Arizona Election Audit

#1,232
#1,232
NCFisher said:
Even when you're shown to be FOS, playing your own dictionary game, you ignore that not fitting your narrative. You don't appear to even understand the word 'formal'.

There were at least four definitions that are not relegated to government or legal domain, which I highlighted.

From Cambridge:
approval or permission, especially formal or legal:
They tried to get official sanction for the plans
See? 'especially formally or legal but not limited to that confine. Try this:

approval or permission:
To be just, a government must have the sanction of the governed.
See? The people must sanction - approve or accept - their government for it to have validity. In this case, they must accept that election results are valid.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Or from Collins
sanction in American English

1. the act of a recognized authority confirming or ratifying an action; authorized approval or permission
2. support; encouragement; approval
3. something that gives binding force to a law, or secures obedience to it, as the penalty for breaking it, or a reward for carrying it out
4. something, as a moral principle or influence, that makes a rule of conduct, a law, etc. binding
5. a coercive measure, as a blockade of shipping, usually taken by several nations together, for forcing a nation considered to have violated international law to end the violation
b. a coercive measure, as a boycott, taken by a group to enforce demands often used in pl.
6. Obsolete a formal decree; law

VERB TRANSITIVE
7. to give sanction to; specif.,
a. to ratify or confirm
b. to authorize or permit; countenance

Exorcise (or exercise, or excise) the demons of your limited vocabulary elsewhere, you perpetually cherry-picking, rat-turd of an intellect.
Click to expand...
So... you are immature, on top of being woefully inarticulate. I see. LOL.
 
#1,233
#1,233
NCFisher said:
1) Actually it likely was possible that Republican-controlled legislatures of 1/2 dozen battleground states could have chosen their own electors. In fact, in this same session in Jan 2017, numerous Democrats called for the rejection of various states' electors. Doh! goes Bowl....
2) He was simply wrong about that., but Trump could have staged a rally for a variety of reasons and they'd have shown up.

That aside, your cause and effect argument is your own wild conjecture.

Without Democratic Congress reps, governors, and mayors encouraging and covering for violent riots nationally, there'd have been fewer violent riots. Without folks like you electing these ****** people who undermine this country and spread the Marxofascist lie that police are killing black criminals because they're black, we wouldn't have a 96% increase in police deaths in 2020. We wouldn't have sustained, months-long attacks on federal and state structures and personnel, and upwards of $2B in damages. Without the left's false narrative of "systemic racism" - the left's term for a disproportionately dysfunctional percentage of our black populace - we'd not have national lawlessness & violence...and we wouldn't be having this same discussion 50 years from now because Dems convinced black America to remain on their plantation.

Or maybe, just maybe, if a small contingent of about 30-35 being charged with actual conspiracy has not shown up for the rally, there wouldn't have been a breach, and everyone would have complied with the call to "peacefully and patriotically make your voice heard".

Two can play your stupid game.
Click to expand...
(1) NOT AS OF JANUARY 6, 2021 - the day of the riot. The electors had already been selected and they had already met and cast their votes for president on December 14th. The only thing left to do as of January 6th, was for the sitting VP to read aloud the certificates cast by those electors representing all 50 states and the District of Columbia in order to finalize the vote count. January 6th only involved procedural formalities. It was already over.

(2) Trump wasn't simply wrong about that. He was lying. Pence's Chief of Staff, Marc Short, says that it was explained to Trump that it was not within the power of the VP to unilaterally disregard electoral votes on January 6th, which Trump had been pushing Pence to do. As a result of this explanation, Short says he was banned from the White House grounds. As of January 6th, Trump continued to tell his supporters that Pence could cast aside electoral college votes in the states that he was still contesting... but on January 6th, Trump knew better than that. Per Marc Short, it had been explained to Trump that Pence had no such authority to do that.
 
Last edited:
#1,236
#1,236
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#1,237
#1,237
#1,240
#1,240
VolinWayne said:
DOJ needs to stay in their lane. This is what they should be investigating
Jack Maxey Unearths More Emails Showing Biden Crime Family Working With Chinese Communists...Now This Family Controls US Government - CD Media
Click to expand...
It would probably draw more than just right-wing interest to stories such as this one, if the media outlet responsible for the report didn't include an ad hominem attack within the headline. It's not possible to read past the headline without thinking that there is at least some degree of bias involved in the article, and it just makes the whole thing look unprofessional. That is not the way to change minds.
 
#1,241
#1,241
K-town Vol Fan said:
Abuse of power? Seriously? If anything is an abuse of power it is the idiot Republicans handing over votes to a private company who literally already made up their mind that there was fraud. All Americans should be embarrassed by this sham of an "audit."
Click to expand...
It's clearly an abuse of power. Election laws the handling of it including investigations are decided by state legislators. If you want to have a say in how AZ runs their elections, move there and run for office. No federal law is being broken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#1,242
#1,242
tnmarktx said:
State legislatures make the laws concerning their elections. No federal laws are being broken.
Click to expand...
Obviously, someone in the DOJ disagrees with you.
tnmarktx said:
State legislatures make the laws concerning their elections. No federal laws are being broken.
Click to expand...
... but federal law requires the safe-guarding and preservation of election records as is pointed out in the article itself. If the DOJ has proof this isn't being done, they have an obligation to investigate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K-town Vol Fan
#1,243
#1,243
BowlBrother85 said:
Obviously, someone in the DOJ disagrees with you.

... but federal law requires the safe-guarding and preservation of election records as is pointed out in the article itself. If the DOJ has proof this isn't being done, they have an obligation to investigate.
Click to expand...

Beat me to it.

Also instances of them going door to door and verifying votes toes the line of voter intimidation. We don't know how those conversations are going exactly. I know if someone knocks on my door and asks me who I voted for ill promptly slam the door in their face.
 
#1,245
#1,245
BowlBrother85 said:
Obviously, someone in the DOJ disagrees with you.

... but federal law requires the safe-guarding and preservation of election records as is pointed out in the article itself. If the DOJ has proof this isn't being done, they have an obligation to investigate.
Click to expand...
The DOJ is morally corrupt as are you if you agree with their unlawful meddling into the AZ audit. I'd say you're more biased, because a corrupt DOJ is a bad thing for you as well. Nothing will come of it. The corrupt Biden DOJ had no jurisdiction here. The AZ audit will go on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#1,247
#1,247
K-town Vol Fan said:
Beat me to it.

Also instances of them going door to door and verifying votes toes the line of voter intimidation. We don't know how those conversations are going exactly. I know if someone knocks on my door and asks me who I voted for ill promptly slam the door in their face.
Click to expand...
No federal laws are being broken.
 
#1,248
#1,248
tnmarktx said:
The DOJ is morally corrupt as are you if you agree with their unlawful meddling into the AZ audit. I'd say you're more biased, because a corrupt DOJ is a bad thing for you as well. Nothing will come of it. The corrupt Biden DOJ had no jurisdiction here. The AZ audit will go on.
Click to expand...
They haven't done anything unlawful. As far as I know composing a letter "raising concerns" isn't illegal.
 
#1,249
#1,249
tnmarktx said:
It's clearly an abuse of power. Election laws the handling of it including investigations are decided by state legislators. If you want to have a say in how AZ runs their elections, move there and run for office. No federal law is being broken.
Click to expand...
Under the Supremacy Clause, found in Article VI, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, both the Constitution and federal law supersede state law.

If the United States Department of Justice has evidence that election records are not being safe-guarded and preserved by a contractor (Cyber Ninjas Inc.) hired to conduct an audit, as required by federal law, then they have the right to investigate the matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K-town Vol Fan
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top