Posted on 11/29/2020 1:36:09 PM PST by rintintin
Rand Paul is a good man. This is obvious voter fraud.
Later
Well, it’s one thing to show that the results were statistically aberrant.
It’s another to prove how they came to be that way.
And any court...is going to require that proof.
An update in Michigan listed as of 6:31AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 141,258 votes for Joe Biden and 5,968 votes for Donald Trump
2
An update in Wisconsin listed as 3:42AM Central Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 143,379 votes for Joe Biden and 25,163 votes for Donald Trump
3
A vote update in Georgia listed at 1:34AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump
4
An update in Michigan listed as of 3:50AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 54,497 votes for Joe Biden and 4,718 votes for Donald Trump
It is a bit technical but Freepers owe to themselves to at least give it a look. Twitter is banning and deleting it so you know it is a spot on analysis. It looks like it is to me.
Really a MUST READ. Or at least a long look.
The perception of a fair election is just as important as a fair election itself.
In a criminal trial, where a man’s freedom is at stake, the perception of fairness is an accepted legal standard, regardless of definitive proof of prejudice.
An election for President deserves no less a standard than criminal trials. The fate of our country is Constitutionally that significant.
Every lawyer involved in contesting this election needs to articulate such a standard for SCOTUS to consider. None have. But it is not too late.
Mere election law is insufficient to the circumstances, legally. I am not saying it is irrelevant or could not succeed.
I am saying, in addition to election law and related equal protection arguments being made, should be a broad and fundamental Constitutional argument based on fairness, the difficulties of proving fraud, and the likelihood of systems to allow fraud without risk.
I am dismayed no Trump lawyer understands or advocates this broad but fundamental legal principle, but it is not too late.
Please see my post at 26.
Please see my post at 26. The Trump lawyers need to consider the burden of proof within the Constitutional standard of fairness.
This is why there’s paper ballots and envelopes
Signature matching
Without that any ballot not from in person on election 🗳 day is null and void
That is the law and there’s of course several other laws
So really only one question must be answered - do we have election laws or do we not?
The Democrats are really going to have to greatly expand their double standard if they’re trying to try to include millions of people who committed fraud
As long as courts insist on “evidence”, we will have resident camel toe and v.p. pee lousy
One of the few senators with 3 digit iq
Will do
Point 1: Election counts were “shut down”. Behavior unprecedented and uncalled for in law. Have the Dem election managers offered evidence to legally justify this act?
Point 2: Observers barred from observing. Behavior in violation of law. Have the Dem election managers offered evidence to legally justify this act?
Point 3: Ballots appeared out of nowhere. Vote counts that violate statistical laws of likelihood and rate of counting that exceeded technology counting capacity. This is impossible. Have the Dem election managers offered evidence to explain this impossibility?
Where is the evidence? Where is the proof these votes are legitimate? Where are the explanations? All we have are claims—words. Uphold the law and prove the vote counts are legal. It should be straightforward. Produce the signature-validated ballots and verify a sample of voters that the ballots are indeed legitimate. Produce the evidence. Otherwise, it must be accepted that Trump won and Harris/Biden should graciously concede for the good of the nation—don’t they want what is good for the nation?
let’s call him Anomalous Joe.
404 Not Found
The requested document does not exist on this server.
Okay
Bad link
The taking outthe observers was the Dems’ ultimate tactic to hide their fraudulent ballot count. The only way the chain of custody of the ballots could be authenticated was be close inspection of the mailing envelope’s signature before the ballot was removed. How that signature was compared to the one on file was important. That comparison method most likely was done by machine. A testing of the signature comparison machine had to be done before the signature verification process was done. Somewhere I read that the signature comparison machine could be fixed for percentage of sensitivity. That way forged signatures could pass if the sensitivity was lowered.
Tabulators and signature verification machines should be inspected to learn if any backdoor functions could be accessed remotely. That would be needed to be done by a computer tech specialist from Goldman Sachs International Audit Firm or PricewaterhouseCoopers.
PLEASE PLEASE TRUMP PREVAIL!
its right there, in front of them....all avenues of proof....
I don’t agree with Rand on everything, but he is definitely not a “bought” politician. We need more like him....heck, we need more like Tulsi Gabbard.....don’t agree with her on much of anything, but definitely not corrupt, which is why she’s hated
The longer Mr Biden takes to concede the election, the more large and small players who participated in the voter fraud and election fraud, are going to go down.
A big list of exhibits are here and once you’ve read through some you’ll have more fire in your belly.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18694655/pearson-v-kemp/
With some I found it easier to go ahead and read the conclusion then go back and read from the start.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.