Where is the evidence of voter fraud (Page 9): I think it is you that needs to get a clue, you Trump supporters that didn`t graduate from from elementary school and wonder why you...

the J man Loc: California

dtucker300 wrote:

But they didn't stop at 2:00 a.m. and send all the poll watchers away. Get a clue!

I think it is you that needs to get a clue, you Trump supporters that didn`t graduate from from elementary school and wonder why you don`t have a clue about what an ass Trumps really is.

GoCubs Loc: Earth

Pat Riot wrote:

Take off the blinders, group thinker and you will see the light!

Back at ya'.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

the J man wrote:

I think it is you that needs to get a clue, you Trump supporters that didn`t graduate from from elementary school and wonder why you don`t have a clue about what an ass Trumps really is.

That's the problem! Elementary schools have graduations as if this was some great accomplishment. I guess it is for lefties. Everyone gets a participation award.

SSDD

dtucker300 wrote:

PFFFT... Oh all-seeing, all-knowing, the mystic of the East (CHINA), I give you Carnak the Magnificent! They should have put you in charge of the impeachment trial so that after you failed you people would shut up and accept the fact that you had nothing because you were trying to put the cart before the horse.

You need to quit jousting with windmills. Peace be with you!

Yes, you are right, trying to get facts through your thick skull or the thick skulls of your fellow Trumplicans IS pretty much the same thing as jousting windmills. You people flat refuse to acknowledge facts. Glad I am not you.

SSDD

GoCubs wrote:

NewsMax? OAN? Surely you are joking. You will never get the truth from either of those stations.

That's why they are so drawn to those media sources, they PREFER alternate reality to actual reality, lies to facts and dis-information to actual information.

SSDD

PeterS wrote:

Media has learned to give people what they want. If it's screwed up it's because we want it screwed up. Who would listen to Fox if they were objective and didn't pander to every conservative out there? Personally, I'll stick with mainstream sources. They may not tell me everything I want to hear but at least I think they are honest with what they say...

Fox news and most of the rest of the RW media was created solely because conservatives were unhappy with the coverage they received from the media of the time. Instead of aligning their policies to be less unpopular so that the coverage would be more favorable or accepting the negative coverage as a consequence of their unpopular policy choices, they chose to go another route, create their own media outlets to spin the news to make their actions more "palatable".

As for:

GoCubs wrote:

We definitely have. I honestly can't think of a single source that could be described as neutral, whether it's TV, radio or printed. Sad really. A long time ago, CNN was completely neutral for quite a while. Was nice. I know that sounds crazy now due to their current left slant, but it's true. Hell, I remember when they were all neutral. Back in the days when we had three channels total. Social media has screwed all this up more than anything else.

Much of the perceived "bias" is merely a consequence of the perception of the individual actions/policies being reported on. While I will grant that there does tend to be some bias in the story selections, wording within the body of the articles/stories, wording within the headlines and the images chosen to go along with the stories, it holds little if any sway in determining how I perceive the facts contained within the body of the articles/stories I am reading/watching. Though I am sure that some may be swayed, the facts within the articles/stories reported on by legitimate media sources, both to the left and the right of center, are true and that is the important part. Just take the OP-ED section for what it is worth in those newspapers/magazines/internet and don't let opinion commentators on radio/T.V./internet videos get into your head and you should be fine with getting your facts from legitimate news sources.

alabuck Loc: Tennessee

Pat Riot wrote:

The "evidence" wasn't permitted to be heard (and proved) by the only court that mattered - SCOTUS. And 5 of them didn't have the stones to hear it because they're afraid of degenerate animals, like you. Patience, my sick friend. The truth will eventually come out.

———————————-

“Evidence?!” How many lower courts listened to the “evidence” and declared it garbage? 59 out of 60! The 1 lone court to hear anything, then summarily dismissed it. It isn’t that the justices “... don’t have the stones... ,” it’s that they’re following the Constitution by siding with the decisions of the 59 lower court rulings and realizing that Trump has lied about the election fraud and continues to lie about it. How many times did Trump’s own lawyer, Giuliani, try to claim the suits weren’t about voter fraud, when all along, both he and Trump, were making many public statements, claiming the suits WERE about voter fraud?! Which was it? Fraud or no fraud?

