Fake News
- Thread starter Uniformed_ReRe
- Start date
ReRe I'm glad you asked cause you are the definition of the difference between conservatives and liberals when it comes to getting news.
Conservatives get their news from sources that tell us the truth. When you lie to us, thats it, you're dead to us. That's why we always know what's actually going on in the world.
Liberals like @Uniformed_ReRe get their news from whatever sources tell them what they want to hear. That's why they have no idea what is happening in the real world and are easily hoodwinked into believing anything they hear that fits the narratives they want to believe.
People like ReRe think that Hiden won the Presidential election when CNN said he did.
Conservatives get their news from sources that tell us the truth. When you lie to us, thats it, you're dead to us. That's why we always know what's actually going on in the world.
Liberals like @Uniformed_ReRe get their news from whatever sources tell them what they want to hear. That's why they have no idea what is happening in the real world and are easily hoodwinked into believing anything they hear that fits the narratives they want to believe.
People like ReRe think that Hiden won the Presidential election when CNN said he did.
Shhhhh. OP likes Joe whispering in his ears while slipping it in the ole RERE
You mean the Joe Biden rectal exam were he puts both his hands on your shoulders?
LOL, the vast majority of local daily newspapers either parrot the national papers or they literally cut and paste with permission.
If Trump cannot prove election fraud, cannot prove the election was stolen, Biden is POTUS elect.
If Trump cannot prove election fraud, cannot prove the election was stolen, Biden is POTUS elect.
Wow. You’re really going out on the limb there.
But the silver lining is that Trumpers will forever question the legitimacy of the Biden presidency, just because Trump said so. So we’ll add that to the institutions Trump has destroyed just because he doesn’t like what they say
Health and Infectious Disease Departments
Intelligence Agencies
Law Enforcement Agencies
Media
Fact Checkers
Elections
And his cultists go marching along, step by step.
It's hilarious how good news for America always brings the trolls and their sock puppets out of the woodwork.
This is nothing, wait till the stock market opens...
Hey psycho, I was agreeing with your position. Only you could find fault in someone agreeing with you.
Good Lord.
Hey @Uniformed_ReRe do you think The Washington Post is credible? Cause they just got busted publishing yet another false story about Trump:
Your implication was that there is fraud, but they just can’t prove it. Maybe I misunderstood you.
Do you believe there was widespread fraud?
Wait...there are still people (even on the mentally ill left) that are denying that voter fraud is widespread???
Wow. Might want to turn off your TV and stay off the interwebs for the next few months then. Which won't be that difficult for some.
I have no idea. But even if there was, it means less than nothing if it cannot be proven.
My implication was that it would need to be proven.
1. I don't have a subscription to the Washington Post and don't read it (or Mother Jones or the Daily Beast, etc.). The only papers I read regularly are the WSJ, Bloomberg, USAToday, the Economist, and Foreign Affairs. And by "regularly," I mean that I read maybe about 10% of the content, mostly while sitting on the can.
2. Here is the original complaint:
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.1.0_3.pdf
Here is the amended complaint
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.125.1.pdf
Notice anything different between the two?
Doesn't matter, all your lefty blogs were parrotting the WaPo claim that the suit was dropped. It wasn't, it was amended, as you just confirmed.
It was amended by cutting out anything that could have had substantive any impact on the election. Now, it’s just a shell.
BTW, all of the attorneys involved just withdrew from the case.
Sigh...
You are the @Nolec of politics. No one should listen to anything you say on the topic because you are always wrong.
So you think Trump has given up on PA and he's turned it over to Sean Hannity.
I may have insulted @Nolec with the previous post. Apologies.
Once again, you didn’t even review what you posted.
If you did, you would have read that the original attorneys are all withdrawing from the case and are being replaced by Marc Scaringi. He is a talk show host.
I didn’t say anything about Sean Hannity.
That's because I know Trump hasn't given up on PA and turned it over to a talk show host. I even gave you confirmation from a member of Trump's legal team about what was happening. But as usual, you tend to ignore what you don't want to hear, while accusing others of doing the same thing.
The court motion that you posted says that the attorneys (named) “hereby move to withdraw their counsel from Plaintiffs. Marc A. Scaringi will act as counsel for Plaintiffs.”
How could this be any clearer?
It's very clear to me what that means. You think it means Trump is giving up on PA and turned it over to a talk show host.
Bless your heart.
They took some of the stronger language out but it still has the trappings of an equal protections suit.
Basically all voters have to be treated the same and the unequal application of the rules by blue vs red counties violated that.
I only scanned the first few pages, did I miss something critical?
The elephant in the room nobody is talking about is the implication that red counties are 100% red and blue counties are 100% blue. Funny thing about counties, they have both types of voters. Another funny thing, they also have their very own set of laws. Now, do Penn counties have their own set of laws in regards to elections? That I don't know. Pennsylvania local municipal codes is not my area of expertise. Let's assume they don't.
There has been a lot of talk about "blue counties let voters fix their flaws but red counties didn't". Well, barring a specific state law either mandating or denying voting precincts to assist voters in casting legal ballots, it would become a "county option". So if one county did, and another county didn't, and there was no state law about it, well, then it's perfectly fine.
Now, if this was not allowed, then of course those fixed ballots would be taken out of the count. But that's highly unlikely, because that would be a violation of the law and those election workers are not going to risk prison to help a few people correct their ballots. OTOH, if it were mandated, then the red counties would have violated the law by not helping voters. I doubt they want to go to jail either, so that says it was most likely allowed but not required.
This is how I interpret what happened. There WAS a county option. Both sides knew that the mail in ballots were going to run heavily blue. EVEN IN THE RED COUNTIES THE MAIL IN BALLOTS WERE GOING TO BE HEAVILY BLUE. The red counties, in an effort to invalidate as many votes as possible, optioned to leave the ballots as they are. The blue counties, in an effort to count every ballot, optioned to help voters have their ballots count.
To come back later and complain that the red counties didn't work to validate all those ballots is a ridiculous argument. If they had, Biden would have won by an even greater margin. And to try to invalidate the election results because the red counties refused to do their jobs properly, that's sickening.
By the way, it's the JOB of an election official to use every legal means necessary to have every vote count. To make the choice to refuse to help voters, when they could, effectively disenfranchised those voters, and was UNETHICAL AND IMMORAL.
So your red buddies up in Penn, they would fit right in on this board with all the rest of you who want to overturn the will of the American people because you think you know better. The ARROGANCE of some of you. It's appalling.
interesting that all of the problems seem to benefit one side. Question. Do you want every vote counted, or every legal vote counted? Also, when one points a finger, three fingers are always pointed back at self.
The problem was the red districts trying to minimize the blue mail ins. If there is going to be an investigation, it needs to be of the red counties that were working to disenfranchise voters.
The reality is that even the red counties had a majority of blue mail in ballots. So the red counties were just trying to throw the election to their side.
The question here is only: Were the election districts allowed to help mail in voters the way that was done, with provisional ballots and mailing them a new ballot to fill out. Unless the answer is that it was denied by state law, then it's all good, and the argument that, because red counties refused to do this that this somehow invalidates the election, is false and invalid.
I asked a simple question. Do you want every vote to count, or every legal vote. As for investigations. Lets do it. Investigate the whole damn election. You good with that, or you just want red counties investigated? I say, lets investigate the whole damn thing.
Also, mail ins have too much room for fraud. We shouldn’t be doing it.
Jimmy Carter agrees
I am perfectly fine with any legitimate issue being investigated. Not a witch hunt designed to do nothing other than delay the process. Note that the DOJ was unleashed last week, and they haven't reported squat, so thinking "witch hunt" is what we are seeing at this point.
But no matter what dirty underhanded crap Trump tries to pull, these elections WILL be certified, and the Electoral College WILL be seated on time.
no need to discuss something with someone who wants illegal votes counted.
Dude,
I'm not going to be baited into your argument that every single vote cast in this country needs to be examined. That's a strawman argument and frankly, a stupid one. You want to review 160 million ballots to see if we find one that wasn't legal? Give that mess up.
As I said, substantive investigations should be done if there is evidence of systemic fraud. But not recheck all the votes cast to see if Edna voted twice.
again. No need to engage with someone who is ok with illegal votes being counted.
It's utterly useless...but it's almost impossible not to react to some of the incendiary and incredibly wrong-headed crap that @LizardGrad89 says.
