Is a tiny NH town going to prove 2020 election fraud beyond a shadow of doubt?

[donnay]

Which one of those lays out the evidence for the claims in Trump's tweet?

You decide.

 

[Invisible Man]

You decide.

So none of them?

It's looking like in post #137 when you claimed that OANN laid out the evidence for those claims at the link you provided, you might have been lying, and actually were not aware of any article at that link where they did that. Were you?

If not, could you just link the actual article where that is done?

 

[donnay]

So none of them?

It's looking like in post #137 when you claimed that OANN laid out the evidence for those claims at the link you provided, you might have been lying, and actually were not aware of any article at that link where they did that. Were you?

If not, could you just link the actual article where that is done?

They did an expose' and I do not have the time now to spoon-feed you all the info.

https://www.oann.com/absoluteproof/

 

[Invisible Man]

They did an expose' and I do not have the time now to spoon-feed you all the info.

https://www.oann.com/absoluteproof/

I'm at a loss about post 137 and all your follow ups.

What is the point of claiming that they laid out evidence to substantiate the claims in Trump's tweet, and providing first the link in post 137, and then several more, when not one of those links goes to a place where they do what you said?

It's not about spoon feeding. But you never had to make the claim or provide that link in the first place if you actually weren't aware of any article in the list that came up when following that link that did what you claimed.

 

[Invisible Man]

I suspect that what happened was that Trump's tweet really was a quote from an article at OANN, but that they subsequently took that article down because they realized that they made false claims in that article and were no longer willing to stand by them.

 

[PRB]

And you came to that "conclusion" how?

CNN Is part of the Fake News Media aka the SEE BS Network so they are NOT a reliable source.

.

Exactly! He's a paid shill.

 

[PRB]

I'm not a Trump supporter.

That's the problem.

 

[Invisible Man]

The extent has been proven, it was the largest landslide in history and Rand not only refused to object to the fraudulent slates but made the ridiculous claim that he couldn't and that the states have a right to cheat if they want

I don't have to provide an exact number and can't because so far nobody will have the investigations required to provide an exact number.

Which one is it? Has the extent of election fraud been proven? Or have the investigations that are a prerequisite to proving the extent of election fraud not been done yet?

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

Bunk.
The extent has been proven, it was the largest landslide in history and Rand not only refused to object to the fraudulent slates but made the ridiculous claim that he couldn't and that the states have a right to cheat if they want.

Should states be allowed to cheat if they want? Why not? Should Governors and Mayors be allowed to let riots continue if they want? Should States and Cities decide they want more or less police present? Should they be able to decide what type of weapons and vehicles they use to neutralize crime in their own city or states?

 

[jmdrake]

Which one is it? Has the extent of election fraud been proven? Or have the investigations that are a prerequisite to proving the extent of election fraud not been done yet?

You have exposed the [MENTION=65299]Swordsmyth[/MENTION] paradox. Claim something is proven by pointing out that it isn't.

 

[jmdrake]

Technically, President Trump was just quoting journalists at OAN. However, their website lays it all out quite well.

https://www.oann.com/tag/voter-fraud/

I'm not debating against Trump's 2.7 million flip number. Quite the contrary. Even with a 2.7 million vote flip Trump lost the popular vote. He might have truly won the election, but there's no way it was by the "largest landslide in history." I'm calling out [MENTION=65299]Swordsmyth[/MENTION]'s hyperbole and BS for what it is.

 

[donnay]

I'm not debating against Trump's 2.7 million flip number. Quite the contrary. Even with a 2.7 million vote flip Trump lost the popular vote. He might have truly won the election, but there's no way it was by the "largest landslide in history." I'm calling out [MENTION=65299]Swordsmyth[/MENTION]'s hyperbole and BS for what it is.

So you think Biden won the popular vote?

 

[Invisible Man]

So you think Biden won the popular vote?

There's a big difference between saying Trump won the popular vote and saying he won it by the largest margin in history.

 

[jmdrake]

So you think Biden won the popular vote?

Going by Trump's own numbers and applying simple arithmetic? Yes. Take Trump's vote flip count of 2.7, double it to 5.4 million. The official number is that Biden won by 7 million. Take away 5.4 million from Biden and he still beats Trump by 1.6 million votes. I'll throw Trump another 1 million votes for other miscellaneous types of fraud. Trump still loses the popular vote by 600,000. Of course the slanted media coverage had a lot to do with that as well such as the admitted suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story. But that doesn't mean Trump somehow won the popular vote. But hey, if you have numbers, even made up numbers, that show different I'm willing to hear them. Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 and that was without having Dr. Fauci undermine him constantly.

 

[jmdrake]

There's a big difference between saying Trump won the popular vote and saying he won it by the largest margin in history.

True. But at this point I don't even have a solid allegation from Trump himself that he won the popular vote. I know Trump said that 2.7 votes were "flipped." That's a 5.4 million vote move. it still leaves Trump 1.6 million short of a popular vote win. He lost the popular vote in 2016. He most likely lost the popular vote in 2020. He might have won the electoral college vote again in 2020.

 

[Invisible Man]

Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 and that was without having Dr. Fauci undermine him constantly.

You'll be hard pressed to find Trumpers who concede that point.

They continue to repeat the claim Trump himself made that Hillary received 3 to 5 million illegal votes. How did Trump and his followers arrive at the number 3 to 5 million? By no other basis than the fact that that's the number that he would need in order to claim that he beat her in the popular vote.

 

[Invisible Man]

True. But at this point I don't even have a solid allegation from Trump himself that he won the popular vote.

He has repeatedly claimed that he won in a landslide. I haven't seen him put a number to it. Normally, I would infer at minimum winning the popular vote.

However, on the other hand, Trump and his followers also repeatedly called his victory over Hillary a landslide, which they based just on the official results apart from additional assertions they made about election fraud in that election too. So I suppose that calling it a landslide doesn't necessarily mean he claimed to have won the popular vote.

I'm not sure though. I have a hunch that with some digging I could find something where he either outright claims he won the popular vote in 2020 or says something that implies it.

 

[TheTexan]

He has repeatedly claimed that he won in a landslide. I haven't seen him put a number to it. Normally, I would infer at minimum winning the popular vote.

However, on the other hand, Trump and his followers also repeatedly called his victory over Hillary a landslide, which they based just on the official results apart from additional assertions they made about election fraud in that election too. So I suppose that calling it a landslide doesn't necessarily mean he claimed to have won the popular vote.

I'm not sure though. I have a hunch that with some digging I could find something where he either outright claims he won the popular vote in 2020 or says something that implies it.

He probably did win by some amount more than the official numbers. I doubt the leftists got so good at cheating without at least some practice in 2016.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Which one is it? Has the extent of election fraud been proven? Or have the investigations that are a prerequisite to proving the extent of election fraud not been done yet?

You have exposed the @Swordsmyth paradox. Claim something is proven by pointing out that it isn't.

I can show you the vast extent of the ocean without being able to tell you the number of raindrops in it.
That is where we are.

The mail in ballots alone account for tens of millions of fraudulent votes but we don't know exactly how many.

 

[Swordsmyth]

That is one report of some of the votes switched, destroyed and invented, we have seen evidence of far more and Trump does not say that is the limit of it.

I don't have to provide an exact number and can't because so far nobody will have the investigations required to provide an exact number.

The fraud amounted to tens of millions of votes and erased the biggest landslide in history, Trump won more votes than any POTUS ever even after all of the fraud and there is no way Biden came anywhere close based on the evidence of fraud we have and the total lack of popularity and enthusiasm for him combined with his total wreck of a campaign.

...