So say the dems

 

Sent from my moto g power (2021) using Tapatalk

Sent from my moto g power (2021) using Tapatalk

Oh yes.  It is perfectly and realistically within our realm.  Will the US government do it?

Corruption says no.

Trump predicted 3AM ballot dumps while the observers were away.  Happened in all the big swing states.

He was 100% correct.

There are still missing documents for those ballots -- i.e. no way to determine chain of custody, and in some cases polling place of origin.

That's just one of many irregularities that tend to repeat each time a democrat is behind in votes when counting pauses.

There should be rules to reject any ballots outside of scheduled counting times when observers from both sides are there, and rejected if no accompanying & VERIFIED chain of custody documentation.

So many holes in the post-election process being taking advantage of.

Lastly, if early and mail-in voting for everyone remains an option, there needs to be a way for someone to cast a replacement ballot at their polling place should they change their minds.  Too many have voted then found out they were making a mistake.  Last election, Fetterman got a lot of votes before his debate performance showed he was unfit for office.  Google showed "How can I change my vote?" in the top search phrases the following 24 hours too late to change.

I personally don't mind mail-in voting.  But I do mind dead people and ineligible people voting through mail- in voting.  We need to fix that and it's 100% fixable but..........

I'm against early voting.  Like they say, HASTE MAKES WASTE.  Like Flapp mentioned, too many people regretted who they voted for after doing the early voting shit.

When the time comes to vote, we vote.  And that means time has been spent for people to now make an informed decision.

And time should be taken to make sure the integrity of the election is not compromised.  Why is the media and government so much in a hurry to know the outcome?

We know why but that shit has got to stop.  Lots of smoke and mirrors can happen when you rush things.

Probably one of the reasons they forced the clot shots on us. Millions of extra votes just went up for grabs.

 

Sent from my moto g power (2021) using Tapatalk

Yes the election was stolen.
What are we going to do about it?
Not a damn thing.
That is why Democrats don't have
problems doing it, as Democrats
have no morals or ethics.
and we Americans are to pusssified to do
anything about it except take it to Democrat
courts.
My solution is simple, cut the head off the snake, literally.
 

Yes the election was stolen.
What are we going to do about it?
Not a damn thing.
That is why Democrats don't have
problems doing it, as Democrats
have no morals or ethics.
and we Americans are to pusssified to do
anything about it except take it to Democrat
courts.
My solution is simple, cut the head off the snake, literally.
 

one person tried and they charged him

the system requires support and maintenance, and that requires good leadership that only comes from honest elections. At this point all we can do is step back and let it fall.

https://www.hawaiifreepress.com/Articles-Main/ID/38601/Hawaii-Democrats-Used-Fake-Electors-During-The-1960-Election-Nobody-Was-Charged

Former President Donald Trump is facing charges under Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment that Democrats who sent alternate Electoral College certificates in the 1960 presidential election never did.

In 1960, the Hawaii governor certified the state’s election results showing Republican Richard Nixon won by 140 votes, but electors for Democrat John F. Kennedy signed and submitted their own certificates voting on behalf of the state claiming to be “duly and legally appointed and qualified” members of the Electoral College, according to Politico. Trump’s efforts to convince state officials to take similar actions during the 2020 election by pushing alternate electors to meet and cast votes for him are at the foundation of Smith’s indictment, yet the Hawaii electors were never prosecuted.

A recount of Hawaii’s votes ultimately reversed the outcome of the state election, so the same three electors who initially defied the results submitted new certificates, according to Politico. Then-Vice President Nixon, presented with three sets of certificates while presiding over Electoral College counting, accepted the newest ones sent by the Kennedy electors.

Two days before the electoral vote count, state Judge Ronald Jamieson determined it was not fraud that the Kennedy electors met before the recount, but rather was crucial for preserving their ability to have their electoral vote counted after a recount revealed Kennedy was the state winner, according to Politico.

The indictment states Trump “and co-conspirators organized fraudulent slates of electors in seven targeted states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), attempting to mimic the procedures that the legitimate electors were supposed to follow under the Constitution and other federal and state laws.” (RELATED: Jack Smith’s Charges Against Trump Wouldn’t Hold Up At The Supreme Court, Legal Experts Say)

Democratic Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel indicted 16 Republicans in July for attempting to file false electoral votes in the 2020 election. Some liberal commentators who celebrated the indictment, such as CNN legal analyst Norman Eisen, previously called for electors to defy their states’ votes in 2016.

In 2016, Eisen wrote in reference to Trump that “electors should not — CANNOT — choose [a] man who will violate oath.”

Legal experts note Trump’s indictment poses First Amendment concerns and could criminalize “incorrect legal advice.”

“Special Counsel Jack Smith’s new indictment against President Trump seeks to criminalize political speech and to criminalize taking incorrect legal advice,” former federal prosecutor and Missouri attorney general candidate Will Scharf tweeted Wednesday.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said Tuesday Smith’s charges represent “the first criminal indictment of alleged disinformation.”

I believe there's a line between trying to convince appointed electors to change their votes to someone other than the state's election winner versus presenting a new slate of electors to Congress who were not appointed by the state in accordance with state law.

Faithless electors happen regularly (Hildabeast had more than her share!  ).  But "replacement" electors posing as official ones is a different tactic.

I think by signing an affirmation that you are a “duly and legally appointed and qualified” member of the Electoral College when you know it's not true, you are committing a criminal act.

Trump would have been better off putting $1M in a couple dozen off-shore accounts and using those to bribe official electors.  At least it's a scheme that had a good chance of working!

 

one person tried and they charged him

I'm not sure who you are refering to,
but Oswald and Sir Sir Han made some dents
in the system.

Like the man said in a famous movie, don't talk, shoot!
 

I'm not sure who you are refering to,
but Oswald and Sir Sir Han made some dents
in the system.

Like the man said in a famous movie, don't talk, shoot!
 

Yeah nothing says freedom like CIA hit squads...

Which makes me wonder:

There are two kinds of people who openly advocate for political violence

Morons and agent provocateurs

Which one are you?

I am shocked, shocked to find voter fraud going on in a blue state.