There is no actual evidence of voter fraud; here's how we know:

originally posted by: johnnylaw16

What does this even mean?

Why would Hillary operate a personal server while she was in the position that everything she did in her official compacity was owned by the people as Sec of State? Why have official communications on it that would then not be recorded as per her position?

Any crime here? lol

but ya off topic...

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Annee


Well, didn’t the cyber guy Trump fired have something to do with that?

I dunno. Honestly, at this point, I’m just trying to stay focused on factual presentable evidence that holds up in court.

As in — do any of these lawsuits have a snowballs chance in Hell. Apparently, not.

Xtrozero — tried to compare Flynn to Hillary. Flynn lied (intent) — what she did was stupid but “lacked intent”.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: johnnylaw16

Please provide a link for your statement that the "agents involved said he didn't lie."

The basis is he did say he didn't talk to the Russian ambassador, and he did within whatever situation, but it wasn't involved in any crime. They already knew he did, so yes he should have said he did have a short conversation, or he didn't remember...But they already knew there wasn't any intent into anything criminal in the nature in it.

In the end it was the driving force to take him down while knowingly there was nothing there to begin with.

Flynn

Why ask him in the first place, why even investigate if they knew up front nothing was there...lol

Look at the document linked in my last reply, he did a bit more than you suggest.

a reply to: Annee

Here is some facts one can bank on:

They don’t have any facts, and I would bet they will never have any facts. Just bluster, sinister propaganda, trolling, and all based on the psychology of:

The Big Lie

From the big liar...

originally posted by: Annee

— what she did was stupid but “lacked intent”.

Easy to say... Official sensitive/secret communication on a person server... OK Hillary has only been in the Goverment business for like a few months so she didn't know, but then that E2 in the military would go to jail for the same thing...lol

I had no intent to drive drunk...I'm sure that works in court...just saying...

Ending this to get back on topic...

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Annee

Here is some facts one can bank on:

They don’t have any facts, and I would bet they will never have any facts. Just bluster, sinister propaganda, trolling, and all based on the psychology of:

The Big Lie

From the big liar...

It’s really crazy.

IMO — the election officials were on alert very early on.

You know — Trump and his mouth.

All of them knew upfront they had to dot their
“i”s and cross their “t”s. I expect they were expecting a lot of nonsense.

So Three Card Monty using the homeless as the Queen card while the voting addresses are the other cards. Are you saying that this is legal? This is voter fraud.

a reply to: Guyfriday

Are you saying that American citizens who happen to be homeless should not be allowed to vote?

Are you serious?

a reply to: Mandroid7

Please don't go sending people off to 4chan with out warning them.

And no trial court has ruled any election unconstitutional. That is just silly.

originally posted by: djz3ro
I'd trust the Professional Opinion of a Federal Court Litigator in this case over anyone else. They know the law of the land.

I'm not really arguing with you about this, but isn't William Barr a 'Federal Court Litigator'.

HE doesn't even know if it is illegal to vote twice!

a reply to: tanstaafl

So, between those two extremes - one illegal vote, vs millions - at what point does it invalidate an election.

All that needs to be done is demonstrate a strong likelihood that it occurred. That will invalidate it.

So 1 fraudulent vote invalidates the entire election?

There has actually been 1 fraudulent vote PROVEN in Pennsylvania - and yet it has not been presented in court as evidence by anyone on Trump's "team". Why not?

Could it be that that ONE fraudulent vote was by a TRUMP SUPPORTER who requested and voted a ballot for his dead mother?

Was that a pre-planned 'false-flag' operation thought up specifically to crash the election?

Inquiring minds want to know.

a reply to: UKTruth

You are kidding right?

You offer a crowd-sourced hearsay garbage dump of untested innuendo and attack the OP for discussing evidence submitted to a court (or in this case, not submitted) by people who are presumably trying to win a case?

Please. Pull the other one.

Double post

originally posted by: Whodathunkdatcheese

originally posted by: johnnylaw16

Extrapolation from facts and history is not a psychic power--it is deductive reasoning; it is logic. We can say with confidence what will happen based on the facts and history that we have at our disposal.

Do you realise that is a Marxist way of looking at things?

Historical determinism is not a thing outside of Marxist historian circles.

This has to be one of the single greatest head-bashed-into the door frame moments I’ve seen on ATS.

Deductive reasoning is now a Marxist way of looking at things. It pains my very existence to think that there’s people out there who genuinely think this is true.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: UKTruth

Sad if there was this much irregularities in any other process there would be audits down to the foundation, and out the wazoo. From taxes to businesses dealings.

But since it’s votes concerning person’s freedom and civil liberties, USA votes on Election Day are half a$$’d counted over night in a mathematical spasm, then called good? With total disregard for “chain of evidence” on controlling the process? And then people have to beg to have quality control and audits conducted. When it should be part of any election.

In fact, the election results ARE audited out the wazoo.

The results announced on election night or shortly thereafter are preliminary only. Everything about the election is audited over and over. Close races are recounted, sometimes more than once.

The USA has been conducting elections for 250 years (and even longer if you include the colonial days) and has seen everything under the sun.

The process around elections is extremely secure, and while a few crims manage to game the system on occasion (North Carolina Republicans in 2018, for example, or ONE Trump supporter in Pennsylvania in 2020), MASS fraud, enough to swing a Presidential election by hundreds of thousands of votes just cannot happen without being extraordinarily obvious. The inability to provide any actual evidence AT ALL to the courts is absolute confirmation that MASS fraud did not occur.

Don't be fooled by wannabe dictators who think they can use a Presidential Proclamation to nullify parts of the Constitution he doesn't like, especially when he is being enabled by an Attorney General who doesn't even know if it is illegal to vote more than once.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

True, but we never had a election like this either, so suggesting something doesn't match historically is moot.

I beg to differ. We have had, what?, 46 Presidential elections now? Some more hotly contested, some positively mundane.

But we've had lots of elections like this.

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: johnnylaw16
So you are of the opinion that voter rolls are botched and that dead people did not actually vote? You presented yourself as unbiased, is this not the case?

Ask your self this: If dead people are voting via absentee/mail-in, how are they signing the ballot return envelope?

Because you know, the signatures have to match the registration before the ballot is accepted for counting, right?

So while it maybe possible for the occasional dead voter to sneak in (PA did catch one dead Trump voter trying it on - and notice they caught it!), is it really credible to support the proposition that it happened for 100,000 times? Are there even that many dead people still on the roles? And you are saying they were all Biden voters when the only one caught was a Trump voter?

Please consider the possibility that a real world exists.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: johnnylaw16

Alrighty then, lets wait and see what really happens. My intuition tells me it isn't going to turn out like you are expecting it to. Lets wait and see.

I bet johnnylaw16's professional experience trumps all over your intuition. Just a hunch.

"Let's wait and see" we hear this from Trump fans a lot when they aren't winning the arguement.

We will see indeed, 16 day is it? Tick-tock...

Your reply to johnnylaw16 saying this...

"There is a reason we aren't seeing evidence of fraud or even allegations of fraud"

Is this...

originally posted by: tanstaafl
The only reason that you would not see those is if you are being deliberately ignorant.

I've seen you and a lot of your Orangebois say this. It's all you ever say?

I challenge you to put before the court of ATS one verifiable example of mass voter fraud, just one. Shouldn't be hard since it's so obvious. Not gonna hold my breath.