Trump Elected Again?

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
That’s not how democracy is suppposed to work and not in line with the idea of how the people of the US are supposed to determine their president.

But is big media and big tech campaigning and selectively report/suppress in a way that likely influence up to 6 million voters to cast the „wrong“ vote how democracy is supposed to work?

Or manipulating maybe up to 17% of all Biden voters to cast the „wrong“ vote?

So Biden‘s victory has the same dubious quality as a Trump victory by state legislature sent electors would have:
Constitutional, but wrong in spirit and contrary to the idea that a truly souvereign people in free and fair election determines the government
Not even close. You can argue media "interference" all you want. But at the end of the day, everybody's narrative is bullsh!t. But the electoral process is the electoral process. You just want to play hand of god and say "I think media didn't portray things the way I think they are, therefore, I declare the other guy president". That is even worse than what the PA legislature is doing. First an foremost because they aren't stupid enough to think they are choosing the president. They just want to sow doubt about "the other side". Maradona may get away with "hand of god", but you will not. Not how it works in Germany either, lol.

Biden's victory "having a dubious" quality is exactly what this dog and pony show is meant to construct. And who is mediating that message. Why the horrible, liberal "msm". Which Trump would be lost without, lol.
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
What also instantly made me suspicious on the gut-level, before this all played out to its finsih, was when Biden spoke to the press before going to bed on election night. How robotically he announced how h was confident and had very good feelings about Michigan, Wisconsin, Pen. That was after the counting stopped and before it resumed. He didnt seem like a man that knew that he really won the vote by having a majority of voters behind him and thus being elated and joyful ... but someone like someone who knew he won becuase of fraud and had to play the part for the short public announcement. Boy, whe that dude is President he will have so many gaffes and will be ridiculed no end. It's Joe Jeltzin time
Or like a 78 yr old man up beyond his normal bedtime? I mean, really, your going to base "he cheated" off of that? I mean, I saw Trump look sideways when he said that he didn't collude with Russia. Proof!
 
OP
L

LeeLemonoil

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
4,265
I thougth his appearance that night was strange. I perceived that he stole the election and knew it. I then acted on it and wrote it here!

Or something. Joe Biden is an old man that lives in the White House`basement.


I'd love to know Peat's assesment of the situation. He perceives things.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,263
Even though Biden cheated, i reckon he should still get the presidency, otherwise Robert De Niro will be forced to move to Canada should Trump get a second term.
 
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
893
Location
The Netherlands
"Officials Had Something to Hide" - There is Enough “Preponderance of Evidence” to “Doubt the Result” -- Democrat Elections Observer Weighs in On Corrupt Georgia Vote

Former Oregon election official and 30 year registered Democrat weighs in:

"I will not comment on the legal claims because, while I have familiarity with the law and court filings, I’m not a lawyer. I am also going to mostly stay away from alleged behaviors, too, as I wasn’t there and, anyway, they add color but are more open to dispute.

The original intent of the software code (acc’d to affidavits) was to manipulate votes without detection.When you start with one goal in mind, it’s tough to pivot to the opposite goal later—no matter how hard you might try. Not that it seems anyone tried… Absence of secure audit log (to record every action in the software) is so indefensible that I LOL’d when I read it. This fact alone should be enough to negate the results when there is ANY question about fraud because it cannot be proven that fraud DIDN’T occur by elections administration.

Lawsuit alleges that many procedures required in state law—for good, common sense reasons to ensure the one voter, one ballot rule is adhered to—were not followed, including Receipt of absentee ballots in their return envelopes was not recorded (this reduces risk of ballot box stuffing, i.e., to ensure that only one real ballot has been submitted by one real voter) Signatures were not verified against voter registration on return envelopes (same reason as 6, above). There might be missing envelopes, too; it wasn’t clear to me in my reading or I missed it. Ballot processing is not allowed before Election Day in Georgia (this varies by state); in this election, by rule inconsistent with state law, Secretary of State Raffensperger allowed counties to start 3 weeks early. Absent a rigid accountability processes, this risks double or counterfeit voting.

Conducting one election with INTEGRITY is hard enough; when you overlay what is, in effect, a 2nd election (by mail) that has to be reconciled with what happens at the polls … this is very high risk this “2 concurrent elections” risk was a primary argument for all elections being conducted by mail in Oregon, which was adopted after 20 years of practice with dual polling/mail elections—practice that none of these states whose elections are in question have had Observers were not allowed during the original count or the recount.There is no defense for this and intrinsically implies that elections officials had something to hide. There are other things to pick on, but these I cannot think of a way to defend and probably are sufficient to meet the apparent (according to the lawsuit) standard of “preponderance of the evidence” to “doubt the result.” Eager to read defendants’ response!"
 
Last edited:

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,263
Last edited:
OP
L

LeeLemonoil

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
4,265
November 23, moderate author Christopher Caldwell wrote in the far-left New Republic magazine:

Trump didn’t sell out his supporters. In fact, his presidency saw something extraordinary, even if it was all but invisible from the country’s globalized cities: the first egalitarian boom since well back into the twentieth century. In 2019, the last non-Covid [Chinese coronavirus] year, he presided over an average 3.7 percent unemployment rate and 4.7 percent wage growth among the lowest quartile of earners. All income brackets increased their take. That had happened in the last three Obama years, too. The difference is that in the Obama part of the boom, the income of the top decile rose by 20 percent, with tiny gains for other groups. In the Trump economy, the distribution was different. Net worth of the top 10 percent rose only marginally, while that of all other groups vaulted ahead. In 2019, the share of overall earnings going to the bottom 90 percent of earners rose for the first time in a decade.



the great demographic surprise of the election — Trump’s uptick among Black and Latino men — owed more to this wage progress than to Lil Wayne’s endorsement, or to Trump’s musing aloud that he had done more for Blacks in America than any president since Abraham Lincoln.

——

No wonder he won in a perceived landslide
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
Reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling | Spectator USA

To say out-loud that you find the results of the 2020 presidential election odd is to invite derision. You must be a crank or a conspiracy theorist. Mark me down as a crank, then...

Ummm... I am also a crank.

I must not Perceive... Think... Act

As there is no evidence.

I lost a gold coin in a dark alley. I walked to the lighted portion of the alley, and couldn't find the lost coin there. I must be a crank. There is no lost gold coin. No evidence lol.

@managing can you help?
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
So I did as @LeeLemonoil suggested. I asked Dr. Peat what he thinks.

He is very clear that he believes there are lots of election shenanigans that go on around primaries and conventions, and have been for a long time. He pointed me to the website blackboxvoting.org which is quite interesting and includes some prima facie evidence of voting improprieties. He seems concerned that that sort of stuff could go on with national elections as well.

On the subject of the 2020 presidential election though, he doesn't have any evidence that the election has been manipulated. Unlike the 2000 presidential election which he says was manipulated in an arbitrary manner in order to achieve a predetermined outcome. The only justices remaining from that are Thomas and Breyer, and Breyer voted against arbitrarily stopping the counting. The other 7 are unknown entities in their willingness to overrule the will of voters.

It seems he believes the court could again try to overturn the election if it gets to them.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
So I did as @LeeLemonoil suggested. I asked Dr. Peat what he thinks.

He is very clear that he believes there are lots of election shenanigans that go on around primaries and conventions, and have been for a long time. He pointed me to the website blackboxvoting.org which is quite interesting and includes some prima facie evidence of voting improprieties. He seems concerned that that sort of stuff could go on with national elections as well.

On the subject of the 2020 presidential election though, he doesn't have any evidence that the election has been manipulated. Unlike the 2000 presidential election which he says was manipulated in an arbitrary manner in order to achieve a predetermined outcome. The only justices remaining from that are Thomas and Breyer, and Breyer voted against arbitrarily stopping the counting. The other 7 are unknown entities in their willingness to overrule the will of voters.

It seems he believes the court could again try to overturn the election if it gets to them.

Well, a murderer is also going to say there is no evidence. It's until the court is allowed to review the evidence presented, and if the evidence presented is deemed so or deemed not enough, that judgment is made.

Until then, a murderer can always say there is no evidence. And the plaintiff will say there is.

We are playing jury here, and I as part of the pretend jury, I and many others consider the information so far gathered to be pretty damning.

You don't, and Ray Peat may seem to agree with you-as based on your recounting. But I'd like to see what Ray Peat says about it in an interview than take your word for it.

"It seems he believes the court could again try to overturn the election if it gets to them."

Did he really say "overturn?"

That is very important.

Or maybe he simply said "the court may with injudicious bias decide the election," with no mention of whether it will favor Biden or Trump. If Ray left it ambiguous, your possible insertion of "overturn" would make it appear that Ray would agree with your preference for the election going for Biden.
 
Last edited:

X3CyO

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2016
Messages
512
Location
Hawaii
I'm just going to leave this here incase it wasn't already shared.

USPS Whistleblower in Michigan Claims Higher-Ups Were Engaging in Voter Fraud; UPDATE: Investigation Launched?

Trump Campaign to the Media: Here's Actual Proof of Voter Fraud, Just as You Asked

USPS Carrier in PA Claims Higher-Ups Instructed Workers to Backdate Ballots

USPS Whistleblower in Michigan Claims Higher-Ups Were Engaging in Voter Fraud; UPDATE: Investigation Launched?

That is I think Trump being practical. We don't agree with vaccines, but if you ask around you will understand that there's no point selling that idea to the part of the world that believe in vaccines. It's an uphill climb and with mass media arrayed against him, it's one less mountain to climb. As it is, MSM has caused Trump to lose the senior vote, because Trump has advocated for opening up the economy, against the media endorsement of lock downs backed by their experts.

But I saw Trump's words twisted just for mentioning the 'd' word - disinfectants. Media mischief made it look like he told people to take bleach, and there were enough dumbasses to believe that - like the low-info senior citizens. But without Trump, I would not have looked more deeply into hydrogen peroxide, ozone, and chlorine dioxide. Not necessarily for COVID, but for use in other health conditions.

Trump cannot elaborate more than that, and it is for dolts to laugh at his idea as silly, and for more critical minds to pick up his cues to find more meaning in them.

But MSM manufactures and feeds on disinformation, because it knows that is how gullible the masses are. And it relies on teachers in k-12 and professors in universities to keep the masses locked up in isles and hamlets of stupidity.

Can't blame Trump if at least half of the country are sheeple.
This. Truth takes time; much better to focus on the wins that matter first.
 

nomoreketones

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
1,237
This. Truth takes time; much better to focus on the wins that matter first.

Problem is that there isn't enough time. December 8th is the deadline to prove enough election fraud to swing the election. There is no doubt that the election was stolen but proving it in a court of law with just over a month between November 3rd and December 8th is very difficult.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
Problem is that there isn't enough time. December 8th is the deadline to prove enough election fraud to swing the election. There is no doubt that the election was stolen but proving it in a court of law with just over a month between November 3rd and December 8th is very difficult.
It just needs a flip of a switch to have light, but you need to wire up the house to get it to work. Getting it done is difficult if you are no electrician. The lawyer will find it just as hard to turn the light on as much as the electrician will find it hard to maneuver through the legal system. Have faith in the lawyer as much as you have faith in your electrician.
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Problem is that there isn't enough time. December 8th is the deadline to prove enough election fraud to swing the election. There is no doubt that the election was stolen but proving it in a court of law with just over a month between November 3rd and December 8th is very difficult.

I think the deadline is more like December 12th or 14th. Truthfully, the actual deadline is January 6th, as that's when Congress accepts (or rejects) the Electoral College Vote.

That being said, there is plenty of time, with the correct approach. Which appears to be what's going on. Juan O Savin pointed out there would not be a single point of failure. No doubt, some of these suits might take months, or even years. And they should go on. But there is likely a strategy or some suit to get a relatively quick resolution. Jerome Corsi outlined one possibility in the video I posted earlier. Fareed Zakaria actually outlined one on CNN (it may have been before the election, but still valid).

Of course, this is only relevant if you think that Biden is still alive, and was alive dating back to March. Much easier to use body doubles when they wear masks and sunglasses. Totally easy to use CGI on something that is televised with no audience (like, say, the Democratic National Convention). Easier to use holograms when you are only speaking to 5-30 people, and never have to shake hands.....



Was Biden the first Max Headroom candidate?
 
Last edited:
OP
L

LeeLemonoil

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
4,265
Election Bombshell! The US Constitution Goes to Court…

There are too many relevant details in the article. If I selected the best bits, I'd effectively be copy pasting the entire content here.

That has been overturned already on Friday.

The PA Supreme Court is of the opinion that such an objection to the change to voting technicalities which is in place for about a year should have been made way before the actual election.
That’s a very thin line to tread, but invalidating an entire state election as the alternative is something that shouldn’t be done easily either.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom