Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
techman05
So, who is going to jail for allowing dead voters, underaged voters, or absentee voters who signed and dated request forms after the deadline? Or, I’m sure you can point out the people who went to jail after signing sworn testimony to this affect who were proven false.
130,000 documented, proven cases of voter fraud in Nevada. The numbers have been quoted several times, but I haven't paid attention to the details. I think I heard 5,000 dead people voted, 13,000 voted from a vacant commercial address (mail-in ballots), etc...such examples totaling 130,000 votes. Now, this is really, really simple...this is either true (factual) or it is not. What I am hearing from the senators conducting the hearing is this, the Repubs are stating emphatically that this is indeed factual, and the Dems just grimace and focus on another angle, such as a local court refused to hear the case based on some procedural issue. Tells me the information is factual.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dawg80
130,000 documented, proven cases of voter fraud in Nevada. The numbers have been quoted several times, but I haven't paid attention to the details. I think I heard 5,000 dead people voted, 13,000 voted from a vacant commercial address (mail-in ballots), etc...such examples totaling 130,000 votes. Now, this is really, really simple...this is either true (factual) or it is not. What I am hearing from the senators conducting the hearing is this, the Repubs are stating emphatically that this is indeed factual, and the Dems just grimace and focus on another angle, such as a local court refused to hear the case based on some procedural issue. Tells me the information is factual.
That'd be like 10% of voters!
Come on, that doesn't remotely pass the smell test. 130,000! And nobody noticed. Or nobody talked? It's just not plausible.
Even the lower claims have been scrutinized and when you get past the big press conference claims end up clearly very hollow.
https://www.statesman.com/story/news...ada/114937290/
That's really the infuriating thing here (well, one of them). You can claim whatever you want in a Tweet (although now I guess they have the "might want to double check this" indicator") or on Newsmax/OAN. But then in court you can either back off and not make the same claims (which you'll notice has been the case several times) or get blasted out of court on your merits or not even go to court as explanations arise but then there is no backing down. You just make up a new claim. And especially if the claims kinda sorta sound half-way plausible (which is not the case for many) then people watching who don't have time to follow the whole case or fact check you just accept it. And then when the election isn't overturned just buy your argument that the whole thing is illegitimate. And most of those people only become a little more jaded about politics and maybe some stop voting (or become more determined to vote than ever and volunteer with election board or run for office which would all be good) but some of them go nuts and start talking about secession or violence in the streets or call in death threats or actually commit crimes!
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
So, do these Signed affidavits only subject the person to perjury if that signed affidavit is used as evidence in court?
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dawg80
That is so utterly wrong it is comical! LOL! You keep posting this BS because you follow the socialist/fascist playbook if you spout a lie long enough people will start to believe it. Doesn't work here.
Do the research and see for yourself. You just don’t like the truth.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
techman05
So, do these Signed affidavits only subject the person to perjury if that signed affidavit is used as evidence in court?
Which signed affidavits? One of the problem with the affidavits that have been submitted in places like Michigan is that they don’t prove fraud even if you accept the facts contained in the affidavits as true. Instead, the affiant didn’t understand the process well enough to know that what they saw was actually proper. A big stack of affidavits that don’t prove something improper happened aren’t worth the weight of the paper that they are printed on.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
techman05
So, do these Signed affidavits only subject the person to perjury if that signed affidavit is used as evidence in court?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ni-vote-fraud/
Quote:
“We have evidence that we will present to the court,” Trump campaign legal adviser Jenna Ellis said.
“These people are under penalty of perjury,” Giuliani assured again about the affidavits. “Their names are on an affidavit.”
Quote:
But among the witnesses who have had their allegations aired in court, many have been dismissed by judges as inadmissible or not credible. One particularly high-profile one alleged many precincts in Michigan had more votes than actual voters, but shortly after Giuliani et al. raised the issue Thursday — alongside their pleas to take the affidavits seriously — it
fell apart.
As the Trump campaign will remind you, these are sworn statements. But according to legal experts, the jeopardy faced by those behind them is relatively minimal.
“There is a remote chance that sworn statements (if they are actually sworn statements — most documents that appear to be ‘sworn’ don’t count within the meaning of the statute) could subject the declarant to some exposure under the perjury statutes,” said Lisa Kern Griffin, an expert on evidence at Duke University, in an email. “But perjury prosecutions are rare and almost never arise from statements outside of the context of proceedings in which oaths are formally administered — such as depositions, congressional testimony, grand jury proceedings, or trial testimony.”
Quote:
A key issue is whether the affidavit is filed in court, as most filed by the Trump team haven’t been. Beyond that, any false statements would need to be deemed to be “material” to the proceedings — i.e. relevant to the actual claims. And from there, any legal jeopardy would require that the statements made were knowingly false.
In the case of affidavits from election observers, for example, it would be difficult to prove that what they were saying was false, especially in instances in which they alleged other people involved in the ballot-counting process said something to them. In addition, statements from those like the Texas security consultant who
mistook data from Minnesota to be from Michigan could be understood as an honest mistake or resulting from a lack of expertise in the subject matter — rather than an outright lie.
The Trump campaign’s affidavits also have a checkered history, to put it kindly. When they have been used in court, they’ve often been cast aside.
I guess instead of quoting the whole thing, I'd just say this article is a pretty good explanation.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
Which signed affidavits? One of the problem with the affidavits that have been submitted in places like Michigan is that they don’t prove fraud even if you accept the facts contained in the affidavits as true. Instead, the affiant didn’t understand the process well enough to know that what they saw was actually proper. A big stack of affidavits that don’t prove something improper happened aren’t worth the weight of the paper that they are printed on.
Quote:
But a closer look at the affidavits showed that many did not allege any wrongdoing with ballots. Instead, they showed poll challengers complaining about other things: a loud public-address system, mean looks from poll workers, and a Democratic poll watcher who said “Go back to the suburbs, Karen.”
So, like these knuckleheads won't be in trouble for perjury, they just aren't alleging what it's being claimed they're alleging or don't understand what they're talking about, or just happen to be wrong.
Now, whether the attorneys should face professional consequences is maybe another matter (they won't, but they should if they submitted this stuff to a court, which they did in some cases but not in others).
At the very least, in the court of public opinion they should face some consequences, but again, pretty unlikely. Because they're going to keep going (for years) to places like OAN and Newsmax and saying "liberal activist judges wouldn't listen to our air-tight case(s)" and won't get called on it (there) and people will buy it. They'll be martyrs, and sell a gazillion books and get a radio show or a podcast or a tv deal and continue to harm our society.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
Selfishly I am looking forward to a day that Republican politicians stop catering to their crazies so it will be safe not to vote Democrat. One can dream.
https://thedispatch.com/p/begun-the-gop-civil-war-has
Lot of tension in the GOP between rule of law and "the crazies."
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
inudesu
Ever notice how the Dems don’t have any “crazies”?
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PawDawg
Ever notice how the Dems don’t have any “crazies”?
They do, but the Democratic leadership don’t give them power.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
If the Dems are smart, which they aren't (although they are conniving and sneaky), they would play the Ga senate races straight. They have stolen the WH and should settle for that for now. But, I kind of think they think they can get away with trying to steal the Ga seats too. And, why not? I am thinking, though, they might get caught, so being greedy could ruin their whole fraudulent operation for future election thefts. That's usually how criminals get caught...it's always that "just one more time."
Heard that Crebs admitted Dominion software IS connected to the Internet, and that was confirmed separately, when a Georgia election official cited their recount which was sent via the Net. As a blogger pointed out this evening, it only takes one minnow and the whole system can be corrupted. That's how Target got hacked a few years ago...well, it's how all hacks occur. So in spite of all the denials that Dominion software can be accessed via the Net...it can be.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
They do, but the Democratic leadership don’t give them power.
Right! which is why Harris will soon be prez, and Crazy Bernie, AOC et al will be calling the shots.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dawg80
Heard that Crebs admitted Dominion software IS connected to the Internet, and that was confirmed separately, when a Georgia election official cited their recount which was sent via the Net. As a blogger pointed out this evening, it only takes one minnow and the whole system can be corrupted. That's how Target got hacked a few years ago...well, it's how all hacks occur. So in spite of all the denials that Dominion software can be accessed via the Net...it can be.
But then there were the recounts, including hand recounts, that aligned with the computer tallies.
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PawDawg
Ever notice how the Dems don’t have any “crazies”?
They totally do. Absolutely they do. And sometimes they war with the more sensible ones.
And sometimes it's really stark, and sometimes it's just a matter of degree.
And sometimes it's less about crazies in the sense of denying reality and just policy disagreements (that rhetorically get called crazy) and other times it's just plain crazy.
But that fact doesn't negate this republican craziness. It's partly just generally harmful to the cause in service of self craziness mixed with a little true crazy (the idiots that attacked the poor repairman because they thought he was hauling around a truckload of ballots).
Re: Democrat voter fraud is on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dawg80
If the Dems are smart, which they aren't (although they are conniving and sneaky), they would play the Ga senate races straight. They have stolen the WH and should settle for that for now. But, I kind of think they think they can get away with trying to steal the Ga seats too. And, why not? I am thinking, though, they might get caught, so being greedy could ruin their whole fraudulent operation for future election thefts. That's usually how criminals get caught...it's always that "just one more time."
Heard that Crebs admitted Dominion software IS connected to the Internet, and that was confirmed separately, when a Georgia election official cited their recount which was sent via the Net. As a blogger pointed out this evening, it only takes one minnow and the whole system can be corrupted. That's how Target got hacked a few years ago...well, it's how all hacks occur. So in spite of all the denials that Dominion software can be accessed via the Net...it can be.
WH wasn't stolen.
Only real plans to commit fraud in the runoff was from the right so far.
