A logical and empirical look at Election Fraud in 2020

City of Detroit filed motions against Sidney Powell: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemima...al-experts-say-it-could-work/?sh=7d48a4516b3e

Giuliani is not subject to rule 11 because it pertains only to what a lawyer does in a courtroom. When before the judge, he admitted "this is not a fraud case". His behavior outside the courtroom still might lead to disbarment: https://fortune.com/2021/01/14/rudy-giuliani-trump-lawyers-disbar-lawmakers-democracy/

 

I've shown you, repeatedly, that no trump lawsuits alleged fraud. I've shown you, repeatedly, that every time a judge asked trumps lawyers, every one of them, to a man, stated they are not alleging fraud. You lose.

 

Hmm, if a democratic country we cannot trust courts because for the most part they did not want to get involved, Judges can't solve every problem so who we should trust???
Eureka! I know! We should trust a man who always tells truth!




No I believe President Trump didn't lie when he said:

 

So did the USSC and trump appointed judeges. I take their opinions over anonymous people on the internet with no proof.

 

They have proof - 8 billion affadivits & 7,000 you tube videos
Plus Trump said it was so and he is known for being honest and never lying

 

And then there was this lady who called a radio show who heard her brother saying he heard his uncles wife's brothers maid say...

 

This disease has a low mortality rate. It was not high enough to call for no-excuse absentee voting. And if it was, then the election should have been pushed till next year; but Democrats did not want that.

Voter fraud by absentee voting is actually harder to detect than in-person voting. One of the reasons for this is the transmission process. (1) Paradoxically, even though it is harder to discover, more cases of it have been discovered to substantiate the observation that voter fraud with absentee voting goes up by a factor of 50. Logically, therefore, the actual number of voter fraud by absentee voting is probably much higher than the number of proven cases. Using the number of small cases to argue that voter fraud is relatively rare is sophistical, given the fact that voter fraud in principle is hard to identify: a full forensic team would have to "analyze each vote, cross-reference it with lists of eligible voters, check those, and drill deep on any suspicious cases"; (2) it's a lot of work and a lot of manpower. Given the fact that voter fraud is hard to identify in general, harder to identify if it is via absentee voting, and the number of no-excuse absentee voting went up astronomically in this election, the probability that there was rampant voter fraud via absentee voting is perfectly logical and probable.

I don't trust a Democrat with TDS to have rational thoughts nor integrity with the franchise.

1. https://electionlab.mit.edu/research/voting-mail-and-absentee-voting
2. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390443864204577621732936167586

 

Rahl, buddy, I have, time and again, proven my case by showing a list of sources, from the New York Times to NPR to Slate, that show that absentee voting leads to more corruption than in-person voting. As to the FACT that absentee-voting increases by a factor of 50, that was backed up in a cited study in the Wall Street Journal. So I will not argue with you on this, since your argument is essentially, "No, it's not!!!!!!!!!!"

As to whether observers were prevented from observing at any time, the point is that there should be regulation to prevent the vote-counting process without observers. The fact that they kept counting after the observers left puts the counting of votes outside of the observers' perception into question. And, again, what is true is that observers, when they were there, had to keep a distance of 6 feet. And that is categorically bull, as the further the observers are away, the more they can miss.

 

I just did!

There is NO EVIDENCE of any degree of significant fraud so the BOGUS allegations about "voter fraud" are nothing more than extremist rightwing FEARMONGERING as a means to implement Minority Voter Suppression.

FORCING people to go to extreme lengths to obtain a species level of "voter id" when they have neither the time nor the funds to do it fits the DEFINITION of Minority Voter Suppression.

IOW's would YOU be willing to be FORCED to take UNPAID LEAVE that left you UNABLE to pay your bills in order to travel via Public Transit to a remote location where you will have to wait for HOURS or even DAYS to submit your application for YOUR voter id?

That is the connection that YOU are missing.

That is a massive load of crap! The GOP only PRETENDS to reach out to racial minorities.

Only party doing that is the GOP!

 

you of course, have not.

you can not support this number

there is no need. observers are allowed to observe, by law. If they didn't, that's on them.

.
no it doesn't, as ever recount and audit shows.

yes, because................................deadly pandemic.

The facts remain, and unrefuted. Every single investigative body that looked into fraud in 2020 election, from trumps DHS, trumps DOJ, trumps Attorney General, Republican secretaries of state, Republican governors, all 50 state election commissions, every single court it went before, republican judges, trump appointed judges and all 9 supreme court justices have told you that there was no fraud.

 

And do what exactly? Allow Trump to remain the POTUS? How would you feel if Biden wanted an additional year?

