ADVERTISEMENT

Rudi layes out the case!!

The issue here is Guiliani, Powell and any other lawyer will make these statements and take as much money as they can from Trumps donors. (Trump likely isn’t spending his money on this and at this point it’s a cash grab) The moment they go in front of a judge under oath they can get in serious trouble for lying so they withdrawal the claims.
 
The issue here is Guiliani, Powell and any other lawyer will make these statements and take as much money as they can from Trumps donors. (Trump likely isn’t spending his money on this and at this point it’s a cash grab) The moment they go in front of a judge under oath they can get in serious trouble for lying so they withdrawal the claims.
Or not.

Let’s keep the powder dry for the legal work ahead.
 
The issue here is Guiliani, Powell and any other lawyer will make these statements and take as much money as they can from Trumps donors. (Trump likely isn’t spending his money on this and at this point it’s a cash grab) The moment they go in front of a judge under oath they can get in serious trouble for lying so they withdrawal the claims.
So there were calls for the voting software company to sue Powell because of what was said yesterday. What happens today? They no show the PA legislature hearing on their machines and software. Yeah, no cause for concern about things being on the up and up.
 
This bothers me why?


Well she was the "bad ass", as some in this thread have called her, who was supposed to lead the exposé of nationwide systemic voter fraud, first in Georgia which would have been "biblical" according to her.

Really, she's just another conspiracy theorist with a penchant for convincingly spouting nonsense- which she did well and why Trump hired her in the first place. Her job was to stir the pot and convince Trump supporters she had the evidence that would blow everything out of the water (easy enough, release the Kraken and shit). Though it didn't look good when she was exposed on Tucker's show as he tried to give her HIS airtime and future slots as a platform to present the case to the MAGAs and she balked.

She also said Doug Collins (R) would have beaten Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) in the Senate race had Governor Kemp (R) not rigged the election machines. So let's get it straight- unnamed (D)'s rigged the machines only for president while Governor Kemp (R) rigged the machines only for his party's Senate race (lol what?). Now, the Trump Legal Team has backed Loeffler into a corner and implicated their own in the massive conspiracy.

Bottom line is if she had something, she'd still be around. Expectedly, this is imploding.
 
She is good at finding big fish to take money from. It’ll be interesting how many millions she will make off hard working Americans who have made donations based on lies. This stuff pisses me off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bioaggie
Well she was the "bad ass", as some in this thread have called her, who was supposed to lead the exposé of nationwide systemic voter fraud, first in Georgia which would have been "biblical" according to her.

Really, she's just another conspiracy theorist with a penchant for convincingly spouting nonsense- which she did well and why Trump hired her in the first place. Her job was to stir the pot and convince Trump supporters she had the evidence that would blow everything out of the water (easy enough, release the Kraken and shit). Though it didn't look good when she was exposed on Tucker's show as he tried to give her HIS airtime and future slots as a platform to present the case to the MAGAs and she balked.

She also said Doug Collins (R) would have beaten Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) in the Senate race had Governor Kemp (R) not rigged the election machines. So let's get it straight- unnamed (D)'s rigged the machines only for president while Governor Kemp (R) rigged the machines only for his party's Senate race (lol what?). Now, the Trump Legal Team has backed Loeffler into a corner and implicated their own in the massive conspiracy.

Bottom line is if she had something, she'd still be around. Expectedly, this is imploding.
Well, i’ve thought the voting machine claim to be both the hardest to prove and the most time consuming. At the same time the most disturbing (because I have a vote changed on my own ballot several years ago. I caught it before submitting ballot).

Bottom line, if it’s real it should be exposed but the President may not feel he has the time.
Curious but not a big deal to me whether it’s a campaign suit or otherwise.
 
I known you don’t care about facts or evidence. It’s the Trump brand. He’s got you sufficiently brain washed.
Nope! What I care about is an honest election and validation process. I’m sure you think it’s OK as is . I don’t. Especially with regards to mail in Universal Ballots and to a lesser degree, Absentee Ballots. Could I be convinced? Sure. But not at the moment. Calm down and let the legal process run its course.
 
Nope! What I care about is an honest election and validation process. I’m sure you think it’s OK as is . I don’t. Especially with regards to mail in Universal Ballots and to a lesser degree, Absentee Ballots. Could I be convinced? Sure. But not at the moment. Calm down and let the legal process run its course.
It has.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeffmc and bioaggie







This signed affidavit has enough reasonable data to merit further inspection as far as I can see. It may turn up nothing but claims to be able to answer the question by examining system logs. Why would anyone NOT want to follow up?
 
Don’t care. Give it a rest!

What a joke. There is no logical conversation on here. 2-33, really 1-34 on appeals, but sure its a conspiracy across 35 judges, 4/5 states across party lines who were elected with the same protocols, machines, etc. That makes complete sense
 
What a joke. There is no logical conversation on here. 2-33, really 1-34 on appeals, but sure its a conspiracy across 35 judges, 4/5 states across party lines who were elected with the same protocols, machines, etc. That makes complete sense

The Affidavit addresses only three states, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia. You’re conflating the issue instead of addressing the data discrepancies. Maybe someone can explain it. I can’t off hand. Why would you NOT want to follow up?

And I don’t think it’s a joke!
 
  • Like
Reactions: darterbury
I’ll give you Benville but a spot check of other on the list are from Michigan. Now, having said that you’ve still not addressed the data discrepancies in the totals.

Have the courts?
 

PA has run 2 elections since Act 77 was passed, both caucuses agreed to the rules beforehand and votes are already certified.

This isn't the ace in the hole PA Republicans thought they had.
 
PA has run 2 elections since Act 77 was passed, both caucuses agreed to the rules beforehand and votes are already certified.

This isn't the ace in the hole PA Republicans thought they had.

We shall see. If you were watching the hearing on election issue just now you might have some different opinions.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT