2020 Presidential Race

Neither of us know that and we will not be the ones to determine if the proof has been met. Also it doesn’t take 100% proof in order for a court to determine there may be fraudulent activity which would create a need for recounts. I believe the volume of fraudulent reports may factor into the courts decision for recounts. Plus the percentage increase of mail in votes is
Extraordinary.
The court may consider that fact alone is a worry-some event that requires recounts.
It would be extraordinary if there wasn't such an obvious reason for it. We are in the middle of a pandemic.
 
sure but when the person of interest publicly denies the claim of the anonymous source it's hard to justify standing by the anonymous source as the "truth" of the matter. at a minimum you have to question it.

maybe here the USPS is correct even if they won't say it on the record but why would you assume the whistleblower is lying?

You'd think at a time like this the USPS would have a vested interest - and a no win situation. If the guy did what he did, that's a negative reflection on the USPS - a trust issue with the public they serve. If he lied about it, that's a negative reflection on the USPS - poor hiring judgement. Could actually be a stab at damage control by the USPS - you didn't say that - go along with us on this, and we'll keep you on - don't forget the pension.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher
nope - he made a mistake in a venue choice; that has no bearing on the merits of the argument.

fun to mock but irrelevant
With Rudy’s recent history, it’s just a piece of the puzzle tied to his credibility, acumen, and overall sense of reality (or lack thereof). Extremely relevant if he’s making unfounded claims on behalf of the president.
 
You said it happens all the time. When has the president fired a cabinet secretary, specifically high-level like defense, during the interregnum or after an election has occurred but hasn't been decided?

Edit: other than Esper.
There is turnover all the time after elections. Esper was fired , the others resigned if I read it correctly. Anyway , it’s not a serious issue and with Esper was going to happen if Trump won or lost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Rudy Giuliani is the President's lead attorney in trying to prove that there was voter fraud. Giuliani's stupidity and lack of integrity is highly relevant to whether or not actual incidents of fraud are uncovered and proven.

But you probably take everything Giuliani speaks as gospel don't you?

Now see, this add on is complete fantasy. Go ahead and find a post where I take anything he's said as gospel.

I'll wait.

Stick to factual arguments and I won't call you out.
 
With Rudy’s recent history, it’s just a piece of the puzzle tied to his credibility, acumen, and overall sense of reality (or lack thereof). Extremely relevant if he’s making unfounded claims on behalf of the president.

the claims will rest on their own merit - who's making them or dumb things they did are irrelevant. Rudy can't make them true by his statements nor untrue by his mistakes.
 
It would be extraordinary if there wasn't such an obvious reason for it. We are in the middle of a pandemic.
The pandemic excuse for mail in votes is a sham and an opportunity to conduct election irregularities. Those same people are going out to sporting activities, restaurants and many other activities which are just as or more likely to spread the virus.
 
It’s not lost on anyone reading along that you like the system because you get to choose to believe things you agree with and ignore the things you don’t.
I, on the other hand, don’t believe people who are not willing to attest too it.
Nonsense.
There are people I trust. If they told me they had information but could not give me the source, I would believe them, regardless of whether or not I liked the information. There are others I do not trust at all, and would not believe anything they told me came from an unnamed source.
It's all about how much you can trust the source using an unnamed source.
 
Now see, this add on is complete fantasy. Go ahead and find a post where I take anything he's said as gospel.

I'll wait.

Stick to factual arguments and I won't call you out.
Hey Birmingham, how about we trade for a couple days? You “lick trumps boots” and I will sit in the pews and listen enraptured by the “gospel” of Pope Giuliani?

We’ll swap next week, and maybe work mafia boss AG Barr into the mix.
 
The pandemic excuse for mail in votes is a sham and an opportunity to conduct election irregularities. Those same people are going out to sporting activities, restaurants and many other activities which are just as or more likely to spread the virus.

Dems - champion opportunists - as Rahm Emmanuel said "Never let a crisis go to waste."
 
Nonsense.
There are people I trust. If they told me they had information but could not give me the source, I would believe them, regardless of whether or not I liked the information. There are others I do not trust at all, and would not believe anything they told me came from an unnamed source.
It's all about how much you can trust the source using an unnamed source.
Off the record I trust nobody.
It’s the same as doing business. I don’t do business without contracts. I don’t take your word that you’re going to pay till you write it down and sign it.
I guess that’s why some are in business and others are not.
 
Under penalty of perjury. A signed affidavit is nothing to scoff at. She has over 200 from one county in Michigan
She said over 200 pages, and what do they allege and with what evidence? Hint: if there were evidence, we would have already heard about it. It’s just a bunch of flailing. I know, my young kids do it all the time. If they can’t win, nobody wins.
 
She said over 200 pages, and what do they allege and with what evidence? Hint: if there were evidence, we would have already heard about it. It’s just a bunch of flailing. I know, my young kids do it all the time. If they can’t win, nobody wins.
Sworn eyewitness testimony of voter fraud is evidence. They will have their day in court. Surely you want it to be investigated if fraud happened, right?
 
Nonsense.
There are people I trust. If they told me they had information but could not give me the source, I would believe them, regardless of whether or not I liked the information. There are others I do not trust at all, and would not believe anything they told me came from an unnamed source.
It's all about how much you can trust the source using an unnamed source.
I do like that you titled the statement “Nonsense” before you started. It helps the reader know what they are getting into.
 

VN Store



Back
Top