Ok. 50 times a rate of less than .0001% is still not a lot. I agree it is a higher risk, but to pull it off on a massive scale would be nearly impossible. Somebody somewhere would get caught or come forward, and that has not happened. The more people involved in a conspiracy the more likely it is to fail.

I just don't believe everyone counting votes is a democrat, and I don't believe every democrat has TDS, nor do I believes every person with TDS is willing to risk jail time.

 

What's the source of your claim that voting fraud goes up by a factor of 50?

Neither article supports your claim. The 1st article notes:
researchers studying voter fraud—a term used to refer to cases in which one voter impersonates another at the poll to cast a fraudulent vote—say they have so far found little direct evidence that the practice is common enough to affect the results of elections, even close ones.

Your claim also depends on the unsupported assumption that fraud is only committed by Democrats. Republicans are just as capable of committing fraud as Democrats. In fact, the instances of fraud that HAVE been uncovered, include fraud by Republicans.

 

Those were opinion pieces.

I have been poor and even briefly homeless twice. I have always had an ID. But still I can see someone not having the money just for the purposes of voting. Also, I have never worked anywhere that I did not have to have a valid ID BEFORE they even hired me. This is not 1920.

Issue a mag stripe card (like a credit card) at the time of voter registration and take a picture and have them sign their name, the picture and signature then becomes associated with that card number. Scan the card to vote, this gives the poll worker a picture and signature to match you to. Problem solved.
_OR_
Scan your fingerprint when you register...
_OR_
Scan your face...
_OR_
Scan you retina...

Four reasonable and cheap solutions that took 30 seconds to come up with. The problem with the left/right is they don't care to resolve the issue. There is any number of ways to verify identity at the polls, but neither side can work together to do this. I believe it is so they can cry fraud, suppression, and racism every time and whip their base in to a frenzy.

Right. Cause the left REALLY cares...

You really need to get out more. It is sad you don't see any fault in your own party.

 

A LOW mortality rate is still non-zero, so you're basically saying it's OK to (unnecessarily) let a few people die. Of course, death isn't the only consequence; some have long term affects (e.g. my wife's cousin has been having seizures ever since getting COVID last April), and there's also the potential for overwhelming the healthcare system with a surge event of this magnitude. Regardless of our respective opinions about what SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE, no-excuse absentee voting WAS done in some (not all) states. You can disagree with the law, and work to change it in the future, but you need to respect the law that is in place.

ROFL! You're right that Democrats didn't want something unconstitutional to be done.
20th Amendment: The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January

 

The polls were already closed. There was no voting going on. Come on. Think about it.

 

Jeez, are there STILL people who don't understand how votes were cast, which set of voters did the most voting by mail, and how votes were counted?

 

Every lawyer who signs a pleading in Federal court is subject to Rule 11.

So, was Sidney Powell sanctioned - or not?

I agree that every lawyer who filed false pleadings should have been hit with motions for Rule 11 sanctions no later that November. But that did not happen. Puzzling isn't it?

"“In their frivolous lawsuits geared toward stealing the election, Trump’s lawyers are bringing ill-repute to the entire legal community and abusing the legal system to assault democracy,” Pascrell told The Post in a statement Tuesday. “Every lawyer promulgating or promoting Trump’s suits should face the strongest possible punishment and be stripped of their license to practice law. If targeting American democracy does not merit such sanction, nothing does."
THE WASHINGTON POST, Letter from 1,500 attorneys says Trump campaign lawyers don’t have ‘license to lie’, By Kim Bellware and John Wagner, Dec. 8, 2020.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/08/trump-lawyer-letter/

 

So, so have any of those judges sanctioned the Trump lawyers for filing false pleadings?

 

Rudy did not sign a pleading that there was fraud. He SAID there was fraud before a judge in Pennsylvania, but when the judge questioned him about this, he said "this is not a fraud case." So his statement can't be regarded as a pleading. That case was about ballot curing. Rudy's real nonsense came outside the courtroom, and that's not subject to rule 11 - but it is subject to review as misconduct, and that's what could lead to discipline and disbarment.

One or more complaints have been filed, and there will be due process. It takes time.

Nope. There weren't many actual fraud cases. There was one in Michigan (see https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics...gal-setback-president-trump/story?id=74199110). The Trump supporting plaintiffs lost the case because the plaintiff’s "interpretation" of events on Election Day was "incorrect and not credible," but that alone doesn't establish violation of rule 11, which requires that some investigation must be done. Although plaintiffs clearly did an insufficient investigation, this doesn't mean they did NO investigation.

On the other hand, Sidney Powell's allegations were prima facie absurd. I analyzed the affidavit that alleged Venezuelan involvement (link) and showed how absurd it was based solely on the obvious fallicies contained in the affidavit.

 

They never got filed. They had nothing to file.

 

So, you are convinced that no false pleadings were filed by the Trump legal team. Well, that would certainly explain why they have not been sanctioned.

 

They were citing FACTS!

e.g. "Since the 2010 elections, 24 states have implemented new restrictions on voting."

"Going back more than 50 years, Republican presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush all sought to galvanize white votes with attacks on people of color — often, though, in subtly coded communication."

"Today, the structural bias is so great that, in Schickler’s calculation, Democrats need to defeat Republicans by at least 3 to 4 percentage points in the popular vote to assure victory in the Electoral College. "

"News reports this week showed that, in 2016, Republican candidate Trump used advanced data-driven techniques to target 3.5 million Black voters with social media messages aimed to discourage them from voting. Latinx, Asian American and other communities of color also were targeted."

" Georgia purged 1.4 million names. Ohio last year purged 460,000 registrations, thousands of them in error. A conservative group in Wisconsin this year is pressing for a new purge, with the case now pending in court."

"To stir up hysteria, Republicans in the George W. Bush administration pushed hard to prosecute voter fraud cases. Their efforts failed. A Department of Justice task force found a trivial number of cases after years of investigation. The White House engineered the firing of U.S. Attorneys who were insufficiently zealous in pursuing voter fraud cases, resulting in a congressional investigation that led to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and other top leadership of the Department of Justice. "

Sad that you DEFEND the party of Minority Voter Suppression thereby debunking your own PRETENSE of being non-partisan.

 

You still haven't shown anything that would lead one to conclude racism, or that requiring someone to identify themselves is voter suppression. That is where the disconnect is.

I do not have your left leaning bias, so if you want to defend your position, please does so. Calling out liberal opinion pieces designed to misinterpret the facts does not make me non-partisan.

If you were to take an objective look for instance, you might conclude - that voter ID can disproportionately affect the lower classes, and because of that, has a disproportionate effect on minorities, particularly blacks. That is a factual statement I would agree with. That does not however mean that it is designed to suppress minority votes.

Asking someone provide identification to vote is common sense. It has nothing to do with racism.

Employers require ID for employment. The DMV requires ID to drive. Banks require ID to take out a loan. Land lords require ID from tenants. You must provide ID to get food stamps. ID is required to buy a car, cigarettes, alcohol, guns, knives, certain medicines. This list is exhaustive.

Is all of this racists?

 

More kneejerk denialism all you have?

Sad!

YOU were previously provided with the example of the BURDEN that obtaining an ID can be for those earning minimum wages but you conveniently choose to IGNORE it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/poll-prri-voter-suppression/565355/

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/new-voter-suppression

And just to DRIVE the POINT home AFTER that ODIOUS "exact match" was thrown OUT by the courts in 2019 we saw the RESULTS in GA where YOUR biggest *LOSER* was thrown out of office as were BOTH of the Senators that supported him by MINORITY voters who FINALLY had the opportunity to VOTE in a free and fair election.

Facts matter!

 

Most of your post is the same opinions over and over. I do not accept that requiring ID to vote is some racist conspiracy. The facts that are presented are not in dispute, however the interpretation is very politically motivated. It is odd you refuse to discuss your own beliefs while continuing to post liberal opinion pieces.

For example: It is a fact that minorities are unwilling/unable to provide ID, have a different name on their ID than what is listed on the voter log, or do not know where to vote, in a higher rate than whites. What is not a fact is that requiring voter ID is an attempt to exploit this in some racist plot.

One of your sources openly admits that impersonation fraud happens, but still spins a narrative that any attempt to combat this is really just racism. That is a completely unfounded accusation that can not be supported with facts.

Many laws affect different demographics differently. Unfortunately, any law that were designed to target violent crime for instance, is going to affect minorities at a higher rate. Likewise, any law created to target white collar crime is going to affect whites at a significantly higher rate. This does not mean the intention of such laws is designed to target any racial demographic. Every thing congress passes is going to have a disproportionate effect on someone.

So one more time, if you can prove that laws requiring ID are designed to do anything but combat fraud, show it. But don't expect me to buy in to any conspiracy theories.

I don't live in GA so none of that is really relevant to me. That being said GA has been purple for a while now, Abrams barely lost in 2018. I don't really see the connection you are trying to draw. Compare voter turnout, that is where your answer lies.

And seriously, I am just trying to have a conversation, no reason to scream and project your assumptions.