4 ms·

The first one where there were too many elderly votes. I hadn't heard that one, seems like a low effort issue that is easy to debunk. The first problem in Penn

The first one where there were too many elderly votes. I hadn't heard that one, seems like a low effort issue that is easy to debunk. The first problem in Pennsylvania was that they kept all republican observers a football field length away from anything. On November 5th the Penn Judge ruled that the republicans can get closer and actually observe vote counts. The stupid republican vote observers didn't bring their binoculars and therefore didn't observe anything. Worse yet, Penn Democrats violated this judge's order to give access to the observers. When they started recording showing the fraud they got thrown out. The second problem is what the article confirms. As Trump said, 'Voting needs to stop.' but that's the problem with mail-in ballots being accepted up to 3 days after the election. The third problem is Benford's law. The actual math shows a confirmed amount of fraud occurred. The 4th problem in Penn is that there's video showing workers filling out ballots. That's just Penn. Michigan threw out all republican observers because of mask violations and 'racism' and such. Immediately after they did that... 138,000 votes showed up, 100% for biden. https://twitter.com/ericjgibbs/status/1324088038830624768 https://twitter.com/ericjgibbs/status/1324088038830624768 How can anyone watch this video and not question the veracity of Michigan's vote. Then there's Wisconsin where republican observers were put in a separate room with a video cam feed. As per the covid rules. That's basically useless and again benford's law was violated for over 65,000 votes. Somehow 100% for biden. Trump won Ohio by quite a margin and realistically should have won Wisconsin and Michigan by about the same amount. Let's just assume for a second there was absolutely no election fraud. The perception is everything. The political divide in the USA over the last 10 years has largely speaking been Democrats. Now it's going to be both.

fatheart 6y ago
Quick Google searches debunk most of your claims. A couple of them have been covered extensively. The fact that you still believe them days later highlights your bias, or the bias of your news feeds.
- sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  >Quick Google searches debunk most of your claims. A couple of them have been covered extensively. The fact that you still believe them days later highlights your bias, or the bias of your news feeds. What exactly has been debunked? That the Penn Judge ordered such that observers can up-close view the count? https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pennsylvania-judge-permits-campaign-observers-close-view-ballot/story?id=74040279 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pennsylvania-judge-permits-c... Benford's law is debunked? Could you provide a link disproving the law please? Voting employees voting debunked? Not at all. It's a real video. People are arguing that they were 'fixing' damaged ballots. Which is allowed by the rules. Except let's rotate back to the observers being placed a football field length away. This is not transparent. Obviously this is not 'debunked' but AT BEST the argument is that it's a completely non-transparent process that places huge doubt on the process. I even provide the video showing the republicans having been thrown out of the vote counting building in Michigan. The windows were being covered up. You're right, I have not provided any evidence at all showing fraud. Except that's because they were thrown out. Blocking windows and blocking people from video recording the vote from outside is quite shifty. However, there's clearly nothing debunked here. I provided the video that cant be debunked. Wisconsin hasn't been debunked. Wisconsin has an open observer policy meaning anyone can show up. Any amount of people could show up. They setup covid rules such that they basically couldn't observe by placing them in a room and a livestream. I have provided no evidence of fraud, but that's because the observers were blocked from doing their job. So again you said most of my claims are debunked but they are inheritantly not debunkable. They aren't even debatable, but they also don't necessarily prove fraud occurred. You assert that it highlights my bias. Here's the even more interesting thing, I'm not American. I'm not in the USA. I have no need for bias. I'm an objective viewer here. You have projected your own feeling of bias. It sounds like your news has 'debunked' these claims but it absolutely has not. You should take another look at your own echo chamber. Denying reality isn't going to make the issue go away. The perception that the election was stolen is quite clear. It wasn't Russian agents in Michigan cardboarding the windows. In fact you should see that Michigan video restricting poll watchers from entering that building as election fraud by itself. Poll watchers dont need any nomination from a party. Everyone can be a poll watcher and legally are allowed to go in that building. It was entirely illegal for them to close those doors.

fatheart 6y ago

Quick Google searches debunk most of your claims. A couple of them have been covered extensively. The fact that you still believe them days later highlights your bias, or the bias of your news feeds.

sleepysysadmin 6y ago
>Quick Google searches debunk most of your claims. A couple of them have been covered extensively. The fact that you still believe them days later highlights your bias, or the bias of your news feeds. What exactly has been debunked? That the Penn Judge ordered such that observers can up-close view the count? https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pennsylvania-judge-permits-campaign-observers-close-view-ballot/story?id=74040279 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pennsylvania-judge-permits-c... Benford's law is debunked? Could you provide a link disproving the law please? Voting employees voting debunked? Not at all. It's a real video. People are arguing that they were 'fixing' damaged ballots. Which is allowed by the rules. Except let's rotate back to the observers being placed a football field length away. This is not transparent. Obviously this is not 'debunked' but AT BEST the argument is that it's a completely non-transparent process that places huge doubt on the process. I even provide the video showing the republicans having been thrown out of the vote counting building in Michigan. The windows were being covered up. You're right, I have not provided any evidence at all showing fraud. Except that's because they were thrown out. Blocking windows and blocking people from video recording the vote from outside is quite shifty. However, there's clearly nothing debunked here. I provided the video that cant be debunked. Wisconsin hasn't been debunked. Wisconsin has an open observer policy meaning anyone can show up. Any amount of people could show up. They setup covid rules such that they basically couldn't observe by placing them in a room and a livestream. I have provided no evidence of fraud, but that's because the observers were blocked from doing their job. So again you said most of my claims are debunked but they are inheritantly not debunkable. They aren't even debatable, but they also don't necessarily prove fraud occurred. You assert that it highlights my bias. Here's the even more interesting thing, I'm not American. I'm not in the USA. I have no need for bias. I'm an objective viewer here. You have projected your own feeling of bias. It sounds like your news has 'debunked' these claims but it absolutely has not. You should take another look at your own echo chamber. Denying reality isn't going to make the issue go away. The perception that the election was stolen is quite clear. It wasn't Russian agents in Michigan cardboarding the windows. In fact you should see that Michigan video restricting poll watchers from entering that building as election fraud by itself. Poll watchers dont need any nomination from a party. Everyone can be a poll watcher and legally are allowed to go in that building. It was entirely illegal for them to close those doors.