Posted on 12/02/2020 1:57:05 PM PST by nicollo
>>How much is 17mm in people?<<
Total pop of NYC and Houston,TX?
>>How much is 17mm in people?<<
Total pop of NYC and Houston,TX?
From what I have seen and read so far about the recent elections, if even only half of it would be true the fraud would still be on a grandiose scale, even recognizable by someone with an I.Q. in the range of room temperature, even the odds makers in Las Vegas recognized that he fix was in. Then here comes our AG William Barr and in so many words states
“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election.”
I thought about his statement for a while and came to the following conclusion.
Number one: Maybe he is in with the other side and just as crooked.
Number two: He is ignorant and dumb, what I doubt.
Number three: Or the whole thing between him, Trump and whoever is trying uncover this monumental scam is just a smokescreen until all the perpetrators are brought to justice.
Your guess is about as good as mine and I hope that justice will prevail, if not I foresee rough times ahead for the US as no nation can prosper and flourish for very long, based on fraud, deceit, hypocrisy and lies.
Perhaps you have some different ideas?
later
Maybe it’s because I’m a Brit who deals with contract law a lot, but are we really looking at a “dismissal” here, or the opposite? Shout out to any Freepers who know how to interpret American legalese.
If that statement had been mad by a British person in a British context, this is how I’d have interpreted it:
1. “To date” and “so far” both tell me they’re still looking. A different DOJ source has since said the department is still working to “vigorously pursue all specific and credible allegations of fraud”. Why say “specific” and “credible”, unless some of the evidence presented turned out to be ambiguous, opinion driven rather than fact based, and hence impossible to verify?
2. “on a scale that...” means that they’ve found a quantity, but it’s not big enough or joined up enough YET to *prove* that all voting machines or all postal voting was compromised. That doesn’t mean “nothing to report”, it means they need more evidence than they’ve already got to pass the test set by the allegation.
“on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election”. Guliani is claiming that an industrial scale fraud switched so many votes from Trump to Biden that it overturned a Trump majority numbering in the millions. Even if DOJ can, today, prove half a million ballots switched from Trump to Biden does that come close to vindicating Guliani’s bold claims when even to satisfy a “balance of probability” level they need at least two million CONFIRMED cases?
If I were Trump I’d be reading this as, “Mr President: would you rather we were being given proof that is specific, credible, and actionable, to such an extent that it confirms SEVERAL MILLION votes were compromised in the way your dye-challenged attorney chum keeps claiming? Or do you want to spend the next six months sifting through an awful lot of crap in order to get to the good stuff?”
Barr. A complete and totally useless fat piece of crap.
Great legacy for their grand-children, huh?
Their refrain will then be, “Trump’s fault!”
Barr has played Trump beautifully. The worst kind of treachery. He helped the deep state to run out the clock so that the criminals in the Trump-Russia and Ukraine scandals did not have to pay the price for their crimes. He kept us expecting results until it was too late.
To have him in charge of the DOJ at this point, when a crooked election should be investigated, is a tragedy. Nothing will be done.
Having been an election judge when I was very young- with no training whatsoever in spotting fraud- I remember one election the most for it, because it was my 2nd or 3rd time at the county counting office, a primary in Illinois, where a Democrat was defrauded when running against another Democrat. Some precincts’ ballots had been pinholed as well as punched. I questioned the pinholing since it did not knock out a chad, and often as not the pinhole missed the cgad altogether, making it unclear where the “voter” had been aiming. I knew that every voting machine came with a stylus not a hatpin.
The County Clerk, a Democrat, could do no wrong; both parties sung her praises, one out of ignorance, probably. She knew I was young and untrained and fed me the bullshit story that the pinholes were from older black women who were used to using the pins from their Sunday go to meeting hats [yes, she really said that] from the old days and it was a habit. I was shy and felt uncomfortable disputing with this much older “expert authority” and reluctant to call the sheriff, but should have, because I knew in my heart it had to be fraud, and while I didn’t then know how the hatpin trick worked, I knew she was lying about the hatpins. For one, election day was not on a Sunday, so no woman no matter how old fashioned would be sporting a church hat on Tuesday, much less carrying around hatpins instead of a ballpoint. But the Clerk insisted that we team up and try to figure out which chads the pinholes were meant for, and “cure” the ballot by punching out the nearest chad to the pinhole.
Later on I found out how the scheme works. The cheater or cheater’s friends in various precincts stack ballots up and place a voted template ballot for their candidate on top, and punch a pin through the desired chad into those of the whole stack. When run through the machine, the unpinholed ballots for the cheater get counted. The machine usually wouldn’t count the pinholed ones but would usually reject the ballot so there would be a recount of ALL ballots by hand, at which point additional votes would magically appear for the cheater in the cases where a voter had not selected either candidate in that race, and worse, the unfortunate candidate that wasn’t cheating would lose counted votes to “spoilage by overvotes” where his voted chad on each ballot that had been rigged was cancelled by a pinholed chad for the other candidate- these last were ballots where the legitimate vote was cancelled and deemed “uncurable” or spoiled, and thrown out. This kind of cheating isn’t caught by recounts because the ballots have been “cured” after the first run, before anyone goes home, and they are wittingly or unwittingly “cured” by counters from all parties. Run them through the machine or by hand at that point and you’ll get the same result over and over because the damage was already done and “fixed,” for good.
I don’t know who the candidates were in that local race as their names were not on the ballots, but I wonder who the cheater was, and regret that the honest candidate [unless he was hatpinning too] may have and probably did lose due to a fraudulent trick that I should have been trained to spot and understand and aggressively report.
Since 2012, the voting-eligible population has risen by 17 million, according to estimates by the U.S. Elections Project.It's still b.s. Census numbers I find show 15mm TOTAL population increase between 2012-2019 and if we subtract 1-1.5 mm illegals and 40% who don't register, that'd be an increase only of 6-7.5 mm available voters, which means Biden I no way increased 16mm over Obama in 2012 or even 11mm more than Hitlery in 2016.
At this point, what does he have to lose? I may be missing something here, though.
They’ve spent four years calling him a Nazi, so...
Wow. Thanks for sharing. Nothing new under the sun.
So the WSJ deleted my comments on this article on its website, essentially noting the same as I did here on post 1.
It’s not just FB, Twatter, etc. that’s censoring us.
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.