DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Resounding victory in court for True the Vote over Stacy Abrams, Mark Elias, and the DOJ today. They sued True the Vote in December of 2020 for voter intimidation and got slapped back. TTV found that over 364,000 voters were still on the voter roles when the 2020 election when they had either moved out of the county or out of State. TTV gave this information to Georgia Secretary of State and he did nothing about it and it effected the 2020 Presidential election and the two Senate Seats in December of 2020. But there is no voter fraud according to the left and posters here.

Slowly the fraud it coming out.

https://truthsocial.com/@truethevote/posts/111688681286317797

---

Not just the LEFT. GA Gov and SOS are RINOs.

Aired a few years back the 1st time. Mockingbird media would not cover it. Military digitally prevented HRC's steal of the 2016 election. Then the 2020 election was allowed to be stolen. You'll understand the basics at some point. We are experiencing the greatest crisis in human history.

HILLARY WAS SUPPOSED TO WIN 2016!! According to the PAYOFFS.
This is DEEP STATE!! voting machines RIGGED!! people are
INSERTED... pic.twitter.com/KEXsIOtzKv

— Tommy Greenberg (@tommyrazorcuts) January 2, 2024

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The # escapes me at the moment, but a huge # of PA counties produced votes totaling 110-115% more than the actual # of registered voters in those counties. A typical % of votes to registered voters across the country ranges from 50% to 70%. The truth in PA is coming .....as is the truth in Az, Mi, Wi, Va, Ga and even Tn........not to mention swing counties across the nation. Orchestrated systematic voter fraud and digital theft. It's overwhelming.

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

---

unnecessarily aggressive - I love this!! What the Hell does that even mean??

All those examples, above, are just red-herrings... The same red-herrings you think were part of the 2020 election integrity groups arguments...

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

---

unnecessarily aggressive - I love this!! What the Hell does that even mean??

All those examples, above, are just red-herrings... The same red-herrings you think were part of the 2020 election integrity groups arguments...

---

It means that en masse voter role "clean up" efforts should be performed to ensure they don't remove real voters with trivial and correctable discrepancies on their voter registration.

In this country we've already established that the downside risk of consequential election fraud is extraordinarily low. We're coming off of 2020 presidential election that was extraordinarily secure despite having the highest fraction of mail-in votes in our country's history.

Rich that you talk about a red herring in the context of these sorts of efforts by the right. The true red herring is this faulty premise that there is a bunch of consequential fraud out there that needs to get corrected or else we're going to have (another) stolen election.

Most of these election security measures are Republicans walking around with a solution looking for a problem and also knowing that what they're proposing often disproportionately impacts the poor, minorities, and young adults. Wonder how those demographics often vote? You think that's a coincidence?

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

---

unnecessarily aggressive - I love this!! What the Hell does that even mean??

All those examples, above, are just red-herrings... The same red-herrings you think were part of the 2020 election integrity groups arguments...

---

It means that en masse voter role "clean up" efforts should be performed to ensure they don't remove real voters with trivial and correctable discrepancies on their voter registration.

In this country we've already established that the downside risk of consequential election fraud is extraordinarily low. We're coming off of 2020 presidential election that was extraordinarily secure despite having the highest fraction of mail-in votes in our country's history.

Rich that you talk about a red herring in the context of these sorts of efforts by the right. The true red herring is this faulty premise that there is a bunch of consequential fraud out there that needs to get corrected or else we're going to have (another) stolen election.

Most of these election security measures are Republicans walking around with a solution looking for a problem and also knowing that what they're proposing often disproportionately impacts the poor, minorities, and young adults. Wonder how those demographics often vote? You think that's a coincidence?

---

Civ, that post is about as ridiculous as people saying… we don't have an immigration problem at the border.

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

---

unnecessarily aggressive - I love this!! What the Hell does that even mean??

All those examples, above, are just red-herrings... The same red-herrings you think were part of the 2020 election integrity groups arguments...

---

It means that en masse voter role "clean up" efforts should be performed to ensure they don't remove real voters with trivial and correctable discrepancies on their voter registration.

In this country we've already established that the downside risk of consequential election fraud is extraordinarily low. We're coming off of 2020 presidential election that was extraordinarily secure despite having the highest fraction of mail-in votes in our country's history.

Rich that you talk about a red herring in the context of these sorts of efforts by the right. The true red herring is this faulty premise that there is a bunch of consequential fraud out there that needs to get corrected or else we're going to have (another) stolen election.

Most of these election security measures are Republicans walking around with a solution looking for a problem and also knowing that what they're proposing often disproportionately impacts the poor, minorities, and young adults. Wonder how those demographics often vote? You think that's a coincidence?

---

Civ, that post is about as ridiculous as people saying… we don't have an immigration problem at the border.

---

It's the standard bull**** fear porn. "Disenfranchising minorities and poor people!" Liberals are so racist and elitist. They believe minorities and poor people are incompetent.

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

---

unnecessarily aggressive - I love this!! What the Hell does that even mean??

All those examples, above, are just red-herrings... The same red-herrings you think were part of the 2020 election integrity groups arguments...

---

It means that en masse voter role "clean up" efforts should be performed to ensure they don't remove real voters with trivial and correctable discrepancies on their voter registration.

In this country we've already established that the downside risk of consequential election fraud is extraordinarily low. We're coming off of 2020 presidential election that was extraordinarily secure despite having the highest fraction of mail-in votes in our country's history.

Rich that you talk about a red herring in the context of these sorts of efforts by the right. The true red herring is this faulty premise that there is a bunch of consequential fraud out there that needs to get corrected or else we're going to have (another) stolen election.

Most of these election security measures are Republicans walking around with a solution looking for a problem and also knowing that what they're proposing often disproportionately impacts the poor, minorities, and young adults. Wonder how those demographics often vote? You think that's a coincidence?

---

Civ, that post is about as ridiculous as people saying… we don't have an immigration problem at the border.

---

So we've got a big election fraud problem in this county?

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

---

unnecessarily aggressive - I love this!! What the Hell does that even mean??

All those examples, above, are just red-herrings... The same red-herrings you think were part of the 2020 election integrity groups arguments...

---

It means that en masse voter role "clean up" efforts should be performed to ensure they don't remove real voters with trivial and correctable discrepancies on their voter registration.

In this country we've already established that the downside risk of consequential election fraud is extraordinarily low. We're coming off of 2020 presidential election that was extraordinarily secure despite having the highest fraction of mail-in votes in our country's history.

Rich that you talk about a red herring in the context of these sorts of efforts by the right. The true red herring is this faulty premise that there is a bunch of consequential fraud out there that needs to get corrected or else we're going to have (another) stolen election.

Most of these election security measures are Republicans walking around with a solution looking for a problem and also knowing that what they're proposing often disproportionately impacts the poor, minorities, and young adults. Wonder how those demographics often vote? You think that's a coincidence?

---

Civ, that post is about as ridiculous as people saying… we don't have an immigration problem at the border.

---

So we've got a big election fraud problem in this county?

---

I don't know… liberal and establishment judges will not allow an adjudication of allegation.

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

---

unnecessarily aggressive - I love this!! What the Hell does that even mean??

All those examples, above, are just red-herrings... The same red-herrings you think were part of the 2020 election integrity groups arguments...

---

It means that en masse voter role "clean up" efforts should be performed to ensure they don't remove real voters with trivial and correctable discrepancies on their voter registration.

In this country we've already established that the downside risk of consequential election fraud is extraordinarily low. We're coming off of 2020 presidential election that was extraordinarily secure despite having the highest fraction of mail-in votes in our country's history.

Rich that you talk about a red herring in the context of these sorts of efforts by the right. The true red herring is this faulty premise that there is a bunch of consequential fraud out there that needs to get corrected or else we're going to have (another) stolen election.

Most of these election security measures are Republicans walking around with a solution looking for a problem and also knowing that what they're proposing often disproportionately impacts the poor, minorities, and young adults. Wonder how those demographics often vote? You think that's a coincidence?

