danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Give me one good reason why a forensic audit should not be done? Because it is our right to ask for the vote to be checked.
The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
I looked back at previous posts but am having a hard time understanding the context of your question.
1. What do you mean exactly by "forensic audit?"
2. Are you referring to a particular election or just elections in general?
3. If you are referring to a particular election, which one?
Yours is an interesting question but before answering, I'd like to know more about what you mean.
What is a forensic audit going to accomplish? How are you going to tell true ballots from fake ones? I know Trumps answer to that question is that all Biden ballots are fake but what do you think?
The creator of 2000 miles even said those people on video did nothing wrong unless they were paid to collect ballots, so I say show me the proof. Unless there is proof this is just another Mike Lindell fairy tale.
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Democrats have decided to declare that the 2020 election was the most fair and secure election ever.....but they do not want anyone to double check the vote.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Forensic audits at least make sure the count is correct and that no fake paper ballots were used.
Arizona had a forensic audit and proved that yes there was shady votes...
What is a "forensic audit?" The term is defined here but it applies to financial audits and financial situations. You are talking about an election. Doing a financial audit of a bank or a business where financial fraud is suspected is something entirely different than auditing an election.
Businesses have accounting rules they are required to follow. Elections are run by local and state governments, not to make money but to select our political leaders. Applying the rules of accounting to elections is like applying the rules of religion to truck maintenance. One has nothing to do with the other.
Elections have their own rules. There is no such thing as an election audit. There are recounts. And there are cases where someone who violates the election rules are prosecuted for those crimes (like people who vote in a dead person's name, or people who cast ballots in districts where they are ineligible to cast votes).
About "Democrats have decided to declare that the 2020 election was the most fair and secure election ever," it was actually Trump administration officials who directly contradicted the president and pronounced, based on the evidence they had and the authority of their offices, the 2020 election to be the "most secure election in history."
Trump’s own officials say 2020 was America’s most secure election in history
Homeland Security put out a statement with state and local officials that countered the president’s fraud claims.
www.vox.com
Last edited:
Georgia Primary Update:
"Trump was fully invested in the race; he aggressively recruited a lukewarm Perdue to run in the first place, traveled to Georgia to stump for him, held fundraisers and poured $2.64 million from his own political committee to fuel Perdue’s campaign." (Source)
Results:
Kemp...........73.7%
Perdue.........21.8%
"Trump was fully invested in the race; he aggressively recruited a lukewarm Perdue to run in the first place, traveled to Georgia to stump for him, held fundraisers and poured $2.64 million from his own political committee to fuel Perdue’s campaign." (Source)
Results:
Kemp...........73.7%
Perdue.........21.8%
So Trump supporters aren’t cult like robots after all, that do whatever Trump wants. Interesting…
Once again, Trump loses in court:
www.cnn.com
New York appeals court rules Trump, Ivanka and Don Jr. must sit for depositions
A New York appeals court has ruled former President Donald Trump and two of his adult children must sit for depositions in the New York attorney general's civil investigation into the Trump Organization.
www.cnn.com
This case has been discussed with some enthusiasm in this forum. The verdict is in.
www.foxnews.com
Michael Sussmann found not guilty of charge brought by Special Prosecutor John Durham
Michael Sussmann was found not guilty of making a false statement to the FBI, a defeat for special prosecutor John Durham.
This case has been discussed with some enthusiasm in this forum. The verdict is in.
Michael Sussmann found not guilty of charge brought by Special Prosecutor John Durham
Michael Sussmann was found not guilty of making a false statement to the FBI, a defeat for special prosecutor John Durham.
Swamp defendant. Swamp judge. Swamp jury.
They look out for their own.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
They spied on a presidential candidate.
Then they spied on the president elect.
Then they spied on the president.......all based on lies.
Now what do you think they would do to the common man if given the chance.
Then they spied on the president elect.
Then they spied on the president.......all based on lies.
Now what do you think they would do to the common man if given the chance.
The jury was tainted from the beginning, coming from DC which voted 90% for Clinton. Three of them were former Clinton campaign workers and/or donors and should never been seated. Consequently, the verdict comes as no surprise but there was a lot of new info exposed in discovery that further exposed Hillary's involvement in the completely debunked Trump/Russia hoax. The smell of Clinton corruption is a lot worse now than when this trial started.
Report: Three Clinton Donors on Sussmann Jury in D.C.
As many as three donors to Hillary Clinton's campaign are on the jury in the trial of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann.
www.breitbart.com
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Hillary vs. Trump
People voted for the lesser evil.
Trump vs. Biden
Dead people and Democrats voted for stupid and giggles.
People voted for the lesser evil.
Trump vs. Biden
Dead people and Democrats voted for stupid and giggles.
That’s about the best that can be done with such a rigged system; to expose the corruption and debunk the countless lies.The jury was tainted from the beginning, coming from DC which voted 90% for Clinton. Three of them were former Clinton campaign workers and/or donors and should never been seated. Consequently, the verdict comes as no surprise but there was a lot of new info exposed in discovery that further exposed Hillary's involvement in the completely debunked Trump/Russia hoax. The smell of Clinton corruption is a lot worse now than when this trial started.
Report: Three Clinton Donors on Sussmann Jury in D.C.
As many as three donors to Hillary Clinton's campaign are on the jury in the trial of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann.
The judge in the case didn’t recuse himself as well, even though there were obvious conflicts of interest with him. The trial should have been moved out of DC. The juries there are both dishonestly partisan and intellectually lazy. One juror spoke on the record and basically said there are too many other problems in this country to be concerned with a defendant potentially lying to the FBI.
Now if that defendant were wearing a red hat, that same juror would have voted to convict and claimed that lying to the FBI was an existential threat to our democracy or something.
ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
“Feed dirt to the press”. They forgot the part about feeding concocted dirt to the FBI.
Grifters gonna grift.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
That's part of what political campaigns do.
If you are referring to the Alpha Bank/Trump/Spectrum Healthcare (DeVos) internet traffic that wasn't concocted as near as I can tell.
It was "dismissed" by some in the FBI after a short - and rather shoddy - investigation apparently.
As testified to during the Sussman trial by the clowns from the FBI that were involved in said investigation.
And it still remains unexplained.
If you are referring to something else that was supposedly "fed to the FBI" please do clarify ... so that I can address it directly.
BTW - who is the "they" you refer to above ?
Yes indeed ... and should be investigated for any abuses of the public trust they may have committed whilst grifting:
https://oversight.house.gov/sites/d... Management LLC re Saudi Arabia Conflicts.pdf
With yesterday's primary votes now counted, we know this:
"... five of the 35 House Republicans who voted to create a bipartisan commission to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol appeared on ballots on Tuesday. And all of them appear to have survived to fight another day.
"For the most part, Republicans who crossed Trump were not suffering for their infidelity." (Source)
Virtually nothing has been in the news regarding Truth Social in recent weeks. If Truth Social was supposed to change or somehow disrupt the status quo, it proved ineffective against Republicans who crossed Trump and chose to run again.
"... five of the 35 House Republicans who voted to create a bipartisan commission to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol appeared on ballots on Tuesday. And all of them appear to have survived to fight another day.
"For the most part, Republicans who crossed Trump were not suffering for their infidelity." (Source)
Virtually nothing has been in the news regarding Truth Social in recent weeks. If Truth Social was supposed to change or somehow disrupt the status quo, it proved ineffective against Republicans who crossed Trump and chose to run again.
Last edited:
I don’t know if you have signed up for truth yet but there are a lot of screwed up people on there. It’s kind of funny but it’s also kind of scary that there are so many people who believe the lies.
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums