Judge Orders New Election After 78 Percent of Mail-In Ballots Found Invalid, Notary Arrested

As was Russian collusion.... Just couldn't get to Russian conspiracy, as required by the law he was never going to ouldn't be charged under...

Imagine.... there was no “agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on election interference.”

 

I love all the liberals on here pretending that they don't know how to use google.

Here is the local news channel with the story.
https://www.wcbi.com/notary-arrested-charged-voter-fraud-connection-aberdeen-alderman-election/

This happens over and over and over again. Please do better. It is not persuasive to anybody to attack the source and think you are done.

 

We do too. The trump cult would like you to believe otherwise. Don't fall for their lies.

 

Funny how none of the right wing posters here, including the OP, bothered to mention that this was about less than 100 votes. Gee, wonder why? Could it be that they know that any honest presentation of the facts will, yet again, result in their claims of election fraud been laughed off the thread.

You certainly have to wonder about the motives of anyone who would focus on the '78%' aspect fo this and refuse to mention the 'less than 200 votes' aspect. There is no way any such person can be interested in an honest discussion of the issue.

 

No no, I said Russian hoax. Of course there is interference. The top 3 highest grossing violators in the realm of election interference are China, UK, and the USA, although we call it statecraft. No no, cd8, what I was referring to was the hoax angle whereby Democrats spent 4 years advancing the greatest conspiracy theory politics has ever known; that Pres Trump colluded with Russia to steal an election. THAT is what I was referring to when rebounding off your earlier comment about not reading biased sources and whatnot. For the left wing MSM spent an incalculable number of man-hours (it has to be in the billions) fabricating that hoax and benefiting from the massive surge in ad-revenue from a flood of visitors and viewers turning in and logging on dozens of times throughout every single day of years 2016 through 2019.

 

AKA a poll tax!

 

Individual 1 was implicated
Who is individual 1?

 

This is a story about Republicans committing voter fraud.

 

A coy way of not having to own up to an unproven fabrication that resulted in net 0 actionable charges.

 

Can’t answer the question, can you. If a simple question is all it takes to unravel your narrative maybe you should reevaluate your positions

 

No that was my answer. Individual one was a coy way of not having to own up to an unproven fabrication that resulted in net 0 actionable charges. Its a boogyman, a phantom, not an actual person.

 

Source? Because what I have read and heard from people within the actual investigation say otherwise

 

Our sources are the same. Liars like Cohen looking for relief from their own crimes, and fraudsters who can wrap a cloak of anonymity around said fabrication and use it to forestall the truth long enough to sell a juicy 'insight' to media which in turn is used to substantiate said fraudsters position/funding and thus the cycle continues as it did for nearly 3 years of great ad revenue and legal billings.

 

What is your plan for governing when about half the electorate lose faith in the vote and simply ignore the system and go their own way? I'm serious. How do you imagine America maintains any stability?

 

Yawn

 

It would be best for the nation if they did go their own way. They have moved from simply tying to sabotage government to outright trying to destroy it.
We have no way of forcing people to believe the truth.
Their only means of winning is lies, conspiracy and anti-democracy efforts.

 

Then what makes you so SURE that it occurred, & on the scale required to have turned the election?

Those 60 courts where the Trump team struck out, were not coming to a final judgement on whether or not the case had been proven, they were only ruling as to whether there was a minimum justification on which to predicate a case. Wouldn't it seem, to a reasonable mind, that if there was MASSIVE fraud, in many states-- which supposedly the, "good guys," had gotten wind of-- as had been alleged, there would have been sufficient signs, sworn witness affidavits, or something, to merely permit the cases to continue? In the instance of the case that did proceed, the difference in the final vote tally was negligible.

And don't you trust William Barr, who no one could say wasn't disposed toward seeing things in a light that was favorable to his boss? He ended up leaving because, according to Barr, who certainly looked for it, there was nothing there, but President Trump was not willing to accept this fact.

It seems, actually, that you suffer from a similar affliction: that is, you appear to be utterly convinced of the reality of this unprecedented voter-fraud scheme based, not on proof, but on your general notion that it might have occurred. From what I can see, the veracity of all the unsupported allegations, however unlikely, rests securely on the sole pillar of your belief that it was, "possible."

 

What is your plan to ease the disgust of the other half who know that the election was fair and that the allegations of fraud are pure Bullschiest?

 

Since apparently the OP's source was correct....that means it was solid. And all it would have taken is just a quick google search on your behalf to confirm that it was solid. But you were too focused on "eww! Epoch Times!!!". Like apexofpurple said, lazy posting.

 

Of course I'm not "so sure" beyond any reasonable doubt However there is eminent reasonable suspicion of fraud, easily enough for any police officer to conduct a search and make an arrest. In addition there is clear and convincing evidence of illegalities other than fraud. There was easily sufficient justification for courts to hear the cases instead of high-tailing it for the hills.

Hardly any court rejected lawsuits based on any assessment of the merits of the cases. All of the cases were tossed or postponed officially on procedural grounds. One case saying the supreme court of PA was wrong got to the supreme court of PA where, based on the merits, I guess, ruled that "no we weren't wrong."

 

Actually , I can.
Each state certified the election results.
Each elector voted.
Congress counted and certified the results.

All FACTS.

 

.... which disproves nothing about Trump's challenges.

 

And since they are only challenges, UNPROVEN challenges, there is nothing to disprove.

 

So you are claiming as a matter of record this is not a true story?