megabytes of information. Votes are quasi-annually, one-and-done, single bit to single-byte transactions. Even relatively poor encryption that could theoretically be hacked with 10 yr. old technology 5 yrs. down the road with a yet-to-be instantiated hack would be more than sufficient for a vote that took place last year and, again, would still be open source and one-and-done.
My state uses computerized ballot machines and separate ballot counters.
You show up to vote, and after getting ID verified and confirming you're in the right place, you are handed a ballot form. You wait for a free balloting machine, then insert your blank ballot form into the machine. You make your selections on the GUI. When you finish and click the "Print Ballot" button, the machine prints your selections on the ballot. You remove your ballot, and can take as much time as you need to review the selections as you walk across the room and insert it into a 2nd machine that counts the ballots and collects them in a lockbox for recount purposes.
Can you take a picture of your ballot as evidence or how you actually voted?
The Constitution specifically prohibits this degree of centralization. You’ll need an Amendment to achieve this. Won’t happen.
Article 1, Section 4
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
So Congress does have *some* authority to set nationwide standards. Besides, in this discussion I am more interested in discussing potential ideas not necessarily their feasible implementation.
There’s already paid staff for administrating election procedure, but you absolutely don’t want the people counting the ballots to have any possibility of benefiting personally from that. An all-volunteer staff is the best way to achieve that.
Possibly. But just read some of the complaints from the MASSIVE FRAUD crowd. They would go on and on about 'chain of custody' issues. Part of it is bad-faith trolling but part of it is a legitimate concern. There was that one county in Michigan where the election workers didn't set the right switch on the voting machine and it produced weird results (like a solid Red county producing all these Biden votes) until they found the error and switched it back, but that sort of mistake, due in part from having poorly trained volunteers running things, fuels these conspiracy theories.
Again, the Constitution says that States run elections. And, the people counting the ballots are volunteers, they aren’t running for office. There are staff who administer the process — provide the training, store the machines, etc. Those tasks aren’t affected by partisanship.
Well yes, but the staff run the election according to the rules set by the partisan heads of the departments. We just don't need to have partisan secretaries of state running things.
Absolutely no on voting machines. Voting on scantron paper that is machine-counted is far more accurate and auditable. You cannot do a recount on voting machines. You can only do a recount when there is a human-readable record. In well-run states that use scanned paper ballots, unofficial results are typically ready within 24 hours.
Oh come on. You can't tell me that financial institutions, which process billions of dollars of financial transactions daily, most of the time purely electronically, can't have an auditable and secure process of doing so, but we can't do something similar for elections?
Eh. I don’t see what good this would do, because what do you imagine would be done if there were actual “violations of the voter’s civil right”?
An actionable case by the victim against the election board supervisor who violated the victim's rights.
Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 and lost the popular and electoral college votes in 2020--despite lethal vandalism by German-style nationalsocialist whackos. One outta four is a poor showing, and kicking and screaming only highlights how right the voters were once they'd tasted the violent prohibitionist Comstockism.
At this point everyone knows there was a conspiracy to elect Xiden, it just didn't happen like Donnie cries. There was a profound conspiracy in play.
Again, theories without evidence. The new religion.
You mean the "theory" that the Times article admitted?
I am to assume that since the GA poll worker fraud fizzled out you are moving to the next conspiracy theory?
Are you purposefully ignoring the article and it's subject matter cited by ace and the one cited by rev below?
Of course he is.
Time magazine literally had an article bragging about it you retarded cancer
Bragging about what? What fraud is reported in the time magazine? That people worked to make sure the election was fair and accurate, is that fraud? The reference to the time article is the same BS.
Are you really this obtuse on this subject?
So, you can't respond and just move on to insults. Same way you move from one conspiracy theory to another.
There was no insult, just an observation. You clearly ignored the cited article that discussed all that was done to prevent Trump from winning. The article discusses the actions taken by the media and other groups to prevent the election of Trump. The article is not about stealing the election through changing votes or fraud, but rather the “fortifying” of the election that occurred. The substance of the article is not remotely a conspiracy theory, and to claim it is just shows a partisan obtuseness that you are clearly employing.
And as someone who believes Trump lost and who does not push conspiracy theories, your characterization of me is really just more partisan obtuseness to condescend in order to deflect. Just like claiming "can't respond" when the response was literally calling you out for not responding.
