2020 United States presidential election - Conspiracy theories, alleged fraud, etc

Status
Not open for further replies.
Part of Sydney Powell's filing in Michigan has a "witness" detailing voter fraud in a county that does not exist.

A witness in a lawsuit from allies of President Donald Trump trying to overturn democracy in Michigan said the votes in Edison County "are cause for concern and indicate fraud" because President-elect Joe Biden won "more than 100% of the votes."

There's just one problem: There is no Edison County in Michigan, the Detroit Free Press pointed out.

In fact, there is no Edison County in the entire United States of America.

The claim came from Navid Keshavarz-Nia, who describes himself in an affidavit as a cybersecurity expert working at a defense contractor who has received training from several government agencies. The affidavit is included as an exhibit appended to a lawsuit filed last week by people working with Sidney Powell, a former member of the Trump campaign's legal team.

In the affidavit, Keshavarz-Nia said he had not analyzed any of the voting machines used in the 2020 election but argued that there was "evidence of fraud" based on his analysis of election data.

Much of that data is simply false or based on a misunderstanding of how election data is reported.

It's not clear whether Keshavarz-Nia had another county in mind when referring to a vote count of more than 100% in "Edison County," but some internet sleuths have made claims about more than 100% of a particular county voting by relying on outdated voter-record information or simply using the wrong data sets, USA Today and Reuters reported.

In another part of the affidavit, Keshavarz-Nia said Trump's lead in Pennsylvania dropped at a rate faster than votes can be counted. But the votes were reported by precincts in the time span he indicated, not actually counted at that time.

Even though Keshavarz-Nia said he didn't analyze the machines used in the 2020 election, Powell's lawsuit cites his affidavit to argue that "hundreds of thousands of votes that were cast for President Trump in the 2020 general election were transferred to former Vice-President Biden" — which is not true.
Click to expand...
 
Armitage72 said:
Someone mentioned at one point that the computer repair guy who "found Hunter Biden's laptop" had closed his shop. Maybe he's being prepared for his new role as an expert witness. :D
Click to expand...

Yes... Republicans like Ted Cruz said that Covid would all go away after the election. Trump himself said that we wouldn't hear about it any more on November 4 (the day after the election)

(NOTE: If you don't believe they really said that, he's a short video proving they actually did..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmRdzbyf9TQ)

Yeah, well I found a very interesting thing about "Hunter Biden's Laptop".... A chart of Faux News' coverage of this alleged laptop of Hunter Biden's

"Hunter Biden's Laptop. It's going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear."

Chart-of-Fox-News-Primetime-Coverage-of-Hunter-Biden-Pre-Post-Election-1.jpg


https://www.mediaite.com/opinion/ho...-from-fox-news-prime-time-after-the-election/


Its seems to me that as soon as it became apparent this laptop was fake, that people weren't buying the BS, and in any case, it wasn't having any effect oh Biden's popularity or approval ratings, they dropped it like a red-hot stone.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
Strong "Leopards eating faces" vibes coming out of Georgia recently regarding the Republican Governor and Sec of State getting thrown under the bus for failing to find fraud and overturn the Biden win. Same applies to Barr too.
...

Again, not a good sign for our nation that one major party is purging anyone who doesn't adequately support Trump's coup, but one can still take a compartmentalized bit of joy watching these people get devoured by a monster of their own creation.
Click to expand...


I understand taking some joy in these idiots reaping the whirlwind, but at the same time, we have to allow them some room to retreat.

Sure, we've been warning them about exactly this for years, but like it or not, these guys are the officials in charge, and we need them to finally, at long last, actually understand why we've been warning them about this. It was always a question if there was any point short of a civil war that would finally get these guys to get their heads out of their asses. Thankfully, it seems we might have found such a point, at least for these few officials.

As much as we might desire to gloat, it's more important that we encourage them to keep moving back towards the sensible end of the spectrum. Don't punish the behavior we want to see.
 
smartcooky said:
Yep, and even further that that, I expect that the plaintiffs will "witness shop" for their so-called expert, looking around until they find one that will tell them exactly what they want to hear.
Click to expand...

That's exactly how the game is played in any court case involving expert testimony, which is most court cases these days. There are no objective criteria to certify experts in any field. The judge doesn't certify expert witnesses, except to note that the proffered c.v. seems to claim expertise that is relevant to the opinion sought. The c.v. could be entirely fabricated, as far as the judge is concerned.

(I should note that while the Daubert standard applies at the federal level and in most states, the prior standard -- the Frye standard -- applies in a few others. This requires expert opinion offered as evidence to be settled enough that other experts would agree.)

In American courts it is 100% up to opposing counsel to challenge the evidentiary value of expert opinion, using the aforementioned rules of evidence and binding precedents. But more often the opposing counsel won't try to do that by undermining the other expert on cross-examination. As one of my attorneys long ago told me, "That's bought-and-paid-for testimony." More often you bring in your own expert to muddy or clarify the waters, whichever the occasion warrants.

At a certain point, if it gets bad enough, counsel can make a Daubert motion in limine, which -- if supported with evidence and ruled upon favorably by the judge -- will vacate the certification of the witness as an expert and thereby remove any opinion testimony of his from the record. (Or preclude it, if the motion is made prior to trial.)

