Trump's "Truth Social" Media Oxymoron Incarnate

#327
#327
utvolpj said:
Can't have fun infiltrating the echo chamber
Click to expand...
Well said. That is what Trump wants - his own echo chamber. It's not truly censorship that Donald Trump has a problem with, he doesn't mind censorship at all ... as long as every member of the forum is being forced to agree with him, then censorship is great.
 
#328
#328
BowlBrother85 said:
1) The Trump campaign could have blocked those changes through lawsuits before the election. They did not. That fact was mentioned multiple times in court by judges overhearing the baseless claims from Trump campaign attorneys.

2) Ballot boxes were properly monitored, and there was a chain of custody.

3) Every single claim of systemic fraud made by Trump supporters involving the 2020 Presidential Election has been debunked. If you disagree, then name one specific allegation of widespread fraud that hasn't been de-bunked, and then watch me swiftly link proof which de-bunks it. You are typically very short on specific allegations. The partisan Maricopa County audit found a net gain of votes for Biden. You are lying.
Click to expand...
1. No he couldn't. Just like the illegitimate president can't federalize elections, though he is trying.

2. There was no chain of custody regarding ballot boxes and they weren't monitored properly.

3. No they haven't. Rules were changed in battleground states any many cases by secretaries of state and judges to create a mass number of mail in ballots. At the same time, safeguards to ensure these ballots were valid were lifted or relaxed. That's a fact that can't be disputed.

The Maricopa audit found there were significant enough problems with a greater number of ballots than the margin of victory. That is a fact.
 
#329
#329
tnmarktx said:
1. No he couldn't. Just like the illegitimate president can't federalize elections, though he is trying.

2. There was no chain of custody regarding ballot boxes and they weren't monitored properly.

3. No they haven't. Rules were changed in battleground states any many cases by secretaries of state and judges to create a mass number of mail in ballots. At the same time, safeguards to ensure these ballots were valid were lifted or relaxed. That's a fact that can't be disputed.

The Maricopa audit found there were significant enough problems with a greater number of ballots than the margin of victory. That is a fact.
Click to expand...
1) Yes, they could have filed lawsuits in those jurisdictions to block those changes. Judges mentioned this in court. It is a silly thing for you to argue.

2) Yes, they were on both counts. There have been interviews with the Secretaries of State from swing states such as Georgia, Arizona and Michigan which refute this false claim of yours. You are wrong.

3) That is not true. None of it. Once again, with a posted link this time, cite a proven case of systemic fraud involving the 2020 Presidential Election and I will gladly de-bunk it.

The Cyber Ninjas audit reported a net gain in votes for Joe Biden. The Cyber Ninjas did not prove that more ballots were fraudulent than Biden's margin of victory. Yes, that is a fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#330
#330
BowlBrother85 said:
1) Yes, they could have filed lawsuits in those jurisdictions to block those changes. Judges mentioned this in court. It is a silly thing for you to argue.

2) Yes, they were on both counts. There have been interviews with the Secretaries of State from swing states such as Georgia, Arizona and Michigan which refute this false claim of yours. You are wrong.

3) That is not true. None of it. Once again, with a posted link this time, cite a proven case of systemic fraud involving the 2020 Presidential Election and I will gladly de-bunk it.

The Cyber Ninjas audit reported a net gain in votes for Joe Biden. The Cyber Ninjas did not prove that more ballots were fraudulent than Biden's margin of victory. Yes, that is a fact.
Click to expand...

1. There was nothing they could've done to prevent the changes to proclaim that it could is just simply lying.

2. Ballot boxes were unsupervised ballot harvesting has been documented on video.

3. Address what I stated. Rules were changed in the 2020 election that created a mass number of mail in ballots. Any many cases illegally by secretaries of state and judges. Along with this, rules were changed or relaxed the ensured the validity of these ballots. That's true, you can't debunk it.

The AZ audit found that there were major issues with ballots at a greater number than the margin of victory.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT
#331
#331
tnmarktx said:
1. There was nothing they could've done to prevent the changes to proclaim that it could is just simply lying.

2. Ballot boxes were unsupervised ballot harvesting has been documented on video.

3. Address what I stated. Rules were changed in the 2020 election that created a mass number of mail in ballots. Any many cases illegally by secretaries of state and judges. Along with this, rules were changed or relaxed the ensured the validity of these ballots. That's true, you can't debunk it.

The AZ audit found that there were major issues with ballots at a greater number than the margin of victory.
Click to expand...
1) Yes, they could have sought injunction relief from those changes prior to the election! Multiple judges pointed this out to their attorneys in court in December of 2020!

2) The video you are likely referring to in Cobb County was misrepresented by the right. It does not show what you are purporting it to show.

3) Cite a specific example of proven systemic fraud or shut up.
 
#332
#332
BowlBrother85 said:
1) Yes, they could have sought injunction relief from those changes prior to the election! Multiple judges pointed this out to their attorneys in court in December of 2020!

2) The video you are likely referring to in Cobb County was misrepresented by the right. It does not show what you are purporting it to show.

3) Cite a specific example of proven systemic fraud or shut up.
Click to expand...

1. Your clueless on this point.

2.
Broken Chain of Custody & Unauthorized Ballot Handling or Movements
The maintenance of a proper chain of custody for ballots cast is the linchpin of fair elections. Chain
of custody is broken when a ballot is fraudulently transferred, controlled, or moved without
adequate supervision or oversight.
While chain of custody issues can apply to all ballots, the risk of a broken chain of custody is
obviously higher for mail-in and absentee ballots. This is because the ballots have to go through
more hands.
In the 2020 presidential election, the increased use – often illegal use – of unsupervised drop boxes
arguably has enhanced the risk of a broken chain of custody. So, too, has the increased practice of
so-called “ballot harvesting” whereby third parties pick up ballots from voters and deliver them to
drop boxes or directly to election officials.
Both drop boxes and ballot harvesting provide opportunities for bad actors to insert fraudulent
ballots into the election process. That this is a very serious matter is evident in this observation by
BlackBoxVoting.org: “In court cases, chain of custody violations can result in refusal to admit
evidence or even throwing a case out. In elections, chain of custody violations can result in
‘incurable uncertainty’ and court orders to redo elections.” (emphasis added)
As an example of the drop box problem, in Pennsylvania, ballots were illegally dumped into drop
boxes at the Nazareth ballot drop center in violation of state law. Likewise in Pennsylvania, a
man caught on videotape and photos came out of an unmarked Jeep extracting ballots from an
unsupervised ballot drop-box to bring them into a ballot counting center. That same man was
observed to come back with an empty ballot container to place in the unsupervised drop box.
In Wisconsin, the state’s Election Committee illegally positioned five hundred drop boxes for
collection of absentee ballots across the state. However, these drop boxes were disproportionately
located in urban areas which tend to have much higher Democrat registration, thereby favoring the
candidacy of Joe Biden. Note: Any use of a drop box in Wisconsin is illegal by statute. Therefore,
the votes cast through them cannot be legally counted in any certified election result.
As an example of ballot harvesting – in this case at the front end of the process – 25,000 ballots
were requested from nursing home residents in Pennsylvania at the same time.
As additional examples of a possible broken chain of custody, there are these: Large bins of
absentee ballots arrived at the Central Counting Location in Wisconsin with already opened
envelopes, meaning that ballots could have been tampered with. They were nonetheless counted.
Also in Wisconsin, an election worker was observed moving bags of blank ballots into a vehicle
and then driving off without supervision. There is also the previously referenced case whereby
a truck driver has offered a firsthand account of moving large quantities of fake manufactured
ballots from New York to Pennsylvania.
As a final note on the unauthorized handling or movement of ballots, there is the problem of illegal
ballot counters. These are persons who not legally permitted and/or certified to be counting ballots.
In one curious case, an individual who worked as an official photographer for Kamala Harris’
campaign in 2019 was alleged to be involved in scanning ballots in Floyd County, Georgia.
Ballot counters cannot have any ties to candidates in a presidential election.

3. Why not address the fact that I stated?
Rule Changes by the Secretaries of State
Secretaries of State in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania bypassed their State
Legislatures to issue rule changes that effectively allowed the counting of illegal ballots. They did
so under the theory that the executive agency makes the rules while power is derived by legislation
passed.
For example, on May 19, 2020, Michigan Democrat Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, elected
with the help of George Soros, announced that all registered voters in the August 4, 2020, primary
and the November 3, 2020, General Election would receive mail-in ballot applications
automatically. This was a sweeping change.
Regrettably, it wasn’t just Democrat officials who were involved in promulgating such rule
changes. As another useful idiot for the Democrats’ Grand Strategy, Georgia’s Secretary of State
Brad Raffensperger played right into their hands. On March 24, he announced that election
officials would mail absentee ballot request forms to all of Georgia’s 6.9 million active voters for
the primary election. This universal ballot measure was taken not just for the Presidential Primary
Election on May 19 but also for the General Election on November 3.
Rule Changes by Election Officials Other than Secretaries of State
Rule changes were also enacted by other election officials, effectively bypassing any chain of
command running through either the Secretary of State or State Legislature. These changes
likewise contributed to the expansion of absentee and mail-in ballot voting.
For example, in Georgia, the State Election Board approved a rule in April of 2020 to allow
Georgia voters to cast ballots by drop boxes on a twenty-four hours a day basis, using the CCP
Virus pandemic as justification. This was a clear case of bending or breaking the rules, as Georgia
state law does not permit counties to collect ballots outside of the normal business hours of Election
Offices. Moreover, as this expanded drop box capability was implemented, poll observers testified
that they were obstructed from observing ballot counting and processing, meaning that fraudulent
ballots could have been dumped into these 24/7 drop boxes prior to collection.
Similarly, on October 18, 2016, the Wisconsin Election Commission unanimously voted on a rule
change for so-called “ballot curing” contrary to state law (specifically Wisconsin Statutes 6.84
and 6.86). With this illegal rule change, the Wisconsin Election Commission instructed that
mail-in ballots with missing addresses should be cured, that is, fixed. However, Wisconsin
Election Law states: “If a certificate is missing the address of a witness, the ballot may not be
counted.”
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst and BreatheUT
#333
#333
tnmarktx said:
1. Your clueless on this point.

2.
Broken Chain of Custody & Unauthorized Ballot Handling or Movements
The maintenance of a proper chain of custody for ballots cast is the linchpin of fair elections. Chain
of custody is broken when a ballot is fraudulently transferred, controlled, or moved without
adequate supervision or oversight.
While chain of custody issues can apply to all ballots, the risk of a broken chain of custody is
obviously higher for mail-in and absentee ballots. This is because the ballots have to go through
more hands.
In the 2020 presidential election, the increased use – often illegal use – of unsupervised drop boxes
arguably has enhanced the risk of a broken chain of custody. So, too, has the increased practice of
so-called “ballot harvesting” whereby third parties pick up ballots from voters and deliver them to
drop boxes or directly to election officials.
Both drop boxes and ballot harvesting provide opportunities for bad actors to insert fraudulent
ballots into the election process. That this is a very serious matter is evident in this observation by
BlackBoxVoting.org: “In court cases, chain of custody violations can result in refusal to admit
evidence or even throwing a case out. In elections, chain of custody violations can result in
‘incurable uncertainty’ and court orders to redo elections.” (emphasis added)
As an example of the drop box problem, in Pennsylvania, ballots were illegally dumped into drop
boxes at the Nazareth ballot drop center in violation of state law. Likewise in Pennsylvania, a
man caught on videotape and photos came out of an unmarked Jeep extracting ballots from an
unsupervised ballot drop-box to bring them into a ballot counting center. That same man was
observed to come back with an empty ballot container to place in the unsupervised drop box.
In Wisconsin, the state’s Election Committee illegally positioned five hundred drop boxes for
collection of absentee ballots across the state. However, these drop boxes were disproportionately
located in urban areas which tend to have much higher Democrat registration, thereby favoring the
candidacy of Joe Biden. Note: Any use of a drop box in Wisconsin is illegal by statute. Therefore,
the votes cast through them cannot be legally counted in any certified election result.
As an example of ballot harvesting – in this case at the front end of the process – 25,000 ballots
were requested from nursing home residents in Pennsylvania at the same time.
As additional examples of a possible broken chain of custody, there are these: Large bins of
absentee ballots arrived at the Central Counting Location in Wisconsin with already opened
envelopes, meaning that ballots could have been tampered with. They were nonetheless counted.
Also in Wisconsin, an election worker was observed moving bags of blank ballots into a vehicle
and then driving off without supervision. There is also the previously referenced case whereby
a truck driver has offered a firsthand account of moving large quantities of fake manufactured
ballots from New York to Pennsylvania.
As a final note on the unauthorized handling or movement of ballots, there is the problem of illegal
ballot counters. These are persons who not legally permitted and/or certified to be counting ballots.
In one curious case, an individual who worked as an official photographer for Kamala Harris’
campaign in 2019 was alleged to be involved in scanning ballots in Floyd County, Georgia.
Ballot counters cannot have any ties to candidates in a presidential election.

3. Why not address the fact that I stated?
Click to expand...
1) You are stubbornly ignorant and annoying. Either the RNC or the Trump Campaign could have sought injunction relief from those changes. They chose not to. Judge Stephanos Bibas, a Trump-appointed judge, specifically made this point in court on November 27, 2020 while dismissing a case brought forth by attorneys for the Trump campaign.

2) I'm not going to read all of that crap, but my previous point still holds.

3) Cite a specific example of proven systemic fraud or shut up.
 
#334
#334
BowlBrother85 said:
1) You are stubbornly ignorant and annoying. Either the RNC or the Trump Campaign could have sought injunction relief from those changes. They chose not to. Judge Stephanos Bibas, a Trump-appointed judge, specifically made this point in court on November 27, 2020 while dismissing a case brought forth by attorneys for the Trump campaign.

2) I'm not going to read all of that crap, but my previous point still holds.

3) Cite a specific example of proven systemic fraud or shut up.
Click to expand...
1. Still clueless

2. I cited examples that you easily could debunk according to you, yet you refuse to debunk?

3. I provided examples
 
#337
#337
BowlBrother85 said:
My whole point, is that what may/may not have happened in 2020, is irrelevant to whether or not Donald Trump will allege that he was cheated in 2024, if he happens to lose again. When Donald Trump loses an election, he will always claim that it's because he was cheated, regardless of the rules and conditions under which the election was held, and his margin of defeat. The way Trump handled losing the 2016 Iowa Caucuses to Ted Cruz, and how closely that resembled and how he handled losing to Joe Biden proves this. If there is no proof that he was cheated after losing an election, then Donald Trump will do his best to manufacture his own proof with lies - which his supporters will eagerly believe, and spread throughout social media. There is an established pattern here.
Click to expand...

Man, I get this. I found most of it to be distasteful. But to be clear are you saying this is strictly a Trump phenomenon?

If so, might want to dig back to HER and the Democrats collective reaction to Trump winning in 2016. While you're at it ask Stacey Abrams, or as she styles herself 'Governor Stacey Abrams,' about how one should deal with an election loss. My point being quit acting like Trump is unique. He's not when it comes to screaming about cheating in elections.
 
#338
#338
Shocking! :eek:

I thought for SURE that Donald and Devin were gonna make a FREE SPEECH platform for all of us.

Curious, any of you dumb Donald fanboys sign up already?


Donald Trump's new social media platform, Truth Social, has already been plagued with signup issues and a long waitlist barring most people from even using the service.

But, perhaps that's the price users must pay for a truly "free speech" platform, right?

Well, just one day into this very soft-launch of Truth Social and even its "free speech" branding is – perhaps, unsurprisingly – falling apart.

Web developer Matt Ortega signed up for the Truth Social service and soon discovered an email from Truth Social telling him that his account had been banned. Ortega confirmed the authenticity of the email and ban in a private message to Mashable.

Furthermore, Ortega had never posted a single thing to Truth Social as his account was one of the many still on the waitlist to join. Ortega was banned simply because of the username he used to sign up for the platform: @DevinNunesCow.

FMLh-xyUUAE8lfq.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#339
#339
More shocking news... dumb Donald plagiarized another company's logo design. Probably thought he was still back in school.

One of these is the icon for Trump's "truth social" site the other is the icon for a British "Fleet Telematics & Fuel Efficiency" company that has used it since at least 2019

FMGOxNXX0AIfmB9.png

FMGN6SYXsAU6zTq (2).png
 
#340
#340
MontyPython said:
Shocking! :eek:

I thought for SURE that Donald and Devin were gonna make a FREE SPEECH platform for all of us.

Curious, any of you dumb Donald fanboys sign up already?


Donald Trump's new social media platform, Truth Social, has already been plagued with signup issues and a long waitlist barring most people from even using the service.

But, perhaps that's the price users must pay for a truly "free speech" platform, right?

Well, just one day into this very soft-launch of Truth Social and even its "free speech" branding is – perhaps, unsurprisingly – falling apart.

Web developer Matt Ortega signed up for the Truth Social service and soon discovered an email from Truth Social telling him that his account had been banned. Ortega confirmed the authenticity of the email and ban in a private message to Mashable.

Furthermore, Ortega had never posted a single thing to Truth Social as his account was one of the many still on the waitlist to join. Ortega was banned simply because of the username he used to sign up for the platform: @DevinNunesCow.

View attachment 435525
Click to expand...
I guess I should change my requested username from @thedotardsux
 
#341
#341
MontyPython said:
More shocking news... dumb Donald plagiarized another company's logo design. Probably thought he was still back in school.

One of these is the icon for Trump's "truth social" site the other is the icon for a British "Fleet Telematics & Fuel Efficiency" company that has used it since at least 2019

View attachment 435529

View attachment 435530
Click to expand...
Biden doesn't see any issue with this
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caculator
#349
#349
I think going with Mastadon for his back end was smart. Decentralized, federated server structure means it will be much harder to ddos or take down. The web front end is a completely different business altogether.
 
#350
#350
tnmarktx said:
1. Your clueless on this point.

2.
Broken Chain of Custody & Unauthorized Ballot Handling or Movements
The maintenance of a proper chain of custody for ballots cast is the linchpin of fair elections. Chain
of custody is broken when a ballot is fraudulently transferred, controlled, or moved without
adequate supervision or oversight.
While chain of custody issues can apply to all ballots, the risk of a broken chain of custody is
obviously higher for mail-in and absentee ballots. This is because the ballots have to go through
more hands.
In the 2020 presidential election, the increased use – often illegal use – of unsupervised drop boxes
arguably has enhanced the risk of a broken chain of custody. So, too, has the increased practice of
so-called “ballot harvesting” whereby third parties pick up ballots from voters and deliver them to
drop boxes or directly to election officials.
Both drop boxes and ballot harvesting provide opportunities for bad actors to insert fraudulent
ballots into the election process. That this is a very serious matter is evident in this observation by
BlackBoxVoting.org: “In court cases, chain of custody violations can result in refusal to admit
evidence or even throwing a case out. In elections, chain of custody violations can result in
‘incurable uncertainty’ and court orders to redo elections.” (emphasis added)
As an example of the drop box problem, in Pennsylvania, ballots were illegally dumped into drop
boxes at the Nazareth ballot drop center in violation of state law. Likewise in Pennsylvania, a
man caught on videotape and photos came out of an unmarked Jeep extracting ballots from an
unsupervised ballot drop-box to bring them into a ballot counting center. That same man was
observed to come back with an empty ballot container to place in the unsupervised drop box.
In Wisconsin, the state’s Election Committee illegally positioned five hundred drop boxes for
collection of absentee ballots across the state. However, these drop boxes were disproportionately
located in urban areas which tend to have much higher Democrat registration, thereby favoring the
candidacy of Joe Biden. Note: Any use of a drop box in Wisconsin is illegal by statute. Therefore,
the votes cast through them cannot be legally counted in any certified election result.
As an example of ballot harvesting – in this case at the front end of the process – 25,000 ballots
were requested from nursing home residents in Pennsylvania at the same time.
As additional examples of a possible broken chain of custody, there are these: Large bins of
absentee ballots arrived at the Central Counting Location in Wisconsin with already opened
envelopes, meaning that ballots could have been tampered with. They were nonetheless counted.
Also in Wisconsin, an election worker was observed moving bags of blank ballots into a vehicle
and then driving off without supervision. There is also the previously referenced case whereby
a truck driver has offered a firsthand account of moving large quantities of fake manufactured
ballots from New York to Pennsylvania.
As a final note on the unauthorized handling or movement of ballots, there is the problem of illegal
ballot counters. These are persons who not legally permitted and/or certified to be counting ballots.
In one curious case, an individual who worked as an official photographer for Kamala Harris’
campaign in 2019 was alleged to be involved in scanning ballots in Floyd County, Georgia.
Ballot counters cannot have any ties to candidates in a presidential election.

3. Why not address the fact that I stated?
Rule Changes by the Secretaries of State
Secretaries of State in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania bypassed their State
Legislatures to issue rule changes that effectively allowed the counting of illegal ballots. They did
so under the theory that the executive agency makes the rules while power is derived by legislation
passed.
For example, on May 19, 2020, Michigan Democrat Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, elected
with the help of George Soros, announced that all registered voters in the August 4, 2020, primary
and the November 3, 2020, General Election would receive mail-in ballot applications
automatically. This was a sweeping change.
Regrettably, it wasn’t just Democrat officials who were involved in promulgating such rule
changes. As another useful idiot for the Democrats’ Grand Strategy, Georgia’s Secretary of State
Brad Raffensperger played right into their hands. On March 24, he announced that election
officials would mail absentee ballot request forms to all of Georgia’s 6.9 million active voters for
the primary election. This universal ballot measure was taken not just for the Presidential Primary
Election on May 19 but also for the General Election on November 3.
Rule Changes by Election Officials Other than Secretaries of State
Rule changes were also enacted by other election officials, effectively bypassing any chain of
command running through either the Secretary of State or State Legislature. These changes
likewise contributed to the expansion of absentee and mail-in ballot voting.
For example, in Georgia, the State Election Board approved a rule in April of 2020 to allow
Georgia voters to cast ballots by drop boxes on a twenty-four hours a day basis, using the CCP
Virus pandemic as justification. This was a clear case of bending or breaking the rules, as Georgia
state law does not permit counties to collect ballots outside of the normal business hours of Election
Offices. Moreover, as this expanded drop box capability was implemented, poll observers testified
that they were obstructed from observing ballot counting and processing, meaning that fraudulent
ballots could have been dumped into these 24/7 drop boxes prior to collection.
Similarly, on October 18, 2016, the Wisconsin Election Commission unanimously voted on a rule
change for so-called “ballot curing” contrary to state law (specifically Wisconsin Statutes 6.84
and 6.86). With this illegal rule change, the Wisconsin Election Commission instructed that
mail-in ballots with missing addresses should be cured, that is, fixed. However, Wisconsin
Election Law states: “If a certificate is missing the address of a witness, the ballot may not be
counted.”
Click to expand...

You swung a baseball bat and knocked a toof loose on this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top