For Those Who Still Insist That There Was Election Fraud

Derf

Derf

Well-known member
User Name said:
Tell us all, exactly why have Republican-appointed judges dismissed charges of fraud in the 2020 election?
www.reuters.com

Fact check: Courts have dismissed multiple lawsuits of alleged electoral fraud presented by Trump campaign

Following President Joe Biden’s swearing in on Jan. 20, a Facebook post shared over 6,140 times has said: “Not one court has looked at the evidence and said that Biden legally won. Not one”. This is false: state and federal judges dismissed more than 50 lawsuits presented by then President...
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
I don’t have to. Your article does it. For example, “In a brief order, the justices said Texas did not have legal standing to bring the case.”
But in saying that, the article refutes its own title, since the reason given is dismissal for lack of standing. Which says NOTHING about the validity of the evidence. The article also refuted you, since you were using it to say there was no evidence.
Since you posted the article, that means you are refuting yourself.
Thank you. This post is now way to long to just say that I agree with you here.
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Derf said:
I don’t have to. Your article does it. For example, “In a brief order, the justices said Texas did not have legal standing to bring the case.”
But in saying that, the article refutes its own title, since the reason given is dismissal for lack of standing. Which says NOTHING about the validity of the evidence. The article also refuted you, since you were using it to say there was no evidence.
Click to expand...
Can you comprehend what you read beyond the second grade level? In fact, the article does state that judges threw out cases for lack of evidence! Here is a quote:

Independent experts, governors and state election officials from both parties say there was no evidence of widespread fraud.

According to the Washington Post here , instead of alleging “widespread fraud or election-changing conspiracy” the lawsuits pushed by Trump’s team and allies focused on smaller complaints, which were largely dismissed by judges due to a lack of evidence. “The Republicans did not provide evidence to back up their assertions — just speculation, rumors or hearsay.”
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Leatherneck said:
Nah, what I forgot was the corrupt DNC.
Click to expand...
Well according to @marke the RNC is also corrupt. It turns out that they are a bunch of Freemasons who are running cover for the voter fraud committed by Democrats who are also Freemasons. That sounds pretty corrupt to me. How do you feel about that?
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
User Name said:
Can you comprehend what you read beyond the second grade level? In fact, the article does state that judges threw out cases for lack of evidence! Here is a quote:

Independent experts, governors and state election officials from both parties say there was no evidence of widespread fraud.

According to the Washington Post here , instead of alleging “widespread fraud or election-changing conspiracy” the lawsuits pushed by Trump’s team and allies focused on smaller complaints, which were largely dismissed by judges due to a lack of evidence. “The Republicans did not provide evidence to back up their assertions — just speculation, rumors or hearsay.”
Click to expand...
I guess that question is a good one for you as well. Do you bother to read past what someone says when it supports your view?

There is no question that some "experts, governors and state election officials from both parties say there was no evidence of widespread fraud.

But this is patently false. There was evidence of fraud in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, and others. I suppose it could be more widespread than that across the continental US (I've heard some rumblings about Alaska, even), but I think we've got the "widespread" part covered. And yes, in those places there are some republicans who were not on board with Trumps attempts to stop certifications--whether rightly or wrongly remains to be seen. Most of us want to trust the election system we have. More and more are starting to lose that trust. This shouldn't be such a big surprise to anyone, since democrats have protested elections for years with much scantier evidence.

Your quotation from WAPO that there's no evidence to back up the assertions? READ YOUR CITATIONS AT A HIGHER THAN SECOND GRADE LEVEL, User Name! It's dated 7 days after the election. 7 Days! Of course it would all seem like speculation, rumors or hearsay--such evidence takes time to develop to a presentable state. And those suits were mostly injunctions saying funny business is happening and should be stopped.


Again, we're back to a disagreement about what happened, and a decently comprehensive audit is just the thing for it.
 
Arthur Brain

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Derf said:
I guess that question is a good one for you as well. Do you bother to read past what someone says when it supports your view?

There is no question that some "experts, governors and state election officials from both parties say there was no evidence of widespread fraud.

But this is patently false. There was evidence of fraud in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, and others. I suppose it could be more widespread than that across the continental US (I've heard some rumblings about Alaska, even), but I think we've got the "widespread" part covered. And yes, in those places there are some republicans who were not on board with Trumps attempts to stop certifications--whether rightly or wrongly remains to be seen. Most of us want to trust the election system we have. More and more are starting to lose that trust. This shouldn't be such a big surprise to anyone, since democrats have protested elections for years with much scantier evidence.

Your quotation from WAPO that there's no evidence to back up the assertions? READ YOUR CITATIONS AT A HIGHER THAN SECOND GRADE LEVEL, User Name! It's dated 7 days after the election. 7 Days! Of course it would all seem like speculation, rumors or hearsay--such evidence takes time to develop to a presentable state. And those suits were mostly injunctions saying funny business is happening and should be stopped.


Again, we're back to a disagreement about what happened, and a decently comprehensive audit is just the thing for it.
Click to expand...
Was there a big fuss kicked up when Trump won in 2016? Did the democrats cry fraud or was there a concession from Clinton and a smooth transition of power to Trump?

Telling that you you use the term "much scantier evidence" in relation when you've attempted to berate others for wanting the substantive sort.
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Derf said:
There is no question that some "experts, governors and state election officials from both parties say there was no evidence of widespread fraud.

But this is patently false.
Click to expand...
You yourself have admitted that there is no evidence of widespread fraud because audits have not been completed:
Derf said:
No, you’re not just waiting. You’re asking for results of the audit before the audit is complete. It’s premature, and therefore divisive..the audit hasn’t produced anything...it can’t produce anything unless it is allowed to complete.
Click to expand...
That's hypocrisy.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
Arthur Brain said:
Was there a big fuss kicked up when Trump won in 2016?
Click to expand...
Yes, every day of his presidency.
Arthur Brain said:
Did the democrats cry fraud or was there a concession from Clinton and a smooth transition of power to Trump?
Click to expand...
www.nbcnews.com

Rep. John Lewis: 'I don't see Trump as a legitimate president'

Lewis, a Democrat representing Georgia and a civil rights leader, said 'I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected.'
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

6 Reasons Why Trump is Not a Legitimate President

Filmmaker Michael Moore came to Rep. John Lewis' defense, arguing six reasons why Americans should question Trump's legitimacy in a Facebook post.
www.blackenterprise.com www.blackenterprise.com
thehill.com

Poll: Dems don’t accept Trump as legitimate president

Majority of voters don’t think Democrats have accepted Trump as a legitimate president.
thehill.com thehill.com

Should I continue???
 
Arthur Brain

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Derf said:
Yes, every day of his presidency.

www.nbcnews.com

Rep. John Lewis: 'I don't see Trump as a legitimate president'

Lewis, a Democrat representing Georgia and a civil rights leader, said 'I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected.'
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

6 Reasons Why Trump is Not a Legitimate President

Filmmaker Michael Moore came to Rep. John Lewis' defense, arguing six reasons why Americans should question Trump's legitimacy in a Facebook post.
www.blackenterprise.com www.blackenterprise.com
thehill.com

Poll: Dems don’t accept Trump as legitimate president

Majority of voters don’t think Democrats have accepted Trump as a legitimate president.
thehill.com thehill.com

Should I continue???
Click to expand...
Oh, there's been a fuss over his presidency since he took office for sure and with good reason but that didn't answer the point. Was there any of this baseless fraud allegation and the like or did Clinton concede and aid a smooth transition of power?

I notice you didn't even touch on the latter in regards to "much scantier evidence". Why is that? Is it fair to presume that you, yourself would regard such as insubstantial?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top