• 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.
Well he mentions his "instincts" yes, but he makes it clear that this is based on his personal knowledge of party politics and operations. So it's not quite the same as some random hobo on the street saying it.
 
Meadmaker said:
Now, about those back dated ballots in Detroit. here's a story on that one:

https://justthenews.com/politics-po...whistle-claims-ballots-were-ordered-backdated

Summary: The FBI is looking into it.


What that tells me is that allegations of voter fraud are taken very seriously, and it would be very hard to get away with actual fraud. Allegations like this should be investigated, and they are, by dedicated people who want to squash fraud like a bug before it has a chance to spread.

We will see what comes of this story.
Click to expand...

Not much there. If you allege a crime to the FBI, they'll probably respond with a claim that they are "investigating".

The article is unclear, but it sounds like any claims were passed off second hand from the state GOP headquarters, so it's unclear if anyone with first hand knowledge of anything actually made a complaint.

I expect a lot of these claims of fraud will find a shortage of people willing to make eye-witness claims to the FBI, because lying to the cops is a crime. There will be no shortage of second-hand reports that the FBI will "investigate", but I'm not holding my breath for anything substantial.
 
I'm glad Blagojevich has instincts. Bet he has outstincts too. And trans-, sub-, intra-, intro-, meta-, xeno-, extra-, and even ULTRASTINCTS!

English is such a beautiful language.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
Well he mentions his "instincts" yes, but he makes it clear that this is based on his personal knowledge of party politics and operations. So it's not quite the same as some random hobo on the street saying it.
Click to expand...

He doesn't actually substantiate any of it. How he knows it, how it works, etc.
 
Meadmaker said:
Now, about those back dated ballots in Detroit. here's a story on that one:

https://justthenews.com/politics-po...whistle-claims-ballots-were-ordered-backdated

Summary: The FBI is looking into it.


What that tells me is that allegations of voter fraud are taken very seriously, and it would be very hard to get away with actual fraud. Allegations like this should be investigated, and they are, by dedicated people who want to squash fraud like a bug before it has a chance to spread.

We will see what comes of this story.
Click to expand...

Interesting wording:

...a city worker stepped forward and claimed election workers were asked to backdate ballots that had come in after the election deadline had passed, multiple officials said.
Click to expand...

So was the city worker ALSO an election worker? Or is this second hand information?

ETA: Sorta ninja'ed by SuburbanTurkey.
 
Last edited:
Now this one:

Statistically impossible voter turnout,
Click to expand...

Classic CT methodology. A vague claim on something where an extremely precise claim is possible.

Statistics is math. Equations. Data. The declaration that something is "statistically impossible" can only come as a result of a calculation, and yet, no calculation is provided. No substance. No backup. Impossible to investigate the claim, because there's no information, despite the fact that the claim is meaningless without that information.


But wait......something about it can be investiaged, because it is no doubt being repeated in exactly the same meaningless form across the interenet, and google can probably find the root of this claim. (Those guys at google can find things pretty well, because they are good with statistics.) So, lets' see what I might turn up just by putting that exact phrase into google.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
Well he mentions his "instincts" yes, but he makes it clear that this is based on his personal knowledge of party politics and operations. So it's not quite the same as some random hobo on the street saying it.
Click to expand...

No, it’s just the word of a proven liar and convicted felon, absent any corroborative evidence.

Having worked within the system he’s now claiming is corrupt, he’s basically a whistleblower and should be able to blow this whole thing wide open with damning evidence.

When do you anticipate this will happen?
 
The claims in this thread are embarrassing. To all the MAGA types out there, you recall the libs melting down in 2016 and how silly they looked right? You're blowing your shot to not look even more pathetic now that it's your guy getting trounced by a terrible opponent.

Cope levels are through the roof.

 
johnny karate said:
No, it’s just the word of a proven liar and convicted felon, absent any corroborative evidence.

Having worked within the system he’s now claiming is corrupt, he’s basically a whistleblower and should be able to blow this whole thing wide open with damning evidence.

When do you anticipate this will happen?
Click to expand...

If someone says "I used to be in the mafia and I had knowledge of mafia hits that were undertaken. This guy who just washed up on the shore has all the telltale signs of a mafia hit, and he was exactly the type of guy they would put a hit out on. He had such and such information and was threatening to expose it..."

It doesn't make sense to say "oh well then why don't you go to the cops and prove it?"

He isn't saying he knows it for a fact, he's saying that as someone who is familiar with the methods of operation, what he's seeing fits the pattern perfectly.
 
When I put in the phrase "statistically impossible voter turnout", with quotes, this is the first hit I got back:

https://thetentacle.com/2020/11/4769/

Apparently, the phrase was uttered by one Leigh Dundas, a lawyer, during a conference call in something Trump relateed.

Well if you can't trust a lawyer quoted in The Tentacle, who can you trust?

In all seriousness, though, it goes back to my last post. What was the turnout? Why was it statistically impossible? If it's statistics, there has to be math to back it up. CTers are famous for using words like "statistically" to make themselves sound smart, but eventually, you are supposed to show statistics. Those are numbers.

On the other hand, lawyers in conference calls are allowed to sling BS. In court, they are severely restricted from doing so, but in the media, they can, and do, say whatever they like. Maybe she should schedule a press conference at Norm's Plumbing Supply and reveal the evidence.

Well, at any rate, if someone can present the statistics, someone should. Until then, claims of "statistically impossible", ring a little hollow.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Tank said:
If someone says "I used to be in the mafia and I had knowledge of mafia hits that were undertaken. This guy who just washed up on the shore has all the telltale signs of a mafia hit, and he was exactly the type of guy they would put a hit out on. He had such and such information and was threatening to expose it..."

It doesn't make sense to say "oh well then why don't you go to the cops and prove it?"

He isn't saying he knows it for a fact, he's saying that as someone who is familiar with the methods of operation, what he's seeing fits the pattern perfectly.
Click to expand...

Blagojevich's claim, though, is at least a step further removed than your hypothetical; it's more like an ex-mafia hit man hearing that someone's died and saying, "My instinct tells me this was a hit because he's exactly the sort of guy the mafia tends to hit" when he hasn't actually seen the body and doesn't know what the dead man knew or was planning to say. Blagojevich isn't saying "Here are tell-tale signs of specific scams I'm familiar with," he's just saying "I think this election was stolen because Democrats always steal elections."

Also, the State of Georgia is hardly a "large Democrat-controlled city".

Dave
 
Skeptic Tank said:
If someone says "I used to be in the mafia and I had knowledge of mafia hits that were undertaken. This guy who just washed up on the shore has all the telltale signs of a mafia hit, and he was exactly the type of guy they would put a hit out on. He had such and such information and was threatening to expose it..."

It doesn't make sense to say "oh well then why don't you go to the cops and prove it?"

He isn't saying he knows it for a fact, he's saying that as someone who is familiar with the methods of operation, what he's seeing fits the pattern perfectly.
Click to expand...

The mafia is a criminal organization not open to public scrutiny.

The election system of any given state is very much open to public scrutiny.

The proven liar and convicted felon that you find trustworthy for some reason has made claims that can easily be substantiated or refuted by an investigation.

When do you anticipate the evidence for these claims will be presented and the subsequent investigation will begin?
 
Last edited:
This is all philosopher logic where someone goes "Okay this is a fact, it's a thing that actually happened" and they respond with "Okay but what if" and expect it to be treated the same.
 
I posted the link about Blagojevich in here because it's a thread for collecting stuff about 2020 election fraud claims / info.

Didn't put much more thought into it than that. I didn't think to myself "oh yeah, this is hard core evidence"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom