Democrats Nuke Georgia Voting Machine Server on "Accident" During Recount

Judge Reapproves Emergency Order Blocking Georgia From Wiping or Resetting Voting Machines

The federal judge overseeing high profile attorney Sidney Powell’s election lawsuit in Georgia issued a temporary restraining order late Sunday night, declaring that election officials were barred from wiping or altering Dominion voting machines used in the November election...

When the poll worker asked if the reset will wipe the forensic info from the machines, the manager said that “Atlanta already did it.”

Lin Wood, an attorney associated with the Trump campaign, said on Twitter: “Sidney Powell & I won, then lost, but ended up winning. We will never give up the pursuit of TRUTH to achieve justice.”

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee
unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

Like the votes in Atlanta that were just wiped from the voting machine so they couldn't be audited.

Has wrong doing been proven in court?

I’ve seen plenty of accusations on ATS, but actual proof seems to be elusive.

What would you consider proof?

By the courts.

By the courts what? What do you consider evidence? That was a dense answer.

Seriously?

Proven in a court if law — is not that complicated.

So, if fraud is proven in a court of law, you will apologise and admit you were wrong?

I noticed you missed this question, most likely by "accident." But you still haven't answered it. Why is that?


TCB

Apologize for what?

Wrong about what?

For stating these accusations have to be proven in court?

Accident/Intentional — the answers the same.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee
unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

Like the votes in Atlanta that were just wiped from the voting machine so they couldn't be audited.

Has wrong doing been proven in court?

I’ve seen plenty of accusations on ATS, but actual proof seems to be elusive.

What would you consider proof?

By the courts.

By the courts what? What do you consider evidence? That was a dense answer.

Seriously?

Proven in a court if law — is not that complicated.

So, if fraud is proven in a court of law, you will apologise and admit you were wrong?

I noticed you missed this question, most likely by "accident." But you still haven't answered it. Why is that?


TCB

Apologize for what?

Wrong about what?

For stating these accusations have to be proven in court?

Accident/Intentional — the answers the same.

You still haven't answered the question. Just deflection.

Ladies and Gentlemen: That right there is the problem with Liberals/Lefties today. They have blinders on.

TCB

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind
Blinders, earplugs and a script

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee
unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

Like the votes in Atlanta that were just wiped from the voting machine so they couldn't be audited.

Has wrong doing been proven in court?

I’ve seen plenty of accusations on ATS, but actual proof seems to be elusive.

What would you consider proof?

By the courts.

By the courts what? What do you consider evidence? That was a dense answer.

Seriously?

Proven in a court if law — is not that complicated.

So, if fraud is proven in a court of law, you will apologise and admit you were wrong?

I noticed you missed this question, most likely by "accident." But you still haven't answered it. Why is that?


TCB

Apologize for what?

Wrong about what?

For stating these accusations have to be proven in court?

Accident/Intentional — the answers the same.

You still haven't answered the question. Just deflection.

Ladies and Gentlemen: That right there is the problem with Liberals/Lefties today. They have blinders on.

TCB

OK, what question?

If it’s based on “feelz” — I’m really not interested.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Butterfinger

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Butterfinger

originally posted by: kwakakev
Is there any evidence this is an 'accident'? Looks like a clear case of destruction of evidence from here.

Exactly!

Without Evidence, Democrats call it an accident

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

See how that works? Do they have evidence that it was an accident?

You are the accuser that something was nefarious.

The proof is on you.

Cool, Mueller called and needs your advice on how to proceed with the imminent criminal trial of Trump.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Guiltyguitarist

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Guiltyguitarist

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Hypntick
a reply to: Echo007

So far, that has been the most troubling aspect of this. At the end of the day it doesn't matter who actually won, at least in my opinion. However, when you remove the trust of that large of a segment of the population it does irreparable harm to the nation as a whole. There is also an element of danger there as a percentage of that larger group may feel slighted enough to do something about it.

Are all the judges part of the deceit?

Just the ones to whom Zuckerberg paid $400 million.

Let me know when you prove that in court.

Until then — unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

All of a sudden a court has to prove something to you? Would you like me to repost your last 4 years back to you?
Everything the CNN told you, you came on here and regurgitated as if you were getting supplemental income to do so.
How’s that Russian Collusion going for you? You swallowed Schiff’s lies and asked for seconds.
Google can tell you Zuck spent 400 million dollars on this election, you don’t need someone wearing a black robe to tell you that.
But that’s normal, right?

He never said there was no collusion. He left it “open”.

And after 3 years and 40 million you think that’s acceptable?
To leave it “open”?

No. I was there. By that point it was all about saving face.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee
unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

Like the votes in Atlanta that were just wiped from the voting machine so they couldn't be audited.

Has wrong doing been proven in court?

I’ve seen plenty of accusations on ATS, but actual proof seems to be elusive.

What would you consider proof?

By the courts.

By the courts what? What do you consider evidence? That was a dense answer.

Seriously?

Proven in a court if law — is not that complicated.

So, if fraud is proven in a court of law, you will apologise and admit you were wrong?

I noticed you missed this question, most likely by "accident." But you still haven't answered it. Why is that?


TCB

Apologize for what?

Wrong about what?

For stating these accusations have to be proven in court?

Accident/Intentional — the answers the same.

You still haven't answered the question. Just deflection.

Ladies and Gentlemen: That right there is the problem with Liberals/Lefties today. They have blinders on.

TCB

OK, what question?

If it’s based on “feelz” — I’m really not interested.

Posted by Annee:
"Has wrong doing been proven in court?
I’ve seen plenty of accusations on ATS, but actual proof seems to be elusive."

Posted by iwanttobelieve70:
"What would you consider proof?"

Posted by Annee:
"By the courts."

Posted by iwanttobelieve70:
"By the courts what? What do you consider evidence? That was a dense answer."

Posted by Annee:
"Seriously?
Proven in a court if law — is not that complicated."

There is the exchange you were engaged in that I responded to. It can not be any clearer. Now, answer this question:

So, if election fraud is proven in a court of law, you will apologise and admit you were wrong? And you're saying there was no election fraud because there was no proof - that is what you're saying and that is what I am asking you to answer about. Just say yes or no that if election fraud was proven in court that you will admit to being wrong. Don't equivocate with your answer. Equivocate means "To use equivocal language in an attempt to mislead." It seems you have a problem comprehending things, so I added that definition for your benefit so that you could answer the question coherently and not keep deflecting.

TCB

He never said what he would consider evidence.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee
unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

Like the votes in Atlanta that were just wiped from the voting machine so they couldn't be audited.

Has wrong doing been proven in court?

I’ve seen plenty of accusations on ATS, but actual proof seems to be elusive.

Did tomorrows sun come up today?

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: yuppa

Have you ever worked as an election official?

If you have, then you would know this kind of stuff does not happen.

I worked with the voting machines. I have no faith in the system.

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70
He never said what he would consider evidence.

That is exactly what you pointed out to that user and that is what I have been trying to point out to that user and what lots of people on ATS are trying to point out about several members on here all screaming "But there has been no proof provided." It can't get any plainer than that. There are a whole lot of people out there with blinders on.

Is it because they don't want to accept reality?
Is it because they know there was fraud and they're helping to add to it by continually denying it took place?
Is it because they are treasonous to the United States Of America?

Or is it because (to quote a user on here) it "hurts their feelz?"


TCB

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee
unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

Like the votes in Atlanta that were just wiped from the voting machine so they couldn't be audited.

You do realize that every vote is also on paper ballots which were recounted by hand, and which showed the count was correct? Every time you bring up voting machines in Georgia, the more stupid you look. If fraud occurred in Georgia it was not by voting machine.

originally posted by: Butterfinger

originally posted by: kwakakev
Is there any evidence this is an 'accident'? Looks like a clear case of destruction of evidence from here.

Exactly!

Without Evidence, Democrats call it an accident

Well those repeated accident's are going to eventually get those fake votes cast out.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: yuppa

Have you ever worked as an election official?

If you have, then you would know this kind of stuff does not happen.

Numerous videos seem to discount that assertion.

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee
unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

Like the votes in Atlanta that were just wiped from the voting machine so they couldn't be audited.

You do realize that every vote is also on paper ballots which were recounted by hand, and which showed the count was correct? Every time you bring up voting machines in Georgia, the more stupid you look. If fraud occurred in Georgia it was not by voting machine.

Who is keeping those paper votes safe? Ha

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee
unsubstantiated — like most everything else.

Like the votes in Atlanta that were just wiped from the voting machine so they couldn't be audited.

You do realize that every vote is also on paper ballots which were recounted by hand, and which showed the count was correct? Every time you bring up voting machines in Georgia, the more stupid you look. If fraud occurred in Georgia it was not by voting machine.

OK.. let me explain how you can defraud with that. Machines code is set up to allow all biden votes to go through with no change,and a proper receipt. Trump vote goes through it devalues it to half or lower value and Electronically gives biden a vote,while printing out a trump receipt to appear legit.

Re: www.govtech.com...

How much of the $107,000,000 GA taxpayer dollars paid to Dominion, did Georgia's Governor and Secretary of State receive as a "kick back" into their personal off-shore accounts?

Attorney Lin Wood says it was a "substantial" amount.

Michigan paid "only" $25,000,000 for the same Dominion voting software and equipment.

Georgia Secretary of State is feeling HEAT.

He now says there was massive dysfunction in the county where Atlanta is located.

www.foxnews.com...

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70
He never said what he would consider evidence.

That is exactly what you pointed out to that user and that is what I have been trying to point out to that user and what lots of people on ATS are trying to point out about several members on here all screaming "But there has been no proof provided." It can't get any plainer than that. There are a whole lot of people out there with blinders on.

Is it because they don't want to accept reality?
Is it because they know there was fraud and they're helping to add to it by continually denying it took place?
Is it because they are treasonous to the United States Of America?

Or is it because (to quote a user on here) it "hurts their feelz?"


TCB

I think most sane, rational people are waiting for a single court to credit a single claim of voter fraud before believing that it happened. We have yet to see this occur. You, on the other hand, appear to be assuming that voter fraud occurred based on the statements of the people that have the most to gain from it. And you know what they say about assuming . . .