So expert witnesses on the weakest side are usually just well enough qualified to survive a Daubert challenge, but they know who's paying the check for their services and they'll say whatever needs to be said "within the bounds of reasonable scientific certainty" -- a non-existent standard, but a statement that impresses juries.
 
Meadmaker said:
But....but....Bubba said there were 47 missing memory sticks, and 50,000 votes. I know where he got that from. I watched the video of the guy's testimony at a hotel in Gettysburg, but I can't find anything in follow up. That guy was a US Navy veteran, so I'm sure it must be true. Surely Bubba knows where to find more information.



Meanwhile, over in Nevada, I saw a lawyer interviewed on Fox Business who says he has overwhelming evidence of fraud that will be submitted to a judge by 5:00 today. At least on Fox Business, this lawsuit actually alleges real fraud. Let's see what gets submitted.
Click to expand...


I'm having flashbacks to the courtroom antics in the 1993 train shootings by Colin Ferguson and all the nutty stuff he tried to claim in his defense. Link . The bit that keeps coming to mind when I hear about the killer evidence that's about to drop any day now is the video interview of this interesting person :
He [Ferguson] also found another man who was willing to testify the government implanted a computer chip in Ferguson's brain, but at the last minute decided not to call him to the stand. This individual, Raul Diaz, was a parapsychologist from Manhattan and claimed during a press conference on the courthouse steps to have witnessed an Oriental man press a chip into Ferguson's head prior to the attack. According to Diaz, the Oriental man told him to behold what he was about to do prior to pushing the button. "He was lasered out by a remote-control device," Diaz told reporters outside the courtroom. "He was zapped, just like that, right out of the twilight zone" and was "commanded to go up and down the aisle shooting people."
Click to expand...


Never managed to find the clip on Youtube, which is a shame as it was something you truly had to see to fully appreciate.
 
It's friendly and fun to watch Trump and Co. get their asses kicked in court and in recount after recount, and now it's Cracked Kraken Sidney Powell's turn.
The federal judge presiding over Sidney Powell and L. Lin Wood’s lawsuit challenging Wisconsin’s election results issued a ruling on Wednesday that reads like a laundry list of embarrassing procedural failures and omissions, highlighting what could well represent the nadir of post-election legal ineptitude.

Filed Tuesday in Wisconsin’s Eastern District, the complaint—which asked the court to direct the state to declare President Donald Trump the winner of the 2020 election—proved immediately problematic, as one of the named plaintiffs stated that the attorneys used his name without permission. “I learned through social media today that my name was included in a lawsuit without my permission,” Derrick Van Orden, who recently lost his bid for the House of Representatives, wrote Tuesday. “To be clear, I am not involved in the lawsuit seeking to overturn the election in Wisconsin.”

Things only got worse from there, with Powell and Wood demanding the immediate production of 48 hours of security camera footage from the TCF Center, which is a convention center used as a voting station on Election Day. It is located in downtown Detroit, Michigan.

On Wednesday, Chief U.S. District Judge Pamela Pepper, an appointee of Barack Obama, took the attorneys to task, bluntly laying out the litany of basic mistakes made in the complaint.
After pointing out that the complaint was “not verified,” Pepper went to work on the substantive errors, first noting that plaintiffs’ motion stated that that the requested relief was “laid out in an attached order.”

“This language was highlighted and in a larger font than the rest of the motion. There was no order attached,” she wrote.

Powell and Wood also declared that they had filed a motion seeking to file affidavits under seal and requesting an in camera review, stating they had delivered those filings to the Defendants “by mail and FedEx at the following addresses.”

But that apparently didn’t happen.

“No addresses were listed below this statement and no documents were filed under seal. There was no request for in camera review,” she wrote.
Click to expand...

The Kraken seems a bit moribund.
 
Diaper Don loses in Ga for a third time!!

Bwahahahahahahaha!! What a dope!
 
Bubba said:
Are 100% of the vote fraud witness affidavits signed by liars??
Click to expand...

No, I think the majority are idiots. They don't know what they saw, but they assume it was somebody cheating. The fact is that there are ways to check these claims, and they fail to stand up. Some don't even come close to making sense.

Trump is a liar, though. He knows he lost, but he's pulling in donations for his future life.
 
Bubba said:
Are 100% of the vote fraud witness affidavits signed by liars??
Click to expand...

I'm sure the one complaining about rhinestones was legit.

Losing recounts over and over and ovah. Getting kicked out of court over and over and ovah.

Diaper Don the Would-Be-Dictator is done, demolished, and demoted to a one term never was.
 
Bubba said:
Are 100% of the vote fraud witness affidavits signed by liars??
Click to expand...
impossible to know.

Many that I've seen reported are wild leaps from "something I don't understand happened" to "FRAUD!"

Vote counting is not complicated, but it's often complex, partly because every effort is made to avoid mistakes and interference. Unless you are familiar with the whole process, it is best to not try and jump in with both feet just because you don't understand one part of it.
 
Worm said:
impossible to know.

Many that I've seen reported are wild leaps from "something I don't understand happened" to "FRAUD!"

Vote counting is not complicated, but it's often complex, partly because every effort is made to avoid mistakes and interference. Unless you are familiar with the whole process, it is best to not try and jump in with both feet just because you don't understand one part of it.
Click to expand...

Yes, but what about the rhinestones? Seems like some funny business to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom