Civilized said:
caryking said:
Civilized said:
caryking said:
Civilized said:
caryking said:
Civilized said:
caryking said:
Civilized said:
Bas2020 said:
Civilized said:
Bas2020 said:
Civilized said:
Bas2020 said:
hokiewolf said:
caryking said:
Were, it's your turn…. Hokie and Civ will die on their sword believing the crap they've been spoon fed…
what purpose does it serve for the FBI to start a riot in the Capitol? If this was the plan, why has zero people come forth to whistleblow this obvious crime?
Did any of these under cover FBI agents try to stop the riots ? Seems like many of the security folks were opening doors etc to let people in . The whole thing was weird juxtaposed that day with the 'Summer of Love BLM/Antifa riots' that now get ignored despite 50+ deaths and it's no wonder folks are confused by reaction and commentary from the media . It's lunacy how one gets ignored while the other gets blown up to cartoonish levels by corrupt politicians and media .
You're confused about why police brutality protests that turn violent (little different in that way than civil rights protests in the 1960's) are treated differently than riots and an attempt to stay in power facilitated by a sitting President in the name of allegedly massive election fraud that never happened?
This is seriously fuzzy logic.
Even if you don't think the BLM riots were at all justified, they weren't over a made-up issue and most importantly they weren't a sitting President's attempt to circumvent a peaceful transition of power.
Actually "hands up don't shoot" was a made up issue . It proved to be a justified police shooting . The riots were flamed up by Democrat and media lies while they let a U.S. city burn .
So you're saying one of these protests was for a shooting that ended up being legally justified.
OK. What about the other protests? Were most of them erroneously protesting justified police shootings?
Now do election fraud. How many of those protests, most especially Jan. 6, were for election fraud that actually occurred?
Ferguson was a made up story that resulted in....
50 people were given treatment at hospitals
250 buildings burned to the ground
$1.3 Billion dollars of damages in Ferguson alone and Billions around the country in spin off riots.
A US city that will never recover
52 people died as a result of these riots across the country including police themselves... and AA police officer David Dorn.
And you still are calling it a "protest" that wasnt a big deal... it ended up to being a manufactured political stunt? Just another race baiting hoax like Jessie Smollet , Freddie Gray and the dozens of others that end up not being true.
Manufactured? Against the backdrop of unarmed black people in this country being 3x as likely to get killed by police as whites?
There's an actual, demonstrable problem with how many people are killed by police in this country, including and especially POC.
Now you do election fraud, like the Jan 6 loons were protesting at the behest of their cult leader.
Is there an actual, demonstrable election fraud problem in this country?
Yes!! Unfortunately, you have shown to be too thick headed, to see it…
Nobody that matters has seen it Cary. Not bipartisan judges. Not bipartisan election commissions. Not legislative panels.
Not even the two firms Trump paid over $1MM in fees to find or corroborate it.
Ken Block, the founder of the second of those two firms said "No substantive voter fraud was uncovered in my investigations looking for it, nor was I able to confirm any of the outside claims of voter fraud that I was asked to look at. Every fraud claim I was asked to investigate was false."
Consequential election fraud is a completely delusional fantasy.
Civ, mail out ballots to locations that doesn't have a home…. Most people have said… it's the canvas, not the count! No one has been willing to do that. That's because it's all political and nobody wants to be wrong.
Correct, nobody wants to be wrong. But maybe more importantly they almost always respond to economic incentives. These incentives help parse fact and fiction.
Take these two firms that Trump hired to substantiate his delusions about election fraud. If the firms ignored real fraud, and claimed the election fraud claims were false when in fact there was evidence they were true, and such evidence came to light later, it would damage these firms' reputations and their businesses, potentially irreparably. No one would hire them again for similar work.
Their economic incentive is to be truthful about what they are observing, not to walk a party or political line. And yet still they claimed that the dozen+ election fraud claims they investigated were all false.
Occam's razor almost certainly applies here. The reason they are claiming they found no evidence of consequential fraud is because they found no evidence of consequential fraud.
And take the Dominion civil suit. Fox agreed to settle for 3/4 of a BILLION dollars. Why would they do this if the didn't feel like they were heading towards a potentially even higher judgment against them for knowingly spreading false election fraud claims? They knew the truth was coming out and they hedged their bet to save themselves money and further embarrassment.
Civ, you glossed over the most important piece, in my post...
it's the canvas, not the count!
When you say "it's the canvas, not the count," is this an issue that's different than all those that were already explored by the firms Trump hired?
Because at first it was definitely about a fraudulent count. Everyone (Trump, Fox, Sid Powell, Rudy G, Mike Lindell, Patrick Byrne, Newsmax, OANN, and on and on) was saying the count was a fraud.
Then they got sued to smithereens and it became clear the count was fine.
So now that we've moved on from the count, what is this now about the canvas? Is this a new made-up issue now that the vote count has been shown to be fine, just like everyone that looked at elections historically and the safeguards in place to prevent voter fraud thought it would?
Did the firms Trump hired look into the canvas? If so, what did they find? If not, why not?
Civ, you're using all these examples of discrediting election fraud. These are your examples, not mine.
How many of those did a canvas?
I honestly have no idea what canvas even means in this context. I wouldn't mind an explanation.
But regardless I'm still not clear on why this wasn't brought up and explored thoroughly in the dozens of lawsuits and investigations previously performed, some of which were by firms hired directly by Trump's team, if it was suspected that the issue of canvassing would bear fruit.
Canvassing is essentially going house to house validating the election roles with the location. They don't know how the voter, voted, just whether or not that voter exist.
BTW, the people I watch have been talking about this, from day one. In fact, I posted the Peter Navarro report, a long time ago that built him premise on this exact process.
I'll need to find the results; however, a small canvass sampling was done, in a state, whereas the results were staggeringly bad.
Civ, I can certainly argue your point of view as good as you; however, we have other facts that support a further investigation. I don't think anyone, at this point, thinks we need to look back at 2020 to fix that election; rather, a fix to the problem, we believe and/or see, needs resolving before anymore elections.
We do have epicenters that need to be looked into, at least to prove or disprove the premise. If not, we have a bunch of people that do not believe in our elections. Blame Trump all you want, but simple math makes people scratch their heads…. 81M votes?
On the illegal or criminal immigrants…
“they built the country, the reason our economy is growing”
Joe Biden
