US Special Forces Attacked CIA Server Farm In Germany In Server Seizure Operation, 5 Soldiers Killed

[dennishoddy]

Haven't read all the thread but saw a video yeaterday of a lady in a hearing of some sort explaining the fraud she saw. The guy on the board or council or whatever authoritative body he sat on was being a bit of a smartazz and stating that there wasn't enough fraud to change the election. The lady giving here statement said that she witnesed a lot of various types of fraud. She then said somthing to the effect of " I witnessed the fraud in person and i signed an affidavit stating if I'm lying i will go to jail, did you sign that?" He had no response.

You should read all the thread.

 

[dennishoddy]

As i said, it wasn't clear if you were talking about the same incident or a different one. You didn't mention a state or anything beyond a common (and debunked) example for the trucks. Hence why i asked if you had a link because the only instances i have found give a credible explanation. I really would love to read about it. If you're will not, or cannot, provide it then okay.

And, as i noted, at least one instance of claiming fraud because of seeing a truck with out of state tags shows why pointing to the dangers of perjury for people who have given sworn statement is somewhat of a red herring. Yes, if they are proven to by lying about what they saw then they could face criminal charges. But swearing you saw something like a truck with out of state tags may not be a lie, so they aren't risking perjury. They are, however, reaching the wrong conclusions when viewed against other evidence and testimony.

So saying 'they've got hundreds of affidavits' could simply mean they have a bunch of people who are telling the truth about what they saw, yet what they saw wasn't fraud. Or, it could be. That is why these things go through the courts.

Remember, people assumed the dude with the wagon was doing something nefarious on election night, even though he wasn't.

As for the electronic stuff, well if you say my questions have been answered then it must be so. Still seems odd to not take the senate seats, or at least one, in GA. Or to not go after a state like florida, which has a history of being a swing state. You'd think if you weren't worried about the senate seats you'd pick states that wouldn't be so obvious.

Perhaps other posters will have more information to share. Do we know for sure that votes for Trump were switched to Biden, or could they have been switched to Jo? Could votes for Jo have been switched to Biden, too? Are we thinking it was code in every machine in GA, or just some? Do they all need examining? I've heard that some were connected to the internet, does that imply the others were safe? How would they know how many votes to switch with multiple people running for office and an unknown (and then still arriving) number of absentee ballots coming in to be counted?

Do anyone have a flow chart handy of how all of this fraud occurred because the methods and size of the conspiracy for each state is starting to run together and get confusing.

There are dozens of posts about real election fraud on this thread and others your involved in. I could tune in to CNN and watch the exact responses your producing.
In all the battle ground states, dead people voted, Non residents voted that used to be residents voted twice and so on in Nevada and so on. The fraud is endless.
You ignore all the facts that are now found to be fact.
When you have a voter number larger than the number of people living in that voting district is that not a clue that voting fraud/irregularities may be involved?

How long does this gone on and there are still ballots in commifornika that have not been counted. 2500 in one county still to be counted since Nov 3.
How can 2500 ballots in a county with a tight race still not be counted? Maybe more will be counted after some will be "found" in the post office or a warehouse?
Ballots keep showing up across all the battle ground states from obscure places. Its reported every day and they are all for biden.
Isn't that amazing?
If you need a flow chart, you need to produce it yourself. The internet has a search engine of your choice to do that to prove your position.
Again, every question you have produced has been answered in prior posts. Every one of them.
It gets boring to watch you keep asking the same questions that keep getting answered.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Not enough fraud? Fraud is fraud! Little or big, what does it matter to the law? So what if - according to that smartazz board member - it isn't enough to change the election results? Are the fraudsters to go unpunished because it wasn't enough fraud? Where is the limit? Who sets the limit? If it doesn't rise to the level of a certain limit is it still a fraud?

Any conclusions derived utilizing any fraudulent data is illegitimate. How can it be anything but illegitimate? If there is no way to separate out and omit fraudulent ballots, then the entire election has to be voided. This fraud would also affect down-ballot races as well. Everyone with a name on any of these ballots ought to be raging.

Woody

 

[Snattlerake]

I like the word debunked. It's so finite. It is misused here though. The debunking comes from someone who said something ridiculous like the Georgia poll workers didn't count any ballot while there was no one watching. They said it and it's now true?

It's debunked? Biden's not president and not gonna be president. I said it, now it's true?

 

[Glock 40]

You should read all the thread.

 

[Dale00]

Hillary was a pathetic campaigner who did not appear to even be trying in the closing weeks of the 2016 campaign.
Biden was a pathetic campaigner who did not seem to even be trying in the closing weeks of the 2020 campaign.
This is a highly unlikely coincidence.

The 2020 election vote count tipped to Biden in five vote counting locations: Atlanta, Milwaukee, Detroit, Philadelphia, Phoenix

• These locations (first four at least) are notorious for being under the control of a corrupt political Democratic party machine
• Republican election observer volunteers were inhibited and harassed in the same way in all these locations
• Vote counting shut down at the same time in all these locations and then a dump of new votes into the system overcame Trump's lead giving Biden the win in that state.

These things and many more speak to a shift in the underlying process consistent with election fraud.....not to mention media bias and A.I. manipulation of opinion.
If you do not see anything here, you are being willfully blind. The manner in which these patterns formed give ample basis for invalidating the elections in those five states. Stop the steal or be complicit in it.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Hillary was a pathetic campaigner who did not appear to even be trying in the closing weeks of the 2016 campaign.
Biden was a pathetic campaigner who did not seem to even be trying in the closing weeks of the 2020 campaign.
This is a highly unlikely coincidence.

...

Eh - When the fix is in ...

Woody

 

[chuter]

Not enough fraud? Fraud is fraud! Little or big, what does it matter to the law? So what if - according to that smartazz board member - it isn't enough to change the election results? Are the fraudsters to go unpunished because it wasn't enough fraud? Where is the limit? Who sets the limit? If it doesn't rise to the level of a certain limit is it still a fraud?

Any conclusions derived utilizing any fraudulent data is illegitimate. How can it be anything but illegitimate? If there is no way to separate out and omit fraudulent ballots, then the entire election has to be voided. This fraud would also affect down-ballot races as well. Everyone with a name on any of these ballots ought to be raging.

Woody

I was thinking the same thing this morning, it's kind of like saying 'he robbed a bank but he didn't really take very much, so we're just going to ignore it'.

No amount of fraud is acceptable.

 

[SoonerP226]

So, who’s saying election fraud is acceptable? So far, I’ve only seen anyone say that there’s not evidence of enough of it to swing the election, which is far from the same thing as saying it’s acceptable.

 

[chuter]

So, who’s saying election fraud is acceptable? So far, I’ve only seen anyone say that there’s not evidence of enough of it to swing the election, which is far from the same thing as saying it’s acceptable.

I just haven't seen anything about prosecuting anyone for it (except that woman in TX a month or so ago), maybe that will come. I hope so.