And, why not go after ALL of the mail-in ballots in ALL states, even those Trump won? If there’s voter fraud with one state’s mail-in votes, there must be fraud with ALL states mail-in ballots. As such, we need to toss ALL mail-in ballots, not just the 4 Trump’s teams sued. If you sue ine, you should ALL states, even those Trump won. While we’re at it, let’s recount every state’s votes, even those NOT cast by mail. It’s only fair. Right? Would you be willing to bet they’re be a change in outcomes? I am.

Sadly, people like you are too ignorant &/or lazy to check it for yourselves. Instead, you accept everything Trump says, even when it’s been proves to be must another lie!

That any lawyer would attempt to take such ridiculous cases only shows just how poor they are and need the money, or are looking for the publicity, or are showing the world just how stupid they are to willingly take on such a frivolous case as these have been shown to be, and risk permanently disbarred as well as being a part of sedition. It’s a wonder the SCOTUS didn’t reject the case “with prejudice,” like the Pennsylvania SCOTUS did. Also, I seriously doubt those justices are afraid of either me or you. To me and to the rest of America, they showed that they DO “have the stones.” They let Trump know real fast and with few words, so he’ll understand, that he and his followers are in the wrong.

Every one of the state AG’s and the Congresspeople who signed into the suit, need to be disbarred, kicked out of their positions and brought up on sedition charges. Trying to get the courts to overturn a proven fair election and try to cancel the votes of 17 MILLION Americans, just to keep on the good side of a liar like Trump, is seditious.

Biden won every recount of every state Trump demanded a recount from. Biden was still certified as president. Georgia recounted 3 times. All of the recounts didn’t change who the winner was. Biden still won. You can claim the election was rigged all you want. It’ll never change the PROVEN FACT that Biden won and Trump LOST.

You can whine and cry foul all you want. Nothing will change except for 2 things: Trump leaving the White House and Biden becoming the 46th President of the USA, come January 20th.

There is another possible change. New York could go after Trump for tax evasion, bank fraud, and money laundering, to name a few things. Even his neighbors, down in Mar-a-Lago, have already said they don’t want him or his wife living there; that he’s already broken several city ordinances and contractual agreements and they don’t want them around, PERIOD.

However, to compensate, I’m sure, there’re a few state prisons in New York that could be found to find accommodations for ALL of them. The downside is, they might not be able to be accommodated iat the same location. They’d be separated for quite a long time.

Patience?! That’s a “sick” joke coming from you. Ha-Ha. You keep in believing Trump’s lies. Let’s see how much further they’ll take him.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

alabuck wrote:

———————————-

“Evidence?!” How many lower courts listened to the “evidence” and declared it garbage? 59 out of 60! The 1 lone court to hear anything, then summarily dismissed it. It isn’t that the justices “... don’t have the stones... ,” it’s that they’re following the Constitution by siding with the decisions of the 59 lower court rulings and realizing that Trump has lied about the election fraud and continues to lie about it. How many times did Trump’s own lawyer, Giuliani, try to claim the suits weren’t about voter fraud, when all along, both he and Trump, were making many public statements, claiming the suits WERE about voter fraud?! Which was it? Fraud or no fraud?

And, why not go after ALL of the mail-in ballots in ALL states, even those Trump won? If there’s voter fraud with one state’s mail-in votes, there must be fraud with ALL states mail-in ballots. As such, we need to toss ALL mail-in ballots, not just the 4 Trump’s teams sued. If you sue ine, you should ALL states, even those Trump won. While we’re at it, let’s recount every state’s votes, even those NOT cast by mail. It’s only fair. Right? Would you be willing to bet they’re be a change in outcomes? I am.

Sadly, people like you are too ignorant &/or lazy to check it for yourselves. Instead, you accept everything Trump says, even when it’s been proves to be must another lie!

That any lawyer would attempt to take such ridiculous cases only shows just how poor they are and need the money, or are looking for the publicity, or are showing the world just how stupid they are to willingly take on such a frivolous case as these have been shown to be, and risk permanently disbarred as well as being a part of sedition. It’s a wonder the SCOTUS didn’t reject the case “with prejudice,” like the Pennsylvania SCOTUS did. Also, I seriously doubt those justices are afraid of either me or you. To me and to the rest of America, they showed that they DO “have the stones.” They let Trump know real fast and with few words, so he’ll understand, that he and his followers are in the wrong.

Every one of the state AG’s and the Congresspeople who signed into the suit, need to be disbarred, kicked out of their positions and brought up on sedition charges. Trying to get the courts to overturn a proven fair election and try to cancel the votes of 17 MILLION Americans, just to keep on the good side of a liar like Trump, is seditious.

Biden won every recount of every state Trump demanded a recount from. Biden was still certified as president. Georgia recounted 3 times. All of the recounts didn’t change who the winner was. Biden still won. You can claim the election was rigged all you want. It’ll never change the PROVEN FACT that Biden won and Trump LOST.

You can whine and cry foul all you want. Nothing will change except for 2 things: Trump leaving the White House and Biden becoming the 46th President of the USA, come January 20th.

There is another possible change. New York could go after Trump for tax evasion, bank fraud, and money laundering, to name a few things. Even his neighbors, down in Mar-a-Lago, have already said they don’t want him or his wife living there; that he’s already broken several city ordinances and contractual agreements and they don’t want them around, PERIOD.

However, to compensate, I’m sure, there’re a few state prisons in New York that could be found to find accommodations for ALL of them. The downside is, they might not be able to be accommodated iat the same location. They’d be separated for quite a long time.

Patience?! That’s a “sick” joke coming from you. Ha-Ha. You keep in believing Trump’s lies. Let’s see how much further they’ll take him.

———————————- br br “Evidence?!” How many lower c... (show quote)

PFFFT...

SSDD

dtucker300 wrote:

PFFFT...

Yes, I know, unless they side 100% with Trump and his Trumplicans regardless of the fact that they had no case whatsoever, they picked the wrong side as far as you are concerned. Justices "picking sides" is entirely unjustified and the only way they could hear and rule in favor of any case that so severely lacked any evidence or credence would indeed be "picking a side" as the case wouldn't have been decided favorably solely on it's merit.

Why should you feel justified in expecting the justices to go against the constitution and their own responsibilities as the arbiters of justice to hear a case and rule in it's favor when it is unfounded? I thought the Republican party was supposed to favor the constitution and be against changing it or ignoring it altogether, why are you people so dead set to ignore it now? Could it be that you people never cared much for it all along? It appears as though the only time you people ever seem to care much for it is if you think the "other side" is going against it, when it is your people trying to go against it, you never seem to hear many objections from any on your side.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

SSDD wrote:

Yes, I know, unless they side 100% with Trump and ... (show quote)

More ignorance on display by "you people" who think you understand the Constitution. You cite the article, section, and clause that supports your thesis and then we'll talk. Otherwise, is the Same $#!+, Different Day from you midget minds.

Pat Riot

alabuck wrote:

———————————-

“Evidence?!” How many lower courts listened to the “evidence” and declared it garbage? 59 out of 60! The 1 lone court to hear anything, then summarily dismissed it. It isn’t that the justices “... don’t have the stones... ,” it’s that they’re following the Constitution by siding with the decisions of the 59 lower court rulings and realizing that Trump has lied about the election fraud and continues to lie about it. How many times did Trump’s own lawyer, Giuliani, try to claim the suits weren’t about voter fraud, when all along, both he and Trump, were making many public statements, claiming the suits WERE about voter fraud?! Which was it? Fraud or no fraud?

And, why not go after ALL of the mail-in ballots in ALL states, even those Trump won? If there’s voter fraud with one state’s mail-in votes, there must be fraud with ALL states mail-in ballots. As such, we need to toss ALL mail-in ballots, not just the 4 Trump’s teams sued. If you sue ine, you should ALL states, even those Trump won. While we’re at it, let’s recount every state’s votes, even those NOT cast by mail. It’s only fair. Right? Would you be willing to bet they’re be a change in outcomes? I am.