But I get it, in your world, anything you disagree with is a conspiracy theory. It’s just pseudo-intellectual laziness.
The Time article was offered as another example of fraud which you yourself admit above it was not fraud. So why question my assertion that it was trotted out as the next conspiracy.
The only person who mentioned fraud was you. No one else was arguing that it showed fraud. Just because you decided to incorrectly reframe someone's argument doesn't change the argument that actually was.
But at least they'd never falsify an election...
https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1659159339905556481?t=tKbxNnBP0Hg-JvsBN0MV3Q&s=19
This is damning information. According to the Durham Report, President Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan, then-Vice President Joe Biden, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and the infamous former Director of the FBI James Comey were briefed in August 2016 about the plan by Hillary Clinton and the DNC to create a false narrative linking President Trump to Russia.
The FBI knew the Steele dossier was a sack of lies, and yet they still pushed false allegations in the nefarious FISA warrant applications against Carter Page. They made it a point to try to crush Trump and those around him. It was a purely political, banana republic effort to change the course of a presidential election and presidency.
Many key Durham report findings were already disclosed thanks to Judicial Watch FOIA investigations and litigation.
Durham let down the American people with few and failed prosecutions. Never in American history has so much government corruption faced so little accountability. Let me be clear, the FBI and Justice Department – and their political masters in the Obama White House – are responsible for the worst government corruption in American history. President Trump is a crime victim who was targeted by a seditious conspiracy by Obama, Biden, Clinton and their Deep State allies.
But at least they'd never falsify an election!
https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1671517519394271233?t=EUs6LeK0qDsx5DgebHNebw&s=19
It's now extremely likely that covid escaped a substandard Chinese lab as a result of experiments funded by the U.S. government and by Doctor Fauci in particular.
I hope all the misinformation cops in the mainstream media are enjoying this huge L.
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
For how the Democrat governor of Colorado wants to issue pardons to persons smeared by anti-psychedelic usurpations go to http://www.hightimes.com
God's Own Prohibitionists are ipso facto sure to claim they "wuz robbed" there too, despite Robert Dear's heroic support.
The false accusation against the two poll workers was despicable. Men like Trump and those that assisted him in his false claims whine they are victims all the while encouraging the harassment of little people like these poll workers. They should all be sued to their last dollar.
https://twitter.com/AuronMacintyre/status/1671597084061884424?t=uC5O_jf1BPUrhgk9GFZD0Q&s=19
Thomas Jefferson
The quote he is mocking is from Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence
Biden: “I love these guys who say the 2nd Amendment is — you know, the tree of liberty is water with the blood of patriots. Well, if want to do that, you want to work against the government, you need an F-16. You need something else than just an AR-15.”
As president.
Almost as if he is crowing about the impotence of the people to challenge corruption.
It should be a Marie Antoinette "let them eat cake" moment.
People close to those in power want to believe in Thano's "I am inevitable". It's why some of them predicted a quick defeat for Ukraine and continue to demand a "peace" where the Russians get to keep whatever areas they still occupy. Successful resistance to the "inevitable" provokes fear in those benefiting from power.
Wow
Not to get all progressive, civil-libertarian on anybody, but the issue with quoting a dead white guy doesn't bug me nearly as much as a world leader rather overtly, and in such a thoroughly intellectually sub par manner proclaming that "If he must be compelled to water the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots, so be it."
1030pm Workers hear someone yelling we’re done for today and you should leave for the night. The FBI and report are never able to identify this person who yelled “we are calling it, let’s everybody go.”. Can’t seem to ID or find any person in Georgia who ordered the counting to stop at 1030. Media and observers see almost everyone has gone by 1034 – they try in vain but no one can tell them how many ballots have been counted or are left to be counted, so they leave at 1046 pm. 3 minutes later, after all but 4 have left and at 1049 – Jones just happens to enter the facility; Jones is in charge of delivering boxes containing thousands of absentee and provisional ballots for ‘counting’. He’s just happens to arrive in time to observe that all but 4 employees have left for the night and then just happens to get a call (1058) ordering him and the ‘Final 4’ (including Freeman and Moss) to resume scanning and counting -all night if necessary. (Certainly the conversation could not have been e.g. ‘…Everyone gone? Yes. Media and observers gone? Yes. Are we good to go? Yes….’) It couldn’t possibly be true that he was waiting and watching for the employees and media and observers to leave the arena in their cars before entering? FBI and report supports it’s BS with e.g. the 4 people who stayed behind outside the presence of media and observers and other employees said (paraphrasing) ‘…I didn’t see anything improper!..’ (And who was watching you? No one of course.). The report also fails to state how long the 4 employees remained at the Center that night with many thousands of ballots e.g. adding another 30,000 Biden votes to heavily democratic Fulton Country is like adding more sand to a beach. If you believe this ‘extraordinary’ BS of a tale, then surely you believe Trump declassified all those documents in his mind.
