They attribute the quote “it’s much easier to fool people than to convince them they’ve been fooled.” I am not sure a more adequate quote can be found here.
This is correct. However, it's turning out that so many people know the truth of what you just said that there is a significant rift between those who know Trump won and those who think Biden won.
That spells disaster one way or the other because the country is divided. If Biden assumes office (which he hopefully won't, but it would be absolutely, historically unprecedented if he doesn't), then there will be about half (+) of the country that will not be recognizing him as the president.
If Trump assumes another term, however? Then HOLY SHIT. I can't even imagine the level of nuclear explosion that will be occurring in the heads of the Karen-sheep that voted for Biden and were happy and crying and hugging each other when the MSM announced him as the winner. The level of "reversal of fortune" that this will constitute in their minds will be off the charts.
Either way, however, we're actually headed right toward civil war in this country. That's not a good thing (at all)...but it looks like it's gonna happen.
Well, to be sure, civil war is a type of "revolution" in the sense that one or both sides is, I posit, doing what they're doing thinking that they're making a revolution.
And they kind of are. I mean civil war is a revolutionary act. For sure. One side thinks "A" and is wiling to fight for it, and the other side thinks "B" and is willing to fight for it. That's kind of a revolution right there, it seems to me.
I think the kind of revolution that would actually work aside from a civil war would be one where the 99% all come together, put aside their (our) indoctrinated faux differences, realize that they ALL have one common enemy, and we all work together to move against that enemy.
THAT would be the kind of revolution that could change things definitely.
Yeah. I'm kind of thinking in the same wavelength.
EDIT: Well...honestly, the REAL revolution that would work is one like the one I mentioned above in my previous comment. However, realistically? The one that would likely take place w/the best results (for the patriot side) is one similar to what you mentioned.
Yes ... It's clearly stated in the second amendment what it's meant for, to overthrow a tyranical government. We have forgotten that somehow... Brainwashed by commies that overthrowing a tyranical government is somehow an Insurrection, meanwhile what they did to Trump over the last 4 years was the definition of Insurrection, sedition, and treason.
Why did Trump's lawyers not present this evidence at any of their 60 cases alleging fraud? Like if you listen to the Trump phone call with Georgia it's just Trump saying shit like "I heard" and "the rumor is", like if he had proof why the fuck didn't he present it? He sounded so fucking weak!
There is no evidence to present whatsoever. If you wanna challenge it in court, you have to aim at the unconstitutional changes of election laws by the corrupt local government officials, you have to focus on the drop boxes and ballot harvesting, you have to trace from the leaves to the branches, and from the branches to the trunk. Those unconstitutional changes directly caused the rampant fraud.
We have the servers that show the votes being changed and a confession from a government official in italy ..... Proving with out doubt forgien Election Interference .
why should they help them? Thought they were suppose to be neutral. Are you calling a judge a politician now? Should we the people allow that to stand?
You cant present evidence until the Discovery phase of a trial. EVERY trial had their initial lawsuit uploaded, scheduled on docket to be reviewed by a judge, sometimes getting to say their opening statement in court, then every time was thrown out by a judge. NO judgement was made on merits and no ruling was ever made. Only punted
Don't be fooled, the trail of evidence never ends. Now Trump and his supporters are ready to uncover the truth that may be a threat to our national security
https://truthfortrump.online/
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VIJU3M-kKhI Go to the 50 minute mark and you see the shenanigans at play. You’ll also see that their claim that Trump is trying to get some free votes is a lie.
At any point in that phone call does he sound like someone who had proof of election fraud? Because to me he just sounds like a whiny bitch. I gave my life for trump, do you know how many of my family won't talk to me anymore because of Q?
I've seen people on pol suggest the reason Trump is agreeing with all the troops in DC is because they're planning on a response to him remaining in power. Due to the actions of the msm and big tech, they know how bad it will look when Biden doesn't become president. It's not so much the numbers, more the actions of a few extremist groups. The BLM summer riots have shown them just how destructive and dangerous the left can be.
The media will most certainly run with this being a coup and Trump being a tyrant that's stolen the election(again) no matter how legitimate his victory is.
I perused the first concrete claims made regarding a particular state, and I have to ask, do you actually examine any of this stuff yourself before championing it? If not, why are you so willing to take the claims aggregated by Trump administration official, Peter Navarro -- a man with a vested self-interest in overturning the election -- as gospel? Claims which have been rebuked by the courts, on merit, at that? If you do vet the claims made, then I'd ask you to explain why you believe unsubstantiated, and overtly false claims are evidence that Trump won?
By far the largest category is 150,000 mail-in ballots cast by voters registered after the registration deadline.
No evidence provided.
Another 22,903 absentee ballots were on record as having been returned on or before the postmark date
No evidence provided.
statistically improbable high voter turnouts in Maricopa and Pima counties
80.51% and 82.45% respectively isn't statistically improbable.
The Copper State also accomplished the remarkable feat of exceeding 100% turnout of its
registered voters.
There were 4.2 million active registered voters as of October 30th, while 3,397,388 actually cast votes in the 2020 Presidential election.
The rest of the claims were based on former Trump campaign operative, Matt Braynard's "data", where he claims he cold-called a subset of people to ascertain the legitimacy of their vote, which he used to estimate the purported impropriety of voters at large. But of course, his claims have lacked substantiation, and have been rife with flaws. As in he used duplicate names, and erroneously claimed voters lived outside of the state they voted in, which ended up being demonstrably false.
I skimmed the rest, and saw that Navarro references a particular report five times; the one where they claim there was 781.91% turnout in North Muskegon, Michigan, when in reality it was 78.1%, and where they use the 1.98 million mail-in ballots sent out during the Pennsylvania Primary as evidence of an overvote of more than 400k, since there were 2.4 million mail-in ballots received for the Presidential election.
I don't know, maybe the 'shotgun a bunch of shit at the wall, and see what sticks' is a compelling argument to you, but it just strikes me as disingenuous.
Don't worry though, as you've already intimated ad nauseam, Biden becoming President is a fairy tale, and a second term for Trump is all but guaranteed. So, Biden will still be out on the street a mere twelve hours from now, locked up, or worse; right, right?
We aren't the same as those propped up states. We are the only super power in the fucking world, I don't care how many chinese, russian shills want to talk fucking shit america isn't the biggest super power, we are the only fucking super power in the fucking world. This military presence in the capitol is a show of strength to the population, to show us not to revolt. Thing is noone knows what to believe anymore and the government is scared as fuck, as they should be.
*based on evidence that was to be presented in a bunch of court cases that failed because the judges refused to hear them for one bullshit reason or another.
In a detailed, 35-page decision, Judge James T. Russell of the Nevada District Court in Carson City vetted each claim of fraud and wrongdoing made by the Trump campaign in the state and found that none was supported by convincing proof. The judge dismissed the challenge with prejudice, ruling that the campaign failed to offer any basis for annulling more than 1.3 million votes cast in the state’s presidential race.
The campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor in an amount equal to or greater than” Biden’s margin of victory, which was about 33,600 votes, Russell wrote.
No, I'm saying you can't say the evidence was rejected in court by citing a completely separate, largely irrelevant case that had zero overlap in the evidence it presented.
The difference there is that if you ran that trial 60 times with different people involved in the process, he would have been convicted probably many many times.
It's the same situation, friendo: people who felt aggrieved for really their own community's faults blatantly ignore the facts and the law to get 'justice'.
You could rerun it a hundred times, and each time the jurors' feelings would triumph over facts and rule of law - because that's what matters to them, their feelings. This is really the only criticism anyone has ever had of Trump, that their feelings were hurt.
He's a piece of shit that loves to screw over contractors. He ran a fraud university, a fraud charity. He put his children in high places. He's golfed about 100 million into his own pocket. He lies all the time. He's a man child that would insult and call people childish names on twitter. He increased the deficit by an insane amount even before covid. He stopped reporting civ casualties from drone strikes and gave the CIA full authority to do therm without presidential approvals. He almost started WW3 with Iran. His tariffs were idiotic and paid by the American people. His wall was stupid. His rhetoric is incredibly divisive, us vs them in nearly every speech.
