• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Project Veritas strikes again / More evidence...

logger said:
I seriously doubt you'd have the same conclusions if these videos were about Donald Trump.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Notice the Telegraph scam on the Trump Super PAC is getting absolutely no traction, yet? Why is that?

From my side, it's because thus far we have claims of reporters that A said that B said that C did, and I've seen no tapes of the events. When reporters go out to actively set someone up, it gets dubious coverage. They claim they approached both campaigns and/or their known Super PACs, but thus far we have only the reporters' words for that.

Until I see something more substantial it's an article on Dirty Politics and doesn't surprise me, terribly..... And I'm Not Selling It As The End of The World As We Know It. Frankly, the charges levied are ten times more serious than those in the O'Keefe videos.

You can't even say that these videos look pretty bad, or that these two stars who were fired, yeah that looks kinda bad.
Click to expand...

These videos look minor-bad. The Donald "Ducks" is just funny - O'Keefe trying to score a talking point win before the end of the election cycle so his donors don't all disappear. His desperation to link back to Brazile is palpable. His pre-announcements of Big Things Coming smack of PT Barnum or Geraldo's infamous What's in Al Capone's Vault TV Spectacular. O'Keefe said he was going to show a link back to Brazile and Clinton. His link back is a joke. A couple of guys saying, "... and believe me, this comes from the highest level...", to bolster their credibility? Or to confess to a roomful of semi-strangers that they were in collusion? And strategically spliced, as usual.

The busing tape has been so cut up that it's a sordid mess and would require the staffs of CSI and Bones to assemble what was actually said and when. The "inspire 'em to violence". I'm fine with that. We know that Trump draws crowds of potentially violent bullies. If you need to sacrifice your chin to get one of them to throw a punch simply because you're expressing your opinion? Fair game.

I'd like all black money out of politics. Ban all PACs. Not limit them.... ban them. Apply the "fairness doctrine" to cable and satellite.

Oh, and make voting a legal requirement.
 
logger said:
Can you get serious for once?
Click to expand...

I am serious. You are telling us that we're in denial. Denial of what? Certainly not denial that there are recalcitrant paleo-conservatives out there. That's why we're here and have set up this lovely Welcome Wagon to deal with crazy conservative bunker-down meanderings.

So you must mean that we're in denial of the sweeping victory you Boyz in the Bunker are preparing for election day.
 
logger said:
Actually we'll have the same gridlock and stalled economy we've had for the past eight years.
Click to expand...

I can deal with the gridlock, the economy is better than it was so I'm doing good.

But I still see the Republicans going further right & giving Clinton 4 more years.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Yeah. Testify, Brother Logger! Can't wait until the morning of the 9th, can you? You're going to have the last laugh on all the dumm libruls when Trump sweeps into office on the Herculean get out the vote efforts of you and the boys down at Jimmy Johns Quick Lube, Bait and Ammo.

Oh, boy will we look silly.
Click to expand...

Home of the Day-Old Sushi Deal™!
 
Foolmewunz said:
Wrong. Notice the Telegraph scam on the Trump Super PAC is getting absolutely no traction, yet? Why is that?

From my side, it's because thus far we have claims of reporters that A said that B said that C did, and I've seen no tapes of the events. When reporters go out to actively set someone up, it gets dubious coverage. They claim they approached both campaigns and/or their known Super PACs, but thus far we have only the reporters' words for that.

Until I see something more substantial it's an article on Dirty Politics and doesn't surprise me, terribly..... And I'm Not Selling It As The End of The World As We Know It. Frankly, the charges levied are ten times more serious than those in the O'Keefe videos.



These videos look minor-bad. The Donald "Ducks" is just funny - O'Keefe trying to score a talking point win before the end of the election cycle so his donors don't all disappear. His desperation to link back to Brazile is palpable. His pre-announcements of Big Things Coming smack of PT Barnum or Geraldo's infamous What's in Al Capone's Vault TV Spectacular. O'Keefe said he was going to show a link back to Brazile and Clinton. His link back is a joke. A couple of guys saying, "... and believe me, this comes from the highest level...", to bolster their credibility? Or to confess to a roomful of semi-strangers that they were in collusion? And strategically spliced, as usual.

The busing tape has been so cut up that it's a sordid mess and would require the staffs of CSI and Bones to assemble what was actually said and when. The "inspire 'em to violence". I'm fine with that. We know that Trump draws crowds of potentially violent bullies. If you need to sacrifice your chin to get one of them to throw a punch simply because you're expressing your opinion? Fair game.

