The usual Kevin election post.

[Skeptic]

I understand the importance of the 5th in the US.

That's funny, a few posts ago you didn't even know what the 5th amendment WAS...

 

[Frank Newgent]

I am SURE to be the REAL WINNER once the criminal/stupid/illegal vote is counted.

Another sig line alert.

 

[Ion]

That's funny, a few posts ago you didn't even know what the 5th amendment WAS...

I knew it as the right to remain silent.

I didn't know it as 1st or 5th amendment.

 

[Ion]

Which is what I have been saying all along. And yet, you kept denying it.

Liar.

Then you didn't understand what I keep saying.

I say that I speak better in my third language than you in your first.

 

[Ion]

I say there was fraud in Alaska. Should we have an investigation there too? I think there was also fraud in New York. Should we have an investigation there too? Look! Over there! Fraud! Let's investigate!

Do you have evidence for your positive claims?

Evidence that matches the standard of this:

...
...the important point, which is that (barring a false affidavit) illegal tampering with the machinery of the Ohio recount has taken place and that at least one person who works for Triad has conspired to thwart an accurate recount.
...

evidence?

The evidence for the positive claim has to be good.

(and to counter it, the counter evidence has to top it)

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Whether or not Triad's owner has donated to Republican campaigns (and if you do a little digging you can even get the exact figures and campaigns relatively easily) is a trivial distraction.

If it is so trivial, why did you mention it? What is trivial would be what the Triad guy was wearing, or what color was his hair. You mentioned that Triad was "Republican linked" because that is the centerpiece of the entire Bev Harris woo-woo conspiracy.

And, since you made the claim, then you will do the "little digging" to show that Triad is "republican linked".

 

[Ion]

...
And, since you made the claim, then you will do the "little digging" to show that Triad is "republican linked".

Well,

in Kevin's link, John Conyers testifies that Triad is linked to Republicans.

But I agree with Kevin's bigger idea that the dishonest counting of votes does transcend sides, Republican or Democrat, and an honest counting of votes is needed.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Well,

in Kevin's link, John Conyers testifies that Triad is linked to Republicans.

Oh well, since John Conyers said it, that must make it so!!!!!!

Moron.

BTW, who the hell is John Conyers and why would we care what he says?

 

[Ion]

...
Moron.

BTW, who the hell is John Conyers and why would we care what he says?

Moron, Kevin_Lowe told you not to care about the link between Triad and Republicans, but about the fraud.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Moron, Kevin_Lowe told you not to care about the link between Triad and Republicans, but about the fraud.

Moron, you didn't tell us who John Conyers is, and why we should care what he says.

I do care about the fraud. Except, in this case, there is none.

 

[Ion]

Moron, you didn't tell us who John Conyers is, and why we should care what he says.

I do care about the fraud. Except, in this case, there is none.

Moron, John Conyers is explained in the thread and the link.

Moron, focus on the fraud.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Moron, John Conyers is explained in the thread and the link.

Moron, focus on the fraud.

Moron, I don't click on woo-woo links.

Moron, there is none.

PS: Learn to speak English!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Ion]

Moron, I don't click on woo-woo links.

Moron, there is none.

PS: Learn to speak English!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then not clicking on "...woo-woo links..." is your problem moron.

And lack of English skills too.

And lack of analytical skills too, like focusing on the fraud regardless of party affiliations.

 

[TonyL]

He can say under oath that Triad didn't mess with the tabulator and didn't coach the falsifying of data, if that's the truth.

Then he is innocent until proven guilty.

I wouldn't take the 5th if I were honest, and I look suspiciously into him taking the 5th.

So, you're saying that because Buzz Aldrin refused to swear on a bible that the moon walk wasn't a hoax, we should believe the people claiming that it was hoax?

 

[Ion]

Another 'intelligence' here:

So, you're saying that because Buzz Aldrin refused to swear on a bible that the moon walk wasn't a hoax, we should believe the people claiming that it was hoax?

The moon walk was a positive claim with evidence.

The moon walk being a hoax, doesn't have counter evidence that tops the evidence.

So for Buzz Alsrin to refuse or not to testify, it doesn't matter:

the counter evidence doesn't top the evidence.

 

[WildCat]

BTW...

TOLEDO, Ohio - Election officials finished the presidential recount in Ohio on Tuesday, with the final tally shaving about 300 votes off President Bush's six-figure margin of victory in the state that gave him a second term.

The recount shows Bush winning Ohio by 118,457 votes over John Kerry, according to unofficial results provided to The Associated Press by the 88 counties. Lucas County, home to Toledo, was the last to finish counting.

The state had earlier declared Bush the winner by 118,775 votes and plans to adjust its totals to reflect the recount later this week.

So much for the massive conspiracy.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Another 'intelligence' here:

The moon walk was a positive claim with evidence.

The moon walk being a hoax, doesn't have counter evidence that tops the evidence.

So for Buzz Alsrin to refuse or not to testify, it doesn't matter:

the counter evidence doesn't top the evidence.

Either you don't speak English very well (true), or you are one of the single dumbest people on the planet (true). Or both.

Which is it?

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

BTW...

So much for the massive conspiracy.

Prediction: Bev Harris and Woo Lowe will be screaming "conspiracy" for the next four years. And Bev will still be collecting donations because, well, gosh darn it, uncovering conspiracies is, well, so gosh darn expensive!

Where is my million?

 

[Ion]

Either you don't speak English very well (true), or you are one of the single dumbest people on the planet (true). Or both.

Which is it?

A third scenatio:

you are an imbecile.

Judging you from your writing style, physically I think you are an ordinary US guy, a fatso, with flabby meat hanging down your hips, a meaty crooked nose, wearing glasses and brown eyes.

 

[TonyL]

Another 'intelligence' here:

Wow, it only took one relatively innocuous post to register an insult from you. Impressive.

The moon walk was a positive claim with evidence.

The moon walk being a hoax, doesn't have counter evidence that tops the evidence.

Ah, so your claim is that in the absense of any tangible proof of either guilt or innocence, the party that makes a statement is obiously telling the truth, while the person that remains silent is obviously guilty.

That's pretty weak.

So for Buzz Alsrin to refuse or not to testify, it doesn't matter:

the counter evidence doesn't top the evidence.

Counter evidence doesn't top the evidence? What is that supposed to mean. There is evidence. Evidence is neither pro nor con, it is what it is. In this case we have one piece of evidence in the form of a sworn statement of unknown reliability. The question isn't what "counter evidence" is available, the questions are what evidence do we have and is the current evidence credible enough to make a positive claim of guilt or innocence?

Sometimes the evidence is just not reliable enough to make a claim, and thus, deserves no response. (ie. requires no "counter evidence".) For example, one or more people (my memory is hazy on this one) have given statements about a conspiracy connecting the death of Vince Foster to the Clintons. By your standard, since Hillary has not given a sworn statement denying responsibility, she must be quilty. After all, there's no other "counter evidence" that proves she had no involvement in some eloborate conspiracy to fake a suicide.