I could go on.
The only thing???
60 different courts threw out the cases for lack of standing or lack of evidence, or that they wanted something ridiculous as the resolution. You can't say they were all biased.
So basically nothing much in the grand scheme of things.
"Stupid", "childish", "mean". Your username should be WrestlingWithFeelings.
The 9th circuit established early on that courts were also struggling with their feelings so I guess you are in 'good' company among those whose brain has been broken by 'bad' man.
OJ was so innocent and non violent that he ended up in prison for 15 years for armed robbery and assault. Lmao that fucking idiot killed his wife and the whole country knows it, The fact that sports and movie and music stars or anyone with money gets away with literal murder is well known. Stop shilling for a piece of shit violent criminal. Oh wait that is what the whole blm leftist bullshit is a fucking shill piece for violent rapists and drug addicts.
Nine years, and he's already out. There was no assault when he tried to recover his stolen property, and no real robbery either, since it was his property. It was probably a staged robbery anyways so the LAPD could save face rather than admit they'd been duped by OJ and friends.
But there was still no substantial evidence. The cases failed because they were shitty lawyers, who had no idea what they were doing, and then tried to blame the "deep state" for stopping them.
Wether you think the cases failed due to shitty lawyers or purposeful stonewalling is up to interpretation. However, because none of the cases got to the point where evidence was presented in court, it is objectively incorrect to claim the cases failed because evidence was not substantial.
1000s of sworn affidavits, statistical analysis by professional mathematicians, video evidence of votes being counted without proper oversight, counties that counted more than double the votes than they have legal age voters, and dominion machines being connected to the Internet when they weren't supposed to be. If that's not substantial, I don't know what is.
Also, what you or I consider substantial is moot. My point is that the judges never made a ruling on the evidence.
You just don't want to admit that the democrats cheated, because you don't like trump its cool we don't care about your feelings. Its the facts that you keep dancing around and omitting.
Do you have hobbies? Did you know spending your life being bitter and on screens stalking people online is not going to bear well for your health. Go on a walk friend, get in nature.
They attribute the quote “it’s much easier to fool people than to convince them they’ve been fooled.” I am not sure a more adequate quote can be found here.
You can fool some people all the time, you can fool all the people some time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time.
That's what the death camps will be for, the awake people ...
This is correct. However, it's turning out that so many people know the truth of what you just said that there is a significant rift between those who know Trump won and those who think Biden won. That spells disaster one way or the other because the country is divided. If Biden assumes office (which he hopefully won't, but it would be absolutely, historically unprecedented if he doesn't), then there will be about half (+) of the country that will not be recognizing him as the president.
If Trump assumes another term, however? Then HOLY SHIT. I can't even imagine the level of nuclear explosion that will be occurring in the heads of the Karen-sheep that voted for Biden and were happy and crying and hugging each other when the MSM announced him as the winner. The level of "reversal of fortune" that this will constitute in their minds will be off the charts.
In my city (west coast - absolutely choc full of Karens), the day Biden was announced the winner, you couldn't go anywhere without every car horn honking and people yelling and screaming in elation. I'm just imagining how many of their heads are going to explode if and when they find out their Santa Clause doesn't exist and Trump gets right back in office (lol).
Either way, however, we're actually headed right toward civil war in this country. That's not a good thing (at all)...but it looks like it's gonna happen.
Civil war when we need a revolution would be utterly retarded..
Well, to be sure, civil war is a type of "revolution" in the sense that one or both sides is, I posit, doing what they're doing thinking that they're making a revolution.
And they kind of are. I mean civil war is a revolutionary act. For sure. One side thinks "A" and is wiling to fight for it, and the other side thinks "B" and is willing to fight for it. That's kind of a revolution right there, it seems to me.
I think the kind of revolution that would actually work aside from a civil war would be one where the 99% all come together, put aside their (our) indoctrinated faux differences, realize that they ALL have one common enemy, and we all work together to move against that enemy.
THAT would be the kind of revolution that could change things definitely.
The only revolution that would work is the kind we did against the British ?
Congress wouldn't be happy if I went into details ☺️
Yeah. I'm kind of thinking in the same wavelength. EDIT: Well...honestly, the REAL revolution that would work is one like the one I mentioned above in my previous comment. However, realistically? The one that would likely take place w/the best results (for the patriot side) is one similar to what you mentioned.
Yes ... It's clearly stated in the second amendment what it's meant for, to overthrow a tyranical government. We have forgotten that somehow... Brainwashed by commies that overthrowing a tyranical government is somehow an Insurrection, meanwhile what they did to Trump over the last 4 years was the definition of Insurrection, sedition, and treason.
I wouldn't disagree w/that - and I imagine Trump knows and sees that himself too.
So why the heck does it seem that he has stopped fighting?
Perhaps they threatened his family...? I don't know.
Either way, it seems he's handed the reins over.
We can't win a revolution if we are at civil war, and that is exactly why this has happened, that's why Obama divided us.
Same commie tactics used every time...
Divide and conquer. smh
Why did Trump's lawyers not present this evidence at any of their 60 cases alleging fraud? Like if you listen to the Trump phone call with Georgia it's just Trump saying shit like "I heard" and "the rumor is", like if he had proof why the fuck didn't he present it? He sounded so fucking weak!
There was no evidence presented in court. t The cases were thrown out for various reasons (standing, laches, moot).
There is no evidence to present whatsoever. If you wanna challenge it in court, you have to aim at the unconstitutional changes of election laws by the corrupt local government officials, you have to focus on the drop boxes and ballot harvesting, you have to trace from the leaves to the branches, and from the branches to the trunk. Those unconstitutional changes directly caused the rampant fraud.
There have been senate hearings in several states in each of which several hours of evidence was presented.
We have the servers that show the votes being changed and a confession from a government official in italy ..... Proving with out doubt forgien Election Interference .
Why would Trump appointed judges throw out cases that HELPED Trump? Please help me understand I am losing my mind over here!
Because they like their jobs, and their families, so they refused brave the inevitable riots and threats to their personal lives.
Kind of like Antifa in the capitol building?
Up to that point, right wingers weren't doing the whole burn loot murder shindig, so covering their ears and shouting lalala was the safest bet.
I think most of the people committing 'right wing' terrorism are most likely planted marxists, like timothy mcveigh.
why should they help them? Thought they were suppose to be neutral. Are you calling a judge a politician now? Should we the people allow that to stand?
You cant present evidence until the Discovery phase of a trial. EVERY trial had their initial lawsuit uploaded, scheduled on docket to be reviewed by a judge, sometimes getting to say their opening statement in court, then every time was thrown out by a judge. NO judgement was made on merits and no ruling was ever made. Only punted
This -- and yet this comment is sitting out here isolated by itself.
Don't be fooled, the trail of evidence never ends. Now Trump and his supporters are ready to uncover the truth that may be a threat to our national security https://truthfortrump.online/
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VIJU3M-kKhI Go to the 50 minute mark and you see the shenanigans at play. You’ll also see that their claim that Trump is trying to get some free votes is a lie.
At any point in that phone call does he sound like someone who had proof of election fraud? Because to me he just sounds like a whiny bitch. I gave my life for trump, do you know how many of my family won't talk to me anymore because of Q?
Go to the point I mentioned and listen for at least five minutes. You’ll hear Trump’s lawyers pointed out they the Georgia officials are hiding data.
And lol at Q. No one needs to mention any of that in order to talk about election fraud.
So start sharing you little bitch
I've seen people on pol suggest the reason Trump is agreeing with all the troops in DC is because they're planning on a response to him remaining in power. Due to the actions of the msm and big tech, they know how bad it will look when Biden doesn't become president. It's not so much the numbers, more the actions of a few extremist groups. The BLM summer riots have shown them just how destructive and dangerous the left can be.
The media will most certainly run with this being a coup and Trump being a tyrant that's stolen the election(again) no matter how legitimate his victory is.
IA allows him control of media. Don lemon would then be working for trump ?
Scorecard....
https://web.archive.org/web/20210109094419/https://www.electionrecords.com/vault/f-02x.html
We must not let these terrorist tarnish our movement, let us come together and speak the TruthForTrump https://truthfortrump.online/
If this is not recognized by judges, rule of law is not a thing anymore in the US.
Well I didn't need a report. Used my eyes and could see. Sad times we in. Sad no one will look further into this fraud.
You are bat shit crazy. Your demagogue lost. Biden is your president.
He won... and???
I perused the first concrete claims made regarding a particular state, and I have to ask, do you actually examine any of this stuff yourself before championing it? If not, why are you so willing to take the claims aggregated by Trump administration official, Peter Navarro -- a man with a vested self-interest in overturning the election -- as gospel? Claims which have been rebuked by the courts, on merit, at that? If you do vet the claims made, then I'd ask you to explain why you believe unsubstantiated, and overtly false claims are evidence that Trump won?
No evidence provided.
No evidence provided.
80.51% and 82.45% respectively isn't statistically improbable.
There were 4.2 million active registered voters as of October 30th, while 3,397,388 actually cast votes in the 2020 Presidential election.
The rest of the claims were based on former Trump campaign operative, Matt Braynard's "data", where he claims he cold-called a subset of people to ascertain the legitimacy of their vote, which he used to estimate the purported impropriety of voters at large. But of course, his claims have lacked substantiation, and have been rife with flaws. As in he used duplicate names, and erroneously claimed voters lived outside of the state they voted in, which ended up being demonstrably false.
I skimmed the rest, and saw that Navarro references a particular report five times; the one where they claim there was 781.91% turnout in North Muskegon, Michigan, when in reality it was 78.1%, and where they use the 1.98 million mail-in ballots sent out during the Pennsylvania Primary as evidence of an overvote of more than 400k, since there were 2.4 million mail-in ballots received for the Presidential election.
I don't know, maybe the 'shotgun a bunch of shit at the wall, and see what sticks' is a compelling argument to you, but it just strikes me as disingenuous.
Don't worry though, as you've already intimated ad nauseam, Biden becoming President is a fairy tale, and a second term for Trump is all but guaranteed. So, Biden will still be out on the street a mere twelve hours from now, locked up, or worse; right, right?
Asaad survived a coup by the US, so did Maduro and others. What does that say about 45?
We aren't the same as those propped up states. We are the only super power in the fucking world, I don't care how many chinese, russian shills want to talk fucking shit america isn't the biggest super power, we are the only fucking super power in the fucking world. This military presence in the capitol is a show of strength to the population, to show us not to revolt. Thing is noone knows what to believe anymore and the government is scared as fuck, as they should be.
"Possible illegal votes" based on a bunch of failed court cases. I, for one, am enjoying this show. I like farces. ????
*based on evidence that was to be presented in a bunch of court cases that failed because the judges refused to hear them for one bullshit reason or another.
In a detailed, 35-page decision, Judge James T. Russell of the Nevada District Court in Carson City vetted each claim of fraud and wrongdoing made by the Trump campaign in the state and found that none was supported by convincing proof. The judge dismissed the challenge with prejudice, ruling that the campaign failed to offer any basis for annulling more than 1.3 million votes cast in the state’s presidential race.
The campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor in an amount equal to or greater than” Biden’s margin of victory, which was about 33,600 votes, Russell wrote.
Now show me Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. The states that mattered.
So you basically admit that fraud doesn't matter, only that he lost. Got it.
No, I'm saying you can't say the evidence was rejected in court by citing a completely separate, largely irrelevant case that had zero overlap in the evidence it presented.
Mmmmhmmm.
TIL a lack of evidence is a bullshit reason. Huh. I guess that's why you're a lawyer, and I'm not. My bad.
Courts let OJ go scot free. I guess you're still looking for the "real killer" since the courts said there was a lack of evidence.
The difference there is that if you ran that trial 60 times with different people involved in the process, he would have been convicted probably many many times.
It's the same situation, friendo: people who felt aggrieved for really their own community's faults blatantly ignore the facts and the law to get 'justice'.
You could rerun it a hundred times, and each time the jurors' feelings would triumph over facts and rule of law - because that's what matters to them, their feelings. This is really the only criticism anyone has ever had of Trump, that their feelings were hurt.
The ONLY criticism?
He's a piece of shit that loves to screw over contractors. He ran a fraud university, a fraud charity. He put his children in high places. He's golfed about 100 million into his own pocket. He lies all the time. He's a man child that would insult and call people childish names on twitter. He increased the deficit by an insane amount even before covid. He stopped reporting civ casualties from drone strikes and gave the CIA full authority to do therm without presidential approvals. He almost started WW3 with Iran. His tariffs were idiotic and paid by the American people. His wall was stupid. His rhetoric is incredibly divisive, us vs them in nearly every speech.
I could go on.
The only thing???
60 different courts threw out the cases for lack of standing or lack of evidence, or that they wanted something ridiculous as the resolution. You can't say they were all biased.
So basically nothing much in the grand scheme of things.
"Stupid", "childish", "mean". Your username should be WrestlingWithFeelings.
The 9th circuit established early on that courts were also struggling with their feelings so I guess you are in 'good' company among those whose brain has been broken by 'bad' man.
Yes, because OJ was innocent. Also, this is different, because there is actual evidence of the opposite of your claim.
OJ was so innocent and non violent that he ended up in prison for 15 years for armed robbery and assault. Lmao that fucking idiot killed his wife and the whole country knows it, The fact that sports and movie and music stars or anyone with money gets away with literal murder is well known. Stop shilling for a piece of shit violent criminal. Oh wait that is what the whole blm leftist bullshit is a fucking shill piece for violent rapists and drug addicts.
Nine years, and he's already out. There was no assault when he tried to recover his stolen property, and no real robbery either, since it was his property. It was probably a staged robbery anyways so the LAPD could save face rather than admit they'd been duped by OJ and friends.
Learn something today for a change.
https://youtu.be/Zq_kIKSe_XM
Even if it was a setup, he at least had to do some time for murdering his wife. That whole case was a sham and he was indeed guilty.
There were many reasons the cases were thrown out. None of them were for lack of evidence or unsubstantial evidence.
But there was still no substantial evidence. The cases failed because they were shitty lawyers, who had no idea what they were doing, and then tried to blame the "deep state" for stopping them.
Wether you think the cases failed due to shitty lawyers or purposeful stonewalling is up to interpretation. However, because none of the cases got to the point where evidence was presented in court, it is objectively incorrect to claim the cases failed because evidence was not substantial.
They've released all their "evidence" online, haven't they? From what I've seen, there's nothing substantial.
1000s of sworn affidavits, statistical analysis by professional mathematicians, video evidence of votes being counted without proper oversight, counties that counted more than double the votes than they have legal age voters, and dominion machines being connected to the Internet when they weren't supposed to be. If that's not substantial, I don't know what is.
Also, what you or I consider substantial is moot. My point is that the judges never made a ruling on the evidence.
You just don't want to admit that the democrats cheated, because you don't like trump its cool we don't care about your feelings. Its the facts that you keep dancing around and omitting.
100,000 ballots were 'adjudicated' and the original ballots were destroyed.
There is zero way to confirm the authenticity of those 100,000 votes.
Where was that? Can't find anything about it.
You still crying like a little bitch on here? How pathetic.
This dude created this .win to get away from faggots such as yourself. Yet, here you are following him around like some fan girl waiting for a load.
Do you have hobbies? Did you know spending your life being bitter and on screens stalking people online is not going to bear well for your health. Go on a walk friend, get in nature.
I like the Magatard better. Your energy is negative and flat.
HAHAHA rent frEEEEE
haha fag @ womp womp