---

Civ, that post is about as ridiculous as people saying… we don't have an immigration problem at the border.

---

So we've got a big election fraud problem in this county?

---

I don't know… liberal and establishment judges will not allow an adjudication of allegation.

---

It's not two or three cases Cary. It's like eighty or ninety.

A small handful maybe you get unlucky with bad or highly partisan judges. If you push 100 cases you've got plenty of conservative judges ruling against the plaintiffs or throwing this BS out for lack of merit or standing.

And if they were actually worth still pursuing, what did the appellate courts say? Did the initial rulings survive appeal? If so, was that because of even more liberal or establishment judges?

Or were they never appealed because everyone knows they're BS?

This "liberal or establishment judges" bit is complete BS and you know it.

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

caryking said:

---

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Catherine Englebrecht on with Steve Bannon talking about the massive win against Elias, Abrams, and the DOJ. Voter rolls are in complete chaos and this win in court gives citizens the chance to help clean them up. But again there is no fraud going on. If you keep believing that BS then there is no hope for you.

https://rumble.com/v44zeft-catherine-englebrecht-discusses-favorable-ruling-in-georgia-voter-role-laws.html

---

The voter rolls are the easiest thing to clean up, and… ineptness has left them vulnerable!

---

Civ would call cleaning up the voter rolls "voter suppression"...

---

No I wouldn't, not as long as the"clean up" efforts are in good faith and not unnecessarily aggressive and executed in such a way that allow for due process and for reasonable inconsistencies like address changes, misspellings, house/apartment number presentation format, etc. to be accommodated without preventing such voters from voting.

Wouldn't call voter ID laws voter suppression either.

I'm fine with taking reasonable steps to ensure election security, like we already do. Our elections are already some of the most democratic and secure in the world.

What I'm not fine with is doing what some Republicans around the country continue trying to do, which is to inhibit votes from being cast not for reasons related to potential malfeasance, but for reasons glaringly and obviously related to the voters in question being likely to vote Democrat.

I'm not fine with Republicans trying to eliminate or prevent polling locations at colleges; for standing in the way of election materials being translated into Spanish and other languages, as is required by law; unnecessarily reducing the number of polling places in minority neighborhoods; or any other embarrassingly transparent attempts to simply prevent their political opponents from voting.

What I'm also not fine with is sloppy and in some cases intentionally dishonest mislabeling of tightening up election processes as being evidence of past consequential, outcome-determinative election fraud when there has not ever been evidence of such, like some people do on here.

There are multiple, layered processes that have been in place for eons that prevent widespread or consequential fraud, even in locations where voter rolls need to be cleaned up, or were there was extensive mail-in balloting in 2020.

Wanting to make sure processes are as tight as they can be, without inhibiting the reasonable ability of the poor, the elderly, the disabled, ESL, minorities, and young people to vote is fine.

But that desire to "clean up" processes is an altogether separate issue from actually finding evidence of such processes leading to actual fraud in past elections.

---

unnecessarily aggressive - I love this!! What the Hell does that even mean??

All those examples, above, are just red-herrings... The same red-herrings you think were part of the 2020 election integrity groups arguments...

---

It means that en masse voter role "clean up" efforts should be performed to ensure they don't remove real voters with trivial and correctable discrepancies on their voter registration.

In this country we've already established that the downside risk of consequential election fraud is extraordinarily low. We're coming off of 2020 presidential election that was extraordinarily secure despite having the highest fraction of mail-in votes in our country's history.

Rich that you talk about a red herring in the context of these sorts of efforts by the right. The true red herring is this faulty premise that there is a bunch of consequential fraud out there that needs to get corrected or else we're going to have (another) stolen election.

Most of these election security measures are Republicans walking around with a solution looking for a problem and also knowing that what they're proposing often disproportionately impacts the poor, minorities, and young adults. Wonder how those demographics often vote? You think that's a coincidence?

---

Civ, that post is about as ridiculous as people saying… we don't have an immigration problem at the border.

---

So we've got a big election fraud problem in this county?

---

I don't know… liberal and establishment judges will not allow an adjudication of allegation.

---

It's not two or three cases Cary. It's like eighty or ninety.

A small handful maybe you get unlucky with bad or highly partisan judges. If you push 100 cases you've got plenty of conservative judges ruling against the plaintiffs or throwing this BS out for lack of merit or standing.

And if they were actually worth still pursuing, what did the appellate courts say? Did the initial rulings survive appeal? If so, was that because of even more liberal or establishment judges?

Or were they never appealed because everyone knows they're BS?

This "liberal or establishment judges" bit is complete BS and you know it.

---

Where is that link showing all the cases?

As Trump has told us several times......."we caught em' all".

RE: the successful launch of the X-37 space plane on its second consecutive Top-Secret mission.


If, as I believe it was used to monitor mainly the 2020 election as an orbiting data center on its historic 908 days (9+8 as a nod) in orbit, then this would similarly serve the same purpose for the upcoming 2024 election in November.

Similarly, this ensures no one has physical access to the data center physically nor can it be accessed by hackers as it isn't connected to any land-based internet backbone network.

I believe that Spaceforce, created shortly after the creation of Starlink (which I believe to belongs to us as well, Elon being the public face for the time being) manages the satellite constellation which then provides Space Force it's own private global network - which is probably even encrypted with a quantum firewall IMO.

And if white hats were going to manage the entire course of events going down all around us big picture, having a secure network to communicate globally without risking your comms being intercepted by your enemies makes the most sense to me.

So, with the records of the 2020 steal in the bag (hence we have it all which was necessary for historical records needed to justify what had to be done in response) we can now similarly record the upcoming election to prove it WASN'T compromised
and was all above board.

At this point, I don't think Biden can win an honest election, and I also don't think his entourage have any intention of being voted out of office. The public doesn't view him like they did in 2020 and the public will probably watching the election process a lot more closely this year. What that portends, is anyone's guess.

Oldsouljer said:

---

At this point, I don't think Biden can win an honest election, and I also don't think his entourage have any intention of being voted out of office. The public doesn't view him like they did in 2020 and the public will probably watching the election process a lot more closely this year. What that portends, is anyone's guess.

---

Are you saying Biden will not do a peaceful transition?

caryking said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

At this point, I don't think Biden can win an honest election, and I also don't think his entourage have any intention of being voted out of office. The public doesn't view him like they did in 2020 and the public will probably watching the election process a lot more closely this year. What that portends, is anyone's guess.

---

Are you saying Biden will not do a peaceful transition?

---

I'm saying they'll do anything to stay in the White House. Anything.

Oldsouljer said:

---

caryking said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

At this point, I don't think Biden can win an honest election, and I also don't think his entourage have any intention of being voted out of office. The public doesn't view him like they did in 2020 and the public will probably watching the election process a lot more closely this year. What that portends, is anyone's guess.

---

Are you saying Biden will not do a peaceful transition?

---

I'm saying they'll do anything to stay in the White House. Anything.

---

I waited for your reply. Beware of false flags.........but a real event. Twin Towers got us into a Middle East war. Hamas over the most secure border wall system in the world provided an excuse for the Israeli Govt to attack "all the people there in the Gaza Strip.

Create the crisis and have a viable sellable reactive act ready to implement.

Look for another virus/plague, a terrorist attack inside our borders, a nuclear ICBM scare/standoff, chaos by CCP agents but blaming American patriots, etc. On record, a WEF insider has indicated the last resort will be some sort of a "fake alien invasion". Now go back to sleep #Gobbler.

wonder if da Sieve knows the Brunson case still lingers at the SCOTUS?

;-)

BREAKING: At long last, this scumbag is being investigated! pic.twitter.com/Co8gOkPuLS

— ULTRA MAGA PARTY 👑 (@MaxEvansUMP) January 14, 2024

This is the best explanation and the HUGE news that isn't being talked about is this was the one case out of all of the cases against Trump that was charges brought by a state in which state convictions can't be pardoned.

If this get's dismissed Trump will be able to pardon… https://t.co/IO35AQFpI3

— Wendy Patterson (@wendyp4545) January 15, 2024

Yes!!! 🙌 That’s just the one of many!Go get him!

Breaking: Georgia State Senators Introduce Legislation to REMOVE Dirty Brad Raffensperger from State Election Board and Open Up Investigations Into His Alleged Violations | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft https://t.co/ti7KUJCGiP

— Lisa MAGADONIAN💃🏻💋🌹🍷 (@Lisahudsonchow7) January 15, 2024

#daSieve says "it makes perfect sense both mathematically and statistically'......... LOL

You didn’t defeat Trump, you just cheated.

— Mr. Hanky (@MrHankyPoopoo) January 16, 2024

#Sieve, is this guy telling us a lie to our face?

“We have put together I think the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” pic.twitter.com/BjXcIjwjj0

— CitizenLenz (@CitizenLenz) June 26, 2023

I'm sure Trump doesn't have the #'s..........but he did say "we got it all". Who's "we"?

And OANN reporting it too, you'd think they would join the boycott of info supporting Trump's wild claims, right Sieve?

pic.twitter.com/Bx8FjePiXP

— 🍀Qᵁᴱᴱᴺ🔰ᴹᴬᴳᴬ🔰ᵁᴸᵀᴿA🍀 (@QueenMAGAUltra) January 18, 2024

But Basement Joe got 81 million and couldn't fill up a MacDonald's parking lot for a rally. Yep, and #Seive, you believe 81 million.

Hmmm… In case you didn’t know how Joe got those “81 million”votes! 👇🏻🙄🤬 These machines must be banned! Agree? pic.twitter.com/00Q4FDjAzZ

— PammsyNow (@NowPammsy) January 18, 2024

In Jan 2021 I watched this on a couple of streamed shows........and it was here too. There's a lot of info that's been censored...........enjoy the show!

REWIND AND REWIND MANY TIMES AND LISTEN AGAIN AND AGAIN Jan 18, 2021

PEACEFUL TRANSITION TO MILITARY POWER

via CaptKyle pic.twitter.com/7dknFUMWqt

— Jack Straw (@JackStr42679640) January 19, 2024

Proof that Dominion Machines can be hacked and vote totals changed in a Georgia court in real time.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/breaking-professor-election-expert-j-halderman-hacks-dominion/

Here is an interview with a reporter who was at the trial.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/gig-is-up-exclusive-local-reporter-describes-election/

But there is no evidence of voter fraud. Keep on believing that fallacy. I know some on here will.

DrummerboyWolf said:

---

Proof that Dominion Machines can be hacked and vote totals changed in a Georgia court in real time.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/breaking-professor-election-expert-j-halderman-hacks-dominion/

Here is an interview with a reporter who was at the trial.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/gig-is-up-exclusive-local-reporter-describes-election/

But there is no evidence of voter fraud. Keep on believing that fallacy. I know some on here will.

---

Correct, there is no evidence of consequential voter fraud. Glad we agree.

If you think that's incorrect, show us the evidence that hackers have attempted to exploit any of the identified vulnerabilities, or that any such hack has occurred in previous elections.

You keep conflating the tiny possiblity of a bad outcome, a possibilty that is hedged by the same disincentives that discourage bad actors from attempting to fraudulently hack mail-in voting, or vote in other people's names in person in states that don't have strong voter ID laws, etc. with it ACTUALLY having happened.

So yes, go shore up vulnerabilities in systems. We're all better for it.

But stop acting like any of those vulnerabilities have been exploited in past elections in ways that modified the outcome of elections because there is zero evidence of that.

I'm really looking forward to these systems being updated to everyone's satisfaction because then during the next election that the election fraud folks lose they'll have to actually reckon with their candidates sucking instead of just trying to pin their election loss on some fake fraud BS.

#daSieve........."prove it, prove it, etc"........LOL He'll ride that wave of cheating for as long as it is allowed to last.

Don't get worked up and have your blood pressure get out of kilter, Sieve. ;-)