Sadly, people like you are too ignorant &/or lazy to check it for yourselves. Instead, you accept everything Trump says, even when it’s been proves to be must another lie!

That any lawyer would attempt to take such ridiculous cases only shows just how poor they are and need the money, or are looking for the publicity, or are showing the world just how stupid they are to willingly take on such a frivolous case as these have been shown to be, and risk permanently disbarred as well as being a part of sedition. It’s a wonder the SCOTUS didn’t reject the case “with prejudice,” like the Pennsylvania SCOTUS did. Also, I seriously doubt those justices are afraid of either me or you. To me and to the rest of America, they showed that they DO “have the stones.” They let Trump know real fast and with few words, so he’ll understand, that he and his followers are in the wrong.

Every one of the state AG’s and the Congresspeople who signed into the suit, need to be disbarred, kicked out of their positions and brought up on sedition charges. Trying to get the courts to overturn a proven fair election and try to cancel the votes of 17 MILLION Americans, just to keep on the good side of a liar like Trump, is seditious.

Biden won every recount of every state Trump demanded a recount from. Biden was still certified as president. Georgia recounted 3 times. All of the recounts didn’t change who the winner was. Biden still won. You can claim the election was rigged all you want. It’ll never change the PROVEN FACT that Biden won and Trump LOST.

You can whine and cry foul all you want. Nothing will change except for 2 things: Trump leaving the White House and Biden becoming the 46th President of the USA, come January 20th.

There is another possible change. New York could go after Trump for tax evasion, bank fraud, and money laundering, to name a few things. Even his neighbors, down in Mar-a-Lago, have already said they don’t want him or his wife living there; that he’s already broken several city ordinances and contractual agreements and they don’t want them around, PERIOD.

However, to compensate, I’m sure, there’re a few state prisons in New York that could be found to find accommodations for ALL of them. The downside is, they might not be able to be accommodated iat the same location. They’d be separated for quite a long time.

Patience?! That’s a “sick” joke coming from you. Ha-Ha. You keep in believing Trump’s lies. Let’s see how much further they’ll take him.

———————————- br br “Evidence?!” How many lower c... (show quote)

Wow! You have one of worst cases of TDS I've ever seen! I'll bet you were foaming at the mouth with rage when you posted this diatribe/rant.

SSDD

dtucker300 wrote:

More ignorance on display by "you people" who think you understand the Constitution. You cite the article, section, and clause that supports your thesis and then we'll talk. Otherwise, is the Same $#!+, Different Day from you midget minds.

It is YOU that wants cases decided without sufficient supporting evidence, YOU should be the one responsible for pointing out where in the constitution it gives judges the right to ignore the fact that the case has no foundation, or do you not know where to find a copy much less what it says? If that be the case, I will be more than happy to supply you a link to the constitution.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

SSDD wrote:

It is YOU that wants cases decided without sufficient supporting evidence, YOU should be the one responsible for pointing out where in the constitution it gives judges the right to ignore the fact that the case has no foundation, or do you not know where to find a copy much less what it says? If that be the case, I will be more than happy to supply you a link to the constitution.

I consider this conversation done and over with since you can't take it seriously.

SSDD

dtucker300 wrote:

I consider this conversation done and over with since you can't take it seriously.

Oh, I have taken it seriously and I find it seriously F'ed up if you think unfounded cases not supported by sufficient evidence should find favorable outcomes for those that enjoy filing frivolous lawsuits. We should not reward those that like wasting the courts' time and our tax payers' dollars.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

SSDD wrote:

Oh, I have taken it seriously and I find it seriously F'ed up if you think unfounded cases not supported by sufficient evidence should find favorable outcomes for those that enjoy filing frivolous lawsuits. We should not reward those that like wasting the courts' time and our tax payers' dollars.

I absolutely agree with your conclusion even though it is based on a false premise.