I was wondering why the daily roundup post didn't have as many comments and now I see it's because the usual comment section provocateurs are here, patting each other on the back.
Read the report. It’s only 10 pages long.
I am a die-hard election process nerd with decades of experience as a volunteer poll worker. The report completely satisfied all my questions. There was no fraud.
Although there was no fraud, the conflicting instructions given to the staff regarding the closing of the operation for the evening was unprofessional, in my opinion.
DaveM, you're just a liar.
And you will die, but it won't be hard.
So you’re a Democrat apparatchik with zero integrity or sense.
I still haven't seen Pennsylvania's report on how their mail in ballots broke for Biden like California's did, when their in-person vote 50-50. Or how the TV networks all knew a 400K vote lead wasn't safe, thanks to the stacks of mail in ballot boxes.
So the thousands of people needed to pull this off included the TV networks? And no one is leaking the evidence? Is that reasonable?
Or people familiar with elections and polling including TV network people covering the election predicted that it could still break for Biden because they were aware that mail-in ballots would break heavily Dem (since republicans were preaching to fear the mail-in ballots) combined with the political leanings of the areas that had outstanding ballots. Is that not reasonable?
You're trying to reason with die hard Trump supporters. They're never, ever, going to concede that he actually lost the election.
I grew up in the metro Atlanta area. Trump was ahead with a large number of votes yet to have been tallied in Fulton and DeKalb counties. I can't remember a single time in my adult life when either of those counties, particularly the areas within and immediately outside the Atlanta city limits, ever went for a GOP presidential candidate. Couple that with a massive swing in demographics in the metro Atlanta area as a whole and the result wasn't a shock. State politics in Georgia as a whole have probably lurched to the left more or less permanently due to the rapid expansion of the metro Atlanta area over the past 30 years, most of it being fueled by those moving in from out of state. It is the same thing that has happened in multiple Southern states that restructured their economies to attract businesses that employ a large number of college educated individuals. That today, rightly or wrongly, are usually exposed to more liberal politics on campus.
GOP is in a bit of a crossroads right now. They can either continue to alienate people with Trump and MAGA as the standard, or acknowledge that things have changed and that you're going to have to find a way to appeal to a different base of voter. Right now it doesn't seem that they're getting the message.
You aren't paying attention.
In August of 2020 Trump was down by 16 points in the polls. Democrat analysts began predicting that "on election night it will appear that Trump won in a landslide. But by the time the recounts and court cases are done, Biden will win in a landslide".
The first time I saw it I was so shocked I reported it here. Several times. Nobody should have said the guy who is down 16 points in the polls us even going to win a single state. That is a historic margin.
Yet? That was introduced as the conventional wisdom. "Everybody knows".
And all night, that is what the press reported... everywhere. They all knew the democrat areas would report very late. They all knew they would have the margin needed to swing those states. All before there was even 3% of the vote in.
How did they know that? The same way the academics knew that Trump would be way ahead election night, months in advance, even though he was down 16 points.
Fox concludes chicken coop is safe, and no one tried to dig their way in. The chickens kicked up that dirt.
Nothing says clean election to me like taping cardboard over windows so you can count ballots in secret.
Any election count where scrutineers are kicked out should become automatically invalidated, and a new polling date set for that area.
lol.... Investigation summary; Yep. It all happened exactly as shown on video - after hours .... but investigators couldn't find any rule broken because .... "she declined to answer further questions until she retained an attorney".
I've seen two mathematical analysis proofs by two University professors that the 2020 potus election was stolen. The proofs are foolproof, utterly convincing, and beyond chance, period, and one drills down to every county in every state.
So there is no doubt.
I recall we had that preposterous doofus of the federal govenment, some goomba on some government election review body - whatever official fraud name they gave it, blabbered out, and dutifully repeated by the libtard msm "the most honest and perfect election in the history of the USA" - that's paraphrased but hits the nail on the head.
I knew that very instant it was 100% propaganda.
We can go just a few years back and SEE the videos of many of the prominent naysayers declaring mail in ballots one of the biggest opportunities for fraud there is. Same for all the years we saw endless take downs of the electronic voting machines and how insecure they were. Then we had all the reports of Republican poll watchers kicked right out and shut right up and kept away from viewing, and told they could say nothing, and screamed at if they objected, then ballot dump boxes by Zuckerberg in demo areas, then the Time Magazine election fraud collusion admission, the the trucks barreling across state lines to dump ballots... it just went on and on and on... then we had the 3:06 am to 5:14 am "magical Biden vertical hockeystick ballot 100,000+ dump to take lead" in the 5 swing states - the graphs were all over the entire internet, then we had the strange percentage adds in exact numbers for Biden vs Trump in the follow "ballot additions", the crimes just kept being exposed it was really unbelievable how many vote count thefts were in the wide open....
I quite understand there were some other claims that really didn't matter and perhaps were never proven, but the entire load was more than any sane person could bear and claim the election wasn't stolen. The 5 Simultaneous Swing State Vertical Hockey Stick just take the lead 3-5am spikes were enough for ANYONE WITH 2 BRAIN CELLS TO SEE IT WAS STOLEN.
To trust anyone who says otherwise is to be a fool.
I’ve seen two mathematical analysis proofs by two University professors that the 2020 potus election was stolen. The proofs are foolproof, utterly convincing, and beyond chance, period, and one drills down to every county in every state.
OK. Please share these proofs.
I’ve seen them. Although they use statistics math for a conclusion which I don’t consider real math. If the rest of the world is going to make claims based on statistics I see no reason not to give this case specifically any lesser amount of credit. Heck; most of the time the BS they regulate can’t even reach statistical significance. The math analysis proofs done on the election surpassed statistical significance in truck loads.
But why even ask for statistical math? The very reason legislature allowed mail-in voting was because at it’s origin it exactly duplicated in-person voting. By it’s very means of validity-testing the last elections invalidated mail-in voting integrity. In every logic/science outside of election when a supposed law is repeatedly and undeniably no longer true it gets thrown out. (i.e. The earth is flat - science).
Lesser statistics have been accepted as damnable proof of racism in banking, college admissions, mortgages, etc.
Translation: WAAAAAH! We tried to enslave women and they kicked our asses--we wuz robbed!
No major stories involving the current administration, boehm? Nothing?
Which should not be taken to mean EVERYTHING was fine and dandy.
There were a lot of irregularities. FOr example, with missing memory cards being found all over the state. Let's assume simple human error for all of them. If so, procedures should be improved to try to mitigate those sorts of human errors.
The unprecedented and extra-legislative use of drop boxes and other COVID-era panic measures have largely been addressed by the legislature (remember Jim Crow 2.0?).
How does the Republican in a run-off for Public Works Commissioner get more votes than ANY Senate candidate on the same run-off ballot, with the hotly contested balance of the US Senate in play?
Jon Ossoff (D)
2,211,603 50.2%
David Perdue (R)
2,194,578 49.8%
(a total of 4406181 votes, and a margin of 17k votes)
Raphael Warnock(D)
2,230,231 50.61%
Kelly Loeffler*(R)
2,176,048 49.39%
(a total of 4406279 votes, and a margin of 54k votes)
You'd think that someone voting for Ossoff would also have voted for Warnock and vice-versa, and similarly that a Perdue voter was also a Loeffler voter and vice-versa.
But 20k fewer people voted for Ossoff than Warnock. There is a similar 20k vote differential in Perdue over Loeffler, so the implication seems to be that 20k people voted for Perdue AND Warnock, which I find virtually unfathomable.
Meanwhile, there was another state-wide race, for PSC
McDonald, Lauren Bubba i (R)
2,214,057 50.78%
Blackman, Daniel (D)
2,145,636 49.22%
(a total of 4359693 votes)
So it seems that about 46.5k people voted for Senators but didn't vote for a PSC. That is in itself not unusual, as it is not rare for people to only vote on the "important" seats and skip down-ballot votes.
The AMAZING thing to me is that despite 46.5k FEWER votes total, that 20k MORE people voted for a Republican for the PSC seat than voted for Senator Perdue and 38k MORE than Senator Loeffler. Heck even 3k MORE people voted for the Republican PSC candidate than voted for Jon Ossoff.
But pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Nothing to see here! Absolutely no shenanigans could possibly have occurred.
Is it too hard to comprehend that someone may not vote in every race on a ballot. Or (and this is REALLY going to blow your mind) that some people may not vote straight down the party line?
Since 2016, some of the GOP candidates have been outright kooks (MTG is almost making Cynthia McKinney look sane) so I don't know how it can be surprising that voters may pass over a race entirely, rather than hold their nose and vote for someone they find repugnant simply because of their party affiliation.
Sorry, that's why Trump lost in 2020 and the GOP lost both Senate seats in Georgia the same year. That's why the GOP didn't retake the Senate and made only just barely secured a majority in the House. But I guess the MAGA crowd is ready to try the same losing strategy again in 2024 by the way things are shaping up.
Why do you compare your *REAL* In-Person vote count to your F'Up excuses then come back and explain how it's just some people vote a certain way. Don't you mean some *invisible/imaginary* mail votes.
I never vote for any Keptocracy candidate. When I run out of libertarian, I'm through voting. To do otherwise undermines spoiler vote clout, itself a leveraged multiple of subsidized looter vote clout.
Repealing the laws against voting money on election outcomes would set all these whining Trumpanzees to either put up or shut up. These are the same thugs that place "scheduled" substances beyond the reach of scientific testing and falsification of superstitious credulity. Global warmunism hoaxers follow the GOP playbook by decreeing that NASA charts are NOT tampered with and that the "science" is "settled." Libertarian candidate Oliver got votes in Georgia for a dime apiece, about 1/200th what the looters spent.
I want every person who is eligible to vote to be able to do so in a fair and straightforward manner.
However, I also want to be sure that each vote represents *that* person's vote (and not someone else's), that the person voting is who they say they are, that the person voting is voting in the proper district in which they actually live.
I want each person to verifiably vote once and only once.
I want the balloting and counting of votes to be done in manner that is as open and transparent as possible so that everyone can feel that the process is fair and impartial.
And when the rules are established, they should be fair, open, and easily complied with, and then enforced evenly (e.g., back to Bush/Gore, you cannot count a dimpled ballot for your guy, then reject a partially punched ballot with a hanging chad for the other guy...count them all the same way, with the same level of scrutiny).
I want the people conducting the election and doing the counting to inspire confidence that they are honest and impartial, and can keep their personal bias out of the equation. Or at least that the procedures in place make it as difficult as possible for the people handling the votes to intentionally or unintentionally skew the results. For example, I do not want election officials to be beholden to the largess of 3rd parties for grants to "improve elections". If some rich guy gives your office $100K without strings to "improve elections", it might be human nature to think that the same guy who gave you the money is supporting one candidate, maybe you need to reciprocate somehow.
Somewhere in there is some sort of Nash Equilibrium or game theory method. Like dividing the cake: one person cuts it, the other gets first choice.
Glad I got of that racist state Georgia, what with them passing these new racist election laws. Have you seen this law yet? You can't even hand out a bottle of water! Read the law and then I'll look at what this means further below.
Section 17-140 Furnishing money or entertainment to induce attendance at polls
Furnishing money or entertainment to induce attendance at polls. Any person who directly or indirectly by himself or through any other person in connection with or in respect of any election during the hours of voting on a day of a general, special or primary election gives or provides, or causes to be given or provided, or shall pay, wholly or in part, for any meat, drink, tobacco, refreshment or provision to or for any person, other than persons who are official representatives of the board of elections or political parties and committees and persons who are engaged as watchers, party representatives or workers assisting the candidate, except any such meat, drink, tobacco, refreshment or provision having a retail value of less than one dollar, which is given or provided to any person in a polling place without any identification of the person or entity supplying such provisions, is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
Oh wait, silly me. That's the New York state election law that DOES THE SAME THING!
I've read the new law, and unless you're a racist who thinks black people are somehow incapable of having an approved ID or unable register to vote 78 days before an election, there's nothing it does that is anything close to "Jim Eagle" (WTH does that even mean?).
Much of it is dedicated to preventing the sort of things discussed in the article (the conspiracy theory things).
Some of the things it is getting called out on are just wrong.
It EXTENDS early voting, rather than cuts it, providing 3 weeks of early-in-person voting and requiring 2 (vs previous 1) Saturday of early in-person voting. It EXTENDS permissible voting hours.
It PROVIDES ballot drop boxes. Georgia did not permit drop boxes at all, except that they were permitted under the COVID emergency. Now they're legal, provided they meet certain requirements, mostly being safely ensconced in a government building and observable. Generally, there will be one ballot drop box at each early-voting site. Drop boxes must be processed by two people.
It does away with signature matching for disallowing absentee votes (it replaces with matching the ID provided). THis should be a help for people who's signatures suffer due to medical issues (parkinsons, arthritis...).
It requires local election officials to monitor line lengths and duration of standing in line and requires changes to reduce both. Precincts with more than 2000 voters must hire additional staff or be split up. Also, at least one voting machine per 250 voters is required in each precinct. Metrics are going to be used used and the SecOfState is required to act (vs at discretion in old law).
It requires elections officials to send a registration card to anyone who requested an absentee ballot when not already registered. It requires provisional ballots in a number of circumstances when there were previously votes simply disallowed.
It sets up a hotline for people to report voter intimidation and other illegal election activities (like electioneering).
It allows elections officials to begin vetting ballots when they are received) but not counting them.
It requires precincts to post the number of ballots cast in person early and on election day) and absentee by 10PM on election day, providing the upper limit before counting votes begins. It also requires precincts to count non-stop and observable to monitors, with results required by 5PM the day after election day.
It DOES cut the absentee request from 180 days (6 months!) to 11 weeks (78 days). It DOES require an approved ID to request an absentee ballot. It DOES prohibit 3rd parties from printing and distributing absentee ballots and/or requests. It DOES require that absentee ballots be printed on security paper. It DOES prohibit local election boards from receiving "grants" from 3rd parties (except that such donations can now be made to the state and disbursed). It DOES shorten the runoff campaign period (when one is needed) from 9 weeks to 4 weeks.
Both of Georgia's blackface Kleptocracy candidate puppets paid 200 times as much for each vote as their Libertarian competitor--who tossed them into runoffs. Our guy got ten votes for a dollar! Honest votes preferred the Libertarian.
Gaslighting like this is why I almost never read Reason.com anymore.
Never a cover-up better perfected except when the same band of corruptibles investigates itself. Like the Commission that investigated the JFK murder.
Note to foreign readers: "Gaslighting" is an expression popular with both factions of the subsidized looter Kleptoocracy. It is a variation of the Monty Python Frenchman telling the English "I fart in your general direction," before the invention of the cigarette lighter. The modern version adds this moon-illuminating technological spark to what was formerly a crude and hirsute insult.
Republican religious fanatic Anthony Comstock was empowered to use the postal monopoly to rob and jail anyone so much as explaining the rhythm method or sending “obscene or disloyal” books anywhere–this on March 3, 1872. In Colfax Louisiana 41 days later male white supremacists murdered 75 to 150 black citizens, claiming the election “wuz robbed." In the 1874 mid-terms Republicans lost 101 seats in both Houses once voters learned of the Comstock law, so they stopped prosecuting Klan murders. Fake reasons like cyclic predestination are recited lest anyone pause to reflect that on election day 1872, woman candidate Victoria Woodhull was arrested lest she draw spoiler votes away from “both” parties. One hundred years later, in 1972, Tonie Nathan of the Libertarian Party got an electoral vote on a platform protecting women’s individual right as constitutional persons to terminate pregnancies during their first 100 days. The loudest shrieks and howls came from the Prohibition Party and God’s Own Prohibitionists. Return of Comstock has once again cost the party of mystical bigotry a bundle of boodle and diminished power to further bully or enslave women. They did it to themselves.
Not one of those people has been on TV explaining what happened. Why not? If they're innocent why not go on TV and say so?
A two-year investigation? If the claims were really false, it would have taken about an hour to disprove them. The two years was to bury the evidence and congeal The Official Narrative. You know, like JFK and LBJ won fair and square, ignore all those dead people on the rolls.