250 open investigations into 'credible claims of illegal voting' and election law violations in Georgia

[Cimarron]

Yeah, he just said they have not seen it. Glad you clarified. This will allow you to firmly grasp those straws as I mentioned.

No, he didn't say that either. What he said was "has not seen fraud on a scale"..... That in no way says he has seen no fraud. Why is that difficult to understand?

That's like a coach saying "no wrong calls by the refs on a scale to overturn the game". No where did he say there were no wrong calls.

 

[311Cowboy]

No, he didn't say that either. What he said was "has not seen fraud on a scale"..... That in no way says he has seen no fraud. Why is that difficult to understand?

That's like a coach saying "no wrong calls by the refs on a scale to overturn the game". No where did he say there were no wrong calls.

Clearly everyone is talking about evidence that would overturn the election. We were referencing Barr from the beginning of that conversation. So I am glad we both agree the election results are in tact with no evidence suggesting that would change.

 

[Cimarron]

Clearly everyone is talking about evidence that would overturn the election. We were referencing Barr from the beginning of that conversation. So I am glad we both agree the election results are in tact with no evidence suggesting that would change.

Can you explain why you were misquoting AG Barr?

 

[Cimarron]

Now, there seems to be evidence that Stacey Abrams or the company she founded has been seeking to “aggressively” register “ineligible, out-of-state, or deceased voters” before the state’s Jan. 5 Senate runoff elections in Georgia.

I suppose those of you no the left are OK with this and no investigation is necessary.

 

[311Cowboy]

Can you explain why you were misquoting AG Barr?

Are you saying Barr does have evidence of fraud that would overturn the election? Give me that quote. If you cannot then you must agree there is no evidence like he said. Another way of putting that is to say there is none.

 

[311Cowboy]

Now, there seems to be evidence that Stacey Abrams or the company she founded has been seeking to “aggressively” register “ineligible, out-of-state, or deceased voters” before the state’s Jan. 5 Senate runoff elections in Georgia.

I suppose those of you no the left are OK with this and no investigation is necessary.

Oh man you got em now! If there seems to be evidence that is all that is needed right! Take em to court for another sweet sweet victory!

 

[Cimarron]

Oh man you got em now! If there seems to be evidence that is all that is needed right! Take em to court for another sweet sweet victory!

So, you're making light of potential voter fraud. That's really sad.

 

[311Cowboy]

So, you're making light of potential voter fraud. That's really sad.

Ha, I am making light of the last months worth of bogus claims that Trump won.

Trump is certainly making light of our election process. Does that make you sad?

 

[snuffy]

Ha, I am making light of the last months worth of bogus claims that Trump won.

Trump is certainly making light of our election process. Does that make you sad?

I thought I read that out of 52 court cases they had lost 51 and 1 was won, is that correct if you know?

 

[311Cowboy]

I thought I read that out of 52 court cases they had lost 51 and 1 was won, is that correct if you know?

Yeah, the one that was won I think was in PA and it kept like 100 ballots from being counted cause they were postmarked after election day. So it was a pretty small win and didn't show fraud as those ballots were already separated.

 

[wrenhal]

You do realize that the department of Justice has had nothing to do with any of the existing lawsuits yet. Currently those lawsuits sit at the state levels and haven't been moved up to federal. More than likely they've just been investigating incidences that have been reported to them directly by individuals or groups rather than from the Trump campaign and their lawyers. It's amazing how the mainstream media will constantly grasp at straws and leave out information and chop up videos to try to make their points and you eat it up.
I personally am not going to jump to any conclusions as to what is or isn't settled until the electors vote. But I still don't understand how you guys cannot look at the multitude of pieces of evidence that are being brought forth in these hearings and not at least wonder what is going on.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

Maybe it is the 30+ loses they have taken in court that have people skeptical that there is actual evidence. Or maybe that the "evidence" is mostly people on twitter posting charts or using data from the wrong state to show bogus turnout numbers. Or maybe Trump's attorneys holding press conferences at landscaping garages. Or maybe the 4+ years of blatant lies. Or maybe the clear desperation and pardons. Or maybe when Trump encourage people in NC to vote twice. Or maybe when Trump was claiming fraud months before the election. Or maybe when Trump called fraud in 2016 primaries and then in the actual election it loses effectiveness.

The media is not grasping at straws when they say Biden won. That literally happened with the same process that has been around for 100s of years. Trump and his MAGA team are the only ones grasping at straws here. It is clear as day.

Have you watched any of the hearings?

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[wrenhal]

Ha, I am making light of the last months worth of bogus claims that Trump won.

Trump is certainly making light of our election process. Does that make you sad?

I thought I read that out of 52 court cases they had lost 51 and 1 was won, is that correct if you know?

Trump's lawyers did not file all those cases. They were filled by individuals and on behalf of local/state candidates.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[Cimarron]

Ha, I am making light of the last months worth of bogus claims that Trump won.

Trump is certainly making light of our election process. Does that make you sad?

No, your response was to a specific post about Stacey Abrams and the evidence she is involved in attempting to register non-residents and dead people to vote in the Georgia election. Which you have not condemned and seem to be fine with given your responses.

 

[311Cowboy]

No, your response was to a specific post about Stacey Abrams and the evidence she is involved in attempting to register non-residents and dead people to vote in the Georgia election. Which you have not condemned and seem to be fine with given your responses.

No it wasn't. It was in response to the #Elections2020 Tweet about the DOJ's statement regarding Barr's statements.

 

[ODMcB]

It is so sad to see people get played like a fiddle. They announce there is no evidence because there is none. Then they leave one little straw to grasp at and you all eat it up like there is still a chance.

They concluded there is nothing yet. So all that BS you all have been spouting for a month is garbage. Sure there is always a "chance" more evidence will come out but I mean every key state has certified the results. So...

Thoughts and Prayers...

Exactly, no where did it say none as you said.

I'm not saying there was any fraud that would overturn the election. There are issues that have been presented that seem not to make sense.

My issue is why is there so much controversy and it's been suggested in past elections. I don't like loosing sports games because we played horribly, I don't mind loosing those same games when it's a clean game and we played well, we just simply got beat.

It's the same here, why can't we do a better job of counting votes? We can keep all sorts of other records, I get a text to the second if there is suspicious activity on my credit card. There are multiple more credit card transactions daily in the US then there are people who vote, but somehow we can't seem to count them.

You total sponge- you started this thread. You’re not saying that now that you look like a Stooge, you mean.

 

[snuffy]

Trump's lawyers did not file all those cases. They were filled by individuals and on behalf of local/state candidates.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

By people who have not made Trumps your bad list, like the latest entrant William Barr.
He had the audacity to say there was no fraud.

 

[Cimarron]

No it wasn't. It was in response to the #Elections2020 Tweet about the DOJ's statement regarding Barr's statements.

 

[CowboyJD]

Now, there seems to be evidence that Stacey Abrams or the company she founded has been seeking to “aggressively” register “ineligible, out-of-state, or deceased voters” before the state’s Jan. 5 Senate runoff elections in Georgia.

I suppose those of you no the left are OK with this and no investigation is necessary.

I eagerly await this “seeming” evidence being presented as admissible evidence and tested in the light of truth generated by litigation in a court of law.

Until then, Ms. Abram’s is presumed innocent of any crime and is entitled to confront her accusers in a court of law.

Go America.

 

[Cimarron]

I eagerly await this “seeming” evidence being presented as admissible evidence and tested in the light of truth generated by litigation in a court of law.

Until then, Ms. Abram’s is presumed innocent of any crime and is entitled to confront her accusers in a court of law.

Go America.

You are right, that's how it works.

 

[Cimarron]

Are you saying Barr does have evidence of fraud that would overturn the election? Give me that quote. If you cannot then you must agree there is no evidence like he said. Another way of putting that is to say there is none.

How can I give you a quote for something I didn't say? And to your next statement, wrong again. This really isn't that difficult.