Disputing Trump, Barr says no widespread election fraud

Want to know what the problem is with lying all the time?

 

There's a couple Republicans in Penn, they've been charged.

 

The people (and their families) that are getting death threats are (mostly) Republican officials that have said there wasn't a problem with elections.

A Georgian Republican election official vented on national tv yesterday. He was pissed that the national Republicans like Trump are cranking up the crazies. His wife and some of his employees have been credibly threatened with violence and death.

You invert reality a lot.

 

Barr didn't say that there was no widespread voter Fraud, he said that the DOJ has found no evidence of it.

 

And that difference means what exactly? I see no evidence of fairies living in the bottom of my garden, but that doesn't rule out the fact they still exist???

You are literally arguing that an agency whose thousands of members have sworn an oath to protect the American public from crime and whose expertise lies (in part) in detecting and prosecuting complex fraud offences for some bizzare reason cant detect blatant electoral fraud. And it would have to be 'blatant' because Bidens margin of victory is so large. And that's with pressure from the 'top' to find it?

So where exactly in your expert opinion is this 'evidence' hiding?

 

Have fairies ever been seen before? Voter fraud certainly has.

Did I say that there was evidence hidden somewhere?

 

I'm not sure just what the investigation has looked at but I believe the only way to find the fraud would be a hand recount of all mail in ballots checking dates and signatures and registered voter lists. I believe the election is about over and Trump has lost but I will never accept that this election was honest. Large scale criminality seems to protect itself if enough powerful people are involved.

 

No, tell me your experiences with it since you are so familiar.

 

While Trump and the Cult are screaming fraud, attempts to prove it in court have failed completely.

If there was serious fraud, the evidence would have already resulted in convictions.

Instead we get one conspiracy theory after another, some of them having Republicans conspiring against Republicans. Which requires a level of gullibility that is kinda amazing.

Back in the real world, Pence swore into office one of the election winners yesterday. IOW, in the real world, it's over, people are being sworn in, the world has moved on.

 

You really have no clue how this works. Funny.

 

Barr was the second worst appointment Trump ever made and he appointed lots of stinkers. The worst Trump appointment? Well that would be the honorable Jeff Sessions of Alabama as his first AG.

 

Yes it has. Analysis of voter fraud patterns in US elections reveals a truly monumental average fraud rate of somewhere around 0.0009% . Or if you prefer about 1 vote in 10,000. And no-one from Trump's legal team, the DoJ, Homeland Security, State Electoral Commissions or anyone else has produced a shred of evidence that there was even a slightly higher rate of fraud this time around, let alone enough fraud to push the election in Binden's favor. Have you any idea how monumentally lacking in proof Trump has had to be to loose every single legal challenge he's tried to date?

If its not hidden then it must be non-existent because he keeps getting laughed out of every court in the Country. And that's on top of being slapped down by republican lead state electoral commissions! Where is his evidence then if it exists?

And to be quite clear - if there is any evidence of fraud, any at all then it absolutely needs to be exposed and put before the Courts. It hasn't. And if it can be proved that this fraud was orchestrated by American citizens those citizens deserve to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law regardless of whose side the fraud favored. Again no-one has been identified and been investigated, not even close.

The integrity of the electoral system comes before partizan politics. So if Trump won he won, but just saying the word 'fraud, fraud, fraud, over and over again like some mantra does not make it true.

 

Okay, so other than the DOJ, you also mention "Homeland Security" and "State Electoral Commissions." So have those entities also come out and said that there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud? In your previous post you seemed to think that the DOJ is the only entity capable of finding evidence, and that because they haven't uncovered any, this then means that there definitely isn't any.

Keep in mind what you originally objected to me saying - this FACT: Barr didn't say that there was no widespread voter Fraud, he said that the DOJ has found no evidence of it.

Well I'm not saying that it DOES exist! I'm simply saying that it MIGHT! And no number of unsuccessful legal challenges will change that. Hell, there MIGHT be evidence that voter Fraud led to Trump winning in 2016!

Correct.

 

No I 'think' the DoJ would be the logical lead agency in any investigation into alleged fraud. The other entities I mentioned are important for other reasons. In the case of Homeland Security it's because they would be assessing the level of cyber based attacks on the election. And based on their report the election was secure. In the case of the State Electoral Commissions they are the agencies in direct face to face contact with the physical mechanics of the election process. This means they would be the ones who should have been able to detect any wide scale attempts to interfere with election process on a district by district basis, bearing in mind observers from both parties were present to witness the vote counting.

So my point was that, to the level that is humanly possible the agencies concerned haven't detected any significant level of fraud, and by 'fraud' I mean deliberate attempts to interfere with the democratic process as opposed to administrative **** ups. And even those, based on the evidence to date are no more common than in other past elections.

I think you have to go (in the first instance at least) with the historical evidence. Which is that the incidence of fraud in US Federal elections is minute (as I noted about 0.0009%). In the washout from this election evidence might emerge, I repeat 'might' that indicates there was a higher than usual level of 'fraud' in this election. But frankly, given the level of effort put in to hardening the systems pre-election and the number of recounts that have occurred post election I doubt that will ever happen.

So I guess it comes down to this. At the end of the day the people running your electoral systems, counting the votes and investigation any allegations of electoral fraud are fellow citizens. That presumably means they love their country and are just as committed to is democratic processes as you are. So if you were involved in organizing, monitoring or investigating complaints about the recent election would you allow incidents of fraud to pass unchecked? Even if the fraud benefited the party you personally supported?

If the answer to that question is 'no' (and I think it is) then the election results have to stand pretty much unblemished.

 

Heartburn, any definition of 'fraud' usually includes something along the lines of 'the wrongful or criminal act of deceiving someone for financial or personal gain.'

The key point is those acts have to be deliberate, planned and intentional. Not administrative mistakes or other unintentional errors. And to date there as been next to no evidence that any significant unintentional counting errors occurred either. So what I'm going to do at htis point is quote something I wrote in another post.

'So I guess it comes down to this. At the end of the day the people running your electoral systems, counting the votes and investigation any allegations of electoral fraud are fellow citizens. That presumably means they love their country and are just as committed to is democratic processes as you are. So if you were involved in organizing, monitoring or investigating complaints about the recent election would you allow incidents of fraud to pass unchecked? Even if the fraud benefited the party you personally supported?

If the answer to that question is 'no' (and I think it is) then the election results have to stand pretty much unblemished'

 

So you now agree with what I originally said to which you initially disagreed? This FACT: Barr didn't say that there was no widespread voter Fraud, he said that the DOJ has found no evidence of it.

It "presumably means they love their country?" Uh, NO! There are people in America who absolutely HATE their country! Biden is one of them! He said that America has never lived up to its ideals. If that was true, why would he NOT hate it? I would hate our country (Australia) if that was true of us! Plus, and much more importantly - given the insane, pathological HATRED of Trump and the perception that he is Hitler, or worse, the DEVIL - people would have done ANYTHING to get him out! If you don't think that this motivation existed in this election, then you haven't been paying attention, and you may well not have been given that you don't live in the US. Neither do I, but I pay a STUPID amount of attention to the US and would certainly know far more than the average Aussie. Then again, you may well be an American living in Australia.

If I thought that the fraud was necessary to stop Hitler, or the DEVIL? Nope! I would absolutely allow it to pass unchecked! That would be the only moral thing to do!

 

It isn't a lie. It is an opinion and is substantiated by actual evidence. Your comments to the contrary don't change that. My personal opinion, influenced by real evidence, is that there was more fraud in this election than in any election in my lifetime. How much fraud? I don't know any better the anyone else. But lots and lots of fraud.

Nevertheless, the left will get its way and Biden will be inaugurated. Welcome to four years of harrassment over the legitimacy of the election. The difference between this and Russia collusion is that everyone was warned about the risks inherent in the wholesale mailing of ballots. Russia collusion came with no warning.

 

I fail to see the point.There is no evidence of fraud. Ergo there is no fraud - at least until proof of same is discovered. And it doesn't matter who is looking for it, be it the DoJ or the Justice League of America! (Which probably has more credibility in the eyes of some sections of the American public than the DoJ does at the moment unfortunately). Either way, there is 'no fraud' is no fraud at some point you have to call 'time' on looking for it or go mad.

What country (or person for that matter) ever lives up to it's (or their) ideals 24/7 365 days a year? We all fail to do this. Both collectively as nations and individually as human beings. Not all the time and not continuously, but often enough to make Biden's comment (and I'm taking your word that he said it - I don't know) more or less true. As for never living up to its ideals? Depends on who you ask and what your perspective is. Stating that you have failed (or your country has) in some aspects at least is not automatically also a statement of self hate - or national hate? Its an admission that neither we or the country we live in is perfect. Also not an American BTW.

If you don't stop the fraud then you are on your way to becoming Hitler, or at least someone cast in his image. He falsified election results as well after all. (We're at Hitler already! that was quick, it usually takes longer.)

I guess I'm asking who are you to decide by yourself alone who is 'Hitler' and who isn't? Your Hitler is, in someone else's eyes (foolishly or not) a hero. So what gives you the right to deny that person their vote, their freedom to choose? And as for the Devil? The only way to ultimately beat him/her/gender undetermined would absolutely be to refuse any notion of fraud. If I recall correctly one of his other titles is 'The Prince of Lies'. So your going to lie on a grand scale and disenfranchise fellow voters because you know better? He wins.

And after the election the voter that voted for Hitler/the devil (Devil Hitler?) gets to face the consequences of his/her choice - just like in every other aspect of life.

 

I think your definition matches my take on the mail order votes campaign to a tee. There are people in prison on weaker circumstantial evidence than we have for this. I also believe it's a done deal, lots of hmmmmm, ahhhaaaahh and then nothing. Not at all unlike the impeachment production or Epstein's murder. The difference between today and my youth is they don't even try to hide it nor do they need to.

 

I thought you said that there "MIGHT" be evidence.

Why do you say that?

Except Biden said that that America has NEVER lived up to its ideals.

What if a candidate went to an election promising to reinstate slavery, and their supporter base was totally okay with it?

 

I think we're starting to veer into the pedantic here;

1) I accept the possibility that there is evidence of fraud somewhere out there. Not fraud on a grand scale, just some evidence of some (degree) of fraud. Like there has been in every election. What I don't accept is the claims of monumental fraud being made by the Trump camp. You cant hide a mountain under a mushroom. Fraud on the scale implied would be impossible to hide for long. So thats not the same thing as saying there's no possibility of fraud at all.

2) Because of the flogging the DoJ took from Trump supporters during the 'Russian' investigation. A certain percentage of the population views any potentially adverse findings against Trump as treason. The fact that investigations by the DoJ into allegations of fraud during the election has failed to find any evidence that fraud actually occurred on a scale significant enough to effect the outcome will only reinforce the opinion of a certain deluded % of the population that the Agency is anti-Trump. Which as stated earlier in their minds is tantamount to treason. Hence the fictional organization having more credibility in the eyes of those same people.

3) Again pedantics. None of us live up to our ideals 24/7 365 days a year. Since nations are a collection of individuals that pretty much means nations don't either, even from day 1 of their founding. That doesn't mean the nation, like it's people hasn't strived to do so.

4) Then the nation reaps what it sows - literally, assuming the decision to reinstate slavery was constitutionally valid in the first place. In a democracy each individual owns what or who they vote for. (Ask the people of Germany.) So who exactly is this person that gets to reach in over the top of the 'will of the electorate' and stop them from voting as they wish? What gives that one person the right or power to intercede? To make the 'right' decision on behalf of everyone else?

 

What if a candidate went to an election promising to reinstate slavery, and their supporter base was totally okay with it?[/QUOTE]
Maybe we should deal with this election before we take that one on?

 

Biden said NEVER! So that's not even ONE day out of 365 days a year!

 

Hopefully you can see the point that I was making.

 

Asked and answered (point 3 above).