• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
ChrisBFRPKY said:
If they are parties to the filing then sure.
Click to expand...

Okay, so which do you think is a "better" way to get to the Supreme Court?

(1) Losing every court battle and appealing until you get there, with a long history of failed arguments trailing behind.

(2) Winning every court battle and the other side keeps appealing until they arrive with a history of failed arguments.

I'm not a clever guy, so I thought (2) would be preferable. Tell me how (1) is better.

In fact, best of all is probably this:

(3) Winning an early battle and the other side recognizes that appeals can't overturn the decision.
 
smartcooky said:
Fail! The Georgia recount was done by hand.

Also, this Lin Wood fruitcake's claim is that Trump really won in a landslide, with 70% of the popular vote.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...very-different-view-election-pro-trump-media/

“Donald Trump won, I believe, clearly, a 70 percent-plus landslide election in the nation,” Lin Wood, an Atlanta-area attorney, said on Fox News host Mark Levin's radio show this week. “He probably won over 400 electoral votes.”​

For this to be true, Trump would have needed to get around 108 million of the approx 154 million votes so far cast. That would require about 30 million votes to be flipped from Trump to Biden to achieve the current 80 million to 74 million margin.

A quick bit of math (30/108) reveals that is 28% of all the votes cast for Trump - more than one in every four Trump voters had their vote flipped to Biden. Given that American voters can actually check their vote online (and I'm assuming the even the dumbest of Trump voters can still remember who they voted for) then it would not be very hard for any group of Trump supporters to prove this, by simply checking their votes.

* Note that as I keep checking the live results, Biden's lead is still increasing, so the vote flipping would need to still be going on. The FBI could swoop in a seize machines to check them for the alleged vote flipping software - so why has this not happened yet?
Click to expand...


The FBI is not interested, according to Sidney Powell. The FBI is not dong its job.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
They've certainly backed themselves into a corner. Every attorney on that team is a high profile type. Every reputation is on the line. If they don't produce something absolutely jaw dropping in court they'll all be considered liars and fools forever more.

If the election was to be stolen thru the voting machines/software it wouldn't take that many people. You'd need a few employees on the inside to tinker with the machines/software. Some of the attorney claims mention witness testimony of Dominion employees. Dominion has recently skipped out of a public hearing in PA and lawyered up.
https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/penn...cle_6020da90-2ba1-11eb-8420-534f51eeb494.html
Click to expand...



That is what Sidney Powell is saying
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
This is likely the issue that will come up. While Justice Alito ordered PA to segregate the votes on Friday Nov 6th, the issue will be how many were segregated and how can anyone trust that PA did the right thing now. After all, without being ordered to do so, they had no intention of separating ballots. Who can say the exact number of ballots in question. A corrupt official need only say "Sure we complied with the Court's order and we only saw 3 ballots that came in late. OK we'll throw those out, they were all Trump votes anyway."
Click to expand...

They were already segregating the late ballots before Alito's decision.

Of course, since you're willing to say that PA officials are all lying scum, there's no reason to believe them. It would take only one county official to prove otherwise, I reckon. If only there was some Republican working somewhere in this election apparatus...
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
The loss of Democrat seats in the House of Representatives verses the number of Republican gains there. Republicans are up 8, Democrats down 7.

I've not any "statistical analysis" other than glancing at the numbers of the wins and losses. Down ticket Republicans have done very well. Though Democrats still hold the majority in the House, Republicans have narrowed the gap substantially. Republicans retain the Senate as well at this time.
Click to expand...

How many of those House wins were in districts that went for Biden?

You're right there wasn't a blue wave, but given the fact that Trump is quite divisive, this doesn't strike me as evidence for fraud. Indeed, if anyone was going so far as to rig the election for Biden, why not fix the Senate races too?

Bit of an oversight, that.
 
jsfisher said:
I would think, too, Trump, et al., would need to appeal the complaint being dismissed (with prejudice), not just the motion to amend being denied (as moot). You cannot really amend your pleadings when you pleadings have already been permanently dismissed.
Click to expand...

Yes, you can. For example: You file a complaint with arguments A B C. Your counsel quits or is dismissed. New counsel determines previous counsel was inadequate that the complaint should have included argument D in order to prove the case. The court for some reasons does not allow an amendment to the complaint to include argument D. The judge then dismisses the case with prejudice based on a review of arguments A B C.

You file an appeal arguing that you should have been able to amend the complaint to include argument D. The appellant court agrees. The case gets remanded to the lower court with instructions to allow an amended complaint to include argument D. The lower court then reviews the case again considering argument D, which may result in a different decision.

But that isn't what is happening here. This is more like filing arguments A B. But then amending to remove A. But then during oral arguments the court points out that without A your case is a mess. Then asking to amend again to once again include A. But then having the case dismissed for multiple reasons and being denied a chance to amend because the court's dismissal includes consideration of the original complaint that included A. Then appealing to be able to amend the complaint even though the motion to amend was to just revert back to arguments A B in the hopes that getting to redo the complaint will allow changing the complaint to use arguments F Q Z now that you know those are the problems that the court had with your original amended complaint.

This motion says the appeal is only on denying the opportunity to amend "solely" [bold italics in the motion] on the basis of undue delay. Respondents need only point to the court's decision to show that is false. And that is that.

Well...this is actually just a motion requesting expedited briefs, not the actual appeal. But since it give the one and only assignment or error and that assignment is easily demonstrably false, that is...basically...that.
 
Bubba said:
That is what Sidney Powell is saying
Click to expand...

Sidney Powell also claimed that there were more votes counted than people who voted in Michigan, but was basing it on the population of precincts in Minnesota.

Everyone else in the world (including Tucker Carlson and the President) now realize that Powell is a blithering idiot. What's it going to take for you to figure it out?
 
Craig4 said:
Of all the court cases, do any allege fraud? So far, all the allegations of fraud have been made in press conferences or on conservative media news shows. Why are concernes about corruption when no corruption is being asserted in court?
Click to expand...


18 USC § 1621
18 USC § 1623
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Biden is not going to pardon Trump. He's probably going to discourage Congress from launching investigations into Trump. Then leave it entirely up to the DOJ and the States.
Click to expand...

I agree. But the article that originated this line of discussion was about actor Edward Norton asserting that all of the chaos and uncertainty being created by Trump is to force a "Nixon-style deal in exchange for finally conceding."

I disagree with that assertion and find no basis to support it.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
A Biden Presidency will not affect me personally or financially. Allegations of corrupt elections bother me. Whoever wins is fine, winning without question is preferred.
Click to expand...

How do you differentiate between credible allegations and baseless allegations?
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
Good gravy!

"If it may please the court, we ****** up. Then ****** up again. Then ****** up trying to fix the **** up. Now we want to fix what we ****** up. But we just ****** up asking to fix what we ****** up. Can we **** up some more?"
Click to expand...

Well put!
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
I agree. But the article that originated this line of discussion was about actor Edward Norton asserting that all of the chaos and uncertainty being created by Trump is to force a "Nixon-style deal in exchange for finally conceding."

I disagree with that assertion and find no basis to support it.
Click to expand...

Norton's theory is one I thought about. I think one of the reasons Trump is playing this game is he is terrified that soon he won't have immunity. But I don't think he's angling for a pardon. A Biden pardon isn't going to stop the New York DA.

I think Trump genuinely believes there is an avenue to stay in power. Longshot sure, but he believes he has nothing to lose. So why not?
 
Last edited:
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Third Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Number: 20-3371

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-c...o-Expedite.pdf

"5. The proposed Second Amended Complaint (ECF 172-2) asserts
claims under the Civil Rights Act for violation of the Equal Protection and Due
Process clauses because Defendants, the Secretary of the Commonwealth, and
seven County Boards of Elections, controlled by Democrats, engaged in an
intentional scheme to count defective mail ballots which they knew would favor
Joseph Biden over Presidential Donald J. Trump. In Marks v. Stinson, 19 F.3d 873
(3d Cir. 1994), on remand, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5273 (E.D. Pa. April 26, 1994),
this Court held such a scheme violates Equal Protection and Due Process and
affirmed the decertification of candidate Stinson and the certification of Marks by
disallowing illegal absentee ballots. Similarly, Appellants seek to exclude the
defective mail ballots which overwhelming favored Biden, which may turn the
result of the Election. Appellants do not seek to exclude any legally cast votes. "
Click to expand...

Nope, still not seeing any evidence of election fraud.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom