Re-boot The fight is still on

[Route 45]

Mike Pence ‘has told Trump he cannot overturn election result’

Joint session of Congress set to ratify Joe Biden victory

www.independent.co.uk

But

Trump says he, Pence in ‘total agreement’ VP has ‘power’ to block certification of ‘illegal’ election

President Trump on Tuesday said he and Vice President Mike Pence are "in total agreement" that the vice president "has the power to act" and block the certification of the 2020 presidential election results on Wednesday.

www.foxnews.com

So...

 

[Timjoebillybob]

There was an Edison School that was a polling place in Detroit. It also occurred to me a hurried reading of 'Detroit Edison Co' could be interpreted as 'Detroit, Edison Co(unty)'

Except it didn't say 'Detroit Edison Co' , nothing near that. Here is what it said.

In another case for Edison County, MI, Vice President Biden received more than 100% of the votes at 5:59 PM EST on November 4, 2020 and again he received 99.61% of the votes at 2:23 PM EST on November 5, 2020. These distributions are cause for concern and indicate fraud.

And more...

the-daily-trumpet.com

This domain may be for sale!

the-daily-trumpet.com

This guy is highly credentialed...

View attachment 119809

Then why didn't they actually use him in the lawsuits? He was listed in one, then they amended it and removed him? Why would that be?

Wait, what? I was replying to your comment about looking at the sources the fact checkers use. I said that should be the responsibility of whomever is quoting the fact checkers. In other words, if Jetta says “fact checkers say X is false” it should be Jetta who cites the source of the fact checkers saying that, and the source the fact checkers used to come to that conclusion.

Shouldn't it be the responsibility to fact check as best they can any claims they post? I've "fact checked" several that were wrong, generally only took me a minute or three and my google fu isn't that strong.

I think holding folks, to a perfect standard, that are doing their best (because the deep state denied anyone access to the best legal talent) to prepare lawsuits and affidavits that normally would be done over many months in short order is unreasonable.

So I don't even care...

Hey you're learning. You now at least admit that Wood and Powell are substandard attorneys... Perhaps that's really why none of their suits went anywhere?

I don’t need a fact checker to tell me something isn’t BS when I watched it come from the bulls ass. You are free to believe a “fact checker” if it helps you sleep at night, I for one know BS when I see it. We saw video of ballots being pulled from under tables, while your highly regarded fact checkers told us they were legitimate votes that just so happened to be stored in a different location than the others.

Did you see any more of that video than they wanted you to see? When that video was first shared here I asked a question. And that was why didn't they show when the boxes were put under the table? They showed the table being set up, and then the boxes being pulled out later, but not when they were put under. Later I saw a bit more of the video that was shared by one of the local news stations there, and it did show when. It was when the room was full of people including poll watchers. It even showed the boxes getting filled and sealed with ballots that had been opened their. Which was when the people who were opening the envelopes were leaving for the night.

Now ask yourself, why would they leave that out? Could it be because they intended to deceive you about what actually happened?

 

[Ingomike]

The cheat is proven and obvious to anyone openminded.

The Cheat In Plain Sight

townhall.com

It’s in the data. It was “certified.” It was “recounted.”

Independent data scientists who are able to spot much more complex data manipulation for clients—who have the most to lose (banks and financial institutions)—were able to easily contextualize and explain the proof from the data itself.

Proof of what?

Election cheating—the data proves it!

Justin Mealey, is a former electronic warfare specialist for the U.S. Navy and the CIA. David Lobue is a data scientist whose skills have been in demand across a wide variety of industries. This past week the two appeared before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on elections for the State of Georgia.

 

[Ingomike]

Except it didn't say 'Detroit Edison Co' , nothing near that. Here is what it said.



Then why didn't they actually use him in the lawsuits? He was listed in one, then they amended it and removed him? Why would that be?

Shouldn't it be the responsibility to fact check as best they can any claims they post? I've "fact checked" several that were wrong, generally only took me a minute or three and my google fu isn't that strong.

Hey you're learning. You now at least admit that Wood and Powell are substandard attorneys... Perhaps that's really why none of their suits went anywhere?

Did you see any more of that video than they wanted you to see? When that video was first shared here I asked a question. And that was why didn't they show when the boxes were put under the table? They showed the table being set up, and then the boxes being pulled out later, but not when they were put under. Later I saw a bit more of the video that was shared by one of the local news stations there, and it did show when. It was when the room was full of people including poll watchers. It even showed the boxes getting filled and sealed with ballots that had been opened their. Which was when the people who were opening the envelopes were leaving for the night.

Now ask yourself, why would they leave that out? Could it be because they intended to deceive you about what actually happened?

Are you just a troll? Powell and Wood are clearly not election specialists attorney's, anyone that would review their resume would know that. They are excellent attorney's and are not done yet. Buckle up...

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Are you just a troll? Powell and Wood are clearly not election specialists attorney's, anyone that would review their resume would know that. They are excellent attorney's and are not done yet. Buckle up...

Nah, not a troll. Just couldn't help . But in seriousness, they aren't election specialist attorneys as you said. Do you think that might be at least some of the problems with their suits being tossed? I'm not going to use a criminal defense attorney for a complicated civil matter and vice versa. But why exactly do you say that Powell and Wood are excellent attorneys?

 

[foszoe]

The first article is from 2019, the 2nd article shows 2 pictures, neither of which showed the size of the “crowd”. It only describes, in words, 100-150 cars present.


WHOA! 150 cars. That’s gotta be a sign of his overwhelming magnitude of support, right?!

Ha. Even the pictures they provided doesn’t have over 20 people in them. But sure, “150” cars for Biden. I’m impressed. Really. I am.

Wanted to see if the hard-core Trump supporters would defend the explicit statement of the number "20"

 

[jamil]

And yet common sense only exists because people believe in it.

I’m sure the conversation has moved on to the Republican loss in GA, but as I catch up, I can’t help it.

Common sense does exist. It’s the consensus “sense”. The thing that everyone agrees is sensible. Like, if you don’t want to get burned, don’t touch the burner when it’s hot. That sense transcends cultures and ideology.

But, when the “sense” is only common to ideological bubbles, like “common sense gun control”, or, “China hacked the election”, neither are common sense. It’s just bubble induced ideological belief.

Because this is a political topic, common sense doesn’t have a lot of space here, because we’re talking about opinions. And when we start talking about opinions as if they are commonly sense, that’s kinda what dogma is.

 

[foszoe]

Looks like a great defense of common knowledge. A poor one for common sensr.

I’m sure the conversation has moved on to the Republican loss in GA, but as I catch up, I can’t help it.

Common sense does exist. It’s the consensus “sense”. The thing that everyone agrees is sensible. Like, if you don’t want to get burned, don’t touch the burner when it’s hot. That sense transcends cultures and ideology.

But, when the “sense” is only common to ideological bubbles, like “common sense gun control”, or, “China hacked the election”, neither are common sense. It’s just bubble induced ideological belief.

Because this is a political topic, common sense doesn’t have a lot of space here, because we’re talking about opinions. And when we start talking about opinions as if they are commonly sense, that’s kinda what dogma is.

 

[jamil]

I would think that would fall on whoever is quoting the fact checkers.

No it doesn’t. That falls on each individual who wants to learn the truth. Someone makes a claim: the truth of that claim doesn’t derive from the side you’re on. It derives from the facts. All of them. Not just those which support your side.

So if you’re truly curious about whether these things are so, wouldn’t you look for all the facts? I’ve been curious about all the claims coming from Trumperville USA. And when I go searching for facts it usually ends up with **** like unverifiable “facts”, like the claim there was a raid in Germany. Or affidavits that are full of errors. It’s not that I believe that no fraud swayed the election. It’s that I don’t have enough to believe it did.

You guys have accepted “facts” without looking at them critically. You eagerly accept the ones favorable to the narrative you want to believe and you reject any facts counter.

 

[jamil]

Don't you mean 'who is' your handler? Since any wrong bit of information apparently invalidates a source, perhaps you should delete the post and do penance

WTF? A common misuse of a word does not invalidate a claim. Saying that fraud esisted in a county that doesn’t exist makes that claim dubious. The very claim itself depends on the county being a fact. Since it does not exist, the claim is false. Maybe there was a miscount in some county. We kinda need a county that exists to even consider whether it could be a fact.

 

[jamil]

I think holding folks, to a perfect standard, that are doing their best (because the deep state denied anyone access to the best legal talent) to prepare lawsuits and affidavits that normally would be done over many months in short order is unreasonable.

So I don't even care...

Okay. So all that is required for you to believe it is for your side to say it. Even if they claim that something happened in some county that doesn’t even exist—if it happened at all you’d think they would have known the actual county—you’re eager to believe it happened.

I keep saying it. I wish Trump would have won the election. Especially since the two Republicans lost, we’re ****ed. But I need more than bias to believe what you do. I need some facts that survive reasonably rigorous scrutiny.

 

[jamil]

Adjusted to maximize truthiness

Nonsense. The people you’re arguing with aren’t “left”. It looks to me like they’re trying to talk you guys off the ledge.

 

[jamil]

Mittens is definitely a piece of ****.

Well there’s something that INGO should all agree on.

 

[jamil]

Except it didn't say 'Detroit Edison Co' , nothing near that. Here is what it said.



Then why didn't they actually use him in the lawsuits? He was listed in one, then they amended it and removed him? Why would that be?

Shouldn't it be the responsibility to fact check as best they can any claims they post? I've "fact checked" several that were wrong, generally only took me a minute or three and my google fu isn't that strong.

Hey you're learning. You now at least admit that Wood and Powell are substandard attorneys... Perhaps that's really why none of their suits went anywhere?

Did you see any more of that video than they wanted you to see? When that video was first shared here I asked a question. And that was why didn't they show when the boxes were put under the table? They showed the table being set up, and then the boxes being pulled out later, but not when they were put under. Later I saw a bit more of the video that was shared by one of the local news stations there, and it did show when. It was when the room was full of people including poll watchers. It even showed the boxes getting filled and sealed with ballots that had been opened their. Which was when the people who were opening the envelopes were leaving for the night.

Now ask yourself, why would they leave that out? Could it be because they intended to deceive you about what actually happened?

D’oh! You misused “their” in a sentence. By the rules of Bug that invalidates everything you’ve said!

The rules as they appear to be, 1) you committed a grammatical error. 2) you appear to be speaking against the “Trump was robbed” narrative.

 

[jamil]

The cheat is proven and obvious to anyone openminded.

The Cheat In Plain Sight

townhall.com

It’s in the data. It was “certified.” It was “recounted.”

Independent data scientists who are able to spot much more complex data manipulation for clients—who have the most to lose (banks and financial institutions)—were able to easily contextualize and explain the proof from the data itself.

Proof of what?

Election cheating—the data proves it!

Justin Mealey, is a former electronic warfare specialist for the U.S. Navy and the CIA. David Lobue is a data scientist whose skills have been in demand across a wide variety of industries. This past week the two appeared before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on elections for the State of Georgia.

The cheat is proven to people who only look for “facts” that support what they want to believe. When facts are presented that tend to disprove your “facts” you use facile reasons why those are false facts.

 

[jamil]

Are you just a troll? Powell and Wood are clearly not election specialists attorney's, anyone that would review their resume would know that. They are excellent attorney's and are not done yet. Buckle up...

Why do you see someone presenting counter facts as trolling. I don’t think that discomfort you’re felling is from being trolled.

In a lawsuit this important, they present an affidavit that asserts something happened in a county that doesn’t exist?

Let’s ask INGO attorneys. Was that competent? IANAL, but I’m thinking that if I were using an affidavit as a support for a lawsuit, I would want to know that the claims in the affidavit were at least superficially true. Because I would hate to find out in a courtroom that it was on its face utter ********. So I’d want the facts claimed in the affidavit verified, at least the easy details. Like, what really were the reported totals in the county. And is it actually a real county. Those things don’t take that long to do a quick sanity check. But like I said. IANAL. Maybe lawyers do things differently. Maybe y’all do throw up whims and pray no one finds anything as bad as a county specified that doesn’t exist.

 

[flightsimmer]

Bottom line, Mark Levin proves the Democrats broke the law in several states by violating their states election laws and the Federal constitution. LOOK IT UP. I'm not going to get on Church mouse's naughty list again for posting it the wrong way.

 

[jamil]

Bottom line, Mark Levin proves the Democrats broke the law in several states by violating their states election laws and the Federal constitution. LOOK IT UP. I'm not going to get on Church mouse's naughty list again for posting it the wrong way.

Okay. So you’re asking me to look up what a right-wing guy is saying? Or you’re asking me to fact-check what the right-wing guy is saying?

I don’t think you’d get on CM’s bad side for posting a link. Lots of people are posting links and I don’t see them being scolded for it.

just copy the link, and paste it in a reply.

 

[flightsimmer]

I don’t think you’d get on CM’s bad side for posting a link. Lots of people are posting links and I don’t see them being scolded for it.

For some reason I can't copy/paste it or link it. You might show me how to do it. Just Goggle Mark Levin.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I don’t think you’d get on CM’s bad side for posting a link. Lots of people are posting links and I don’t see them being scolded for it.

For some reason I can't copy/paste it or link it. You might show me how to do it. Just Goggle Mark Levin.

If I Google Mark Levin I get lots of stuff. I'm not sure which particular article or story or tweet you're referring to in order to copy/paste the ink.