qwerty12345678

5 ms·

1.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
It doesn't say they were "blocking" the entrance, it says they gathered at the entrance holding signs. Let's be fair, as long as they were peaceful, they were perfectly within their first amendment rights whether you agr
2.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
> There's an election process with many layers of oversight, that's the 'proof'. In what world do you live in where this statement constitutes as proof . > Just because there are what might appear to be opaque ele
3.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
If the alleged fraud did take place (and I'm not sure if it did or didn't), it was likely only a handful of string-pullers and lots of useful-idiots. There was so much emotion in this election cycle (based around hatred of Trump a
4.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
I replied to this on multiple other comments in this thread. (they may be flagged or dead so may not be visible unless you have your settings set to show dead) "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply here since it's
5.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
I forgot to touch on this in my reply...If what I mentioned in my reply did in fact occur, you now understand why "recounts" wouldn't make any difference.
6.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
"Innocence until proven guilty" is relating to an individual being formally accused of a crime in a court of law. We are talking about a PUBLIC PROCESS, which in my opinion doesn't fall into the same category. The burden of
7.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
Here's the forensic report from Allied Security Operations Group. Michigan politicians did everything in their power to keep this hidden, but a judge ultimately released it. This story was blackballed by MSM and censored on social medi
8.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
Since you bring up technical backgrounds, how do you feel about the voting machines having logs erased for 2020 but not 2016? And would you be against analyzing all election machine logs related to server-activity/internet-usage/u
9.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
You're referring to Hitchens's Razor, which I believe is a flawed mindset that's used selectively as it suits people. The situation here is that the proof is very well hidden, and therefore the situation has been rendered un-
10.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
Debating with the left on this is like debating with a brick wall. You try to have a logical conversation about the basic security aspects involved here and they respond by calling you a conspiracy theorist and change the underlying subject
11.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
Between server logs disappearing, servers themselves disappearing, USB devices being plugged into voting machines throughout election night, voting machines being connected to the internet, quick destruction of paper ballots, routing of vot
12.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
Please provide references that she was in fact "telling the truth".
13.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
Technically, it IS violating free speech when anything is censored. That doesn't mean that particular speech is condoned. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that, you just don't want to understand it. Apple isn&#
14.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
So if your private water utility company decides to cut off your water access because they don't agree with your politics, would you say "welp, they're a private company and they can do as they please."? Cutting communic
15.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
Exactly. And Apple is in bed with the government. And many of us carry around Apple branded microphones (or telescreens I should say?) in our pocket. And Apple allows indirect government backdoors (unencrypted iCloud "backups", et
16.
by qwerty12345678 6y ago
This is absurd and infuriating that people are sheepishly agreeing with a mega-corporation as they literally attempt to change the definition of something in front of our eyes. Has no-one read 1984 ? All based around selectively curated em