I'd like all black money out of politics. Ban all PACs. Not limit them.... ban them. Apply the "fairness doctrine" to cable and satellite.

Oh, and make voting a legal requirement.
Click to expand...

The busing scheme is extra weird because it would not work.
 
BobTheCoward said:
The busing scheme is extra weird because it would not work.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the right wing cites "cases reported where people witnessed this"... Yet with a mobile phone on every person, no one has a photo or video of these buses full of out-of-district voters with fake IDs pulling up to the polling stations. Between 2008 and today, the era of the ubiquitous mobile phone/camera combination, there have been literally thousands of polling stations in operation for two presidential elections, two off-year elections, city elections, primaries, by-elections, etc.... And not one piece of photo/video evidence. But everyone knows a guy who knows a lady who saw "musta been 'bout fifty of 'em gettin' off that bus...".
 
Foolmewunz said:
Yeah, the right wing cites "cases reported where people witnessed this"... Yet with a mobile phone on every person, no one has a photo or video of these buses full of out-of-district voters with fake IDs pulling up to the polling stations. Between 2008 and today, the era of the ubiquitous mobile phone/camera combination, there have been literally thousands of polling stations in operation for two presidential elections, two off-year elections, city elections, primaries, by-elections, etc.... And not one piece of photo/video evidence. But everyone knows a guy who knows a lady who saw "musta been 'bout fifty of 'em gettin' off that bus...".
Click to expand...

You can vote without an ID. But you would have to know information about a registered voter at that polling station that hasn't voted.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Yeah, the right wing cites "cases reported where people witnessed this"... Yet with a mobile phone on every person, no one has a photo or video of these buses full of out-of-district voters with fake IDs pulling up to the polling stations. Between 2008 and today, the era of the ubiquitous mobile phone/camera combination, there have been literally thousands of polling stations in operation for two presidential elections, two off-year elections, city elections, primaries, by-elections, etc.... And not one piece of photo/video evidence. But everyone knows a guy who knows a lady who saw "musta been 'bout fifty of 'em gettin' off that bus...".
Click to expand...

Well, in all fairness, my polling places have posted signs reminding us that our phones must be turned off at the polls. That makes it a little difficult to snap a photo even if you are like me, and leave your phone on (just put it on silent) but don't want to pull it out and get tackled by the octogenarians checking IDs and passing out stickers.
 
All these reports fall under the "too-good-to-check" category: instead of trying to find out what's really going on, they just report everything that could possibly be seen as bad as if they were the result of careful research.
 
wareyin said:
Well, in all fairness, my polling places have posted signs reminding us that our phones must be turned off at the polls. That makes it a little difficult to snap a photo even if you are like me, and leave your phone on (just put it on silent) but don't want to pull it out and get tackled by the octogenarians checking IDs and passing out stickers.
Click to expand...
It's the buses outside disgorging hordes of non-white folk who are clearly strangers to the area which could be photographed. And ain't been.
 
CapelDodger said:
It's the buses outside disgorging hordes of non-white folk who are clearly strangers to the area which could be photographed. And ain't been.
Click to expand...

Even assuming there are pictures, there's also the assumption that those hordes of non-white folk aren't legal voters. Rather than say, a certain church or community group organizing to bring groups of a minority population to the polls because they may otherwise have difficulty doing so.
 
BobTheCoward said:
For the sake of this, let's concede the busing s occurring in states most favorable to it. How would that work?
Click to expand...

The rest of your post was correct. You would have to know what polling station the voter was assigned to, and whether or not they had already voted. Without that information, the scheme would fail. I, for one, do not believe that busloads of people could all get that information consistently correct.
 
CapelDodger said:
It's the buses outside disgorging hordes of non-white folk who are clearly strangers to the area which could be photographed. And ain't been.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the story, I'm just pointing out that (at least in GA) by law we all have to turn off our phones at the polls. This limits the ubiquitous-ness of mobile phone cameras.
 
wareyin said:
I don't believe the story, I'm just pointing out that (at least in GA) by law we all have to turn off our phones at the polls. This limits the ubiquitous-ness of mobile phone cameras.
Click to expand...

But that would be INSIDE the polling station, right? What is preventing people from having cellphone cameras in, say, the parking lot?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom